• Korean Institute of Interior Design Journal
• /
• v.17 no.6
• /
• pp.30-40
• /
• 2008

Adolf Loos showed important directionality in the thought of modem culture and architecture. The thought about the architecture of Adolf Loos was gathered by "Raumplan". It is the solution of the plan in space. But the concept and method of the "Raumplan" had not been synthesized until near the end of Loos's life. Loos's first reference to the "Raumplan" appears in 1929. I think that "Raumplan" became the solution of the plan in space with a formation process of the thought about the architecture and culture of Adolf Loos. Therefore, the purpose of this paper derived a characteristic of "Raumplan" from the relations between the architectural thought of Adolf Loos and "Raumplan". The processes of the study are as follows. (1)Consideration about the growth background of Adolf Loos and the social situation of Vienna. (2)Analysis about architecture and the cultural critic of Adolf Loos. (3)Analysis of "Raumplan" based on architectural thought of Adolf Loos. As a result, I got the four characteristics of "Raumplan" as follows. (1) Separation and continuation of "Raum". (2) Fragment of "Raum". (3) Overlay and transmission by the axis of multiplex eyes. (4) Structural adjustment of the "Raum" by Hierarchy. Finally, I understood the architecture which Adolf Loos pursued in "Raumplan" had a high function and contained the clear meaning and contents which had practical use and economic value, and it were not a results of the simple logic.

• Journal of the Korean housing association
• /
• v.27 no.6
• /
• pp.85-93
• /
• 2016

The spaces have a variety of sizes dependent upon their function and significance as well as their geometric shape. An architect Adolf Loos (1870-1933) had incorporated a correlation between the unconstrained formation of space into design. He had noticeably revealed the features of space that are unconstrained and mutually related with each other, for the space compositions among modern architects. This study is about to analyze the feature of space structure for houses of Adolf Loos through Space syntax which is the quantitative space analyzing method for the subject of his detached houses. These houses were emphasized for functional aspects of space without unnecessary decorations. Le Corbusier's Villa Savoye was analysed along with it to review a comparative point of view of his house's characteristic. Based on this, the features of the spatial structure of Loos' house were examined in conjunction with his views space as essence. A J-Graph and VGA for Adolf Loos' detached house revealed the structure's spatial characteristics in which the interior space is located deeply removed from exterior yet it is integrated as a whole. Also, it revealed that the experiments of the various spatial structures shown in Adolf Loos' detached house and European rationalist architects like Le Corbusier affected each other at the same time.

• Korean Institute of Interior Design Journal
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.41-48
• /
• 2018

This thesis is a paper comparing Adolf Loos and Antoni Gaudí's 'theory of ornament', based on their text. Adolf Loos and Antoni Gaudí are architects who had worked from late 19c, just before advent of Modernism architecture, to early 20c. When 'ornament' had started to be excluded from architecture according to development of industrialization and capitalism, Loos and Gaudí have both written about 'ornament.' Generally, Loos is known to have possessed rational mind and designed modern building with no ornament, and Gaudí is known to have possessed romantic mind and used splendid ornaments. For those reasons, it was assumed that two architects would have contrast opinions regarding ornaments. However, analysis of two architects' major text reveals that their theories of ornament are fundamentally analogous. Loos and Gaudí both argue dissolution of past normative 'ornament' and claims that rational 'ornament' that fits modern time is possible. Interestingly, intentionally adopted ornaments exist considerably in architecture of Loos. On the other hand, in Gaudí's architecture, there are many points where Gaudí had restrained ornaments. This thesis organizes similarity and differences of two architects' 'theory of ornament' through their texts and works. Moreover, this thesis suggests that then today's architecture aims to restart a debate on 'ornament', it is worth reviewing texts of Loos and Gaudí.

• Architectural research
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.1-12
• /
• 2015

This article examines spatial concepts of urban design led by Camillo Sitte (1843-1903) and its influences. Sitte infused the fervor of city planning as an initiator, and his achievements affected Adolf Loos (1870-1933). Thus, this thesis, with regard to Sitte's penchants concerning urban design, focuses on two matters in order to understand Camillo Sitte's efforts to invent a new method on modern city planning and its influence on an architect: first, it deals with his urban studies, theories, and practices on city planning that consider communal living and everyday life and urban typology as well; second, it discusses how his urban ideas are accepted by Adolf Loos. Conclusively, through the investigations on Sitte's movement on city planning and its influence on Adolf Loos, this study clarifies Sitte's efforts to improve urban life and its milieus, and then Loos's efforts to adopt Sitte's criticisms and then re-interpret them in tune with the modern way of living as well. As a result, this thesis shows that they suggested new methods in performing dialectic designs, drawing on the picturesque and modern tradition, although their difference is differentiated from the sense of space, exterior vs. interior, i.e. Raumkunst vs. Raumplan.

• Korean Institute of Interior Design Journal
• /
• v.15 no.5 s.58
• /
• pp.36-43
• /
• 2006

Architecture is the product of a way of thinking. If the problems of architecture are to be traced to their roots, then attention needs to be focused on the thinking and considerations that inform its production. Adolf Loos occupies a truly exceptional place in the history of architecture. Adolf Loos's ideas and attitudes disagree with the notion that modernity is possible to develop a harmonious culture within the bounds of a modernizing society. Loos chronologically precedes the modern movement, but his ideas contain the seeds of what will be worked out later as a complex critique of the movement's notions about architecture and modernity. Loos holds the view that modernity provokes an inevitable rupture with tradition that has as a consequence the disintegration of one's experience of life. This evolution, he think, obliges architecture to display a number of languages corresponding to a multitude of different experiences. Through the discussion of Loos's opinions on dwelling and architecture, it explores the true features of position of Loos in modern architecture. Loos thinks that the rejection of the deliberate creation of a new style was a correct response to the diagnosis of life as being rootless and fragmented. Ornament is that which people use to attempt to relate different aspects of life and to join inner and outer worlds in a coherent whole. By getting rid of ornament the illusion is destroyed that a harmonious unity of this sort is still possible. One can only remain true to tradition if one acknowledges that its continuity is not an unbroken one. Dwelling can only be saved by separating it from other aspects of life.

• Architectural research
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.33-38
• /
• 2010

Many theorists acknowledge that Modern architecture denied the architect's crafty gesture for the sake of pure formal and compositional status of a building. As well, modern technology in construction has been prevailing as the sole support for modern architecture. But there exists architects who proposed a dialectic development of traditional and modern techniques. This thought was prominent in Germanic circle where technological development was in advance. Throughout $20^{th}$ century, the works of Adolf Loos, Mies Van der Rohe, and Peter Zumthor are representatives in each period. A common point begins from their apprenticeships as craftsmen: Loos and Mies as stonemasons, Zumthor as a cabinetmaker. More than this fact, their craftsmanship is embedded in their works and express creativity of architects. While mass production system raises non-participatory practice that merely require assemblage of products, the adjusted techniques with craftsmanship brings forth a participatory practice that does not limit the creativity of architects.

• Korean Institute of Interior Design Journal
• /
• v.15 no.5 s.58
• /
• pp.112-119
• /
• 2006

This study intends to understand the visual experience of architectural space generated by users' movement based on the interpretation of visual properties. An analytic theory of Isovist is suggested for the objective and comparable measurement for such visual experience, and a computer program for the analysis has been proposed as well. By using the analytical theory and computer program, eight houses designed by Adolf Loos and Le Corbusler are analyzed for the purpose of understanding the visual characteristics of the Modern Architecture and the contemporaries. The result shows that, while the architectural space of Loos emphasizes personal privacy as for being livable spaces, the architectural space of Corbusier emphasizes users' movement as for including diverse visual arrays. These commensurable results exhibit that the analytical tool and research frame suggested in this study can be a competitive tool for such analysis.

• Korean Institute of Interior Design Journal
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.11-16
• /
• 2004

Adolf Loos studied at the Dresden Institute of Technology. He lived in America from 1893 to 1896. On his return to Vienna, hi worked for a year with the architect, Carl Mayreder. From 1897, he wrote extensively on design and architectural matters. In 1908, his famous article "Ornament and Crime"(Ornament und Verbrechen) was published, in which he linked the use of excessive decoration to a debasement of society. For Adolf Loos, it was a question not of renunciation of every ornament, but of the liberation from superfluous ornament. Where ornament was pastes on only, without connection with the subject or the building, and where ornament was not honest with the hand put on, the ornament is supposed to be removed. Onto the place of the ornament the joy of the material and the shaping should step. That the opinion of Adolf Loss is not correctly understood Is due on the one hand to the concentration on the 'ornament and crime' too very much. On the other hand his extreme Position is supposed to be understood more as thinking-impulse, more as provocation.ovocation.

• Journal of the Korean housing association
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.45-52
• /
• 2014

Adolf Loos and Hiroshi Hara are very well known for their distinctive method of spatial composition. Adolf Loos showed white silent outer facades from his strong aversion to the ornament, whereas dynamic and rich inner space by the principle called 'Raumplan' in his housing design. Hiroshi Hara, one of the most influential architects in modern Japanese architectural history, designed a series of controversial houses with radical design by his 'Yukotai Theory' and the thought of 'Reflection House'. Even they have no common in regional background or the period of their works, both similarly have shown their own focus on cladding surface as an important design language. From this point of view, this paper investigates the design method of those two architects focused on the similar points and also the differences of their approaches to cladding in housing design. In conclusion, in case of Adolf Loos, the cladding is a tool to create completely safe and pure inner space by separating from the outside. On the other hand, the cladding of Hiroshi Hara has the meaning of social ideology that individuals must follow the principles of a dominant structure, which is the reason why the cladding should be removed. However there exists something in common also. They radically denied the outer circumstances and had a firm belief that the requests from the inside living space were the more influential factors.

• Journal of architectural history
• /
• v.17 no.5
• /
• pp.55-69
• /
• 2008

One of the most notable architectural aphorisms in modern period must be undeniably Louis Sullivan's, 'Form Follows Function.' The aphorism has been not only an important source of new aesthetic but also an formal principle of machine age. Other most famous source in order to justify modern aesthetic was the short essay by an cynical critic, Adolf Loos(1870-1933), 'Ornament and Crime' of 1908. Apart from what the essay asserted it is also famous for the influence of Sullivan's architectural notion during Loos' States staying. For Architectural historians of the early 20th century this connection is so useful to create a legacy of modern architecture. The historians seemed to believe that Loos understanded Sullivan's aphorism on which the historians wanted to focused. When we however look into two buildings designed and built in the period of publishing both aphorism and essay there must be a big fissure between the buildings and the historians interpretations. With this view point this study aims at showing the true meanings of Sullivan's aphorism and Loos' essay and also the big difference between the machine age's aesthetic and theirs.