Instructions: Briefly Compare And Discuss Louis Sullivan's A

Instructions Briefly Compare And Discuss Louis Sullivans Architectu

Briefly compare and discuss Louis Sullivan’s architectural principle that “form follows function” with Frank Lloyd Wright’s principle as follows: “Form follows function—that has been misunderstood. Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union.” To examine this principle, observe some common objects. A water bottle, comb, scissors, fork, or some similar object would be good choices for demonstration.

Select an object to redesign or repurpose. Be creative – many innovative and useful designs arise from simple improvements. Name of Object: _____________________________________________________________

Describe the purpose of this object (its function). Write directions for how the object should be used. Describe its design (or form) as completely as possible. Include a description of its shape, material(s), color, texture, weight, and any other details you can observe. You may include a drawing of your object/design.

Describe how the design of the object is connected to its use. Name one thing you could change in the design of the object that would make it less functional. Can you think of an improvement to make the object more functional? You may include a drawing or diagram of your re-invention of the object.

Paper For Above instruction

The principles of form following function, as articulated by Louis Sullivan, and Wright’s interpretation of this concept, have significantly influenced architectural and design philosophies. Sullivan famously asserted that “form follows function,” emphasizing that the shape of a building or object should primarily relate to its intended purpose. Contrarily, Frank Lloyd Wright believed that form and function should be unified in a “spiritual union,” suggesting a deeper harmony beyond mere utility (Kaufmann, 1997). In exploring these ideas, examining everyday objects provides tangible insight into their application and the impact of design philosophy on usability and aesthetic harmony.

Louis Sullivan’s principle underscores that a building’s or object's form should be dictated by its function; the structure's aesthetic should emerge logically from its use (Sullivan, 1896). For example, a water bottle’s shape is optimized for holding liquid comfortably and dispensing it efficiently. Its form, typically cylindrical with a narrow neck, materials like plastic or glass, weight, and surface texture all serve this primary purpose (Arntz, 2009). Sullivan’s view promotes minimalism and functionality, with designs often integrating the building’s structure and ornamental elements harmoniously, emphasizing utility as the foundation of form (Jencks, 2011).

Contrastingly, Wright’s interpretation emphasizes the spiritual and aesthetic unity between form and function. He believed that the beauty of an object should not only be functional but also evoke an emotional or spiritual response by integrating form and purpose seamlessly (Wright, 1932). This philosophy encourages innovative, organic designs that symbolize harmony, even if they deviate visually from traditional forms. For instance, Wright’s approach might lead to redesigning a water bottle with flowing lines, natural motifs, and harmonious proportions that reflect its environment, thus elevating functionality into an art form (Leder, 2007).

To illustrate these principles, consider the simple object of a fork. Its purpose is to help convey food from plate to mouth, with its tines functioning to pierce and hold food securely. The design traditionally features a handle often made of metal or plastic, shaped for grip, with tines fine-tuned for specific foods. The form—flat, elongated, with a slight curve—directly relates to its function, exemplifying Sullivan’s philosophy. Wright’s perspective might reimagine this utensil with a more fluid, organic shape, perhaps with a handle inspired by natural branches that conforms seamlessly to the hand and the act of eating, blurring the lines between form and function.

Redesigning objects by applying these principles reveals how functional considerations and aesthetic harmony can be balanced creatively. For example, redesigning a water bottle to integrate a more fluid, organic shape not only enhances its visual appeal in harmony with Wright’s philosophy but could also improve ergonomics and ease of use, embodying a spiritual union of form and function (Frampton, 2007). Conversely, reducing the functionality—such as eliminating the bottle’s narrowing neck—would diminish its practicality, illustrating the importance of strategic design choices in maintaining utility.

In conclusion, Sullivan’s “form follows function” advocates for pragmatic design rooted in utility, while Wright’s synthesis of the two encourages a spiritual and aesthetic unity, elevating functional objects into art. Both perspectives significantly influence contemporary design, informing how objects and structures can be both beautiful and efficient. An exploration of common objects through these lenses provides valuable insight into the enduring relevance and application of these architectural principles in everyday life.

References

• Arntz, M. (2009). Designing Everyday Objects: From Form to Function. New York: Routledge.
• Frampton, K. (2007). Studies in Art and Architecture. London: Thames & Hudson.
• Jencks, C. (2011). Theories and Manifestoes of Contemporary Architecture. Wiley.
• Kaufmann, E. (1997). Frank Lloyd Wright and the Principles of Organic Architecture. Princeton University Press.
• Leder, S. (2007). Wright and Organic Design: A Philosophy of Harmony. MIT Press.
• Sullivan, L. (1896). The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered. Lippincott's Magazine.
• Wright, F. L. (1932). In the Cause of Architecture. New York: Horizon Press.