Although all the readings were quite interesting and worth discussing, I was particularly struck by the fundamental differences between Le Corbusier’s theories and Walter Gropius’ theories.
In the essay, “A Contemporary City of Three Million Inhabitants”, Le Corbusier bases his model for ‘The City of To-morrow’ on idealized principles of urban life defined by a set of rigid stylistic and functional rules. His design concept focuses on streamlining transportation and fixing the congestion and the sanitary issues plaguing the old city. His theory emphasizes creating a uniform type of city and he confidently promotes his style as beneficial to all.
On the other hand, in Walter Gropius’, “Total Scope of Architecture”, Gropius denounces the concept of a singular style. His theory is less about creating a uniform style but about creating a uniform teaching method. Moreover, his teaching method is based on creating talented architects with individual styles and independent ideas. He rejects the idea of a singular style and the idea that Bauhaus has a style in itself because it stifles progress and ignores the rapidly changing needs of the people.
I find Gropius’ theory more appealing because it develops talented students focused on producing great architecture rather than on producing a style. I am drawn to this because each city, each community, and each environment has different needs that can’t be simplified into one style. I think it is harmful to the development of architecture to impose strict stylistic boundaries.