Ledent, Gérald
[UCL]
Masson, Olivier
[UCL]
Collective modernist housing was once a shared ideal. But it often proved to be a mere chimera. Yet, it cannot be cast aside without a clear analysis of its true nature as an answer to human housing. Hence, anthropology and sociology are called upon to reach back to the essence of dwelling. In order to dwell, every human being performs a series of operations to establish his position on Earth. We believe those anthropological skills to be common to all mankind. They can be depicted with three infra-cultural antonymic couples: Separation - Continuity; Exposure - Concealment; Appropriation - Alienation. Those three basic competences are culturally translated, turning space into socially recognizable places. The means of this translation are identified as structures of correspondence. They are a modus operandi that transforms human needs into artefacts as well as into signs distinguishing social positions. Therefore, they ought to be acknowledged by the members of a specific group. Besides, their transformation into artefacts should bring together contemporary materials and techniques. Architects have conceived various answers to the three basic anthropological operations. Some answers give preponderant consideration to one operation in particular, while others develop a balance, often through sedimentation in time. The concept of type is an example of such an answer. Through history, modern ruptures disturb structures of correspondence not only through changes in society itself – transforming positions as well as recognition codes - but also through changes in techniques and materials. Modern ideologies dismantle traditional structures of correspondence – which subsist nevertheless to a certain extent – to create new ones. Regarding collective housing, the modernist rupture of the 20th century is crucial. It pulls to pieces the usual codes of housing production and recognition. As such, Le Corbusier's Five points towards a new architecture contradict, item by item, every housing convention of the time. Through the creation of new structures of correspondence, former ones are condemned. Type and the notion of typology are replaced by new concepts, such as typification or model. Moreover, modernism is facing another greater challenge as major changes in our societies' equilibrium blur the values the new models should respond to. Collective modernist housing in Brussels is studied as a specific case. Until the early 20th century, individual housing types strongly marked the city. The emergence of new structures of correspondence through collective modernist housing has had a great impact on the city. Those new structures are investigated regarding their socio-anthropological operativeness. Time is required for models to turn into structures of correspondence. Consequently, collective modernist housing should not be abandoned. Instead, it should be re-evaluated to foster anew the values of our present societies. It can be reinvested to achieve the balance between basic anthropological operations and, with time, be recognized by society as a genuine structure of correspondence. Among modernist models, some are abandoned while others thrive if they are able to nurture the socio-cultural competences of a specific society.
Bibliographic reference |
Ledent, Gérald ; Masson, Olivier. Living Utopia – Leaving Utopia. Brussels: Modernist Urban Forms Evaluated against Pre-Existing Row Houses.Cities in Transformation - Research & Design (Milan, du 07/06/2012 au 10/06/2012). In: Marco Bovati, Michele Caja, Giancarlo Floridi, Martina Landsberger, Cities in transformation Research & Design, EAAE / ARCC, International Conference on Architectural Research, 7. Education in Architecture, Milan 2012, 2012, p.268-279 |
Permanent URL |
http://hdl.handle.net/2078/126197 |