Wow the analysis of this building is amazing, I found this incredibly entertaining and informative! The only thing for me was the cuts get a bit distracting when they are midsentence but I see your channel growing tremendously! Keep up the good work I love your videos, easy sub!
Hey Steven! I agree completely with you, but honestly, I´m still not fully comfortable in front of the camera. It will be better in the coming videos, its a slow progress. Stay around, let me know if the next ones are better :) Thank you for the feedback!
With due respect, I think Corbusier's Unite d'Habitation was far from a failure. Corbusier's revolutionary ideas on high density living may have failed to gain traction in Europe, but they influenced a generation of postwar architects, including those who worked in early postwar Singapore. There, the government was faced with the twin problems of a severe housing shortage, and having to decongest a crowded and often unsanitary city centre. The concept of high density living in a park-like setting provided the model for many of the first generation new towns like Toa Payoh. What were called 'slab blocks' (as opposed to tower blocks that came later) were obviously influenced by the Unite d'Habitation. The ground level was often left open (called void decks) for communal use or devoted to commercial actiivty. Finer aspects like the roof top recreational areas and double volume apartments were left out, possibly because of a tight construction budget. However, it wasn't a simple transfer of a European concept to a SE Asian setting. The buildings were adapted to suit local conditions. Slab blocks for example were often aligned east-west in order to minimise exposure to the hot equatorial sun. Louvered windows assisted in cross ventilation. Short pipe sections embedded into concrete walls allowed residents to dry their laundry naturally. Sadly, many of these slab blocks are now around 50 years old and are being replaced by newer and taller buildings that offer modern amenities. Like airconditioning and bedroom ensuites. I hope that some of these slab blocks will kept, as a reminder of modern architecture's heroic phase in postwar Singapore. And of the universality of Corbusier's ideas, many of which were well ahead of his time.
Hey pervertt (interesting name :D) , Thanks a lot for writing. - I love that you share your thoughts and info here. I must say that I am not only open to learn from all of you watching, but having this conversation with you might be even more important than the video itself! Did you watch the last part of the video? Because I was breaking down my conclusions in two parts, to be a bit more specific. - Don't forget the Unité was a "one fits all" solution. And this is a very important distinction in the concept from my point of view. It was a solution that would work anywhere, and by repetition, be the new city.
It's amazing how quick people are to excuse the flaws simply because it was done by Corbusier. If it was done by any other person it would have been demolished and forgotten. Yes there are good lessons, but most of it is utopian and unrealistic, not to mention the Unité is ugly to most people besides architects. Having 1k people on one building with green surrounding it and repeating it 10x or more sounds nice in theory, but would only work in a planet with infinite resources. Not to mention it doesn't create communities or cities.
The "failure" that you talk of is because of the fact that only few buildings were built. the concept was to have tens of these buildings set in a huge park, interconnected by the park but also by walkways at the commercial levels and if I recall correctly a few parking cylinders on these connecting walkways. Unfortunately the political landscape was also in turmoil and the changes in life also played a role. in three years time they had no less than 9 prime ministers, the Vietnam war war roaming and, especially bad for Marseille, the war in Algiers started in 1952. But more important was that he had a competitor for this project which is now the 'cités Saint-Just Palmieri et Garderie' which was far more "conventionally modern" and more popular and liveable as they were not so high rise nor ostentatious. these buildings with no true soul nor architectural grandeur are still going strong and are more wanted to live in that the Unité d'Habitation or "Cité Radieuse" I believe that Marseille was not ready for such a concept, few cities were, and that no city in the world had the audacity to say "lets build it completely like it is planned." even Paris went for the more conventional cheap buildings of what i call "soviet style" which have now become the Cité's because they dumped the poor there and never invested in making the areas liveable. the same errors were made all over Europe, from the UK to Germany, from Norway to Spain and Italy. The original concept of Corbusier was genius but way ahead of it's time, today it's looked on as dated but that is only because of his Modula being wrong. The flats are too narrow, the "streets" too dark and the commercial area not pulled through on the full length. On top of that visitors to that commercial area and restaurant from outside were usually insulted and not welcome, which didn't help the viability of the project. remember, there were only just over 300 appartements, a maximum of 1000 people who would have the choice of 1 restaurant and a few shops. I live in a town with 19000 inhabitants and we have a few hundred eating places, a almost 500 café's and pubs and four shopping areas with hundreds of shops. The biggest failure was the narrow thinking of both the Architect and the governing body. the Architect wanted people to live like he designed it (which is why many great architects would make exceptional dictators) and the local government succumbed to the popular vote of the time. Let's just say that the Unité d'Habitation was at the same time too communist and too luxurious at the same time. Unfortunately these two extremes are not combinable even today. these building were made for what we call "Gauche Caviar" the caviar left, but there are very few of them and they prefer the villa's and freedom as well as the big center that is Paris during the working week. So yes it was a failure when you take all of it into account. But what a failure, it is a thing of beauty, a dream to live in and a way of life you cannot compare. Oddly we love going on cruises, well te Unité d'Habitation is the exact blueprint of what cruise ships have become to the T so it is far from being a failure. There is a different "successful failure" with the similar principle in Brussels, but this one is closer to it's original plans. the "Cité Modèle" Here the big issue is also that it went from a mixed population to ending up fully owned by the social services and having become a dumping ground for poor and outcasts as it is built far from the city center. However it had everything, swimming pool, cultural center and theatre, shops, restaurants, school etc... yet from 1965 to 2015 it was seen as a place to avoid at all cost because it was social housing. And off course it being social service flats they never kept the landscapes maintained, the streets were not cleaned and the maintenance was reduced to a bare minimum. 7 years after the renovation the same history is repeating itself. So these project only succeed when you mix up the people living there, just like in the real world, because if we want to live like the architects decided it to be lived like we would live joyfully like in and idealised Soviet land where there is very little place for individuality. In conclusion, Yes they are a major failure because you cannot dictate how people should live and any design should give enough liberty in surrounding areas to be oneself. The project was just too big, too large and would be better as a vacation camp than a real housing estate.
the "sparse tall residence buildings on a park" doesnt work urbanistically combine that with the fact that corbusier eliminates the ground floor you just have a non-comunity of tall residential buildings far away from each other with no mixed used. And they are ugly, and thats important too.
Thank you so much for all the effort that you put into your videos! I always enjoy watching them for the depth and the analysis that you provide. While I am mostly opposed to Le Corbusier's ideas about city planning, I do admire his Unite projects. I like his attempt at building a city within a building, and I think that some of his concepts can be updated and improved. I recently found an article where current inhabitants of the Unite in Marseille were saying that they fell in love with their building during the pandemic because it was like a little self-sustained world. After reading a book that summarized Le Corbusier's ideas, I found that a lot of his concepts may have inspired urban planning in the Soviet Union. I don't know if I am right, but growing up in a former Soviet republic, in a district made up of social housing buildings, I found a lot of similarities.
Hey Yaroslav, ,thanks for writing. The influence of Le Corbusier´s ideas and concepts cannot be measured really. They have been around for 70 years already, and they have derived into anothers, and those ones, into new ones as well. Some of his concepts and visions regarding urban planning I don't share, but I think the Unité as a project is tremendously interesting. ps: Are you referring to the panelaks by any chance?
@@FourthWallArchitecture Yes, I was referring to the panelkas but also to the design and layout of city blocks and streets. I found that Le Corbusier's sketches from Towards A New Architecture are very similar to what was built in the 60s and 70s in the Soviet Union. The long five-floor residential buildings (more commonly 9 floors), surrounded by green pedestrian areas or parks, and separated streets for cars (usually quite wide, 4-6 lanes).
Le Corbusier was inspired by a monastery? It explains a lot about why his buildings plans were adapted for social domination and order. This buildings especially the Plan Voisin were really the pinacle of the police state dystopia...
Depending on your screen you might not be able to see the table comparing the Unites clearly enough. You can find a link below to the slide as a photo as well, so you can zoom in. I think this might help! :) ibb.co/Q8cZDjb
Very informative video! I don’t get why people are so quick to judge without watching the full video, i loved his opinions on Le Corbusier’s thinking process, while still acknowledging his revolutionary ideas. But I do agree that the sketches had to be a bit bigger.
Hey. It was an amazing analysis. Is it possible to send the notes of analysis that you were explaining from your iPad for better visibility and understanding? Thank you
I think you might have phrased this more diplomatically (especially considering how insightful and well researched the video is) however I agree that it might have been nice to see the master bedroom (with the circulation running through it) in plan for example.
Really enjoyed the video and I subscribed! The information was very rich. One comment is the audio was very quiet. Had to boost the audio with a third party app :)
Good analysis of the unité type. Nice presentation. I would like to see the pictures on a larger scale, so zoom in to the white section of your tablet. And keep the pictures in the video for a bit longer timespan, because only experienced Corbu viewers recognize them now. The Berlin unitë is the only one outside France. Apparently building is less universal because of the local restrictions. Besides that the Germans changed a lot in that building for economic reasons. Good luck !
Hi Hans, thanks for the feedback. Yes, the screen capturing process still needs to be a bit refined. I will improve it for next videos - either zooming in more aggressively, putting the slides on the screen if they contain lots of info, or just having them in paper. But I totally agree with your comment.
Semantics perhaps but this is a list of elements that you considered failures, i.e. failureS. Though I agree with your logic I think it is unfair to describe the building as a failure. I've stayed in two separate apartments in the Marseilles Unite. Both wonderful apartments. The only failure in my experience was that it was unbearable hot in the evening/ night in summer without AC. Great channel, thanks!
Hey David, thanks for writing. Well, in the video I split it in several ways -from the concept perspective, as a one fits all solution for the housing in Europe, and as a collage of technical and concepts. Depending on how you look at it it can be a failure or not. The other points are my opinions on the concepts, or the interesting contradictions that Corbusier always had in his discourse. I didnt stay overnight, so thats interesting to know! Thanks for sharing! Cheers, Bruno
@@FourthWallArchitecture Yes, I understand. I was only criticising the title of your video where a plural of "failure" would be more accurate but Im just splitting hairs. Great stuff
I suppose the only way to critique a building properly is to ask one of the inhabitants ... is it successful to you? - failing living there, at least a thorough going visit and analysis must be undertaken. Corb's work was often completely rhetorical - so was 'Plan Voisin' a success/? -well that depends why Corb drew it and publicised it .... it certainly helped his career, didn't the Unités do that too? was he paid the fees? (that's the REAL success mate). But above all going into the flats and saying how you feel about the effects of the modulor is the worthiest criticism. Catch the train then pass judgement? (forgive me if u already have done, but you could have used your experience in the video or referred to it, it doesn't look as though you have?)
Thanks for writing! Totally fair points! I have visited an apartment in one of the unités, together with the owner. I didnt include the footage in the video because the apartment was in a very very poor condition, and also this person had problems unrelated to the project. I considered it wouldn’t bring anything positive to show the footage. I should have mentioned it though. Theres a video coming up this Sunday with some quick impressions after revisiting the Firminy unité. I would be interested to know your thoughts! Thanks!
@@FourthWallArchitecture I thought you would have done and obviously I agree. It is completely reasonable that you protected the owner's privacy. But obviously, if you had said you found the unusual arrangement of rooms (violating the usual privacies) difficult .... your presentation would have felt all the more powerful. I haven't been in any of them, but to me, the width ( at Marseille) LOOKS really quite oppressively tight .... like I say, I would welcome your feelings when you were inside,. Was the state of the place a result of the architecture to some extent? are the apartments noisy, a common problem in blocks of flats, which is detrimental to a persons psychological well-being ..... anyway, I'm sure you can cobble a video together as a part 2 if u feel the need. Thank you so much for the video, and thank you for answering me and doing it so promptly, cheers, Colin
@@MrVorpalsword Hey Colin, I totally agree with your comments regarding the width of the apartments. Berlin is a bit better, because the dimensions of the apartments are a tad more generous, but in general they are small. I don't know if you visited the Weissenhof project, for example. The service area of the apartment there is tremendously small, in my opinion. The very positive thing the apartments have, in general, is the natural light and the balconies. If we focus on worst case apartment variation, I think the single height apartments in berlin with the vertical brise soleil, are the worst of all. They have poor light, no double height of course, they are basically a 1 room space, and have no balcony. (I don't think Corbusier can be really blamed for these though.) Thank you for writing and sharing your thoughts. I am always trying to improve for next videos, so I really appreciate the feedback! Cheers, Bruno
I enjoyed the video, the projects do seem to be a failure because they never truly served their intended purpose but the concepts are interesting to study and in that way I don’t think the design was a complete failure. I’m currently working on an urban design school project, are there any urban design projects that you recommend that I study if my aim is to create a healthy community ? Thank you
Barcelona is interesting, planned completely from scratch and some new proposals for super blocks are coming up. Copenhagen is quite interesting as well. Amsterdam...Then you can find lots of smaller interventions to regenerate spaces within existing cities.
Thank you for this video! I think that Le Corbusier's ideas are very interesting and that, despite their undeniable drawbacks, contemporary architects can definitely learn from them. For instance, his idea of providing highly functional living spaces on a relatively small footprint to leave enough green spaces around the building is often discarded in favour of less densely populated suburban areas - a lost opportunity, in my opinion. I have one additional thought about the body proportions: This concept is highly problematic due to its misogynist premise. Indeed, man is taken as the basis for the considerations, while woman is entirely neglected.
I would definitely say that his relationships with women were...odd, at least. So..it could be that your option is correct, but I would have to dig deeper to be certain. I could do a video about this only, I always found it interesting. Let me know if you'd be interested :) Bruno
@@FourthWallArchitecture Thank you for your response. Personally, I think that issues of gender in relation to modern architects or specifically Le Corbusier would be an interesting topic for a separate video. I would definitely watch it.
Doesn't it make sense to design a residence in proportion to its tallest occupants? It's important that the work surfaces and chairs in particular don't force users to hunch, giving them back strain.
@@rwatertree Well, it's also just as inconvenient if the users have to stretch every time they use something in the house. Therefore, it's best to adapt the measures to the average occupant.
@@loveartandscience6289 But they don’t have to? I am 2,02m tall, and feel highly Claustrophobic in essentially all of the conventionally sized buildings. My biggest nemesis are Doorways which not exceed the height of 1,92m (an Old German norm). My girlfriend is 1,54m tall. We moved into an apartment with ceiling heights of 2,80m and adapted most of the furniture and amenities to my size, while compromising in common areas as the kitchen and the dining room. The higher ceiling and doorways have zero influence on her ability to use the apartment. On the contrary, she loves the more open and spacious feel of the higher ceilings. There is literally 0 drawback
Such a great video! I wish there was a course in my architecture school were we would analyze influential buildings the way you did!
Wow the analysis of this building is amazing, I found this incredibly entertaining and informative! The only thing for me was the cuts get a bit distracting when they are midsentence but I see your channel growing tremendously! Keep up the good work I love your videos, easy sub!
Hey Steven! I agree completely with you, but honestly, I´m still not fully comfortable in front of the camera. It will be better in the coming videos, its a slow progress. Stay around, let me know if the next ones are better :)
Thank you for the feedback!
@@FourthWallArchitecture absolutely! I look forward to your next videos!
With due respect, I think Corbusier's Unite d'Habitation was far from a failure. Corbusier's revolutionary ideas on high density living may have failed to gain traction in Europe, but they influenced a generation of postwar architects, including those who worked in early postwar Singapore. There, the government was faced with the twin problems of a severe housing shortage, and having to decongest a crowded and often unsanitary city centre. The concept of high density living in a park-like setting provided the model for many of the first generation new towns like Toa Payoh.
What were called 'slab blocks' (as opposed to tower blocks that came later) were obviously influenced by the Unite d'Habitation. The ground level was often left open (called void decks) for communal use or devoted to commercial actiivty. Finer aspects like the roof top recreational areas and double volume apartments were left out, possibly because of a tight construction budget.
However, it wasn't a simple transfer of a European concept to a SE Asian setting. The buildings were adapted to suit local conditions. Slab blocks for example were often aligned east-west in order to minimise exposure to the hot equatorial sun. Louvered windows assisted in cross ventilation. Short pipe sections embedded into concrete walls allowed residents to dry their laundry naturally.
Sadly, many of these slab blocks are now around 50 years old and are being replaced by newer and taller buildings that offer modern amenities. Like airconditioning and bedroom ensuites. I hope that some of these slab blocks will kept, as a reminder of modern architecture's heroic phase in postwar Singapore. And of the universality of Corbusier's ideas, many of which were well ahead of his time.
Hey pervertt (interesting name :D) ,
Thanks a lot for writing. - I love that you share your thoughts and info here. I must say that I am not only open to learn from all of you watching, but having this conversation with you might be even more important than the video itself!
Did you watch the last part of the video? Because I was breaking down my conclusions in two parts, to be a bit more specific. - Don't forget the Unité was a "one fits all" solution. And this is a very important distinction in the concept from my point of view. It was a solution that would work anywhere, and by repetition, be the new city.
It's amazing how quick people are to excuse the flaws simply because it was done by Corbusier. If it was done by any other person it would have been demolished and forgotten.
Yes there are good lessons, but most of it is utopian and unrealistic, not to mention the Unité is ugly to most people besides architects.
Having 1k people on one building with green surrounding it and repeating it 10x or more sounds nice in theory, but would only work in a planet with infinite resources. Not to mention it doesn't create communities or cities.
Why ugly? I don't like Le Corbusier but the Unité d'Habitation is cool
The "failure" that you talk of is because of the fact that only few buildings were built. the concept was to have tens of these buildings set in a huge park, interconnected by the park but also by walkways at the commercial levels and if I recall correctly a few parking cylinders on these connecting walkways. Unfortunately the political landscape was also in turmoil and the changes in life also played a role. in three years time they had no less than 9 prime ministers, the Vietnam war war roaming and, especially bad for Marseille, the war in Algiers started in 1952. But more important was that he had a competitor for this project which is now the 'cités Saint-Just Palmieri et Garderie' which was far more "conventionally modern" and more popular and liveable as they were not so high rise nor ostentatious. these buildings with no true soul nor architectural grandeur are still going strong and are more wanted to live in that the Unité d'Habitation or "Cité Radieuse" I believe that Marseille was not ready for such a concept, few cities were, and that no city in the world had the audacity to say "lets build it completely like it is planned." even Paris went for the more conventional cheap buildings of what i call "soviet style" which have now become the Cité's because they dumped the poor there and never invested in making the areas liveable. the same errors were made all over Europe, from the UK to Germany, from Norway to Spain and Italy.
The original concept of Corbusier was genius but way ahead of it's time, today it's looked on as dated but that is only because of his Modula being wrong. The flats are too narrow, the "streets" too dark and the commercial area not pulled through on the full length. On top of that visitors to that commercial area and restaurant from outside were usually insulted and not welcome, which didn't help the viability of the project. remember, there were only just over 300 appartements, a maximum of 1000 people who would have the choice of 1 restaurant and a few shops. I live in a town with 19000 inhabitants and we have a few hundred eating places, a almost 500 café's and pubs and four shopping areas with hundreds of shops. The biggest failure was the narrow thinking of both the Architect and the governing body. the Architect wanted people to live like he designed it (which is why many great architects would make exceptional dictators) and the local government succumbed to the popular vote of the time. Let's just say that the Unité d'Habitation was at the same time too communist and too luxurious at the same time. Unfortunately these two extremes are not combinable even today. these building were made for what we call "Gauche Caviar" the caviar left, but there are very few of them and they prefer the villa's and freedom as well as the big center that is Paris during the working week. So yes it was a failure when you take all of it into account. But what a failure, it is a thing of beauty, a dream to live in and a way of life you cannot compare. Oddly we love going on cruises, well te Unité d'Habitation is the exact blueprint of what cruise ships have become to the T so it is far from being a failure.
There is a different "successful failure" with the similar principle in Brussels, but this one is closer to it's original plans. the "Cité Modèle" Here the big issue is also that it went from a mixed population to ending up fully owned by the social services and having become a dumping ground for poor and outcasts as it is built far from the city center. However it had everything, swimming pool, cultural center and theatre, shops, restaurants, school etc... yet from 1965 to 2015 it was seen as a place to avoid at all cost because it was social housing. And off course it being social service flats they never kept the landscapes maintained, the streets were not cleaned and the maintenance was reduced to a bare minimum. 7 years after the renovation the same history is repeating itself. So these project only succeed when you mix up the people living there, just like in the real world, because if we want to live like the architects decided it to be lived like we would live joyfully like in and idealised Soviet land where there is very little place for individuality. In conclusion, Yes they are a major failure because you cannot dictate how people should live and any design should give enough liberty in surrounding areas to be oneself. The project was just too big, too large and would be better as a vacation camp than a real housing estate.
the "sparse tall residence buildings on a park" doesnt work urbanistically combine that with the fact that corbusier eliminates the ground floor you just have a non-comunity of tall residential buildings far away from each other with no mixed used. And they are ugly, and thats important too.
Thank you so much for all the effort that you put into your videos! I always enjoy watching them for the depth and the analysis that you provide. While I am mostly opposed to Le Corbusier's ideas about city planning, I do admire his Unite projects. I like his attempt at building a city within a building, and I think that some of his concepts can be updated and improved. I recently found an article where current inhabitants of the Unite in Marseille were saying that they fell in love with their building during the pandemic because it was like a little self-sustained world.
After reading a book that summarized Le Corbusier's ideas, I found that a lot of his concepts may have inspired urban planning in the Soviet Union. I don't know if I am right, but growing up in a former Soviet republic, in a district made up of social housing buildings, I found a lot of similarities.
Hey Yaroslav, ,thanks for writing. The influence of Le Corbusier´s ideas and concepts cannot be measured really. They have been around for 70 years already, and they have derived into anothers, and those ones, into new ones as well. Some of his concepts and visions regarding urban planning I don't share, but I think the Unité as a project is tremendously interesting.
ps: Are you referring to the panelaks by any chance?
@@FourthWallArchitecture Yes, I was referring to the panelkas but also to the design and layout of city blocks and streets. I found that Le Corbusier's sketches from Towards A New Architecture are very similar to what was built in the 60s and 70s in the Soviet Union. The long five-floor residential buildings (more commonly 9 floors), surrounded by green pedestrian areas or parks, and separated streets for cars (usually quite wide, 4-6 lanes).
Le Corbusier was inspired by a monastery? It explains a lot about why his buildings plans were adapted for social domination and order. This buildings especially the Plan Voisin were really the pinacle of the police state dystopia...
nonsense.. like LC ideas..but the Unit'e d'Habitation is cool
This is a great analysis! I really enjoyed it and it also helped me as I am an architecture student learning about architecture!
Thanks a lot Josephine!
Depending on your screen you might not be able to see the table comparing the Unites clearly enough. You can find a link below to the slide as a photo as well, so you can zoom in. I think this might help! :)
ibb.co/Q8cZDjb
Very informative video! I don’t get why people are so quick to judge without watching the full video, i loved his opinions on Le Corbusier’s thinking process, while still acknowledging his revolutionary ideas. But I do agree that the sketches had to be a bit bigger.
Hey. It was an amazing analysis. Is it possible to send the notes of analysis that you were explaining from your iPad for better visibility and understanding? Thank you
You have a point dude but your voice sounds horrible 😖
What a generous comment left by Frank Sinatra… 🙄
Drawings are too small, displayed for very few seconds at a time and 80% of the video is your face talking.
I think you might have phrased this more diplomatically (especially considering how insightful and well researched the video is) however I agree that it might have been nice to see the master bedroom (with the circulation running through it) in plan for example.
You’re right. I wrote the comment before watching it all the way through and he does make up for these flaws with rigour. The flaws persist, however.
@@pmejia727 Yeah :) I've been watching a few of his other vids, they're pretty good.
Great vid, your are helping me a lot with your videos. Would you be able to upload your presentation somewhere. It would help a lot. thanks
a thoughtful and objective look at the subject. some great insight to this work, thank you.
Really enjoyed the video and I subscribed! The information was very rich. One comment is the audio was very quiet. Had to boost the audio with a third party app :)
Thanks for subscribing, and for the feedback! I will have the next ones be louder! :) Audio is always a bit tricky.
Good analysis of the unité type. Nice presentation. I would like to see the pictures on a larger scale, so zoom in to the white section of your tablet. And keep the pictures in the video for a bit longer timespan, because only experienced Corbu viewers recognize them now. The Berlin unitë is the only one outside France. Apparently building is less universal because of the local restrictions. Besides that the Germans changed a lot in that building for economic reasons. Good luck !
Hi Hans, thanks for the feedback. Yes, the screen capturing process still needs to be a bit refined. I will improve it for next videos - either zooming in more aggressively, putting the slides on the screen if they contain lots of info, or just having them in paper. But I totally agree with your comment.
The best analysis of Le Corbusier work I have ever seen 👏
Semantics perhaps but this is a list of elements that you considered failures, i.e. failureS. Though I agree with your logic I think it is unfair to describe the building as a failure. I've stayed in two separate apartments in the Marseilles Unite. Both wonderful apartments. The only failure in my experience was that it was unbearable hot in the evening/ night in summer without AC. Great channel, thanks!
Hey David, thanks for writing.
Well, in the video I split it in several ways -from the concept perspective, as a one fits all solution for the housing in Europe, and as a collage of technical and concepts. Depending on how you look at it it can be a failure or not.
The other points are my opinions on the concepts, or the interesting contradictions that Corbusier always had in his discourse.
I didnt stay overnight, so thats interesting to know! Thanks for sharing!
Cheers, Bruno
@@FourthWallArchitecture Yes, I understand. I was only criticising the title of your video where a plural of "failure" would be more accurate but Im just splitting hairs. Great stuff
I suppose the only way to critique a building properly is to ask one of the inhabitants ... is it successful to you? - failing living there, at least a thorough going visit and analysis must be undertaken. Corb's work was often completely rhetorical - so was 'Plan Voisin' a success/? -well that depends why Corb drew it and publicised it .... it certainly helped his career, didn't the Unités do that too?
was he paid the fees? (that's the REAL success mate).
But above all going into the flats and saying how you feel about the effects of the modulor is the worthiest criticism.
Catch the train then pass judgement? (forgive me if u already have done, but you could have used your experience in the video or referred to it, it doesn't look as though you have?)
Thanks for writing! Totally fair points!
I have visited an apartment in one of the unités, together with the owner. I didnt include the footage in the video because the apartment was in a very very poor condition, and also this person had problems unrelated to the project. I considered it wouldn’t bring anything positive to show the footage. I should have mentioned it though.
Theres a video coming up this Sunday with some quick impressions after revisiting the Firminy unité. I would be interested to know your thoughts!
Thanks!
@@FourthWallArchitecture I thought you would have done and obviously I agree. It is completely reasonable that you protected the owner's privacy.
But obviously, if you had said you found the unusual arrangement of rooms (violating the usual privacies) difficult .... your presentation would have felt all the more powerful. I haven't been in any of them, but to me, the width ( at Marseille) LOOKS really quite oppressively tight .... like I say, I would welcome your feelings when you were inside,. Was the state of the place a result of the architecture to some extent? are the apartments noisy, a common problem in blocks of flats, which is detrimental to a persons psychological well-being ..... anyway, I'm sure you can cobble a video together as a part 2 if u feel the need.
Thank you so much for the video, and thank you for answering me and doing it so promptly, cheers, Colin
@@MrVorpalsword Hey Colin, I totally agree with your comments regarding the width of the apartments. Berlin is a bit better, because the dimensions of the apartments are a tad more generous, but in general they are small. I don't know if you visited the Weissenhof project, for example. The service area of the apartment there is tremendously small, in my opinion.
The very positive thing the apartments have, in general, is the natural light and the balconies. If we focus on worst case apartment variation, I think the single height apartments in berlin with the vertical brise soleil, are the worst of all. They have poor light, no double height of course, they are basically a 1 room space, and have no balcony. (I don't think Corbusier can be really blamed for these though.)
Thank you for writing and sharing your thoughts. I am always trying to improve for next videos, so I really appreciate the feedback! Cheers, Bruno
thank you.
I enjoyed the video, the projects do seem to be a failure because they never truly served their intended purpose but the concepts are interesting to study and in that way I don’t think the design was a complete failure.
I’m currently working on an urban design school project, are there any urban design projects that you recommend that I study if my aim is to create a healthy community ?
Thank you
Barcelona is interesting, planned completely from scratch and some new proposals for super blocks are coming up. Copenhagen is quite interesting as well. Amsterdam...Then you can find lots of smaller interventions to regenerate spaces within existing cities.
Thank you
Thank you for this video!
I think that Le Corbusier's ideas are very interesting and that, despite their undeniable drawbacks, contemporary architects can definitely learn from them.
For instance, his idea of providing highly functional living spaces on a relatively small footprint to leave enough green spaces around the building is often discarded in favour of less densely populated suburban areas - a lost opportunity, in my opinion.
I have one additional thought about the body proportions: This concept is highly problematic due to its misogynist premise. Indeed, man is taken as the basis for the considerations, while woman is entirely neglected.
I would definitely say that his relationships with women were...odd, at least. So..it could be that your option is correct, but I would have to dig deeper to be certain.
I could do a video about this only, I always found it interesting. Let me know if you'd be interested :)
Bruno
@@FourthWallArchitecture Thank you for your response. Personally, I think that issues of gender in relation to modern architects or specifically Le Corbusier would be an interesting topic for a separate video. I would definitely watch it.
Doesn't it make sense to design a residence in proportion to its tallest occupants? It's important that the work surfaces and chairs in particular don't force users to hunch, giving them back strain.
@@rwatertree Well, it's also just as inconvenient if the users have to stretch every time they use something in the house. Therefore, it's best to adapt the measures to the average occupant.
@@loveartandscience6289
But they don’t have to?
I am 2,02m tall, and feel highly Claustrophobic in essentially all of the conventionally sized buildings.
My biggest nemesis are Doorways which not exceed the height of 1,92m (an Old German norm).
My girlfriend is 1,54m tall.
We moved into an apartment with ceiling heights of 2,80m and adapted most of the furniture and amenities to my size, while compromising in common areas as the kitchen and the dining room.
The higher ceiling and doorways have zero influence on her ability to use the apartment. On the contrary, she loves the more open and spacious feel of the higher ceilings.
There is literally 0 drawback