Facade as Sculpture: A Comparative Analysis Through The Works of Four Architects by Luke Kong

FAĂ&#x2021; ADE AS SCULPTURE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS THROUGH THE WORKS OF FOUR ARCHITECTS

By Kam Lung KONG

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for The degree of Bachelor of Science (Honuors) in Architectural Studies

Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering City University of Hon Kong

March 2012

DECLARATION

I declare that this thesis represents my own work, except where due acknowledgement is made, and that it has not been previously included in a thesis, dissertation or report submitted to this University or any other institution for a degree, diploma or other qualification.

Signed___________________________________ Kam Lung Luke KONG

ABSTRACT

For centuries both art and sculpture have evolved and influenced architecture to varying degrees. Architects such as Antoni Gaudi, Le Corbusier, Eero Saarinen, Jorn Utzon, Frank Gehry and Zaha Hadid have all generated ideas and visual expressions resulting in radical designs which are often associated with sculpture and therefore having â&#x20AC;&#x17E;sculptural qualitiesâ&#x20AC;&#x;. Such architectural expressions are characterized or easily identified by their organic, curvy, distorted geometrical expressions resulting in complex three-dimensional facade expressions. Though architectural forms, styles and the ideologies presented by their creators have been recorded, sculptural architecture by comparison remains relatively unexplored. This case study is aimed at providing the basic framework for analyzing facades as sculpture through comparative analysis of the work of 4 architects and 4 projects.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am very grateful to many people that have contributed in direct or indirect ways to this dissertation. First I would like to acknowledge the support of Mr. Atul Kansara, my supervisor for constant guidance and encouragement. Throughout all the stages in writing this research paper, he has consistently instructed and assisted me to reach such present form of work. I would like to express my indebtedness to Dr Joseph F Wong, Mr. Ip S F Ivan and Dr Lara Jaillon for their valuable advice during the intermediate stages. I owe most of comments as a researcher to them. In addition, I would like to thank Ms. Yau P T Serena, Mr. Wong K H Oneal, Mr. Chu K P, Mr. Yau C C Rex and Ms. Wu Y K Annase for their comments, assistance and their patience. Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to those whose influence may not be so evident but nevertheless provided the educational and emotional foundation without which this dissertation would have never been possible: my grandparents, my mum, my brothers, sisters and friends.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENT DECLARATION....................................................................................................................... i ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENT.......................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLE ................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURE ................................................................................................................ viii 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 Interpretation of Sculpture .................................................................................................... 1 Definition of Façade................................................................................................................ 6 Study Framework ................................................................................................................... 7

LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................. 8

2.1 Development of Sculptural Architecture .............................................................................. 8 2.1.1 Sculptural Decoration in Historic Styles ........................................................................... 9 2.1.1.1 Industrial Revolution ....................................................................................................... 13 2.1.1.2 Art Nouveau .................................................................................................................... 13 2.1.1.3 Modernism and International Style ................................................................................. 15 2.1.2 Engineering Challenges in Sculptural Architecture – Eero Saarinen and Jorn Utzon .............................................................................................................................. 16 2.1.3 Programmatic Era – Frank Gehry .................................................................................... 17 2.1.4 Visualization – Zaha Hadid ............................................................................................. 18 2.2 Research Question ................................................................................................................ 19

3 3.1 3.2 3.3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 20 Text Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 20 Comparative Analysis of Selected Works........................................................................... 21 Sampling Method.................................................................................................................. 21

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION .................................................................................... 25

4.1 Philosophies of Selected Four Architects ............................................................................ 25 4.1.1 Antoni Gaudi ................................................................................................................... 25 4.1.1.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 25 4.1.1.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 26 4.1.1.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 26 4.1.2 Le Corbusier .................................................................................................................... 26 4.1.2.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 26 4.1.2.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 26 4.1.2.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 27 4.1.3 Frank Gehry ..................................................................................................................... 27 4.1.3.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 27 4.1.3.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 27 4.1.3.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 28

4.1.4 Zaha Hadid ...................................................................................................................... 28 4.1.4.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 28 4.1.4.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 28 4.1.4.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 29 4.1.5 Summary .......................................................................................................................... 30 4.1.5.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 30 4.1.5.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 30 4.1.5.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 30 4.2 Intentions of Selected Works ............................................................................................... 32 4.2.1 Sagrada Familia ............................................................................................................... 32 4.2.1.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 32 4.2.1.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 32 4.2.1.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 32 4.2.2 Ronchamp Chapel............................................................................................................ 32 4.2.2.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 32 4.2.2.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 33 4.2.2.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 33 4.2.3 Guggenheim Museum Bilbao .......................................................................................... 33 4.2.3.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 33 4.2.3.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 33 4.2.3.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 34 4.2.4 MAXXI Museum ............................................................................................................. 34 4.2.4.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 34 4.2.4.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 34 4.2.4.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 34 4.2.5 Summary .......................................................................................................................... 35 4.2.5.1 Inspiration ........................................................................................................................ 35 4.2.5.2 Intention ........................................................................................................................... 35 4.2.5.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture ........................................................................ 35 4.3 Comparison ........................................................................................................................... 36 4.3.1 Simplification of Form .................................................................................................... 36 4.3.2 Distribution of Form ........................................................................................................ 39 4.3.3 Unity of Form .................................................................................................................. 42 4.3.4 Tension of Form .............................................................................................................. 46 4.3.5 Summary of Comparison ................................................................................................. 49

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................ 50

5.1 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4 5.1.5 5.2

Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 50 Antoni Gaudi and Sagrada Familia.................................................................................. 51 Le Corbusier and Ronchamp Chapel ............................................................................... 52 Frank Gehry and Guggenheim Museum Bilbao .............................................................. 53 Zaha Hadid and MAXXI Museum .................................................................................. 54 Four Selected Architects and Their Works ...................................................................... 55 Recommendations................................................................................................................. 58

REFERENCE LIST ............................................................................................................... 59

APPENDIX A1 - Comparison of Simplification of Form in Three-dimensional Perspectives ............................................................................................................................ 62 APPENDIX A2 - Comparison of unity of form in plans and section and threedimensional perspectives ....................................................................................................... 63 APPENDIX A3 - Summary of the storey of the works ...................................................... 65 APPENDIX A4 - Interrelationships between Antoni Gaudi and Sagrada Familia ......... 66 APPENDIX A5 - Interrelationships between Le Corbusier and Ronchamp Chapel ...... 67 APPENDIX A6 - Interrelationships between Frank Gehry and Guggenheim Museum Bilbao ...................................................................................................................................... 68 APPENDIX A7 - Interrelationships between Zaha Hadid and MAXXI Museum .......... 69 APPENDIX A8 - Interrelationships between ...................................................................... 70 Selected Architects and Their works.................................................................................... 70

LIST OF TABLE Table 4.1 Summary of philosophies of selected four architects 30 Table 4.2 Summary of intentions of selected works 35 Table 4.3Comparison of simplification of form in three-dimensional perspectives 37 Table 4.4 Comparison of distribution of form in plans 40 Table 4.5 Comparison of unity of form in plans and section and three-dimensional perspectives 43 Table 4.6 Summary of the storey of the work 44 Table 4.7 Comparison of tension of form in sections 47 Table 4.8 Summary of comparison 49 Table 5.1 Summary of the factors and characteristics of sculptural architectural design 56

vii

LIST OF FIGURE Figure 1.1 (a) Anish Kapoor; (b) Cloud Gate, 2006 3 Figure 1.2 (a) Henry Moore; (b) Reclining Figure, 1951) 3 Figure 1.3 (a) Alexander Calder; (b) L’empennage (1953) 3 Figure 1.4 (a) Richard Serra; (b) Tilted Arc (1981) 3 Figure 1.5 (a) Statue; (b) Wall sculpture; (c) Public sculpture 4 Figure 1.6 David (1504) Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 1.7 Canton Tower, 1988, Coop Himmelb(l)au, Austria 5 Figure 1.8 Study framework 7 Figure 2.1 (a) The Parthenon, 432BC; (b) Pantheon, 126 8 Figure 2.2 Doric order column 8 Figure 2.3 (a) Colosseum, 80; (b) Arches 9 Figure 2.4 (a) Hagia Sophia, 537; (b)Colonnades 10 Figure 2.5 (a) Pointed arches and vault; (b) flying buttress; (c) 11 Figure 2.6 Amiens Cathedral – West portals, 1270 11 Figure 2.7 Pazzi Chapel, 1461 12 Figure 2.8 (a) Cornaro Chapel, 1652; (b) Interior 12 Figure 2.9 The Crystal Palace, 1854, Joseph Pexon, U.K. 13 Figure 2.10 (Top) Exterior Glasgow School of Art, 1897, Charles Rennie, Scotland 14 Figure 2.10 (Bottom left) Hotel Guimard, 1912, Hector Guimard, France 14 Figure 2.10 (Bottom right) Casa Mila, 1912, Antoni Gaudi, Spain 14 Figure 2.11 (a) Villa Savoye, 1931, Le Corbusier 16 Figure 2.11 (b) Seagram Building, 1958, Mies van der Rohe 16 Figure 2.12(a) TWA Flight Centre, 1962, Eero Serraino; 17 Figure 2.12 (b) Sydney Opera House, 1973, Jorn Utzon 17 Figure 2.13 Guggenheim Museum Bilbao (1997), Frank Gehry 18 Figure 2.14 (a) Walking City, 1964, Archigram; (b) Hong Kong Peak, 1988, Zaha Hadid 19 Figure 3.1 Sagrada Familia – vertical expression 22 Figure 3.2 Ronchamp Chapel – curvilinear expression 23 Figure 3.3 Guggenheim Museum – curvilinear expression 24 Figure 3.4 MAXXI Museum – off axis angular expression 24 Figure 4.1 Parabolic and hyperbolic curves 25 Figure 4.2 Directions of Facade – (a) Guggenheim Museum Bilbao; (b) MAXXI Museum 41 Figure 5.1 Interrelationships between Antoni Gaudi and Sagrada Familia (see also Appendix A4) 51 Figure 5.2 Interrelationship between Le Corbusier and Ronchamp Chapel (see also Appendix A5) 52 Figure 5.3 Interrelationship between Frank Gehry and Guggenheim Museum Bilbao (see also Appendix A6) 53 Figure 5.4 Interrelationship between Zaha Hadid and MAXXI Museum (see also Appendix A7) 54 Figure 5.5 Interrelationships between four selected architects and their works (see also Appendix A8) 55

viii

INTRODUCTION

Buildings have existed for centuries during which time a number of styles have appeared. Over centuries architecture has transformed from early primitive, organic expressions into regular, defined shapes influenced largely by Modernism. Exponents of the „ Modern Movement „ believed in the theory that the form of the building should reflect or relate to the function – hence “ Form Follows Function “ resulting in architectural forms that are shaped into efficient box-like expressions. However, this theory has been challenged by some claiming different theories which have been influenced by other factors. Over several decades only a few sculptural buildings sprouted however in recent years this has changed and the numbers have risen quite dramatically. The emergence and the popularity of designing buildings which are irregular and 3 dimensionally challenging has in some cases elevated to having „ Iconic Status‟. Fashion houses flock to the scene in an attempt to closely mimic or draw inspiration from the latest expressions of our built environment which are a reflection of our socio-political status – one such example is the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain designed by Frank Gehry (Figure 2.17). This museum is regarded as one of the pioneering masterpieces in creating sculptural architecture. Its sculptural facade is utilized as a design strategy for attracting attention and for increasing tourism in an area of Spain that otherwise known for wine growing - basque country. Ironically sculptural architecture has received a lot of publicity but very little has been documented and so this study aims to fill this gap by investigating the common grounds in the making of sculptural architecture, the factors, the characteristics and the architects that have contributed to the renaissance of sculptural architecture through works.

1.1

Interpretation of Sculpture

Today, there are a wide range of interpretations and definitions for the word „sculpture „

It is therefore important to firstly define and interpret what sculpture is and then to explain the relationship between sculpture and the field of architecture before proceeding with the analysis of sculptural architecture. By definition, Sculpture: According to the „Cambridge Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary‟ and „Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary‟, the term „sculpture‟ is defined as “the art of forming solid objects that represent a thing, person, idea, etc. out of a material such as wood, clay, metal or stone, or an object made in this way.” and “a work of art that is a solid figure or object made by carving or shaping wood, stone, clay, metal, etc.” respectively. As defined above, sculpture generally is a three-dimensional object which could be composed of any material. Literally, everything or anything could be considered to have sculptural qualities – this is often dependant on the level of artistic value or importance placed upon it. While the concepts of sculpture are surely familiar to sculptors, there is considerable variability in the meanings attributed to them. The definitions of sculpture have been offered by different sculptors in their aims and ideals according to their different characters personality and his point of development (Sylvester, 1988). It can be seen that sculpture can be made in different forms among sculptors. Anish Kapoor (Figure 1.1a) thinks sculpture as a collective and something that has resonance on an individual level and so becomes mythical (Kent, 2008). For example, Cloud Gate (Figure 1.1b) reflected and distored the skyline which was resonance to the people and the city. According to Henry Moore (Figure 1.2a), sculptures should have a certain mystery and should make demands on the spectator (Day, 2008). His work, Reclining Figure (Figure 1.2b) was a semi-abstract form which was not easy to understand and forced people to think of the meaning behind the sculpture. Different to Kapoor and Moore, Alexander Calder (Figure 1.3a) considered sculpture is a series of individual elements which are able to move, to stir, to oscillate, to come and go in its relationships with the other elements in its universe (Calder, 1932). He believed sculpture to be a composition of motion (Prather et al., 1988). L‟empennage (Figure 1.3b) is one of his representative works which can be moved by an external force, such as wind. To Richard Serra (Figure 1.4a), a term of sculpture means having its own space which exists in time and which is very different from the flat picture plane (Seidner, 1993). For instance, Tilted Arc (Figure 1.4b) was made of steel which was corroded to express its existence when time was passing by. It indicates that even sculptors describe sculpture in different meanings without an exact definition. 2

Figure 1.1 (a) Anish Kapoor; (b) Cloud Gate, 2006

Figure 1.2 (a) Henry Moore; (b) Reclining Figure, 1951)

Figure 1.3 (a) Alexander Calder; (b) Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;empennage (1953)

Figure 1.4 (a) Richard Serra; (b) Tilted Arc (1981)

Though there is no accurate concept, sculpture still has its place or role in representation, decoration and centralization. For example, a statue (Figure 1.5a) is a sculpture representing something in terms of realistic form or abstract form. Metal sculptural wall art in the example below is used for creating visual interest and presence (Figure 1.5b) sculptures on walls within a building can help to articulate the surface finish or add visual interest to an otherwise plain wall. (Figure 1.5c)

Figure 1.5 (a) Statue; (b) Wall sculpture; (c) Public sculpture

Sculptures in themselves are usually individual and therefore singular and unique. For example, David (Figure 1.6) by Michelangelo represented the prefect of a body while Cloud Gate (Figure 1.1b) by Anish Kapoor created linkage between the sculpture and the surrounding. As a medium sculpture has the power to transform and bring about social change through expression it therefore influences us and how we perceive the world. As a result, design industry today can be said greatly influenced by sculpture. Apart from acting as representation, non-representatively sculptural aspects have also been taken advantage in exploring the relationship between object and its surroundings. The works, therefore, can be lablled as sculpture.

Figure 1.6 David (1504) 4

Architecture is sometimes called „sculpture‟ especially when it is shaped by particular factors. Studying precedent examples of buildings provides crucial information for understanding and the composition of sculptural architecture. For example, Rooftop Remodeling (Figure 1.7) is the most representative work of Coop Himmelb(l)au. Although the work only remodeled the roof, the uniqueness is emphasized by the weird façade which is different to the past. It cannot be found its start or end of the façade because it is a united form. It can be seen that architecture today can be made in an unusual form and even sculptural expression through using computer-aided design tools.

Figure 1.7 Canton Tower, 1988, Coop Himmelb(l)au, Austria

1.2

Definition of Façade

Façade, according to Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus, means “the front of a building, especially a large or attractive building”. One can therefore deduce that the façade of a building is a key aspect of sculptural architecture. In addition, façade is the result from an instrument of culture or an autonomous form (Moussavi, 2009). This reinforces the point that architects use the façade of a building to express their philosophies through the expression of form.

1.3

Study Framework

Figure 1.8 Study framework

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1

Development of Sculptural Architecture

From very early times, sculpture in architecture was used to decorate buildings. Typically found in classical architecture in buildings such as The Parthenon (Figure 2.1a) in Ancient Greek architecture and the Pantheon (Figure 2.1b) in Ancient Roman architecture. Through studying these buildings, it can be seen that elements such as the roofs, walls and columns were decorated. For example, sculpted columns (Figure 2.2) were a key element in the beautification of buildings and although these buildings had sculpted motifs as decoration these buildings in themselves were not regarded as sculptural objects.

Figure 2.1 (a) The Parthenon, 432BC; (b) Pantheon, 126

Figure 2.2 Doric order column 8

2.1.1

Sculptural Decoration in Historic Styles

In the history of architecture, Greek and Roman architecture were both regarded as classical architecture and therefore shared a similar style and design language. In 400BC, Greek architecture rose to prominence during which time a number of temples were constructed. It can be seen that the most basic element of the temple was the colonnade (Ching, 2007) which can be classified into three types â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Doric, Ionic and Corinthian however in all cases the column caps and the base of the columns were sculpted to varying degrees for decorative purposes. The Parthenon, a representative Greek temple, followed the Doric order (Figure 2.2) having three distinctive parts â&#x20AC;&#x201C; roof, column and floor. In 200BC, Roman architecture led the way for buildings such as temples and public, civic amenity buildings. Distinctly different from Greek architecture, the Colosseum (Figure 2.3a) explored complex articulation of vertical wall surfaces using arched construction. Thus the wall itself becomes the architecture. The technique of framing arches (Figure 2.3b) within engaged half-columns supporting an entablature (Ching, 2007). The half-columns were used as decorative elements either side of arched openings offering as a sense of vertical expression.

Figure 2.3 (a) Colosseum, 80; (b) Arches

In the 330, Byzantine architecture was developed. The main building type in this style was church. The feature of churches was an integral part of the architecture of the later Roman Empire. It shows churches were transformed into a new form for the churches. For example, a 9

famous Byzantine church – Hagia Sophia (Figure 2.4a) was the vaulted space without intermediate supports that had ever been built. This huge dome made a message – “suspended by a golden chain from heaven” (Fletcher, 1996). Furthermore, the church was interrupted by two-storey open colonnades (Figure 2.4b) that had different column spacing at the two levels. Gold mosaic using purely non-figural motifs covered the vault surfaces, wall spaces between two windows (Fletcher, 1996).

Figure 2.4 (a) Hagia Sophia, 537; (b) Colonnades

In the twelfth century, Gothic architecture was developed in France and then spread to other parts of Europe. The main building type in this style was the church. Instead of the domed roofs seen in Byzantine architecture, pointed arches, vaults (Figure 2.5a) and flying buttresses (Figure 2.5b) were applied in this style. For example, Amiens Cathedral (Figure 2.6) is one such example of a church with richly decorated chapels added to the south nave aisle. The vault is 42m high and very expansive featuring double aisles. Furthermore, the quadripartite vaults of the church are supported by a range of flying buttress (Fletcher, 1996). At this time, sculpture was used to as decoration only. In the church, there are richly decorated portals to both facades and the west portals are covered with figure sculptures (Fletcher, 1996).

Figure 2.5 (a) Pointed arches and vault; (b) flying buttress; (c)

Figure 2.6 Amiens Cathedral – West portals, 1270

During the fifteenth century, Renaissance architecture developed in Italy and then spread further within Europe. In this style, classical architecture – Greek and Roman architecture were revived. The dome was applied to represent the degree of „perfection‟. Also, buildings were designed into a balanced system of proportions. For example, Pazzi Chapel (Figure 2.7), designed by Brunelleschi, is created in this new style. In the Chapel, it was set the tone for a type of architecture that emphasized the use of columns, pilasters, and entablatures, all unified by a proportional system that governed the heights, widths, and intercolumniations of the pilasters (Ching, 2007). Buildings in this style not only were formed by geometries, but also designed to a system of proportions.

Figure 2.7 Pazzi Chapel, 1461

In the seventeenth century, Baroque architecture was developed in Italy and then spread to Europe. It can be observed that highly decorative details and ornaments were the main characteristics. Different kinds of sculpture were sculpted on different elements of a building. This ornamentation was carried out to an extraordinary degree without regard to fitness or suitability (Fletcher, 1996). For example, Cornaro Chapel (Figure 2.8a), designed by Bernini, is a chapel which was contrast to previous styles. A lot of sculpture was sculpted in the interior (Figure 2.8b). Besides, the expression of sculpture was livelier.

Figure 2.8 (a) Cornaro Chapel, 1652; (b) Interior

2.1.1.1 Industrial Revolution At turn of the 19th century, the Industrial Revolution began firstly in Europe which then spread to the world. It had a huge impact on the world and influenced in different aspects. Architecture was one of the industries that greatly affected by Industrial Revolution, for example, The Crystal Palace (Figure 2.9) was used to display the latest technologies of which architects employed to integrate into the architecture. By applying advanced technologies, some of them incorporated the sculptural aspects into their works in making as sculptural forms.

Figure 2.9 The Crystal Palace, 1854, Joseph Pexon, U.K.

2.1.1.2 Art Nouveau In the nineteenth century, Art Nouveau was developed as a style flowered during the time of Industrial Revolution and was exuberant and colourful, delighting in natural forms and sinuous, organic curves (Hammett, 2008). New technologies invented during the Industrial Revolution were employed to create natural forms and structure that had only designed on paper. The architecture had set a trend among fashionable, European architects, such as, Charles Rennie Mackintosh in Britain (Figure 2.10 Top), Hector Guimard in Belgium (Figure 2.10 Bottom left) and Antoni Gaudi in Spain (Figure 2.10 Bottom right). The style led architecture to different areas. For example, architect, Antoni Gaudi was deeply affected by Art Nouveau. He made use of the fusion of nature and geometry (Sterner, 1985) 13

integrated into architecture to harmonize with the nature. His work, Sagrada Familia (Figure 3.1), which is one of the significant works showing the impact Art Nouveau had made in the creation of an organic form rather like a sculptural art.

Figure 2.10 (Top) Exterior Glasgow School of Art, 1897, Charles Rennie, Scotland Figure 2.11 (Bottom left) Hotel Guimard, 1912, Hector Guimard, France Figure 2.12 (Bottom right) Casa Mila, 1912, Antoni Gaudi, Spain

2.1.1.3 Modernism and International Style In the twentieth century, modernism appeared when avant-grade architects considered buildings to have been over-decorated. It was various twentieth-century movements that combine functionalism with aesthetic ideals that reject historical precepts and styles (Robinson, 2003). Because of the advantage of Industrial Revolution, new technologies were developed and new materials such as iron, steel and glass were being mass-produced through industrialization. Instead of applying a style, architects such as Le Corbusier started to design box-liked buildings such as the Villa Savoye (Figure 2.13a) integrated with new materials. This type of building was simple in form and was therefore regarded as being honest to the functions it supported. Modernism led architecture into a new era one that is totally different to the past. In general, modernism embraces five key principles which Le Corbusier described as having : (1) pilotis - elevating the mass off the ground, (2) The free plan, achieved through the separation of the load-bearing columns from the walls subdividing the space, (3) The free faรงade, the corollary of the free plan in the vertical plane, (4) The long horizontal sliding window, and finally (5) The roof garden, restoring, supposedly, the area of ground covered by the house. Villa Savoye is one of the great icons of modern architecture (Frampton, 1992; Jones, 2002). In the 1920s, International style was generated from modernism. This style advocated the elimination of ornamentation, replaced with box-shaped buildings, expansive windows, smooth wall surfaces and cantileved building extension (Robinsion, 2003). It can be easily observed many skyscrapers were adapted. The buildings are interlocking spaces, hovering volumes and interpenetrating planes made by concrete, steel and glass (Curtis, 1996). For example, Seagram Building (Figure 2.14b), designed by Mies van der Rohe, is a skyscraper that expresses its volume and structure enclosed by curtain wall.

Figure 2.13 (a) Villa Savoye, 1931, Le Corbusier Figure 2.14 (b) Seagram Building, 1958, Mies van der Rohe

2.1.2

Engineering Challenges in Sculptural Architecture â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Eero Saarinen and Jorn Utzon

In the 1950s, organic modernism was come out when the time was the mid-century of modernism. Architects began to explore the form to be organic and even sculptural in response to the natural surroundings. Therefore, more sculptural buildings can be seen at this time. Due to the advancement of technologies such as reinforced concrete, buildings were started to build into organic forms. Architects, Eero Saarina was one of the pioneers who thought architecture could serve other purposed and respond to the new concerns of post-war society. He considered architecture not only serve the functions, but also satisfy spiritual needs of man (Serraino, 2005). His work, Tran World Airlines Terminal (Figure 2.15a) deeply shows his philosophy. The terminal is composed of modular space and organic form because Saarien explored the possibilities of structure that were not only mathematical formulae, but also were good ways to create difference (Serraino, 2005). At the same time, engineering continued to advance after WW2. The influence of advanced engineering was not limited to just construction, it is also filtered its way into the application of organic modernism. Although computers have only been around since the end of WW2, during this relatively short period their intervention has drastically changed the world and the 16

way in which architecture is practiced today. Previously sculptural forms in organic modernism were complex requiring high levels of mathematics and complex calculations. Hence due to limited resources, most sculptural buildings were still formed from simple geometries to create variations. For example, Sydney Opera House by Jorn Utzon (Figure 2.16b) and TWA Flight Center by Eero Serraino that are sculptural forms were designed from simple geometries but proved to be challenging and ground-breaking at that point in time.

Figure 2.15(a) TWA Flight Centre, 1962, Eero Serraino; Figure 2.16 (b) Sydney Opera House, 1973, Jorn Utzon

2.1.3

Programmatic Era â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Frank Gehry

In the 1980s, computer-aided design (CAD) which uses computer to design when computer (CAD) is used to translate and improve existing ways of thinking, and to build faster and more efficiently (Schmitt, 1999). CAD used was popular within the fields of engineering and architecture. CAD connects the real and virtual worlds and points to the original idea behind using computers in architecture: to improve the built, physical environment by providing the best instruments and methods for the creators of architecture (Schmitt, 1999). Because of the advantage of CAD tools, architects have employed the tools to explore architecture into the complexity of structure and form with high freedom. Architecture is not more limited by the technologies. The presentations of architecture are based on architectsâ&#x20AC;&#x; thoughts and then formed by use of the tools. Therefore, a lot of sculptural buildings has been designed and constructed since the 1980s.

Frank Gehry, was one such architect who started to use CAD tools at a very early stage. He has been influenced by the world of art – and, in particular, by American Pop artists and Minimalist artists (Chollet, 2001). Most of his works like Guggenheim Museum Bilbao (Figure 2.17) are designed into curvy forms that are considered sculptural forms. Therefore, Gehry uses CAD tools to resolve the increasingly difficult task of describing the innovative new designs to the contractor (Lindsey, 2001).

Figure 2.17 Guggenheim Museum Bilbao (1997), Frank Gehry

2.1.4

Visualization – Zaha Hadid

Today, architecture has developed into many styles. It can be seen that architecture can be represented as different forms that can be either regular or free-form. This is no doubt a reflection of a style of architecture driven and influenced by the philosophy of the architect. Walking City (Figure 2.18a), by Archigram, was designed as a moveable structure – such concepts may not have been possible some years ago technology was not sufficiently advanced. Architects now use advanced computer aided design tools to direct their designs and visualize complex geometries where previously this was very much limited to the capabilities and the manual drawing techniques being reproduced on paper / non digital media. Zaha Hadid designs and draws with a certain notion of distortion, thus allowing herself to see a project from every possible and impossible perspective (Schumacher, 2004). This enables 18

Hadid to explore further possibilities in design. Hadid takes advantage of computer generated forms as tools for testing and visualizing her design concepts in three-dimensions which would otherwise be virtually impossible to do manually to any degree of success.

Figure 2.18 (a) Walking City, 1964, Archigram; (b) Hong Kong Peak, 1988, Zaha Hadid

2.2

Research Question

As shown in the above literature review, the purpose of this study is to report on factors and characteristics of sculptural architecture design. To address the issues already outlined and to begin to close the gaps on any previous research, the present study was designed to address the following research question: How does architecture - facades in particular relate to sculpture?

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Although it is difficult to observe with clarity the characteristics of architecture, it is believed that the origins of architecture lie within the architects themselves and is reflected through their work. In order to understanding sculptural architecture, the study was designed to answer the following question: How does architecture - facade in particular be shaped as sculpture? However, because of lacking in existing research, this study aimed to generate a theory for a less-studied area in architectural design rather than adapting established theory. The question was therefore investigated by constructing and administrating a specifically designed version of the comparative analysis of sculptural architecture design and therefore a comprehensive analyzing methodology – Qualitative Case Study was employed including extracting subjects' words and analyzing plans, elevations, sections and built form of the subjects to gain in-depth and holistic understanding of the subjects. The proposed research method was made use of „retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events‟ and also „the investigation as having insufficient precision, objectivity and rigor‟ (Yin, 1994), which it was applied into research is a lack of existing theory and study on this research area. Moreover, in keeping with a tradition in qualitative research, the research method was aimed for those descriptions of the individual cases, while also attempting to identify some general trends and significant patterns among them. Achieving this goal required triangulation of multiple analyzing methods, data source and viewpoints. The study then documented the subjects' philosophies and design strategies about sculptural architecture, revealing common grounds of the design. Two types of analyzes were conduced: (a) the extracted descriptions of the subjects were used to investigate the characteristics of the subjects and (b) a series of comparative analysis were employed to examine the differences between the four works.

3.1

Text Analysis

The descriptions of the architects and their works were extracted from their own words and criticisms. Summarized text relating to sculptural architecture was categorized into three

major categories â&#x20AC;&#x201C; inspiration, intention and advancement of sculptural architecture in representing philosophies of architects and intentions of works.

3.2

Comparative Analysis of Selected Works

A cross-case study approach was adopted to provide an understanding of the characteristics of the four works. The staged processes shifted from two-dimensional planes to threedimensional volumes and from the abstract forms to concrete shapes. A series of diagrams were then generated to observe the characteristics of the individual cases and interpret the similarities, differences and trends discovered in their work. As above mentioned, the comparative analyses were conducted and placed into four categories - Simplification of form, Distribution of form, Unity of form and Tension of form.

3.3

Sampling Method

The subjects adopted for this study were the four works of four architects. The four architects and their works were selected because they had a significant impact throughout the world and were seen to be pioneers of what we refer to as sculptural architecture. The samples of work represent and include architects from different periods in history among these include Antoni Gaudi, Sagrada Familia, Le Corbusier, Ronchamp Chapel, Frank Gehry, Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, and finally Zaha Hadid, MAXXI Museum. Antoni Gaudi was a Spanish architect who style of Art Nouveau. He was a pioneer in designing architecture as an organic form. His most significant work, Sagrada Familia (Figure 3.1), located in Barcelona, Spain commenced in 1882. Essentially a large Roman Catholic Church which Gaudi surpassed the limitations of a rigid, classical plan form by creating a highly decorated, sculptural facade which continuous high into the sky as if it were trying to reach out to the heavens above.

Figure 3.1 Sagrada Familia, 1882, Spain â&#x20AC;&#x201C; vertical expression

As distinct to Gaudi, Le Corbusier, a great Swiss architect, was the promoted modernism which expressed simplicity of form above all else often resembling box-like forms. However, in his later years, Corbusier departed from simple box like expressions and expressed a fascination for curved expressions in pursuit of sculptural form. Ronchamp Chapel (Figure 3.2) is one such example designed in this way. The chapel located in Roncahmp, France, was completed in 1954 and it was the first sculptural piece of architecture designed by Corbusier.

Figure 3.2 Ronchamp Chapel, 1954, France â&#x20AC;&#x201C; curvilinear expression

After entering the new era, the famous Canadian American architect, Frank Gehry, (Pritzker Prize-winner) began using computers as a vehicle for exploring complex 3 dimensional curvilinear geometries. His most influential, representative work i.e., the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, Spain (Figure 3.3) was completed in 1997 and is still regarded as one of the most critical works representing deconstructivism.

Figure 3.3 Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, 1997, Spain â&#x20AC;&#x201C; curvilinear expression

As compared with Gehry, Zaha Hadid, an Iraqi British architect, was also awarded the Pritzker Prize. Unlike her predecessors, she is a theorist and experimentalist in architecture using abstract drawing and computer-aided design tools to explore complex 3 dimensional geometries. She claims she is free from the traditional, two-dimensional approach to design. Therefore the architecture of Hadid contrasts with early examples - MAXXI Museum (Figure 3.4) is a good example for demonstrating her philosophy. It is located in Rome, Italy and was completed in 2010. For Hadid, the museum help keep the innovation in architecture in which Hadid imparts her philosophy and applies these theories through computer aided design.

Figure 3.4 MAXXI Museum, 2010, Italy â&#x20AC;&#x201C; off axis angular expression

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.1

Philosophies of Selected Four Architects

The descriptions of architects‟ words and criticisms related to sculptural architecture design will be extracted to analyze. These analyzed concepts are then categorized into three major categories – inspiration, intention and advancement of sculptural architecture to represent the philosophy of architects.

4.1.1

Antoni Gaudi

4.1.1.1 Inspiration Antoni Gaudi firmly believed in Art Nouveau – he observed and gathered inspiration from forms that existed in nature. He noted and understood the value of geometry in form and found that geometrical forms were also to be found in nature. He therefore explored different geometrical forms in nature like that of natural growth but not from artificial abstraction (Cuito, 2002; Sterner, 1985). As a result, combination of straight lines and parabolic and hyperbolic curves (Figure 4.1) can often be seen on Gaudi's facade (Sterner, 1985).

Figure 4.1 Parabolic and hyperbolic curves

4.1.1.2 Intention As an Art Nouveau architect, Gaudi kept on searching for continuous form and although technology was advancing during the industrial revolution, he thought that architecture would be meaningless if technology were the only component. As a result, he considered technology as the skeleton while the form represented flesh a larger mass. Therefore, Gaudi explored the possibilities of the form and he finally found continuous form is perfect form to represent the ideal form of nature (Crippa, 2002).

4.1.1.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture Unlike other architects, Gaudi's designs were usually in sculptural form which was difficult to construct. Yet, the 19th century, in between the time of classicism and modernism, reinforced construction was invented. Due to the flexibility of this new material, structures could be twisted to create parabolic and hyperbolic curves (Crippa, 2002; Sterner, 1985).

4.1.2

Le Corbusier

4.1.2.1 Inspiration Le Corbusier was inspired by harmony in nature. He tended to see nature and architectural order as material manifestations of some vaguely defined spiritual presence (Curtis, 1986). He considered architecture is composed of natural order. Therefore, his works such as Ronchamp Chapel were the results of studying the roots of architecture. Corbusier attempts to create psychic experience, and the old obsession of harmony with nature (Curtis, 1986).

4.1.2.2 Intention Addicted to arts, Le Corbusier pursued the synthesis of art, he explored the possibilities to transform arts into architecture. He thought architecture is in the practice of the plastic arts and regards it as the intellectual stimulus for his designs (Jenger, 1996). As a result, he started to study sculpture, which as an essential mode of expression, since sculpture provided another

way of inhabiting and molding spaces. For example, interplay of surfaces and volumes, of mass and void, can be regarded as representation of the interplay of forces and tensions as in a building (Jenger, 1996).

4.1.2.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture In Corbusierâ&#x20AC;&#x;s time, concrete played an important role in architecture. Concrete load-bearing walls, columns at the outer edge of buildings could be eliminated and therefore larger unobstructed spaces could be achieved. Besides, use of concrete also enables the creation of massive forms, textured faĂ§ades and profiles of complex curvature and thus provides greater freedom on designs (Curtis, 1986).

4.1.3

Frank Gehry

4.1.3.1 Inspiration Being influenced greatly by his artist friends, Frank Gehry derives inspiration from the arts. He not only loves art, but also tries to be an artist-architect. Painting and sculpture are the two main sources that have effects on his philosophy and designs (Sorkin, 1999).

4.1.3.2 Intention Greatly attracted by folding, Gehry aspires after sense of movement. He starts to look for the representation of folding, and finally found it in the fish (Sorkin, 1999). He then extracts the ideas of sense of movement and applies it into architecture. As a result, his architecture starts to transform into curvy forms which can be regarded as sculpture. For example, the Barcelona Fish is one of his early works representing the sense of movement.

4.1.3.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture Gehry‟s works are often designed with curvy forms which are too complex to be calculated and built. But, thanks to the introduction of the computer program – CATIA, he can thus have a lot of freedom to play with shapes. And the computer can then digitize his curvy models, reducing the time consumed during design process (Sorkin, 1999). Moreover, the possibilities of new buildings can further be explored by using computer – more sculptural shapes instead of just plain boxes (Sorkin, 1999).

4.1.4

Zaha Hadid

4.1.4.1 Inspiration Thirst for elaborating an architectural territory, Zaha Hadid is always inspired by the arts. She tries to identify herself and explore a new direction. She studied a project for a bridge – Malevich's Tektonik (London, 1976-77) – which is an abstraction on paper, a conceptual hypothesis inspired by the Suprematist artist (Hadid, 2000). Hadid is greatly influenced by this project and its process – abstract arts to represent ideas of architecture. As a result, she then adapts this method to present her works as a form of pure art (Hadid, 2000).

4.1.4.2 Intention Inspired by Surprematist arts with fractal language, Hadid seeks for compositional transformation. Fractal geometry can usually be found in her works. The space is broken up, creating a play of perspectives in an attack on orthodoxy of form and visual control (Hadid, 2000). As a result, her designs are then recomposed into a folding structure which offers a spatial interplay and confrontation with the subject matter (Schumacher, 2000). And the functions of territorialisation, enclosure and interfacing are reconstituted by means of boundaries, fields, planes, volumes, cuts, ribbons etc. (Schumacher, 2000).

4.1.4.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture At Hadidâ&#x20AC;&#x;s early stage, her works are too complex to be built. She succeeded in winning numerous competitions but the designs could only be revealed on paper. However, by 1990, computers were beginning to gain popularity. Making use of the computer-aided design tool, such complex construction are not only thus allowed and facilitated, but also being pushed into a more formidable territory. Also, through the use of this tool, she could further explore the potential of other medium that could help to visualize her designs (Hadid, 2000).

4.1.5

Summary Antoni Gaudi

Inspiration

Intention

Advancement of

Sculptural

Architecture

Le Corbusier

Frank Gehry

Harmony with

Arts (Fish at

Nature

later stage)

Continuous

Synthesis of

Sense of

Compositional

Form

Arts

Movement

transformation

Nature

Reinforced Construction

Use of Concrete

Use of Computer

Zaha Hadid Arts (Originally Malevichâ&#x20AC;&#x;s Tektonik )

Use of computer-aided design tool

Table 4.1 Summary of philosophies of selected four architects

4.1.5.1 Inspiration The four architects can be classified into two types. One is Antoni Gaudi and Le Corbusier who are both inspired by nature whereas Frank Gehry and Zaha Hadid are inspired by the arts. In general, architects who design sculptural architecture are considered as they are influenced by arts such as painting and sculpture. However, it can be seen that sculptural architects are not only influenced by arts, but also by nature.

4.1.5.2 Intention The architects have different ideas on their works. It can be concluded that sculptural architecture is the result of different intentions.

4.1.5.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture The four architects can be categorized into two directions. One direction is depending on the use of materials the other depending on the use of computer. To Gaudi and Corbusier, their 30

works are comparatively simple. Construction methodology was the principal consideration at that time. Therefore, sculptural architecture in their time is used to be made by concrete which allowing free-form to be buildable. To Gehry and Hadid, their works are comparatively complex. They not only need to consider the materials, but also have to design suitable construction methods. Therefore, computer is a useful tool for them to analyze their works. Complicated form thus can be calculated with the help of different software reducing the difficulty of construction.

4.2

Intentions of Selected Works

4.2.1

Sagrada Familia

4.2.1.1 Inspiration The inspiration of the Sagrada Familia comes from tree. Antoni Gaudi thinks the church should be like a tree which can free people from the sun and rain. Besides, the columns in the church are further designed as the image of tree whiles the decoration as leaves (Crippa, 2002).

4.2.1.2 Intention Unity form is what Gaudi wanted to achieve in Sagrada Familia in consistent with his philosophy â&#x20AC;&#x201C; continuous form. Instead of following Gothic architectural style, he made the structure of the church dynamic (Descharnes, 1989). Though the plan can still be found as regular like Gothic one, united form is prevailing.

4.2.1.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture To achieve the intention, continuous parabolic structure is designed. During the process, Gaudi designs with models instead of drawing plans. Besides, he invented parabolic vaults which can be supported by inclined piers and in a single continuous material (Descharnes, 1989). And the creation of united form cannot be separated from this kind of vault.

4.2.2

Ronchamp Chapel

4.2.2.1 Inspiration In Ronchamp Chapel, the design is inspired by crab shell (Jenger, 1996). Unlike Le Corbusierâ&#x20AC;&#x;s early works, ideas are extracted from crab shell to design a sculptural architecture in this project.

4.2.2.2 Intention Connecting with nature is the main theme in Ronchamp Chapel. Since Corbuiser thinks the design should be dedicated to nature (Jenck, 2000), he makes it buried in the ground so that a tension can be created between outside and inside and reacting with the surroundings (Baker, 1996). â&#x20AC;&#x153;Therefore, the chapel is carved out like a cave, and the blobs of ineffable space pulsate and close off the pyramid to the northeast,â&#x20AC;? Jencks (2000) said.

4.2.2.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture So as to reach, Corbusier applied fractural design. Different to modern architecture, he designs the chapel with a sculptural form composed of fractal geometry. As a result, the chapel is transformed into a complex arrangement of interlocking parts that no element is possible to be subtracted without destroying the whole (Curtis, 1986; Jenger, 1996).

4.2.3

Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

4.2.3.1 Inspiration In Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, Frank Gehry is inspired by fish. Gehry transforms the concept of fish into leaf or boat-liked shapes and applied in the form. Along with the concept of fish, Gehry extracted a sense of movement which make the museum connect with the larger fabric of movement of the city (Bruggen, 1998).

4.2.3.2 Intention Gehry makes the museum as cracks between buildings. Since he wants the museum to respond to different site factors, he tends to breakdown the museum into different wedgeshaped components. The larger components create a dialogue with the bridge while the smaller components to achieve a more human scale as parts of the riverfront (Bruggen, 1998).

4.2.3.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture Use of computer is the advancement of sculptural architecture in the museum because the museum is too complex and therefore Frank Gehry makes use of the computer capture the physical model and develops a process through digitization and visualization in the compute. Besides, the museum is a large-scale design. Computer can facilitate the progress and predict its reasonable budget and space of time as well (Bruggen, 1998).

4.2.4

MAXXI Museum

4.2.4.1 Inspiration Zaha Hadid does not mention the inspiration for the MAXXI Museum.

4.2.4.2 Intention Irrigating is the intention of the MAXXI Museum design. Hadid aims at irrigating the site with the surfaces of lineal exhibition and weaving a dense texture of interior and exterior spaces (Cambert, 2004).

4.2.4.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture In order to accomplish, the key has been placed at interlocking routes and pathways. Unlike other architecture, Hadid is used to explore urban fabric and integrate it into the site. In the museum, the routes and pathways are designed across the site and resulting in continuous walls which intersect and interrupt each other creating the form of the building (Cambert, 2004).

4.2.5

Summary

Inspiration

Sagrada

Ronchamp

Guggenheim

MAXXI

Familia

Chapel

Museum Bilbao

Museum

Tree

Crab shell

Fish

Connecting with

Cracks between

Nature

Buildings

Intention

United Form

Advancement

Continuously

of sculptural

Parabolic

architecture

Structure

Irrigating

Interlocking Fractal Design

Use of Computer

Routes and Pathways

Table 4.2 Summary of intentions of selected works 4.2.5.1 Inspiration Four architects are generally inspired by nature except Zaha Hadid which it is a lack of information. Antoni Gaudi and Le Corbusier have a more specific inspiration in their works. However, Frank Gehry turns his inspiration from arts into fish.

4.2.5.2 Intention Four architects have different ideas on their works. It can conclude that sculptural architecture can be designed by different intentions.

4.2.5.3 Advancement of Sculptural Architecture Four architects can be classified into two directions. One direction is depending on the technology. Other direction is depending on the ideas. Antoni Gaudi and Frank Gehry make use of technology to help to design their work. However, the works of Le Corbusier and Zaha Hadid

are

based

the

ideas

the

architects.

4.3

Comparison

4.3.1

Simplification of Form

As Form, Space and Order (Ching, 2007) mentions that â&#x20AC;&#x153;Gestalt psychology affirms that the mind will simplify the visual environment in order to understand it.â&#x20AC;? Simplification of forms is thus suggested to be an essential factor to understand sculptural architecture, and the built form will be simplified until significant shapes are left for further investigation.

Sagrada Familia

MAXXI Museum

CAN be easy to reassembled by simple geometry

Organization Composition of form Order of Geometry

Face-to-face contact Grid form Repetition in shape Ronchamp Chapel

Interlocking volume Linear form Linear form Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

CANNOT be reassembled by simple geometry

Organization Composition of form Order of Geometry

Interlocking volume Centralized form Asymmetrical transformation

Face-to-face contact Clustered form Hierachy by size and placement Table 4.3Comparison of simplification of form in three-dimensional perspectives

Analyzing the diagrams (Table 4.3), two categories among fours works are emerged - (a) CAN be reassembled by simple geometries and (b) CANNOT be reassembled by simple geometries. One possible reason for this significant difference lies in the transformations of geometry. Accordingly, with simple geometries distorted, irregular forms are resulted in Ronchamp Chapel and Guggenheim Museum Bilbao. Beside the two categories observed, the simplified built form of Sagrada Familia revealed the organization of church as grid form (Table 4.3). Compared with four works, the church can be said as less sculptural because only parts of the work are representing sculpture. The difference is likely due to the limitation of the rigid Gothic plan. As a result, rigidity of plan is suggested to be one of the limitations on designing sculptural architecture. As shown in the diagrams (Table 4.3), a common characteristic is found in the three later works that some of the components are formed by geometries with varied size. It is implying that the geometries are in three-dimensional instead of two-dimensional. A significant correlation is further identified between sculptural architecture design and the threedimensional space. Consequently, although composition of forms maybe different among the works, they can still be regarded as sculptural architecture.

4.3.2

Distribution of Form

In the following session, forms will be broken down into series of pattern. Only outermost shapes will be taken into account since the configuration of forms is the one of the dominating factors to understand sculptural architecture. The colored diagram indicates the distribution of forms. By observing the patterns, the composition of forms can be obtained. By the definition from Form, Space and Order (Ching, 2007), form is â&#x20AC;&#x153;the primary identifying characteristic of a volume. It is established by the shapes and interrelationships of the planes that describe the boundaries of the volumeâ&#x20AC;?. Therefore, the diagram represents the volumetric form of the works.

Sagrada Familia

Ronchamp Chapel

Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

MAXXI Museum

One distinct geometries

Distorted geometries

Irregular forms

Linear form

Scale of Form

One dominating size

Similar sizes

Varied sizes

Similar sizes

Organization

Centralized

Embedded

Fragmental

Interlocking

Plan

Diagram

Geometry

Table 4.4 Comparison of distribution of form in plans 40

By observing the two sets of diagrams (Table 4.4), one of the obvious patterns is the darkened area. It indicates the overlapping layers between forms. In these four works, more overlapping parts can be observed in the later works that are Guggenheim Museum Bilbao and MAXXI Museum. This pattern can be explained that the later works put more emphasis on variation in height and it is suggested the architectsâ&#x20AC;&#x; tendency of using three-dimensional design methods rather than two-dimensional one. Besides the darkened pattern, another pattern (Table 4.4) is the void between the shapes. It indicates that the works are deconstructed into fragments. In these four works, gapping voids appear in the later works. This pattern can be explained that the walls are inclined. Instead of the adaption of right angle rule in modernism, distorted forms (Figure 4.2) are more preferred by the architects.

Inclined Facade

Curvy Facade

Figure 4.2 Directions of Facade â&#x20AC;&#x201C; (a) Guggenheim Museum Bilbao; (b) MAXXI Museum

In comparison of the sizes of shapes (Table 4.4), variations can be observed except Sagrada Familia. The other three works are free from rigid design, for example, Gothic architecture. This phenomenon indicates that a common character that sculptural architecture is composed of elements with varied form. Tendency towards variation in element sizes of form can be resulted among these four works. This can be explained that architects take advantage of manipulation of fragmental strategy to create varied size of shapes. 41

4.3.3

Unity of Form

There is an investigation of form through series of patterns. Only significant shapes will be taken into account since the organization of forms is the one of the dominating factors to understand sculptural architecture. The dashed line indicates the unity of forms. By observing the patterns, the order of forms can be obtained. By the definition from Form, Space and Order (Ching, 2007), order is â&#x20AC;&#x153;the each part of whole is properly disposed with the reference to other parts and to its purposeâ&#x20AC;?. Therefore, the diagram can be regarded as representation of the underlying intention of the works.

SINGLE intersection

MULTIPLE intersections

Sagrada Familia

Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

Ronchamp Chapel

MAXXI Museum

Axial order, Bilateral symmetry, Plan corresponds to section Express only in pure horizontal and vertical direction

Irregular radiant, The axes are intersected at the tower of the museum Express in inclined horizontal and vertical directions

Nonlinear approaches, The axes are shifted from the grid system, Express in curvy horizontal and inclined vertical direction

Multi-intersections are found in the multidirectional axes Express in inclined horizontal and vertical directions

Yes

Partly

None

Form can be read in the plan

Partly form can be read in the plan

Form can be read in the plan

Form cannot be read in the plan

Plan

Section

Threedimensional Pespective

Observation in Plan Observation in Section Correlation between Plan and Section Observation in Plans and Threedimensional Perspectives

Table 4.5 Comparison of unity of form in plans and section and three-dimensional perspectives 43

All patterns of dashed line (Table 4.5) in four works are different. The patterns of dashed lines are from pure horizontal and vertical directions to curvy horizontal and inclined vertical directions, from bi-directional to multi-directional. Transformation from single to multidirectional forms can be identified. This phenomenon can be explained that the later works that are Guggenheim Museum Bilbao and MAXXI Museum more emphasize in height variation (Table 4.6).

Sagrada Familia

Ronchamp Chapel

Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

MAXXI Museum

Table 4.6 Summary of the storey of the work 1st Floor 2nd Floor 3rd Floor

In addition, more dashed lines can be found in the same direction in Guggenheim Museum Bilbao and MAXXI Museum (Table 4.5). Except varying heights, this can also be explained that the works are constructed a group of components. Besides, in the MAXXI museum, continuous dashed lines can be observed. It indicated that the form is integrated rather than composed of a group of fragments. Comparing between the plan and section of selected works (Table 4.5), obvious correlations can be seen between the plan and section in Sagrada Familia and Ronchamp Chapel. However, in Guggenheim Museum and MAXXI Museum, less correlation is observed between the plans and sections. It is suggested that the architects tends to use three-dimensional design methods instead of two-dimensional one. Besides understanding the correlation between the plans and the sections (Table 4.5), a comparison between the plan and the built form of the works can be drawn. The relationships between the plans and built forms is slightly different form that between the plans and sections. Plans are gradually showing lesser consistency with built form. It is suggested that the later works are not just developed or extruded from the plan. This can be explained that the later architects design their works in a three-dimensional perspective. On the other hand, there is a clear pattern (Table 4.5).which is the intersection of axes. Four works can be categorized into two groups â&#x20AC;&#x201C; (a) containing SINGLE intersection and (b) containing MULTIPLE intersections. It indicates that sculptural architecture can be designed by

centralized

fragmental

ideas

depending

the

architectsâ&#x20AC;&#x;

thoughts.

4.3.4

Tension of Form

Apart from investigating the level of unity of form, tension is also an important aspect for understanding sculptural architecture. Only significant forms will be taken into consideration while direction of tension will be indicated by arrow. Through the observation of these patterns, the force of forms can be obtained.

Observation of Pattern

Major Direction of Form Direction Force

Sagrada Familia

Ronchamp Chapel

Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

MAXXI Museum

Emphasizes the vertical direction only

Emphasizes multiple directions

Not to emphasize the directions

Emphasize the inclined directions

Vertical

Horizontal, vertical and inclined

Composed of cracks that has individual direction

Overlapped with each other

Table 4.7 Comparison of tension of form in sections

All patterns in all of the four works are different. The patterns of dashed lines are varied from vertical directions to multiple directions. This indicates the later works are more influenced by multi-directional forces. This phenomenon can be explained that the works after Sagrada Familia is designed with different shapes of components which can be integrated or fragmental forms. In addition, the pattern of arrows of MAXXI museum is different to the others. The arrows are intersected. This can be explained that the museum is varied in height and the fragments are interlocked. This phenomenon imply that the architect, Zaha Hadidâ&#x20AC;&#x;s preference of using three-dimensional design methods.

4.3.5

Summary of Comparison

Simplification of Form

Distribution of Form

Unity of form

Tension of form

Guggenheim

Sagrada Familia

Ronchamp Chapel

Rigid plan

Transformations of geometries

Can reassembled by simple geometries

Cannot reassembled by simple geometries

Can reassembled by simple geometries

Three-dimensional design

Varied heights

Two-dimensional design

Three-dimensional design

Transformations of geometries

Similar elements sizes

Varied elements sizes

Fragmental design

Varied heights

Fragmental design

Integrated design

More correlated between plan and section

Less correlated between plan and section

More correlated between plan and built

Less correlated between plan and built

form

Two-dimensional design

Three-dimensional design

Single intersection

Multiple intersections

Single intersection

Centralized design

Fragmental design

Centralized design

Fragmental design

One directional force

Two directional force

Multi-directional force

Integrated design

Fragmental design

Interlocking form

Three-dimensional design

Table 4.8 Summary of comparison

Museum Bilbao

MAXXI Museum

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1

Conclusions

Architecture – façades which are regarded as sculpture refers to a type of architecture that has existed for decades and has been deeply influenced by sculptural at forms. Today the design of sculptural architecture has become increasingly complicated which is a direct consequence of time and progression – the result of having so many new design concepts by various architects, different philosophies of each architect resulting in the creation of different façade expressions which nowadays appear to be represented by organic, curvilinear geometries which are sometimes regular but very often distorted. By applying and exploring the different design strategies proposed by the selected 4 architects, this research attempts to discover and categorize the factors and the characteristics of sculptural architecture through the analysis of their selected work. In order to analyze the relationship between the architects and the works, a methodology, Case Study, is introduced to quantizing the architect‟s words and design strategies into a series of analytical diagrams in term of plans, elevations, sections and built forms. When combined with philosophies of architects, intentions of works and design strategies, there are a set of diagrammatic representations illustrating interrelationship between the each of the selected architects‟ and their work and as a result such design factors can be extracted and analyzed. The diagram is organized into the three levels. The first level refers to the architects and their work. After that, five aspects are categorized in the second level: Inspiration, Intention, Advancement, Strategy and Constraint. Finally, all the key items analyzed in the previous sections are extracted in the third level. Subsequently, there are series of diagrams defining sculptural architecture and the factors, or characteristics by comprehensively extracting the selected architects‟ words and their analyzed work.

5.1.1

Antoni Gaudi and Sagrada Familia

Figure 5.1 Interrelationships between Antoni Gaudi and Sagrada Familia (see also Appendix A4) From the diagram, the critical finding is that a ring connection can be observed. That is a linkage between the inspirations and intentions of Antoni Gaudi and Sagrada Familia. This indicates that the intention of the church is related to the philosophy of Gaudi who applied his design concepts to the church. It can be reasoned that continuously parabolic structure of the church is greatest bonding between to the inspiration and intentions of the architect and the church. This structure was introduced to achieve the combination of the philosophy of Gaudi and the intention of the church. This suggests this structure is the main factor designing the church as sculpture. But it is a weak linkage between the philosophy of Gaudi and design strategies used in the church. Rigid Gothic plan would be possible for this disconnection; consequently, Gaudi only made use of two-dimensional design methods leading to less variation of form. Besides, Gaudi did not apply the reinforced construction into the church. To Gaudi, sculptural architecture can be accomplished by practicing the philosophy of architect. It can be seen that the philosophy and the intentions are more far important than use of new technologies.

5.1.2

Le Corbusier and Ronchamp Chapel

Figure 5.2 Interrelationship between Le Corbusier and Ronchamp Chapel (see also Appendix A5) The major finding in this interrelationship of Le Corbusier is similar to that of Gaudiâ&#x20AC;&#x;s one. The diagram reflects there are two ring connections between the architect and the work. One of the ring connections is between the inspirations and intentions of Le Corbusier and Ronchamp Chapel. This result lends credence to the relationship that the inspiration and the intention of the chapel are influenced by the inspiration of the architect although there is no direct connection between the inspiration and the intention of the chapel. Surprisingly, the finding also suggests that design strategies of the chapel can be generated from the intention of Corbusier. It indicates that the intentions of the architects do lead to different choices of design strategies instead of influenced by the inspiration or intention of the work. However, Using of two-dimensional and three-dimensional design method could be seen as paradoxical. It is likely that the early his worksâ&#x20AC;&#x; that were box-liked design greatly influence him who designed the two-dimensional drawing first. Different to Gaudi, Corbusier did apply into the work but only use of concrete cannot achieve the sculptural form of the chapel. It seems design concepts to the architects are more important.

5.1.3

Frank Gehry and Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

Figure 5.3 Interrelationship between Frank Gehry and Guggenheim Museum Bilbao (see also Appendix A6) Contrast to the previous two studies, it is found that a significant correlation between the architect and the work forming a large ring connection even some items are weak connection. For example, there is an indirect linkage between the intentions of Frank Gehry and design strategy used in Guggenheim Museum Bilbao. This can be explained that the comprehensive connection is due to the same inspirations and advancements. It seems to be indicative of the fact that philosophy of architect and intention and design strategy of work is strongly correlated system contributing to a complicated design process. Different to Gaudi and Corbusier, the advancements to the architect and the work are far more important. Before of using computer tools, sense of movement can be realized into a sculptural form. In addition, the museum is only designed by three-dimensional design method creating varied height and varied element size of form as sculpture. This shows the form of the museum is distinct from the works using two-dimensional or hybrid design method.

5.1.4

Zaha Hadid and MAXXI Museum

Figure 5.4 Interrelationship between Zaha Hadid and MAXXI Museum (see also Appendix A7) Compared with Gehry, there is a large ring connection in common. Almost all of items of Zaha Hadid and MAXXI Museum are connected. With regard to the structure of the ring connection, it can be found that many inter-linkages are between items forming complicated structure, although there are similar shapes of connection. This result shows a clear implication that sculptural architecture design is constituted by inter-linkages factors. In addition, the diagram also suggests that the emphasis of Hadid contrast starkly with the Gehryâ&#x20AC;&#x;s one. Instead of aided by computer tool, compositional transformation, the intention of Hadid, is the main concept contributing to the development of the interlocking routes and pathways in sculptural-liked interlocking form. And, interestingly, use of computer-aided design (CAD) tools is not the main factor that results in sculptural form in the museum, however, the correlation show a strong relationship between the application of CAD tools and interlocking routes and pathways, indicating CAD tools is important in the design of the museum. However, the inspiration of Hadid is disconnected from the ring connection. This can be explained that arts and Malerich's Tektonic are the direction of her presentation and career path less correlated with the works. This results indicates the intention of Hadid is the crucial first step in design the sculptural architecture

5.1.5

Four Selected Architects and Their Works

Summarizing the relationships between the architects and their works, three trends concerning sculptural architecture design can be found: (a) Transforming from the use of twodimensional to three-dimensional design method, (b) Transforming the generation of design from strong correlation between architectsâ&#x20AC;&#x; philosophy and worksâ&#x20AC;&#x; intention to the use of computer tools, (c) Transforming from correlation between only philosophy and intention to also design strategy of works. All the trends observed are suggested to be significant in terms of the change of sculptural architecture design.

Figure 5.5 Interrelationships between four selected architects and their works (see also Appendix A8) In analyzing the interrelationships between four architects and their work, a diagram is used to represent their overall relationships. Each of the architects and their works are indicated by four colours and the sharing items are coloured grey.

Many ring connections can be seen in the diagram. The major finding is that there are interrelationships between different architects or works. The result indicates that common factors or characteristics can be found even in different times. It can be reasoned that sculptural architecture design is not limited by time or places and the design is depending on the concepts of the architects. Moreover, in the present study, eleven sharing items can be extracted from the diagram. It can be said that these items are the factors and the characteristics of sculptural architecture design. A critical observation can be seen that “integrated design”, “fragmental design”, “interlocking form”, “transformation of geometry”, and “use of 3D design method” have the maximum number of linkages. It is suggested that sculptural architecture mainly consists of these factors based on the research. In addition, although “use of 2D design method” shows significant number of linkages, it will not be taken into consideration because it is regarded as limitation for design. Common Characteristics

Number of linkages

Arts

Can reassembled by simple geometry

Cannot reassembled by simple geometry

Fragmental design

Integrated design

Interlocking form

Transformation of geometry

Use of 2D design method

Use of 3D design method

Varied element size

Varied height

Table 5.1 Summary of the factors and characteristics of sculptural architectural design To conclude, this research is to explore the factors and characteristics of architecture – façade in particular as sculpture, but the relevance between architects and works can also be obtained. A key finding is that the sculptural architecture design can be realized by strong correlation between philosophy of architects and intentions of their works. The result indicates that design concepts are far more important than other aspects contributing to design process even the technology is advanced. It can thus be reasoned that Gaudi did not apply new technology into his works. The sculptural façade of Sagrada Familia is purely based on Gaudi‟s design 56

strategies and his own knowledge instead of using reinforced construction. But it is still suggested that the use of computer tools is an important issue helping to achieve the sculptural form.

5.2

Recommendations

The findings of this research should help provide an understanding of sculptural architecture through various forces. The degree of integration between the architects' thoughts and design intentions could be regarded as one such force - which could then be used as a means for evaluating design. Another such force used for evaluation design is the underlying design strategies. This study aims to throw some light on several issues or at least pave the way for new research projects and design which will help consolidate the study of sculptural architecture and design at a scientific level. However, this study does have limitations resulting from the lack of analysis for certain periods in history times however this study does provide a descriptive basis for additional research. Therefore, it is hoped that further research is warranted for other, different characteristics of sculptural architecture to be analyzed for a given architect or period in history.

REFERENCE LIST

1. Cambridge Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary 2. Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary 3. Sylvester, D. and Read, H. (1988), “Henry Moore: complete sculpture”, 5th edition, Lund Humphries, London, U.K. 4. Kent, S. (2008), "Mr Big Stuff", Modern Painters, Vol. 20, No. 9, pp. 86 - 91. 5. Day, E. (2008), “The Moore Legacy", The Observer, Observer Review, pp. 6. 6. Calder, A. (1932), "Comment réaliser l'art?", Abstraction-Création, Art Non Figuratif, No. 1, pp. 6. 7. Prather, M et al. (1998), “Alexander Calder, 1898-1976”, 1st edition, National Gallery of Art ; New Haven : Yale University Press, Washington, U.S. 8. Seidner, D. (1993), "Richard Serra", Bomb, Vol. 42, pp. 40 – 45. 9. Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus 10. Moussavi, F. et al., "The function of form", 1st edition, Harvard University, Graduate School of Design, N.Y. 11. Ching, F. (2007), "Architecture--form, space, & order", 3rd edition, John Wiley & Sons, U.S. 12. Fletcher, B. Sir (1996), “History of architecture”, 20th edition, Oxford, U.S. 13. Hammett, B. (2008), "Cross Stitch Art Nouveau", 2nd edition, David & Charles, U.K. 14. Sterner, G. (1985), “Antoni Gaudi: Architecture in Barcelona”, 1st edition, Woodbury, N.Y., U.S. 15. Robinson et dl. (2003), “Growth, Efficiency, and Modernism", U.S. General Services Administration, U.S. 16. Frampton, K. (1992), “Modern architecture: a critical history”, 3rd edition, Thames and Hudson, U.K. 17. Jones, P. B. (2002), "Modern architecture through case studies", 1st edition, Boston: Architectural Press, U.S. 18. Curtis, W. (1996), "Modern architecture since 1900", 3rd edition, Phaidon Press, London, U.K. 19. Serraino, P. (2005), "Eero Saarinen, 1910-1961: a structural expressionist", 1st edition, Taschen, London, U.K. 59

20. Schmitt, G. (1999), "Information architecture: basis and future of CAAD", 1st edition, Birkhauser, Boston, U.S. 21. Chollet, L. (2001), “Frank O. Gehry”, 1st edition, Wonderland Press, New York, U.S. 22. Lindsey, B. (2001), "Digital Gehry : material resistance:, 1st edition, Birkhauser, Boston, U.S. 23. Schumacher, P. (2004), "Digital Hadid : landscapes in motion", Birkhauser, Boston, U.S. 24. Yin, R. K. (1994), "Case study research : design and methods", 2nd edition, Thousand Oaks: Sage Pub, U.S 25. Cuito, A et al. (2002), "Gaudí : complete works", 1st edition, H Kliczkowski, Spain 26. Sterner, G. (1985), "Antoni Gaudi : architecture in Barcelona", 1st edition, Barron's, U.S. ss, U.S. 27. Crippa, M. A.et al. (2002), "Living Gaudí : the architect's complete vision", 1st edition, Rizzoli, U.S. 28. Curtis, W.J.R. (1986), "Le Corbusier: ideas and forms", 1st edition, Phaidon, U.K. 29. Jenger, J (1996), "Le Corbusier: architect of a new age", 1st edition, Thames & Hudson, U.K. 30. Sorkin, M et al. (1999), "Gehry talks: architecture + process", Rizzoli, U.S. 31. Hadid, Z. (2006), "Zaha Hadid", 1st edition, Guggenheim Museum Publications, U.S 32. Schumacher, P. (2000), "Zaha Hadid", 1st edition, The British Council, U.K. 33. Descharnes, R. (1989), "Gaudi, the visionary", 1st edition, Dorset Press, U.S. 34. Jencks, C. (2000), "Le Corbusier and the continual revolution in Architecture", 1st edition, The Monacelli Press, U.S. 35. Bruggen, C. v. (1998), "Frank O. Gehry : Guggenheim Museum Bilbao", 1st edition, Guggenheim Museum Publications, U.S. 36. Cambert, M. (2004), "Top architects of the world", 1st edition, Atrium, Spain 37. Bechtler, C. (1999), "Frank O. Gehry, Kurt W. Forster", 1st edition, Ostfildern-Ruit: Cantz, U.S. 38. Schumacher, P. and Fontana-Giusti, G. (2004), "Zaha Hadid complete works", 1st edition, NY: Rizzoli International Publications, U.S. 39. Benjamin, A. (1997), "Sculpture: contemporary form and theory", 1st edition, London: Academy Editions, U.K. 40. Mallgrave, H. F. (2006), "Architectural theory", 1st edition, MA: Blackwell Pub, U.S. 41. Sewing, W. (2004), "Architecture: sculpture", 1st edition, New York: Prestel, U.S. 60

42. Glusberg, J. (1991), "Deconstruction: a student guide", 1st edition, London: Academy Editions, U.K. 43. Noever, P. (1991), Architecture in transition : between deconstruction and new modernism", 1st edition, Munich: Prestel, U.S. 44. Pearson, D. (2001), "New organic architecture : the breaking wave", 1st edition, London: Gaia, U.K. 45. Waters, J. K. (2003), "Blobitecture : waveform architecture and digital design", 1st edition, Mass.: Rockport Publishers, U.K. 46. Rattenbury, K. et al. (2004), "Architects today", 1st edition, London: Laurence King, U.K. 47. Reas, C. and McWilliams, C. (2010), "Form+code in design, art, and architecture", 1st edition, New York: Princeton Architectural Press, U.K. 48. Jencks, C. (1997), "The architecture of the jumping universe : a polemic : how complexity science is changing architecture and culture", 1st edition, London: Academy Editions, U.K. 49. Schirmbeck , E. (1987), "Idea, form, and architecture: design principles in contemporary architecture", New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, U.S.

APPENDIX A1 - Comparison of Simplification of Form in Three-dimensional Perspectives Sagrada Familia

MAXXI Museum

Ronchamp Chapel

Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

Ronchamp Chapel

Sagrada Familia

APPENDIX A2 - Comparison of unity of form in plans and section and three-dimensional perspectives

MAXXI Museum

Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

APPENDIX A3 - Summary of the storey of the works

Sagrada Familia

Ronchamp Chapel

Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

MAXXI Museum

APPENDIX A4 - Interrelationships between Antoni Gaudi and Sagrada Familia

APPENDIX A5 - Interrelationships between Le Corbusier and Ronchamp Chapel

APPENDIX A6 - Interrelationships between Frank Gehry and Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

APPENDIX A7 - Interrelationships between Zaha Hadid and MAXXI Museum

APPENDIX A8 - Interrelationships between Selected Architects and Their works