Jean Renaudie
Vilee Wagh
MArch Housing & Urbanism
Housing Form
Tutor: Irenee Scalbert | Naina Gupta
Jean Renaudie’s proposals for the urban renewal of Ivry-sur-Seine and other projects around 1928 portray a sense of ingenuity in the design of public housing and draw an inspiration from structuralist principles and his research in molecular biology.1 Renaudie addresses a deeper set of questions about qualities of a desirable dwelling, spaces that give more importance to the experience rather than the prescribed function, and towards the individuality that each house provides to the resident. It was through his projects that the diagonal was brought into the planning of a housing unit, as well as the importance of terraces provided for each dwelling. What sets his work apart from the rest was the high level of standard set for each space that makes a house home. The rhythmic alterations within the configurations result in an almost impossible pattern that makes each of his designs unique. This gives a whole new identity and character to the field of mass housing which works its way through a combination of design sensitivity and innovation that is second to none. The essay aims at understanding and exploring the underlying notion behind the idea of indeterminacy through analyzing one of his buildings through re-drawing the units of Danielle Casanova and comparing it with another building in the same master-plan, the Le Liegat, designed by him and Renee Gailhoustet. It is through the mode of drawing that Renaudie achieved most of his ideas and this essay tries to build upon his initial sketches and find a pattern and the evolution of form, the missing piece that governed his design principles, as his work and architectural philosophy seems relevant to this day.
The suburbs of Paris faced an increasing demand of housing due to the everincreasing population around 1958. The period between early 1920s to 1960s was a transformational period in terms of the evolution of public housing as the government authorities deemed it right to provide better services like central heating and showers that were not a part of mass housing earlier. There was a shift in the type of mass housing from the ‘Grand ensembles’ 1 where State along with the contractors’manufactured large blocks of standardized housing units with little or no imagination or diversity in their inherent structure. It was during this period that Jean Renaudie, a French architect and a communist himself who had radical ideologies about the concept of the city created a set of drawings for the upcoming town of Le Vaudreuil. Contrary to the existing conditions in the way his drawings were reacted to, the drawings of this project were to be of a lasting impact in his future housing design schemes.
An architect who challenged the notion of grand ensembles, he portrays a robust approach in way he relates the structure of the city to that of a living organism , and of the building of an organ within itself made up of cells that evolve and multiply rapidly, creating unique forms and spatial experiences for the user. The complexity of the way a city functions is reflected in his drawings and eventually in his designs. But after carefully analyzing the complex drawings one sees an underlying simplicity, that is not governed by the segregation of spaces but by giving importance to the more qualitative aspects of the spaces and using an innovative grid as a underlay for the same.
Using a similar method that was used by the architect himself, the essay uses drawings and diagrams as a tool to get to the root of the guiding principle behind the intricate design of spaces that differed from one another in multiple ways.
The works done by Renaudie are interlinked and inspired from one another in a way that makes us understand his process of design through drawing, through overlapping layers of complexity. The characteristics of the drawings of Le Vaudreuil made by Renaudie give us a hint of his later projects, the overlapping of forms, the use of basic geometrical forms that combine together to form a bigger constellation of elements that would later shape the site. There are traces of pattern, repetition, consistency and geometry evident in these earlier drawings that somehow, seem to culminate in the drawings for the redevelopment of Ivry-surSeine, making it a long process of design development.
In the second half of 1920s, the suburbs in Paris connected by the railway portrayed a reflection of communist values in a need for social housing for the working class of society. The local authorities felt the need to have homes with central heating and showers.1
The period around 1950s witnessed a transformation in the notion of public housing in terms of the quality of the spaces as well as the services provided in it. Basic services like a bathroom with bath, windows were a rarity in social housing. Later, the upcoming priority zones of urbanization gave an opportunity for redevelopment projects on a larger scale due to the incentives that employers received to move to the provinces.1One such suburb, Ivry-sur-Seine had a growing demand for housing for the increasing population and had sites that were available for large scale redevelopment
Initially, this commission was given to an architect Roland Dubrulle who was both a communist but who also believed in the concept of Grand ensembles. The connection of Renaudie to Dubrulle’s office was through Renee Gailhoustet who worked at Dubrulle’s office on these public housing projects. Renaudie’s initial work for the city of Le Vaudreuil that made a strong impression on the director of Ivry’s public housing officer. It played a vital role in connecting Renaudie to the Ivry.2
Scalbert, Irenee. 2004. A Right To Difference - The architecture of Jean Renaudie Pg. 44
It is only after extruding lines from each of the vertices of the diagonals can one establish a grid, a slow realization of the innate simplicity of form, of complexity and indeterminacy generating in a manner as simple as that of joining of the two ends of a line, a diagonal. In the pursuit of dissecting the plan and studying how each space corresponds to the adjacent one, there remains the question of whether the evident effects of the disposition of one apartment on the others that made it necessary to have never-ending adjustments between themselves as well as the inside and outside, a meaningful transition. The highly complicated design development paved a way to a chain reaction of complexity that not always came with a meaning attached to it.
The traditional manners of judging a space based on its segregation and adjacency of function, the size of the rooms does not seem to be applicable here. On the other hand, the interdependency of internal faces almost renders it impossible to make any changes to any of the blocks as it would eventually change the rest of the spaces. It is evident in some cases that the ratio of indoor to outdoor space is not a standard figure and adds to the complexity of the form as a whole.
Each unit of the Danielle Casanova, when studied as an individual block has a different story to tell. The underlying grid that was once present in the floor-plan suddenly disappears, turning it into a complex puzzle that does not seem to have any order or logic. As Renaudie’s drawings seek to marry imagination with practicality, the design investigates the complexity of urban life while introducing a subtle hint of some kind of order, unnoticed by the habitants, but experienced in the way the spaces witness the performance of daily life itself. When read in coherence with each other, the internal intricacies start making sense in a way that they function in unison with immediate units.
Using sketching as the main driver to imitate evolution, one can trace the lines along which each of the spaces came into being from the grid that almost becomes nonexistent as it transforms itself into angular spatial nodes. However, the unique identities and complexity of forms were achieved and made a reality by going over budget by almost 70 percent
One of the reduced floorplates of the upper levels of Danielle Casanova houses five units that span in three directions with most of their service areas structured around each other that are incorporated in such a way that can be read together as dense clusters closer to the circulation path, that transform into bigger spaces of living along the outer edges of the building, eventually interacting with the terraces that blur the boundaries between functions.
Introduction
Evolution
Reduced floorplates of upper levels of Casanova , building’s form derived from the varied ratio of built and open spaces
Architectural Association
Individual units of Danielle Casanova – mixed pieces of a puzzle that derive their meaning as a floorplate when stitched together, combining functions, form and structure together. The acute angles of the units giving us an idea of the structural and formal interdependency of the block on its neighbor.
The spaces interlock in each other in such a way that the service areas do not take up more space than which is absolutely necessary. Designing with a goal of giving the user a freedom that is directed by the structural allocation of spaces and their experiential qualities, not segregated by the hierarchy of function. One unit might have a kitchen that laterally looks onto the balcony outside , a part of which accommodates the dining space that also spills over in the balcony area. Living spaces that span throughout the diagonal of the house that almost utilizes the longest possible dimension in a given unit. There is complexity in the way one unit is woven together with the others. Open spaces and the variation in the internal layouts is a result of treating the restrictions presented by the structure in a way that expands the visual connectivity of spaces, breaking lines that could overpower and become passages.
Analyzing the third floor of the Danielle Casanova in a purely artistic manner, without looking at the internal spaces , the plan can be divided into four main parts structured around four main cores that have wing-like spaces attached to them, giving a sense that they want to be set free from the core, aiming in different directions. The peripheral edges of the building are a combination of internal spaces with punctures or more commonly, attached terraces that venture out into the space , often having a direct relationship to its adjoining terrace. Each shape of the unit seems like a part of a larger puzzle, like a cell giving birth to another one upon which it is dependent on performing its inner functions. The manner in which these indoor and outdoor spaces are stitched together gives a unique identity to each of the units. The building relates to the structure of a city as an organism with that of the life within the building in a way that the building itself becomes like an organ of the city. The way a city inhabits an infinite amount of ever-changing functions in itself, so does the building and the spaces within each unit.
Le-Liegat was another cluster in the bigger masterplan of Ivry, that was designed after the Danielle Casanova, along a similar ideology except it explored the form based on a geometry derived from a hexagon, multiplying itself through more orthogonal spaces that give rise to more freedom of interstitial spaces. The overlapping units inhabit multiple individual homes that are not directly defined by the forms generated through the rectangles but by embracing the variations in typology and freedom of space that result in spaces that are not interdependent in terms of services and structure, and encompass living and sleeping units that have more coherence in the way the internal furniture sits within the space.
The complexity of this design does not just focus on the space each house occupies, but also the negative space created by it as well. The evolution of a hexagon into a cluster is facilitated by rectangles protruding from each side of the hexagon that further connect themselves through triangles. However, the units do not correspond to the spaces formed through these multiplicities, but are further interlinked through slicing the rectangles and connecting vertices to the midpoint of the length of the rectangle The final output, a replication of this form, generates a rhythm that almost replicated the growth of a living organism, a cell of a human body with a nucleus of a core that again relates to the circular core in Danielle Casanova.
The internal circulation passages are a result of joining lines that break and continue in different directions, creating a unique experience for the user in a mundane space that has no spatial importance given otherwise. Clusters of these units grasp a myriad of elements that compound into an organic whole.
The Le-Liegat redefines the way in which Danielle Casanova encompasses an abstract quality of spaces generated through an underlay of a grid, while avoiding sharp angles that create complications, more than the complexity and delves instead into re-generating forms that have a similar sense of freedom as well as an orderliness that lets no space go under-utilised.
The spectrum of spaces generated through this constellation of forms was a framework and also a guiding factor in synthesizing the commercial (public) and private scales. The domestic spaces have a similar quality that presses upon the experience of the space than the segregation of formal functions. It inhabits paradoxes, heavy masses and light spaces, complexity of internal units and simplicity with which they are derived, recombining leftover areas to generate a character to the communal spaces in the urban environment.
Overlapping morphologies
Le-Liegat Ivry-sur-Seine 1982 Collection FRAC Centre
Connection of core to different unit blocks, clusters of living
Le-Liegat Ivry-sur-Seine 1982 Collection FRAC Centre
The two cases, Danielle Casanova and Le-Liegat, portray a progressive and evolutionary approach in overcoming the challenges and drawbacks of one experiential form over the other, while opening up a broad spectrum of possible geometric articulations in housing form. Both the buildings, along with the rest as a part of the grand masterplan of Ivry, with their undeniable originality and innovation, showcase a level of risk taking in the overall field of public housing that was only possible because of the willingness of the government to take the plunge with something totally unconventional, a drift from the Grand ensembles, an opportunity for the architects to research and rediscover what a space can do, and what it can be. The socio-economical and political scenario of that time was in favor for a change in how public housing was dealt with.
However, the idea of designing a space that has the potential to be utilized in the most improbable and indeterminate way, is something that is still relevant, and even one of the needs of the hour, today. The train of thought that Renaudie started years ago, finds itself to be useful in more than one way in re-thinking ways in which public housing or even housing in general is approached in present times. Aworld in which cities are changing at a pace like never before, that demand buildings and spaces that can accommodate cross-disciplinary functions as well as being ingenious, the drawings and science behind the designs of Renaudie help us subvert from the standard prototypes that are evolved as a result of purely singular functional spaces.Also, one of the key learnings from the works of Jean Renaudie, is to fearlessly explore and unearth the simplicity behind the complex geometries and intricacies of form, breaking the spatial restrictions that create mass mundane spaces when it comes to public housing.
There are also challenges in terms of politics, economy and the social construct that would make it difficult to put the learnings to direct use, but the lasting design principles about being more attentive towards the unsaid needs of the inhabitants, embracing the unknown desires of the future living, and recreating a structural base to carve spaces that can be given multiple meanings and relationships by and with the user, remain strong drivers of change in the housing industry.
Chaljub, Bénédicte. n.d. www.frac-centre.fr. https://www.frac-centre.fr/_en/art-andarchitecture-collection/gailhoustet-renee/le-liegat-ivry-sur-seine317.html?authID=74&ensembleID=854
n.d. DIvisare https://divisare.com/projects/346825-jean-renaudie-renee-gailhoustetlorenzo-zandri-za-ivry-sur-seine-social-housing-project
Nisa, Richard. 2013. http://www.crisisofenclosure.com/atelier-four. Roger H. Clark, Michael Pause. n.d. Precedents in Architecture.
Scalbert, Irenee. 2004. A Right To Difference - The architecture of Jean Renaudie. London: Architectural Association.
Buffard, Pascale, Jean Renaudie, with a foreword by Bruno Zevi (Paris 1992)