Architecture is an art that seeks to give out various messages without using the conventional tools and means of communication. Over time, the tools used by architects to pass their messages have evolved, with the modern day architects divided into some who follow the traditional approaches to architectural expression, and those who opt to adopt new ways of expression. This paper argues that modern day architecture is yet to come up with a distinctive approach to architectural communication, but is in the process of coming up with a pluralistic language that brings together modern and traditional approaches to architecture.
According to Jencks, architecture, in its essence is a representation of human experience which is portrayed through various forms of architectural language devices such as metaphors, paradox and irony (308). To this end, there are three major forms of architectural expression or styles that architects employ in their work. First is the radical eclecticism, where different objects are brought together, but require semantic justification. The purist approach, on the other hand, is against the bringing together of different parts or approaches to architecture. Lastly is ad-hocism, which calls for the different approaches to be creatively fused towards the realization of a given purpose (Jencks 310).
All these styles point in the evolution of communication via architecture. According to Venturi, the field of architecture has been left behind with respect to the adoption of the concepts of complexity and contradiction (16). Other fields such as mathematics and science have traditionally used these concepts to build the disciplines; an area architects have failed in the past. The implication here is that modern day architects need to bring together traditional Vitruvian elements of their work such as firmness and delight to the modern aspects such as structure and expression (Venturi 16). This position is supported by Jencks, who roots for the creation of a pluralistic language in architecture (312). According to him, this form of language can only be realized through architects who fuse both modern and traditional styles. An example is quoted of Japanese architects such as Kikutake, Kurokawa, and Takeyama who employed a mixed system (Jencks 308). The success in using the mixed approach requires an architect to be well versed in multiple fields, to possess the capability to communicate using the pluralistic language (312).
The use of a mixed approach offers the architects the room to create architecture that bears different meanings (Jencks 313). The result here is the realization of multivalent architecture as opposed to univalent architecture, where meanings from pieces of architecture are open for different interpretations. Venturi, Izenour, and Scott offer a good example in this regard, by conducting a comparison of Paul Rudolph’s Crawford Manor/ Guild House (90). According to Venturi, Izenour, and Scott, the two architectural works are comparable, but the images portrayed to the audience are different. The differences arise from the fact that the Guild House has decorations which the Crawford Manor lacks (Venturi, Izenour and Scott 134). The analysis gives a picture of the movement made by modem day architects, who try to fill the gap between traditional practice and the pursuit of science by an intense desire of expressionism. The results of the mixed approach can also be seen in the analysis of Antonio Gaudi’s work, who, according to Jencks is one of the few architects to use pluralist language (134). This is seen in his work, Casa Battlo, where a red dragon is used and raises metaphors regarding Christianity, Chinese culture and Spanish political struggles featuring Spain and Barcelona.
In conclusion, it is evident that the modern day architects are making the effort to introduce new forms of expression through their work. This has resulted in the development of the pluralistic language, which represents a mixture of traditional and modern approaches to architectural expression.
Works Cited
Jencks, Charles. “Post-Modern Architecture.” The Language of Post-Modern Architecture. New York: Rizzoli, 1977. Print.
Venturi, Robert. Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture. New York Museum of Modern Art in association with the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, Chicago, 1996. Print.
Venturi, Robert, Steven Izenour and Brown D. Scott. Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1988. Print.
