Does it follow that the house has nothing in common with art and is architecture not to be included in the arts? Only a very small part of architecture belongs to art: the tomb and the monument. Everything else that fulfills a function is to be excluded from the domain of art.
Cartoon of the Agricultural Mass Production of Suburbia, c. 1990
Finally the business section fell behind and the residences came into view. Scarlett picked them out as old friends, the Leyden house, dignified and stately; the Bonnells’, with little white columns and green blinds; the close-lipped red-brick Georgian home of the McLure family, behind its low box hedges.
Before we left Atlanta I was dickering for that big lot on Peachtree, the one near the Leyden house. You know the one I mean?
Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:
She hath killed her beasts; she hath mingled her wine; she hath also furnished her table.
She hath sent forth her maidens: she crieth upon the highest places of the city
If we go back to the origins, houses and cities must have been indistinguishable, just as houses and forests must have been indistinguishable. If that is the case, I think it is possible to create a place that is simultaneously a house, a city and a forest. I believe the architecture of the future lay within some being akin to a forest. Within a forest, from leaves and insects and the seeds it carries, to the grand scale of the tree trunks, myriad of truly diverse matters interrelate and coexist. It is this diversity that I am strongly attracted to. Richness born from space between order and chaos. Thus if architecture akin to a forest can be created, it will be a place of complexity, rich in diversity far beyond preexisting architecture and cities of today. and its inhabitants will organically be a part of this diversity.
For the last couple of generations, traditional architecture and modern architecture in the city have been set on opposite sides of a firm divide. Not for nothing did Tom Wolfe portray Charlie Croker as living in an old mansion in Buckhead while making his money as a builder of glass office towers along the interstate. Wolfe had it exactly right. In Atlanta, that’s what you do once you hit a certain demographic category. Classical architecture is what you live in, and modern architecture is what you work in. The number of modern houses of significant quality in Atlanta is very small. Atlantans want to live in Philip Trammell Shutze houses, but they expect to go to work in John Portman towers.
1. sex life, 2. sleeping habits, 3. pets, 4. gardening, 5. personal hygiene, 6. weather protection, 7. hygiene in the home, 8. car maintenance, 9. cooking, 10. heating, 11. exposure to the sun, 12. services - these are the only motives when building a house. We examine the daily routine of everyone who lives in the house and this gives us the functional diagram - the functional diagram and the economic program are the determining principles of the building project.
— Hannes Meyer, “Motives for Designing a House,” 1928