The Floating Modern: Pilotis and the Free Plan

The Floating Modern: Pilotis and the Free Plan

Paper by

Nick Tanner

Arch 6237 Case Study: Modernism Dr. Ole W. Fischer

University of Utah College of Architecture and Planning Salt Lake City, Utah

2011 (Submitted 5 May 2011)

Table of Contents

I.

II.

III.

IV.

Intro to “Floating Architecture” Histroy and Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background on Architects Le Corbusier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Mies van der Rohe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Case Studies Villa Savoye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Farnsworth House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Contemporary Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Conclusion Function or Aesthetic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Meaning/Symbolism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

The Floating Modern: pilotis and the free plan

I. Intro to “Floating Architecture”

The modernist movement facilitated many new ideas in the formal arrangement and conceptual approach to architectural design. The idea of an elevated or floating ar‐ chitecture was explored and developed through the first point of Le Corbusier’s Five Points of New Architecture. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe also investigated this idea with minimalistic designs. This paper will make a comparison and analysis as to what is “The Floating Modern” and how it was developed through Le Corbusier and Mies van der Rohe. This paper will evaluate each of their early careers and prominent projects that led up to their prime examples of floating architecture. Through this journey, we will discover how floating architecture came to be, what makes it successful, what it means and if it has potential today.

In classical architecture, one element of design to create spaces was the column. Serving primarily as a support function, composed of three parts: the base, shaft and capital. Looking at the Doric column which incorporated an en‐ tasis, or “sculpting of columns with larger radius in the middle than on either end, making them seem to flex like a muscle under the weight of the entabla‐ ture.” (Prina, 2008, p.375) The intention o f the column was to ground the build‐ ing to the site and prevent visual appearance of the building slanting outwards.

1

In the Parthenon, Athens constructed 447‐38 BCE, the arrangement and form of the columns is used to “compensate for the visual impression of the outward inclination caused by the luminosity of the sky against which they are projected.” (Prina, 2008, p.38)

The idea of floating takes the use of the column and deliberately breaks the link to the ground. There are many ways to express the notion of floating. Some synonyms of float include raising, lifting, elevating, keeping adrift, bringing up, and suspending. It can also be associated with hovering, flying, gliding, soaring, and levitating. It has a 1

sense of being above and weightlessness. It is often related to water, buoyancy, water‐ craft and aircraft. This is significant because of Corbusier’s interest in the Machine Age and the powerful forms of beauty found in ocean liners and airplanes. (Toward an Architec‐ ture, 2011, Wikipedia)

II. Background on Architects

Le Corbusier

Charles‐Edouard Jeanneret, who changed his name at

age 33 to Le Corbusier, was born in La Chaux‐de‐Fonds, Switzer‐ land on 6 October 1887 to George Edward and Marie‐Charlotte‐ Amélie. His mother was a music teacher while his father was a watch engraver and enameller. At the age of four, he began his creative life path by attending primary school at La Chaux‐de‐ Fonds, a kindergarten that used Frobelian‐teaching methods.

2

This teaching approach suggests, “That children learn by playing.” (Friedrich Froebel, 2011) Later, in 1900 he studied watch engraving with his teacher Charles L’Eplattenier. In 1904, at age 17, he began studying in the Advanced Decorative Arts Course also taught

by L’Eplattenier. L’Eplattenier was the teacher that sparked Corbusier’s interest in ar‐ chitecture. “L’Eplattenier’s particular influence on Jeanneret was that he expected the young man to be at the same time the architect and the artist. This was to have lasting effect on Jeanneret as would the special relationship of master to student as practiced

by L’Eplattenier.” (Sekler, 1977, p.305) Corbusier had his first real architectural design ex‐ perience when Louis Fallet commissioned Corbusier to design a villa. He teamed up on the project with the architect Rene Chapallaz. In 1907, two years after the completion of Villa Fallet, he began a series of travels throughout Europe.

3

2

Italy was the first stop in his five‐year European journey followed by visits to Aus‐ tria, France, Germany, Bulgaria, Turkey and Greece. During all his travels, he made many sketches, took notes and photographs. While traveling, he had other opportuni‐ ties to expand his design skills. Corbusier worked half time as a drafter for Auguste and Gustave Perret in Paris in 1908.

While visiting Germany, two years later, at age 23, he arrived at the office of Pe‐

ter Behrens where he stayed until 1911. His experience there was dissatisfying. “At Be‐ hrens’s office one does not make pure architecture, only the façade.” (Frampton, 2001, p.

13) While at Behrens’s office, he met Mies van der Rohe and Walter Gropius. After leav‐

ing Behrens office, he continued touring Eastern Europe including Greece, and Italy.

(Foudation Le Corbusier, 2011)

In 1918, Le Corbusier was introduced to the cubist artist Amedee Ozenfant by his former employer Auguste Perret. To‐ gether, Corbusier and Ozenfant established the Purist style of

4

painting. This style of painting was inspired by machinery and the golden section (see figure 4). The golden section is a rectangle, which is derived from a unit square by creat‐ ing an arc with the center point at the midpoint of one of the sides of the square. The radius of the arc is a diagonal line extending to a corner of the square and rotated to the horizontal plane. It rejected the de‐ corative trend of cubism and advocated a return to clear, or‐ dered forms that were expressive of the modern machine age.

During 1918‐1922, he focused on developing the purist theory and did not construct any buildings. Also during this time, he in‐ itiated a journal called L’Esprit Nouveau. This movement fo‐ 5

cused on having the aesthetic of the De Stijl but be classical in

spirit. (Colquhoun, 2002, 139) While in this period of reinventing himself, he changed his name to Le Corbusier, which was derived from his maternal grandfather, Lecorbesier.

3

Mies Van Der Rohe

Ludwig Mies was born a little over a year and a half be‐ fore Le Corbusier. Mies was born in Aachen, Germany on March 27, 1886 to the owner of a stone yard. For his early education, he attended the Cathedral School of Aachen until age thirteen, and then attended a trade school until age fifteen. During his early years, he apprenticed in his father's stone‐cutting yard, be‐

6

coming a Journeyman Brick Mason. This opportunity gave him the knowledge of the constraints of materials. In 1905, at age nineteen, Mies worked in Berlin for two years for a noted furniture designer, Bruno Paul. This experience lent him the familiarity of wood and its restrictions and capabilities. At the age of twenty‐one when he left Bruno Paul's office, Mies received his first commission, the Riel house. This style of design re‐ flected Japanese architecture. In 1908, at the age of 22, Mies began work for Peter Be‐ hrens, and his prominent team of architectural innovationists. Here Mies was to super‐ vise the construction of Behrens German Embassy in St. Petersburg. While working for Behrens Mies met and married Ada Bruhrn, they had three daughters together.

Shortly after leaving the army in 1919, Mies started to design incredibly modem buildings. Glass had not been considered as the prime material of architecture; Mies wanted to change that way of thinking. Mies was commissioned to build the German Pavilion for International Exposition at Barcelona in 1929, known as the Barcelona Pavi‐ lion. The large overhang cantilever roof is an early expression of the idea of floating ar‐ chitecture. The building had no practical purpose, but the building itself was the object of the exposition. Mies' European masterpiece was destroyed after the exposition was over in 1930. Mies was made the Director of Bauhaus School at Dessau in 1930. Two years later the school was closed. (Vandenberg, 2003, p.59) During 1931‐1938 Mies de‐ signed a series of projects for ideal houses where unbroken exterior walls enclosed a house or garden. (Zimmerman, 2006, p.92) Mies came to the United States in 1937 at age

4

51, and a year later he became the Director of the Armour Institute, now called the Illi‐ nois Institute of Technology.

Despite being built seventeen years apart, the Villa Savoye by Le Corbusier & the Farnsworth House by Mies van der Rohe are timeless pieces of architecture and have many similar characteristics relating to the idea of floating architecture. The following illustrations from Precedents in Architecture, Third Edition along with my own descrip‐ tion and additional references will present these formative ideas and analytic diagrams for an exploration of each design, which strengthen the notion of floating architecture.

III. Case Studies

Villa Savoye

In 1914 while Corbusier worked with his cousin Pierre Jeanneret, he developed

the idea of the Maison Dom‐ino. This created a system‐structure skeleton independent of the plan of the house. This design created a form made of standard components al‐ lowing great diversity in home interior layout. (Foundation Le Corbusier, 2011) It is believed that the naming of this design scheme came from the merging of two words, domicile and innovation. (Frampton, 2011, p.21)

Before beginning the Villa Savoye, Le Corbusier had a villa that was a notable precedent. Villa Schwab was the first occasion on which Corbusier employed the Golden Sec‐ tion as well as applying regulation lines to con‐ trol the elevation schemes.

7

[Figure 1a] The structure of Villa Savoye, built 1929‐1931, begins on a four bay by four bay concrete columnar grids of pilotis. This grid forms an uninterrupted equidistant perimeter of columns spaced 4.75m apart in both directions. Initially the design called 5

for 5 meter spacing but the client requested to reduce some of the costs and the smaller spacing resulted. The interior spacing of columns is not as consistent with additional column off grid at the core of the plan where the ramp and stairs are located.

It is with the pilotis that the idea of floating architecture is rea‐ lized. Francesca Prina describes the function of the pilotis as: “They lift the house off the ground, freeing it from the dampness of the earth and increasing its access to light and air.” Moreover, “They open up the ground floor and make it usable; the area gained can become part of the garden, as is also the case with the house’s roof terrace.”

(Prina, 2008, p.93) Further, the intention of the pilotis is to “raise the buildings so that they

would appear to be floating, ‘celestial’ objects.” (Sbriglio, 1999, p.49) “Corbusier's piloti per‐ form a number of functions around the house, both inside and out. On the two longer elevations, they are flush with the face of the façade and imply heaviness and support, but on the shorter sides, they are set back giving a floating effect that emphasizes the horizontal feeling of the house. The wide strip window to the first floor terrace has two‐ baby piloti to support and stiffen the wall above. Although these piloti are in a similar plane to the larger columns below a false perspective when viewed from outside the house gives the impression that they are further into the house than they actually are.”

(Villa Savoye, 2011, Wikipedia)

[Figure 2a] Side lighting articulates the use of natural light within the interior spaces while the exterior courtyards on the second floor and the solarium both have direct over‐ head full sun exposure. This use of natural light was critical and the home was fully intended to be “Designed as a sun trap, a box of light floating above a meadow…” (Sbriglio, 1999, p.7)

6

[Figure 3a] The overall massing of the building is a cube and specifically looking at the massing of Villa Savoye from a North Elevation there is a primary mass with proportions of one high to just over five wide, elevated above a secondary mass at ground level with a shorter height to width ratio of just less than 1:6. Lastly, the massing element on the top of primary element is a shorter, rectangular mass with a ratio of nearly 1:7. This diagram is significant because it presents the pri‐ mary use of the building at an hovering location.

[Figure 4a] The relationship of plan to section has similar

proportions when considered from the west elevation. The plan with west oriented at the bottom to match elevation presents a square with the upper‐left 3/4 of the space open. Similarly, the Elevation has the upper‐left portion open.

[Figure 5a] The circulation arrangement within the Villa

Savoye is located around the r amp and stairs at the center of the design. Each of the spaces is a compartment off the central circulation hub. The ground floor is devoted to service facilities such as space for three cars, entrance hall, laundry, house cleaner’s quarters, and chauffeur’s apartment. The first floor above ground is used for the kitchen, pantry, salon, guest room, son’s bedroom, bath‐ room, master bedroom and master bathroom, boudoir, and garden terrace. The second floor above ground functions as a solarium. (Sbriglio, 1999, p.182)

[Figure 6a] The proximity of the spaces created by the

structural grid creates 16 equal square spaces of a similar pro‐ portion of the overall square plan.

7

[Figure 7a] Considering the repetitive spaces created

from the previous figure, these are interrupted by the circula‐ tion system which emphasize ramp by having them occupying and overlapping the edges of the central set of six square bays.

The stair shaft also stands out from the repetitive grid system with its asymmetrical position.

[Figure 8a] On the ground floor of

Villa Savoye, there is a clear symmetry of the form of the grid, perimeter walls and ramp about a north‐south axis line. The stair shaft creates a slight misbalance to the scheme. On the second floor, there is no exact line of symmetry but there is a sense of balance by creating a diagonal line running from southwest to northeast. The crea‐ tion of this balance comes from the arrangement of interior and exterior spaces sug‐ gesting a solid‐void relationship.

[Figure 9a] The composition of the

geometry begins with the initial square from the structural grid. The overall shape of the plan is a north‐south elongated 4x4 unit square that protrudes slightly over the north and south column grid. A second dominant shape of an east‐west elongated 2x2 unit square is over the upper half of the interior of the larger 4x4 square. A half cir‐ cle is attached to the interior rectangle with a radius of the same width as the elongated square. In an east west, section there is also a square as the base geometric form. The location of the square is in the middle of the composition. To create the extents of the mass, a rectangle with a ratio of 1:6 is created by drawing a vertical line in the middle of the square and extending a line from the base of this new line to the upper left corner.

8

This diagonal line is then rotated at the base of the vertical line in the center of the square until it is horizontal. The left‐most endpoint of the horizontal line defines the outer boundary of the west side of the geometry. This boundary is mirrored about the vertical line in the middle of the square to define the east side of the geometry. It is in‐ teresting to see the relationship of the height of the building in relation to it is with through this diagram when the width could just as easily be interpreted from the plan.

[Figure 10a] In this diagram, we see the representa‐

tion of how the penetrations on the facades of the primary cubic form represent how “The house is a box in the air, pierced all around, without interruption, by a long window.

No more hesitations about architectural play of space and mass. The box is in the cen‐ ter of fields, overlooking orchards.” (Sbriglio, 1999, p.40)

[Figure 11a] With the pilotis, the elevated Piano No‐

bile of the building becomes the primary hierarchal ele‐ ment of the design. The lower service functions become secondary and the solarium becomes the tertiary element in the hierarchy arrangement.

[Figure 12a] There are multiple concepts in the Parti

diagram that include: the 4x4 square grid representing the plan and structure layout, a diagonal line representing sym‐ metry and balance, the ramp and stair shafts for the circula‐ tion. Notice that the 4x4 box is deliberately shown floating above a ground plane. In addition, there is a wavy line posi‐ tioned above the rest of the Parti. This gesture may have multiple meanings such as the symbolism of the home being a ship on water, or the movement of air through the raised structure.

9

Ground Floor Plan, Villa Savoye. (Gast, 2000, p.67)

10

First Floor Plan, Villa Savoye. (Gast, 2000, p.67)

11

Diagrammatic Analysis, Villa Savoye.

(Gast, 2000, p.75,77)

12

Farnsworth House

Two significant precedents influenced Mies van der Rohe’s expressions of the

Floating Modern. First was the Barcelona Pavilion, 1928‐1929. This scheme

“…consisted of the realization of the “free plan” and the “float‐ ing roof.” Like an antique temple, the building rested on a plinth of travertine, with a southern U‐shaped enclosure on the same material leading to a small service annex. A large water basin stretched to‐ wards the southeast, its floor‐slabs projecting over the edge and giving the impression that the water’s surface continues under the plinth, connection outside and inside…. The building’s roof plate was carried by … columns, giving the impression of a hovering roof and disclosing the non supporting character of the walls.” (Zimmerman, 2006, p39)

The second precedent of note is the

Tugendhat House, 1928‐1930 labeled “the most sumptuous domestic design Mies ev‐ er executed.” (Filler, 2007, p.60) Here, Mies elaborated on the concepts of the Barce‐ lona Pavilion and merged the uses of en‐ trance hall, living room, dining area, work

9

area with library, and lounge corner into a single use space. (Zimmerman, 2006, 47)

In 1945 Mies designed a house that was timeless, the Farnsworth House of Pla‐ no, Illinois. Heavy steel columns welded on three horizontal planes support an elevated floor, a detached terrace and a roof. The use of massive glass walls gives an ever‐open feel of nature around you, as though you are in the center of it.

[Figure 1b] The structure of the Farnsworth House is

arranged on a rectangular grid comprised of eight steel columns arranged in two rows of four, spaced 6.6 meters 13

apart. The columns are on the outside of the “two floating parallel platforms” that com‐ prise the floor and roof. “Mies van der Rohe had studied the concept of the elevated structure, raised above the ground, floating, with several architectural models.” (Blaser, 1999, p.38‐39) A second, smaller platform, used as a terrace, is positioned slightly off cen‐

ter and south of the primary rectangular plane. This structure uses only six of the steel columns with the same 6.6 peter spacing.

[Figure 2b] Side lighting is also the primary means of bringing in natural light to the interior spaces within the Farnsworth house. The cantilevered roof over the terrace shades from the afternoon western sun and permits indi‐ rect bounced light into the space. On the east end, the morning sunlight is permitted to enter the space. It is clear that the program of the home established around the path of the sun. “The sleeping area is to the east, where the sun rises. The sensation is indescribable—the act of waking and coming to con‐ sciousness at the light dawns and gradually grows. It illuminates the grass and trees and the river beyond; it takes over your whole vision.

You are in nature and not in it, engulfed by it but separate from it. It is altogether unforgettable.”

(Schulze, 1997, p.5)

[Figure3b] Essentially the form is two differ‐

ent forms. First, a floating glass cube sandwiched between two floating parallel platforms and second, a planar surface creating the entrance terrace.

[Figure 4b] There is a proportional relationship between the plan and the section. The height of the building is just under half of the width of the plan and is raised 1.2 meters off the ground. (Blaser, 1999, p.10) [Figure 5b] Movement into the residence oc‐ curs by means of four steps from the ground plain to 14

the open terrace on south. Then, five additional steps in line with same axis carry the individual to the covered terrace on the plain of the living space. The use of the main space is an open plan with the utility core, contain‐ ing kitchen and bathroom, in a narrow band off center of the longitudinal axis of the plan. (Blaser, 1999, p.39) [Figure 6b] The relationship of the whole building to smaller units can be seen

through the column layout, which divides the façade in‐ to three equal portions with the small ends cantilevering beyond the column to the east and west.

[Figure 7b] A smaller grid is created on the floor with 24‐inch by 33‐inch travertine slabs. (Schulze, 1997, p.17) This pattern is presented on both the open terrace

in 11 panels by 20 panels as well as the higher space comprised of 14 panels by 36 panels.

[Figure 8b] The first line of three lines of sym‐ metry/balance is a north‐south line through the middle of the entire system, thus showing more of a balance ra‐ ther than equal forms on either side of the plan. The second line of symmetry is an east‐west axis through the center of the enclosed space. The final symmetry line bisects the utility core directly through the center of the fireplace.

[Figure 9b] The geometrical form of the plan is a rectangle with the exterior ter‐ race a smaller proportion of the main floor area.

[Figure 10b] When looking at how the dominant ele‐ ments of the building 15

are composed in an additive/subtractive manner, first, two forms added together with smaller appendages of the utility core in the larger space and masses for the stairs add‐ ed to the secondary space. Next, a space one third the length of the large space is sub‐ tracted to create to covered porch on the main level.

[Figure 11b] In consideration of the hierarchal ele‐ ments and spaces, Mies van der Rohe has clearly made the interior space the highest precedence with each space leading to the interior a succeeding hierarchy, concluding with the thin floating stairs.

[Figure 12b] The hierarchal representation contin‐ ues through a system of layering and opaqueness represented in the illustration of the Parti of Mies’s design solution. The diagram indicates that the most transparent space is the open‐air terrace. Second, the covered terrace is a less transparent area. Next, the interior is more en‐ closed than the previous two spaces. Lastly, the utility core is the most opaque. The interpretation of this dia‐ gram is descriptive solely of the line weights and not the spaces since each of them are all completely open on every side.

16

8

17

Contemporary Projects

A couple of twenty‐first century archi‐

tects that continue the idea of floating mod‐ ern architecture are Renzo Piano and Steven Holl. Completed in 2002, Renzo Piano’s Pina‐ coteca Giovanni e Marella in Turin, Italy is a “treasure box housing the Agnelli’s art collec‐

10

tion” and appears to be floating above the building beneath it. (Renzo Piano Building Work‐ shop, 2011)

Lastly, the Horizontal Skyscraper – Vanke Center in Shenzhen, China, completed

by Steven Holl in 2009 also demonstrates the floating modern. “The building appears as if it were once floating on a higher sea that has now subsided.” (Steven Holl, 2011) The reason the entire building was raised was twofold; first, to create views over the exist‐ ing neighboring buildings, and second to create an immense publicly accessible green

11

space beneath.

IV. Conclusion

From this comparison of the Villa Savoye by Corbusier and the Farnsworth House, we can see how the ideology of floating architecture is based on the use of Pilo‐ tis and the free plan. It is more that a functional quality by creates a sensation in the built environment that links it to the natural world. The Aesthetics of floating architec‐ ture are appealing and create a visual tension in relation to the ground.

The symbolic qualities of floating architecture suggest a need for attention, and a

hierarchal precedence.

18

Bibliography

Banham, Reyner. Theory and Design in the First Machine Age. New York, Praeger. 1960.

Benton, Tim. “Villa Savoye and the Architects’ Practice.” Le Corbusier. Ed. Brooks, H. Allen.

Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ. 1987. 83‐105. ISBN 0‐691‐00278‐9.

Blaser, Werner. Mies van der Rohe : Farnsworth House : Weekend House/Wochenendhaus.

Birkhäuser. Basel, Switzerland. 1999. ISBN 3‐7643‐6089‐5.

Clark, Roger. Precedents in Architecture : Analytic Diagrams, Formative Ideas and Partis.

John Wiley & Sons. Hoboken, NJ. 2005. ISBN 0‐471‐47974‐8.

Colquhoun, Alan. Modern Architecture. Oxford History of Art. Oxford University Press.

Oxford, NY. 2002. ISBN 0‐19‐284226‐9.

Corbusier, Le. Precisions on the present state of architecture and city planning: with an American prologue, a Brazilian corollary followed by The temperature of Paris and The atmosphere of Moscow. 1930. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA. 1991. Translated

by Edith Schreiber Aujame.

Corbusier, Le. Towards a New Architecture. New York: Dover Publications, 1986.

Eisenman, Peter. “Aspects of Modernism: Maison Dom‐ino and the Self‐Referential Sign.”

Oppositions 15/16. MIT Press. Winter/Spring 1979. p. 118–128.

Filler, Martin. Makers of Modern Architecture. The New York Review of Books. New York, NY. 2007. ISBN 978‐1‐59017‐227‐8.

Fondation Le Corbusier. “Foudation Le Corbusier ‐ Bibliography.” Last modified May 05, 2011. http://www.foudationlecorbusier.fr/.

Frampton, Kenneth. Le Corbusier. World of Art. Thames & Hudson. New York, NY. 2001.

ISBN 0‐500‐20341‐5.

Friedrich Froebel. “Friedrich Froebel inbended Kindergarten.” Last modified February 05, 2011. http://www.friedrichfroebel.com/.

Gast, Klaus‐Peter. Le Corbusier, Paris – Chandigarh. Birkhäuser. Basel, Switzerland. 2000.

ISBN 3‐7643‐6291‐X. Giedion, Sigfried. Space, time and architecture; the growth of a new tradition. Cambridge, The Harvard University Press. London. H. Milford. Oxford University Press. 1941.

Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig. “Industrialized Building”. 1924. Programs and Manifestoes on 20th Century Architecture. Ed. Conrads. 1971. p. 81‐2.

Priana, Francesca. Architecture: elements, materials, form. Princeton University Press.

Princeton, NJ. 2008. ISBN 978‐0‐691‐14150‐3.

19

Padovan, Richard. Towards Universality: Le Corbusier, Mies, and De Stijl. Routledge. New York, NY. 2002.

Renzo Piano Building Workshop. “Renzo Piano Building Workshop Offical Site.” Last mod‐ ified March 24, 2011. www.rpbw.com.

Sbriglio, Jacques. Le Corbusier: La Villa Savoye/The Villa Savoye. Birkhäuser. Basel, Switzer‐ land. 1999. ISBN 3‐7643‐5807‐6.

Schulze, Franz. The Farnsworth House. Peter G. Plaumbo. 1997. ISBN 0‐9660840‐0‐4.

Scully, Vincent. “Le Corbusier, 1922‐1965.” Le Corbusier. Ed. Brooks, H. Allen. Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ. 1987. 47‐55. ISBN 0‐691‐00278‐9.

Sekler, Mary Patricia May. The Early Drawings of Charles‐Edouard Jeanneret (Le Corbusier) 1902‐1908. Outstanding Dissertations in the Fine Arts. Garland Publishing. New York, NY. 1977. ISBN 0‐8240‐278‐0. (Originally presented as the author’s thesis, Harvard, 1973.)

Steven Holl. “Steven Holl Architects.” Last modified May 5, 2011. http://www.stevenholl.com/project‐detail.php?id=60&award=true.

Tafuri, Manfredo and Dal Co, Francesco. Modern architecture. Translated from the Italian

by Robert Erich Wolf. New York: H. N. Abrams. 1979, 1986.

Towards an Archticture. “Toward an Architecture – Wikipedia, the free encyclepdia.” Last modified April 28, 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toward_an_Architecture.

Vandenberg, Maritz. Farnsworth House : Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Phaidon Press Inc. New York, NY. 2003. ISBN 0‐7148‐3152‐2.

Villa Savoye. “Villa Savoye – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.” Last modified May 02, 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Savoye.

Zimmerman, Claire. Mies Van Der Rohe, 1886‐1969 : The Structure of Space. Taschen.

Germany. 2006. ISBN 978‐3‐8228‐3643.

20

Image and Figure List

1:

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/edu/dictionary/thentasi.jpg

2:

http://www.editionedartmag.com/wp‐content/uploads/2010/09/LeCorbusier.jpg

3:

http://www.fondationlecorbusier.fr/CorbuCache/410x480_2049_979.jpg

4:

Image created by Nick Tanner

5:

http://www.fondationlecorbusier.fr/

6:

http://ndvale.com.br/upload/noticia/Capa_ludwig‐mies‐van‐der‐rohe.jpg

7:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/106/262392346_8e92cb6287.jpg

8:

http://x2d.xanga.com/e0ef772216233265178841/b211462754.jpg

9:

Vandenberg, 2003, p44

10:

http://www.a‐torino.com/web/images/torino/pinacotecaagnelli.jpg

11:

http://www.evolo.us/wp‐content/uploads/2010/04/Steven‐Holl‐Vanke‐Center‐1.jpg

Fig. 1‐12a:

Clark, 2005, p.89

Fig. 1‐12b:

Clark, 2005, p.193

21