FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE from Modern to Global Space
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
António Alberto Duarte Lopes Fernandes Correia António VOLUME II (ANNEX) VOLUME António Alberto Lopes Fernandes Duarte Correia FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE From Modern to Global Space ARCHITECTURE From FABRICATING From Modern to Global Space VOLUME II (ANNEX) Tese de Doutoramento em Arquitectura, orientada pelos Professor Doutor Luís Simões da Silva e Professor Doutor Vítor Murtinho e apresentada ao Departamento de Arquitectura da Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da Universidade de Coimbra Dezembro de 2017 Bolsa SFRH/BD/65732/2009: António Lopes Correia FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE From Modern to Global Space VOLUME II (ANNEX) PhD thesis in Architecture, advised by Prof. Dr. Luís Simões da Silva and Prof. Dr. Vítor Murtinho and presented to the Department of Architecture of the Faculty of Sciences and Technology of the University of Coimbra December 2017 Table of Contents I A MECHANISTIC INHERITANCE—COMPLEMENTARY TEXTS —9 1 Architecture: An etymological draft —11 2 The fragment experience of space-time —17 3 Illustrating ideological incongruities —21 4 Aldo Van Eyck’s Orphanage synthesis —25 4.1 The Otterlo Circles —25 4.2 The Orphanage —26 4.3 Dialectics of control and freedom —27 5 Down Magritte’s rabbit hole —29 6 Albert Frey’s nature and industry synthesis —33 6.1 A living architecture —33 6.2 House Frey I —34 7 The Additive Architecture of Jørn Utzon and the Espansiva System —37 7.1 Vernacular and natural influences —37 7.2 An Additive Architecture —37 7.3 The Espansiva System —39 8 John Turner’s network and hierarchy —41 9 John Habraken’s Supports —43 10 Enacting freedom in Herman Hertzberger’s Central Beheer —45 11 Alterity beyond control through Jean Nouvel’s Nemausus I —47 II (PRE)FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE COMPLEMENTARY TEXTS —51 1 Outline and challenges of the housing and the construction sector in Europe —53 1.1 Introduction —53 1.2 Some numbers —54 1.3 The construction sector —55 1.4 Prefab innovation and business as usual in the Portuguese case —56 1.5 Thinking of a future possible —58 2 Prefabrication of houses: A historical and socio-cultural survey —61 2.1 Context and challenges of house prefabrication in Europe —61 2.1.1 A brief acknowledgement of the French case —62 2.1.2 A brief acknowledgment of the Soviet Union case —63 2.2 Prefabrication of houses in the Nordic Countries —64 2.2.1 Constructive roots —64 2.2.2 Installation of a new paradigm through the XXth century wars —65 2.2.3 Architectural experimentation after WWII —67 2.2.4 Market and technological developments in the past decades —69 2.2.5 Playfulness and social acceptability —71 2.3 Prefabrication of houses in The Netherlands —73 2.3.1 Country context —73 2.3.2 A systems’ design culture —74 2.3.3 Some recent cases —75 2.4 Prefabrication of houses in Germany —77 2.4.1 Outline —77 2.4.2 The housing problem in Berlin in the early XXth century —78 2.4.3 Martin Wagner and the state programs —78 2.4.4 GEHAG wave examples —79 2.4.5 Ernst May and system construction —80 2.4.6 Behrens and the architecture-product —81 2.4.7 Walter Gropius and a Neues Bauen through Bauhaus —81 2.4.8 Prefab explored through steel construction —82 2.4.9 The Weissenhof Siedlung inner circle —83 2.4.10 The Frankfurt Kitchen —85 2.4.11 The Nazi hibernation and a post-WWII rebirth —85 2.4.12 GDR’s Plattenbau age —86 2.4.13 West Germany systems —86 2.4.14 Current prefab business —88 2.4.15 The case of WeberHaus ‘Option’ (Bauart AG architects) and WeberHaus Systems —90 2.5 Prefabrication of houses in the UK —92 2.5.1 Outline and early examples —92 2.5.2 A global revolution —93 2.5.3 Crystal Palace and a synthesis of an iron tradition —95 2.5.4 Post-WWI prefab programs —96 2.5.5 The rise and fall of the post-WWII temporaries —98 2.5.6 Successful post-WWII commercial systems —101 2.5.7 Social prejudice and the rise and fall of systems —103 2.5.8 Remarkable architectural cases —105 2.5.9 Current reality —106 2.6 Prefabrication of houses in the USA —108 2.6.1 Early historical landmarks —108 2.6.2 Inventiveness and playfulness —109 2.6.3 Fordism and Taylorism 109 2.6.4 Catalogue homes and a culture of consumption —110 2.6.5 A media driven, inventive and competitive spirit —112 2.6.6 New aesthetics and the masses —114 2.6.7 Imagining Futures (The 1933 Chicago World Fair) —115 2.6.8 Around WWII —116 2.6.9 Prefab business today —117 2.6.10 Notable architectural incursions on prefab —117 2.6.10.1 Buckminster Fuller —118 2.6.10.2 Richard Neutra —119 2.6.10.3 Albert Frey —119 2.6.10.4 Frank Lloyd Wright —120 2.6.10.5 Marcel Breuer —120 2.6.11 Case-Study House Program media legacy —121 2.6.12 Manufactured homes from America —122 2.6.13 Patent your building —125 2.7 Prefabrication of houses in Japan —127 2.7.1 Traditional systems —127 2.7.2 A contemporary prefab panorama —129 2.7.3 The case of Toyota Homes —131 2.7.4 The case of Onjuku Beach House by Bakoko architects—134 3 Logistic notes—Containers & pallets —137 4 Mass-customization notes —139 4.1 Overview of mass-customization concepts from a business perspective —139 4.2 Some methodological approaches to MC from an architectural perspective —141 IV EPISTEMOLOGICAL NOTES [A GLOBAL EPILOGUE]—COMPLEMENTARY TEXTS —143 1 The phenomenon of globalization —145 2 Three cases of global collaborative work —149 3 The Bo-Klok, or architecture as branded product —151 4 Housing, a global issue —153 BIBLIOGRAPHY —157 TABLE OF ACRONYMS —169 TABLE OF FIGURES —171 TABLE OF TABLES —173 REFERENCES —175 I A Mechanistic Inheritance COMPLEMENTARY TEXTS 9 10 1 ARCHITECTURE: AN ETYMOLOGICAL DRAFT Everything starts with a name. That could well be an ontological motto for this dissertation, for in structuralist terms there is an invisible linguistic bridge between us and the world—or, as Heidegger formulated, the Dasein (i.e. the being there or existence)1. Accordingly, intertwined within a quintessential social nature of the human endeavoring, there is a linguistic sphere locating architecture among the things of the world, engaging it among the production processes underlying the come-to-being of human artifacts. As the world moves on, our frames of reference move with it, shifting as we shift throughout, as too languages evolve. Thus, any attempt to observe the unfolding matters of what we can assume as being architecture, will always be incomplete. But it is also from that point of departure that we can arguably aspire to the production of some meaningful sense, i.e., knowing beforehand that no ends are achievable, but endless paths of possibilities, with an end and a beginning in architec- ture. In western culture, etymologically, architecture seems to be derived from the Latin, architectura and ultimately from the Greek, arkitekton (αρχιτεκτων), roughly meaning master builder or director of works, from the combination of arkhi- (αρχι), a chief or leader, and tekton (τεκτων), a builder or carpenter. In turn, tekton comes from the Sanskrit taksan, denoting to the use of the axe and the craft of car- pentry. Vestiges can also be found in Vedic, referring again to carpentry. In ancient Greece, it would appear in Homer, alluding to the art of construction in general. A poetic sense is first noted in Sappho where the tekton impersonates the poet. The meaning would further evolve, as the term went from referring to something physical and specific—carpentry—to a more generic notion of making—po- etic sense. In addition, architecture can be related with the notion of arkhé, that is, the knowledge or engagement towards the origin, which is the root of words such as archetype, archeology, or archive. Such can be observed in the sense of what the ancient western philosophers called the Demiurg, the unat- tainable original architect, an ontological God-like figure, the seemingly one and only to have access to the genuine essence2. In a common sense, architecture stands for creating, planning, coordinating, and for building, to refer the characteristics of what is built, and so forth. Accordingly, the term is frequently applied to describe works related with the built environment. In addition, it has been used via other connota- tions, such as in explicitly artificial things (e.g. software, hardware), characteristically natural things (e.g. biological structures, geological formations), or in implicitly abstract things (e.g. music, mathematics). In each, broadly we can regard it as a mapping to the elements or components of a structure or system, to understand them better and/or to creatively re-combine them towards new meanings. Indeed, the term has also been associated to a wider notion that implies the métiers of creating or devising a thing or a system, addressing some sort of problem, to be implicitly or explicitly applied— 11 e.g. through the own hands, through others’, through machines’, to build a logical frame, and so forth. In this perspective, in a modern sense, it can be understood from Immanuel Kant’s (b.1724– d.1804) broader notion of architectonic and its correlated notion of systematicity3. Before Kant, other thinkers, such as Aristotle4 (b.384BC–d.322BC) or Leibniz5 (b.1646–d.1716), had implied such no- tion. In common, all these authors place it close to a sense of system construction, via Idea (mental) and through devising combinatorial ars logica, and finally, as an ontological structure by itself.