- DRAW!!!!!!
- Read and post ticket on the following reading:
The Book :Architects’ Journeys
Read Chapter, The Inner Journey of Luis Barragan pgs 105-135
- Color Photocopy and Analyze 5 drawings from Le Corbusier’s childhood or his early travels in Italy – see Book on Reserve – The Creative Search from the previous reading – many of these drawings I have been showing and talking about. The written analysis should contain at least 7 points or ideas about each drawing you choose. Please type them up and print out the drawings and ideas so we can pin them up and go over each drawing and each point.
- Go to the library
- Next Tuesday - Meet at the Biltmore as close to 2pm as possible to draw
The reading for this week provides an interesting view on an architect’s way of seeing. Barragan describes “the art of seeing as recovering the primacy of perception as a source of learning and knowledge. To see in such a way without being overpowered by purely rational analysis” Barragan brings up a very important skill for a learning architect. Being able to see purely the more important detail than the unnecessary qualities that can distract the eye from the true aspect of the drawing. The action of seeing and being able to use it to better ones design is essential. The art of seeing what is necessary and learning to use it is key! In Le Corbusier drawings you can see that he mastered this skill of seeing architecture. He had the capability to see what was relevant and simply edit the other unnecessary qualities out. After analyzing Le Corb’s drawings I can see how he successfully depicted the actual subject. A common aspect shown in all his drawings is composition of the page. By simply composing his drawings properly it makes his drawings look beautiful and allows the viewer to easily understand what he is studying. Le Corb is able to show detailed studies of design and can clearly show it with a few colors and precise lines. He does no doubt in his work and is able to show his work clearly. It is absolutely amazing to see him use 3 colors and it brings such a vibrant life to his drawings. One of the hardest parts about learning to see architecture is figuring out what is not necessary for the drawing. Another challenging part that takes time to develop is being able to clearly depict an object and compose it correctly so it is easily understood. Reflecting on Le Corb drawings I am beginning to learn and see how one can become successful at these things. What the eye sees is just one of many ways how one can understand a building. In Barragan’s designs, “The unity of space is achieved at its inception and built on perception…To transcend the material, Barragan began to build perceptions beyond the physical boundaries requiring construction with light, air, and color.” Perception is a requiring aspect of Barragan’s in his architecture. His use of materials and the ways he allows light to interact with his buildings is exceptional. He also uses this talent in his design with the way he has nature interact with his houses. Barragan’s architecture is very engaging with the way he interacts with nature and light. These qualities bring a unique life to each of his designs. “Architecture welcomes us by provoking the adventure of wandering on our own path, stripped of all superficiality, demanding the extreme challenge of facing our own inner journey.” Barragan’s states a simple fact that makes architecture unique for each individual. The journey in which each of us develops and become a successful architect is different. Taking this class has shown me the areas that are necessary for me to develop to become a better architect. It has been quite adventure and I look forward to learning more with each class.
ReplyDeleteElizabeth Fleischhauer
ReplyDeleteEach architect has different experiences that shape their design philosophy, so it is interesting to read about Luis Barragan’s travels and compare them with Le Corbusier’s. Barragan also went to Europe, and the trips seems to have had a more profound impact on him than it did on Le Corbusier, at least from what we’ve learned so far. Barragan began to refer to himself as an architect after his trip, and he incorporated the lessons and memories of his journey into his architecture for the rest of his life.
I really did not know much about Barragan’s architecture other than that he was known for his use of color. I found his philosophy on connecting architecture to memory and emotion very powerful. I had never really considered the author’s statement that “silence can also be seen” before, but Barragan’s projects convey that quality. Many of the projects depicted were beautiful in their simplicity. I thought it was fascinating to see that Barragan used very traditional construction methods and still created modern buildings.
I also like how Barragan incorporated the landscape into the architecture through landscape design and through the manipulation of light, air, and water. In some ways this reminded me of Corbusier’s later work in India and in particular at Notre-Dame-du-Haut in Ronchamp, France. Both men were also influenced by and strove to incorporate art and architecture, although at opposite ends of their careers. Le Corbusier began with painting, and in the beginning of his architectural studies treated the wall as a surface for ornament, while Barragan used this approach in his later work.
The one drawback to this reading is that it did not incorporate any of Barragan’s travel sketches, so while it was stated that his journey through Europe and North America was highly influential, it was difficult to determine which buildings he saw and how it inspired his later work. Even so, the reading reminds us that the goal of visiting different places and seeing different buildings is not just to create great drawings, but to also learn something from the architecture and, perhaps, inspire our own.
There seems to be a theme throughout the readings and that we, as future architects, need to learn how to ‘see architecture.’ It was first prevalent with the Peter Eisenman reading when his travel partner and mentor suggested that he see what is perceived, then in The Creative Search, Le Corbusier wrote to his mentor that there was no good architecture in Florence, Italy. His mentor replied back to him with instructions on how to enhance his vision of the greatness surrounding him. And finally, in the Architect’s Journey when Luis Baragan tries to learn how to perceive what is around him, naturally and artificially. Baragan went searching for the disconnection, or more often than not, the connection between the built and natural world. All of these instances of perception and vision came while travel drawing throughout the world (mostly Europe), even though Baragan pursued most of his experiences close to his home in Mexico.
ReplyDeleteThere are moments in a person’s life that are directly related to how ones life turns out. These defining moments can make or break a career or a life. Baragan was no different. The deaths of his parents, in a way, made him focus on the beauty and possibilities of his home. Was it because he was saddened by their deaths and did not want to leave the place he knew, or was it because he felt safe at home and found no good reason to leave. In the better part of his career Baragan practiced within Mexico (all of his work is located in Mexico), but this does not mean his designs are strictly Mexican because he brought the outside world into his work. He mastered the ability to freeze time and place within his designs. They are historical in architectural theory because of the influence from Mediterranean Style, which he picked up on during his early travels of Europe.
Unlike the previously mentioned architects, Baragan had different experience through Europe. Eisenman and Corbusier both heavily favored Italy and all it had to offer, but Baragan was an advocate of South Spain and North Africa. His travels to South Spain and North Africa seem to be the most architecturally influential because of the application of what he saw and experienced while on those trips in his houses. The bright colors and open spaces are renditions of what his architectural eyes saw.
Throughout Baragan’s career he look several ‘Inner Journeys,’ which I felt were essential to his career. The reading suggested that, at one point, he dropped what he was practicing at that particular time to go on a hiatus to pick up an interest in integrating painting, sculpture, and architecture. Before the hiatus he was mainly concerned in finding the connection between nature and architectural theory, he could never narrow down and specify what his personal theory actually was. All of the houses he designed that I have seen have been deep in the connection of its surrounding foliage. I understanding, and completely agree with, the ability to stop what you are doing to take a step back and evaluate your progressions. And to have the aptitude to say to yourself that something is missing from your life and architecture is something to be said. The ‘thing’ missing from Baragan’s architecture and life at this point in his life was culture. The culture he obtained from traveling the world as a young man, but lost when he stayed and focused on the Mexican influences. With this hiatus, he regained the connections between humankind, nature, and architecture. Because don’t the first two equal the latter. Without any one of them, the equation will be unbalanced.
It’s very interesting that this reading showed the other side of travel drawings. In the class we talk a lot of Le Corbusier’s travels and the things he sketched and how he sketched them, and just recently we discussed how it influenced his architecture. However, this reading focuses solely on how the experience of traveling can and did influence Luis Barragan’s architecture. The things we see when we're out in the field are the things that affect us emotionally. The buildings we like, that have a lasting impression are the ones that we're prone to learn from and mimic.
ReplyDeleteWhat's interesting is the continuation from the ideas that we learned that Corb got on his journey. He was taught that he needed to learn how to see like an architect. How to take what he saw and make meaning of it. Barragan knew his principles and basic ideas, as were shown in the placement of the fireplace in the Prieto House. It was not just about where he placed it, which was correctly in the main area of the house. It was about the feeling that he invoked in visitors with it. The aroma that filled the air is something that Barragan created to give the owner and visitors a sensory recollection of the environment; even though the house had central heating, the owner always kept the fireplace on.
This was another very interesting point of the reading, “Barragan does not build on geometry, but from perception.” The reading talks about the affect of the light on the architecture of the Chapel of Tlalpan. Within the theory that architecture is affected by the experience and environment that a person is in, this brings in light and air as elements of architecture. Using these elements, an architect can create the feeling that he wants people to experience in his building. This also changes how architect may design. Instead of using precedents that are analyzed for symmetry or stylistic characteristics, an architect may want to recreate a feeling or experience that they’ve had when visiting another place. This also changes the buildings that have importance. Not only would famous, important buildings be of use, but even the most basic building that does an amazing job of lighting or air circulation can aid a designer.
Living and learning architecture in south Florida is a great example of how an environmental experience can influence design. I recall sketching at Lincoln Road atop 1111. I was standing at the edge looking down and the sun beating down on me made the time unpleasant. However, it influenced the designers of Lincoln Road. The area would not be popular had the designers not taken the sunlight into consideration and provided natural shading and areas to sit, relax, and enjoy the tropical air.
It is clear to me by now that traveling is an essential part of an architect’s career. The common denominator between each of Peter Eisenman, Le Corbusier, and most recently Luis Barragan is that each began a series of long travels early in their careers. However, each young architect took a different approach to what they observed.
ReplyDeleteCarlos Labarta states that the architecture of Luis Barragan “cannot be understood divorced from his travels.” As a matter of fact, those words are how Labarta starts the chapter on Barragan’s early travels. This is demonstrated in Barragan’s projects later in his career. Labarta uses the chapel of Tlalpan as an example to support that point. After writing about how Barragan manipulated light and materials in the chapel, Labarta states, “this transformation of matter suggests that Barragan does not build on geometry but from perception.”
While that alone was enough to convince me that at some point of my education I need to take a tour overseas of some sort (the use of the word “education” instead of “career” is intentional), something else was the highlight of the reading for me. It was the fact that Barragan “required solitude from his first journeys onward.”
While reading the interview with Peter Eisenman a few weeks back, it was very evident that Eisenman’s grand tour was mostly dependant on his mentor, Collin Rowe. In many occasions, Eisenman mentioned that they went wherever Rowe said they would. Eisenman even got “fed up”, at one point, of being told what to do and where to go. At the conclusion of that trip, however, Eisenman stated that the era of the Grand Tour has come to an end because that type of mentorship, which to him was the most important ingredient for the Grand tour, was no longer available nowadays.
Luis Barragan was the exact opposite. As stated above, he not only enjoyed the solitude, but also required it! In his first trip to Europe, Barragan started with a guided group, but enjoyed the latter portion of his trip when he decided to extend it to remain alone. Barragan wrote to his parents, “Now I am on my own and stop when I like something.” Carlos Labarta states that in this solitude, “the young Barragan began to weave the intensity of his work.”
This to me is very encouraging because it means the Grand Tour is still possible in this day and time. Luis Barragan took the initiative to benefit from traveling alone, without a mentor, and obviously things worked out well for him. He also did it in the early 20th century, when the Internet was nothing more than a fantasy that seemed impossible. With today’s available technology, I would imagine such tours would be more efficient, and maybe more effective as the traveler could research the place he or she is visiting beforehand. It was refreshing to read this about Barragan, especially after Eisenman’s interview somewhat discouraged the topic of a Grand Tour to me. Now, I look forward to my solitude in other places.
As we continue to learn and uncover the creative search and growth of renowned architects, it is interesting to find and relate to the inner workings of each individual’s unique creative process. To me, I felt that I could relate particularly well to the work and thoughts of Luis Barragan.
ReplyDeleteProbably the most poignant aspect of the Barragan reading was the exploration of the relationship between memory and architecture. Barragan’s work is one which is a product of the accumulation of memories through travel, both far and near. It is one of mixing architectural, perceptual and sensory memory to achieve a deeply spiritual and sensual experience of space, light, air and color.
A particular quote that I found meaningful was Barragan’s desire to “internalize his journey in sensory experiences creating an imaginary beauty – a universal memory for his local experiences”. Memory is what I believe ultimately serves to inspire our work, and defines our stories as human beings. It is the difference between any individuals’ personal backgrounds, and as a result leads us to think, see and feel in differing ways. In this way, Barragan’s ‘local experiences’ (i.e. his travels and memories of home) developed his architectural sensibilities through the growth of his intuition, experience, and memory.
Bearing an interest in minimalist architecture, I have had a certain fondness of Barragan’s works since discovering him. It was interesting to read about the underlying inspiration for his minimalist approach, as the result of his perceptual memory. When taken at purely face value, minimalist work, including Barragan’s, may seem to be an exploration of pure geometry or proportion. However, when stripped of detailing and ornamentation, the raw formal nature of the work “builds not on geometry, but from perception.” The work becomes an exploration and expression of Barragan’s memory of places, where he begins to “build perceptions beyond the physical boundaries, requiring construction with light, air and color.” The experience of these less tangible aspects of architecture leads to the creation of “a presence”, or the memory of an ambiance.
Having had a chance to travel and study in Rome, I have been recently realizing the importance of memory in architecture, as an inspiration for the development of one’s architectural voice. While memory serves as an inspiration to the creative end of the profession, I believe it is also what defines successful architecture. At the end of the day, successful architecture is one that provides the framework for the creation of lasting memory.
With the architecture of Luis Barragán as an example, design ideas and styles can originate in personal histories and experiences. In reviewing some of Le Corbusier’s drawings, we have already started to notice that his analytical methods of drawing nature and buildings directed him towards his own language of spacial interpretation. Perhaps even a few of our individual school projects are grounded in our own past experiences. Barragán is one architect who implemented the notion that there are common fundamental dimensions and basic shapes found in all types of architecture, and the way in which each person manipulates the objects and spaces they have preferred more than others is how good design ideas are born.
ReplyDeleteThe “Inner Journey” is search that many architects, including Barragán, enter as a sort of natural resource that all people have, in which rethinking our favorite experiences and places reminds us of what each of us understands best. Thus, architecture might be defined as “a consequence of an accumulative memory.” It’s not common for the mind to remember events exactly as they once occurred. The favorite memories might merge together according to our beliefs and values to form a new thought that could in fact be entirely different. And it will be original.
Barragán was traveling through Europe, Africa, and the U.S. looking for “beauty”. But the definition is very relative for designers. He was looking for things he liked to draw. For him, there was no border separating the local architecture of his homeland Mexico and the architecture across the Atlantic. Like experienced architects, he had a grip on the universal connection of all architecture and was searching for the most desirable way to create it.
The architect reaches good design ideas through a process that begins with travel drawing (which can be either over very short or very long distances). Recording a place’s physical aspects preserves the authenticity without sacrificing the historical relevance. Then it’s easier to understand the presence and quality of the concept. That overall concept (sometimes a feeling) becomes the link in a “chained sequence” of recollections. While embarking on the “Inner Journey”, we as designers refer back to the drawings and memories for intense ways to re-conceptualize them, and even improve them.
Le Corbusier found his great design for villas, as well as one of his 5-points, while drawing the profile of a house in Algeria, and from drawing a house in Turkey. It became one of the most famous concepts in the world.
Personally, between now and when I started designing almost 6 years ago, my ideas have become more complex, and I realize that I always need to refer back to photographs and whatever drawings I have. They are learning tools and they make me question my designs. In this way my mind remains open to the unlimited representations of spaces in architecture.
Its interesting too see how travelling matters a high deal to architects. However is the way of observing and taking value of the travels that makes the difference. I always think that creativity comes from different things, experiences and elements; it’s not just the specific use of such element but something related, similar or evolved by it. Because if you try to think of a color that you haven’t seen before its no likely to happen. Thus an architect career is highly influenced by what images he sees and experiences he has and what value he can get from it by observing it and feeling it.
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting to see the philosophy or the drive behind Luis Barragan. I didn’t really know much about him but the way he uses prime colors in his architecture. Now I understand a lot more. How he enriches himself by solitude, “Walking alone became a vital aspect of experimentation and learning”, and how this notion it’s transmitted in his design, the simplicity and naked architecture that entails the essence of it which provokes peace and mystery to the observer, and pokes the subject to walk in his own inner self.
And the other interesting aspect is that his architecture it’s a synthesis of oppositions, (traditional-modernity, presence, ausence, subject-object, intuition-reason, local-universal). This synthesis creates an overall harmony that overcomes dualities. Also, he designs with perception instead of geometry alone. He makes the observer perceive the form, a form that has a color, a material, the actual form changes, its perceive different.
Ticket 3
ReplyDeleteFebruary 21st, 2012
Inner Journey of Luis Barragan
ARC 581 – Jacob Brillhart
Carlo J Guzman De Jesus
“Barragan had no need to construct outside his borders, and all his work is located in his native country. However this did not imply distancing himself from the foreign. Nothing was distant.” Despite his physical attachment to his land, Barragan took cues from all his travels, primarily the sensory experiences he obtained through collective assembly. His travels aided his understanding of architecture, especially because he trained himself, originally studying engineering.
The argument that simplicity is a result of the internalization of experiences, as seen in Barragan’s work is an enticing one. That he studied the specific experiences and ripped apart the excess to leave the essence of the idea expressed in the individual work. There is purity in the expression of his work. Specific moments at the human scale depicted in a series of moments as the building is explored. One of these moments beautifully expressed in the image of the Capilla de las Capuchinas photograph where from a simple block wall with square fenestration equally spaced a blanket of thin light covers the ground, exposing a known reality of cast light in a new manner carefully orchestrated.
As we explore more and more sites of Miami, studying these experiences and understanding them the way Barragan did, stripping them down to their bare essence and capturing that moment would seem to be the most effective for future application in work. It seems that we do that already to an extent, with deciding what to draw first or what to detail more closely. However, the essence of experience, of the emotion, of the state of being at that moment is typically not recorded, documented or otherwise noted, at least by myself. It would seem that these experiences are inherently vital because through their application there is a nostalgic humanistic connection that can be provided to increase the connection to place by spectator or patron of the work. There is no doubt in my mind that if I ever got an opportunity to visit one of his works in Mexico I too would closely connect to his work in those individual experiences. Ironically enough modernism is commonly tied to a coldness or detachment from the real human condition. Simply from the documentation of Barragan’s work I can readily identify that this is not the case in relation to the architecture that Barragan designed. In addition, by stripping the idea down to its essence these moments of experience are expanded to relate to a larger number of people. The extraneous execution of details that would further identify a place would maybe characterize that place as individual and unique rather than this nostalgic experience. On the same plane however one can argue that this idea is not typically executed especially so masterfully, making a Barragan work of architecture unique in its own right. Whether the later is the case or not, this duality of uniqueness is interesting and worth exploring in future study.