The elegance and simplicity of Shaker architecture.

[ptrbice]

I've spent a few days on the internet re-exploring Shaker architecture/design.
I began my career with a great admiration for the Shaker works. It is always astonishing to me, that, with absolutely no formal educations, the Shakers designed and built some of the most elegant houses, barns, interiors, especially staircases, than virtually any architects in American history, including all the same old "big names".

I drove to several of the Shaker villages recently and the approach to them,
the layout of them, the siting of the buildings on them, the houses especially,
are all the most elegant, simple statements in residential architecture.

Comparing these Shaker communities with the overwhelming banality of most American suburbs, all designed by licensed, formally "educated" architects, makes one believe that it all comes down to taste, good taste, innate good taste in design, balancing objects with the spaces, creating an uplifting feeling,

that is almost utterly absent in most of our residential design.

I drove through "Parish Pond" in Southampton, New York recently. It is
an almost repulsive grouping of thoroughly vapid, ugly, trophy houses,
not one of which will ever be "uplifting" in any way, and each was designed and built by the licensed, "formally educated".

It's worth a drive to see this catastrophe and then drive to a Shaker village.

Your eyes will tell the truth.

[phansford]

Shaker Architecture is very nice stuff. It's minimalism is more about utility than a grand design statement. It is properly refered to a vernacular architecture. The height of the Shaker communities was the early 1800's to about 1830. Most of the Shaker architecture, such as Pleasant Hill, Kentucky, was built during those years.
http://www.shakervillageky.org/

During this period of time, there were no formal schools of architecture in America and only a handful in Europe. The Ecole de Beaux Arts in Paris being the leading formal institution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecole_des_Beaux-Arts

Most architects were self-trained and the best were well-traveled and educated men, such as Thomas Jefferson. The only architect (not formally trained however) to ever be President. Jefferson was educated at William and Mary. He had an extensive library, which we know contained the major treasties on architecture, particulary Palliadio's Four Books. American architecture schools did not really become a reality until after the Civil War and then after the WW I.

Until the Modern Movement, nearly all residential buildings (except for the most wealthly) were designed and built by "Carpenter" builders. They used pattern books to guide their work and simple "rules-of-thumb" to direct thier work. The various books by Asher Benjamin being the most important.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asher_Benjamin

The Modernist became interested in new construction technologies and trying to construct houses for the middle-class. The Case Study program by Art and Architecture being the most famous foray by trained architects into the mass market of housing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_study_houses

I really love vernacular architecture (architecture without architects). The carpenter builders and master stonemasons of the 18th and 19th century know their craft and were well-read individuals. I would recommend reading Benjamin Ashers books, Vincent Scully's work on the Shingle Style, and Pamphlet Architecture #9 by Steven Holl (Urban and Rural housing types).

The latter book would inform your Katerina house. It is not a suitable design for the climate and is quite counter to your arguement about simple answers. Most bayou houses have large windows for natural ventilation. These houses also use double hung windows which are best in controlling natural ventilation. These vernacular houses have covered porches to enjoy the shade and the pedistran flow of the street. The vernacular architecture informs us of the local building traditions.
http://www.peterbice.com/KATRINA_HOUSES/Main/

If fact I would argue that the simple Katrina Cottage (designed by a formally trained architect) is more in-keeping with the New Orleans vernacular. http://www.cusatocottages.com/index_content.html

Vernacular architecture is beautiful. But unfortunately, the traditional craft of building and design that was once the hallmark of the "carpenter" builder has been lost. Even though there are many licensed and "formally trained" architects trying to change their part of the world.

Today, nearly all of residential design is designed by non-architects. Or the designs created by larger builders who have design staffs. There are a few large architecture firms doing houses/housing/residential development, but nationally, most new developments are designed by non-architects.

Concerning the developments themselves. I spent 13 years on the local Planning Commission. None of the work I reviewed while sitting on Planning Commission has been designed by an architect. It is typically designed by Civil Engineers. A typical design is best describe as "let's count the cul-de-sacs". Civil Engineers are not trained in design as architects and landscape architects understand it. FWIW - Landscape architects are probably the profession best suited and trained to do residential development design.

I also worked for a top 100 E/A firm that provided design services for residential development. Again, even though we had planners, architects and LA's on staff, the civil engineers did the "design-work" and it was horrid stuff, but sold like hotcakes. Once someone figures out the American house buying public, let me know.

There are some developments out there being designed by architects, but there are also architects out there trying to swing the pendulum the other way.
Peter Calthrope http://www.calthorpe.com/
Duany Plater Zyberk http://www.dpz.com/

So to pin the present condition on "formally educated" licensed architects shows a lack of historical knowledge and perspective on your part. I would wage that nearly 90% of the typically housing developments and houses within those developments are NOT designed by licensed and formally trained architects.

[ptrbice]

The 5th grade history lesson bored the living shit out of me, and my office.
It contained information any 8th grade design student would have heard
endlessly.

The wind bag nature of the reply was wordy and useless, ie.

typical, blowhard, and, frankly embarrassingly stupid thought processes of the brainless, talk, talk, talk, and do nothing design dorks that think shallow and build garbage.

Your reply could have been one sentence.

Bottom line: 99% of American residential housing is built by morons, with zero taste. A drive through any, and I mean any US city's suburbs clearly illustrates nothing but banalty and slop, to the point that one wouldn't know if you were in Toledo or Tuscon but for the vegetation.

Regarding your comment that ugly houses sell like hotcakes, we would point out that so do Big Macs. Duh.............................

This Office thinks you're an idiot.

[phansford]

[jack.mark]

Hi all,

I want more information about shaker architecture.Or tell me any website where I get more stuff.

Thnks,

Mark.