Reflections over Semper, Ruskin, and Viollet-Le-Duc

           The three minds of the 19^th century that greatly contributed to the modern architecture movement are Gottfried Semper, John Ruskin, and Eugene Viollet-le-Duc. In this blog I will compare the individual beliefs, styles, and view on architecture of these three men, and will identify the significant elements of their theories, the approach to building and restoring architecture, pointing to a key architectural project or work. Discuss the criticisms and debates surrounding their work.

            Viollet-Le-Duc and Ruskin both were both fond of Gothic architecture, but with two completely different reasoning’s. Ruskin favored Gothic style because he approached it with an emotional view and admired the free expression of the artist for the ornamental decorations. Gothic Architecture also embodied the organic relationship between worker, guild community natural environment and god. This drove Ruskin to adopt the idea that a building only becomes architecture once its ornament surpasses that of that of the core functions of the building. Ruskin introduced his study: a work entitled The Seven Lamps of Architecture, which defined seven moral qualities he saw in architecture (sacrifice, truth, power, beauty, life, memory, and obedience). I would have to disagree with Ruskin about ornamentation defining architecture, because although art is nice if a structure fails to complete its primary functions then it can’t serve its purpose the entire structure becomes just something to look at. Ruskin fervently advocated preservation of structures, stating that restoration is “the most total destruction a building can suffer” (Pevsner 38), He went on to found Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings.

            Viollet-Le-Duc admired Gothic Architecture for the logic in the design and construction of them. This leads him to an opposite viewpoint that focused on science and reason behind the building and not for its ornamentation stating that a building’s looks should not contradict its function but rather have a purpose, as good architecture is only defined as being rational. I tend to agree with Viollet-Le-Duc and can tell his ideas were later adopted by Louis Sullivan who stated “form follows function.” Viollet-le-Duc is passionate about the restoration of buildings, but takes his restorations past general repairs to the point that he reinterprets the building in a state that it was not originally before in a state that it was not originally before. Viollet-Le-Duc believed in expressing materials including iron which he held in high regards for its aesthetic potential and structural qualities.

Viollet-le-Duc’s most famous restoration work Medieval Fortress of Carcassonne (1853), demonstrates the criticism and debate surrounding his methods.  To restore the fortress, Viollet-le-Duc disregarded the historical time period of its construction and applied an architectural style of a different region altogether, constructing colorful pitched roofs onto the fortress.  Opponents of this interpretative restoration like Ruskin view this as destruction of historical work; others see it as an artistic statement of the potential of a building. In my personal opinion I find it to be a great way to reconstitute a structure so it can meet the standard for its modern functions and styles.

  

            Semper admired Greek architecture for its social and political values while condemning Gothic architecture. Semper organized his thoughts into “The Four Elements of Architecture.” He said that all build form was divided into four categories: the “hearth” (the communal prerequisite for architecture and the basic social point for families, it is the germ of civilization and is the central element around which the other three group themselves), “substructure” (used to raise the hearth off the damp ground), “roof” ( to protect the fire from rain), and “enclosure” ( to keep out weather, and conceived of as general non load bearing walls). From this idea came today’s modern curtain walls. Semper agreed with Viollet-Le-Duc in in that they both believed that a building should always show its structure and in a style that used tectonics. According to Semper, architectural style was only true if “its forms were motivated by construction, material, and the prevailing socio-economic, cultural, and climatic conditions.” (Zucker 9) Semper sided with Viollet-Le-Duc on the restoration verse preservarion debate. Ruskin and Semper disliked the use of iron and favored the use of stone construction.  Semper believed iron would lead to the development of a new style bad for an architect’s creativity.  Besides stone, he used local materials, such as plaster and paint in the Semper Opera instead of marble.