Dmitry Kocheshkov 
 
>> Portfolio
>> Architecture
>> To main page  
Architect
 
 
  • >> Links
  • >> Articles
  • >> etc
  • >> Articles <<
    20th Century Organic Architecture
    We live in an era, dominated by the fear of exhaustion of natural resources, an era of expecting some global natural disasters of climate change. The scientific world continually produces «prophecies» about natural apocalypses and Hollywood attaches to them easy-to-perceive visually-acoustic background.
    I am not the one to judge the extent of credibility of such fears and the degree to which they adequately reflect reality. Nonetheless, there is some plausibility to them which should not be argued with or denied. This reality is comprised by two factors:
    1) Humans consume their immediate needs resources faster than they are restored in nature and the speed of their consumption grows.
    2) These resources become more and more expensive.
    I see the task of contemporary architecture, as well as the rest of the fields of human activity, in decreasing, as much as possible, the extent of influence of these factors on people.
    At his time F. L. Wright stated certain principles, which have become the basis of what we call today organic architecture. It is clear that nothing is created in empty space - eventually architectural thought itself realized this although, it has used it for a fairly long time. For thousands of years people have been living in huts, “exquisitely matching the landscape”, they have built castles on hills and mountains, not particularly considering issues such as landscape design and principles of composition.
    Wright’s genius does not lie in inventing a certain word or in stating that a house belongs to a given place, but in the fact that he was able to combine architectural cannons with this concept, creating bright masterpieces of architecture, while simultaneously following the hints of the environment.
    However, a century has passed - and not just any century but 20th century, which brought unparalleled changes in all fields of the human life.
    Architecture has changed too. Lords’ castles turned into skyscrapers, craftsmen’s huts - into nice apartments, lined up one above the other in condominiums, tradesmen’s shops - into supermarkets and trade centres, while city-centre fairs gradually move into the internet. But still, there is a field, in which there are not many innovations. The existing innovations, however, had not turned into a mass rule ( in our modern time of “standards”) – resource-supplying of various constructions is left unchanged in the course of quite a long time.
    It is not a secret that the vitality of a construction depends on the timely supply of such resources. Moreover, we become more and more dependent on such supplies, and the consequences of installation faults are more destructive. For example, an electricity shortage in a hospital can cost the lives of tens of people. Therefore, a logical conclusion follows - the need of the construction in outer sources should be minimal.
    The basic critical needs of modern building are fresh air, electricity, water, telephone. In many countries such a resource can be gas ( propane, as a rule ) and in developed countries, which increase in number, this can also be the internet.
    So, engineers, specialized in different areas, or just enthusiasts with independent lifestyle, offer a multitude of solutions to one of these problems, or another, connected with man’s dependency on air, light, heat, water and communications.

     
    For me it is obvious that the integral approach, where its application is possible, is far more successful than the deferential one. For example, if the cleansing of water is possible with the help of plants, which would liberate oxygen and absorb hydrogen dioxide from the air, this can solve the problem with the fresh water, as well as the ventilation problem. Certainly, an architect cannot plan such a process - this is a task for biochemists or, possibly, for biophysicists, but to integrate such a structure in a premise is architecture.
    There is another possibility - wind electrical station on the roof of a skyscraper is capable of supplying this skyscraper with the electricity needed, and the water-cleansing system - with water. Satellite connection grants its own independent internet and the system of IP telephony- the telephone connection. In this way a building, remaining a part of the landscape (whether city or countryside), acquires independency and self-sufficiency in areas, deemed impossible some time ago, such as electricity. The building, speaking simply, will become “mature”, and will not depend on external supplies.
    This can apply and should apply to all kinds of buildings- residential, commercial and industrial. We shouldn’t forget that industrial premises deposit different wastes than residential buildings. I feel like just saying - stop polluting our world! But in fact, the system of utilizing deposits should comprise integrity with the initial project. The part of the wastes that can be used in some way should be used, and what cannot be possibly used in a given building, should prove to be transportable to an area where it would be useful.
    On one hand, we will lessen the extra consumption of resources, and on the other hand we will stop paying monthly bills or will pay much less. But is this an architect’s task? Fully! Sure most such elaborations will be quite considerable; they will need constructive changes and will take certain part in the compositional game of space and light.
    It is clear that this will cost some money. In a society where everyone agrees that “eating is good!” only an infant is not capable of counting money. However, an investor can count quite well. And he is bound to imagine confidently the resulting economies from such innovations. He will be able to imagine it if the architect is able to explain this clearly.
    Such an approach comes to be nothing else but a development of F. L. Wright’s idea about the correspondence between construction and landscape, having in mind that the landscape does not represent the building site solely, but the whole planet, nature and climate. I am convinced that climate and nature characteristics should be used exactly in the same way as the characteristics of the site surroundings. We shouldn’t fight with them but navigate them in the needed direction, and yet not destroying the balance that had been created in the course of thousands of years.
    Bulgaria, Varnaтел: (+359)-878-120-729 e-mail: dkocheshkov@mail.ru2007 © www.visart.biz