comparison of architects

8/7/2019 Comparison of Architects

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/comparison-of-architects 1/10

Comparism of a western and a non-western architect

and their works from a philosophical point of view

My essay is going to explore two world-famous architects, namely Robert Harvey

Oshatz, (American) and Shinichi Ogawa (Japanese). They both fit into the concept of

contemporary, at least because they are both alive, and they are dominant and

determinative architects of today’s world.

Robert Harvey Oshatz is probably well known from 1971, it was the year when the

established the Robert Harvey Oshatz, Architect firm, and from that time on the firmconstructed a huge variety of organic architecture, planning, interior design and

construction management services for both individuals and developers. “While most

architects today are specialists who associate with other specialists, Robert Oshatz is a

generalist who associates with specialists. He has experience wearing the hat of a

client, architect, and contractor.”

(http://www.oshatz.com/text/thearchitect.htm, accessed 9th November, 2010)

According to his philosophy, "An architect is an artist, creator, logician of evolving

aesthetic structures; a designer of not only the visual but the internal space. I see

architecture as a synthesis of logic and emotion, exploring and fulfilling the dreams,

fantasies and realities of my clients, whether they are individuals, corporate, or

community-identities.”

(Oshatz, R. H., A Traditional Design Approach)

This means that there is no such thing as a perfect line, style or anything, since we –

as humans are all different. Therefore, every project is different as well as the design,

and they altogether should fit into the need of the client. The synthesis of logic and

emotion suggest that the firm has to fulfill two request – a stable construction with

good space, room and energy ‘arrangement’ and has to represent its habitant. In this

sense, the first seems easier, because for that a good specialist is enough, but

establishing or rather bring someone’s dream to fruition is absolutely hard, even

because the clients are not even aware of what their secret dreams are, and usually an

architect is a complete stranger for them and vice versa. Therefore, the artist /

architect has a relatively short period of so-called ‘realizing’ before the actual

planning takes place.



And what’s then? Oshatz stays away from design theories because he states, that

“Design theories tend to outshine their author's performance, becoming limiting

concepts, prejudicing the mind while tying one's hands behind one's back. They are

roadblocks to new ideas. While subscribing to a particular theory of design an

architect must solve problems within the parameters of that theory; this is limiting at

best.”

(Oshatz, R. H., A Traditional Design Approach)

“The starting point of my work is the clients program, so my first step is to divide the

program into its functional and spiritual components” (Oshatz, R. H., A Traditional

Design Approach)

The above mentioned quote also proves that he has to detect all the beauties and

mysteries that the client will appreciate. He differentiates between architecture and

building. Building is a non-living thing that has a function and simply ends in itself.

However, architecture is a unique project, which can result in rewarding the ‘artwork’

as a life-time home. And the key is home not a house.

“It is the architect's responsibility to go beyond the mere program and into the realm

of what I call the spiritual.” (Oshatz, R. H., A Traditional Design Approach)

His most famous work is the Fennell Residence in Portland, Oregon which was

finally completed in 2005.



The Fennell residence is a floating house, which provided a completely innovative

and new opportunity for design. The use of curved beams symbolize or evoke the

poetry of waves and also the contours of a river. The large glass front covers the river

and frames the sunset. You can access the deck via a wide sliding glass door. The

bedroom is situated on the “last floor” which provides a wonderful perspective and

look over the living room combined with the dining area and even a sight to the river

beyond. The establishment of curvilinear forms provide an experience of time as the

lights ‘happily’ play with both the daily and seasonal changes.

(http://www.fataj.hu/2009/11/172/200911172_UszoHazFaHullamai.php, accessed 9th

November, 2010)

As the website also points out, the basic idea focuses on time, moreover the time-

passing and the artist played with the different ‘appearances’ of natural and artificial

light provided by the daily and seasonal changes. From the exterior to the interior, up

and down, the floating wooden house uniqly represents the waves underneath. The

motives all evoke the shapes of nature therefore they give an aesthetic experience on

the one hand, and functionally widen the space while letting the light coming in.

“The graphic tools used to express the design program are plan, section and elevation.

To me the plan is everything. It is the expression of the client's functional program, a

beautiful translation of an idea. I find the plan to be a simple picture of a program

organized into a rhythm of usages.” (Oshatz, R. H., A Traditional Design Approach)

The Wilkinson Residence, which also stands in Portland, Oregon (and was finished in

2004) is another example of his mad and deep ‘love’ in nature.



“A lover of music, the client wanted a house that not only became part of the natural

landscape but also addressed the flow of music. This house evades the mechanics of

the camera; it is difficult to capture the way the interior space flows seamlessly

through to the exterior. One must actually stroll through the house to grasp its

complexities and its connection to the exterior. One example is a natural wood

ceiling, floating on curved laminated wood beams, passing through a generous glass

wall which wraps around the main living room.”

(http://www.oshatz.com/text/wilkinson.htm, accessed 9th November, 2010)

This building evokes the feeling of being in a tree house. It is situated in the middle of

wood. Or above? … so the background is given to prove the impressions / feelings of

the viewer. Oshatz used only natural materials, mostly wood but the necessary

enormous glass walls (in order to have a complete view over the green nature outside)

are also unique creations by him.

The other artist who I chose likes (unlike Oshatz) labels and stereotypes, his works

are truly minimalist. Honestly, at first sight Ogawa’s architecture seems like usual

modern architecture, or rather say no different than others – dominant black and white

‘colour’-usage, empty spaces or ‘one room spaces’, minimal usage of furniture, nearly

no decoration because they are all useless… In fact, his constructions are different

from that minimalist architecture that we got used to during the 20th and 21th century.

Or at least because of his incomparable approach – his architecture does not serve a



balance between functionality and form nor provides a living ideal. They are not

personally designed buildings.

He interpreted architecture as given spaces describing facts comprising reality.

Creation means establishing a context in which both the physical being of habitants

and their complex, physical surroundings are manageable. It is interesting that he

studied at Washington State University in 1977 as an exchange student and later also

in New York. His education suggests that he must have been influenced by the trends

in the United States. Here comes the question: so what is the actual case?

(http://www1.odn.ne.jp/ogawa01/index_profile_en.html, accessed 9th November,

2010)

His firm, the Shinichi Ogawa & Associates was established in 1986. From that time

on the firm has produced a numerous number of buildings. The Warehouse, which has

been finished just yet (in January of 2010) is located in Hiroshima, Japan.

From the outside it catches no intention to examine it furthermore. It is white, it is

simple, it seems rather unfinished or just uncreative. The house is 175m2 in size and it

has no partition walls. Instead of them, there are built in wardrobes and sliding level-

differences which separate the space.



The inner and the outer space has fused together because a quadrangle is also

combined with the building. The terrace-kind quadrangle complexity is found on the

southern side of the house which is separated from the street with ground glass

boards. The different house-functions (usually rooms) are situated linearly behind

each other.

The kitchen and the bathroom make the center of the construction, while the living

room and bedrooms are put into the ends of the house. The Washitsu’s level (a room

done accordingly to Japanese traditions) is sinking below while the children’s

territory are above it.

The freely-standing cupboards and wardrobes, built in shelves and the usage of

sliding doors make possible the free (unlimited) opportunity of space-shaping and

divide the living spaces. These solutions seem too extravagant, extreme and even

risky to western people.

(http://tervlap.hu/index.php?id=201008301736valaszfalak_nelkul, accessed 9th

November, 2010)

Another example of his works which also ‘wear’ the common features of the artist’sapproaches and shows his philosophy – the domestic programs of the house are



arranged in a linear orientation in a 'one room space – is the Minimalist House in

Okinawa, Japan.

This house was built to serve as a court house for a couple. In this case the spacecomposition is solved by dividing the house into two areas by a wall-like furniture.

The first area contains the living room, the dining room and bedroom. They altogether

form the interior space which is in a linear arrangement and they are connected to the

exterior court. The second area is composed of the kitchen, the powder room and the

study room.

“The shower room, toilet, small court, and various storages are laid out in this wall-

like unit, which also incorporates the services; all spaces combined together create a

lifestyle that minimize the division of the space as much as possible. With regards of



the natural light of Okinawa’s climate, the internal space connecting with the outside

is designed with eaves in order to control the amount of direct sunlight coming inside

the house.” (http://www.archdaily.com/70869/minimalist-house-shinichi-ogawa-

associates/minimalist-house-09/, accessed 9th November, 2010)

So what is the outcome? Perhaps that this house is creating a habitation space that

invites to a minimal and a flexible lifestyle which again seems to be too absurd for

western people.

The differences between the two artists could have been seen in several senses. At

first, their approach – Oshatz tries to make newer and newer things, he deeply

believes in change / innovation and that since we are all different, we have to live in

different houses. He thinks that a building is not just a building, but should also be a

home, a place where you live not just as a habitant, but actually as a ‘living’ part of

complex.

Ogawa believes in the minimalist philosophy – works should be stripped to their most

fundamental and basic elements. “Less is more” is a motto for all minimalist architect,

sho it can be translated to: do more from less. The design shall be reduced to its

minimal request. As an aesthetic tactic of arranging the space, he thinks that at most

one ‘room’ is enough and the space should be divided linearly. Oshatz thinks it

differently, he states that the space is part of the atmosphere therefore the separation

should be done accordingly (like in the case of floating house). Ogawa strives for

extreme simplicity while Oshatz turns towards nature.



They both love playing with light and the cause of its constant changing. Ogawa plans

by using basic geometric shapes / lines like Piet Mondrian on his paintings, while

Oshatz tricks with curved forms while evoking the shapes of nature and everyday

objects. But this is partly because he adopts the need of his clients to the product.

Owaga does not pay much attention to the personality of his clients nor to their

desires.

To sum it up, the different philosophical aspects can be a cause of the distance

between the two artist since they live in the two ‘ends’ of the world (western and non-

western) but at the same time it still can be explained simply with the different

mindsets regarding aesthetics and beauty. Because they are radically different in the

belief: what the product shall serve, their aims should be different, so it is not

surprising that the solutions are also, no matter they are at the same ‘generation’.

comparison of architects

Documents