Masters of the Structural Aesthetic

141 Pages·2018·4.728 MB·English

by  Derek Thomas (auth.)

Derek Thomas
Masters of the
Structural Aesthetic
Masters of the Structural Aesthetic
Derek Thomas
Masters of the Structural
Aesthetic
DerekThomas
CapeTown,WesternCape
SouthAfrica
ISBN978-981-10-5444-0 ISBN978-981-10-5445-7 (eBook)
DOI10.1007/978-981-10-5445-7
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2017946476
©SpringerNatureSingaporePteLtd.2018
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpartof
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or
dissimilarmethodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexempt
fromtherelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Thepublisher,theauthorsandtheeditorsaresafetoassumethattheadviceandinformationinthis
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained
hereinor for anyerrors oromissionsthat may havebeenmade. Thepublisher remainsneutralwith
regardtojurisdictionalclaimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations.
Printedonacid-freepaper
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbySpringerNature
TheregisteredcompanyisSpringerNatureSingaporePteLtd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Preface
Attheendofmyfinalyearinarchitecture,Ihadthegoodfortunetobeawardeda
travel scholarship to any place of my choice. The focus of the study had to
contribute to the understanding of architecture as being the art of philosophical
embodiment and of intuitive thought. Efficient buildings are often without archi-
tectural value, just as an initially pleasing building can be inefficient and quite
possibly impractical. On my study tour to Italy, I immersed myself in finding out
more about Pier Luigi Nervi who had managed through his intuitive skills and
architectural sensibility to mix just the right proportion of both, but more signifi-
cantly,towhatextenthewasoperatinginsyncwithNature.
WhileexploringtheworkofProfessorNerviinmoredepth,Iresearchedhisnew
structural techniques and its potentialities. I realised at the time that Nervi was
becoming an icon of the twentieth century for his achievements in both structural
andconstructionalengineering,aswellasinarchitecture.Thisviewwasreinforced
byErnestoRogers(1957)aboutNerviasexpressedinAPortraitofPierLuigiNervi
(quotingLeonBattistaAlberti):‘HimIcallArchitect,who,byasureandwonderful
Art and Method, is able, both in thought and invention, to devise, and with
execution, to complete all those Works, which, by means of Movement and great
Weights,andamassmentofBodies,can,withthegreatestBeauty,beadaptedtothe
usesofMankind.’OfallthecommentatorsonNervi’sapproachtodesign,starting
with ‘a basis of scientific certainty, but transcending through intuition’ and his
‘disciplinedandprecisemind’,Rogers’clarityofobservationstandsout.
As though to confirm how elusive, even subjective, a unified evaluation of the
structuralaestheticcanbe,evenamongstthoserecognisedasauthorities,therehave
beendiscordantviews.InOveArup:MasterBuilderoftheTwentiethCentury,Arup
stated that Pier Luigi Nervi had said that ‘the outward appearance of a building
cannot and must not be anything but a visual expression of an efficient structural
andconstructionalreality’(Jones2006).Arup,however,initiallydisagreedthatthis
maxim could be the ‘main criterion of architectural merit’. It did not fit many
v
vi Preface
obvious famous works (he stated) such as Le Corbusier’s Ronchamp Chapel or
severalbuildingsbyMiesvanderRoheorOscarNiemeyer,anditoverlookedhis
long-heldbeliefthatsizeandscalearealwaysrelevanttocriteriaofmerit.‘Nervi’s
own obvious interest in form is notalways the visual expression of structural and
constructional reality’, Arup observed in 1955, and he went further: ‘ Formal and
spatial relationships on the one hand and structural rightness on the other can
conflict: the idea that correct structural and the best possible aesthetic solutions
areoneandthesamethingmust,I’mafraid,beabandonedtogetherwiththeolder
philosopher’s dream about the harmony and ultimate identity of truth, goodness,
justiceandbeauty’.
Due to the rising ‘flamboyant rhetoric and incontinent generalisations [that]
easily attracted indefensible attention... [Arup] who had denounced the idea that
correct structural and the best possible aesthetic solutions are one and the same
thingwasforcedtoreiterateoneyearlater:‘IamnotreallyattackingNervi—heis
onthesideofangelsinthismatter—Iamdefendinghimagainstthosewhousehis
words to defeat his spirit’. He added that building ‘is an art within a limited
framework within which certain rules must be obeyed. Nervi’s kind of logical
build up in a scheme is to my mind the essence of good engineering and good
architecture alike. Architects forget about the more sordid aspects of life because
they—quite legitimately—get involved in the aesthetic aspects of their work’
(Jones 2006). This turnaround can be construed as an endorsement that indeed
structure and the aesthetic are indispensable allies in the design of the best in
architecture, as evident in the works of the ten master architects presented in this
narrative.
This alternative evaluation of Nervi’s work applies equally to the role of
architects and the products of their thought and invention down the Ages and is
the starting point for this narrative which explores ten masters of the structural
aestheticandtheirarchitecturallegacies.
The history of architecture acknowledges the legendary role of architects who
have led the field and through their example have brought about significant para-
digmshifts.Architecture,likeart,reflectsthechangingculturalmoodofthetimes
and is marked by movements, for example, the Renaissance, or Modernism and
even the avant-garde. According to Iversen (1993), Alois Riegl claims that ‘the
changeintheartisticformsandaestheticsareprettymuchrelatedwiththechange
ofthewaypeopleperceivetheworld.’
The role of the structural engineer is paramount in realising the designs of the
architect.‘Theaestheticsofawelldesignedstructureisindeedinherentinitsvery
existence and therefore, when visually expressed clearly and honestly makes its
ownaestheticcontribution’(Khan1980).
Morein-depthscientificknowledgeofthenatureandpropertiesofmaterialsand
advancedtechnologyhavegiventothemodernworkmanimmenseadvantagesover
hismedievalbrother-craftsman.‘Theeffortsofprimitivemanintheconstructionof
Preface vii
dwellings must have been at first determined solely by his physical wants. Only
afterthesehadbeenprovidedfor,andmaterialsamassedonwhichhisimagination
might exercise itself, would he begin to plan and erect structures, possessing not
only utility, but also grandeur and beauty’ (Statham 1911). Computer-aided tech-
nologyhasbroughtaboutsignificantchangesinthedetailsofthetrade,ortheartof
building,althoughstonesandbricksusedhistoricallyandconcrete,andsteelnow,
stillformthemoresolidpartsofalledifices.
Theessentialfocusofthisbookisthestructuralaestheticsoftenseminalworks
of architecture and those architects and engineers responsible for them. This
requires a holistic rather than a simplistic evaluation from a wider perspective
that should take into account innovative digital design aids, structural innovation
andadvancedconstructiontechnologies.
A question arises as to whether structural honesty and integrity impose oppor-
tunityorconstraintonthebuilderssincethroughtheirlimitations,materialsassuch
have encouraged design ingenuity related to their particular properties and struc-
turalpotentialities.Historyshowsthattherearenumerousiconicbuildingformsin
basic materials, such as mud or clay, before concrete and steel freed the imagina-
tions of the architect and structural engineer to design buildings that demonstrate
theintrinsicpotentialofeithermaterialwithhonestyandintegrity.
Thestudyofgeometryrelatedtoshapeandform,spaceandmotionfromavisual
standpoint,hasbeenthesubjectofmuchinterdisciplinaryresearchintothefunda-
mentalproblemsofneuroscience(Sangarietal.2011).Sotoohavetheideasfrom
thebiologicalsciencesaffectedarchitecturalthoughtandpracticewhereNatureis
presented as the main source, currently known as biomimicry. In the sphere of
genetic preference, there is strong evidence that evolution is not restricted to
biologyasweassociateitwithCharlesDarwin,butcanbeobservedinhumankind’s
cultural selection. According to observers such as Richard Dawkins, a reality in
cultural proclivity exists that relates to ideas and theories, elements that he calls
‘memes’. This hypothesis cannot be summarily brushed aside in determining
differingselectivenessbetweenculturesintheArtsandhasabearingoncognition
andthusonwhatconstitutesdistinctpreferencesindesign(Distin2005).Exploring
thepsychologicalargumentfurther,arthistorianGombrichargues‘theremaybea
transcendent aspect of art, a realm of values that great works of art incorporate,
ultimatelyone’sresponsetothesevaluesisbasedonconditionedtaste...andnoton
the application of methods or rules.’ He concludes that ‘aesthetics, as rules or
methods for discussion of aesthetic quality, cannot capture the values of art.’
(Richmond1994).
Ontheroleofcladdingofbuildings,‘Sometheoristsdenouncedecorationofthe
underlyingstructureasarchitecturallyimproper,asevidencedinbuildingsthatrely
ontheexternaltreatmentappliedtothesurface,wheninfactarchitecturalpurityis
of a much higher order’ (Sparshott 1994). Others observe that the experiential
aspect of appreciating architecture is as important as the architecture itself,
viii Preface
questioning why certain architectural experiences stay with us whereas others
vanish(Danielsson2011).
Representedinthisbookontheaestheticofthestructureinarchitecture,across
sectionofleadersinthefieldofthestructuralaestheticfromancienttimestopresent
dayareidentifiedashavingmettheessentialdeterminantsandphilosophicobser-
vations provided by recognised commentators. The selected protagonists are: The
Roman master builders (2BCE–4CE), the Gothic architects (1300–1500), Filippo
Brunelleschi(1377–1446),AntoniGaudi(1852–1926),LeCorbusier(1887–1965),
Pier Luigi Nervi (1891–1979), Oscar Niemeyer (1907–2012), J€orn Utzon
(1918–2008),FreiOtto(1925–2015)andZahaHadid(1950–2016).
Structural architecture leads to that synthesis of static-aesthetic sensitivity,
technicalknowledgeandmasteryofexecutionwhichproducedmasterpieces
ofthepast.
PierLuigiNervi,1958
Keywords
Structural aesthetic; Biomimicry; Fractal design; Thematic transformation;
Parametric design; Sense of place; Cultural proclivity; Cognitive associations;
Symbolicdesign;Visualharmony
Preface ix
Fig.1 Elementaldeterminants
x Preface
References
Danielsson,C.B.(2011).Experiencingarchitecture–Exploringthesouloftheeye
(pp.95–101).Stockholm:TheRoyalInstituteofTechnology(KTH).
Distin, K. (2005). The selfish meme: A critical assessment (pp. 2–5). Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Iversen, M. (1993). Alois Riegl: Art history and theory (p. 13). Cambridge: The
MITPress.
Jones,P.(2006).OveArup:Masterbuilderofthe20thcentury(pp.195–196).New
Haven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.
Khan, F. R. (1980). Structuralaesthetics inarchitecture and itssocial andtechno-
logicalrelevance.InArticleinZeitschrift:IABSEcongressreportAIPC=IVBH,
Kongressbericht,Nov.(p.136).
Richmond, S. (1994). Gombrich’s critique of aesthetics. In Aesthetic criteria and
thephilosophiesofscienceofPopper&Polyani(11thed.).Amsterdam:Rodopi
B.V.
Rogers,E.N.(1957).TheworksofPierLuigiNervi(vi,ix,x,xi)(PrefacebyPier
Luigi).
Sangari, A., Mirkia, H., & Assadi, A. H. (2011). Perception of motion and archi-
tectural form: Computational relationships between optical flow and perspec-
tive.Wisconsin:UniversityofWisconsin.
Sparshott, F. (1994). The aesthetics of architecture and the politics of space. In
M.H.Mitias(Ed.),Philosophyofarchitecture(p.13).Amsterdam:Rodopi.
Statham,H.H.(1911).Architectureanddome.InEncyclopaediaBritannica(Vols.
2&4).