Download Dan Turkel Intro to Architecture Reading Response #2 Laugier

Dan Turkel!
Reading Response #2!
!
Intro to Architecture
Laugier
Marc-Antoine Laugier’s thesis in An Essay on Architecture is that there is objective beauty
and lack thereof in architecture and that in architecture, as in all things, “there is only one way
of doing it well” (Laugier, 3). The success of a work of architecture is inherent and not to be
seen as varied with the opinion of a viewer—the ability to know whether or not a piece is
beautiful is simply a matter of taste-level. Laws have to be set up to define the best routes to
create this solidified vision of beauty and Laugier attempts to draft those laws in An Essay.
!
Laugier states that the Greeks are to thank for all architectural perfection and that the
Romans could do nothing but imitate or change it for the worse. In the same way, he believes
there is little that contemporary architects can do but imitate and detract from Greek
architecture. Laugier’s most important criterion is adherence to the natural model of a simple
shelter. It is natural human nature to create a simple shelter and Greek architecture can be seen
as representative of that template: columns represent wooden beams, entablature represents
horizontal pieces across them and the pediment represents the sloped roof. “Such is the course
of simple nature; by imitating the natural process, art was born” (12). This model is necessary as
it is the “cause of beauty” and the only deviations can be by necessity, which allows license to
stray from the model, or “parts added by caprice” which “add every fault” (12).
!
A striking feature of Laugier’s work is his harsh criticism of well known and highly
valued architectural pieces of his time. The logic here is that by critiquing so harshly what
others would consider to be so beautiful he “suggest[s] to the public, especially to the artists,
that they should doubt, should make conjectures, and should never be easily satisfied” (4). He
wants to solidify the guidelines as to which factors, motifs or techniques in a building make it
pleasing and which make it distasteful. As a result of this goal, Laugier casts doubt on wellestablished trends and highlights others that are falling by the wayside in an attempt to restore
what he believes to be the proper guidelines for architectural beauty.
Dan Turkel!
Reading Response #2!
!
Intro to Architecture
Laugier
Laugier sets up guidelines for orders where he lists rules to follow and faults to avoid.
Faults can be a practice as widespread as the use of pilasters. Laugier is especially vehement
about putting columns on pedestals as columns are the legs of a building and pedestals are like
stilts that it sits on. While this might seem like nitpicking or pretension, he then segues into
something more profound with regard to the fact that the Greeks used pedestals for their
columns and even Vitruvius wrote of it. “Any device—even if approved by great men—which is
either contrary to nature or cannot be convincingly explained is a bad device and must be
proscribed” (21). He goes on to state that things which were in poor taste when they were
implemented remain in poor taste even if they become well-precedented and popular. This
marks Laugier’s largest departure from typical classicism. Despite how highly he may speak of
Greek architecture, it is not that Greeks were infallible and perfect but that they closely
followed nature. The Greeks were just as prone to what he felt was poor taste.
!
This is only the beginning of how Laugier’s Essay is unlike Leon Battista Alberti’s De Re
Aedificatoria. Alberti’s work embodies the Renaissance ideal that classical architecture allows a
rebirth of much more than just ancient buildings but culture, philosophy and lifestyle. Laugier
simply believes that the Greeks had the right idea in keeping their architecture close to the
natural model but does not go so far as to agree with every decision they made and does not
think it needs to be expanded on. Alberti and Laugier admire much of the same thing but
Laugier cuts out the middle-man of the ancients and admires the natural model directly where
Alberti views it through the lens of the ancients.
!
There are similarities between Laugier and Alberti. Both feel that the beauty of a
building is objective and not in the eye of the beholder. They also both value the model of
nature (though Alberti less directly and literally than Laugier). They also both right to guide
architects of the future towards the right designs (though Laugier uses more negative
reinforcement—pointing out flaws—where Alberti describes what he admires). These surface
Dan Turkel!
Reading Response #2!
Intro to Architecture
Laugier
similarities mask overt philosophical differences. Ultimately Alberti prioritized form over
function; “[t]o have satisfied necessity is trite and insignificant...when the inelegance of a work
causes offense,” (Alberti, 156). Architecture had immense social connotations in the
Renaissance realm of thought and Alberti was well aware of this. Classical architecture meant
the glory and wisdom of the ancient Romans and good taste in a building reflected on and
idealized the patron. Laugier feels the form put above function causes ridiculous and absurd side
effects. Even when he seems to split hairs over the usage of certain motifs, it is because he feels
they do not conform to the natural model of the house of branches or come from unavoidable
structural necessity. Laugier can even appreciate beauty in Gothic architecture because he feels
that in a Church, Gothic architecture had been better implemented because any classically
inspired church ended up feeling heavy where the Gothic ones felt airy, majestic and natural.
This is not a concession that Alberti would make.
!
Laugier’s ability to critique the ancients and appreciate Gothic style marks that his focus
lies much more in the architecture itself than in its social impact and historical connotations.
Laugier bases his essay on the idea that architecture should be about beauty from the natural
model first and small exceptions from necessity next, and no other allowances. This utilitarian
mindset is one that Alberti would surely see as underly-focused on aesthetics and preoccupied
with the metaphor of the natural shelter but Laugier seems to genuinely believe—and perhaps it
is his downfall—that that which does not represent a piece of that natural model cannot help
the building be beautiful.
Dan Turkel!
Reading Response #2!
Intro to Architecture
Laugier
Works Cited
Alberti, Leon B. On the Art of Building in Ten Books. Trans. Joseph Rykwert, Neil Leach, and
Robert Tavernor. Cambridge, Mass: MIT. Print.
Laugier, Marc-Antoine. An Essay on Architecture. Trans. Wolfgang Herrmann and Anni
Herrmann. Los Angeles: Hennessey & Ingalls, 1977. Print.