BOOK REVIEW adhar talati 3302.pdf

BOOK REVIEW
Learning from Las Vegas
UGLY AND ORDINARY ARCHITECTURE, OR THE DECORATED SHED
Robert Venturi
Denise Scott Brown
Steven Izenour
The M.I.T Press
Copyright 1977, 1972
18 th August, 2008 Adhar Talati
Urban History UA 3302

The ironic thing about the idea for the "Duck and the Decorated
Shed," is the fact that the group of Robert Venturi, Denise Scott Brown,
and Steven Izenour admit to an ulterior motive of its invention. They start
by telling us a simple known fact that architects as a rule, tend to
philosophize and write in order to justify their own work. And that they
are no different than the masses of architects, big names and small
names that have come before them.
They define the idea and an exercise in image over process or
form. The part they tell us that is the final 10% of a project but the part
we all see and remember. They talk about the idea of the image being
either similar to or relating to the form or a contradiction to the form,
structure, and program of the building of which they are part. The
exercise will be divided into these manifestations:
1. Where the architectural systems of space, structure, and program are
submerged and distorted by an overall symbolic form. This kind of
building becoming sculpture we call the duck in honor of the duck
shaped drive-in, "The Long Island Duckling," illustrated in God's Own
Junkyard by Peter Blake.
2. Where systems of space and structure are directly at the service of
program, and ornament is applied independently of them. This we call
the decorated shed.

The group opens their discussion with a comparison of two
buildings. They compare a building by themselves, the Guild House and
Paul Rudolph's Crawford Manor. The reason they chose this
comparison, is by virtue that they were built at about the same time, in
similar locals, have similar programs, but express a different image.
They also note that in no way do they say one building is better than the
other, just that they are different.
The differences that are felt to be of the buildings are that the Guild
House has ornament on it and the Crawford Manor does not. On the
Guild House the applied ornament is explicit and at the same time
contrasts and reinforces the building behind it. The stripes of white brick
placed so high on the building gives it a scale of a Renaissance Palazzo.
The scale of the central space in proportion to the whole building creates
the reading of a grand entrance to the palazzo as well. At the top is an
arched window; it is not structural but used as a sign of a different
activity at the top, common space. The location of the arched window,
balconies, and base entry unify the building to a scale of monumental
size rather than layers of apartment units.
`

On the Crawford Manor, such items are unthinkable. It would
never be adorned with expensive materials, white stripes, or
Renaissance compositions. The balconies in this structure that stick out
from the façade are completely integrated into the building rather than
tacked onto it. For the Crawford Manor, the building is understood not
from the adornm of the facade, which is none existent, but from layers of
meaning beyond that of simple facade detailing, the translation of the
elements and their technology to form a building.
The decorated shed is to be understood as signed. The precedent for
this idea of signage is not a new one and can be traced back to some
historical precedent but in modern architecture it is far more prevalent as
a tool and a method of design. The low cost box with the huge sign is
the ultimate expression of this concept and something very prevalent in
building today. It is this idea that was the precedent for the Guild House
and the large sign saying "Guild House" is its most literal interpretation.
This idea of signage, which is something, that can be said to be in every
building is the key to the study. When the sign is literal and spelled out
either by letters or by bold ornaments, we end up with a decorated shed.
On the other hand, when a building is subtly formed and interpreted by
its overall composure, it is then that we have a duck. The question then
gets posed as to which type of building method is the correct one, or
better still which is the accepted one? These questions cannot be
answered simply.