ARC 331 Forum 04: Early Modernist Architectural Critique of the Red House

Is this a good building?

34 Comments

  1. Reply
    Elizabeth Van Bruggen, A De Stjil Perspective March 17, 2019

    Like my good friend Piet Mondrian would say, “As a pure representation of the human mind, art will express itself in an aesthetically purified, that is to say, abstract form”. The Red House itself is a partial abstraction in its use of a various building techniques and designs that are combined to form the house, but it relates to closely to the natural world and colors that are seen everywhere in nature. It needs to be more abstract and neo-plastic in its form and color to set it apart from the natural world.

    • Reply
      Grant Bradman (De stijl) March 19, 2019

      Elizabeth, I completely agree with you. The Red House is nice in showcasing artists work, but in the same sense it blends in far too much. It needs to be more abstract like you said and more color. When you hear the name red house one would expect a little bit more color than just a red brick.

      • Reply
        Elizabeth Van Bruggen, A De Stijl Perspective March 23, 2019

        Agreed. Some nice primary colors would do this house some good.

    • Reply
      AaDdAaMm WwIiSsEe - DADA March 20, 2019

      Hmmmmmmm. Daffodils.

      • Reply
        Elizabeth Van Bruggen, A De Stijl Perspective March 23, 2019

        I mean sure, if the building itself uses the color of daffodils in the building components that could be an improvement to this buildings design.

    • Reply
      Monica Medina (Expressionist) March 20, 2019

      I can see what you are saying when you say it needs more abstract, but I think it just needs to be lighter over all. Too much masonry. It needs some connection to nature. Can we include glass and call it abstract? I think we can.

      • Reply
        Adam Wise FLOWERS! - DADA March 22, 2019

        Naaaaah, Dafffffoooodiiiillllssss.

    • Reply
      Adaliz Carballo (Futurism) March 20, 2019

      I don’t think this building needs color. Putting colors will cover the material and it’s going to ruin the building. It needs a new beauty, the beauty of speed.

      • Reply
        Adam Wise PLANTS! - DADA March 22, 2019

        Otto Wagner: DAFFODILS.

    • Reply
      Universitair Hoofddocent March 27, 2019

      Hallo Elizabeth. What a terrible house this is. So natural, so vernacular, so organic, you can almost smell the eons’ worth of bugs and grass that have died and withered within the soil that the bricks (shudder) are made of.

  2. Reply
    Monica Medina, Expressionist March 18, 2019

    I am not completely opposed to the Red House, but I do not think this type of architecture bring us to a new refinement of our culture. It seems acceptable to have a building built with heavy masonry for the transitional period, obviously it is very functional and serves its purpose. But if we want to live towards a culture that grows, we need to change the sort of functional style that we see here; where there is no glass to allow light to come in, or color that creates a glowing effect. In Glass Architecture, it says, “The new glass environment will completely transform mankind, and it remains only to wish that the new glass culture will not find too many opponents.” Knowing that, I think this building would more glass to allow that connection to the outdoors, and less heavy masonry. The rooms, and even the house itself, is very private and reserved, and this is no way to grow towards a different culture that to the one that currently exists. (Monica, Expressionist)

    • Reply
      Elizabeth Van Bruggen, A De Stijl Perspective March 20, 2019

      Not only does this building need more glass and color it needs to look less like the world around it. The entire form of this building should take a new shape and needs to become more abstract in its nature! Lines and planes I say, Lines and Planes.

      • Reply
        Aaron, Expressionist March 23, 2019

        Ugh, not another robot again. Go outside and learn that there’s more to this world then planes and primary colors.

        • Reply
          Elizabeth Van Bruggen, A De Stijl Perspective March 23, 2019

          I am no ROBOT! Of course the world has more than planes and primary colors, but our buildings should not be like the rest of the world and do not need to follow the organic geometries of nature, but are instead made of lines and planes and the spaces inside of these buildings should be divided simply with these elements.

    • Reply
      Aaron, Expressionist March 20, 2019

      Finally, someone after my own tastes. Or should I say, her own taste. It is good to see a building in which someone has chosen to design it totally for themselves and their own taste. Good for them! However, I would have to agree, not many windows to allow for adequate light. Open up some more and connect yourselves to the beauties of nature. But I would applaud its character and expression. Thank you Monica for bringing some light to the subject on behalf of expressionism.

    • Reply
      Parker Done, Expressionist March 21, 2019

      I agree with the suggestion of more glazing to allow light to enter this building. Light is a key element of the human experience and the manipulation of light allows the architect to alter the user’s perception within the building. Another feature of this building that does not contribute to growing towards a different culture its massing in relation to its programming. The function of the spaces within is fairly articulated on the exterior, making the experience quite predictable.

      • Reply
        Emma Okesson March 23, 2019

        See, the problem with this is that you seem to be entirely focused on the human experience of the user. What about the designer themselves? What is their experience like? If you focus so much on the end product, you are stifling the creativity of the designer and limiting their language, their expression, their dada.

    • Reply
      Frau Doktor Sparkle-Farben March 27, 2019

      Monica, I see what you are saying about the somewhat heavy use of brick! Though brick in a more imaginative use would be ok! It’s all about feeling its expressive qualities! And Philip Webb sure liked the middle ages, as do we Expressionists, so that’s good! And there is some stained glass here! Just not enough, like you said!!!

  3. Reply
    Emma DADA March 18, 2019

    Red house is a bad house because it relies too much on local vernacular and does not allow the builder to express themselves in their own stuff and rhythm. This house is a step in the right direction as compared to classicism because it allows the artists to make some of their own decisions, but the oversight of the architect is too overbearing and keeps the artists from truly speaking their own language. They should be able to build entirely on their own terms, even if that means ignoring what society expects of them.

    • Reply
      Elizabeth Van Bruggen, A De Stijl Perspective March 20, 2019

      I think you may be right that this is a step in the right direction, we are moving towards abstraction and away from the natural demands of society. However, it is not the artists desires we need to be moving toward, but rather a non-objective art form. The building should reflect purity and simplicity.

      • Reply
        Emma Okesson DADA March 20, 2019

        Why should artists all push for a unified art form? I’m not sure there’s anything worthwhile in that. Whose purity and simplicity should we pursue? What if I like orange, brown, and purple? Why not accept that the world has gone crazy and go crazy ourselves. There’s no point in creating arbitrary rules and ideals of purity and rationalism when we’re gassing each other in the trenches. – Emma, DADA

    • Reply
      Adam Red Wise - DADA March 20, 2019

      With Red House Red Homeless Red layout, flexibility is flexible, and Red Builder does not bother with its speed. Compared to classical, this house is a red step because the red artists speak their language correctly. Red-red red must also be fully rescued from its conditions
      If that means the community is expected of them.

    • Reply
      Monica Medina, Expressionist March 20, 2019

      I agree with what you are saying. It relies too much on local vernacular instead of allowing it to fit in with the place it is in. The enclosure it too harsh and there is too much brick, it needs to allow more connection to the outdoors and allow the culture to grow and change and the structure needs to make that possible. (Expressionist)

    • Reply
      ▁ ▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ March 27, 2019

      What care we of vernaculars? or Classicisms? Or personalities? Are any more or less irrelevant?
      .
      ..

      ….
      …..
      Things stick in my craw. The jerk in architecture, sitting there & thinking for years, now knows
      only too well, his work. He, a student even, made remaks about Him that were so self-evident . I was The Professor. I consider us the brilliance. I distinctly remember that I flashed up, so almost brilliant. When I was whatever it was, the only person with Piranesi who didn’t understand this Piranesi stuff. As this book went on to something else and then tortured the large class, a slide of the Campo Marzio of Piranesi and his plan of Rome nears completion. It required no professorial explanation whatsoever. Who didn’t understand that.

  4. Reply
    Gabe David, Constructivist March 18, 2019

    Red House does not represent a good building because the architecture this building is constructed from does not resemble an overall composition that is a combination of mass produced industrial elements. The main unifying construction element found is brick masonry, a mass produced material like iron would be better suited as the overall construction material. Vladimir Tatlin has said, “This investigation of material, volume and construction made it possible for us in 1918, in an artistic form, to begin to combine materials like iron and glass, the materials of Modern Classism, comparable in their severity with the marble of antiquity”.

    • Reply
      Elizabeth Van Bruggen, A De Stijl Perspective March 20, 2019

      It is not a matter of the lack of mass production that concerns me about this house, although, mass produced exposed planes and lines may be more elegant than the form this building takes. More glass and iron may contribute to the improvements of this building, but if it remains in the form as it stands today and we simply add glass and steel, we have gone nowhere. And let us not forget about the need for a new color(s) as to not reflect the nature of the material and the world around the building.

    • Reply
      David Filipowski - Russian Constructivist March 20, 2019

      This house is indeed difficult to read, too many small volumes clashing together. You are also correct about the outdated brick, this building seems to be stuck in the past. However, I can appreciate what the owner of this home tried to do for the arts by including the common folk and their daily encounters with art.

    • Reply
      профессор March 27, 2019

      Comrade Gabe, If I remember correctly, this whole movement is about rejecting the purity and glory of industry. Disgusting! You can almost see the brick masons’ fingerprints on this thing, and the pigment of the earth in its brick! Aside from the fact that these people did like to work in a collective, it is a total horror.

  5. Reply
    Adaliz Carballo (Futurism) March 18, 2019

    I’m not against the Red House, but from a futurist point of view, it’s all that futurism wants to run from. Futurism looks for movement, simplicity, long horizontal lines. It starts looking for materials to replace wood, stone, and brick and it founds it concrete, glass, and textiles. The Red House is all that futurism want to run from. However, for its time, it was what people were looking for even if it feels like heavy blocks with a few windows. (Adaliz, Futurist)

    • Reply
      Elizabeth Van Bruggen, A De Stijl Perspective March 20, 2019

      Yes! Horizontal lines and new material would do wonders for the Red House and a new material, oh! If only this building could reflect a non-objective art form and be broken down into lines and planes, oh, what wonders. Then, if primary colors, simple primary colors, could be added instead of that red-brown brick, it could be a marvelous sight to bestow.

      • Reply
        Adaliz Carballo (Futirist) March 24, 2019

        No colors, the simpler the better. Let’s use concrete and iron to reflect that movement I’m looking for. Maybe inside if we can use lines and planes, but nothing of color! Let’s make some curves! Let’s reflect movement.

    • Reply
      Gabe David, Russian Constructivist March 20, 2019

      I agreed with you, the Red House is in need of breaking from traditional materials like stone and wood. Modern materials like iron and glass have become the future of construction materials. Industrial elements have now provided inspiration for new architectural design.

      • Reply
        Adaliz Carballo (Futirist) March 24, 2019

        Not only that, but we also include concrete. This gives us all the freedom to create any kind of form. What if we start to build with these 3 modern materials?

    • Reply
      Dottore Architetto March 27, 2019

      Adaliz, This building has nothing to offer us Futurists. Vernacular and anti-future by its nature, it is barely of its present day. Its tiny bricks expressing the colors of the earth make me sick.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

css.php