This vacation house in Chile was designed following six basic principles, which I have gradually outlined throughout my professional career. The way these principles are expressed in the building should be easily recognizable from the attached photos and plans:
1. Clarity: Order, proportions, equilibrium between part and whole.
This is a “classical” virtue, that transcends epochs and cultural-historical contexts. A well-constituted form, whether natural or artificial, reveals its principles of spatial organization in a clear and legible way, based in relationships of order and hierarchy. Its opposite is chaos, which means, lack of formative force, leading to states of contradiction, incoherence, and randomness. Certainly, this is valid not just for architecture, but for society as a whole - which is also a form of “organic construction”.
2. Simplicity: Non-complex forms. Use of regular modulations and linear geometries.
Simple forms are easy to read and understand, and also facilitate the process of execution of the architectural project. Such simplicity can be achieved primarily by the use of regular modulations and linear geometries. The result: clear-cut forms, straight lines and axes, rhythmic sequences of pillars, beams, walls, fills and voids, etc...and, last but not least, important savings in terms of budget.
3. Sobriety: Avoidance of an excess of theatrical or formalistic effects. No “shouts“…
A good work of architecture should not be invasive or overloaded with formalistic intentions, which can ultimately create a form of "conditioned experience" for the inhabitant. Life is already complex enough in itself, therefore architecture should only constitute a kind of silent frame, a backdrop that allows life to unfold fully, in a state of unconditional freedom. As Fritz Neumeyer affirms in his book "Der Klang der Steine"[1], a building overloaded with spatial effects resembles an anxious individual, who shouts incessantly to be noticed by force. On the contrary, a really powerful individual is able to impose him/herself only by presence, in silence, without the need for screams or pathetic gestures. Same with buildings.
4. Structural coherence: Don´t sacrifice the structure for the sake of “artistic effects“.
Structural engineers should be treated as allies and not enemies, lest slaves which must obey the tyrannical commands of a capricious-childish architect. On the contrary: from the early stages of conception of an architectural project, we must be conscious of the structural demands that our designs imply, understanding the logic of materials, their possibilities, and “intrinsic structural vocation”. In the case of this particular project in Chile, this alliance between architecture and engineering has led to a prominent role of the structure, which is brought to light and made visible as a determining aspect of the architectural expression. Following Schopenhauer, “(...) the conflict between gravity and rigidity is the sole aesthetic material of architecture; its problem is to make this conflict appear with perfect distinctness (...)”.[2]
5. Functionality: Adequate response to programmatic needs. “Life goes first“.
Before any form of conceptual-abstract-artistic consideration, a house is basically a place for living, and the act of living is inextricably related with the notion of function. Just as in the case of a human body, each part is perfectly related to its specific function in terms of form, position, and morphological attributes, configuring an articulated and harmonic whole. Same for a house, which is also a “living body”. Logic, the will for efficiency, common sense derived from experience and empirical observations, are necessary tools that architects must use in order to achieve this purpose.
6. Contextual awareness: Adequate relationship with the surroundings.
Respecting the context means to be aware of the impact that our buildings will have in their surroundings, not just in visual-spatial terms, but also in its social and ecological implications, from a wider perspective. When we build, we are not tracing a free line in an empty canvas, but rather inserting a new actor in a living setting which is already pre-defined, with unique spatial, social, and historical attributes. How will this new actor insert itself within the plot? Will it contribute in a positive and constructive way to further enhance it, embellishing and developing it in a respectful way? These are some of the questions that I have always tried to bear in mind before attempting to create a new work of architecture...like this vacation house in Chile.
[1] Neumeyer, Fritz. Der Klang der Steine : Nietzsches Architekturen. Berlin: Gebr. Mann., 2001, p.180.
[2] Schopenhauer, Arthur. The World as Will and Representation. New York: Dover, 1968, p.214.
