Comments on: House 1 in Penafiel / Claudio Vilarinho

By: Don Leopardo

Don Leopardo — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 03:56:09 +0000

Really guys ?!

http://www.archdaily.com/11726/genesis-house-palais-de-justice-planda/

By: Casa de astazi #106 - House 1 in Penafiel « O casa pe zi

Casa de astazi #106 - House 1 in Penafiel « O casa pe zi — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:01:13 +0000

[...] Surse: http://www.claudiovilarinho.com/Site/EN/proj/a/penafiel1/01penafiel1.htm http://www.archdaily.com/11522/house-1-in-penafiel-claudio-vilarinho/ [...]

By: Rokas

Rokas — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:57:15 +0000

thanks :)
I agree,its a pitty that there arent the photo from other side.
The puristic facade, I think comes from 2 points-a)to have “pure”,sculpture-like fascade;b)to feel at home alone with this fantastic landscape(note,that the road is very close to the house-you know-the cars,people passing by…).To me its the manifesto of the dinamic solitude-the carport shows this very well-you enter into the “cave”,like some monk,who’s going away from the world-and,when you are in it-gone-you see the light-its the sort of the tunnel,of the journey-when you enter in one side and emerge in the other-its some sort that you have made a journey between the worlds.Some sort ot the time-space machine :)
And-besides-The house deals pretty well with its function-I think that one must have a pretty sharp mind to make a beautifull,sculpture like body,which is suitable to live in comfort(eastetical and phisical).

By: Carlo

Carlo — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:30:16 +0000

of course a building can have sculptural aspects, but in this case everything that constitutes archtecture is put aside just for the sake of the grand gesture. You have to agree with me that in this case the formal ambition was priority. ok, we dont see the other facade, but from this side the pure formal gesture was the main ambition.
you could call that formalism!!

interesting discussion by the way

;-)

By: Rokas

Rokas — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:11:09 +0000

ok,then lets do some more glass boxes-that fullfill the funcional needs.Or lets stick to the 50’s fubctionalism?Sorry guys,but these thoughts is like the one’s of Nikita Chruschev.By the way-what’s wrong with sculptural looking houses?(If it’s not like the ones like the O’gehry’s?These are really..gmm..an art-arent suitable to live in).Whats wrong with austerity?To have focus?Colleque,do you have an eye on your ear?

By: Carlo

Carlo — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:11:09 +0000

nice, then let’ see what adolf loos said:

“Only a very small part of architecture belongs to art: the tomb and the monument. Everything else that fulfils a function is to be excluded from the domain of art.”

;-)

By: Rokas

Rokas — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:02:16 +0000

“Architecture is an art”-O.Niermeyer

By: Carlo

Carlo — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:40:04 +0000

From outside it looks interesting, however very monumental for the context. The monumentality is given due to the hermetically closed facade . When you look at the floor plans you ask yourself, why the room allocated along this wall cannot get natural light. I understand the notion to avoid views to the neighbourhood but there would have been many solutions to make openings that allow natural lighting and privacy. These openings would also have reduced the purely sculptural look of the house, thus making it more an architectural object than an art piece. I’ m sure the main view is great though.

By: Rokas

Rokas — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 08:13:56 +0000

Maria,there are continuity in this project!!It’s white-as the others,it isnt overwhelming the view to others, it answers the questions in topographical way.Do you miss some cantelevered towers?

By: House 1 in Penafiel - Claudio Vilarinho | ...ambushU.com...

House 1 in Penafiel - Claudio Vilarinho | ...ambushU.com... — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 03:01:36 +0000

[...] more info & pics @ ArchDaily [...]