Sorted by date |
page043from Building IdeasLike other writers of his time he produced a “universal history” from the origins of architecture in the “primitive hut”, but whereas Hegel had been interested in what buildings meant, Viollet simply concentrated on how they were built. With an emphasis on function and economy of means, all previous architecture was presented as rational – even classical Greek “ornament” was show to derive from construction. Whereas in his “Lectures” he followed a Hegelian chronology, in the Dictionnaire he used a more anatomical method – dividing up his subject into alphabetical sections, more easily, he maintained, to study its parts:
… because this form obliges us, if we might thus say it, to dissect separately in describing the functions performed, the use of each of the diverse parts and of the modifications it has experienced.21 Throughout the history of architecture he saw a fundamental principle, in the application of reason to the satisfaction of needs, and this substantiated his case for architecture as a science and saved it from its fate as historical curiosity. It was this principle which he felt should be applied in his own time, making use of new materials and advances in technology. As he writes in the Lectures, again inspired by engineering: The construction of locomotive engines did not take it into their heads to copy a stage-coach team. Moreover we must consider that art is not riveted to certain forms, but that, like human thought, it can incessantly cloth itself in new ones … Let us endeavour to proceed thus logically; let us frankly adopt the appliances afforded us by our own times, and apply them without the intervention of traditions which have lost their vitality…. 22 21 E. E. Viollet-le-Duc, the Foundations of Architecture, translated by Barry Bergdoll and Kenneth D. Whitehead, George Braziller, New York, 1990, p 18. 22 E.E. Viollet-le-Duc, Lectures on Architecture, translated by Benjamin Bucknall, Dover, New York, 1987, v2, p 64-5.
|
|