ARCH 465-1 Contemporary Architecture and Theory

LECTURE REPORT-02

Elif Uluç

21704035
 NINE POINTS MONUMENTALITY

Modernity and monumentality have always had a tense relationship, this tense relationship
caused a lot of controversy in the 20th century. the modernism ideas of rational functional
building and the buildings are machines to live, drastically change the appearance of the
world but the need for monumental buildings has never disappeared. The need for "new
monumentality " arisen in one of the congresses of CIAM after world war two. Pioneers of
this discussion were Gideon Sert and Leger. Its power of expression derives from the
discussion created by the effort to reformulate the idea of "monument" in the field of modern
architecture. the need for reformulating the idea of monumentality based on the relationship
between the monuments, human and space. For them, the definition of a monument is
strongly linked to memory and then leads one to reflect on the present or the future.
Monumentality includes the quality of touching people's feelings through its appearance and
the message it conveys. Sigfried Giedion in his manifesto "Nine Points on Monumentality"
argued that the devaluation of monumentality was the result of neglecting the spirit of the
collective emotion of modern times.
Spaces undergo cultural and physical changes over time. These cultural and physical changes
in the spaces are a product of the society living there. Change on a spatial scale can be
evaluated with its experiential qualities rather than the geometric integrity of the space. In this
sense, monuments are the basic elements of both cultural continuity and the change
experienced in this continuity. What ensures the continuity of change is the experience of the
monument itself and its inhabitants, rather than its physical definition. Therefore, monuments
are not only symbolic and geometric structures but also structures that reflect the unique
identity of that society and transfer that identity from the past to the future spatially. there
were too many counter arguments about new monumentality like Lewis Mumford holds a
completely opposite opinion. He believed that the very notion of a modern monument is a
contradiction in terms; "if it Modern Monument in the Context of Modernity – the expression
of monumentality in present time is a monument, it cannot be modern, and if it is modern, it
cannot be a monument."
For me, monumentality is a concept that should reflect the past, because today's residential
buildings or large shopping malls can provide information about today's lifestyle in the future,
but I think they will not express deep thoughts about our civilization.
The concept of new monumentality started to have appeared in Le Corbusier's Unite d'
Habitation, this project made after world war two while Europe was still feeling the effect of
the war. in this project, le Corbusier changing approach to communistic living and community
apparently can be seen here. this building was new to Le Corbusier because of its substantial
scale compared to the other works.
The use of the material- the rough concrete- in Le Corbusier's Unite d' Habitation was a
significant indicator of this project made after world war two beside using low-cost rough
concrete in the impoverished country after the war it also shows the states of war which are:
rough, worn and unforgiven.
Le Corbusier, Chapel of Notre-Dame du Haut, Ronchamp, 1950-55
Ronchamp chapel, another work of Le Corbusier, is one of Corbusier's most important
architectural works. Ronchamp, came about when Corbusier was commissioned to design a
new Catholic church to replace a church that was destroyed in World War II. Since the
Ronchamp area is an important part of the sacred journey for Catholics, the church to be built
was of great importance. But unlike the church built, which has extraordinary architecture
rather than exaggerated details of the period and religious motifs of the old church. Ronchamp
has a misleadingly modern perception and an aesthetic that is totally out of Corbusier's style.
In fact, this church, which cannot be attributed to a single style in general architecture, was a
sculpture in the field, This example conveys the communistic and humanistic aspect of " new
monumentality". Ronchamp has a form of interplacticity which is a form of language that
tries to construct space as plasticity.

https://inhabitat.com/le-corbusiers-iconic-ronchamp-chapel-damaged-beyond-repair-by-
vandals/le-corbusier-ronchamp-chapel/
Ronchamp have solid reinforced white plastered walls and a tailored roof from rough
concrete. while one element very grey the other element is very pure and white. This
contradiction made this building strong in appearance.
Besides its different design language also contains the ideas of Le Corbusier like constructing
elements that are able to support structurally, able to last and are able to keep together not
only in a structural way but in a consistent way. Also, it is designed to be able to touch
peoples feelings emotionally. This emotional aspect of Corbusier's architecture appeared after
world war 2. thus this design is not a contradiction to the design ideologies of the period. The
humanistic and communistic approaches that emerged after the war are actually the
approaches this building wants to take. Le Corbusier in his Parliament Building
(Chandigarh) follows a similar approach to this Ronchamp building. This building is a
good example of monumentality again taking attention to the traditional and vernacular with
its monumentality in a brutal way.
Modernism came with tradition
The case of Velasca Tower: the dialogue with history, continuity, memory
Velasco tower establishes a dialogue that connecting but also reacting to the context it is a
building that is very different from the building at that period. it was back to the idea of
rational and functional architecture but it was established in monumentality but not in the
legacy of progressist idea. It draws a continuity with the city's historic values with its
approaches.
Louis Kahn: history as inspiration, form & design, the symbolic dimension of
architecture
In Kahn's buildings, the spirit of space, which emerges as light, material and structure melt
into each other, shaped the architect's view of the city before the buildings. Kahn's
architecture has exceed the limit of styles, trends, geographical and cultural boundaries.
Instead of moving his contemporaries to traditionalism, Kahn carried the modernism that
prevailed in his time to a much more subtle plane. In this context, it can be said that Kahn is
different than the architects at his time were who considered modern monumentality.
While the abstraction and symbolism in Kahn's buildings made him "timeless but the architect
of his time". He is evoking precise historical sources in order to achieve his symbolic aim. the
symbolic geometries he carefully used enabled him to address different cultures and
architectural backgrounds through his designs. İt can be said that "Louis kahn seems too
modernist to be a historicist, and too historicist to be modernist. ”
Also Kahn showed that heavier, more monumental and modern buildings using brick and
stone can be designed
 Kahns design and
form diagrams
and relationship
between them

Kahn sees the diagrams that he drew as a design study. These diagrams reveal the importance
of Kahn attaches to form and design. On the other hand, he says forms are not designs.
Because, according to Kahn, design means revising thoughts to find solutions to problems
after finding solutions to the problems Architects must establish spatial relationships while
establishing the form.

References
https://www.archdaily.com/806115/ad-classics-master-plan-for-chandigarh-le-corbusier
Özten, Ü. (2005). New monumentality (Master's thesis).

Sert, J. L., Léger, F., & Giedion, S. (1943). Nine points on monumentality. Architecture culture, 1968,
29-30.