Weißenhofsiedlung Settlement and Loos Methodology

Weißenhofsiedlung Settlement

In an era where society craved for the next “In” thing in art and design, the result became a scattered collage of incomplete and abstract art movements that eventually caved in on themselves; bowing the knee to the Modern architecture we know today. Modern architectures’ predecessors such as: Art Nouveau, Der Stijl, Amsterdam, Arts and Crafts etc. feature elements of design that are unique to them, but often can be seen carried through to current modern architecture. To combat this chaos the German issued Werkbund was implemented as a cultural reform project “Aiming to subsume and transcend the emerging dominant capitalism.” (Adolf) Although it commissioned dozens of famous German architects and designers, its goal was not to create a new set of principles of architecture or aesthetics, but rather to provide the stepping stone of modern architecture to combine mass production techniques into meaningful poetic design. I personally think this was an intelligent idea of the Germans to try and pull the country back together and initiate some sort of systematic idea about new architecture.

Peter Behrens

Diagrammatic Plan of Haus 31 

The German state government issued a design competition in Stuttgart, Germany called Weißenhofsiedlung in 1927. One of the design objectives was to make small residences and push the ideas of modern architecture as well incorporating a “programmatic goal of creating a model for the future living of people in large cities” (Weißen.) One of the architects that was commissioned at Weißenhofsiedlung was Peter Behrens. He is now referred to as the Father of incorporating industry into modern design, a concept that Ruskin followers would be appalled at and could possibly be considered a refinement/readjustment or the next step following the Art Nouveau era. Behrens developed House number thirty-one. It’s interesting to study the floor plans of this multi-apartment small building. He comments that unlike other architects who use the same plan for each level, he decided to offset them and on some upper floors not have a living room space, but rather substitute it with an outdoor terrace. This building in particular demonstrates very well how he experiments with varying wall thicknesses as one moves up the building. The notion I found to be most interesting is how the roof planes juxtapose out on different sides of the building and each level builds as it moves down. For example: the top floor has a (blue) terrace, the terrace now becomes a part of the second floor and its terrace (green) becomes a part of the third floor so you have this progression towards the ground plane. ­

View of Behrens Multi-Level Apartment Building

Victor Bourgeois

Another member of this Werkbund team is Victor Bourgeois who designed house number ten. This is simply a three story single family residence. It seems that most of the Werkbund contestants took some form of grid or structure and would pattern it or offset it slightly so that the grid was still evident, but there was one portion or multiple portions that stood alone to be expressed or somehow compliment the other forms. If you will notice in the diagram the light blue section is shifted down, reminding me of two tectonic plates shifting against each other. There is a reference to the three by three grids in plan, but the wall planes do not follow the grid exactly making me wonder if this is intentional or if Bourgeois just placed them around there where they were convenient. If the grid did fit up perfect would it not cut down on construction cost and labor? Another question comes to mind, were the architects in the Weißenhofsiedlung given a program including exact restroom and appliance dimensions? The reason I bring this up is to say that if they had complete liberty and didn’t have to follow a rigid program then why not move the wall that is one foot away from fitting to the grid over? It is apparent that although it doesn’t fit the grid perfect it does fit rather well to the three vertical rectangles in which I mentioned the shift action previously. The blue section of the plan deals with circulation and main public spaces while the other two (violet and crimson) split the kitchen, restrooms, and sleeping quarters.

Haus 10

Diagrams of House 10 Including "Shift" Idea

Adolf Loos

The infamous Adolf Loss is the wildcard of this exhibition and in all of modern architecture in fact. He was very strongly opinionated in his view on human and social development and evolution as he studied Darwin’s works, and how modern architecture should be dealt with. In interesting fact is that he was originally offered a spot in the Weißenhofsiedlung, but was later denied permission and his site was given to Victor Bourgeois. Although many rising architects including Frank Lloyd Wright and Le Corbusier were working on breaking apart the barrier between the outside and interior of a structure and making it one with its surroundings, Loos was strongly opposed to this, almost as much as he was against ornamentation and Art Nouveau and even dedicated a book to it called “Ornament and Crime.” His ideals branched from how he viewed community. The outside of the building reflected the community and public so therefore should reflect the culture and community in its form language and material selection, BUT on  the interior of all of his spaces was where he allowed the richness of the space to be expressed. He preferred showing the natural beauty of materials like marble and other highly polished surfaces included in his design. Loos broke away from the common practice of forcing perspectives on an individual in a space and directing them where to go next as was commonly practiced in Renaissance architecture; playing off the cubist almost 2D aspect. He allowed the owner of the space to fill the space and even included the “Craft” on the inside, but would never allow it on the public side.

Truth In Material (Marble)

As a follower of Darwin he believed that Modernism was the next step in the evolutionary process for mankind and that all forms of ornamentation were just superfluous and didn’t aid in the progression of the species. As his ideas of modernism grew and likewise his commissions, architecture historians and other designers recognized that his work was different than other architects like those who participated in Weißenhofsiedlung or Frank Lloyd Wright and found him hard to classify.

As I went back and reviewed some of Loos’s projects I discovered light does play a large role in his work. He often uses mirrors to reflect natural or artificial light throughout his spaces and routinely designs his own light fixtures as seen in Kaernter Bar, the Café Museum in Vienna, and the Michaelerplaztz in Vienna is worth studying.  

As you can see the directions a designer can develop a methodology and a process of designing is infinite. The two designers from the Weißenhofsiedlung Peter Behrens and Victor Bourgeois both found ways to design a residence from a grid or structure and shift that structure or build up to it, and Adolf Loos was independent in that all his residences have a unique distinction between the public outside and the private ornamented interior.

Cafe Museum in Vienna (Custom Light Fixtures)

Works Cited:

Adolf Loos. Academic Lecture Notes. Accessed September 28, 2011. < https://blackboard.bsu.edu/bbcswebdav/courses/2011Fal_ARCH329s002_Combined/08%20Adolf%20Loos.pdf>

De Stijl Architecture. Accessed September 28, 2011. < http://www.arthistoryunstuffed.com/de-stijl-architecture/>

Flexible Housing. Accessed September 28, 2011. <http://www.afewthoughts.co.uk/flexiblehousing/house.php?house=11>

Kirsch, Karin. The Weissenhofsiedlung: Experimental Housing Built for the Deutscher Werkbund, Stuttgart 1927. Pub. 1992. p. 22-23, 57-60.

Kirsch, Karin. The Weissenhofsiedlung. Pub. 1989. Rizzoli INternational Publications, Inc. p. 88-92, 176-186.

Weißenhofsiedlung (Weissenhof Settlement). Accessed September 28, 2011. < http://www.stuttgart-tourist.de/ENG/sights_attractions/weissenhofsiedlung.htm>