Customer Reviews

Towards a New Architecture

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This book is inspirational for those who believe in modern architecture. The ideas are still as potent as ever. This book reflects the optimism of those early 20th century architects who worshipped new technology, who had a fervent desire to do every "modern" using industrial materials, who denounced old materials like stone and wood, who preached the benefits of a social architecture for the masses. For almost a century, this book has also influenced every great architects in the 20th century.

Having said all that, this book needs to be read with the reminder that not everything it preaches is "correct" and the many manifestations of modern architecture is darn right "de-humanizing" and "souless". This book is best contrasted by the work of Frank Lloyd Wright and many contemporary architects who emphasize the importance of a sense of "living" space in architecture.

who is this crazy person who gave this book one star?? i had to read this book for an architecture class and i have to say, after the class was over, i sold all the books back except for this one. the whole concept of 'eyes which do not see' is so smart. it definitely takes some understanding of the whole bauhaus movement and architectural snobbery to get it. people who are fans of classical architecture and think that louis xvi furniture and victorian glassware is "beautiful" probably won't like this book, but people who see the intelligence and beauty underlying modernism and industry will most definitely appreciate this book. le corbusier is a total genius and one worth studying.

-U MUST BELIVE IN IDEALS TO UNDERSTAND THIS BOOK- This book is a product of modernist period of architecture. Its writer is one of the greatest architectures that world has seen .It was a fight given against eclectism and all other styles.It exspresses a new way of looking to life which is still a live.You find some key words which will take you through a new world's door.

Le Corbousier's mathematical and, at times, brutal approach to architecture is clearly and coherently laid out in this gem of a book. He is very to the point and uses words and ideas that can plainly be understood by his audience. This book is not as bad as some people say it is - Le Corbousier's just not a romantic like the rest of us!

This is probably the stupidest book I've ever read. It amazes me that people still read it as if it has something worthwhile to offer. I read it 21 years ago when I was 17, and I filled the margins with harsh criticism. I looked at it again a couple years ago to see if I still agreed with those criticisms and I did. The book is a monument to illogic, and what's frightening is that it's been enormously influential. The basic thesis is this - airplanes, ships and grain silos look cool, so our buildings should look like them. If anyone tries to convince you that the message is deeper than that, don't be fooled. It's rubbish. Unfortunately it goes beyond buildings to urban planning. And it was very influential in this realm also. To devastating effect. This is probably a good point to refer anyone who's considering this book to Jane Jacobs' The Death and Life of Great American Cities, not only because of her specifics, but because of her method. Corbusier envisioned utopias and decided they were perfect models for a brave new world without any research or logical basis whatsoever. Jane Jacobs studied real cities, real neighborhoods and real people and came to conclusions from her observations of reality. Another book I'd recommend as an antidote to Towards a New Architecture is Christopher Alexander's A Pattern Language. I'm not a mindless devotee of Alexander - the book is a mixture of wisdom, common sense and nonsense. But it has real value, unlike Towards a New Architecture (except for it's historical importance), and my point here is Alexander's methodology. He and his colleagues did a lot of research and studied real situations in real places, from which they drew their conclusions. There's no question in my mind that Le Corbusier was a genius. I've been to Ronchamp and it's one of the most amazing places I've been on Earth. He was a great architect. But a theoretician? Forget it! Also, I think it was Lewis Mumford who referred to Corbusier as a "twisted genius." I have to agree with this assessment (and recommend another book - Le Corbusier and the Tragic View of Architecture, by Charles Jencks). Corbusier's philosophy was condescending and elitist, and his architecture was fundamentally anti-human. His multidudes of imitators foisted his brutal environmental image on the world, minus the genius. It's time we start treating this book as it deserves to be treated - as illogical, self-serving garbage that's been hugely influential in giving us a world that's full of mean, inhuman, unpleasant places.