The news headlines that the brand new place home for Rowan Atkinson has been approved by the Oxfordshire Planning Committee despite being proposed for refusal by the Authority's Planning Officers is in peril of raising again the rather drained discussion about Modernism versus Classicism in the English countryside. But this is totally the incorrect debate. Dragging out both previous conflict horses onto the jousting fields of Middle England is displacement activity that requires the attention away from an even more pushing, contemporary discussion affecting European culture more generally that might be broadcast if the war-horses could possibly be put in their stables for a while.
Atkinson's planning consultant Terence O'Rourke is reported as explaining the brand new proposals as'a bit of 21st century large structure '. I'm not sure this is a beneficial or entirely precise explanation of the proposals. It is correct that Atkinson's architect for the home, Richard Meier, brought around from the US to do this his first developing in the UK, is really a respected architect however training in the 21st century nevertheless the some ideas that create his work are firmly seated in the first the main last century. The home could therefore equally be called a bit of 20th century structure or as a bit of'Old Modernism '.
The some ideas that Meier however employs in 2010 were new in the 1920's and 30's when Le Corbusier and other early pioneers of the Modern Motion made an structure that expressed the heart of a era coming out from the first world war. This era rather naively thought that they roofing installation companies may wipe clear the record of record and build a daring new world. Corb's polemical articulation of the structure was explained in his famous'Five Points for a New Architecture ', first published as a series of posts in the diary he made, titled'L'Espirit Nouveau '. These five factors put up effective polemical dichotomies, purposefully disparaging of the previous get; the brand new structure was to stay elegantly over the bottom on slender'pilotis'(columns) rather than around wet and rat infested basements, the columned design could build the'Free plan'and supersede the constraints of large load-bearing structures using their uncomfortable sides, training the buildings off the bottom on pilotis could create'free ground'in the town to restore the busy streets. The architectural figure could in addition to releasing up the program build the'free elevation'and the quality outside strip windows of the era. Ultimately, what Corb argued were the worthless dark roof rooms connected with conventional pitched roofs could possibly be changed by the'roof garden'the sixth of Le Corbusier's five points. The other principal quality with this structure that strangely doesn't get mentioned as one of many five factors is that it is'bright '. The whiteness enabled that structure to reject the materiality of the building's surfaces. The materials are thus regarded as great abstractions, conceptual skins which find to establish potentially unlimited space. The flaws of a genuine material could undermine the search for a pure record of utter room, and therefore material it self had to become listed on those repressed aspects of architecture's reality.
Of course those aspects of architecture's reality that in these five factors were condemned by Le Corbusier did not go away. Certainly after the 2nd Earth Conflict, Le Corbusier's own structure needed a revolutionary change of direction. By the time he was planning Masions Jaoul in Paris the 1950's the five factors had been abandoned. The piloti had faded, in a way that the buildings sat steadily on the ground. The properties got load keeping structures, thereby limiting the results of the'free plan'and'free elevation'and at the same time the roofs were vaulted thus questioning the accessible'roof garden '. Also the'whiteness'that refused the buildings materiality had faded to be changed by'Beton brut ', a new and intense kind of architectural materiality that appeared to be called from Le Corbusier's mind to harmony the earlier denial.
The Small Old Protect:
Although we are able to note that Le Corbusier was able to move ahead from the intense polemic of early modernism, the seeds of the architectural language he had served to produce had been sown and were later to be found uncritically by way of a new generation. Richard Meier was part of the new generation. He surfaced together of several small architects working in New York in the 1960's who came to international interest in 1967 subsequent an exhibition of their work at the Memorial of Modern Artwork arranged by Arthur Drexler and later published in a book featuring the task of'The New York Five '; Philip Eisenman, Michael Graves, Charles Gwathmey, David Hejduk and Richard Meier. In those days that group somewhat shared the reductive language of the first contemporary motion but however some were later to move into new place, Meier presented the line. "If I can't be Le Corbusier, then I could be Richard Meier", I seem to remember him saying in the first days of his job, and in a recent letter to the Oxfordshire Planning Team he's today obviously claiming the place as his own, "Whiteness is one of many quality features of my work.... ".