Abstract:
In the twentieth century, the place of the public building was identified, in several architectures, with the space of the hall.
Starting from the generality of hall typology, it can be achieved many different types of architectures.
Through the constructive process we can research the most appropriate forms to reveal the meaning of the building.
The exact form of single elements and the exactness of the relationships between themselves define the character of the spaces, which must be the most appropriate to their function and to the context in which they are built.
In this way, we would compare three buildings of three “modernist” masters of architecture:
- Asplund’s Stockholm library assumes the constructive system of the wall.
Asplund builds a sequence of rooms distinguished by different spatial characters, in order to organize the composition and to declare the centrality of the reading great hall.
- Mies van der Rohe’s Chicago Convention Hall assumes the reticular structure as constructive system.
In this architecture, we can find the theme of inside-outside continuity and the theme of the relationship between the elements that build the space: the roof and the enclosure.
- Tessenow’s project for the “Kraft durch Freude” (“Strength through Joy”) festival hall on the German island of Rugen, assumes the trilithic constructive system, in which the main element is the column.
Through the analogy with the woods, in which the clearings are rooms, identified by the rarefaction of tree trunks, Tessenow builds the inner space of this architecture by the rarefaction of the columns, clearing a field.
Mies, Asplund and Tessenow decline the same architectural typology in three different ways, through the constructive process.
In these projects, construction becomes an expressive instrument, able to represent the character of each building and to give it a specific identity.
