Le Corbusier - Unite d'Habitation, Firminy, Rhône-Alpes, France. 1965-1967. (a night stay)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 дек 2021
- Le Corbusier - Unite d'Habitation, Firminy, Rhône-Alpes, France. 1965-1967 (a night stay)
르 꼬르뷔지에 - 유니떼 다비따시옹, 피흐미니, 론알프, 프랑스. 1965
Le Corbusier était en avance sur son temps, avait tout compris de l'espace habitable pour un humain, merci du partage et on voit concrètement son travail avec cette vidéo
Thank you ! It seems very quite during the night, quite surprising for such a crowded building.
Bravo et merci pour cette immersion dans cette unité d'habitation de cet architecte mythique dans laquelle j'ai vécu dans ma petite enfance en 1974. 👍
Thank you for the comment. I highly believe that you had a great moment and memorable experience while living in. I guess you will strongly grab and have them for your entire life time. Envy you!
This in an excellent video. I always wondered, how the building realy looks like. Thank you very much indeed sharing your video with us
Thanks for the comment. I’m genuinely glad that it helps.
These are wonderful ! Makes me want to take a road trip to visit them in person…..Thank you so very much 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Thanks for the comment. Happy that you enjoyed!
I admire Le Corbusier’s unités d’habitation a lot, but I perceive the standard ceiling height of 2,26 m based on his modulor as too low. It’s claustrophobic, especially if the space contains a lot of furniture. In the Berlin unité d’habitation ceiling height has been increased to 2,50 m due to german building regulations. I doubt that measurement systems like the modulor are of such great importance for good design proportions.
Maravilloso. Muchas gracias...
Thanks for the comment. Glad that you liked it :)
cher monsieur, merci pour votre video.
I'm glad to hear it's helpful.
This apartment unit seems to be much wider than I have seen in the other Unite buildings. Was a second unit taken over for more space? Was the red lower floor bedroom originally part of a separate unit?
😍😍😍
Cet immeuble que les Appelous (les habitants de Firminy) appellent le Corbu a son pendant à Marseille : la Maison du Fada.
Great video, but it looks like is 2 units who was connected. Am I right?
I am thinking the same thing -- it looks like two units side by side were joined. None of the original units were this spacious. I had heard they made some modifications to add space, so this must be what they did.
Au début des années 2000 j'ai vécu ici.... d'abord Un studio et ensuite un T2 en duplex j'ai adoré et sa situation sur une colline a l'écart de la ville avec la nature a deux pas c'était le plus... mais je crois que ces dernières années l'ambiance générale s'est dégradée avec des incivilités et une propreté dans les rues qui n'est plus ce que c'était...la population a changé et les nouveaux arrivants c'est pas le dessus du panier si vous voyez ce que je veux dire.... dommage
In Italia si chiamano CASERMONI DA ANBATTERE
Hi, I would like to know if the building is free entry or a guide tour is must. I would not visit rooms, but only building inside
Hi, thanks for the comment. As far as I experienced, it is totally free to enter, if residents don't mind it. I'd say that it is possible to enter the building without any permission, if you are caring with minding there are people really living in as home.
@@99archi Nice, I will visit this building in this May, 😜
Hope you enjoy the town. There are many buildings by Corbusier as you probably know. :)
@@99archi haha, of course for Le Corbusier, have you ever visited the famous church - Colline Notre Dame du Haut
Yes I did in early October last year. You can find the video of the church on my channel.
에어비앤비에 묵으신 건가요? 혹시 그렇다면 어떻게 예약하셨는지 여쭐 수 있을까요?
안녕하세요. 답글 감사드립니다. 답글로 설명드리기 어려운 부분이 있어서, 제 유튜브 정보란에 있는 이메일로 연락주시면 답장 드리겠습니다.
Guelle c'est?
There's socialism/communism for you.
What WW II couldn't destroy was destroyed after the War by "architects" such as Le Corbusier and the people who followed his style (or lack of style).
Luckily in some places monstrosities like this one are finally torn down and replaced with beautiful houses. Le Plessis-Robinson is a good example.
I sincerely thank you for the comment. I have read all your comments on my videos. I get your point indeed and I truly respect your opinion. It would be much more appreciated if you can give more specific features that brought you this point rather than depreciating only. From my point of view, you seem like to depreciate for depreciation with not considering all the social situation at the time. In terms of ‘style’, you sound like to insist there is only one perfect way of designing a building. Also you sound like you insist your taste to everybody, which seems to disapprove of human diversity, as I do not say ‘Le Plessis-Robinson’ is an old fashion and just the reproduction of past fad. I hope there is no misunderstanding and no offense.
@@99archi Sorry for the strong language. I have already changed 1 word in the meantime. And I agree that Le Plessis-Robinson is a reproduction to a large extent, but it's a high quality reproduction, unlike other reproductions that can be seen in China or Japan, and which belong in a Disney theme park.
What enrages people like myself is the simple fact that many of our beautiful towns and landscapes have been destroyed forever in the name of politics, and more precisely a type of politics that leaves no room for individual freedom or diversity. What Le Corbusier has designed is large prisons, high-rise blocks of flats just like in the USSR.
The city of Stockholm is a good example of such large-scale destruction. The city was untouched by WW II, but more than half of it was demolished by the socialist government, in the name of 'progress'. Bye bye freedom. Everyone had to look the same, talk the same, think the same. Women who did not meet the "standard" of the "ideal race" were sterilized, even until the 1980's. No freedom, no diversity !
In the world Le Corbusier had in mind there was no diversity either. It was the same grey, concrete cell for everyone, a world in which every person was just a number.
My personal taste is not important. I wouldn't even dream of imposing it on someone else. I want every person to have a large degree of freedom, large enough to fulfill their dreams. What I don't want is for that freedom to go as far as to demolish beautiful houses or beautiful nature and fill the space with hideous, high-rise blocks.
If someone builds an ugly house, but it's only 2 floors, it will still blend in with the landscape somehow. But if you make it 10 or 20 floors there's no way for anyone to ignore it. That's the kind of ugliness that imposes itself on everyone, near and far. That's the kind of building that destroys the entire view of a city.
Thank you for the comment again and you do not have to be sorry for that. I truly understand what you want to point out and I pretty agree with your opinion as well. I would like to answer your comment by re-commenting one comment that I wrote on this same video.
There is one modernism architect during this period that talked about, they needed minimum sun light, minimum air ventilation, minimum space, at least to lead a minimum life as human being. I could manage to imagine from this quote, how harsh and unhuman living in those period was. Unite d’habitation was not even designed for someone who were already living a moderate life back then. Corbusier had tried to provide a space for someone who suffered from that time. I strongly believe that it does not make sense this building being judged by the notion of today’s living, as we do not say “the place that Australpithecus was living in was messed up.”
What I try to do as an architecture student, I try to see what I should take and what I should avoid from those remarkable buildings. That is how I study and learn architecture and that is why I visit all those buildings. I would never say that Unite d'Habitation is perfect for everybody with no flaw at all, but I would always say there is such a marvelous solution, although I see something could have been better than how it was designed. And also I find Corbusier's struggles from those points, what he wanted to keep all the time under any circumstances and what he would have been okay to ignore because of all the issues he was into.
@@99archi Well, you certainly have many points to avoid then. In the city where I live most high-rise buildings which were built between the 50's and 70's are finally getting demolished because everyone agrees that these monstrosities should not have been built in the first place.
You refer to social housing, which was indeed a big issue after WW II and in many places this resulted in 1-floor prefab buildings, similar to the trailers you find in the US.
The further need for social housing could have been fulfilled with similar houses, but many architects were influenced by communism. That's why they travelled to the USSR. Le Corbusier did that too. And that's where the problem starts. When architecture becomes a means to achieve a totalitarian, political goal it's no longer intended to be pleasing and increase people's well-being.
The lack of social housing after WW II has been abused for political purposes. The USSR-style has been advocated by communist architects, but if we look at these housing projects today, all of them have utterly failed, not only because of their ugliness and lack of safety but because of the crime and violence that seems to thrive inside such buildings.
I have lived inside such a building myself and I can assure you it makes you feel sick.
People are not made to live in a high concrete tower. It goes against our nature.
You cannot generalize and apply your experience to everybody. As I am from South Korea where Le Corbusier style social housing is successfully settled down, I would say the idea of social house works still now. You can easily google it by "South Korea apartment complex" and find some images. You may want to say that Korean do live in an inappropriate way housing-wise which I partially agree, as you said people are not made to live in there, but this is what it is happening in some countries. I would not be happy to hear that your way of living is better than somebody, since all different society and country have their own way of valuing. There are too many aspect to be considered to insist your opinion.
Mais qu'elle horreur cage à poule
Thanks for the comment. Yes, you could say that. I get your point indeed, but I strongly believe that I should not judge this building only with today's idea and situation. It should be judged always with considering all the situation at the time and zeitgeist. :)
Faut comparer ce qui est comparable les barres d’immeubles comme a Bordeaux lac par exemple appartement 1579 là on parle cage à poule couloir Dd 1 m à peine
C'est une horreur se truc j'habite saint etienne quand ont passe devant ont dirais un homme abandonné cette période des années 70 et 80 ont étais les pires en termes d'architecture faut le rase se truc c'est dégueulasses pour le pqysage
I genuinely thank you for the comments. There is one modernism architect during this period that talked about, they needed minimum sun light, minimum air ventilation, minimum space, at least to lead a minimum life as human being. I could manage to imagine from this quote, how harsh and unhuman living in those period was. Unite d’habitation was not even designed for someone who were already living a moderate life back then. Corbusier had tried to provide a space for someone who suffered from that time. I strongly believe that it does not make sense this building being judged by the notion of today’s living, as we do not say “the place that Australpithecus was living in was messed up.”
Non les appartements sont géniaux et la nature est tout autour j'y ai vécu quelques années c'était agréable