Proportions in Design

One of the most interesting design decisions explored in the modern architecture movement is the proportions of space.  Each of the architects we explored in class had an opinion on how to address this issue.  On the two far ends of the spectrum are Le Corbusier and Mies Van der Rohe.  Le Corbusier’s designed were based on a modular system founded on the proportion of the human dimension.  Mies Van der Rohe based his designs on the enclosure of the function not based on a modular concept.  Both methods create very different spaces, each with their own positive and negative characteristics.

Let me begin with the work of Le Corbusier with his modular method.  This modular system used the golden ratio for the scale of architectural proportion.  He took as an example the Vitruvian Man from

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7zkwwO8Re1qd1uj5.jpg

Vitruvius.  This system used proportions from the human body to improve architecture.  Le Corbusier also used the Fibonacci sequence as a guide.  Armed with these scientific tools, Le Corbusier set out to change how the world views architecture.  The design project that displays this the most is Sainte Marie de La Tourette.   The image on the left is a picture of a room in Sainte

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/Sainte+Marie

+de+la+Tourette.jpeg

Marie de La Tourette.  Everything in the room is dimensioned based on the dimensions of the Vitruvian man.  The room width and ceiling height is chosen based on the proportions of a human body.  The bed size and desk are also sized on these proportions.  All of these rooms are identical at La Tourette, therefore the entire building is considered to be designed with this modular method.  All details of the building follow the same Vitruvian man proportions from hallway sizes to height of windows.  This proportioning system created limitations to the design ability for Le Corbusier.  The modularity prevented the freedom of larger spaces.  Rather, Le Corbusier chose to stick with the smaller proportions and repeat the rooms over and over again.

Mies Van der Rohe had a different approach when it came to proportions in design.  He was more concerned about the proportions of the space supporting the functions of the space.  Whether that function was connecting the interior and exterior spaces or the reflection of light, the proportions of the space are chosen in order to best accommodate the function desired.  My favorite example of this is the Barcelona Pavilion.  In this project, Mies Van der Rohe uses a system of planes to separate space.  The proportions of the rooms are not chosen based off of the proportions of a man as Le Corbusier did; rather Mies chose the

http://0.tqn.com/d/arthistory/1/0/Z/1/1/Mies-van-der-Rohe

-Barcelona-Pavilion-1928-29.jpg

proportions based on the desired effect he wanted in the specific space.  The image on the right shows a room from the Barcelona Pavilion where the dimensions of the space were chosen in order to best accommodate the reflection of sunlight off both the walls and water.  By choosing proportions that best suit the function, the space is able to live up to its full potential.  If Mies would have designed the space based on the human form rather than the function of the space, the reflection of sunlight would not be as strong of an affect.  This design approach allowed Mies Van der Rohe the opportunity to design spaces with any characteristic he desired.  The drawback of this approach was he lost the sense of human scale in some of his projects.  I look at the Crown Hall building, pictured below, and notice how large the space is.  The interior of this space

http://www.blueprintchicago.org/2010/06/24/crown-hall/

does not reflect the scale of a human at all.  A person is less significant to the design than the desired connection with the exterior space is. 

As I mentioned before, both design approaches contain potential for success as well as limitations.  Designs based on the human form have a lot of logical sense, but I feel that Le Corbusier didn’t carry out the idea very effectively.  His rooms at Sainte Maria de La Tourette may have been based of off the space a human form wants, but the rooms look very uncomfortable to be in for too long.  Mies’ buildings appear much more aesthetic.  Some of his designs may lose the human scale, but the end result is much more effective than Le Corbusier’s.  By looking at the function of a space to design the proportions, a building is better able to serve the functional needs of the building.  This leads to a more successful building design.  I think Mies Van der Rohe’s approach is more affective in creating strong designs.  His building leave a stronger impression on those that visit them and ultimately are better designed  in my opinion.  I credit this better design on his approach of allowing the function of a space drive the proportions.