Pompeii Garden; author: Karin.

Is Noth-America inhabitable? Is there an after-life? The answer for this questions is an answer of faith.

The text of Rudofsky starts describing the amenities of modern life of the human beings, how they think that they have conquered the inconveniences of the climate, but to tell the truth, there are only pre-arranged positions, never a complete control of the weather, because it is more than the air we breathe and the temperature that we feel, it is a random series of facts. He talks about that in the time of New England Settlers, the relation between men and nature was resuming into economic advantages, transforming into a hostile environment; and that they failed to produce anything revolutionary or particularly ingenious because they retreated into their houses and all of their efforts toward maintaining a tolerable indoor temperature. And that the modern men still doing today.

After a long weather talk, Rudofsky starts with his real main point: the garden. He talks about that humans do not see the garden as a potential living space, only as a space for parties; he says that domestic gardens are an essential part of the house and a ingredient for a happy environment. Rudofsky talks about how Roman gardens established a mood particularly to the most elaborate composure and they communicated a unique sense of comfort. The description of garden from Pompeii gave a better idea from what Rudofsky wanted to explain; the way of how they used the wall as an element that introduce a sense of order and its importance when they build it, because with this the human create space on human scale, he became a biped.

In the final pages of the text, the main idea is about how the modern garden has become  in wasted space, that front laws adds nothing to the looks of the house and that it belongs to the street rather than the house; and in this point is when Rudofsky combine the garden with the wall, explaining that the enclosing walls can be the answer to transform the garden from a wasted space into a personal space, giving the sensation of comfort and privacy that makes you feels like you have the control.

Rudofsky finishes the text with the idea that you do not need pre-arranged positions in order to have the perfect control of climate, that the perfect conditioned outdoor room can be achieved with the combinations of garden and walls, that allows variations of light, temperature, humidity with the help of sun and wind; only by this way the garden will became in a living space and in a nobler version of the house.

During the debate of the class and the talk with the other members that had read the lecture, there was several discussions about the main ideas of the text and in which of the 6 logics it fits; at the end we decided that the garden as an outdoor room of potential living space was the main topic, and that it belongs to a logic of system by illation and interaction, because of the relation and explanation between the climate, cultures and architectural elements with the garden.

Possible topic

One of the possible topic for my personal research that suggested from the reading of the text could be about how this ideas and theories can be applied in the contemporary era, the difficulties of how the garden could become into a living space because of the excess of population and the low amount of land in the world, the fight between economical facts and social convenience; inserting several new concepts like transversality actions, entropy systems, resilience spaces and optimization of resources into this ideas, the conditioned outdoor room could be a real fact for everybody and for the sake of the finite resources.

T1- The conditioned outdoor room

In order to unravel the main arguments demonstrated in the writing of Bernard Rudofsky, it is essential to understand author’s background and previous work. Rudofsky was most influential for organizing a series of controversial MOMA exhibits in the second half of the 20th century. Nowadays he is remembered for numerous urbane books that provide relevant design insight that is concealed in entertaining and subversive sarcasm. The text in its undertone could be related to his famous work in MOMA: Architecture without Architects, where he states that “Architectural History , as written and taught in the Western World , has never been concerned with more than a few select cultures. “.

The term “conditioned outdoor room” is a pithy synopsis of the leading idea expressed in the first paragraph. The amenities of our modern life are unstoppably trying to conquer the climate: we can force desired temperature both outdoor and indoor, we are able to control humidity etc. Due to modern technology achievements, the permanent indoor life has become possible. Our achievements are certainly an expression of progress in technology and other industrial fields, but can turn out to be inhumane and self-destructive. Climate is not the mere weather outside, it is a whole chain: diet, tiredness, skin color, sexual development. By disturbing one of its components we are triggering unexpected changes. In other words, the author does not believe people to be able to face the nexus of climatic-ecological-environemental- and social factors.

Continuing his discussion, Rudofsky tries to embody his ideas into mind-broadening examples. One of them is concerned with the Pilgrim Fathers, the first people coming from Europe to settle in America. Apparently the willingness to control the climate has been long existing, which is also visible in the location chosen by the pilgrims. The hostile climate did not encourage a human-environment relationship, which had a direct impact on the local architecture. The temporary houses’ shape and general condition were provoked by the rough conditions and therefore there could not have been put any emphasis on aesthetics or any complex function programme.

As a counterexample, the text brings us back to Pompei’s ancient times with entirely different principals of spatial arrangements- influenced by climate itself and not the other way round. Domestic gardens had a big value for being inhabitable and providing an extension to the interior. The garden space was a room without the roof- the intangible relationship was created mainly by putting domestic elements like paintings, sculptures or expensive floor finishing outside. The ruins of Pompei arrangement even nowadays leaves a trace of the labyrinthine urban principals. Even though in some areas only bare walls can be seen, their erection stands now for a symbol of human mental and physical evolution. Contemporarily, the gardens function is to be viewed from inside. There is no real connection between the house and the garden- both spaces work as separate functions with an indirect relation.

Taken together, his written work constitutes a sustained argument for humane and sensible design. Rudofsky attempts to break our confined idea of architecture and introduce the reader to the world of indigenous designing. Another interesting thing is the discrepancy of his examples. The genesis may be explained by the authors heterogeneous interests ranging from vernacular architecture to Japanese toilets and sandal design. Inspired by the text and Rudofsky’s background, in my research I would like to explore two overlapping components: designing humane architecture and the versatility of the designer. The versatility of architecture bases on the reference to very different and sometimes unconnected fields, not as professionals but as hobbyists. I believe an architect is not enough to perform a successful design: we have to be musicians, mathematics, shoe designers, columnists and doctors trapped in a body of an architect to be able to draw inspirations and create spaces.