The Utilitarian

Object
Adolf Loos - The Villa Müller in comparison to
Villa Tugendhat of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe

Architecture & Objects

2022

Prof. Jordi Vivaldi

Institute of Urban Design / Peter Trummer
Faculty of Architecture
of the Leopold Franzens University

Students:
Stephanie Winandy
Cora Nill
Emilia Scharler
Madeleine Wölfle
Max Schmidt
The Utilitarian Object/Adolf Loos
Seminar -2022
Architecture & Objects, prof. Jordi Vivaldi
Institute of Urban Design, dir. Peter Trummer

Students:
Stephanie Winandy Madeleine Wölfle
Cora Nill Max Schmidt
Emilia Scharler

General introduction.
The Utilitarian Object/Adolf Loos
Seminar -2022
Architecture & Objects, prof. Jordi Vivaldi
Institute of Urban Design, dir. Peter Trummer

Students:
Stephanie Winandy Madeleine Wölfle
Cora Nill Max Schmidt
Emilia Scharler

Figure 1: Vladislav-Hall, Benedickt Reit, 1493

Figure 2: Vladislav-Hall, Benedickt Reit, 1493

Figure 3: Vladislav-Hall, Benedickt Reit, 1493

The Utilitarian Object/Adolf Loos
Seminar -2022
Architecture & Objects, prof. Jordi Vivaldi
Institute of Urban Design, dir. Peter Trummer

Students:
Stephanie Winandy Madeleine Wölfle
Cora Nill Max Schmidt
Emilia Scharler

Texts:

Books:
- Adolf Behne, Der moderne Zweckbau (Berlin Frankfurt/M Wien: Ullstein, 1923);
44,51, 56, 114, 115
- Adolf Loos, Ornament and Crime (Vergangenheitsverlag, 2011), 6-11
- Beatriz Colomina, The Split Wall: Domestic Voyeurism (Routledge, 1999)
- Christian Kühn, Das Schöne, das Wahre und das Richtige – Adolf Loos und das
Haus Müller in Prag (Vieweg, 1989)

Thesis:
- Adam Boyd Brandow, Modern Façades Anti-Modern Interiors: Gender, Partner-
ship, and the Architecture of Adolf Loos (Annandale-on-Hudson: Bard College,
2010), 49-58
-Joern Besser, Stephan Liebscher, Adolf Loos, the life - the theories - analysis of
the villa mueller (University of Bath), 33,34
- Mag. Harald Krieger, Ethik des Öffentlichen Raumes (Graz: Karl-Franzens-Univer-
sität Graz, 2018), 50-55

Articles:
- Marta Toral Guinea, Activation of compact architectural systems. The construc-
tion oft he diagonal projection mechanism in Adolf Loos‘ work (EGA. Revista de
expresión gráfica arquitectónica; Vol 24, No. 37, 2019)
- Vanessa Mao, Utilitarianism in 21st Century: Modern Architecture (Medium, 2016)
ADOLF LOOS
Ornament und Verbrechen (1908)

der menschliche embryo macht im mutterleibe alle entwicklungsphasen des tierreiches durch. wenn
der mensch geboren wird, sind seine sinneseindrücke gleich denen eines neugeborenen hundes.
seine kindheit durchläuft alle wandlungen, die der geschichte der menschheit entsprechen. mit zwei
jahren sieht er wie ein papua, mit vier jahren wie ein germane, mit sechs jahren wie sokrates, mit acht
jahren wie voltaire. wenn er acht jahre alt ist, kommt ihm das violett zum bewußtsein,
bewußtsein die farbe,
farbe die
das achtzehnte jahrhundert entdeckt hat, denn vorher waren das veilchen blau und u die purpur-
schnecke rot. der physiker zeigt heute auf farben im sonnenspektrum, die bereits einen namen haben,
deren erkenntnis aber dem kommenden menschen vorbehalten ist.

das kind ist amoralisch.

amoralisch der papua ist es für uns auch. der papua schlachtet seine feinde ab und
verzehrt sie. er ist kein verbrecher. wenn aber der moderne mensch jemanden abschlachtet und
verzehrt, so ist er ein verbrecher oder ein degenerierter. der papua tätowiert seine haut, sein boot,
sein ruder, kurz alles, was ihm erreichbar ist. er ist kein verbrecher. der moderne mensch,
mensch der sich
tätowiert, ist ein verbrecher oder ein degenerierter.
tätowiert degenerierte es gibt gefängnisse,
gefängnis in denen achtzig prozent
prozen der
häftlinge tätowierungen aufweisen.
aufweisen die tätowierten,
tätowierten die nicht in haft sind, sind latente verbrecher
verbreche oder
degenerierte aristokraten. wenn ein tätowierter in freiheit stirbt,
stirbt so ist er eben einige jahre, bevor er
einen mord verübt hat, gestorben.

der drang, sein gesich

gesicht und alles, was einem erreichbar
erreichba ist, zu ornamentieren,
ornamentieren ist der uranfang der
orn
bildenden kunst
kunst. es ist das lallen der malerei.
malerei alle kunst ist erotisch.
erotisch

das erste ornament,

ornamen das geboren wurde, das kreuz, kreu war erotischen
ero
rotischen ursprungs. das erste kunstwerk,
die erste künstlerische tat, die der erste künstler, um seine überschüssigkeiten los zu werden,
werde an die
schmierte. ein horizontaler strich:
wand schmier strich das liegende weib. ein vertikaler strich:
stric der sie durchdringende
durchdringend
mann. der mann, der es schuf, empfand denselben drang wie beethoven, er war in demselben
mann
himmel, in dem beethoven die neunte schuf. aber der mensch unserer zeit, ze der aus innerem drange
die wände mit erotischen symbolen beschmiert,
beschmie ist ein verbrecher oder ein degenerierter.
degenerierte es ist
selbstverständlich, daß dieser drang menschen mit solchen degenerationserscheinungen in den
anstandsorten am heftigsten überfällt. man kann die kultur eines landesland an dem grade messen,
messe in
dem die abortwände beschm beschmiert sind. beim kinde ist es eine natürliche erscheinun
erscheinung: seine
e erste
kunstäußerung ist das bekritzeln der wände mit erotischen symbolen.
symbolen was aber beim papua und beim
kinde natürlich ist, ist beim modernen menschen eine degenerationserscheinung.

ich habe folgende erkenntnis gefunden und der welt geschenkt: evo evolution
v luti
tion der
d r ku
de kkultur
ltur ist
gleichbedeutend
gle
l ic
i hbede t nd mit de
d ute dem
d entfernen
m entfe r en des
f rn d s ornamentes
de orn
r amente dem
t s aus de
d gebrauchsgegenstande.
m gebra r uchsgegensta d ich glaubte
t nde
damit neue freude in die welt zu bringen, sie hat es mir nicht gedankt. man war traurig und ließ die
köpfe hängen. was einen drückte, war die erkenntnis, daß man kein neues ornament hervorbringen
könne. wie, was jeder neger kann, was alle völker und zeiten vor uns gekonnt haben, das sollten allein
wir, die menschen des neunzehnten jahrhunderts, nicht vermögen? was die menschheit in früheren
jahrtausenden ohne ornament geschaffen hatte, wurde achtlos verworfen und der vernichtung
preisgegeben. wir besitzen keine hobelbänke aus der karolingerzeit, aber jeder schmarren, der auch
nur das kleinste ornament aufwies, wurde gesammelt, gereinigt und prunkpaläste wurden zu seiner
beherbergung gebaut. traurig gingen die menschen dann zwischen den vitrinen umher und schämten
sich ihrer impotenz. jede zeit hatte ihren stil und nur unserer zeit soll ein stil versagt bleiben ? mit stil
meinte man das ornament. da sagte ich: weinet nicht. seht, das macht ja die e größe unserer zeit aus,
daß sie nicht imstande ist, ein neues ornament hervorzubringe
hervorzubringen. wir haben das ornament o
überwunden, wir haben uns zur ornamentlosigkeit durchgerungen. seht, die zeit ist nahe, die erfüllung
wartet unser. bald werden die straßen der städte wie weiße mauern glänzen! wie zion, die heilige
stadt, die hauptstadt des himmels. dann ist die erfüllung da.

aber es gibt schwarzalben, die das snnicht

icht dulden wollten. die menschheit sollte weiter in derr sklaverei
sklavere
ornamentes keuchen. die menschen waren weit genug, daß das ornament ihnen keine lustgefühle
des ornamente
mehr erzeugte, weit genug, daß ein tätowiertes antlitz nicht wie bei den papuas das ästhetische
empfinden erhöhte, sondern es verminderte. weit genug, um freude an einer glatten zigarettendose zu
empfinden, während eine ornamentierte, selbst bei gleichem preise, von ihnen nicht gekauft wurde.
sie waren glücklich in ihren kleidern und waren froh, daß sie nicht in roten samthosen mit goldlitzen
wie die jahrmarktsaffen herumziehen mußten. und ich sagte: seht, goethes sterbezimmer ist herrlicher
als aller renaissanceprunk und ein glattes möbel schöner als alle eingelegten und geschnitzten
museumstücke. die sprache goethes ist schöner als alle ornamente der pegnitzschäfer.
das hörten die schwarzalben mit mißvergnügen
mißvergnüge und der staat, dessen aufgabe es ist, die völker in
ihrer kulturellen entwicklung aufzuhalten, machte die frage
e nach der entwicklung undd wiederaufnahme
des ornamentes zu der seinen. wehe dem staate, dessen revolutionen die hofräte besorgen! bald sah
man im wiener kunstgewerbemuseum ein büffet, das „der reiche fischzug“ hieß, bald gab es schränke,
die den namen „die verwunschene prinzessin“ oder einen ähnlichen trugen, der sich auf das ornament
bezog, mit welchem diese unglücksmöbel
unglücksmöbe bedeckt waren. der österreichische staat nimmt seine
aufgabe so genau, daß er dafür sorgt, daß die fußlappen aus den grenzen der österreichisch-
ungarischen monarchie nicht verschwinden. er zwingt jeden kultivierten zwanzigjährigen
zwanzigjähr mann drei
jahre lang an stelle der gewirkten fußbekleidung fußlappen zu tragen. denn schließlich geht eben
jeder staat von der voraussetzung aus, daß ein niedrig stehendes volk leichter zu regieren ist. nun gut,
die ornamentseuche ist staatlich anerka
anerkannt und wird mit staatsgeldern subventioniert. ich aber

erblicke darin einen rückschritt.

rückschritt ich lasse den einwand nicht gelten, gelte daß das ornament
orname die
lebensfreude eines
e kultivierten menschen erhöht,
erhöht lasse den einwand nicht gelten, der sich in die worte
kleidet: „wenn aber das ornament schön ist ist. ..!“ mir und mit mir allen kultivierten menschen
mensche erhöht das
nicht. wenn ich ein stück pfefferkuchen essen will, so wähle ich mir eines,
ornament die lebensfreude nicht
das ganz glatt ist und nicht ein stück, das ein herz oder ein wickelkind oder einen reiter darstellt, der
über und über mit ornamenten bedeckt ist. der mann aus dem fünfzehnten jahrhundert wird mich nicht
verstehen. aber alle modernen menschen
mensche werden es. der vertreter des ornamentes glaubt, daß mein
drang nach einfachheit einer kasteiung gleichkommt. nein, verehrter herr professor aus der kunstge-
werbeschule, ich kasteie mich nicht! mir schmeckt es so besser. die schaugerichte vergangener
jahrhunderte, die alle ornamente aufweisen, um die pfauen, fasane und hummern schmackhafter
erscheinen zu lassen, erzeugen bei mir den gegenteiligen effekt. mir grauen gr
graue gehe ich durch eine
kochkunstausstellung, wenn ich daran denke, ich sollte diese ausgestopften tierleichen essen. ich
esse roastbeaf. der ungeheuere schaden und die verwüstungen, die dieneuerweckung des orna-
mentes in der ästhetischen entwicklung anrichtet, könnten leicht verschmerzt werden, denn niemand,
auch keine staatsgewalt, kann die evolution der menschheit aufhalten!
aufhalten man kann sie nur verzögern.
wir können warten. aber es ist ein verbrechen an der volkswirtschaft, daß dadurch menschliche arbeit,
geld und material zugrunde gerichtet werden. diesen schaden kann die zeit nicht ausgleichen.

das tempo der kulturellen entwicklung leidet unter den nachzüglern. ich lebe vielleicht im jahre 1908,
mein nachbar aber lebt um 1900 und der dort im jahre 1880. es ist ein unglück für einen staat, wenn
sich die kultur seiner einwohner auf einen so großen zeitraum verteilt. der kalser bauer lebt im
zwölften jahrhundert. und im jubiläumsfestzuge gingen völkerschaften mit, die selbst während der
völkerwanderung als rückständig empfunden worden wären. glücklich das land, das solche nachzügler
und marodeure nicht hat. glückliches amerika! bei uns gibt es selbst in den städten unmoderne
menschen, nachzügler aus demachtzehnten jahrhundert, die sich über ein bild mit violetten schatten
entsetzen, weil sie das violett noch nicht sehen können. Ihnen schmeckt der fasan besser, an dem der
koch tagelang arbeitet, und die zigarettendose mit renaissance ornamenten gefällt ihnen besser als
die glatte. Und wie stehts auf dem lande? kleider und hausrat gehören durchaus früheren
jahrhunderten an. der bauer ist kein christ, er ist noch ein heide.

die nac
n
nachzügler
chzügler verlangsamen die kulturelle entwicklung
entwicklun der völker
völke und der menschheit,
menschh denn das
ornament wird nicht nur von verbrechern erzeugt, es begeht ein verbrechen dadurch, daß es den
menschen schwer an der gesundheit, am nationalvermögen und also in seiner kulturellen entwicklung
schädigt. wenn zwei menschen nebeneinander wohnen, die bei gleichen bedürfnissen, bei denselben
ansprüchen an das leben und demselben einkommen verschiedenen kulturen angehören, kann man,
volkswirtschaftlich betrachtet, folgenden vorgang wahrnehmen: der mann des zwanzigsten jahr-
hunderts wird immer reicher, der mann des achtzehnten jahrhunderts immer ärmer. ich nehme an,
daß beide ihren neigungen leben. der mann des zwanzigsten jahrhunderts kann seine bedürfnisse mit
einem viel geringeren kapital decken und daher ersparnisse machen. das gemüse, das ihm mundet,
ist einfach in wasser gekocht und mit etwas butter übergossen. dem anderen mann schmeckt es erst
dann gleich gut, wenn honig und nüsse dabei sind und wenn ein mensch stundenlang daran gekocht
hat. ornamentierte teller sind sehr teuer, während das weiße geschirr, aus dem es dem modernen
menschen schmeckt, billig ist. der eine macht ersparnisse, der andere schulden. do ist es mit ganzen
nationen. wehe, wenn ein volk in der kulturellen entwicklung zurückbleibt. die engländer werden
reicher und wir ärmer …

noch viel größer ist der schaden, den das produzierende volk durch das ornament erleidet.
erleide da das
ornament nicht mehr ein natürliches produkt unserer kultur ist, also entweder eine rückständigkeit oder
eine degenerationserscheinung darstellt, wird die arbeit des ornamentikers nicht mehr nach gebühr
bezahlt.
die verhältnisse in den gewerben der holzbildhauer und drechsler, die verbrecherisch niedrigen preise,
preise
die den stickerinnen und spitzenklöpplerinnen bezahlt werden, sind bekannt. der ornamentiker muß mu
zwanzig stunden
stunde arbeiten, um das einkommen eines modernen arbeiters zu erreichen, der acht
stunden arbeitet. das ornament verteuert in der regel den gegenstand, trotzdem kommt es vor, daß
ein ornamentierter gegenstand bei gleichem materialpreis und nachweislich dreimal längerer
arbeitszeit um den halben preis angeboten wird, den ein glatter gegenstand kostet. das fehlen des
ornamentes hat eine verkürzung der arbeitszeit und eine erhöhung des lohnes zur folge. der
chinesische schnitzer arbeitet sechzehn stunden, der amerikanische arbeiter acht. wenn ich für eine
glatte dose so viel zahle
zah wie für eine ornamenti
ornamentierte, gehört die differenz an arbeitszeit
arbeitsze dem arbeiter.
arbeite
und gäbe es überhaupt kein ornament, – ein zustand, der vielleicht in jahrtausenden eintreten wird –
brauchte der mensch statt acht stunden nur vier zu arbeiten, denn die hälfte der arbeit
arbe entfällt heute
noch auf ornamente.

ornament ist vergeudete arbeitskra

arbeitskraft und dadurch vergeudete gesundheit
gesundheit. so war es immer. heute
bedeutet es aber auch vergeudetes material
mater und beides bedeutet vergeudetes kapital.
kapital da das
ornament nicht mehr organisch mit unserer kultur zusammenhängt, ist es auch nicht mehr der aus-
druck unserer kultur.

das ornamen
ornament, das heute geschaffen
geschaffe wird, hat keinen zusammenha
zusammenhang mit uns, hatt überhaupt keinekein
menschlichen zusammenhänge,
zusammenhänge keinen zusammenhang mit der weltordnung. es ist nicht nich
entwicklungsfähig. was geschah mit der ornamentik otto eckmanns, was mit der van de veldes? stets
entwicklungsfähi
stand der künstler voll kraft und gesundheit an der spitze der menschheit. der moderne ornamentiker
aber ist ein nachzügler
nachzügle oder eine pathologische erscheinung. seine produkte werden schon nach drei
jahren von ihm selbst verleugnet
verleugnet. kultivierten menschen sind sie sofort unerträglich, den anderen wird
diese unerträglichkeit erst nach jahren bewußt. wo sind heute die arbeiten otto eckmanns? wo werden
die arbeiten olbrichs nach zehn jahren sein ? das moderne ornament hat keine eltern und keine
nachkommen, hat keine vergangenheit und keine zukunft. es wird von unkultivierten menschen,
denen die größe unserer zeit ein buch mit sieben siegeln ist, mit freuden begrüßt und nach kurzer
zeitverleugnet.

die menschheit ist heute gesünder

gesünd denn je, krank sind nur einige wenige. diese wenigen aber
tyrannisieren den arbeiter, der so gesund ist, daß er kein ornament erfinden kann. sie zwingen ihn, die
von ihnen erfundenen ornamente in den verschiedensten materialien auszuführen.

der wechsel der ornamente

ornament hat eine frühzeitige entwertung
entwertun des arbeitsproduktes
arbeitsprodukte zur folge. die zeit des
arbeiters, das verwertete material sind kapitalien, die verschwendet werden. ich habe den satz
aufgestellt: die form eines gegenstandes halte so lange,
lang das heißt, sie sei so lange erträglich,
erträgl so lange
der gegenstand physisch hält.hä ich will das zu erklären suchen: ein anzug wird seine form häufiger
wechseln als ein wertvoller pelz. die balltoilette der frau, nur für eine nacht bestimmt, wird ihre form
rascher wechseln als ein schreibtisch. wehe aber, wenn man den schreibtisch so rasch wechseln muß
wie eine balltoilette, weil einem die alte form unerträglich geworden ist, dann hat man das für den
schreibtisch verwendete geld verloren.

das ist dem ornamentiker wohl bekannt und die österreichischen ornamentiker suchen diesem mangel
die besten seiten abzugewinnen. sie sagen: „ein konsument,
konsume der eine e einrichtung hat, die ihm schon
nach zehn jahren unerträglich wird, und der daher gezwungen ist, sich alle zehn jahre einrichten
einrich zu
lassen, ist uns lieber als einer, der sich einen gegenstand erst dann kauft, wenn der alte aufgebraucht
ist. die industrie verlangt das millionen werden durch den raschen wechsel beschäftigt.“ es scheint
dies das geheimnis der österreichischen nationalökonomie zu sein; wie oft hört man beim ausbruch
eines brandes die worte: „gott sei dank, jetzt haben die leute wieder etwas zu tun.“ da weiß ich ein
gutes mittel! man zünde eine stadt an, man zünde das reich an und alles schwimmt in geld und
wohlstand. man verfertige möbel, mit denen man nach drei jahren einheizen kann, beschläge, die man
nach vier jahren einschmelzen muß, weil man selbst im versteigerungsamt nicht den zehnten teil des
arbeits und materialpreises erzielen kann, und wir werden reicher und reicher.

der verlust trifft nicht nur den konsumenten, er trifft vor allem den produzenten.
produzente heute bedeutet das
ornament an dingen, die sich dank der entwicklung dem ornamentiertwerden entzogen haben,
vergeudete arbeitskraft und geschändetes material. wenn alle gegenstände ästhetisch so lange
lang halten
würden, wie sie es physisch tun, tun könnte der konsument einen preis dafür entrichten, der es dem
arbeiter ermöglichen würde, mehr geld zu verdienen und weniger lang arbeiten zu müssen. für einen
gegenstand, bei dem ich sicher bin, daß ich ihn voll ausnützen und aufbrauchen
aufbrauc kann, zahle ich gerne
viermal so viel wie für einen in form oder material minderwertigen. ich zahle für meine stiefel gerne
vierma
vierzig kronen, obwohl ich in einem anderen geschäft stiefel um zehn kronen bekommen würde. aber
in jenen gewerben, die unter der tyrannei der ornamentiker schmachten, wird gute oder schlechte
arbeit nicht gewertet. die arbeit leidet, weil niemand gewillt ist, ihren wahren wert zu bezahlen.

und das ist gut so, denn diese ornamentierten dinge wirken nur in der schäbigsten ausführung
erträglich. ich komme über eine feuersbrunst leichter hinweg, wenn ich h öre, daß nur wertloser tand
verbrannt ist. ich kann mich über den gschnas im künstlerhaus freuen, weiß ich doch, daß er in
wenigen tagen aufgestellt, in einem tage abgerissen wird. aber das werfen mit goldstücken statt mit
kieselsteinen, das anzünden einer zigarette mit einer banknote, das pulverisieren und trinken einer
perle wirkt unästhetisch. wahrhaft unästhetisch wirken die ornamentierten dinge erst, wenn sie im
besten material,
mater mit der höchsten sorgfalt
sorgfa ausgeführt wurden und lange arbeitszeit beansprucht
haben. ich kann mich nicht davon frei sprechen,
spreche qualitätsarbeit zuerst gefordert zu haben, aber freilich
nicht für dergleichen.

der moderne mensch,

me der das ornament
orname als zeichen der künstlerischen überschüssigkeit
überschüssigke vergangener
epochen heilig hält, wird das gequälte, mühselig abgerungene und krankhafte der modernen
moderne
ornamente sofort erkennen.
ornamen erkennen kein ornament
orname kann heute mehr geboren werden von einem, der auf
unserer kulturstufe le
lebt.

anders ist es mit den menschen und völkern, die diese stufe noch nicht erreicht haben.

Iih predige den aristokraten, ich meine die menschen, die an der spitze der menschheit stehen und
doch das tiefste verständnis für das drängen und die not der untenstehenden haben. den kaffer, der
ornamente nach einem bestimmten rhythmus in die gewebe einwirkt, die nur zum vorschein kommen,
wenn man sie auftrennt, den perser, der seinen teppich knüpft, die slovakische bäuerin, die ihre spitze
stickt, die alte dame, die wunderbare dinge in glasperlen und seide häkelt, die versteht er sehr wohl.
der aristokrat läßt sie gewähren, er weiß, daß es ihre heiligen stunden sind, in denen sie arbeiten. der
revolutionär würde hingehen und sagen: „es ist alles unsinn.“
unsinn. Wie er auch das alte weiblein vom
bildstock reißen würde und sagen würde: „es gibt keinen gott.“ der atheist unter den aristokraten aber
lüftet seinen hut, wenn er bei einer kirche vorbeigeht.

meine schuhe sind über und über mit ornamenten bedeckt, die von zacken und löchern herrühren.
arbeit, die der schuster geleistet hat, die ihm nicht bezahlt wurde. ich gehe zum schuster und sage:
„sie verlangen für ein paar schuhe dreißig kronen. ich werde ihnen vierzig kronen zahlen.“ damit habe
ich diesen mann auf eine selige höhe gehobe
gehoben, dieer mir danken wird durch arbeit und material, die
an güte in gar keinem verhältnis zum mehrbetrag stehen. er ist glücklic
glücklich. selten kommt das glück in
sein haus. hier steht ein mann vor ihm, der ihn versteht, der seine arbeit würdigt und nicht an seiner
ehrlichkeit zweifelt. in gedanken sieht er schon die fertigen schuhe vor sich. er weiß, wo gegenwärtig
das beste leder zu finden ist, er weiß, welchem arbeiter er die schuhe anvertrauen wird, und die
schuhe werden zacken und punkte aufweisen, so viele, als nur auf einem eleganten schuh platz
haben. Und nun sage ich: „aber eine bedingung stelle ich. der schuh muß ganz glatt sein.“ da habe ich
ihn aus den seligsten höhen in den tartarus gestürzt. er hat weniger arbeit, aber ich habe ihm alle
freude genommen.

ich predige den aristokraten. ich ertrage ornamente am eigenen körper, wenn sie die freude meiner
mitmenschen ausmachen. sie sind dann auch meine freude. ich ertrage die ornamente des kaffern,
des perser’s, der slowakischen bauern, die ornamente meins schusters, denn sie alle haben kein
anderes zu bekommen. wir haben die kunst, die das ornament abgelöst hat. wir gehen nach des tages
last und mühen zu beethoven oder in den tristan. das kann mein schuster nicht. ich darf ihm seine
freude nicht nehmen, da ich nichts anderes an ihre stelle zu setzen habe. wer aber zur neunten
synphonie geht und sich dann hinsitzt, um ein tapetenmuster zu zeichnen, ist entweder ein
hochstapler oder ein degenerierter.

das fehlen des ornamentes hat die übrigen künste zu ungeahmter höhe gebracht. die symphonien
beethovens waren nie von einem manne geschrieben worden, der inseide, samt und spitzen daher
gehen musste. wer heute im samtrock herumläuft, ist kein künstler, sondern ein hanswurst oder ein
anstreicher. wir sind feiner, subtieler geworden. die herdenmenschen mussten sich durch
verschiedene farben unterscheiden, der moderne mensch braucht seine kleider als maske. so
ungeheuer stark ist seine induvidualität, dass sie sich nicht mehr in kleidungsstücken ausdrücken
lässt. der moderne mensch verwendet die ornamente früherer und fremder kulturen nach seinem
gutdünken. seine eigene erfindung konzentriert er auf andere dinge.

Text aus: Adolf Loos – Sämtliche Schriften 1897-1930

1962 by: herold druck- und verlagsgesellschaft m.b.h. – wien VIII– münchen
 Modern Façades, Anti-Modern Interiors: Gender, Partnership,
and the Architecture of Adolf Loos

Adam Boyd Brandow

A thesis

Submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts in the History of the Decorative Arts, Design, and Material Culture

Bard Graduate Center: Decorative Arts, Design History, Material Culture

Bard College

March, 2010

© Copyright 2010 Adam Boyd Brandow

THESIS COMMITTEE:

________________________________

________________________________
 49

Chapter Three

Womanhood and the Ambivalence of Loos’s Gender Ideals

In a letter written just before their wedding in the summer of 1903, Loos self-

assuredly professed his love to the actress Lina Obertimpfler (1884–1950) and asked that

she put aside her theatrical life after their marriage. The tone of the letter, however, was

not intimidating but affectionate and even doting. “My sweet, most lovely wife!” Loos

wrote,

I spoke recently with Altenberg about you and said: ‘She is the
wisdom of the world. She has learned nothing and yet knows
everything. She has seen nothing and understands everything. She
has read nothing and feels all the pains that the poets of this earth
have described.’105

This excerpt reveals the architect’s perception of his fiancé as an archetypal Kindfrau, an

innocent child-woman whom, by virtue of her innate sensitivity and youthful

impressionability, he could mold to conform to his wishes . This was not an isolated

occurrence in Loos’s private life. His subsequent marriages to Elsie Altmann and Claire

Beck, as well as his long-term romance with Englishwoman Bessie Bruce, demonstrate

the architect’s proclivity for forging relationships with naive, malleable females while

avoiding bold, self confident “new women.” Loos’s regressive mindset is striking given

his apparent admiration of personifications of bold femininity including the athletic and

imposing “Gibson Girls” of American illustrator Charles Dana Gibson and the primal,

105
Adolf Loos to Lina Loos, 16 July 1903, Handschriften und Nachlass Sammlung, I.N. 126.901, Wien
Bibliothek im Rathaus.
 50

unbridled sexuality of performer Josephine Baker. Loos seemed to publically

y endorse the

Viennese feminists’ objectives aas demonstrated in his writing on subjects such as clothing

reform, as well as in architectural commissions for groups such as Viennese Women’s

Club (Wiener Frauenclub) and the building he designed for the girl’s school founded by

his friend, the educational reformer Eugenia Schwarzwald. However, in private hhe

favored a much more conventional gendered

d model tthat is reflected in the tranquil

bedroom he designed for his and Lina’s apartment in the Giselastraße.

Loos’s perception of womanhood was more intricate and ambiguous than his

straightforward ideal of modern masculinity as interpreted in the previous chapter. By

favoring a more conventional – perhaps even regressive – ideal of matrimonial

domesticity, Loos avoided the threatening female figures in his personal life that he

publically praised by pursuing relationships with women he viewed as impressionable

and childlike. This chapter will attempt to demonstrate that despite Loos’s exterior guise

of progressivism, his contrasting personal and professional attitudes toward women

t comes into focus through his

reveal a persistent sense of masculine insecurity that

relationships and gendered architectural projects. Considered in combination with his

professional activities, Loos’s own view of femininity as represented by his reference to

Lina in the “wisdom of the world” passage sheds new light on the polarity between the

conflicting public and private spheres of the architect’s personality.

As with Loos’s opinions on so many subjects about which he polemicized, his

public attitude toward women was outwardly progressive and utilitarian. Loos openly lent

his support to the middle-class Austrian women’s movement through his connections to

the Allgemeine Österreichische Frauenverein (The General Austrian Women’s League)

 51

and Eugenie Schwarzwald’s progressive Schwarzd’sche Schulanstalten.106 In his essays

“Ladies’ Fashion,” “Short Hair,” and “The Woman and the Home,” Loos addressed

issues including the role of sexuality in contemporary gender relations, social

conventions of dress, style, and appearance, and the cultural benefits of the broad

feminist agenda.107 Perhaps Loos’s most important statement of his progressive ideals on

women was his 1902 essay for Dokumente der Frauen, the official periodical of the

Allegemeine Österreichische Frauenverein, the more philosophical arm of the Austrian

women’s movement. Loos highlighted how current gender relations–particularly the

necessity for women to appeal to men’s desire through sexually alluring fashions–kept

women subjugated to men. As the architect surmised, “the noble side of womankind has

only one desire: to take her rightful place at the side of a great, strong man.”108 While

modern standards of men’s dress emphasized sobriety and fostered advancement in the

public sphere, he argued that women’s clothing was designed merely to arouse desire in

men
men. Loos thus posited a somber, tailored vision of clothing that would liberate women

from their present state as slaves to fashion, with their clinching wasp-waits, unhygienic

corsets, and shoes and skirts that hampered mobility

mobility. Reforming women’s clothing would

thus allow females

[to] no longer have to appeal to sensuality to achieve equal status

with men but will do so through their economic and intellectual
independence, gained through work. A woman’s value will not rise

106
See Harriet Anderson, Utopian Feminism: Women’s Movements in fin-de-siècle Vienna (New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1992), 104-110.
107
Adolf Loos, “Ladies’ Fashion (1898/1902),” in Ornament and Crime, Selected Essays, trans. Michael
Mitchell (Riverside, CA: Ariadne Press, 1998), 106-111; Adolf Loos, “Short Hair (1898/1902),” in
Ornament and Crime, Selected Essays, trans. Michael Mitchell (Riverside, CA: Ariadne Press, 1998), 190;
Adolf Loos, Die Frau und das Haus,” in Die Potemkinsche Stadt, ed. Adolf Opel (Vienna: Prachner
Verlag, 1983), 69-75.
108
Adolf Loos, “Damenmode,” in Dokumente der Frauen, Bd. 6., No. 23 (1899), 664.
 52

and fall with fluctuations in sensuality…Silks and satins, ribbons

and bows, frills and furbelows will lose their effectiveness. They
will disappear. And rightly so. There is no place for them in our
culture.109

At this juncture it should be emphasized that Loos’s essay on clothing reform–and more

generally his association with the Austrian women’s movement–was limited to its

intellectual faction rather than the more practically-oriented women’s organizations such

as Marianne Hainisch’s Bund Österreichische Frauenvereine (League of Austrian

Women’s Association).110 The BÖFV’s ties to the international women’s movement and

Anglo-American suffrage-oriented groups such as the International Council of Women

may, in part, explain why Loos’s lofty ideals on women’s progress failed to measure up

in practice.

One must be cautious, however, not to read too literally into Loos’s progressivist

rhetoric as a cry for the liberation of women. Historian Patricia McBride has argued that

Loos’s supposed “feminism” as suggested in the article “Damenmode” was not a genuine

expression of his support of gender equality. Rather, she believes that Loos’s interest in

elevating women from the function of sexual subjugation by men merely reflected his

“utilitarian and pragmatic” belief that continued gender inequality would impede the

advancement of Western civilization.111 Loos connected the increase of functionalism

and the decrease of ornament in dress

dress, particularly the collective wearing off trousers,

with cultural progress. For example, he claimed that long garments such as a clergyman’s

cassock, Chinese mandarin’s robe, or nobleman’s ceremonial state dress all signified an

109
Adolf Loos, “Damenmode,” in Dokumente der Frauen, Bd. 6., No. 23 (1899), 664.
110
See Anderson, Utopian Feminism: Women’s Movements in fin-de-siècle Vienna, 94-101.
111
Patrizia C. McBride, “‘In Praise of the Present’: Adolf Loos on Style and Fashion,”
Modernism/Modernity, Vol. 11 No. 4 (2004): 761.
 53

elevated social position free from the burden of physical labor and emphasizes a

connection to the past through the use of ornamental materials such as gold, velvet, and

silk.112 Upper class ladies, Loos argues, had not yet progressed to a point at which society

permitted them to wear trousers whereas working women such female coal miners in

Belgium, alpine dairy maids, and fisherwomen in the North Sea all did out of

necessity.1113

In contrast to the seemingly modern visions of gender equality he preached in

“Damenmode,” Loos’s personal relationships with women were far from progressive.

Manifesting a common disjunct between theoretical and applied gender ideals among

early-twentieth century avant-garde artists including adherents of movements such as

Expressionism, Dada, and Surrealism, Loos’s highly idealized views of women failed to

be translated into practice in his own life. Loos’s three marriages to much-younger

women demonstrated a repeated pattern in which the architect sought to exert his control

over impressionable Kindfrauen. As noted in the introduction to this text, the attraction of

the Kindfrau for certain members of the Viennese avant-garde, particularly Loos,

reflected a desire to seek out emotionally and sexually naïve young women who would

provide devoted and unthreatening love. Loos invariably pursued women who exhibited

the emotional traits of the Kindfrau who were at odds with the female ideals he espoused

in his public polemics.

Loos first established this pattern in marrying Lina Obertimpfler, the beautiful

“silver muse” of the Vienna Moderns and daughter of the proprietors of the Café Piccola

112
Adolf Loos, “Damenmode,” in Dokumente der Frauen, Bd. 6., No. 23 (1899), 663.
113
Ibid.
 54

at which he, Altenberg, and other members of the Viennese avant-garde were regular

patrons. In her memoir Das Buch Ohne Titel, Lina recounts meeting Loos in 1898 at the

Café Löwenbräu Stammtisch of Karl Kraus, Egon Friedell, and Peter Altenberg. Loos had

brought along a cigarette case of Russian birch, which he had intended to show his

friends as an example of an unornamented object of great function and natural beauty.

While attempting to force the case open, Lina broke the latch. Humiliated by her gaffe in

the presence of such illustrious company, she apologized profusely.

Loos, who made no attempt to pacify me, looked at me earnestly

and said: “Do you really want to compensate me?” I exhaled.
“Naturally!” “So marry me!” Without a second of hesitation I
replied “Yes!” My sister laughed, as she took it for a joke – it was
not! It was a normal spring day on which these unusual
circumstances took place. We married that summer.114

Reminiscing on her youthful marriage to Loos in a Neues Wiener Tagblatt feuilleton in

1936, Lina admitted that at age nineteen she had entered into the marriage too quickly.115

While she admits that she could not yet recognize her own naïveté nor perceive the

motivations behind Loos’s affection, her devotion to him at the time was wholehearted.

After their wedding Lina felt increasingly pressured by Loos to give up her acting

career and dedicate herself to simply being his wife. In the same letter in which he called

her the “wisdom of the world,” Loos emphasized the social impropriety of life on the

stage for a woman of her stature. “You are not an actress,” he wrote. “Empresses cannot

be actresses. At most they can act like actresses. But they can’t themselves act.”116 Loos’s

invocation of the female aristocrat parallels his idealization of the gentleman. His concern

114
Lina Loos, Das Buch ohne Titel: Erlebte Geschichten (Vienna: Büchergilde Gutenberg, 1953), 81-82.
115
Lina Loos, “Erinnerungen werden wach,” Neues Wiener Tagblatt, April 13, 1935. (Feuilleton)
116
Adolf Loos to Lina Loos, 16 July 1903, Handschriften und Nachlass Sammlung, I.N. 126.901, Wien
Bibliothek im Rathaus.
 55

with the unseemliness off having a wife appear on stage as a professional actress seems to

reflect his own emphasis on the importance of maintaining a dignified façade

façade. This

scenario would play out again in each of his subsequent marriages with women all of

whom, curiously, were either actresses or dancers.

Loos seems to have placed a great emphasis on his wives’ pre-marital virginity.

Loos’s second wife Elsie Altmann Loos recalled an observation of his on the importance

of marrying a virgin:

When the unchaste bride enters the nuptial bed, she can perhaps
realize that her husband is nothing special, but the virgin has no
chance of comparison, as she knows nothing else. That is the
operative point.117

Loos’s bourgeois attitude with regard to male and female sexuality exhibited a clear

double-standard implying that women should abstain from pre-marital sex while it was

acceptable for men. In his memoir The World of Yesterday, Stefan Zweig described the

unnatural “social morality” of middle- and upper-class standards of sexual propriety in

Vienna before the First World War.

That a man could experience desires, and was permitted to

experience them, was silently admitted by custom. But to admit
frankly that a woman could be subject to similar desires…would
have transgressed the conception of the sanctity of womanhood…
In the pre-Freudian era, therefore, the axiom was agreed upon that
a female person could have no physical desires as long as they had
not been awakened by a man, and that, obviously, was officially
permitted only in marriage.118

117
Elsie Altmann-Loos, Mein Leben mit Adolf Loos (Vienna: Amalthea, 1984), 27.
118
Stefan Zweig, The World of Yesterday (Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press, 1964), 77.
 56

Zweig makes it clear that a sexual double-standard guided Viennese society. While it was

perfectly acceptable for a man to carry on an extra-marital affair, provided it was done

discreetly, such behavior was unthinkable for women and explains Loos fury upon

discovering his first wife Lina in bed with a much younger Heinz Lang, son of the

Austrian feminist Marie Lang who later upon instigation from Peter Altenberg,

committed suicide following Lina’s rejection.

By all accounts, Loos’s marital experiences revealed how the architect ritualized

and even fetishized sexuality. Following his divorce from Lina after only two years of

marriage, Loos married the much younger Elsie Altmann (1899–1984) in the summer of

1919 whom he had met while leading educational excursions for students at Eugenie

Schwarzwald’s girls’ school. In her memoir of life with Loos Elsie recounts the elaborate

preparations he undertook for their wedding trip, climaxing however in the surprising

unconsummation of their marriage. Following a long day that included spending the

afternoon at one of Loos’s building sites in Vienna, he and Elsie arrived in Pöchlarn, a

small village on the Danube in Lower Austria, at midnight. At the hotel she discovered

that their room contained two beds. Loos explained:

You know, I deliberately asked for two separate beds, so that God
willing it couldn’t occur that we celebrate our wedding night as the
bourgeois [Bürger] do. I couldn’t bear it. Now, go to sleep quickly,
as tomorrow we have to get up early.119

It is impossible to be certain of Loos’s reasoning for not wanting to consummate his

marriage with his second wife on their wedding night, as Elsie’s only commentary on the

occasion was that she fell fast asleep. Although the architect’s typically highbrow remark

119
Elsie Altmann Loos, Adolf Loos der Mensch (Vienna, Herold: 1968), 79.
 57

about the commonness of Bürgerlische customs might imply his wanting to impart on his

new bride a sense of patrician dignity, one might also surmise that the forty-nine-year-old

Loos was simply exhausted after a full working day and a strenuous journey and hadn’t

the energy to make his wife’s first sexual experience –assuming, indeed, that she was a

virgin–memorable. Regardless of how one chooses to interpret this unusual series of

events, the fact that Loos lavished so much attention on orchestrating their wedding night

indicates that more was at stake than simply his vision of social propriety, but deep-

rooted sexual insecurities.

Loos’s third and final marriage to Claire Beck, daughter of a client whose age was

considerably less than the architect’s, repeated patterns of insecurities faced in his

previous relationships. Striving, once again to fashion a young Kindweib to his wishes,

Loos wished to avoid the pitfalls of his prior marital experiences: i.e. that his precocious

and ambitious wives had prioritized their own creative vocations over his. Loos clearly

sought to avoid this in marrying Beck, a young creature who he could surely dominate.

As he confessed to Beck in proposing to her:

Would you always like to stay with me and work with me? Up
until now I’ve always worked for my wives and tried to make them
into grand and famous actresses and dancers…But you, you will be
no actress and no dancer. You will work with me…consider it
well.120

Beside companionship, the aging architect saw in Beck the ideal secretarial and personal

assistant who could deal with his correspondence, clients, and set about to cataloging his

works. Yet, it should immediately strike the reader that Loos did anything but support his

wives in their artistic endeavors, but did everything in his power to reign them in at every

120
Claire Beck Loos Adolf Loos Privat (Vienna: Czernin Verlag, 2007), 12-13.
 58

opportunity. In his last and final marriage, in which Loos married twenty-four year old

Beck at age fifty-nine, Loos sought to turn the tables once and for all and hold the marital

upper hand. While the situation temporarily proved successful as Beck dealt with his

professional matters, the period following their separation witnessed some of the most

tumultuous times in Loos’s life including his 1928 child-abuse trial recounted in the

introduction. Alone and aging, Loos faced the charges against him with difficulty, made

worse by his ultimate separation from Beck in 1932.

d Loos’s complex and often contradictory

In summary, this chapter has surveyed

relations with the women in his personal life. A distinct pattern of modern façades and

anti-modern interiors marked the division between his public and private gender ideals
ideals.

While Loos outwardly supported the progressive women’s movement, his marital

experiences reflected a deeply self-conscious and insecure masculinity

masculinity, the very image of

masculinity so boldly and somberly projected in his architectural spaces intended for

modern men. It is to be hoped that this study of Loos’s partnerships with women will

inspire more studies integrating Loos’s architectural output with the intricacies of his

private life and the circumstances motivating his creative process.

 walls, the podium of the room
and also the entrance for the
stair.
V influence the ground floor,
I Loos use the same system to
VI
design the second floor (Ill.-31).
The symmetrical placed
robing-rooms have the same
proportion like the vertical
rectangle and are also based
IV on the dimension a (aspect ratio
III a to 1/2a). An identical sized
rectangle describes the child`s
II playroom and the staircase,
V consisting of the gallery, the
I stair well and the stair. Also
VI
the toilet and the bath room
VII
have the same aspect ratio of
1/2a to 1/4a. It is also interesting
to see that the axis VIII, which
divides one vertical rectangle in
IV
the middle ,is identical with the
III
wall of the bath room, the toilet
and the support funnel.
II
V
The floor plan shows that Loos
I
VI followed for the design straight
and basic composition rules,
like in the facade.
Loos could not keep up on his
compositorial conception in
the basement and the ground
Ilustration 32 - roof plan, first floor, ground floor
floor. The reason for this is the
fact that the basement with
the support rooms (laundry,
garage, coal storage etc.) also
through the heights differences
of the stories along the north-
south direction.
Symmetry-axes
The interesting aspect of the
house Müller is the interaction,
or the missing of an interaction,
between the facade axis
and the floor plan axis. As
aforementioned their are two
main symmetry-axis
y ((I and IV).
Namely the symmetrical
y axis
I is identical with the facade
axis I of the north facade, but
not with the facade axis V of
the south facade. There is a
hop between these axis. This is
very good recognisable in the
ground floor plan. The entrance
situation (the
( entrance niche))
is symmetrical
y placed in the
south facade according to the
facade axis V, but asymmetrical
in the ground floor plan. For
the first look there is no relation
33
 between the facade axis V and
the floor plan,
p , but Loos tried
to connect this axis in the floor
plan
p by
y placing
p g the border wall
of the staircase on this axis. He
reflected this border wall at the
axis I and got in this way the
width of the stair. Due to this
the hop of the to axis is 1/2 of
the stair width. This dimension
is also observable in the roof-
a ic-plan, where it is part of the
measures of the skylight.
There are also axes in the
rooms, like the axis III. It is the
axis of the Hall. Loos supported
pp
the axis with 4 hollow corner
pillars,, which should underline
p Müller’s house” Adolf Loos 20
the symmetry
y y of the short
walls of the Hall.
In the context of the axes it is
also necessary to take a closer
look back to the entrance
situation. As aforementioned it
is symmetrical
y situated in the
south facade,, but asymmetrical
y to her are the other rooms. The
in the floor plan. However
Loos realised, through an ably
chosen entrance-motive (a
tripartition), an entrance door
which is exactly situated on the
34
symmetrical main axis I. He
repeated this entrance motive
at the rise for the first floor.
3.2.7 Spatial Plan
The idea of the spatial plan,
which was described in the
chapter 2.3, was a er Loos`s
own words realised on its best
in the house Müller. He said:
“...this spatial interaction and
spatial austerity that thus far I
have best been able to realise in Dr.
To make the spatial interaction 5
in the house Müller easier to
understand, we created a room- 4
6
cast of the important rooms 3
7
(Ill. 33). The room-cast shows
that the dominant room of the
1
house is the hall and assigned
ground floor and the first floor
2
are the really interesting levels
for the intrinsic spatial plan
(grey tagged in the axonometric
projection). The reason for this
is that Loos situated in the Ilustration 33
74
Activación de los sistemas arquitectónicos
compactos. La construcción del mecanismo de
proyección diagonal en la obra de Adolf Loos
Activation of compact architectural
systems. The construction of the diagonal
projection mechanism in Adolf Loos’ work
Marta Toral Guinea
doi: 10.4995/ega.2019.10832
La activación de los sistemas
arquitectónicos compactos, formados
por unidades espaciales adosadas,
especializadas, cualificadas,
relacionadas entre sí en un contenedor
definido y regular, requiere de
herramientas específicas, capaces de
suplir la carencia de espacios dinámicos,
intersticiales y de comunicación.
En la construcción del Raumplan, Adolf
Loos desarrolla diferentes mecanismos
relacionales. Entre ellos, destaca uno
de gran capacidad dinamizadora del
espacio interior. Su construcción parte
de la evolución de las operaciones de
fluctuación y frontalidad heredadas de la
tradición arquitectónica para incorporar
gradualmente alteraciones focales que
conducen a la proyección diagonal.
Mediante el análisis gráfico elaborado por
la autora, se estudian las herramientas
empleadas para la cualificación de este
mecanismo perceptivo, que potencia la
disociación entre el recorrido físico y
perceptivo del observador.
Palabras clave: Adolf Loos.
Diagonal. Frontalidad. Raumplan.
Sistemas Compactos. Herramientas
Arquitectónicas. Proyección.
Observador. Rufer. Müller
The activation of compact
architectural systems, built by
attached spatial units –specialized,
qualified, related to each other within
a defined and regular container–
requires specific tools capable
of supplying the lack of dynamic,
interstitial and communication spaces.
The construction of Loos’ Raumplan
implies the development of different
relational mechanisms, based on
the use of some of these tools.
Among them, we can highlight one
of great importance for its capacity
to activate the interior space.
Its construction arises from the
evolution of fluctuation and frontality
operations inherited from the
architectural tradition and it gradually
incorporates focal alterations that
lead to the diagonal projection.
Tools for the qualification of this
diagonal perceptual mechanism are
studied through a graphic analysis
developed by the author.
KeyWords: Adolf Loos. Diagonal.
Frontality. Raumplan.
Compact Systems. Architectural
Tools. Projection. Observer.
Rufer. Müller

En 1922 Adolf Loos construye en
Viena el primer ensayo espacial de
lo que se conoce como Raumplan:
la casa Rufer 1. Su configuración
es la de un sistema arquitectónico
compacto tridimensional formado
por unidades espaciales adosadas,
especializadas, cualificadas, rela-
cionadas entre sí mediante una se-
rie de herramientas arquitectónicas
dentro de un perímetro definido.
Las estancias mantienen su auto-
nomía mientras son activadas por
un mecanismo relacional interior,
accionado por la percepción del
observador 2 y su movimiento.
En el caso de Loos, estas herra-
mientas para la relación de unidades
espaciales surgen de la evolución de
temas de la tradición arquitectóni-
ca y la arquitectura internacional 3.
Por tanto, parece lógico que inicial-
mente emplee una estructura base
de estancias ordenadas frontalmen-
te. Después introducirá la diagonal,
para construir en Rufer por primera
vez un mecanismo perceptivo tras-
cendente para la activación del sis-
tema compacto.
Podemos decir que la proyección
diagonal de Rufer surge de dos ex-
periencias previas: la evolución de
la fluctuación frontal, que culmina
en el apartamento Hirsch, 1907-
1908, y la casa Strasser, 1919, y su
diagonal perceptiva 4.
El análisis gráfico es la herra-
mienta principal de este estudio,
entendiendo el dibujo como un
instrumento disciplinar de investi-
gación, pensamiento y transmisión
de ideas en arquitectura.
Sobre la obra de Loos existen
numerosas publicaciones de carác-
ter teórico, pero el análisis gráfico
subjetivo de la misma es limitado 5.
También lo son los dibujos origina-
les que se conservan. Dada la com-
pleja construcción relacional del
1. Vista desde el comedor. Hirsch. ALA2201
sistema, resulta difícil una repre-
sentación del espacio que permita
su comprensión completa 6.
La evolución de la
fluctuación frontal.
El caso Hirsch
Los primeros trabajos construidos
de Loos –intervenciones en edifi-
cios existentes– se desarrollan en
estratos horizontales, sometidos a
importantes restricciones. En ellos
trabaja recurrentemente con un eje
perceptivo que ordena también la
secuencia espacial frontal.
En 1907-1908, Loos reforma el
apartamento para Wilhelm Hirsch,
en Viena 7 (Fig. 1).
En él se suceden tres estancias
con un eje central que estructura
también las circulaciones: el come-
dor, un anexo de servicio con jardín
interior y la sala de música 8. Ésta
puede independizarse mediante co-
rrederas respecto de los otros espa-
cios, más dinámicos, siempre física-
mente conectados (Figs. 2 y 3).
1
expresión gráfica arquitectónica 37
1. View from the dining room. Hirsch. ALA2201
In 1922 Adolf Loos built in Vienna the first 75
spatial test of what is known as Raumplan:
the Rufer house 1. Its configuration is that of
a three-dimensional compact architectural
system formed by adjoining, specialized,
qualified spatial units. These units are
related to each other by some architectural
tools, within a defined perimeter. They
maintain their autonomy while being
mobilized by an internal relational mechanism
that is activated by the perception of the
observer 2 and their movement.
In the case of Loos, these relational tools
arise from the evolution of topics from the
architectural tradition and the international
architecture 3. Therefore, it is logical that at
first Loos used a structure of frontally arranged
rooms. Then he introduced the diagonal and
finally he built –in the Rufer House for the first
time– an important perceptive mechanism for
the activation of the compact system.
Rufer’s diagonal projection arises from two
previous main experiences: the evolution
of the frontal fluctuation, culminated in
the Hirsch apartment, 1907-1908, and the
perceptive diagonal of the Strasser house,
1919 4.
Graphical analysis is the main research tool
for this study as drawing is a disciplinary
architectural instrument of research, thought
and transmission of ideas.
There are numerous theoretical publications
76 on Loos, but the subjective graphical
analysis of his work is limited 5. So are
his preserved original drawings. Given the
complex relational construction of the system,
it is difficult to find a way of representing
the space that allows its complete
comprehension 6.
The evolution of frontal
La innovación en Hirsch es doble:
tiene que ver con el carácter de las
estancias y con el trabajo en el límite.
Por un lado, los espacios refuer-
zan su autonomía mediante herra-
mientas arquitectónicas autorrefe-
renciales 9: el “principio del reves-
timiento” (Loos [1898] 1993, 151-
157); una entrada de luz propia,
2. Circulaciones y áreas estáticas. Hirsch
3. Configuración muraria. Sombreadas las
superficies vítreas. Hirsch
4. Desplazamiento físico y perceptivo. Hirsch
5. Circulaciones en relación a los ejes. Strasser
6. Tensión diagonal. Strasser
7. Vista desde el estar. ALA2605
8. Relación de alturas y visuales. Strasser
9. Desplazamiento físico diagonal horizontal.
Activación de superficies vítreas. Diagonal
perceptiva ascendente. Strasser

fluctuation. The Hirsch case especializada –luz loosiana: difusa, 2. Dynamic and static areas. Hirsch
The first built Loos’ works were interventions 3. Wall configuration. Glass surfaces shaded.
sin visión– y la implantación de un Hirsch
in existing buildings developed in horizontal programa estático, depositado en el 4. Physical and perceptual displacement.
strata. They were, therefore, subjected to Hirsch
mobiliario integrado.
important restrictions. In these buildings, the 5. Movement relation to the axes. Strasser
architect recurrently worked with a perceptual
Por otro lado, se cualifica el límite 6. Diagonal tension. Strasser
central axis that ordered the frontal spatial mediante la descomposición mura- 7. View from the living room. ALA2605
ria, basada en un sistema adintela- 8. Heights and visuals. Strasser
sequence. 9. Horizontal and diagonal physical
In 1907-1908, Loos refurbished an apartment do. Por primera vez esta operación displacement. Activation of vitreous surfaces.
for Wilhelm Hirsch, in Vienna 7 (Fig. 1). se acompaña de huecos virtuales: Ascending perceptual diagonal. Strasser
Three rooms –the dining room, a service
annex with interior garden and the music
room 8– are arranged along a central axis
that also organises the movement. The music
room can be separated by sliding doors from
the other two rooms, more dynamic, that are
always connected (Figs. 2 and 3).
There is a twofold innovation that has to do
with both the space features of the rooms and
the manipulation of the limit.
On the one hand, Loos applies some self-
referential architectural tools 9 to reinforce
spatial autonomy: “the principle of cladding”
(Loos [1898] 1993, 151-157); a specialized
light entrance –loosian light: diffuse, non-
vision– and a static program with integrated
furniture.
On the other hand, the limit is qualified
by a wall decomposition based on a lintel
system. For the first time this operation
involves virtual openings: the mirrors enhance 2 3
spatial multiplication and cause “disjunctive,
subversive effects” 10 as Frampton has
pointed out 11 (Fig. 3).
How does the perceptual mechanism
work? There is a frontal horizontal physical
displacement, complemented by another,
ascending one, caused by the relation
between the vitreous surfaces of both walls
–the mirror and the glass case–. These
surfaces have similar behavior as they receive
light in a similar way. Note that the glass
case has not a transparent character but
rather a vitreous one, as it usually happens 4
 expresión gráfica arquitectónica 37
77

5 6 7

los espejos potencian la multiplica-

ción espacial y provocan los “efectos
disyuntivos y subversivos” 10 a los
que se refiere Frampton 11 (Fig. 3).
¿Cómo funciona el mecanismo
perceptivo? Se produce un despla-
zamiento físico frontal horizontal,
complementado con otro, ascenden-
te, provocado por la relación entre 9
las superficies vítreas –espejo y vitri-
na– de ambos muros. Estas superfi-
cies, iluminadas de forma semejan- La diagonal perceptiva. with glass in the interior spaces of Loos: it
te, tienen un comportamiento pare- is an active support of reflections and light;
cido. Nótese que la vitrina no tiene El caso Strasser. therefore, of movement.
carácter transparente sino vítreo, La primera operación relevante de Thus, the Hirsch frontal fluctuation
como en general ocurre con el vidrio manipulación de la frontalidad en mechanism is built 12 (Fig. 4).
en los interiores de Loos: constituye arquitectura residencial se observa
un soporte activo de reflejos y luz; en la casa Strasser, 1919. En ella The perceptive diagonal.
por tanto, de movimiento. aparecen dos unidades espaciales The Strasser case
Así, queda construido el meca- contenidas entre planta baja y pri- The Strasser house, 1919, is the first Loos’
nismo de fluctuación frontal Hirsch mera: la biblioteca, aislada, y una residential building to display a relevant
12 (Fig. 4). escena elevada sobre el estar. frontal manipulation. Here are two spatial
78
10
units contained between the access and the
first levels: an isolated library and an elevated
stage on the living area.
Movement is arranged in relation to the axes.
There is a frontal access to the stage by a
short flight of stairs (Fig. 5) and the dining
room recess introduces a diagonal tension
similar to the one we will find in the Rufer
house (Fig. 6).
The wall between stage and living spaces
is almost totally decomposed. There are
two well-known elements in this limit 13: a
column and a transparent glass case 14 (Fig.
7). The stage autonomy is maintained due two
powerful self-referential tools: a window of
its own and, above all, a different headroom.
The graphical analysis shows the importance
of the window situation that attracts an
upward visual diagonal, reinforced with
the reflection over the glass case (Fig. 8).
This visual tension destabilizes the static
space and transforms the perception of the
observer (Fig. 9).
Thus begins three-dimensional spatial
development, which will be retaken in the
Rufer house to build a complex mechanism
that combines what has been seen so far.
The diagonal as a relational
tool. The Rufer case
The Rufer house means a turning point in
Loos’ work. The freedom in the container
definition allows more experimentation in the
relationships between interior spaces.
As in Strasser, two rooms are located on
an intermediate level over ground floor:
the library 15 and the dining room, square
and static.
The movement is related again to the main
axes of the diagonally tensed spaces (Figs.
10 and 11).
11
Las circulaciones de nuevo se or-
denan en relación a los ejes. El ac-
ceso a la escena se resuelve frontal-
mente con seis peldaños (Fig. 5) y
el recess del comedor introduce una
tensión diagonal que se repetirá en
la casa Rufer (Fig. 6).
La descomposición del muro de
separación entre escena y estar es
casi total. Construyendo el límite 13,
una columna y una vitrina transpa-
rente 14 (Fig. 7). La escena consigue
mantener su autonomía gracias a
dos potentes herramientas autorrefe-
renciales: la ventana propia y, sobre
todo, una altura libre diferenciada.
El análisis gráfico muestra la
importancia de la situación de la
ventana. Su luz, reforzada por el
reflejo sobre la vitrina del ventanal
al fondo del estar, provoca una dia-
gonal visual ascendente (Fig. 8). La
tensión de esta visual desestabiliza
el espacio estancial y transforma la
percepción del observador (Fig. 9).
Se ha inaugurado el trabajo tri-
dimensional, que se retomará en la
casa Rufer para construir un me-
canismo complejo que conjuga lo
visto hasta el momento.
La diagonal como
herramienta relacional.
El caso Rufer.
La casa Rufer supone una inflexión
en su obra. La libertad en la defi-
nición del contenedor le permite
12
mayor experimentación en las rela-
ciones entre espacios interiores.
Como en Strasser, se elevan dos
estancias respecto a planta baja: la
biblioteca 15 y el comedor, de plan-
ta cuadrada y estática.
Las circulaciones se ordenan de
nuevo según los ejes principales de
los espacios, tensados diagonal-
mente (Figs. 10 y 11).
El muro de separación entre
comedor y estar mantiene su inte-
gridad, aunque se recorta 16 alber-
gando un armario con puertas de
vidrio (Fig. 12). El mobiliario inte-
grado al fondo del comedor forma
un nicho que aloja un espejo.
Las herramientas autorreferen-
ciales son potentes –altura libre,
entrada de luz propia, entre otras–
y, aunque ambas estancias compar-
ten revestimiento vertical y techos
nervados, la decisión de encajar las
vigas en cada una y alterar su ali-
neamiento aumenta su autonomía
(Figs. 13 y 14).
El dintel, doble viga con junta
abierta, determina un límite char-
nela relacional o especular 17: se-
para dos espacios relacionados por
desdoblamiento. Esto provoca una
distorsión perceptiva: parece que,
a través de ese límite, el espacio
cambia algunas de sus cualidades,
como ocurre con la alineación de
las vigas. El mismo doble dintel se
repite en el espejo, que multiplica el
espacio y produce un nuevo desdo-

13 16
17
10. Circulaciones en relación a los ejes. Rufer
11. Tensión diagonal. Rufer
12. Descomposición del muro. Rufer
13. Techos estar y comedor. Vigas dobles en
transiciones. Rufer
14. Perspectiva egipcia y alzados consecutivos
14 sobrepuestos. Rufer
15. Reflejos sucesivos. Rufer. ALA3219
16. Proyección física frontal horizontal.
Activación de superficies vítreas y
desplazamiento perceptivo ascendente entre
ellas. Mecanismo Hirsch. Rufer
17. Comparativa: traslación de superficies
vítreas. Rufer y Hirsch
10. Movement relation to the axes. Rufer
11. Diagonal tension. Rufer
12. Wall decomposition. Rufer
13. Ceilings of the sitting and dining room. Double
beams in transitions. Rufer
14. Hedjuk perspective and consecutive
overlapping elevations. Rufer
15. Successive reflexes. Rufer. ALA3219
16. Horizontal frontal physical projection. Vitreous
surfaces activation and ascending perceptual
displacement between them. Hirsch mechanism.
Rufer House
17 Comparison: translation of vitreous surfaces.
Rufer and Hirsch
15
expresión gráfica arquitectónica 37
79
The wall between the dining room and the
living room maintains its integrity although it
is cut out 16. It houses a built-in closet with
glass doors (Fig. 12). There is a mirror in the
niche of the integrated furniture in the bottom
of the dining room.
Some powerful self-referential tools are applied
–the headroom and the window, among others–.
Although both rooms have the same cladding
and beam system, the fact that the beams fit
into each ceiling increases the autonomy of the
spaces, as it causes an alteration in the beams
alignment (Figs. 13 and 14).
The lintel, a double beam with an open joint,
determines a relational or specular “hinge
limit” 17: it separates two spaces that are
related by an unfolding operation. This causes
a perceptive distortion: it seems that some
of the characteristics of the space change
when crossing this limit, as it happens with
the beams alignment. The same double
lintel appears above the mirror, replicating
the space. It produces a new unfolding that
reaffirms the virtuality of the dining room with
respect to the living room (Fig. 15).
We can find the Hirsch mechanism –with a
greater three-dimensional development– in
80
18
the activation of these elements.
There is a frontal and horizontal physical
displacement between the wall and the
furniture openings, both of them almost
homothetic and fitted between 4 beams.
The windows cause an equivalent activation
of the vitreous surfaces, which support
another frontal and upward perceptive
displacement. The Hirsch mechanism is
completed (Fig. 16 and 17).
As in Strasser, the dining room window
focuses the perceptual diagonal, which is
more tensioned here by the strong frontal
fluctuation of the dining room (Fig. 18). This
way the diagonal projection mechanism is
completed (Fig. 19).
The Müller house
This complex spatial mechanism will be
consolidated as a tool in the Müller house
18. But its solution will not be so misleading,
nor the space so unstable, since decisions
are made that clarify the relation between
rooms. Although the arrangement of the units
–elevated dining room and living room– and
the movement repeat Rufer scheme (Fig. 20
20
blamiento que reafirma la virtuali-
dad del comedor respecto al estar
(Fig. 15).
En el accionamiento de estos ele-
mentos se observa el mecanismo
Hirsch, con mayor desarrollo tridi-
mensional.
Se provoca el desplazamiento
físico frontal horizontal entre los
huecos del muro y el mueble del co-
medor, casi homotéticos, encajados
entre 4 vigas.
Las ventanas provocan una ac-
tivación equivalente de las superfi-
cies vítreas, que favorece otro des-
plazamiento, perceptivo, frontal y
ascendente, completando el meca-
nismo Hirsch (Fig. 16 y 17).
Como en Strasser, la ventana del
comedor focaliza la diagonal per-
ceptiva, más tensionada por la fuerte
fluctuación frontal del comedor (Fig.
18). Así, se completa el mecanismo
de proyección diagonal (Fig. 19).
21
19
18. Desplazamiento físico horizontal. Activación
de superficies vítreas. Diagonal perceptiva
ascendente. Rufer
19. Mecanismo de proyección diagonal completo.
Rufer
20. Circulaciones en relación a los ejes. Müller
21. Descomposición articulada del muro. Rufer y
Müller
22. Articulación en sección. Desde arriba: Müller,
Rufer y Strasser (sección simétrica en Rufer)
23. Espejos. Funcionamiento perceptivo en Müller
y Rufer, donde el espejo no ocupa todo el hueco:
su posición impide que el observador pueda verse
reflejado desde el estar
24. Comparativa: visuales. Müller y Rufer
25. Vista del estar hacia el comedor. Müller.
ALA2488
18. Horizontal diagonal physical displacement.
Vitreous surfaces activation. Ascending perceptual
diagonal. Rufer
19. Complete diagonal projection mechanism. Rufer
20 Movement relation to the axes. Müller
21. Decomposition of the wall. Rufer and Müller
22. Section articulation. From above: Müller, Rufer
and Strasser (symmetric section in Rufer)
23. Mirrors. Perceptive performance in Müller
and Rufer, where the mirror does not fill the entire
opening: its position prevents the observer from
being reflected from the being
24. Comparison: visuals. Müller and Rufer
25. View of the living room towards the dining room.
Müller. ALA2488
 expresión gráfica arquitectónica 37
and 21), the dimensional alterations have 81
important perceptual repercussions (Figs. 22,
23 and 24).
Since more self-referential tools are applied,
the spaces are clearly differentiated (Fig. 25).
The relational mechanism works in a similar
way to that of the Rufer house, but weakened
due to the absence of the dining room mirror.
Maybe to balance this situation, one of the
three openings to the garden takes part of
22
the projective axis (Figs. 26 and 27). There are
two aquariums built into the division wall that
reflect light.
The dining room window focuses an upward
diagonal tension. The window recess, built
by an extrusion operation, has a side mirror
which reflection is visible from the living room
19. The bright finish of the ceiling multiplies
the light effect (Figs. 28 and 29).
23

Conclusion
In compact architectural systems, openings
perform essential functions:
Interior openings are the main relation
tool between units. They structure spatial
projections and manipulate or manage the
perception of the observer. We could say
that they build the skeleton of the internal
relational mechanism.
Facade openings have a triple function: to
produce spatial tension –for example, the
window in front of the living room access
in the Rufer house–; to activate vitreous
surfaces with light or reflexes –no vision–
24
and, finally, to focus the relational perceptual
interior mechanism. Thus, all this mechanism
ends in a facade opening that denies the
vision of the outside.
As we have seen, the Rufer mechanism,
which is part of the main perceptual
skeleton, consists of tensioning the frontal
fluctuation of space through the focal
diagonal perception of different spatial units.
It is one of the most elaborate and complex
architectural tools in Loos’ work.
He also used it with another objective: to
articulate alterations in the point of view of
the observer and in the characteristics and
scale of the spaces that it relates, as if it was
a specular or hinge limit.
As a result, spaces have a misleading,
fluctuating and unstable relation. The Rufer
dining room is not perceived as completely
real because it is connected through an
25
82 illusory spatial operation, an intellectual
construction of the observer. The relational
limit and the different headroom are the
vehicles of a change of scale and of the
height of the observer’s point of view, with
the perceptive alteration that it implies 20.
The access flight of stairs is not frontal, as
it was in Strasser: it would not make sense
to frontally cross this transforming limit to
access the elevated space. For this reason the
movement goes parallel to the wall.
The described mechanism is based on a
dissociation between the visual and physical
movement of the observer. It implies,
therefore, the intellectual activation that is
so relevant for the proper functioning of the
compact architectural system. n
Notes
1 / Heinrich Kulka coined the term ”Raumplan” (Kulka [1931]
1979, 13-14). He referred to the Strasser House, 1919, as one
of its first applications (Kulka [1931] 1979, 33). However, its
spatial system is very basic.
2 / Crary differentiates “observer” from “spectator”. “Though
obviously one who sees, an observer is more importantly one
who sees within a prescribed set of possibilities, one who is
embedded in a system of conventions and limitations”. (Crary
1990, 6)
3 / The historian Julius Posener places the traditional English
home of the nineteenth century at the origin of the idea
of ​​Loosian space articulation (Posener 1983, 52 ff.) Other
influences are the Shingle Style, the American house and
Japanese architecture.
4 / This selected case studies are built town houses. The
references to other projects –most of them unbuilt– is avoided
here to increase clarity. These other projects are analyzed in
the author’s ongoing PhD Thesis.
5 / Max Risselada highlights the article by Johan van de Beek
(Van de Beek, 1988) in his introduction to the catalog of the
exhibition Raumplan versus Plan Libre, 1986 (Risselada, 1988).
Van de Beek included high level analytical drawings that open
multiple ways of interpretation and research.
6 / Loos alluded to the difficult photographic representation of
his interiors: “It is my greatest pride that the interiors which
I have created are totally ineffective in photographs [...]”.
(Wang 1985, 106).
7 / A sketch of Loos, preserved in the Graphische Sammlung
Albertina (ALA 721), reveals the importance of this spatial
operation. In addition, it is the only image that Benedetto
Gravagnuolo included to illustrate the apartment.
(Gravagnuolo 1982, 120).
8 / There is a similar annex in the Kraus Apartment, 1907.
9 / These architectural tools are essential to maintain the
independence of the units within the relational system.
Cacciari refers to what he calls a “game of a combination of
places”. (Cacciari [1981] 1993, 172).
10 / Beatriz Colomina quotes Kenneth Frampton in relation to
the disjunctions that Loos introduced in the places that seem
most peaceful. (Colomina 1988, 73)
11 / Hirsch is the most complex example among those
Frampton relates to the use of real or apparent mirrors that
cause a perceptual oscillation between real and virtual
images. (Frampton 1996)
12 / This mechanism will be reapplied, although simplified,
in the Brummel apartment, 1927-1929. The analysis of Loos’
work shows a progressive reduction in the complexity of
La casa Müller
Este complejo mecanismo espacial
se retomará en la casa Müller 18,
consolidado ya como herramienta.
Pero la solución no volverá a ser tan
equívoca, ni el espacio tan inesta-
ble, ya que se toman decisiones que
tienden a aclarar la relación entre
estancias. La disposición de las uni-
dades –comedor elevado y estar– y
las circulaciones repiten el esquema
de Rufer (Figs. 20 y 21), con altera-
ciones dimensionales que tienen im-
portantes repercusiones perceptivas
(Figs. 22, 23 y 24).
Las herramientas de autorrefe-
rencia son más numerosas: los es-
pacios quedan claramente diferen-
ciados (Fig. 25).
El mecanismo relacional fun-
ciona de modo semejante al de la
casa Rufer, debilitado sin el espejo
al fondo del comedor. Quizá para
compensar esta situación, uno de
los tres huecos al jardín forma par-
te activa del eje proyectivo (Figs. 26
y 27). El muro incorpora dos acua-
rios, soportes de reflejo y luz.
El ventanal del comedor focaliza
la tensión diagonal. Se acompaña
de una operación de extrusión que
construye un recess, con un espejo
lateral 19 cuyo reflejo es visible des-
de el estar. El acabado brillante del
techo multiplica el efecto de la luz
(Figs. 28 y 29).
Conclusión
En los sistemas arquitectónicos
compactos, el papel de los vanos
resulta fundamental y diferenciado:
Los vanos interiores son la he-
rramienta principal de relación
entre unidades, estructuran las pro-
yecciones espaciales y manipulan o
conducen la percepción del obser-
vador. Podríamos decir que cons-
truyen el esqueleto del mecanismo
relacional interno.
Los vanos en fachada tienen tri-
ple función: provocar tensión espa-
cial –por ejemplo, el ventanal frente
al acceso al estar en la casa Rufer–,
incorporar luz o reflejos activan-
do las superficies vítreas –nunca
visión– y, por último, focalizar el
mecanismo perceptivo relacional
interior. Así, todo este mecanismo
concluye en un vano abierto en fa-
chada que nos niega la visión del
exterior.
Como hemos visto, el mecanismo
Rufer, que forma parte del esquele-
to perceptivo principal, consiste en
tensionar la fluctuación frontal del
espacio mediante la percepción dia-
gonal focal de unidades espaciales,
y constituye una de las herramien-
tas más elaboradas y complejas en
la obra de Loos.
Se sirve de ella además con otro
objetivo: articular alteraciones en
las cualidades de los espacios que
pone en relación, en su escala y en
el punto de vista, como si se tratara
de un límite-charnela o especular.
El resultado es que los espacios
tienen una relación equivoca, fluc-
tuante e inestable. En Rufer, el co-
medor no se percibe como comple-
tamente real, porque se relaciona
mediante una operación espacial
ilusoria, una construcción intelec-
tual del observador. El límite rela-
cional, junto con el cambio de altu-
ra entre las unidades espaciales, es el
vehículo de una operación de cam-
bio de escala y de altura del punto
de vista del observador, con la alte-
ración perceptiva que conlleva 20.
La colocación de los peldaños de
acceso no es frontal, como en Stras-
ser: no tendría sentido atravesar este
límite transformador para acceder
al espacio elevado. Por ello la circu-
lación se desvía en paralelo al muro.

26. Perspectiva egipcia y alzados consecutivos
sobrepuestos. Müller. Comparada con Fig.14, la
diagonalización ascendente se reduce
27. Proyección física frontal horizontal. Müller
26
27
26. Hedjuk perspective and consecutive overlapping
elevations. Müller. Compared to Fig.14, the
ascending diagonalization is here reduced
27. Horizontal and frontal physical projection. Müller
El mecanismo descrito se basa
en una disociación entre el recorri-
do físico y visual del observador.
Implica, por tanto, la activación in-
telectual tan relevante para el fun-
cionamiento del sistema espacial
compacto. n
Notas
1 / El término Raumplan fue introducido por Hein-
rich Kulka, colaborador de Loos (Kulka [1931]
1979, 13-14), que hace referencia a la casa Stras-
ser, 1919, como una de sus primeras aplicaciones.
(Kulka [1931] 1979, 33). No obstante, el sistema
espacial planteado en ella es aún muy básico.
2 / Crary emplea el término “observer” diferen-
ciándolo de “spectator”, como un sujeto activo
que, inscrito en un sistema de convenciones y limi-
taciones, ve contando con un conjunto de posibi-
lidades definidas. (Crary 1990, 6)
3 / El historiador Julius Posener sitúa la vivienda
tradicional inglesa del siglo xix en el origen de la
idea de articulación de espacios loosiana (Posener
1983, 52 y ss.) Otras influencias son el Shingle
Style, la casa americana y la arquitectura japone-
sa.
4 / Los casos de estudio seleccionados son vivien-
das unifamiliares construidas. En pro de la clari-
dad se evita la referencia a otros ensayos interme-
dios, la mayoría no construidos, que sí se estudian
en la Tesis Doctoral que la autora está desarro-
llando en el DPA de la ETSA Madrid – Universi-
dad Politécnica de Madrid.
5 / Max Risselada destaca el artículo de Johan van
de Beek (Van de Beek, 1988) en su introducción
expresión gráfica arquitectónica 37
perceptual mechanisms in favor of clearer spatial readings. 83
13 / The elements are located in a step down the opening,
outside the spatial unit.
14 / Van de Beek relates two drawings: the Strasser stage and
the Rufer’s dining room. This comparison demonstrates that
the operation in Strasser is additive, while in Rufer there is an
interpenetration between both rooms. (Van de Beek 1988, 30)
15 / Not as isolated as in Strasser: there are two openings
–a second order relational tool– to observe both the exterior
access and the living room access from the stairs.
16 / “Cut out” insists on the idea of the decomposition of the
wall instead of the idea of ​​incomplete construction of it.
Colomina points out the relationship of physical separation
and visual connection between the dining and living room in
Rufer with the Moller House. (Colomina 1992, 85-86).
17 / “(...) What to say if what is revealed is a limit, a border,
but that must be imagined and thought not as a mirror but
as a substance of glass, as a sheet with two faces? (...) That
sheet is a limit: it is pure intrinsic difference between its
own front and back. These are not the same thing at all. And
yet, they are the same, the same glass substance.” Author’s
translation (Trías 2000 329-330)
18 / There is a group of Loos’ projects developed between
the Rufer and the Müller houses in which the architect
continued the development of the Raumplan. The Moller
house stands out among them, but its not included here
because the diagonal mechanism we are analyzing is not
clearly constructed in it. The dining and the music room
are mainly frontally related and the projective complexity
in the chained spaces of the hall area blurs the diagonal
mechanism.
19 / There is a kind of built-in glass case with a mirror on top.
It is the reflection of the latter the one that attracts the gaze,
since it provides a direct window reflection.
20 / This alteration is similar to that of, for example, Yasuhiro
Ozu’s cinema, where the camera lens is systematically placed
about sixty centimeters from the ground. This objective
position produces a spatial contraction effect that Ozu uses
to achieve a great intensity relation between the stage and
the characters. (García and Marti 2008, 132).
84
28
References
– CACCIARI, M. (1993) Architecture and Nihilism: on
the philosophy of modern architecture, New Haven:
Yale University press. [Original: CACCIARI, M.
(1981) Adolf Loos e il suo Ángelo. Milano: Electa].
– COLOMINA, B. (1988) “On Adolf Loos and Josef
Hoffman: Architecture in the Age of Mechanical
Reproduction”. In: RISSELADA, M. (ed.). Raumplan
Versus Plan Libre. New York: Rizzoli.
– COLOMINA, B. (1992) “The Split Wall: Domestic
Voyeurism”. In: COLOMINA, B. (ed.). Sexuality and
space. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
– CRARY, J. (1990) Techniques of the Observer: On
Vision and Modernity in the Nineteenth Century.
Massachusetts: MIT Press.
– FRAMPTON, K. (1996) “Adolf Loos: The Architect as
Master Builder”. In: Adolf Loos Architecture 1903-
1932. SCHEZEN, R. (ed.). New York: The Monacelli
Press.
– GARCÍA, M., MARTÍ, C. (2009) La Arquitectura del
cine: estudios sobre Dreyer, Hitchcock, Ford y Ozu.
Barcelona: Fundación Caja de Arquitectos.
– GRAVAGNUOLO, B. (1982) Adolf Loos: Theory and
Works. New York: Rizzoli.
– KULKA, H. (1979) Adolf Loos: Das werk des
architekten. Wien: Löcker Verlag. [First Edition:
1931]
– LOOS, A. (1980) “Arquitecture”. In: Ornamento y
delito y otros escritos. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.
[Original: “Architektur”. Der Sturm, 1910].
– LOOS, A. (1993) “El principio del revestimiento”. In:
Escritos I: 1897/1909. Madrid: El Croquis. [Original:
“Das Prinzip der Bekleidung”, Neue Freie Presse,
Vienna, 1898].
– POSENER, J. (1983) “Der Raumplan. Vorläufer und
Zeitgenossen von Adolf Loos”. In: WORBS, D. (ed.),
Adolf Loos 1870-1933: Raumplan Wohnungsbau.
Berlin: Akademie der Künste.
– RISSELADA, M. (1988) “Introduction”. In:
RISSELADA, M. (ed.). Raumplan Versus Plan Libre.
New York: Rizzoli.
– TRÍAS, E. (2000) Los límites del mundo. Barcelona:
Destino.
al catálogo de la exposición de 1986 Raumplan
versus Plan Libre (Risselada, 1988). Van de Beek
elabora una colección de gráficos que analizan
distintas variables con un nivel analítico y comu-
nicativo muy alto, abriendo múltiples vías de in-
terpretación e investigación.
6 / Loos aludía a la difícil representación fotográ-
fica de sus interiores: “Mi mayor orgullo reside
en que los interiores que he creado resultan total-
mente carentes de efecto en fotografía […]”. (Loos
[1910] 1980, 225)
7 / Se conserva un croquis de Loos en la Graphis-
che Sammlung Albertina (ALA 721) que revela la
importancia de esta operación espacial. Además,
es la única imagen que emplea Benedetto Gravag-
nuolo para ilustrar el apartamento. (Gravagnuolo
1982, 120).
8 / En el apartamento Kraus, 1907, se incluye un
anexo similar.
9 / Estas herramientas resultan indispensables para
mantener la independencia de las unidades dentro
del sistema relacional. “Si en el término espacio
resuena el hacer-espacio que instaura lugares, en el
término lugar habla el disponer-concertar las co-
sas. Estas cosas no pertenecen a un lugar, sino que
ellas mismas son el lugar. El espacio ya no sería
entonces la pura extensión uniforme y equivalente
del proyecto técnico-científico, sino un juego de
un conjunto de lugares”. (Cacciari [1981] 1989,
112-113)
10 / Beatriz Colomina cita a Kenneth Frampton en
relación a las disyunciones que Loos produce en
los espacios aparentemente más estables. (Colo-
mina 1988, 73)
11 / Hirsch es el ejemplo más complejo entre los
que Frampton relaciona con el empleo de espejos
“reales o aparentes” que provocan una “oscila-
ción perceptiva que se produce entre imágenes
reales y virtuales”. (Frampton 1996)
12 / Este mecanismo se retomará, simplificado, en
el apartamento Brummel, 1927-1929. Se observa,
al estudiar la obra de Loos, una progresiva reduc-
ción en la complejidad de los mecanismos percep-
tivos, en favor de lecturas espaciales más claras.
13 / Todos los elementos se sitúan fuera de la uni-
dad espacial, en una depresión del recorte del
muro, con apoyo inestable.
14 / Van de Beek relaciona dos dibujos: la escena
de Strasser y el comedor de Rufer. Evidencia con
acierto que la operación en Strasser aún es aditiva,
mientras en Rufer supone una interpenetración
entre las estancias. (Van de Beek 1988, 30)
15 / No tan aislada como en Strasser: dos huecos
–herramienta relacional de segundo orden– permi-
ten observar el acceso por el exterior y a través de
la escalera.
16 / El término “recorta” insiste en la descompo-
sición del muro frente a la idea de construcción
incompleta.
Colomina relaciona la separación física y cone-
xión visual entre el comedor y el estar en Rufer
con la operación de la casa Moller. (Colomina
1992, 85-86).
17 / “(…) ¿qué decir si lo que se revela es un lí-
mite, una frontera, pero que debe imaginarse y
pensarse no como espejo sino como sustancia
de vidrio, como lámina con dos caras? (…) Esa
lámina es límite: es pura diferencia intrínseca
entre su propio anverso y reverso. Éstos no son
en nada lo mismo. Y sin embargo, son lo mis-
mo, la misma sustancia de vidrio”. (Trías 2000
329-330)
18 / Existe un grupo de proyectos desarrollados
por Loos entre la casa Rufer y la casa Müller –tan-
to construidos como en proyecto– en los que Loos
continúa el desarrollo del Raumplan. Destaca la
Casa Moller, cuyo análisis no se incluye aquí debi-
do a que en ella el mecanismo diagonal que esta-
mos estudiando no se construye de manera clara.
Las relaciones entre comedor y sala de música son
principalmente de carácter frontal y, en el caso de
los interesantes espacios encadenados en la zona
de hall con el recess estancial elevado junto a la
ventana, la complejidad proyectiva desdibuja el
mecanismo.
19 / Esta operación es doble: incluye una estantería
revestida de espejo, retranqueada, en la parte infe-
rior y un espejo enrasado con el muro en la parte
superior. El reflejo de este último es el que más
atrae la mirada, ya que es el que proporciona un
reflejo directo de la ventana.
20 / Una alteración semejante a la de, por ejem-
plo, el cine de Yasuhiro Ozu, donde el objetivo
de la cámara “se sitúa sistemáticamente a unos
sesenta centímetros del suelo (…). Esta posición
del objetivo produce un efecto de contracción
espacial que Ozu utiliza para lograr una rela-
ción de gran intensidad entre el escenario y los
personajes que lo pueblan”, (García y Marti
2008, 132).
 expresión gráfica arquitectónica 37
28. Desplazamiento físico horizontal. Activación 85
de superficies vítreas. Diagonal perceptiva
ascendente. Müller
29. Mecanismo de proyección diagonal completo.
Müller

28. Horizontal and diagonal physical displacement.

Vitreous surfaces activation. Ascending perceptual
diagonal. Müller
29. Complete diagonal projection mechanism. Müller

Referencias
– CACCIARI, M. (1989) “Adolf Loos y su
ángel”. En: ANDERSON, S., et al. Adolf
Loos. Barcelona: Stylos. [Original: CAC-
CIARI, M. (1981) Adolf Loos e il suo Án-
gelo. Milano: Electa].
– COLOMINA, B. (1988) “On Adolf Loos
and Josef Hoffman: Architecture in the Age
of Mechanical Reproduction”. En: RISSE-
LADA, M. (ed.). Raumplan Versus Plan Li-
bre. New York: Rizzoli.
– COLOMINA, B. (1992) “The Split Wall:
Domestic Voyeurism”. En: COLOMINA,
B. (ed.). Sexuality and space. New York:
Princeton Architectural Press.
– CRARY, J. (1990) Techniques of the Obser-
ver: On Vision and Modernity in the Nine-
teenth Century. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
– FRAMPTON, K. (1996) “Adolf Loos: El ar-
quitecto como maestro de obras”. En: Adolf
Loos Arquitectura 1903-1932. SCHEZEN,
R. (ed.). Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.
– GARCÍA, M., MARTÍ, C. (2009) La Ar-
quitectura del cine: estudios sobre Dreyer,
Hitchcock, Ford y Ozu. Barcelona: Funda-
ción Caja de Arquitectos.
– GRAVAGNUOLO, B. (1982) Adolf Loos:
Theory and Works. New York: Rizzoli.
– KULKA, H. (1979) Adolf Loos: Das werk
des architekten. Wien: Löcker Verlag. [Pri-
mera edición: 1931]
– LOOS, A. (1980) “Arquitectura”. En: Or- 29
namento y delito y otros escritos. Barcelo-
na: Gustavo Gili. [Original: “Architektur”.
Der Sturm, 1910].
– LOOS, A. (1993) “El principio del reves-
timiento”. En: Escritos I: 1897/1909. Ma- – VAN DE BEEK, J. (1988) “Adolf Loos – – VAN DE BEEK, J. (1988) “Adolf Loos –pattern of
drid: El Croquis. [Original: “Das Prinzip pattern of town houses”. En: RISSELADA, town houses”. In: RISSELADA, M. (ed.), Raumplan
der Bekleidung”, Neue Freie Presse, Vienna, M. (ed.), Raumplan Versus Plan Libre. New Versus Plan Libre. New York: Rizzoli.
1898]. York: Rizzoli. – WANG, W. (ed.). The Architecture of Adolf Loos:
– POSENER, J. (1983) “Der Raumplan. Vor- An Arts Council Exhibition. London: Arts Council of
läufer und Zeitgenossen von Adolf Loos”. Great Britain, 1985.
Notas a las figuras
En: WORBS, D. (ed.), Adolf Loos 1870-
1933: Raumplan Wohnungsbau. Berlin: Todos los dibujos son elaborados por la autora, y
forman parte del análisis gráfico que conduce su Notes to the figures
Akademie der Künste.
Tesis, en desarrollo en el Departamento de Proyec- All the drawings are elaborated by the author and are part
– RISSELADA, M. (1988) “Introduction”. tos Arquitectónicos de la ETSA Madrid, Universi- of the graphic analysis of her PdD Thesis in process, in the
En: RISSELADA, M. (ed.). Raumplan Ver- dad Politécnica de Madrid. Department of Architectural Projects of the ETSA Madrid,
sus Plan Libre. New York: Rizzoli. Las imágenes fotográficas proceden del archivo Universidad Politécnica de Madrid.
– TRÍAS, E. (2000) Los límites del mundo. de Adolf Loos en la Graphische Sammlung Al- The photographic images belong to Adolf Loos Archive in the
Barcelona: Destino. bertina, Viena. Graphische Sammlung Albertina, Vienna.
 F6D#&A# ?$9&%9"79$8

!"#$%%"&'"( )(**(+

,(-&./0&.12/ 3 4&56#&7$"8

!"#$#"%&#%'#()*#'*+,("*-.'"/&01*234.&'
5&67#".6"/&.

)(#8"96(#&:(;6%&!;699(#0&<=&)7"#>&?$@7=0&A+"#&B""#&C@(9(D7"E@=

What is utility? According to the Oxford Dictionary, utility is defined as “the Oxford def .

utility

state of being useful, profitable or beneficial” (Oxford). For economists, the

term utility is more associated with the “total satisfaction received from economic def

consuming a good or service” (Investopedia). For architects, utility means to

architectural definiten
maximize the efficiency of the use of space, light, material that the → maximize the effiency in constructions

construction of a building requires. In a more common sense, utility is about

the level of happiness from doing an activity. If utility is a measurement of
how satisfied we are or how useful things are, then utilitarianism is to
promote action which maximizes utility or happiness. Utilitarianism in Utilitarismus architecture
becomes functionalism

architecture becomes functionalism, which stresses that the design for a

building should
building shouldbe
bebased
based on its purpose,
on its purpose,a aprinciple
principlethatthat
manymany
21st 21st century
century architectures follow.
architectures follow.

It is not hard to find the utilitarianism values in the construct of 21st century
architecture. The utilitarianism in modern architecture rejects bourgeois
details such as over-abundant decorative details in cornices and eaves.
Utilitarianism honours the functionality of the building and space rather than roots are in
Bauhaus
the
architecture

the grandeur of ornamental purpose. The roots of utilitarian thinking in 21st

century architecture could be traced back to the establishment of Bauhaus
School by pioneer modern architect Walter Gropius in 1919, Germany — or its
American alternative called International Style. The Bauhaus school of
architecture not only started “a utopian craft guild combining architecture,
sculpture and painting into a single creative expression”, but also for the first
time adopted the slogan “Art into Industry” and stressed the “importance of
designing for mass production” (Griffith Winton). This Bauhaus trend —
which mainly focuses on mass production — demands its architecture and as an utilitarian understanding
Architecture has to be effi cent in all Ways

design to be efficient, cost-effective and functional in a utilitarian sense.

Usually in a Bauhaus building, eyes are drawn by dark and neutral colors in
white, grey, or black; the Bauhaus house often has flat roofs, smooth façades,
Bauhaus style
and cubic shapes to eliminate any unnecessary decorative details and to →
removing
decorative aspects
↳ maximin utility
maximize utility within a finite financial budget; inside the house, the floors
are open and furnitures are functional; last but not the least, the Bauhaus
normally uses steel-framed glass curtain walls, to invite natural light beaming daylight friendly
"
architecture
„

→ Saves power

through the interior during the day and saves electricity in lighting — another
manifestation in modern architectural utilitarianism.

An example of 21st Century architecture with Bauhaus inspired elements,

from ArchitectWeekly

architecture
Another fundamental utilitarian belief in modern architecture is “form (ever) principle utilitarian in
"

form follow function

→
S

follows function” proclaimed by Louis Sullivan, the American architect who

„

was the mentor of the popular modern architect Frank Lloyd Wright
(Sullivan). In his essay “The Tall Building Artistically Considered” he
explained his most famous words:

“Whether it be the sweeping eagle in his flight, or the open apple-blossom, the
toiling workhorse, the blithe swan, the branching oak, the winding stream at its
base, the drifting clouds, over all the coursing sun, form ever follows function, and
this is the law. Where function does not change form does not change. The granite
rocks, the ever-brooding hills, remain for ages;the lightning lives, comes into shape,
and dies in a twinkling (Sullivan).”

In a period of booming industrial design (around the early 20th century),

Sullivan believes that the construct or the design of a building should be in
direct relation to its purpose: who are its inhabitants? How much space do
they need? What facilities will they put inside the building? etc.. For Sullivan,
to ask and think about these practical questions are essential in maximizing practical questions Kelp
the utility of space and material; in between the design process, the Sullivan- generale
utility
"
to the „

style, functional architecture entails a kind of utilitarian mathematical utilitarian Mattis Kelp
to develop Cost
effigercy
calculation of costs and benefits and economical thinking, in order to meet
today’s mass demands and new green standards. Later Frank Lloyd Wright
extends Sullivan’s utilitarian statement on architecture: “Form follows
function — that has been misunderstood. Form and function should be one,
joined in a spiritual union” (Wright). His idea of unification of form and
function in modern architecture is thoroughly visible in his design for the
Guggenheim Museum in New York City, where the interior spiral ramp
provides a continuous art-viewing experience for the visitors. For Wright, the
function of a building could change over time and oftentimes, “great
architecture has this capacity to adapt to changing functional uses without Frank Lloyd Wright quote
losing one bit of its dignity or one bit of its original intention. And [he] think[s]
that’s the great thing about the building at the end of the day” (Wright). A
todays def
building suits today’s utilitarian need perfectly that is both functional and architecture .
ofutilitarian in

adjustable. In addition to public spaces like the Guggenheim Museum, there is

a skyrocketing demand for housing and mass production. When we apply
utilitarian and economical principles to the construct of modern architecture,
we align the needs for mass accommodation and the public request for high
efficiency. In conclusion, for the 21st century architecture there is usually an
intention before the designing of space or a building. And in the best
scenarios of all, the form and the function of the building are in union — a 21 Centerq
as union
form & function

perfectly justified utilitarian belief.

But when people design for modern architecture, if people always start with a
purpose — a definite one, like putting a loop or end to it — could we risk losing
something daring and creative along the way? However, also keep in mind
that, that something daring about a piece of architecture comes with a
tremendous financial cost and normally invites public doubt towards its
functionality in a society deeply rooted in utilitarian beliefs. In a lot of ancient
and modern cases, glorious architectural marvels — such as the great Roman
heritage Pantheon or Paris’s recent revealed Fondation Louis Vuitton —
requires massive funding and often associates with bourgeois ideas. The
Fondation Louis Vuitton, designed by modern architect Frank Gehry, newly
opened in 2014 and situated at Jardin d’Acclimatation in Bois de Boulogne, like
a hidden gem in waves of green at the west center of Paris. When I first visited
the museum earlier this fall, Gehry’s abundant use of glass for building
excited me from far and enticed me to come close. When I walked closer, I
saw a gigantic, beautiful, remarkable architectural masterpiece that I have
never experienced in my life. Its modern sophistication, lively energy, and
organic, dramatic forms — enhanced by a cascading waterfall by the side of
the building — truly thrilled me……But later, I realized that this initial wow
and admiration are not the whole story.

The luxury and dramatic look of Fondation Louis Vuitton comes with a very
exclusive and expensive background and a private purpose — a purpose that
partially runs counter to the utilitarian motto of maximizing practicality and Foundation
pwpose
IT

increasing value for the mass public. To begin with, Frank Gehry works for a
corporate leader, the French billionaire Bernard Arnault, who is eager to
display personal wealth and reputation. Therefore Fondation Louis Vuitton is
more a personal or private museum than a public one, “built to hold the blue-
chip paintings of a wealthy collector” (Hawthorne). Even though Arnault
agrees that in less than 50 years from now (in 2062), the building will revert to
public ownership and it will be “a gift to the City of Paris”, the private
characteristic of the museum still becomes a “controversial art-world
initiative” as it “tweak bourgeois taste and flirt with ugliness, into something
monumentally elegant and recognizably Parisian” (Hawthorne).

There is no doubt that the design for the building is brilliant, so airy and
organic that it resembles a living entity that breathes in the village of Paris.
But from a utilitarian perspective, it has people wonder what its grandeur and
drama is all for. And many critics such as Oliver Wainwright responded that
the construct of Fondation Louis Vuitton is “an indulgence of over-
engineering”; that is , “in reality, a hell of a lot of steel columns and glue-
laminated timber beams, thrown together in a riotous cat’s cradle of zig-
zagging struts and brackets, props and braces” (Wainwright). Here
Wainwright is suggesting that Fondation Louis Vuitton uses excessive
construction material, which is supported by generous private funding and
would be impossible otherwise. The high-end status of the building refuses
many modern utilitarian considerations and it demands extremely immense
financial support. On the other hand, Fondation Louis Vuitton does function
as a promotional vehicle for LVMH, the European multinational luxury goods
conglomerate, integrating haute couture and modern architecture. In fact,
LVMH manages various luxury brands including Louis Vuitton, Dior, Fendi —
many of which are exclusive to the rich and the high-class and as a
promotional vehicle, Fondation Louis Vuitton logically should conform to the
same luxury image as well. The corporate background behind the building
explains its particular and unusual drama and splendor; its high status further
justifies its refusal to utilitarianism in modern architecture in which typically
form follows function and focuses on maximizing efficiency of space,
definition of utilitarism in architecture
structure and construction material. todays
Another aspect that shows Fondation Louis Vuitton’s opposition to
architectural utilitarianism is the relationship between the architectural
structure of museum and the art displaying activity inside it. For one thing,
Gehry has often “been accused…of making architecture that overwhelms art”
(Goldberger). In the case of Fondation Louis Vuitton, its multi-level terraces
and overlapping irregular rooms might interfere with its function as art-
displaying museum. In a room at the museum (see below), its unusually high
ceiling creates a sense of awe and space, which might disturb, enhance or
change the character of the art-viewing experience depending on which art it
chooses to display. Therefore, it is questionable that if Fondation Louis
Vuitton obeys the Walter Gropius’s golden rule that “form follows function” or
Wright’s enhanced version of the rule — “Form and function should be one,
joined in a spiritual union” (Wright). It doesn’t look like so. Fondation Louis
Vuitton betrays the utilitarian beliefs in the 21st century architecture and
invites quite a few criticism as it resembles a sumptuous personal collection
and proposes bourgeois ideas. lesage of utbitarism and Critic

A room inside Fondation Louis Vuitton, ArchitectDaily

The reason that Fondation Louis Vuitton receives much criticism is that first,
it ostentatiously display personal wealth of its founder Bernard Arnault and
some public are offended by that. Second, it disobeys the common modern Critic because
of disObey
utilitarian rule of maximizing efficiency of space and instead is infamous for
lavish use of glass and steel to create its stunning, dramatic, organic forms.
Indeed it looks absolutely stunning; in fact, it brilliantly proves the Geryh
magic again — after the Guggenheim museum in Bilbao — by design a
sophisticated modern crystal palace at the heart of Paris. But to some degree,
it does have some limitations on a utilitarian perspective; its expensive and
lavish design and use of material and utilize of space is impractical for most
architecture in the 21st century; its irregular, abnormal forms might interfere
with the art-viewing experience.

Utilitarianism in architecture has its roots in the Baohao School or

risks of following
International Style from the 1920s to 1930s. And the utilitarian beliefs in the utilitarian rates
architecture
architecture includes the idea that form follows function or form and function in
→ Kiss of Creativity
should be one. But is there a danger in conforming to the utilitarian belief in
architecture or any other thinking? We might risk losing creative energy while
following completely to the function — something creative and daring like
Fondation Louis Vuitton’s dramatic and organic forms despite its exclusive
background. In the 21st century, a period in which a growing population and to
day we Reed
utilitarismkx.enormc.us
economy demands the maximization of utility and efficiency, it is crucial to Reed in
housing)
the other hand have
keep up the pace and apply certain utilitarian rules so as to meet the mass
on we

to allerticn that we
pay
and
don't love innovation
standards. But meanwhile, we have to reserve some space for creativity and creativity

innovation for a more interesting future landscape and way of thinking —

even that means compromise some utility.

Citings

ArchitectWeekly. “ Why was the Bauhaus Movement so Important for Modern

Architecture? “ 12/24/2012 .ArchitectWeekly . Accessed 12/8/2015.
“http://www.architectweekly.com/2012/12/why-was-bauhaus-style-so-
important.html “

Baan, Iwann. “Fondation Louis Vuitton / Gehry Partners” 13 Oct 2014.

ArchDaily. Accessed 8 Dec 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/555694/fondation-
louis-vuitton-gehry-partners/>

Goldberger, Paul. “Frank Gehry Disrupts Paris Architecture with the

Foundation Louis Vuitton.” Vanity Fair. Vanity Fair, 31 Aug. 2014. Web. 09 Dec.
2015.

Griffith Winton, Alexandra. “The Bauhaus, 1919–1933”. In Heilbrunn Timeline

of Art History. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–.
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/bauh/hd_bauh.htm (August 2007)

Investopedia. “Definition of Utility.” Investopedia. N.p., n.d. Web.

Oxford. “Definition of Utility in English:.” Utility. Oxford Dictionary, n.d. Web.

09 Dec. 2015.

Hawthorne, Christopher. “Gehry’s Louis Vuitton Foundation Museum Is a

Triumph, but to What End?” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 17 Oct.
 2014. Web. 09 Dec. 2015.

Sullivan, Louis H. The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered. Lippincott’s

Magazine, Mar. 1896. Web.

Wainwright, Oliver. “Frank Gehry’s Fondation Louis Vuitton Shows He Doesn’t

Know When to Stop.” The Guardian. N.p., 21 Oct. 2014. Web.

Wright, Frank Lloyd. Frank Lloyd Wright: From Within Outward Audioguide
[New York: Antenna Audio, Inc. and the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation,
2009])

G<(;9 H$*E I$75% C76-"J=

Project
“Villa Müller”, Adolf Loos; Praque, czech republic (1928-1930).

The project was commissioned by an important member of Prague society, namely

Dr. Frantisek Müller, a civil engineer and co-owner of the Prague construction
company Kapsa-Müller. Adolf Loos was entrusted with this task and the architect
Karel Lhota was his assistant. The architect’s contract was signed on 30.10.1928.
Since the building shell was completed in July 1929, but the building permit was
not issued until June 1929, it is assumed that construction began before the permit
was given. The building was completed in February 1930.

The building is located on the western edge of the city of Prague, on a northern
hillside. The address is: Nad Hradním vodojemem 642, 162 00 Praha 6, Czech Re-
public. The villa was placed on the upper street passing by on the south side. The
main entrance and driveway are also located there.

The Müller family lived in the villa until 1948, after which it was expropriated from
them. The State Pedagogical Publishing House and the Marxism-Leninism Institute
were located in the building. Currently, the house is owned by the capital city of
Prague and the museum is in charge of its management. Since August 1995 it has
been a folk cultural monument of the Czech Republic.

Externally, the building is rather plain and strictly functionalist, with its cubist form,
only the yellow window frames offer a contrast. Four large reinforced concrete
columns form the main supporting system. Inside, however, it becomes interest-
ing due to the arrangement, division and design of the rooms. Adolf Loos was
given absolute freedom, following his concept of the “Raumplan”. Each room was
assigned its own ceiling height, so that it is located in a separate level, depending
on its purpose. The living space of the villa consists of the following rooms: the
entrance hall, the living room, the mahogany room, the ladies’ room, the library,
the master’s study, the parents’ bedroom, the bathroom, the ladies’ and men’s
dressing rooms, two children’s rooms, the summer dining room, the terrace, the
chauffeur’s apartment and the servants’ apartments.

In the following, the Villa Müller will be compared with the Tugendhat House by
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, and both objects will be analyzed with regard to the
following Key Elements of the Utilitarian Object: The simple exterior form, the
“Raumplan”, the high quality materials, the room arrangement according to func-
tion, the different levels of privacy following the paths in the building, the simmetry
and its axes, and also the split wall.
Project
“Villa Tugendhat”, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe; Brno, czech republic (1929-1930).

At the same time as Villa Müller in Prague was built Villa Tugendhat in Černopolní
45, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic. The architect here was Ludwig Mies van der
Rohe and it was commissioned by Greta and Fritz Tugendhat, built in 1929-1930.
The family lived here until 1938 when they were forced to emigrate in connection
with the impending World War II.

Like Villa Müller, the building is situated on a slope, but it faces southwest and
the entrance and driveway are located to the northeast. Towards the street, the
building presents itself as a kind of bungalow, while on the other side it opens as a
three-story building.

Upon entering from the street side, one finds oneself directly in the actual living
area, whereas in Loos’ Villa Müller one first enters the more public representative
rooms. On the street side are two children’s rooms, the nanny’s room, and the
communal bathroom. On the garden side, on the other hand, are the ladies’ and
gentlemen’s bedrooms and their bathrooms. On the south side extends one, which
can also be entered directly from the street. To the west are the garages and the
chauffeur’s apartment. A left-turning spiral staircase leads down to the main floor.
This consists mainly of a single room, divided into autonomous spatial units. Thus,
here one finds a winter garden, the work area with a library, a sitting niche, a living
area and the dining niche. To the west are the utility rooms, divided into individual
rooms, to which the staff rooms are connected. East, west and south facades of
the main room consist of floor-to-ceiling glass front. In the basement, which can
be reached via a left-turning spiral staircase, are the utility and equipment rooms.
Through the lowest floor and from two sides of the main floor you can get to the
garden.

Mies van der Rohe chose the steel skeleton construction, i.e. steel columns, con-
crete ceilings and brick masonry, which was rather unusual for residential buildings
at that time. The technical equipment was also completely new, for example, the
windows opposite the dining area could be retracted to the floor.
The simple facade and exterior of the Villa Müller

Villa Müller in Prague displays the design features typical of Adolf Loos. A simple
facade and exterior design are characteristic. It also reflects the connection be-
tween Loos architecture and the utilitarian object.
Since Adolf Loos plans his buildings from the inside out, a pure and symmetrical
form of the simplest geometric bodies emerges on the outside. In this example, it
is a cubic shape with an attached barrel. This is also a principle of the utilitarian ob-
ject. The principle coined by Louis Sullivan was adapted here - “form follows func-
tion”. Applied to the Villa Müller, this means that Loos first planned the functions
of the residential building as individual rooms, which then dictated the geometries
of the exterior design. It can be said that the design of the façade is not random,
but rather the result of the functions of the interior spaces. This principle becomes
clear above all in the fact that special rooms sometimes receive a special formation
in the outer facade. An example of this is the size of the windows. Important rooms
are given larger windows. For example, the windows in the bedroom or the large
salon.
The slightly larger windows are not only used as a stylistic device, but they also
allow a higher incidence of light. This not only increases the comfort of living, but
the high angle of incidence also maximizes efficiency. This brings us to another
principle of the utilitarian object - the efficiency maximization. In this example, this
is done by saving heating costs or heating materials but also by increasing the
comfort of living.
The most distinctive point of the utilitarian object is the renunciation of decora-
tion and ornaments in the exterior. The facade has a simple design and a uniform
white plaster. Only the yellow window frames form a colour contrast in the facade.
This proposition was specifically coined by Loos himself. In his essay Ornament
and Crime, he denounces the use of ornament as unfashionable and terrible.
Loos wants to achieve a complete abandonment of the decoration of facades
through revolution. For Loos and other followers of utilitarian object, beauty can
be identified by functional forms. According to them, only old-fashioned people
use ornaments and decorations. Based on this foundation, Loos designed a plain
and simple facade. The house shows outwardly smooth walls with largely small
facade openings. Only symmetrical structuring elements break through these
smooth walls. For example, the small recess of the facade volume at the entrance
area. The canopy protrudes slightly from the facade, creating both shading and
protection from the weather. Despite all, this is done without any use of decoration.
Simply and only small deviations in the flat facade form a structure and bring out
symmetrical facade motifs. It seems to outsiders that the front of the villa is a com-
position of planar surfaces. This facade speaks a new language of so-called mod-
ernism. For Loos, the lack of ornamentation is far from economical, as it requires
fewer working hours and wages.
Nevertheless, the simple form as well as the simple facade of the villa do not say
much about the complexity of the interior. Adolf Loos always tried to separate
the public from the private. While the living space is allowed to be pompous and
decorated, Loos is always concerned with keeping the exterior appearance plain
and simple. His architectural concepts are adapted to the needs of the inhabitants.
In this case, this means the withdrawal into the private and personal, and this strict
separation from these very aspects. Loos architecture should be free of social con-
ventions, you cannot really tell from the outside what is inside the house. This also
avoids the notion of social conventions. The external appearance only gives the
facts for the complex creation of the spatial plan inside. Moreover, a city without
ornaments means the perfect fulfilment for supporters of the utilitarian object. Loos
also described this in his essay Ornament and Horror. Finally, that is why Loos
created the lack of ornament and simple exterior design.
The simple facade and exterior of the Villa Tugendhat

If you look at the building from the outside from the street side, it seems that the
villa has only one floor. However, if you look at the villa from the garden, you will
see that the building is three stories high. This is not an accidental phenomenon,
but the deliberate intention of the architect. In order to follow the principles of util-
itarian objects and to create an architecture free from social conventions, Ludwig
Mies van der Rohe created a residential building whose size could not be seen
from the street. The young Tugendhat family had the most expensive house in
Europe built at that time.
However, the exterior design was always plain and simple. The residential building
is composed of the simplest geometric shapes and, like the Villa Müller, appears
almost planar. Only the round frosted glass at the entrance door forms a contrast
to the otherwise angular and white plastered masonry. Like Adolf Loos, Ludwig
Mies van der Rohe does without any ornamentation and emphasizes a reduced
and simple design. While the lowest floor appears very compact and massive, the
top floor is set back and appears lighter.
This fits in with the aspiration for a city without ornamentation, as Adolf Loos
describes in his essay Ornament and Crime. The simple white plaster makes the
impression from the street side, as mentioned above, very plain. An ornament-free
city means complete fulfilment for followers of the utilitarian object. This aspiration
was fulfilled by the architect of Villa Tugendhat. Even if the interior was a bit richer
in ornament, the street view was calm and managed without any kind of decora-
tion.
The former Bauhaus director was equally an advocate of utilitarianism in terms
of functionalism. With its steel structure, which is only partially visible from the
outside, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe built this villa in a highly functional way. This
construction method also follows the principle “form follows function” which is
practiced by the followers of utilitarianism. According to them, beauty can be iden-
tified by functional forms. With the help of Loos’ innovative construction method,
he particularly succeeds in this principle.
Although the villa has windows facing the street, the residents are not presented
to the public. A narrow skylight as well as the frosted glass in the entrance area
allow privacy and still enough light in the interior of the house. This principle also
follows a goal of the utilitarian object and that is to maximize efficiency. The house
Tugendhat is a sunlight friendly architecture. The natural light in the interior saves
electricity costs and creates a pleasant living environment.
Also important is the context in which the house was placed. The exterior design
not only affects the house but spills out into the associated garden. The outdoor
space does not stop here with nature, rather it merges smoothly. Responsible for
this are the retractable windows, which can be opened to the garden and thus
extend the villa into nature.
The “Raumplan” at Villa Müller

The room plan of Adolf Loos’ Villa Müller is focused on the occupant’s use of the
rooms. The focus here is on functionality and efficiency, which means that the
room plan is characterized by the utilitarian object.
Adolf Loos first plans the interior spaces and their function before moving on to the
exterior and facade design. His design for Villa Müller is intended to be a response
to the living needs of its clients. Thus, each room is clearly and strictly structured
and corresponds to its given function in the best possible way.
Loos always wanted to separate the private from the public. For this reason, the
more public spaces are created on the first floor, which can be reached from the
street. The further up you go, the more private the rooms of the villa become. That
is why Loos also places the bedroom on an upper floor.
In the main building, the main entrance is located on the first floor, from which you
can go directly to the living area. Here is the living room, dining room and kitchen,
which are all connected, creating an open living landscape. The connection of the
rooms creates a great flexibility and usability and follow the principles of utilitarian
object. Mainly Loos follows here the principle of the greatest possible functionality.
The fact that Adolf Loos draws in different levels in different rooms creates different
room heights within a room. These room heights are then optimally adapted to the
function of the room.
The rooms are separated using columns and pillars as room dividers. They di-
vide the rooms into individual areas and at the same time contribute to the visual
lightness and openness of the room concept. The use of glass doors and windows
also contributes to this atmosphere, providing plenty of daylight and a connection
to nature. Daylight-friendly architecture also maximizes overall efficiency by saving
on electricity.
In addition to the “normal” staircase that leads from the basement to the top floor,
Loos creates an architectural promenade. The individual rooms with different ceil-
ing heights are usually connected by a few steps. This principle develops from the
function of the rooms and creates a rather unconventional way of access.
Upstairs are the bedroom, study and bathroom, all designed to meet the individual
needs of the occupants. Here, too, attention was paid to functionality and efficien-
cy, which allows each room to be used optimally. It is also evident from this exam-
ple that Loos is considered a proponent of the Utilitarian object. This is because
the best state to be achieved in the utilitarian’s mind is the attainment of an overall
utility. Each space is given a specific function as well as an individual adjustment to
its user, thus fulfilling another principle of the utilitarian object.
Although the exterior design was based on plainness and simplicity, the interior of
the house is quite ornate. Loos used decoration and luxury items in the interior of
the villa and in this point contradicts the principle of his criticism of decoration. The
furniture Loos designed was, despite everything, also highly functional. In contrast
to the simple colour scheme of the exterior, Adolf Loos set far more colourful ac-
cents in the interior. For example, the emerald, green glazed opaque glass panels
in the entrance area.
Overall, the room plan of the Villa Müller shows that each room has a specific func-
tion and that there is a clear separation between the different areas. This is in line
with utilitarianism, which focuses on the functionality and usability of spaces.
The concept of fluent rooms at House Tugendhat

While Adolf Loos created his interior according to the principle of the spatial plan,
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe followed the principle of flowing space.
The Tugendhat House consists of three floors. Unlike the Villa Müller, one enters
the Tugendhat House from the street on the top floor. Living here is on the middle
floor.
The Tugendhat House by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe is characterized by its spa-
tial concept of flowing space. This concept aims to blur the boundaries between
indoor and outdoor spaces and give residents a sense of freedom and mobility.
In addition, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe only hints at a room layout. Van der Rohe
separates the rooms solely through curtains or the striking onyx wall. This creates
the feeling of a flowing and almost floating space, as they merge almost unnoticed.
To create a highly functional space, the Tugendhat house was also equipped with
the latest technology and even had air conditioning. Thus, according to utilitarian
objects, the principle of functionality was also observed.
Achieved using large window fronts, which provide a view of the surrounding
landscape, giving the impression of a single, large space. The living space seems
to blur with nature, thus giving the residents a thoroughly pleasant indoor environ-
ment. This is also done according to the principles of utilitarian objects. Through
the wide window band, which can be opened to the living space, Loos creates a
daylight-friendly architecture that corresponds to utilitarianism. At the same time,
as with the Villa Müller, this maximizes efficiency. Electricity and heating costs can
be saved by a sunlight-friendly architecture.
In order to make the living space as functional as possible despite its openness,
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe also designed pieces of furniture with the help of Lilly
Reich, among others. The pieces of furniture that serve to fulfil a specific function
and at the same time can be used as a room divider or partition. Only the built-in
furniture is a kind of division of the home. Nevertheless, most of the furniture can
be moved to create a different use of space. Examples of this are the movable
room dividers used in the living area of the Tugendhat house. They can be moved
as needed, allowing flexible use of space. These, too, always follow the principles
of utilitarian objects, which in this example are consistent with Bauhaus architec-
ture.
Despite the use of very expensive materials and furniture, the interior was kept as
simple as possible. Only individual elements, such as the onyx wall or the green
Barcelona Chair, set contrasts through their structure or colour scheme.
The design of the furniture also largely avoided ornamentation and decoration.
This goes along with the strict idea of lack of ornamentation of the followers of the
utilitarian object.
Overall, the concept of flowing space was implemented in the Tugendhat house
through the use of large window fronts and the use of utilitarian objects.
The materials of Villa Müller

The house with its large closed exterior wall surfaces and the relatively small open-
ings shows itself hermetic and repulsive in its entire external appearance, it obvi-
ously wants to reveal nothing of itself and its inhabitants. “The house is concealed
from the outside, inside it reveals all its richness“. The only feature is the covered
entrance niche, completely lined with yellow travertine and with a bench.
The entrance is completely clad in soft yellow-brown travertine marble and the oak
door
with bronze pieces. Nearby is a stone bench between two travertine marble cubes.
Recurring
element in the architecture of Loos. The entrance is clad in travertine marble may
have two intentions, to emphasize the access to the house with a noble material of
a soft color so as not to lose the overall external , and the intention to invite you to
go inside indicating, in a way, the wealth that exists inside, this
wealth is manifested both in the noble materials, as in the suggestive play of
planes.
The contrast to the brittle exterior is enormous when you finally enter the house.
The travertine cladding protruded into the entrance niche was only the prelude to a
wealth of colours, material effects and spatial drama that is now unfolding. “Inside
the house, the cultured man revels in velvet and silk“.
The house was built naked of any ornament, a white facade but, surprisingly, as
in almost all his mansions, makes good use of color, both in exterior woodwork as
yellow lines on a white plane, as in radiators, ceilings and floors, mahogany wood
or lemongraswood in the living room of the house, stone and ceramic Delft tiles in
the master bedroom or green marble Cipollino in the dining room. Thus, although
the ornament is two-dimensional, it covers and adorns this austere dwelling in a
very peculiar way.
The floor of the living room is made of oak parquet covered with Persian carpets.
The walls are covered with
Cipollino de Sion marble, marble from the Rhone valley with greenish veining, half-
height
and the upper surface plastered and smooth painted white, yellow curtains on the
windows.
The anteroom is uniformly framed with a square cassetted wood panelling, which
with its matt glossy white lacquer appears like a box in which the movement tem-
porarily comes to rest. If you enter the niche, you are surrounded by the stable,
symmetrical framework of pilasters and beams and the surrounding threshold of
the mahogany strip inlaid in the parquet. There is a sublime, classic order here.
The subtle materiality, however, sets the space in vibration. “Green-veined marble
with reddish-blue and yellow speckles covers walls and pillars.
The dark depth structure creates a peculiarly subtle spatial effect on the high-gloss
polished mahogany wood of the coffered ceiling and the furniture in the dining
room, which, in contrast to the finely differentiated textures and colours of the
bright, spacious living room, appears strict and compact. The walls and columns in
the salon are made of Cipollino marble interspersed with green veins.
The library is with green carpet flooring covered with Persian rugs. With polished
mahogany wood paneled walls with built-in bookshelves and furniture, windows
with yellow curtains. And white painted ceiling with polished mahogany beams.
From the master bedroom we can access the master’s dressing room. The furni-
ture and panels in the dressing room are made of oak wood, and the inside of the
closet have a mahogany varnish. To create an
interesting color and structure of the furniture surfaces.
On the basis of the above mentioned few rooms, you can see that in the interior
noble materials and decor from different eras were used.
The materials of Villa Tugendhat
The room arrangement of Villa Müller

Each room was given its own ceiling height in accordance with its spatial plan, so
that it extends in its own plane depending on its purpose. Loos made the stair-
case, which spirals upwards in the middle, as the construction axis. By means of
a second staircase and an elevator, he separated the private rooms for family and
servants from the reception rooms. These included a spacious living room with
a fireplace and two wall aquariums, a dining room and a shared ladies’ boudoir,
reminiscent of a train compartment, with a stylish rolling window, from which one
could observe the events in the common room unobtrusively. Furthermore, there is
the study of Müller, which Loos equipped with a screen and a projector in addition
to its typical built-in wardrobes, which were indispensable for architectural presen-
tations. Since the couple planned to have two children, the house has two chil-
dren’s rooms, one of which has been furnished as a bedroom and the other as a
playroom. The residence also has two large terraces, each on the second and third
floor, with the upper one having a magnificent view of the St. -Veits-Dom offers the
Loos additionally framed by a pergola.
On the upper floors there are exclusively private rooms such as bedrooms, dress-
ing rooms, and the children’s playroom. All rooms have similar or same functions.
Because of his idea, Loos has adapted each room a different ceiling height to its
function. The vertical organization of the public spaces in the lower area and the
private areas in the upper floor is very typical of Loos. According to the height
differences and the different room heights, Loos has created two different vertical
entrance systems. One is continuously in height and the other is not. The contin-
uous is on the south facade and connects the house from the basement is to the
roof. Functional rooms such as the kitchen are connected to the system.
The villa already shows the typical double challenge character that is characteristic
of the movement experience in Haus Müller: By continuing in a straight line in the
steps already visible, the corridor shows the further course of the path and invites
you to continue walking. The static arrangement of the anteroom, on the other
hand, causes the arriving guest to step out of the movement path in order to find
the cloakroom in the doubly celebrated central axis or to sit down on the bench
for a short rest. To get further from here, you have to go up seven steps through a
narrowing winding passage over the spiral-like staircase. There you reach the level
of the salon. Like stepping into a cupboard, you are taken in by the panelling of
the “box” without seeing where you are going. The result is presented above: the
visitor is first placed in a niche only about two meters high; in front of him, separat-
ed by another layer of space, is the salon twice as high, which occupies the entire
width of the building and opens through the window doors onto the landscape
panorama of the „Moldautal“. The ascent from the anteroom zone began with a left
turn on the stairs. Whoever follows this direction of rotation continues the ascent to
the lady’s room without entering the huge salon. The further left turn instead leads
further into the interior and in ever tighter turns into the intimacy of the boudoir. Up
the stairs, to the platform of the dining room, the room opens even further. It is the
path where also the residents from the upper rooms enter the living area, with a
clear overview of the open spatial landscape in front of them.
In addition, it can be said in general that the rooms or the room size are always
related to the windows. The size of the windows depends on the size of the room
behind the window. In addition, in almost all rooms the window size is related to
the size of the room and the degree of importance and function of the room. The
large living room, the dining room, and the bedrooms have the largest windows.
At last it is to say that de spatial plan in the Villa Müller ist not recognisable at the
facade of the house. Only the differences in the size of the windows indicate the
different rooms with their various functions but not their height movement on their
different height.
The privacy paths of the Villa Müller compared to
Villa Tugendhat
Another key element of the implementation of the utilitarian object in architectural
form by Adolf Loos is the privacy of and in the building, respectively the impor-
tance for the participation in the creation of the already described „Raumplan“.
When creating his buildings, Adolf Loos was always inspired and influenced by
his social views and understandings of lifestyle and culture. This included a great
desire for complete privacy and intimacy within his buildings. The origin of this
desire for privacy can be explained by his psychological disposition in addition to
his ideas about social order.
Adolf Loos draws a clear line between the street and the apartment or house.
Since Adolf Loos primarily designs three-dimensional spatial systems, the imple-
mentation of the desired privacy is shown here by the decision to arrange and
individually relate the individual rooms, with their utilitarian intended purposes, to
each other. Each of these decisions is never random by Adolf Loos, but completely
controlled and intentional. This also reflects one of Loos’ central character traits, as
he has a strong need for control and its enforcement, as has also emerged from
his various marriages.
Therefore, in the sequence of the individual rooms, the so-called Raumplan, one
can speak of a clear instruction on living and habitation by Adolf Loos to the later
resident and to the general observer of his work, since the Raumplan leaves no
room for interpretation and change in the later course of the building. This unam-
biguousness in the design of these very buildings complies with Loos` under-
standing of efficiency and modernity. Another aspect of this controlling nature in
the creation of the Raumplan is that Loos holds the view that, generally speaking,
use creates the cultural form, that is, the original and thus utilitarian form of ob-
jects, and not a newly created form defines the cultural form. In terms of architec-
ture, this can be interpreted to mean that man should shape architecture, rather
than letting architecture shape himself, for example, in terms of lifestyle. This is
achieved by Adolf Loos through the preceding precise definition of each room with
a specific task in the final spatial structure.
Looking further at Loos’ implementation of privacy, it becomes clear that he sub-
divides the various rooms with their prescribed levels of privacy and arranges and
relates them accordingly in his buildings. It is also noticeable that the deeper one
enters a house by Adolf Loos, the more private the rooms become in relation to
their task. As Loos’ architecture progresses, his desire for more separation and
privacy intensifies, which can be seen, for example, in the fact that some windows
are made of frosted glass, since, according to Loos, the cultivated person does
not look out through the window into the public, but only looks into his own rooms.
Furthermore, seating in front of window openings is also placed in such a way
that it only invites people to look into the room. In this way, Adolf Loos also limits
windows to their utilitarian use, since Loos does not want to use them for anything
more than letting in light and ventilation.
An example of Loos’ design of achieving maximum privacy in the Raumplan is the
Villa Müller. In this, this key element is brought to light in various ways.
First, in general, the rooms and their tasks are lined up given their position on the
hierarchy of privacy in Villa Müller. In this building, too, the spatial tasks become
more private and less intended for the public, the deeper and higher one enters
the house. The spatial tasks go from maximum privacy, as in the bedroom, which
for Adolf Loos constitutes the heart of a house or apartment, to the living room,
which offers the most synergy between public and private, to the entrance hall,
which for Loos represents the most public part of a building.
With this distribution of space and three-dimensional arrangement, he not only
plays with a smooth transition between the strengths of the given private spheres,
but also allows insights into different areas. But this goes only from private spaces
into more public spaces. This creates interesting vantage points, such as Loos al-
lowing a view into the entrance hall from an assigned women’s room on the upper
floor, so that the woman of the house can always follow who enters and leaves the
house, as well as observe when special visitors are being welcomed. From and
into private rooms such as the bedroom, invariably, there are no windows or other
openings that do not have the function of entry.
Further to be observed in the Villa Müller is, among other things, the well thought-
out relationship in which Loos places the large hall to the dining room and intimate
sitting area, since the chosen size of a component in Loos’ building alone direct-
ly achieves the intended effect, here, for example, the comfortable security of a
slightly secluded sitting area.
Villa Müller thus shows very clearly how the three-dimensional system of the
Raumplan enables Adolf Loos to create publicity, privacy, openness and intimacy
at will and as needed, just by choosing the size and location of the room in the
resulting spatial structure. Only after that, the exact designation of the room with
exact task is created, which is self-explanatory due to the chosen size and location
according to Loos.
In terms of construction and organization, the exact counterpart to Adolf Loos’ Villa
Müller is Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s Villa Tugendhat.
The architecture of Mies van der Rohe is characterized by open floor plans and
thus an open spatial structure and the resulting possibility for interpretation and
variation of the use of space. This results in a more difficult understanding of
privacy for the viewer to identify, just as there is, for the most part, less privacy in
general.
In a direct comparison of the relationship of different spatial tasks with different
strengths of privacy between the Villa Müller and the Villa Tugendhat, it is notice-
able that in the Villa Tugendhat on the upper floor there is hardly a recognizable
border between the dining area, living room and work area. This is impossible in a
building by Adolf Loos like the Villa Müller, since Loos assigns a different status to
each of these rooms and therefore wants to separate them from each other at all
costs, while Mies van der Rohe wants to break up this status and begins to equate
these different rooms. In Mies van der Rohe’s case, this also results in an over-
lapping of the function of the space, since the construction makes it possible to
continue the function of one space into the next.
Another noticeable difference between the two villas are the installed windows
and wall openings. In the case of Villa Tugendhat, a large window front is a main
component of the house, opening the interior space to the outside world. At the
same time, the facade of the Villa Müller is only slightly open and does not offer
any insight into the interior. Adolf Loos as well as Mies van der Rohe, as modern
architects, break up the traditional spatial structure, with Loos focusing on private
life and intimacy, while Mies van der Rohe makes the boundaries between private
and public disappear to some extent.
The importance of the symmetry axes in Villa Müller

One of the key characteristics of Adolf Loos’ Villa Müller is its use of symmetry
axes. A symmetry axis is a line which splits an object into identical segments cre-
ating a sense of harmony and simplicity in its design. Loos used symmetry axes to
create a sort of order and balance in the building, which can be found in its floor
plan and façade. His use of symmetry axes highlights how architects use symme-
try to construct aesthetically pleasing and functional structures.
In the Villa Müller the relation and lack of relation between the façade axes and the
floor plan axes is one of the most interesting aspects. In Loos’ building there are
two major symmetry axes (I and IV). The Axis I is the central axis of the floorplan. It
divides the floorplan into two sections. It runs from the building’s entrance into two
alike halves. The symmetry Axis IV is the central Axis of the façade which runs ver-
tically from top to bottom of the building, dividing the façade into two halves. This
Axis produces the previously implied harmony and balance on the extioror of the
buiulding which is further accentuated by the use of identical windows on its sides
The symmetry axis I is equal to the north façade’s axis I, but not with the south
facades axis V. There is a small space between these two axes which is well recog-
nizable in the floor plan. The entrance niche is symmetrical to the south Façade’s
axis V but is not symmetrical in the floorplan.
At first glance, there appears to be no relation between the façade axis V and the
floor plan, however Loos attempted to connect axis V in the floorplan by posittionig
the border wall of the staircase on this axis.
Axes, such as axis III which is the axis of the hall, can also be found in the rooms.
Loos supported the axis with four pillars which should emphasize the symmetry of
the Hall’s short walls.
As previously stated, the entrance niche is symmetrical on the south façade but
not in the floorplan. Nontheless Loos created an entrance door which is precicely
placed on the symmetrical main Axis I by using a well-chosen entrance-motive (a
trupartition). He duplicated this motif at the rise for the first floor.
The use of symmetry axes in Villa Müller shows Loos’ awareness of the importance
of symmetry in architecture. It makes a defining characteristic of the building’s ar-
chitecture. It also provides a functional purpose by providing a clear path through
the design and making it easy to navigate.
The symmetry of Villa Tugendhat in comparison to
the symmetry of Villa Müller
As we are comparing the utility and design of the Villa Tugendhat by Ludwig Mies
van der Rohe to the Villa Müller, it is noticeable that both building have a sym-
metrical layout, however the axis of symmetry in the Villa Tugendhat is firstly not
centered on the main entrance and secondly we are speaking of a curved axis of
symmetry and not a straight one as it is the case for the Villa Müller. Its symmetry
axis runs through the central living space which consist of a large open plan living
and dining room that is surrounded by a terrace and garden. The curved axis is
created by the curved edge of the patio, which is mirrored by the edge of the gar-
den. Moreover, the positioning of the fireplace and the large windows which frame
views on the garden highlight the axis even more.
The split wall
 Architecture & Objects
2022-2023

Prof. Jordi Vivaldi

Institute of Urban Design / Peter Trummer
Faculty of Architecture
of the Leopold Franzens University

Students:
Stephanie Winandy
Cora Nill
Emilia Scharler
Madeleine Wölfle
Max Schmidt