Vision and reality (1960-1970)
The sixties of the twentieth century will be remembered by the rebellion young generation born after World War II, especially the protests of students, with the sounds of the guitarists Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, The Rolling Stones and the Beatles. Long hair, colorful clothes, “flower children” versus mandatory manners. Constructed values of Western democracies have become questionable; NATO opposite the Warsaw Pact, Martin Luther King, the Vietnam War, and the Prague Spring. New York has finally grown into a renowned capital of art, Pop Art. Andy Warhols poster of Campbell’s soup can opens the way to 15 minutes of world fame created by the presence of the media: advertising, trademarks, stars, Marilyn Monroe, Che Guevara.


In the early 1920s Rudolph Schindler built his house in America in which he tried to formulate new ways of collective life in the private sphere, as reflected in the shape of a house. At the same time architects such as Gropius, who has worked on residential schemes in Europe were influenced by socialist views on society. One of the most important ideals for which it can be said that has left a mark on the history of modern architecture of the 20th century was an attempt to discover the principles on which the building was constructed, and from it to discover how it works. Structural elements of reinforced concrete structures have been discovered so they were not covered by glass panels or lining of stone. Different functions of non-bearing parts of the facade could be emphasized by using different materials. The contrasts between the materials help the viewer to draw conclusions about the role of different parts of the building. Beyond that lies the concept of honest architecture that does not hide its structure behind the facade of changing varieties. American architect Louis I. Kahn has formulated this principle very clearly when he postulated, architecturally designed space, where we can see exactly how it is made. Separately Kahn and Smithson in English among the younger generation, has once again Le Corbusier mostly applied this principle in his later work. His use of concrete brut (the French “brut” means “rough”, “rugged”), a clean, bare concrete is what we owe the idea of brutalism: architectural direction based on ethical rather than the aesthetic concept of a coherent style and as such remains important component of the architectural forms of expression until the mid-1970s.  There is always a conflict between the priorities of the owner, who can put a function or size in the first place, and those of conservationists, who will want to preserve all the historic remains as complete as possible. In war-torn buildings are relatively easy to make a decision: either you make a new building exact 1:1 copy of the old buildings, such as in Warsaw after 1945 – or you look different, modern architectural design to replace the destroyed building. The result is always a new building in the first case in the historical “clothes” and the second in modern. But what do you do with the existing historic buildings that have been changed and were changed many times over the centuries, and that in this way every epoch have left behind a different layer? Do you choose a specific period, such as Gothic or Baroque and make all the necessary alteration or restoration in this style, as it was often done in the 19th century? Or decide to remain visible all historical layers, and add contemporary changes in style appropriate for that time? Warsaw’s old town was completely destroyed in 1945 and the object after renovation, Warsaw was founded in the 13th century. After the war, the city was rebuilt by facsimile, through historical documents and architectural surveys of students before the war. This last line has adopted Venetian architect Carlo Scarpa in his perhaps most important work, the restoration of Castel Vecchio between 1956 and 1964, which is now used as a museum, in the northern Italian city, Verona. Recognizing thoughtful mix of styles that is already there, Scarpa tried with a combination of sensitivity and willingness to experiment, to reclaim prized cultural unity of the building, which will take into account the demands of modern art. The result is a magnificent work of art, in which the individual layers of historical periods, mixed with Scarpino architecture that seeks to form a completely new interpretation of the building. Scarpa was making a clear distinction between the materials for modern construction, such as concrete, steel and glass, and historical material, so that the various different materials for edge were placed next to each other, giving the whole original charm.

No votes yet.
Please wait…

Prijavi se

Detalji dokumenta

Više u Arhitektura

Više u Skripte