You are on page 1of 4

Roger Scruton. The Problem of Architecture from The Aesthetics of Architecture, 1979.

Scruton was professor of aesthetics at ir!bec! "ollege, #on$on, between 1971 an$ 1991. %e has
written o&er '( boo!s an$ also writes music, inclu$ing an opera entitle$ the )inister.
1. Since buil$ings are places where humans wor! etc. the form is
impose$ b* the nee$s an$ $esires the buil$ings are suppose$ to
fulfill.
1.1. +nli!e other art forms it is not re,uire$ that a buil$ing be
aesthetic.
1.-. Also unli!e other art forms the function of architecture
stems from its essence.
-. .unctionalism has man* forms.
-.1. Popular form/ true beaut* in architecture consists in
a$apting form to function.
-.-. A cru$e form/ since architecture in&ol&es a$apting means to
en$s, we appreciate buil$ings as means, as contraste$ to
other art forms 0he mentions on pg. 117 that cru$e
functionalism woul$ ha&e us e&aluate architecture in the
same wa* we e&aluate toilets1.
'. ut what is &aluing something as an en$2
'.1. "ollingwoo$ $istinguishe$ art from craft, an$ architecture is
a craft in "ollingwoo$3s sense.
'.1.1. 4et architecture s*nthesi5es art an$ craft 6$oesn3t 7ust
mi8 them9, which poses a problem for "ollingwoo$3s
$istinction.
'.-. To see architecture as art in "ollingwoo$3s sense woul$ be to
see it as an e8pressi&e acti&it*.
'.'. ut there is no craft of e8pression for "ollingwoo$ as there
is no proce$ure to follow in e8pression.
:. ;t is a $istortion to assume that architecture is e8pressi&e in
the wa* sculpture is.
:.1. The &alue of a buil$ing cannot be seen as in$epen$ent of its
utilit*.
:.-. <ne could ta!e a sculptural &iew of architecture where the
connection to function is merel* acci$ental. Then te8ture,
surface, form representation an$ e8pression woul$ ta!e on
more importance than the specificall* architectural.
:.-.1. The $ecorati&e aspect woul$ then become more
autonomous an$ personal.
:.-.-. =au$i is one e8ample/ in his wor! 6in which the
buil$ing represents itself as a form of tree>li!e growth9,
the $ecorati&e is strangel* translate$ into the structural,
an$ the acci$ental has become the essential.
:.-.-.1. %is buil$ings are onl* elaborate e8pressionist
sculptures.
:.-.'. ?e "astilho3s win$ow is not an organic growth,
although it loo!s li!e it.
:.-.:. Perhaps the same &iew as =au$i3s fin$s architectural
significance in the geometr* of the @g*ptian p*rami$.
0attac! on #e "orbusier21
:.-.A. This &iew implies 6wrongl*9that one can 7u$ge the
beaut* of something without !nowing what !in$ of thing
it is.
:.-.B. ut, &s. Cant, our sense of beaut* is alwa*s $epen$ent
on a conception of the ob7ect/ for what we consi$er
beautiful on a horse we woul$ see as ugl* in a man.
A. Another $efinition of functionalism is an attempt to assert
architectural as oppose$ to sculptural &alues.
A.1. @ugene Diollet>le>?uc an$ American architect #ouis
Sulli&an argue$ that form shoul$ follow or e8press function.
A.-. The subtle functionalism of Augustus Pugin hel$ that
function is necessar* as a stan$ar$ of taste, helps us to
$istinguish genuine from i$le ornament. This is a $ilute$
form of functionalism.
B. Architecture is also highl* locali5e$/ change of place in&ol&es
change of character 6unli!e wor!s of literature or paintings9.
B.1. uil$ings an$ their en&ironment are important to each other.
B.-. uil$ings cannot be repro$uce$ at will without absur$
conse,uences.
B.'. The* are affecte$ b* changes in their surroun$ings/ for
e8ample, the ernini pia55a.
B.:. .or some buil$ings the effect $epen$s on their location/
orromini3s church, temple of Agrigento, an$ #e EFtre3s
gar$en.
B.A. Though some buil$ings can be repro$uce$, for e8ample St.
Pancras repro$ucing the @rechtheum, this is 7ust a scholarl*
e8ercise.
B.B. Ge e8pect fine architecture buil$ings to ha&e a sense of
place, e.g. to claim $ominion/ #e "orbusier3s Ronchamp
chapel an$ the S*$ne* <pera %ouse.
B.7. The sense of place, an$ the sense of immo&abilit*, constrains
architecture/ architecture is an art of ensemble an$ is
&ulnerable to change in surroun$ings.
B.H. #i!e interior $ecoration an$ fashion, taste 0here1 shows the
importance of st*le. 0contra #oos an$ #e "orbusier.1
7. )oreo&er, what is possible in architecture is $etermine$ b*
technical a$&ances.
7.1. .or e8ample )aillart3s bri$ges $epen$e$ on the e8istence of
reinforce$ concrete.
7.-. +nli!e the other arts, the e&olution of architecture $oes not
follow a changing attitu$e to art, a shifting spirit of creation.
runelleschi3s $ome is an e8ception that pro&es the rule.
7.'. So we shoul$ ,uestion the i$ea that the mo$ern mo&ement is
better because more in !eeping with the spirit of the age 0a
&iew hel$ b* #e "orbusier21.
H. Architecture is a public ob7ect/ there is no free choice as to
whether the public ma* obser&e it.
H.1. The architect $oes not create his public, unli!e poetr* an$
music.
H.-. The architect ma* change taste but onl* b* appealing to the
public at large.
H.'. Thus mo$ernism in architecture is $ifferent from mo$ernism
in the other arts.
H.:. ;n other forms, mo$ernism $epen$s on sub7ecti&it* of
outloo! an$ has been in$i&i$ualistic an$ e8pressi&e.
H.A. .or e8ample, the mo$ernist composer Schoenberg
transforme$ music in a self>conscious wa* for the e$ucate$
ear.
H.B. Although it is necessar* for the other arts to ha&e mo$ernit*,
it is not possible in architecture/ it is public an$ it ta!es up
space.
9. The most important feature of architecture is continuit* with the
$ecorati&e arts in ha&ing man* aims.
9.1. @&en the aesthetic in a wor! of architecture is simpl* to
loo! right in the same wa* a table shoul$. ;t is primaril* a
&ernacular art/ a process of arrangement.
9.-. ;t $oes not ha&e art meanings, present itself self>
consciousl* as art, or ha&e %egelian content. ;t naturall*
e8ten$s human acti&ities.
9.'. So/ an aesthetics of architecture is at least an aesthetics of
e&er*$a* life/ not high art but practical wis$om.
9.:. ;n$ee$, our post>romantic conception of art with its obscure
concept of e8pression is inappropriate to the $escription of
normal aesthetic 7u$gments of normal men.

You might also like