The Integration of Form and Structure in The Work of Louis Kahn

ABSTRACT: An important aspect of design, as a product of a cultural context, is the unity between form and structure in architecture. In modern architecture, since the Renaissance, the emphasis has been on stylistic expression, and consequently much consideration has been placed on formalistic and geometric elements of design, as for example, the tradition of Baroque and Neo-Calssical architecture. Since the Industrial Revolution, and particularly with the increasing use of modern materials and structural systems (e.g. iron, steel. glass, reinforced concrete, high-rise and wide span structures) the expression of structure began to emerge as main stylistic criteria. But, this expression was not a balanced statement between form and structure but rather the emphasis was on tectonic. This is one of the major criticisms of Postmodern architects regarding modern architecture; that is, the reduction of architecture to mechanical and functionalist expression. By contrast, the work of Louis Kahn is a very good example of both a more balanced and holistic approach toward an inclusive design, in which the integration of form and structure plays a major role. The aim of this thesis is to discuss and analyze the ideas and methods implicit to Louis Kahn’s work; i.e. an understanding of this integration and how he applied this to his design. This is important because, today, much architectural work suffers from the unbalanced emphasis upon formalist or tectonic expressionism. Louis Kahn, and his successors are examples of how architecture, as a cultural as well as tectonic/functionalist form is result of designing with an understanding of the integration of form and structure, as an expression of a particular cultural period. This thesis will conclude with examples and a discussion, of relevant architectural successors of Kahn and their expression of this integral approach to architectural design in contemporary architecture. Key Words: Louis I. Kahn, Influences, Theory, Form, Structure. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………