RAFAEL MONEO

Lecture Course
Spring Term 2016

Harvard University
Graduate School of Desing

The jargon that critics and architecture historians talk about architecture.

The notion of knowledge in architecture

II

Form and Time: Architecture as an inevitable witness of time

III Architecture versus necessity

IV Architecture versus arbitrariness

The notion of knowledge in architecture

( January )

Lecture 1: The notion of knowledge in architecture

Lecture 2: The dissemination of architectural knowledge
Lecture 3: How architects work nowadays;
what means knowledge today

Gothic cathedrals:
- collective effort involving
the treaty and artists and
mason
- concatenated successions
of arches and bolts, the
complete geometry,
proportion, the total control
of the elements, the
constructed
wisdom,programmatic
content, deceptive visual
nuances, difficulty of
execution and body of
knowledge
- What kind of knowledge
was behind that?

- collective efforts - clergy,

builders, masons, laborers,
carpenters capable of
designing complete
scaffolding and systems,
congress people involved in
all aspects . But this
knowledge wasn't written.
- Overlap geometry of
structures cathedrals surely there was systems of
proportions and knowledge
of geometry that brought
into result.

- All complexity behind the

first cathedral has to do with
some naive or charming
quality of the diagrams. It
can be said instead that
knowledge was
consummated in the
building itself. Each building
that was built in collective
effort represent all together
the knowledge itself in a
completely different way
that what means
knowledge. - How Gothic
was diffused? Those who
know Gothic - masons who
move from one city to
another creating cathedrals.

- This knowledge resisted

separation between idea of
the design and the building
construction itself. It was a
comprehensive method of
putting all that they knew
together in the building
itself.

- What was behind the

most of the high ideas of
Gothic - was to reach this
construction in a
homogeneous society in a
most elevated mind
production. The attempt to
solve and offer the most
perfect shape and most
perfect form. Notre dam in
Paris - difficult to say here
that at the end it was the
litergy that mastered the
plan - remotely you are
able to identify the course
or content of that. But later
this accomplishment of
construction and form that
put together the highest
token that men and
women can do in very
specific period of time.

- Plans like that allowed

to speak of unexplicit
knowledge- this
changes in 15 century
- Signature of Alberti one of the moments on
15 th century - how
bunch of people decide
how they want to do
things in a completely
different way
- They believed what
they were doing should
be done differently new ideas

- Plans like that allowed

to speak of explicit
knowledge- this
changes in 15 century
- Signature of Alberti one of the moments on
15 th century - how
bunch of people decide
how they want to do
things in a completely
different way
- They suddenly
believed what they were
doing should be done
differently - new ideas
that was in their minds.
- Obviously, it didnt
happen so suddnely history of italy in late
13-14th century - what
happened in 15th
century didnt happen by
chance - Dante and
Picante
- Steel - mode of
antiquity that could be
reach that could change
radically the world
- Alberti wrote - well
known treaties - De re
aedifictoria

- Alberti - what
architecture is - can be
said and written in a book
to allow people to be
architects - similarly he
talks about painting - but
architects are different
than builders - as
builders know how things
are to be done but
architects are able to
replicate nature of
knowledge and artefact's
that can be examined
with some consistency
that can be found in
nature
- Virtuvius - handbook
written by Jews of
architects that had been
lost - one of the humanist
looking around the
records of antiquity
in 1415, Trechorini
discovers in Switzerland
this manuscript by
Virtuvius - probably
Alberti knew about that
even though it wasn't
published in Italy yet

- Alberti - Architect is
neither a carpenter nor a
joinery - its an instrument
in the hands of the
architect - sense of
involving everybody that
allows to build the
cathedral - cumulative
effort
- For him, architect is
somebody who wants to
enter in those process of
creation and has a
commitment in it.
- Notion that Alberti invaluable way of joining
lines and planes geometry underlies
geometry and structure
- Alberti - sense of
holiness - all the
elements composing the
building should provide
the sense of unity in such
a powerful way that you
can't get rid of any of
those elements.
- it is the function and
duty of those elements proper scale, graceful
order for each of their
constituents parts

use of ornaments for

defining the abstract
planes
- handled with a
knowledge of putting
together
- During 15th - beginning
of 19th century architecture is
summarized in pieces of
literature called thesis by
Alberti - even when talking
about temple - Alberti for him the temple is
something in lost
paradise as an antiquity
- The book of Alberti give
origin to system of
treatises at end of 15th
century

Francesco Georgio
Martini - gains
information in the sense
of associating humans
with buildings - arms and
legs and heads of human
figures - those
manuscripts were
published on lately in
early 19th centry. FGM
realised how much
solving the issues of
Palaces or going into
these kind of buildings courtyard used in a
different way architecture though
differently - with the help
of geometry combination of elements

- Comparing what used

to be knowledge v/s what
is considered today
- Albertis book had lot of
connections to what
Virtuvius stands for. But
when the Vitruvio was
first published in 1521 milano cathedral drawing
was included - most
canonical materials,
systems of proportions he established things
how proportions could be
changed with
relationships. when you
are making something on
top can give same
dimension when it goes
down - making the plinth
- sowing the courtyard of
Parisian style Roman
house - diagonal heights relating to plan
- The book wanted
Roman architect to know
all these description of
mechanisms of
proportions and material
construction

For Vitruvius principles

- Order
- Arrangement
- Symmetry
- Column
- Distribution
- complete knowledge of
architects with part of
design and part of
construction - firmitas,
utilitas and venustas practical and theological
manual for lingusitic and
decorative elements.

Palladio uses his own

work as an example - to
transfer the knowledge of
what he thinks and does.
Quatro Libre was
translated all over and
still used as an important
Architecture book.
- Like LC uses his own
work to explain what his
idea architecture should
be similar to Palladio.
- Working with theses
was the way of thinking
architecture till the
beginning on 19th
Century

- In early 19th century, the

significance of the term
architect seems to move
in two opposite directions
without a clear separation
between architects and
engineers - Architectural
knowledge absorbs the
positive science related
with growing concerns of
public health - Materials
and their resistence, fluid
mechanics as
incorporated into the
curricula of school and
once dominant platonism
gives way to pragmatism utilitas and firmitas prevail
above venustas
- Starting use of steel ,
how ventilation matters,
explain nuances of
construction, books
became with this flavor of
pragrammatism
- Venustas appears here
again - illustration - library
by Labroust - who built
wonderful libraries in paris
- you see the structure but
enhanced by delicacies

New system of architecture laws to

adapt to metallic construction
- New materials - steel construction
- how we are able to enter into
buildings of handling something with
positive knowledge of steel
- In 19th Century - architects looked
for formal alternatives - turned to
history - was considered a positive
science - began to study buildings free to clad structure in whatever
style - now the best archive of
history was at their disposal
- they traveled - made drawings result - paradox - industrial
revolution with innovative metal
structure places itself with saddistic
clippings recovered from history
- Parthenon is examined with the
same carefulness how histologists
try to divide the body - it looks like
small vernacular architecture that
wants to have precision of
entamology - but then when it
comes to an an architect he wants
to come with new techniques and
use of the metal members being
able to built up the system of vaults
that would otherwise need columns
(slide 40)

This attempt of providing this

historical consistency - they want to
end up becoming what was the
positive signs of architecture - in a
way school of architectures gave up
classical orders established in
synthesis and comes into history
books and says example of Trinity
church by Richardson is clear.
Richardson and so many other
architects of his generation traveled
all over Europe and makes
something that is reminiscent of
Romanisque / or the top that has to
do with some Spanish church in
Antoro

Buro Ladeek - his work

illustrates very clearly what
knowledge meant to the
architect's in the second half of
the 19th century - was in depth
- few if any recent architectural
theoreticians / writer have
enjoyed his extent of influence how is this new knowledge
consolidated and passed along.
- Moneo - emphasizes on Treatises is no longer the
formal. The architect over the
course of 19th century has well
defined professional profile and
status knows that he cannot
build by simply applying the
principles found in architectural
treaties. Instead the architect
now has at his disposal all that
has been built with an
explanation of the relationship
inherent between building
systems and materials. Any
book as important as treatise of
architecture - french book?! will tell you the way in which
knowledge became history. but
how much of that history ended
up creating all those fake
historic buildings that started
affecting people and in the end people wont talk about 20th
century work but instead about
the imitation like in WWI

in the manifesto of Bauhaus what was to say that - why

chosen such an image to speak
about Bauhaus - it formulated a
way of thinking and way of
teaching of how architecture
should be approached and this
is not by chance that the
beginning of Bauhaus favored
the people who worked directly
with their hands and work of
objects should be related with
the making itself and then
besides that clarity and sense of
abstraction and of form - in a
way bauhaus - evolved from this
early symbolism that we have
seen in the Feninger bootcut to
the whole cut attempt of defining
all the formal conditions that
should be considered in the
basis of designing an object or a
building.
- Therefore trying to make the
advancement in the perception
of abstract forms - working with
hands - makes bauhaus so
attractive and certain
relationships that were of
importance to social concern

- define the paradigm where

artist with a colonial idea mental attitude - combines the
homophobic (man who works
with hand) - bauhaus - some
quality present in the thesis
- Bauhaus tried to establish
certain thesis - cannon that
starts with consideration of form
with the liberation of what has
been added for linguistic or
ornamentation reason and
keeping the function as primary
and then with more abstract
principles - force and strength that could be somehow
precluded in what _______- tried
to do with all those drawings.
- What the Bauhaus has done evolved rapidly - end of WWI till
30's - with different stages believed that the crucial
movement is here again and
Bauhaus merges with formal
exploration that can from Paris,
from cubism and painters and
ultimately, were summarized and
absorbed by Le corbuiser

- Le Corbusier in Stuttgart puts

together where the best known
architects all over europe establish the International Style new way of thinking
- Important comparisons
between architects of Bauhaus
and Le Corbusier
- The architects of Bauhaus still
believed that the visual aspects
of built form dependent on
certain principles - for the
bauhaus - inquiry to form was a
syntax prior to the architects role
for LC - create architecture spirit of the time - it was an
obligation and ensure the quality
of the architecture comes with
inherent coherence - instruments
and machines at the time of the
20th century - technological
progress.

- Now we will see how architects

gave up the traditional books and
only the knowledge that came from
treatises and art history and need to
find another kind of way of
presenting ideas was coined by LC
and is still present in todays practice
- Putting together different writings
and he believes that common
language - discipline of the engineer
- the engineer did not corrupt form
with unnecessary elements.
- The architect does for the sake of
this value be given to ornament to
mask the actual truth and necessary
elements - LC insisted that architect
moves towards the aesthetics of
engineers - now architecture didnt
have much to do with style anymore
- architecture could now rely on the
formal works of the past - now
exploit new mode of technology and
production that are to offer automobile era - takes the manifest
of architect - without forgetting the
lessons of the past
- in a way Moneo, wants us to see
the difference of people from
Bauhaus and people from LC clan
and for some reason LC prevailed

- Simple sketchy way of making drawing

reductions of his architectural thoughts became the vehicle for learning Architecture
- All these books - 1930, 1937, 1938 ,1947 many others - communication of complete
works - canonical representation of his
works
- going through all these titles to keep you
aware of some other way of talking about
architecture has happened and is not any
more the way Palladio did but not so far
away either - LC presents architectural work
in a way that in the end it has become
canonical manner - formats and proportions,
organization of images - becomes a
precedent for future
- It is important to think about LC in this way
- all of his books assumed the same tone,
writings - it will be a way of insisting the
presence of the person behind the lines of
what he is saying - narrative noise - that has
little in character with Renaissance
treatises.
- Palladio tells us how to proceed but LC is
urging people to do things in a certain way political turmoil that affected Europe in
beginning of 20th century
- Rhethorical pursuation
- relentless use of photographs and
drawings that make his books a relevant
instrument for quick and easy solution
- Aritist/ builder/ theoretician - his work
represents this

- In the 19th century, the temptation of the architect was

to make the practice far from those applied sciences
abandoning search for new architecture - LC - formal
investigation + architect should be involved in the
technological side of construction - crucial for him need to study the principles of building and reinforced
concrete
- At the same time in linguistic terms, he teaches how
to compose with solids. He writes to inspire architects
to recognize the spirit of time along with illustrating his
own work. The success of the architects work is related
to ability to faithfully express historical moment, in
depiction of present, future .
- History has been a repository of elements - to help
architects to make their builidngs - we can see what
Richardson did - architects should anticipate what
happens in the future - good architect - new upcoming
history will be - should be questioned is the premise of
what the historians have written.
- The paradox that no matter what LC was against
history as a style - he is just trying to use history to
provide him the direction to go ahead - the model is not
inclined to study history - paradoxical - it could be said
that history of the modernists have been the most
important body of knowledge since the end of WW2.
- History as a source of knowledge - architects from
1950s on have been educated by reading recent
histories of contemporary architecture - what you
should do - try to foresee and need to be helped by
reading history for that guidance

- History as a source of knowledge appears again for

the architects but different meaning than 19th century histories allow architects to understand the evolution of
architecture and to do it with meaning, aesthetically and
ideologically as he sees
- You dont read treatises any more - during those years
- connect history of future - the use architects make of it
- transforms it into an operative tool - instrument
capable of moving architecture forward
- we have learnt and still do - learning from
contemporary history
- which architect was more able to foresee the future
will be the best architect and what the historians are
looking for regardless of differences and nuances in
history
- Criticism - Role of historians and architects as people
like Rudolph, or Paul Frank or Colin Rowe - ability to
think full visual formal terms of what architecture has
done - critics should be recognized as a source of
knowledge to architecture students now a days
- Robert Venturi made this wonderful book - with depth literary criticism - could be transfered to reading
architecture - ended up with valuable book
- After Venturi - the role played by Rossi - he tried to
examine the architectural history (venturi) and rossi
tried to be able to find out clues of how the cities grow 80's ended up with some completely different - other
kind of materials - that could be considered
architectural knowldge in the schools

- Robin Evans and many others like that are looking for something quite different
- Since then critics would no longer be an ally of architectural practice and instead it
was increasingly looking to become autonomous. the emphasis on the constructivism
on the subjects became the only one responsible and became the way of approaching
architectural writing and critiscism lost contact with reference with architectural works
to be examined and trying to be inspired by new philosophical reflection. those who
write about architecture were tainted by the literally value of what the write - or
different subjects like gender or race in architecture or everyday life - Therefore, critics are often so close to what we can see in philosophers and not
clear architectural relevance - no longer the role they played in the middle of 20th
century - so losing relevance
- Robin Evans - Michael Hays - they belong diffusely to this kind of critics
- Is that the kind of knowledge that characterizes architecture or we would like to find
out precisely what it means today - LC tried to put together the grammar - as a tool of
construction - but today perhaps - we recognize how difficult it is to find the knowledge
relevant to the architect
- Rem who has safely followed the LC model of publishing and building together venice biennial - body of knowledge for architect as beginning of 21st century - yet
this dissimilarity in disseminating ideas - LC , alberti sees the architect as omnipotent
artist who knows everything, whereas Rem sees the architect from a much more
pragmatic point of view - recognizing that construction no longer lies in the architect's
control and the architect now is connecting the structural and formal strategies of
buildings and in the third lecture - Koolhaas work - what means knowledge - what he
wants to do - find the formal structure and strategy of the building - knowledge has
changed - knowledge only reduced to this bunch of elements - it would be deceptive
to say that - in that sense - Koolhaas wants to put himself out of the artist like
approach of LC or Alberti and wants to say that is what matters to him - even though
there is some other things he is trying to look for and that is what we will try to
examine in third lecture.
2nd lecture - how knowledge has been disseminated in time and evolves from one
country and over time - trying to follow the discourse - big movement than the detail panorama - how the sense of knowledge has changed - what forecast we can do
ourselves