It is a Baroque Architecture

From my understanding toward last lecture of history of architecture class, the characteristics of Baroque architecture is taking up the same architectural elements as the Renaissance style, and adapt to use them in a greater profusion and in a more plastic and fluent manner. Interior were given greater force though they never completely lost their definition.Moreover, in Baroque architecture ,the structural members were given a similar fluency of line by means of projections and recesses, curved walls, and etc. The Baroque architecture become increasingly contain the character of living organisms by incorporate the sculpture and painting to become an integral part of architecture.

Baroque architecture proposed itself as style that evoke out of Mannerism from ,which it reformulated the set of rules in Renaissance principals. Complexity and Contradiction in architecture , as well as the ambiguity in their functions are the terms that can described the word “ Baroque”. Completely against the Renaissance architecture !!!

“Everyone images in his head a new idea of architecture in his own manner.... so that they deform buildings....They use, almost deliriously, angles and broken and distorted lines; they tear apart bases,capitals and columns which crowded stucco decoration and trivial ornaments and with faulty proportions, in spite of the fact that Vitruvius condemns such novelties” Giovanni Pietro Bellori, 1664

If look forward to the age of late modernism to Postmodernism era, we can see that the same principals have been bury in them. Boredom is the reason why Post-modernism try to break away the constraint in orthodox modernism to the new era where the architecture become ambiguity in its form and function create complexity and contradiction in architecture; the architecture can be read many ways. This has the same idea to Baroque architecture in which the architect become bored of the same old tradition ,therefore they try to stand itself as the opposition of Renaissance architecture, but Baroque has a affective result rather then cerebral.From this ideas, we can see that the relationship between Renaissance and Baroque have similar distinction in to the Modernism and Postmodernism.

TO BE CONTINUE !!!!

From Sacred to Profane space

In this lecture,we tried to go deep in the details of how the renaissance architecture developed from the term “ rebirth”, which derived from idea that the architecture of period adapted the elements from past such as Byzantine and Classical architecture.In contrast, the architectures are presented themselves in the different languages according to the context of each era as architectures changing from sacred to profane spaces.

In the ancient period, people tend to celebrated the use of “anthropomorphism” which applied to the architecture since the Roman period. The proportion that derived from man become the rational norm and standard in order to create architecture, for instance the the proportion of columns. In the high Renaissance era, we can see the clearly example of how proportion of man become the embodiment in the architecture through the drawing by Leonardo da Vinci: the “ Vitruvian man”. However, the purposes of the “rebirth” and “reuse” architectures were difference from the original purpose;therefore, the function of architectures were changed over time.

Looking back to the history of the Egypt architectures, we can see that the pyramid is created with no interior function because pyramid is a representational of worshiping god and celebration life after death. The interior space become sacred space which does not allow people to go in. As well as, the concept of Pathenon in Roman period. The building was dedicated for the celebration of the Athena God, which make the building was strictly rely on the man proportion as a representational relationship between man and god. They attempt to achieve the perfect architecture as house of god by carefully calculate the human proportion to accomplished the perfect symmetrical and accurate architecture to show the respect to god , therefore, the architecture mean in a sacred way.

In Renaissance period, for example, Bramente. He used the proportion and symmetry as a basic idea to form the building's plan .The building generated from the basic idea of creating sacred space for worshiping the Christian god.Also , we can also see clearly example from he great architecture of the Renaissance period, Michelangelo. In contrast with Bramente ,he introduced the use of Mannerist style into his work the “ Laurentian library”. The building raised the controversially to idea of perfection and symmetry in architecture. The function of the elements in the building become ambiguity whether it is really functional or just decoration elements. But if we actually look closely, the plan of the building is still based on the fundamentally of Renaissance Vitruvian principles.

“ Beauty shall result from order and from the relationship of the whole to the individual parts, of the parts to each other and of the parts back to the whole,.....” This is the quote by Andrea Palladio. He emphasized this idea through the building design of “Villa rotonda, near Vicenza”. The plan of the building is a square with an inscribed circle. The columned porticos in the form of classical temple fronts stand on all four idea of the square.Moreover, the regularity of the exterior is matched by the arrangement of the interior around the circular domed hall. This building showing that the idea of perfect building is does not only use in the sacred space for celebration of god, but the principle of human proportion and symmetry is being use in the man residential , or in profane space. The classical principle is revival in order to create for man to celebrated the standard of beauty in the building perfection ,as well as for celebrating the potential of human.

History

Brunelleschi vs Corbusier vs Venturi

For this response I tried to look close at different period and examined how these three period adopt and use history in different ways.

Within last lecture of history of architecture,we were traveled back through time to the period of Renaissance architecture which was began in Florence since C.I420 and developed until C.I770. The main topic is focusing on the pioneer architect of the era “ Filippo Brunelleschi”. His name become famous from his career by putting the finishing touch to Gothic architecture and invented dome of Florence cathedral. This dome which what we can called as a “new” construction technique which done by studied from how the “ Pantheon “ constructed. He apply the knowledge from what he has been extracted from Pantheon and develop to his dome in Florence cathedral. This show how history become significant in order to further develop the a new advance construction method and technology.

Moving on to the next era, where modernism come to play a role after the world war where architecture try to create what is called a new “utopian world”. This era is a void of history, modernism attempt to simplify the richness ornaments in the past and turn them into pure abstract form. But does modernism really reject the idea of bringing back the history ? Le Corbusier, his name is embodied in the name as a great architect of the modern era, but his writing “ Toward a new architecture”; he tried to draw a connection between history and the new industrial age of automobile. Le Corbusier’s work reflect the idea of anthropology where the forms were derived form human proportions.This proportion was evoked since the Greek architecture which the order of the column derived from scale of human proportion , for instance the doric column can be refer to the proportion of men.

In Post-modernism, history become arise again as it played a role against modernism era. History and architecture are combined together in a way to create what we called “ hybrid” architecture. In this case history is being use in different way to how Brunelleschi and Corbusier did in the past. Robert Venturi attempt to extract the history in a conceptual way.He apply it with the technology to create his work of architecture that define himself as an opposition to modern architecture. In this way, history is used to communicate Venturi's languages through architecture.

Bigness or the problem of Large by Rem Koolhaas.

“Only Bigness instigates the regime of complexity that mobilizes the full intelligence of architecture and its related fields. One hundred years ago, a generation of conceptual breakthroughs and supporting technologies unleashed a architectural BigBang. By randomizing circulation, short-circuiting distance, artificializing interiors, elevator, electricity, air-conditioning, steel , and finally? The new infrastructures formes a cluster of mutations that induced another species of architecture”

This is quote is a brief explanation about the idea of “Bigness”. Bigness theory by Rem Koolhaas based on the ideas that when the building become too large and massive in size that ones can no longer capture the essence of its true experience that the building try to convey. As Rem Koolhaas mentioned in one of the five theorems of “Theory of Bigness” that “Beyond a certain critical mass, a building becomes a Big Building. Such a mass can no longer be controlled by a single architectural gesture,or even by any combination of architectural gestures”. The example of the building that we can clearly see is the “ Embassy Building” in Thailand. The building itself is killed by their massive size. Compare the size of this building to the other , we will noticed that the size of this building is much more bigger than the football fields. The interior spaces does not serve the best use space of in term of utilizing. As Aj. Taylor mentioned in the class that what he have seen is the space is use for “ children playing remote controlled car.” The size of the spaces make the building lost quality of being as a architecture because it is hard to maintain functional aspects within the spaces such as the quality of light , circulation, the position of air-conditioning and etc. I used to visited this building too 6 months ago. The large spaces rather make the interior become unfunctional. The interior layout make the circulation of people scattered around and struggle to find the way.

In my opinion, in order to creating architecture, ones should not take a consideration that “large and massive” building is perform better. In term of how people look at their exterior , it may does their job as impressing the viewers. But once they go into the space , if the building become too large and complex; there are so many factors that need to take in consideration such as electricity system , light, circulation and much more. If the building can not find the way to intellectually integrated them together, the building will start is lose the essence of being a quality architecture, and once the people does not understand and appreciated it so what is the point of design !!

Expressionism in Architecture

This week of history of architecture lecture , we look deeper at another side of post-modernism where the architecture focusing mainly on the highly expression of the form and complex structure. Form become dominant feature over the function of the architecture. Architect play with visually effect that create by richness of the form that make one architecture stand out from the other in the surroundin context.

I am particularly interested in “ Gateway arch” designed by Eero Saarinen. This building express itself in term of abstract expressionism form of architecture. In a first glance when I look at the image of this building , I rather imagine as it is another great piece of sculpture, because of the abstract structural shape that look as it is can not be functional. The building is designed as weighted or flattened catenary arch which clean, simple in their shape, but as well as innovating which is what make its meaning become ambiguous. People interpret it according to their assumption and experience. This monument has very contradict idea to modernism where “materiel reveal truth” , but in this case the stainless exterior skin covering a sandwich of two carbon steel walls with reinforced concrete tend to “ conceal the truth” ;hiding the interior structure ,and interior programme. Unlike the modernism where interior is a vital role of architecture ,but in this case exterior become crucial point of architecture.

“ I like elements which are a hybrid rather than pure, compromising rather than clean , distorted rather than straightforward, ambiguous rather than articulated, perverse as well as impersonal, boring as well as interesting, conventional rather than designed, accommodating rather than excluding, redundant rather than simple, vestigial as ell as innovating, inconsistent and equivocal rather than direct and clear. I am for messy vitality over obvious unity.”As the Venturi said about the post-modernism architecture

But if we closely examined their form and structure, there are rational reasons behind the conceptual i idea of representing monument. The arch does not only perform as being visually affecting the viewers,but also suggest movement through time and space ,invite inquiry into complex, fascinating story of national expansion. The hollow structure in the middle allowing the tram capsule to move people throughout the spaces which symbolise the idea that arch try to emphasize on movement of time and space. However, in my opinion this architecture is successful in term of creating visual effect as it is intentionally design for monumental sculpture , but it does not make the best use of their functions.

This might be because the concept of monument does not create to serve best performance in their functions, but rather create just for people to interact. That is why the interior of the Gateway Arch is just a observation tower. Also the interaction between people and monument can also raise the awareness of how is this important for built as a monument to the westward expansion of USA.

Killing Modernsim

Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture

“But even here the building becomes a diagram of an oversimplified program for living – an abstract theory of either-or. Where simplicity cannot work, simples results. Blatant simplification means bland architecture. Less is bore.”

This capture from the book name “Complexity and Contradiction in architecture “has a controversy idea from Mie’s doctrine “Less is more”. This book give introduction to the new coming era where the architecture was no longer depends on the modern language of purification and simplification, but rather the complexity and contradiction in architecture; the multiple languages based on the vagueness of modern experience. This coming style is called " Post-modernism ".

Post-modernism is obviously the movement after Modernism era.It emerged out as it attempt to break and become isolate from "boredom" which created from the idea of perfection where architectures are following the set of rules and restriction. In my opinion , Architecture of modernism can be view only one dimension, which means that it should be either black or white or either-or. Architecture create to be interpret only one side of thought due to perfection and pureness of architecture that reveal "truth".On the contrary, post-modernism try to break away from the perfection and restriction of particular context. The architecture become involve and rely on the multiple factors which make one see and interpret in different way according to their experiences. It allows architecture to be read in more dimension view points according to individual. It reflect contradict idea of modernism by partiality in "both-and", neither choose black or white ,but rather "grey" which dancing between their gap.

In addition, Post - modernism also tend to break away from the perfection and purity in their form. The buildings are not depend on the pure form, symmetrical , materials reveal the truth anymore ; function become less concerned to the architect unlike modernism where every elements play the parts of becoming an architect; "Form follows function".

The example that we can clearly see the " Mother House "by Robert Venturi .

-painted rather leave with true colour of materials.

-impure geometry

- in the upper part - pipe offset which make the building become asymmetrical

- the middle part that carved out does not perform the function, just ornament.

- the windows at both side of the house are not the same

we can conclude that " FORM DOES NOT FOLLOW THE FUNCTION "

From Europe to American modernism

This week of history class, we are tend to explore the " modernism " through the film from architectural view point.From the film " play time " by French director named Jacques Tati, this film revealed the modernism style which dominated the futuristic of urban life in Paris. The scene begin at the airport where the group of American t

ourists arrived. The scene is illustrated in the

black and white color tones; the color only a

ppears in some parts. From this we can notify that the use of color has a relation to the idea of "modernism" that tend to make the building looks pure and being " bourgeois". The interesting point about the film is how the author attempt to demonstrate the story through the background noise nor the dialogue. Furthermore, background scene of high-rise building with cover entirely with glass facade, the use of car industry, industrialize furniture and new invention technology. The theme of the film demonstrate the turning point of the society to the better world through the development of technology, society.The film try to contradict this idea through the American tourist who have lost in the maze or in the interior of the building that everything seem to mimic the mass production process. From this I think it can be linked to the idea of Modernism that try to move toward American architect. People can still beware of "new" change; they are still confuse or lostin the idea of being a "modernism" that derived from Europe.

In the early part of lecture, we were looking at a great American architect who bring the new meaning toward American modernism.His name is Louis I. Kahn. In my opinion, he is more like Post-modernism architecture.He tend to bring back the history; he viewed architectural progressing as intrinsic to the past. Rather than revitalize specific forms or styles, Kahn used them as inspiration or a staring point of his architect which adapt to his concept of " light ".Through the study of Kahn’s drawing, we can clearly notify that he is no longer felt the necessary to express common object that denote scale .On the contrary, he used media such as typically pastels and charcoal to convey a sense f mass, geometry and shadow. In a first glance, we will see that in this painting Kahn try to draw exactly what we saw; the important aspects of the building were not the details of the number of floors, but rather the scale of the building in relation to one another and the conversation between each element and the light.

If we look at the one of Kahn's famous building " Salk Institute ", his architect is focusing mainly on the quality of light in the space . In this building Kahn chooses concrete to manifest beauty of mind and act by revealing the pureness of the structure in the spaces. Moreover concrete also emphasize quality of light that enter the space, and also emphasize on the clear line that in the middle of the courtyard pointing toward the

beautiful scenic of ocean.

The White God No.2

From my last lecture on the modernism, we were focusing mainly on one of four great “European functionalists” named “ Mies van der Rohe. ( as Hitchcock and Johnson called him; “The International Style” writers) In this chapter, they tried to distinguished between two words “ Architecture” and “Building”, and these four great European were consider by Hitchcock and Johnson that they were creating what is called an “architecture”. In contrast , in America , architects who thought they were involve with modern and being functional were just engaged only to a word “building”.

“ The skyscrapers were empty compositions tarted up with “ zigzag trimmings”

If we were to look at the early design of the skyscraper of American architecture ,which we would say that it is a “ bad design”. According to the preface to the book “ The international Style” , the writers point out to the most famous NY skyscraper design the “ Chrysler Building”. He made comments thatit is a stainless-steel gargoyles with little Christmas-tree ornaments on top. Moreover, they also added they also heard he architects were arguing about the function of the ugly ornaments and hollow grandiosity were “ functional”. From that , they made another sarcastic comments about this skyscraper that the only function it does is to “please” the clients. The person who should blame forthis is “client”. To be engaged with the style of modernism, clients were not play the roles of the decision of how the building looks like , the only job that they do in this case is “ paying”.

For this response , I would like to compare the design of skyscraper of the American architecture with building by European architects : “Mies van der Rohe”.In 1919, G magazine proposed new standard of “ architecture”. The cover of the magazine was images of heavy building on the right and the new design of skyscrapers of Mies 'style on the right”.Mies most famous concept is “ less is more”. He added that he was to combine the usual worker-housing elements in an elegant way while maintain the concept of “minimalism”.

In 1958, the “Seagram building” designed by Mies was rised up on the Park Avenue street. This building designed was the proposal by the firm manufactured rye whiskey. It is a worker housing based on “ non-bourgeois” word. It is a 38-stories high of entirely glasses that has tinted brownish amber to emphasize the color to the whiskey bottle. The steel structure were propose to be “ broze” as it mean to have a coherent color to the glasses. The building composed of only steel beams and glass with concreted slabs creating floors and ceiling. Furthermore , due to the requirement that the steel must encased in concrete or fire protecting material, then Mies end up with enclosing the steel members in concrete and express them by sticking vertical wide-flange beam outside the concrete.

In my opinion, we can definitely say that this can be called as “ architecture” not just “ building”.From the book as it said “ heart of the function was not function but the spiritual quality known as non-bourgeois”. The elements that compose the building are what make it non bourgeois such as the color glass which came from machine manufactured , bronze that use instead of steel reveal the true color of it, and the pure structural without the decorative element : steel beams, glasses , concrete. Lastly,the wide -flage beam that doesn't function in term of physical ,but in term of spiritual reveal the term of being “ worker” or “non bourgeois”

In conclusion, Mie using the concept of “minimalist” as we can see from the pure structural of the buidling witout any additional decoration; the material that plays a role of decoration in itself (colors).These compositions are what make the building become “ architecture”

Modernsim: From Art to Architecture

Respond to the lecture

From my last history of architecture class, the lecture drove us back to the starting of beginning of the Modernism in context of how it is related to "Art" in that era.

“Le Corbusier was a thin, sallow, nearsighted man who went about on a white bicycle, wearing a close-fitting black suit, a white shirt, a black tie, round black owl-eye glasses, and a black bowler hat”

This is how Tom wolf described the great modernist architect name “Le Corbusier”.

As he called his house design as “ machine for living” and he tried to start startled onlookers, therefore he intentionally emphasize the image of perfect “mass-producible” wire figure for the Machine Age through his character of fashion that look as neat and precise and anonymous as possible.

As he said the architect who wished to grow must join the compound or “ism”, and be part of them ;accept the forms that compound have created.

…………….

Then , What is compound ? What does it do ?

From quote from the text

“ Secessionists -had a natural tendency to be esoteric, to generate theories and forms that would baffle the bourgeoisie.”

The compound is group of people who try create new language of architect and re-creating the world; creating the new community which based on the idea of

“non-bourgeois”. The compounds produced the sort of avant-gardism that inscribe in the history of twentieth-century art, and the tool of dissipate the compound is“ painting “ ;the most perfect device that creating visual codes for the esoteric theories of compound – or designing in code.

It started in 1905 , when the fauve exhibition at Salon d' Automne. The modern painting were seeking for purity. It tended to avoid what have been doing in the classical era through the concept of " simplicity " and "abstraction" and get approach to the words " minimalism".

An example of work which assure the concept of minimalism from the painting" the dance " by founder of the movement "Henri Matisses".

Matisses simplify the painting into the pure abstract form of human by using the few lines and colors. Even though, the painting is

on the flat canvas with the use of few color, the human figure seem to appear creating depth on the 2D canvas.

From Fauvists to Cubist : In 1909-1912 , it is the period of analytical cubism ; in this era the movement tend to explore the idea of simultaneity, everything is rendered visible at once to the viewer. They rejected the 3 dimensional representation and simplify into the language on flat canvas. The example of the work is " The Guitar " by Pablo Picasso. This painting is rejected all the tonality and depth ; rather represented as flatness abstract flattening of human parts with the guitar. In the contrary, the

painting can be look at from many angles to perceive the 3 dimensional image on two dimension flat surface.

Move forward to 1917, Theo van Doesburg was published the movement " De-Stijl". The purposes of the style are

- pure orthographical

- pure abstraction and universality by reducing phenomena to simply form and colour ( black, white and primary colours)

- rectilinear forms

We can see an example clearly from the painting by "Piet Mondrian"

The Element of the painting is annunciated which broken into lines, and every room/plane has its own expression(layered out in xyz axis)

Then, how art reveal to form Modernist Architecture ?

"The inner structure, the machine-made parts ,the mechanical rectangles ,the modern soul of the building must be expressed on the outside of the building, completely free of applied decoration. The ultimate expression of this principle was the de Stijl"

The clear example were shown by through the principle of expressed structure of the Schroder house by Gerrit rietveld.The projections of the exterior of the Schroder has only function was to indicate the grid, the diagram, the paradigm, the geometric progression on which the plans were based .

In 1923 , Corbusier published the " Toward a new Architecture " , this book is a new manifesto apply to the new age of modern architecture.

In my opinion , what he was trying to say in the manifesto is the idea of architect that reveal the truth through the " pure form " of architecture ( Basic elements telling themselves as they )like what an artist from the movement trying to reveal the truth through the painting by simplify and abstract the subject into the simple form. As Corbu said

"mass and surface are the elements by which architect manifests itself ".

From the great film "Metropolis"

From the film “METROPOLIS “

When I heard my professor talked about of this film during the history class, I thought this must be another boring old historical film. It is early morning and it is a history class. I felt so sleepy. But I never thought this kind of film will get my attention and make me sit up straight with eyes open.

The story begins with the bunch of mass production workers in a large factory. The author try to express the image of industrialize age with workers who working with hopeless pale face in the factory under the world. Their circle-lifes are working and resting with the machine.The only motivate that they have is the sound of the “bell” telling them that it is time to rest. It is such a torture scene.

After that, the story was suddenly shifted to which I rather refer it to a utopian “world”. The man who is a son of metropolis is living his life full of happiness surrounded by the servants. In this scene, the author tried to show the contrast between two classes of people which are low class people ( slaves ) and high class who has a power to control the slaves. The scene emphasize on the unpleasant world of machine age.

The turning point of this film is when “Maria” beutiful woman appears in front of the son of metropolis with group of children. After that Freder run after her to the under world ,and because of this , it leads him to a pathway that he really experience the truth, the life of slaves that working under his feet. In this scene I like the way how this film communicate with the viewers without saying a thing. The author make the viewers get into the core of the film without a dialougue , but from transferring character’s mind about the underworld through the emotion on the faces , and the comparison of the real world and visual world. ( such the scene that comparing between the machine as a monster the symbol of death and hell.)

Moreover, this film tries to show the different social level in that period between the utopia of the wealth and dystopia of the slaves. The age that the slaves have no voice to argue; they forced to work in order to continue their life.The core of this film is focusing on the Maria, who is the only warm light among the workers, and Freder who play a role of “mediator” try to find the middle point between those two classes of people from upper world and underworld creating the revolution to the social life of worker and to the evolution of machine age.

Lastly,The interesting part of this movie is not only about the plot, but also the scene of the future city or “dream” city; the skyscraper, the flyover and etc. The film reveals the direction of how the city will be developing in the future.

First analytical text form the book " From Bauhaus to our house "

"From Bauhaus to our house “by Tom Wolfe

Introduction

This book is one of the books which introduce us to new age “Modernism”.

The book started with the story of the Young American architects who want to escape

from what they called “colonial complex” to Europe seeking for new arts. They

joined the “Bauhaus School” which opened by Silver Prince or White God No.1-

Walter Gropius. As from the quote from the book the Bauhaus not just a school but

rather “ a commune , a spiritual movement, a spiritual movement, a radical approach

to art in all its forms, a philosophical center comparable to the Garden of Epicurus”.

When the architects and artist attend to the study at Bauhaus; one phrase that

they always hear is “starting from zero”. As I read through the chapter1 I saw one

paragraphs very interesting talking about one of the example

lesson at Bauhaus by Josef Albers. Albers is painter who teach the introduction

courses to the students. He walked into the class and deposits a pile of newspapers

on the table and said that “ he would return in one hour”. Most of the students tried

to impressed by turning the newspaper into fascinating pieces of art.

Then after he returned he would pick up the cathedral and airplanes and say: “These

were meant to be made of stone or metal-not newspaper”. After that he would pick

up the object which simply have taken a piece of newspaper and folded it like a “tent”

He said that “This is work of art in paper” and this is what make the best use of

paper because paper can fold without braking and paper has tensile strength that

can use for supporting two edges. For, I really like the quote that say “ this make use

of the soul of paper” This is simple but it is very sharp.

Gropius has his interest to the “proletariat” or another word “non

bourgeois”. The Bauhaus style must proceed from certain firm assumptions; they

tried to purpose the new concept of architecture that “was being created for

workers” and “ the new architecture must reject all things bourgeois”. This means

that architecture is become open to everyone in the class. Gropius and his friends

form a compound that try to produced the sort of avant-gardism that makes up the

history of 20^th century art. They tried to new perception of people and create a better

social life for everyone.

Furthermore, there is agreement that the members of the groups have to

be accept. Their goal is to create things that when people see it, they would say that

it is “non-bourgeois”, and there are some certain aspects that the architecture is non-

bourgeois. The building must be constructing in the form concrete, steel, wood glass,

and stucco. The color must also be white, beige, gray, and black. Moreover, for the

structural elements of the building ; the roofs must be flat making clean right angle

with the building façade. In addition, all the elements must be made by mechanic

new technology. The new concept or “Modern Architecture” approaches.

If we were to compare the modern architect in the early century to the late

century. We can noticed that in the early stage everything must be restrict to the

set of rules and beliefs that say that this is the right thing. For example, the design of

the worker housing. It has flats roofs with no cornices, shear walls and no

windows architraves or raised lintels, no capitals or pediments ( in other words :

there is no such things that refer back to the history) ,and even no color.

Simple interior decoration with no wallpaper, no drapes, no Wilton rugs with

decorative flowers, no lamps with shades and bases , with a natural tones of material

such as bentwood and etc. In conclusion, there is no “decorative” elements in the

house For sure , the workers would have complain “ What a house ! ”. In my

opinions, the house is a place where people come back from tire day would feel like

they are comfort and cozy. I think this type of house would mentally destroy the

owners. But what can they do, during that time the “workers” have no voice.

Comparing with the architecture in the late era the “Guild House” by Venturi.

The idea that against the modern architect make people point eyes on him. He

choose “red” brick to create the upper part of the façade , this seems to be “

bourgeois” , this is because it does coherent with the “ smog-smudged” brick of the

run-down working–class housing around that area. Furthermore, he placed the

huge columns at the entrance, but in contrast this will see as a decorative elements

with no capitals and no pediment like the historical column. This is also because

he placed in the middle of the entranceway which making it does not look grand but

rather distract. Lastly, the balcony which seems to be decorative , but it rather looks

cheap from the mass-production process.

In conclusion , we can see the changes to the perception as the movement

grow up. As one of the quote said about Venturi “he was doing the same thing, but

he was updating the process”. This means he doesn’t try to abandon what have been

create in the past, but rater changes and development for the society.