Elegance_Argale_10/12/13

ELEGANCE

Eleganceby Alise Ārgale

Didactic exerciseFall Semester2010

Interior worlds: “your word”

Main EditorGennaro Postiglione

Course of Interior ArchitectureFaculty of Architettura e SocietàPolitecnico di Milanowww.lablog.org.uk

EditorAlise Ārgale

only for pedagogic purposenot for commercial use

INDEX

00_Eleganceby Koenraad Van Cleempoel

02_George H.Boke house

03_W.E. Martin house

07_Casa Batllo

11_Adziogol lighthouse

23_Masion La Roche et Jeanneret

30_Tugendhat house

31_Villa Savoye

55_Aalto Studio

61_Fawcett house

72_Philips Exter library

92_Allen Lambert Galleria

98_Gare do Oriente

This essay presents the word elegance as essential in any vocabulary of interior architecture. The paper will argue that, despite the valuable momentum to move our discipline closer to academia and to infuse it with research, the creation of el-egant interior spaces remains an impor-tant competence. The coveted theoreti-cal basis of our discipline can be found in the exploration of central concepts such as elegantia. We will describe its etymo-logical source in Calepino first Latin dic-tionary (Cornucopiæ, 1502) and argue that it should not exclusively be associ-ated to harmonious prose and correct language (eg. L. Valla’s De elegantiis lin-guae Latinae, 1471). Indeed, its intrinsic humanist meaning can be linked to Leon Battista Alberti’s concept of concinnitas or beauty, as described in De re ædifica-toria of 1452. In book 9 On Ornament to

to Private Buildings, he writes: “Beauty is a form of sympathy and consonance of the parts within a body, according to definite number, outline and position, as dictated by concinnitas (…). This is the main object of the art of building, and the source of its dignity, charm, authority, and worth.” It is indeed to the Renaissance pe-riod – and its foundation in antiquity such as Vitruvius’ notion of venustas – that the theoretical basis of our discipline can be traced back. The article will further aim to analyze the usage of the concept of elegance in the written discourse of (in-terior) architects throughout the Western history, with particular emphasis on An-drea Palladio, Frank Lloyd Wright, Adolf Loos, Le Corbusier, Hans Van der Laan, Louis Kahn and Peter Zumthor.

Eleganceby Koenraad Van Cleempoel

Abstract

In this contribution I want to argue that since avant garde, elegance and beauty are too often neglected in judgements of interiors. It was a valid criterium up to the 19th century that de-serves a revaluation. We will describe two types of elegance:

objective – visual, formalistic, harmonious pro-portions (Leon Battista Alberti, Palladio, Le Cor-busier), Platonic and orientated towards an ideal world;

subjective – wonder and emotions/senses, rela-tionship between interior space and happiness: Louis Kahn, Peter Zumthor, Alain de Botton, Gaston Bachelard, orientated towards personal subject.

Elegance and beauty are often used to describe interiors, or parts of it that please, enchant or fas-cinate its users or visitors. It expresseswonder, respect and admiration. Vitruvius’ con-cept of venustas, alongsidefirmitas and utilitas,

is translated in contemporary English as beauti-ful, and delight in Sir Henry Wotton’s Elements of Architecture in 1624. We all value its essen-tial character, but sometimes fail to pronounce it in our curricula of interior architecture. When evaluating project work, it is usually not on our list of criteria to qualify the design of a student; it is perhaps even advised to avoid this scheme of considerations in order to be more “objec-tive”. Yet in 19th century vocabulary on interiors there is no hesitation; in Robert Kerr’s descrip-tion of The Gentleman’s House in 1864, for ex-ample: “The character to be always aimed at in a Drawing-room is especial cheerfulness, refine-ment of elegance, and what is called lightness as opposed to massiveness.” (1) Indeed, “beauty is not a word readily found in the indexes of recent books on architecture, although it is a topic that seems to fascinate architects.” (2)

Do we still suffer from the functionalist par-adigm of modernism and are we really fail-ing to catch up with venustas when we left

Paper

it at the dawn of the avant-garde? Charles Jencks argues in What is Beauty? that “beauty is back. Architects are designing harmonious skyscrapers for London, artists are producing works on the subject, and evolutionary psychologists are presenting evidence that canons of beauty are hard-wired into the nervous system.” (3) Jenks opposes the idea that “beauty is objective” and puts excessive sensual patternappre-hension, through one of our five senses as a foundation for the experience of beauty. This contribution will not enter the discus-sion of defining elegance and beauty, but will rather dwell on its notion and the rela-tion to interior architecture.

Despite the valuable momentum to move interior architecture closer to academia and to infuse it with research, an important competence will still be the creation of el-egant interior spaces. The coveted theoreti-cal basis of our discipline may partly rest in the exploration of this concept of elegantia. In the humanistic tradition, one was en-couraged to use Latin in a correct and “el-egant” manner, e.g. in Valla’s De elegantiis Latinae linguae (1471). A similar formalistic interpretation was common to define and interpret venustas. Most famously in this respect is Alberti’s attempt to describe the concept of concinnitas or beauty in book 9 of De re aedificatoria (1452): “Beauty is a form of sympathy and consonance of the parts within a body, according to definite number, outline and position, as dictated by concinnitas(…) This is the main object of the art of building, and the source of her dignity, charm, authority, and worth”. His emphasis on harmonic scale and pro-portion clearly inspired Palladio’s concept of beauty, obtained, in his view with a set of seven harmonic proportions for desig-ing rooms – three of which he links to Py-

thagoras. (4) In addition to this classical legitimation, so characteristic for humanist argumentation, Palladio also links beauty with nature and its countless examples of embedded proportions and harmony. This is echoed centuries later in 1973 by Louis Kahn in a lecture at Pratt University:

When sight came, the first moment of sight was the realization of beauty. I don’t mean beautiful or very beautiful or extremely beautiful – just beauty, which is stronger than any of the adjectives you may put to it(...) It is like meeting your maker, in a way, because nature, the maker, is the maker of all that is made. You cannot design any-thing without nature helping you. (5)

The concept of geometry and proportion as a condition for beautiful architecture, re-vives also – including its neoplatonic con-notation – with Le Corbusier’s modular, stating that “Genius is personal, decided by fate, but it expresses itself by means of sys-tem. There is no work of art without system”, or “‘Regulating Lines’ showing by these one of the means by which architecture achieves that tangible form of mathematics which gives us such a grateful perception of order.” (6) Another, less well known, propor-tion system of the same epoch is Le nom-bre plastique by Dom Hans Van der Laan. (7) Different from the Modular and its classical precedents, this system is more akin to the spatial character of interior architecture be-cause of its 3D character. By implementing his model, the monk-architect generated fascinating, mostly sacred, spaces. In these interiors “the visual beauty refers to the in-visible beauty, the odor representing the spiritual enlightenment (…) what are these but natural forms obtaining a spiritual meaning?” (8)

These “formalist” approaches – albeit with a metaphorical dimension – suggest that beauty depends on lines, proportions or patterns and that its perception is partly cognitive: one has to “understand” the ra-tional behind a certain design. But can seeing and knowing be separated to ex-perience beauty, opposed to what Ernst Gombrich claimed? Louis Kahn and Peter Zumthor enrich the discussion by introduc-ing, respectively, the concept of wonder and the link between spatial experience and one’s emotional state. They want to ar-gue that there can be strong experiences of beauty without knowledge or hermeneu-tics. Kahn in the same 1973 Pratt lecture said: “Now from beauty came wonder. Won-der has nothing to do with knowledge.” (9) Zumthor believes that beauty lies in natu-ral, grown things that do not carry any signs or messages, or that beauty manifests itself in vagueness, openness and indeterminacy because it leaves the form open for many different meanings. (10) He invites us to ex-amine his spaces with our senses and our intellect:

We may wonder what it was we liked about this house, what was it that impressed and touched us – and why. What was the room like, what did it really look like, what smell was in the air, what did my footsteps sound like in it and my voice, how did the floor feel under my feet, the door handle in my hand, how did the light strike the facades, what was the shine on the walls like? Was there a feeling of narrowness of width, of intimacy or vastness? (11)

The elegant combination of a contempo-rary addition (1990-94) to an early 18th century Swiss wooden farmhouse, known as Gugalun House, shows well his intention to create a sensuous space to give its users

memorable experiences.

Indeed, in his phenomenological discourse on materials and perception the Swiss ar-chitect opens the architectural experience to all of our senses and he links it with our moods: “spatial situations in which people instinctively feel good.” (12) This is also one of the conclusions in John Armstrong’s The Secret Power of Beauty (2004), when he links the experience of beauty with finding spiritual value, such as happiness, in ma-terial settings, such as interior space. The French novelist Marie-Henri Beyle (1783-1842), known as Stendhal, coined it as beau-ty being the only promise of happiness. This paradigm forms the cornerstone of Alain de Botton’s Architecture of Happiness, (13) who traces the link between beautiful in-teriors and moral status to early Christian and Islamic theologians who would argue that beautiful surroundings make us good as they reveal us something of the Creator’s intelligence, good taste and sense of har-mony. It is the task of the architect to de-sign spaces that contribute to happiness by incorporating values. As such we are able to communicate via our interiors, which can become projections of our – desired – self.

Absent in the Botton’s quest for materialized happiness in spatial language, is a reference to Gaston Bachelard’s Poetics of Space. (14) Yet, in his introduction the French philoso-pher develops a scheme of thoughts to frame his central concept on the phenom-enology of dwelling and poetics. He explic-itly refers to the love for felicitous spaces, which he likes to call topophilia: “they seek to determine the human value if the sorts of space that may be grasped, that may be de-fended against adverse force, the spaces we love. For diverse reasons, and with the dif-ferences entailed by poetic shadings, this is

eulogized space.” (15) Refering to Carl Jung, Bachelard then develops the notion that the interior of a house can become a tool for analysis of the human soul. It would be worthwhile to explore this further in the context of the Japanese notion of beauty where elements such as imperfection, im-permanence (wabi-sabi), asymmetry and patina are essential ingredients, just as the bond between beauty and memory and the imperfection of one personal body. Jun’ichirō Tanizaki’s Praise of Shadows (16) would be a good guide to contextualize the discussion on beauty in western vs eastern tradition and how both blend in the work and discourse of various architects.

Elegance and beauty are complex notions without clear definitions, but we have tried to argue that it limits our schemes of refer-ence if we would exclude them from our criteria to judge interiors. To make it more complex, the historical link between moral values, such as happiness and elegant inte-riors confronts us with even more subjec-tive aspects of our disciplines. If interiors are expressions, or projections, of ourselves – see Jung supra – they are also becoming images of our desired felicity. But can we still talk of topophofilia in our age and con-temporary interiors, especially after post-structuralism? The increased attention in popular magazines – but also from students – for concepts like “Fen Shui”, “cocooning” or “healing spaces”, seems to suggest an af-firmative answer.

References

Alberti, Leon Battista. 1988. On the Art of Build-ing in Ten Books (1486). Trans. Joseph Rykwert, Neil Leach, and Robert Tavernor. Cambridge Mass.: the MIT Press.Bachelard, Gaston. 1994. The Poetics of Space (1958). Trans. Maria Jolas. Boston: Beacon Press.de Botton, Alain. 2006. Architecture of Happi-ness. New York: Pantheon Books.Jencks, Charles. 2001. What is beauty? http:////www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2001/08/whatis-beauty.(May 3, 2010)Latour, Alessandra. 1991. L. I. Kahn: Writings, Lec-tures, Interviews. New York: Rizzoli International.Joy MoniceMalnar and Frank Vodvarka. 1992. The Interior Dimension: A Theoretical Approach toEnclosed Space. New York: Van Nostrand Rein-hold.Miller Lane, Barbara. 2007. Housing and Dwell-ing: Perspectives on Modern Domestic Architec-ture.New York: Routledge.Le Corbusier, 1948. Towards a New Architecture (1923). Trans. Frederick Etchells. London: JohnRodker.Johnson, Paul-Alan. 1994. The Theory of Archi-tecture: Concepts, Themes,&Practices. New York: VanNostrand Reinhold.Van der Laan, Dom Hans. 1960. Le nombre plas-tique. Leiden: Brill.------ .1985. Het vormenspel der liturgie, Leiden: Brill.------. 2005. The Play of Forms (1984). Trans. Rich-ard Padovan. Leiden: Brill.Zumthor, Peter. 1999. Thinking Architecture. Ba-sel, Boston, Berlin: Birkhäuser.Tanizaki, Jun’ichirō. 1977. Praise of Shadows (1933). Trans. Thomas Harper and Edward Sei-densticker.New Haven: Leete’s Island Books.

ATLAS

George H.Boke house is very clear example where we can see how architect puts an emphasis on material pattern. Letting its beauty to manifest itself. Leaving clear and simple lines in interior . Not making it complicated or spoiling its natural charm.

‘02/elegance/George H.Boke house

‘03/elegance/ W.E.Martin house

Obvious example of interior made by geometrical principles. Leaving materials to work the way they express themselves best. Partly keeping their meaning symbolic and their functions sim-ple. Wood shows houses structure, combined with glass that brings light in to the room.

‘07/elegance/Batllo house

Though at first Gaudi architecture might seem too complicated, it is based on natural propor-tions. It would be really hard to find someone who would not agree that Casa Batllo really takes the breath away. Bringing us to conclusion that Gaudi has been master on making his architec-ture to touch tousends of human hearts.

‘11/elegance/ Adziogol lighthouse

Adziogol lighthouse is very clear example of “objective” elegance. Its structure is so simple and we might even use word poor, but at the same time its beauty lies in the fact that it leaves ob-server very strong impresion about clarity in forms.

‘23/elegance/Maision La Roche et Jeanneret

As we can see Le Courbusier is fan of form and colour simplicity. In Maision La Roche are huge windows and opened roof inviting nature in and allowing shadows play on white walls. Le Cour-busier interiors seem to allow the nature around and the people play the main role at the same time staying really elegant and not becoming just a background.

‘30/elegance/Tugendhat house

Tugendhat house is one of examples that are hard to be difanied as “subjective” or “objective” elegance sample. Because it keeps signs of both types. It geometry is really clear and under-standable. Choice of materials are also simple. Creating interior that is inviting, unobtrusive and elegant.

Huge impact on Le Corbusier work was made by antic architectures proportions- that were based on Golden section. In Villas Savoye stair case we can read this proportion very well and even make parallels with shells inner structure. At the same time he keeps down colours and form simplicity, so that forms and proportions speaks for themselves avoiding becoming some-thing really too complicated and renaissance redolent. Coming out as something simply ele-gant through all times.

‘31/elegance/Villa Savoye

Aalto studio as a place where to work and to be creative, definately holds a great deal of el-egance. Letting architect and his ideas to take the lead role, but at the same time having unique style.

‘55/elegance/Aalto Studio

‘61/elegance/Fawcett house

Hawcett house definately holds great deal of elegance. Giving clear vision how simple geom-etry can make enviroment very atractive. At the same time it is also obvious that architect has spent a lot of hours calculating litness and angles. As a result we can see this very elegant and atractive interior.

‘72/elegance/Philips Exter library

In this library we can see how architect uses clarity of forms and different kind of materials that are not hidden to people’s eyes. Showing materials, the way they are, expressing their natural beauty. We can see how artist reaches perfection and elegance through form – circles (nothing to add or take away). They are faced to the central spot creating huge space above the entrance hall. Successfully creating interior that is simply elegant in its way of expression.

‘92/elegance/ Allen Lambert Galleria

Allen Lambert Galleria recalls the artistic complex in Valencia, which is based on fish anatomy. We can see that this motive also here. Santiago Calatrava has made interior that is unique. Defi-nately holding on to same natures principles, but at the same time braeking them with refusing to express any beauty of material, becoming very clear about his vision.

‘98/elegance/Gare do Oriente

Gare do Oriente is also one of Santiago Calatravas masterpieces. It shows much more geometry and construction then his previos works. But at the same time he still stays very loyal to his ideas, that grabs peoples breaths, letting his work to become good example as “subjective” elegance sample.

REFERENCES

‘01

‘02George H.Boke house, California, USABernard Maybeckhttp://www.architectureweek.com/cgi-bin/awimage?dir=2001/0328&article=culture_2-1.html&image=11339_image_1.jpg

‘03W.E.Martin house, Oak Park, Illinois, USAFrank Lloyd Wrighthttp://www.luxist.com/2010/11/10/w-e-mar-tin-house-estate-of-the-day/

‘07Casa Batllo, Barcelona, SpainAntoni Gaudihttp://www.flickriver.com/photos/raclos/popular-interesting/

‘11Adziogol lighthouse, near Cherssan, UkraineVladimir G.Schuchovhttp://www.shukhov.ru/deutsch.html

‘23Mason La Roche et Jeanneret, Paris, FranceLe Corbusierhttp://www.maitrepo.com/article-2240512.html

‘30Tugendhat house, Brno, Czech republicLudwig Mies van der Rohehttp://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/22/garden/22mies.html?_r=1

‘31Villa Savoye, Poissy, FranceLe Corbusierhttp://www.panoramio.com/photo/4788306

‘55Aalto Studio, Munkkiniemi, Helsinki, FinlandAlvar Aaltoht t p : / / t h e n o r t h e l e vat i o n . b l o g s p o t .com/2009/11/creative-spaces-studio-of-al-var-aalto.html

‘61Fawcett House, Los Banos, CA, USAFrank Lloyd Wrighthttp://arquiteturaconceitual.blogspot.com/2009/11/uma-casa-de-frank-lloyd-wright.html

‘72Philips Exter library, New HampshiresLuis Kahnh t t p : / / e d i f i c e c o m p l e x . t u m b l r. c o m /post/457934778/spatula-exeter-academy-library-louis-kahn

‘92Allen Lambert Galleria, Toronto, CanadaSantiago Calatravah t t p : / / w w w. f l i c k r. co m / p h o to s / f l i p -keat/2494114037/

‘98Gare do Oriente , Lisbon, PortugalSantiago Calatrava http://www.flickr.com/photos/34027344@N06/3169546098