| Sorted by date | |||
page120from Nordic Architects Writes
We have Cezanne and Picasso. Many say that
Picasso is the greatest painter of today. Maybe. Maybe he will found the
painting of the future. Or maybe his influence will be gone in a few years, or
a few decades.
Maybe
there will appear some day a strong mind that will go deep into things, and the
doors will open for the painting of the future. Maybe the same will happen in
the art of building! Only the future can tell.
But, say someone, why all this talking
about deep thinking? Our time is practical! We have to build in a practical
way. Practicality has to decide the form of our architecture. If a building is
practical, it is beautiful. This is what they say.
But
I wonder! I wonder if it is so, because we so often see very, very practical
buildings, practical from every angle, practical in every point, and they
appear so terribly ugly. They have no proportions, no rhythm, no balance of
masses. The colour is terrible, the treatment of materials is terrible.
So,
I do not think we can say that if a building is practical it is beautiful. But,
I think we could say – or rather – I do think we should say that a building has
to be practical to be able to be beautiful. And further, a practical building
is able to be beautiful only if the architect has a subconscious sense for
beauty, that is, if he is a creative artist.
Is
the practical really so especial a mark of our age as we think? We are inclined
to think so when we see what they had in the earlier days. But is seems to me
that they were more practical than we are, because they could get along with
lesser needs. And on the other hand, we do not know what the future holds for
our practically. Maybe then it will be said: they were not practical at all. They
used gasoline in their cars, just as in the old kerosene lamps! Why couldn’t
they take the power directly from the air as we do?
Every
age has its own point of view regarding practicality. Practicality is one the
cornerstones of all architecture, has always been and always will be so. Nature
is our teacher in the principles of architecture, and nature itself is the
perfect functionalism.
When
we speak about practicality, we mostly think about our daily comfort. We push a
button here and a button there, we get cold here and hot there, and that is all
very practical. But we do not live for our daily comfort. We have higher
ideals. And the very man who preaches the coldest and hardest practicality is
not always practical himself. He plants roses in his garden. Why roses? Roses
are not practical. Cabbage is more practical.
Then there arises the question of our
traditions.
Couldn’t
we take the forms from our forefathers and mould them so that they fit our time
and then develop our architecture through tradition?
That
is evolution!
It
sounds good.
But
where do we find our traditions?
If
we go to the forms of yesterday, I am afraid we will arrive in trouble, because
we will find so many different styles. Which of them should we adopt? Or should
we take all of them and melt them together to a gay pot-pourri?
Or
should we go deeper in the past and find our forms there?
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
At 2021-11-02 20:28:57,
page000
Paula Noronen
Yökoulun Pieni Kauhukäsikirja
kuvitus
Kati Närhi
Tammi
... ...
At 2021-09-28 09:43:54,
page0013
Ruoka
Kakkua pullaa, leipää ja
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:05:39,
page0012
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:04:58,
page0011
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:04:35,
page0010
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:04:02,
page0009
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:03:17,
page0008
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:02:35,
page0007
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:02:14,
page0006
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:01:32,
page0005
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:59:22,
page0000
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:58:31,
page0000
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:57:52,
page0000
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:57:21,
page0000
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:56:34,
page0000
... ...
Share to International sites:
分享到国内网站和微博
