In this paper my main argument that “Durand’s”
idea of type exists permanently in his method. This statement quite offers the
possibility to draw up the concerning knowledge of architecture through type.
It also put forward that the idea of type presented by Durand can be understood
in more than one way; the prime idea consisted all the principles and rules
that helps to take out building patterns and the secondary being a generative
method to increase these principles in the design of buildings, which utterly
is liable on abstracted principles. The second more indicates a rational
process, the logic of type and in other words basically typology.
It dismisses the theories of Vitruvius and Laugier as moving away from the
doctrine of copying/following and dismissing. Durand seems to move away the
practice of architecture from the singular through the imitation of mainly
human body and nature. And to enable differentiation to make make it procedural
and open ended. Whereas, Villari seems to hold a slightly different opinion, he
argues on that this particular method is straight away connected to a structure
of a language and is very syntactic.
This method can be more seen as a phylogenetic process instead to be fully
abstract as the ‘elements of architecture’. Durand sets out in his
summary/precis is physical. This doesn’t mean that it suggests that the method
produces bio-mimetic architecture but that a building can be torn down to its
irreducible part whilst keeping the imprints of the respective irreducible part
and be reconstructed again to a completely and entirely different building.
This serial process sets up an unbroken a link to its precedent, I argue, and
as such a link to the history of building types.
He was a Paris porn architect and also worked for Boullee and for civil
engineer Jean-Rodolphe Perronet (1708-94-who has designed the Pont de la
Concorde,Paris). He was undoubtedly one of the most significant theorists and
teachers of the early 19 century and became the professor of architecture at
the Ecole Polytechnique in 1795.
By the end of 18th century, there was this emerging concern that architecture
was falling behind the latest science terms of development and progress. Hence,
in a consequence of this threat the attempts started to be made to erect and
build a science of architecture. And the work of Jean-Nicolas-Louis Durand
(1790-1834) clearly reflected the huge effort to achieve a systematization of
architectural knowledge. In order to pursue that goal, he sets himself a task
that was based onto find the generic principles that are implicit in works of
architecture and he inevitably touched upon some of the tricky situations and
puzzles that are essential to architecture in any way. For instance
subjectivity versus objectivity, particular versus general, art versus science,
and abstract versus physical. It comprises a timeless value that ultimately
makes it a necessary reference in any discussion that can be undertaken about
the systematization of architectural knowledge. Hence for the reason that, his
theoretical work goes beyond of the limits of that particular historical
Peeking into the the initial ages of modern architecture, a vivid image of, as
per concerning right view of construction, it gave the opposing viewpoints and
ideas. For instance Boullee and Durand entirely distilled like oil and water;
the doctrine of Vitruvius, being commodity firmness, and delight. If we talk
about Boullee then he completely seem consented to the purity of true geometric
forms for example pyramid, cubs and most vigorously, the sphere with the belief
of that the sphere is perfect enough to encompassing all the expressions of
architectural from. Also he was sternly involved and interested in the delight
part of Vitruvius doctrine with works based on inattentiveness of program,
unbuildable at the time of conception and imaginative.
The sphere is the most distinct shape in architecture making no easy road and
to the right of entrance into the volume so that a program may fits into it.
Boullee was not into the quality of being practical, but had aesthetic sense.
In a profession of which is ruled by the practical realm of constructability
and program suitability: resolution and value, he went for dreaming.
While talking about Durand, he is on the other hand based his theories
relentlessly on logic with the ideas of, that buildings shouldn’t need to
concern themselves with aesthetics; exquisite procedures ascend higher because
of the precise and apt utilization of preparation and creation. He labelled the
cylinder and sphere to be greatly resourceful and cost-effective project in
lieu of a spiritually perfect form. He was among those who reasoned for grid
lucidity, which was resourceful for methodity and uniformity.
“Architects should concern themselves with planning and nothing else” Jean-Nicolas-Louis
His ideas of work and theories
Durand had enough convinced by the idea, that an architectural education should
not be entirely based on the study of a particular buildings or style “it
is not in such a manner that one study architecture.” According to
him, the study of any subject ,whether it is scientific or artistic or any
other genre, had to be based on the study of general principles “A
man who playwright does not learn how to do this or that tragedy; a musician
this or that opera; painter this or that painting ;Before composing ,in
whatever genre ,one must know what one composes with.”
Durand followed a logical path that began by verification that which confirm
without any doubt and question the existence of architecture itself, that is to
say, by recognizing the existence of the buildings of architecture itself, in
order to establish the general principles of architecture. This first step is
serve as a typical example of by the Recueil, in which he classified. However,
in a second step, the studies and analysis of past buildings disclosed their
common features, that is not other than but the general principles of
architecture. This did not interpret or mean function with its common meaning
that we are knowing today, instead he had talked about the building as a system
and order with not giving much considerations to its program. Hence this’s how,
he comes up with his theory of work and has used symmetrical forms which have
given the appeal of classic buildings on his designs. But by not forgetting the
fact that his ideas about studying architecture can be considered as a
reference for any of who wants to teach or study architecture.
The first epoch 19th century proved to be momentous concerning architectural
discern as it was a totally discrete era pertaining to the reinforcement of
architectural proposal introduced by the French architect Jean-Nicolas-Louis
Durand (1760–1834). These piece of work and study soon became very
influential. Durand’s works gained position to longstanding worth instead of
his scarce structures much similar to Goldmann, who had structured nihility.
Amid his six publications, three seemed to develop prominent part here. The
core essence and appeal of the primary of these disparates with the additional
two, classified rendering to kind and all offered on a solitary scale, as being
a diachronic contrast of historical buildings.
In this paper my main argument that “Durand’s”