The almost endless adaptability of concrete has been time and time again expressed in entranceways or approaches to the private or public estate.
been used to pervert the artistic, and no doubt because of these perversions an adaptable material has been unjustly condemned.
The architect requires not only a medium which will express in body and form the artistic creations of his mind, but wants one which also will put the stamp of reasonable permanence upon his work. The artistic is not worthy of endeavor unless it in a measure endures. There is no doubt that the explanation of the slow development of concrete in architectural structures is due primarily to lack of knowledge among architects of its possibilities. However, within the past few years these possibilities have been understood and appreciated more fully, and for that reason we see rising, here and there, monuments to the designer’s skill in
adapting concrete to the scheme which he had in mind. Designing a house of concrete is more than the mere combining of effects. It offers to the architect of ambitious ideals a medium for the embodiment in form of his artistic conception.
The handicap which concrete in architecture has suffered in the past has been the tendency of designers to impose on this medium principles of construction or attempted uses that were identified more with other building materials. Structures of brick
and stone do not allow of great plasticity and can be modeled only in straight lines or apparent curved surfaces which have but little grace in their treatment. This necessitates resorting to balconies, inlays and artificial trimming or to fanciful designs in roof and gable in an attempt to relieve the stubborn severity of the material. It is true that many beautiful and pleasing effects have thus been obtained, but to attempt to apply such styles of architecture to concrete is a grave mistake. The funda
mental principle which must control in concrete is simplicity. It matters not whether the subject be treated to express dignity or strength, or be molded into more ornate forms of the expression of charm and beauty. There must be no complex and irrelevant forms which more often than not detract from the simple grace of the structure and do nothing to please the eye.
There is no other material which the architect has whereby he can allow himself such latitude of shade and surface finish. He may develop the cold, gray surface so attractive in a country home with its background of foliage; he can duplicate various panels as needed to relieve the monotony of plain surfaces; he can make these depressed or raised, can cause the surface to be modeled
as desired and can secure almostA simple garden setting, in which concrete is admirably blended.
been used to pervert the artistic, and no doubt because of these perversions an adaptable material has been unjustly condemned.
The architect requires not only a medium which will express in body and form the artistic creations of his mind, but wants one which also will put the stamp of reasonable permanence upon his work. The artistic is not worthy of endeavor unless it in a measure endures. There is no doubt that the explanation of the slow development of concrete in architectural structures is due primarily to lack of knowledge among architects of its possibilities. However, within the past few years these possibilities have been understood and appreciated more fully, and for that reason we see rising, here and there, monuments to the designer’s skill in
adapting concrete to the scheme which he had in mind. Designing a house of concrete is more than the mere combining of effects. It offers to the architect of ambitious ideals a medium for the embodiment in form of his artistic conception.
The handicap which concrete in architecture has suffered in the past has been the tendency of designers to impose on this medium principles of construction or attempted uses that were identified more with other building materials. Structures of brick
and stone do not allow of great plasticity and can be modeled only in straight lines or apparent curved surfaces which have but little grace in their treatment. This necessitates resorting to balconies, inlays and artificial trimming or to fanciful designs in roof and gable in an attempt to relieve the stubborn severity of the material. It is true that many beautiful and pleasing effects have thus been obtained, but to attempt to apply such styles of architecture to concrete is a grave mistake. The funda
mental principle which must control in concrete is simplicity. It matters not whether the subject be treated to express dignity or strength, or be molded into more ornate forms of the expression of charm and beauty. There must be no complex and irrelevant forms which more often than not detract from the simple grace of the structure and do nothing to please the eye.
There is no other material which the architect has whereby he can allow himself such latitude of shade and surface finish. He may develop the cold, gray surface so attractive in a country home with its background of foliage; he can duplicate various panels as needed to relieve the monotony of plain surfaces; he can make these depressed or raised, can cause the surface to be modeled
as desired and can secure almostA simple garden setting, in which concrete is admirably blended.