Talk on Fallingwater
Fallingwater
Today I am going to introduce an architecture built by
architect Frank Lloyd Wright
in 1935, called Fallingwater. It locates in rural southwestern Pennsylvania.
It is entitled as Wright's most beautiful
job. It is listed among the 28 places
to visit before you die. American Institute of Architects named the house the best all-time work of American
architecture.
Analysis
Wright's Fallingwater is designed for the Kaufmann family
villa. Wright said the creak, which he saw during the period when he came to
the valley to find inspiration left a deep impression to him. Wright realized
that his dream of building a house in the
mountain would come true.
The back of the floor is hanging in natural rocks. The main
floor is a complete large room and many dependent circulation spaces were
connected through distinctive spatial processing. There is a small ladder
leading to the pool downstair. Between the sill and the ceiling is a large
glass metal window, which gives a very strong contrast.
From the whole appearance, we can read out those floors
extending horizontally. The bridge, sidewalk, driveways, balconies stretch
across the valley and protrude out. These levels are tightly gathered together
in a strange space order. Huge platforms reverse swing, like water falling from each
rock. The whole architecture looks growing out from the ground and it is more
like hovering above the earth.
The whole idea is bold. This building contains the highest
level of architecture skill.
Fallingwater has gone beyond the building itself. This building
has a living and permanent texture.The color
of the building is the color of nature, which makes the building hiding and
merging into the nature perfectly. The direction of Fallingwater moved correspondingly
like the creak. It combines the nature and human together, which expresses the hope that human want to live with nature harmoniously. Every piece of architecture should be with life. Most important
thing is, no matter what the environment is, we can all come to feel. The building is regarded a reflection of the ideal human life style.
Question
In fact, Fallingwater itself is so complex that the direction
is always changing, which begins at the main door. Tourists have to turn left,
take three steps, and then turn right to get to the living room. Someone said
after you finish these series of actions, standing inside the villa, you would
feel yourself like falling water. It is just a small part.
Do you think people judging the architecture too much by its
external than its internal? Why do you think Wright design the architecture
like this?
Reference
Fallingwater, from
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fallingwater official website
《揭穿流水別墅的神話》
http://www.xzbu.com/5/view-4797579.htm
Essay on Fallingwater
Essay on Fallingwater
Fallingwater
is an actually not practical artwork.
Fallingwater is remarkable
and can’t be recreated again.
Frank L. Wright, one of the most outstanding architects
in modern 20th century, who describes himself[i] as
the pioneer to define the concept of ‘modern architecture’ under the situation
that no one has done before, has a close connection with an architecture called
Prairie Style.
Prairie Style is a kind of modern architecture
developing during late 19th century to early 20th
century, which is most commonly seen in Midwestern United States. The style is
usually marked by horizontal lines, flat or hipped roofs, solid construction,
craftsmanship, and well-disciplined ornament[ii].
When we look at
some works from F. L. Wright, such as Robie
House in Chicago or Larkin
Administration Building in NY, we will all find that these constructions
stand out by a sense of intensive dimensional sense. The use of huge cube with
the extension of plane makes these architectures firmly grow into the ground
and form a visual-beauty.
Fallingwater is a piece of
architecture applying Prairie Style too. The work is similar to the work
mentioned above, the Robie House. The
vast roof of Robie House is cantilevered over the ground. However, the case is
totally different in Fallingwater. Although the balconies of Fallingwater are
constructed in the same style as Robie
House, these platforms are all of overhead. No support is under these components.
They are suspended in the natural rocks. Wright also extends the balcony of the
second floor soaring six feet beyond the room below[iii]. This
activity is so bold that it suffers from an unavoidable displacement[iv].
On the other hand,
Fallingwater is one of the few buildings, which is built inside a valley, above
the creek. The color on the outside wall is very soft and warm, so the contrast
between architecture and wood is very obvious but not strange. It also utilizes
the natural light by using a big glass wall to let the light filter in. Also,
the designer even bows to nature by bending a trellis beam to accommodate a
pre-existing tree[v].
As a result, Fallingwater is
remarkable. It combines the nature with people, expressing the idea that people
are a part of nature and both of us depends on each other to develop and grow
up. This is what Wright pursues, the organic architecture[vi]. It
will never be reproduced again. Why?
Fallingwater is not practical
to live in.
Once Fallingwater was built for
Family Kaufmann as their villa, so it was named ‘a weekend house[vii]’.
Nowadays, the place is developed into a world-famous tourists’ destination. According
to this view, can we say Fallingwater is such a place, which is proper for sightseeing
instead of living inside? If it does, why don't some people spend their time
living in?
Fallingwater itself is a one-off work
because F. L. Wright is a one-off master[viii].
When people entitle one person ‘pioneer’, it shows the achievement the person
has done to his own field can be described as revolution. It is rare for human
being to take the relationship with nature into consideration when designing a
piece of architecture. Although the remarkable piece is regarded as ‘A powerful union of architecture and nature[ix]’,
it is not practical to live in.
There is a saying sound
interesting. Is there any difference between living in a masterpiece and living
in a normal house[x]?
Will you be too excited to fall asleep in the masterpiece at midnight? Meanwhile,
it is far from downtown. It locates in a mountain in Pennsylvania. If it is
used for living, will the cost be a little bit expensive? The second reason has
been mentioned. The bold design of this architecture leads the work someway
dangerous. The owner, Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, has to check and
maintain the balance of this extraordinary work.
Two aspects lead architecture
to change.
Every piece of architecture is
designed for people. When our society develops, the architecture develops. When
we move, architecture moves. That’s another why Fallingwater is a saga that can’t
repeat again.
Industrialization
Fallingwater is an extremely large construction of different parts and most of these parts are handmade. Coincidentally, after Fallingwater is finished, it is the period when ‘industrialization’ in architecture begins to replace the status of handmade[xi], which causes a consequence that fewer and fewer architects makes buildings by hand. At the same time, the skill of handmade becomes scarce and those handmade pieces become more and more valuable.
The way we build our homes has changed. Similar buildings can be copied easily because of the design drawings stored in the computer. Buildings nowadays, workers use machine to polish the floor or the glass, use computer to measure accuracy. With the help of machine and computer, as long as we have an empty ground, we can make a building. No matter what it looks like, the real reason why we should build these buildings maybe is minor. Under this circumstance, Fallingwater is valuable than ever.
Urbanization
Many pieces of famous modern architecture, differing from Fallingwater, is that they are all built in cities and the tendency is that many designers want to show their talents in cities. When comparing with the architecture in 21st century, we will find that many designs are out of our imagination. Owing to the wide space in cities, they have more chances to build a whole crowd of buildings rather than simply one building. The use of skylines of these buildings reaches a peak.
Urban lets designers to rethink how to combine city landscape with nature harmoniously. Without the most natural environment, designers use nature as ornaments more than merging the nature into the architecture. Urbanization changes our thinking way of building.
We can find difference easily from just looking at these pictures. The structure of the architecture in 20th century is more regular than what in 21st century. Old century architecture is gentler in expressing the idea. Maybe they are more realism and stick to the rules. They seldom do deformation to the basic stereoscopic elements such as cuboid or sphere.
New century architecture is accustomed to using irregular association between line and plane to create a grand momentum. The shape is always advanced. The application of changing the normal line of the basic stereoscopic elements is widely used. The fluid appearance of Jockey Club Innovation Tower in HK PolyU makes the whole building a sharp contrast with other Academic Building around. The color of new century architecture is always white, which can mix with the nature easily and make the architecture stand out in cities’ skyscrapers. Especially the Estação do Oriente, the combination of so many single lines and planes in different degrees builds up a strong sense of luxury with the decoration of yellow light at night.
Modern architects are looking for ways to rush out from the inherent thinking of building. They usually merge the hi-technique to attain the balance of nature and architecture. Up to the external figure, this is where they can exert their gifts, so modern architecture has bolder idea than any architecture last century.
Contrast
Early 20th century:
Villa Savoye by Le
Corbusier
Fallingwater by F. L. Wright
Early 21st century:
Estação do Oriente by Santiago
Calatrava
Jockey Club Innovation Tower
in HK PolyU by Zaha Hadid
New century architecture is accustomed to using irregular association between line and plane to create a grand momentum. The shape is always advanced. The application of changing the normal line of the basic stereoscopic elements is widely used. The fluid appearance of Jockey Club Innovation Tower in HK PolyU makes the whole building a sharp contrast with other Academic Building around. The color of new century architecture is always white, which can mix with the nature easily and make the architecture stand out in cities’ skyscrapers. Especially the Estação do Oriente, the combination of so many single lines and planes in different degrees builds up a strong sense of luxury with the decoration of yellow light at night.
Modern architects are looking for ways to rush out from the inherent thinking of building. They usually merge the hi-technique to attain the balance of nature and architecture. Up to the external figure, this is where they can exert their gifts, so modern architecture has bolder idea than any architecture last century.
Fallingwater can only be
appreciated.
Some artworks, like Fallingwater,
we can only appreciate it. The idea conveyed through this building is ahead of
other the same period works, directly sticking to the present. The value of
this architecture is not only that it breaks the boundary between architecture
and nature, but also how we should interact with nature, how we live with
nature.
Louis Hellman defines modern
architecture like an Esperanto and it shouldn't be understood in the eyes of
majority people[xii].
We consider Fallingwater a modern architecture. After this not practical work,
but still an insurmountable artwork, is entitled a tourists’ destination, will
a second architecture like Fallingwater appear again?
(Word Counting: 1622)
Reference
Laurie Schneider-Adams, Art
Across Time
Malcolm Millais, Explording the myths of modern architure
尹國均，國外後現代建築
Prairie School on
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is Fallingwater modern? (Not according to Wall Street
Journal)
Is Fallingwater modern? (Wall Street Journal), David Netto
Charles Wiebe, Frank Lloyd Wright, Fallingwater, Modernism, Khan
Academy
Fallingwater - Frank Lloyd Wright’s Powerful Union of
Architecture and Nature, Kaye
Passmore, Ed. D, Art education consultant, Corpus Christi, Texas
[i]
He
considered himself the originator of ‘modern’ architecture, Page 31, Malcolm Millais, Explording
the myths of modern architure
[ii]
From ‘The
style is usually marked by horizontal lines, flat or hipped roofs with
broad overhanging eaves, windows grouped in horizontal bands,
integration with the landscape, solid construction, craftsmanship, and
discipline in the use of ornament’, Wikipedia, Prairie School
[iii]
From ‘He
boldly extended the balcony of the second floor master bedroom soaring six feet
beyond the living room below’, Charles Wiebe, Fallingwater, Khan Academy
[iv]
According to ‘By
2001 some of the 15 foot cantilevers had fallen more than 7 inches’, Charles
Wiebe, Fallingwater, Khan Academy
[v]
‘Wright even
bows to nature by bending a trellis beam to accommodate a pre-existing tree’,
Charles Wiebe, Fallingwater, Khan Academy
[vi]
‘Fallingwater
fulfills Wright’s pursuit of organic architecture’, Page 907, Laurie
Schneider-Adams, Art Across Time
[vii]
‘Wright built
a weekend house for the Edgar Kaufmann family’, Page 907, Laurie
Schneider-Adams, Art Across Time
[viii]‘Wright in
any way, he was simply a one-off’, Page 31, Laurie Schneider-Adams, Art Across Time
[ix]
From title ‘Fallingwater
- Frank Lloyd Wright’s Powerful Union of Architecture and Nature’, Kaye
Passmore, Ed. D
[x] From ‘But living
in a masterpiece doesn't appear to have made anybody any happier than they
might have been living in a normal house’, Is Fallingwater modern, David
Netto
[xi]
From ‘That's
mainly because by the late 1930s, just as the Kaufmanns' house was being
completed, the moment had come in architecture when the "industrial"
strain of modernism would finally conquer the handmade’, Is Fallingwater
modern, David Netto
[xii]
From ‘Modern architecture is like
Esperanto, an attempt to invent and impose a common “rational"
language and succeeding only in being incomprehensible and alien to the
majority of people’, index, Malcolm Millais, Explording the myths of modern architure
No comments:
Post a Comment