FEATURE-May 2011

Edited by Rebecca Falzano
Photography Trent Bell

With history as his guide, architect John Gordon attempts to define his field

Architecture can be hard to define—even for architects. When Bucksport-based architect John Gordon tries to define it, he channels Sir Henry Wotton’s 1642 treatise on the subject: “In Architecture, as in all other Operative Arts, the end must direct the Operation. The end is to build well. Well-building hath three conditions:  Commodity, Firmness, and Delight.” Sir Henry’s definition, based on the musings of ancient Roman architect Vitruvius, simplifies architecture with these three functions. Gordon believes that architecture is best defined as a synthesis of these three conditions, with possibly the addition of a fourth condition: “If Vitruvius and Sir Henry were writing about architecture today, they might include ‘Comfort’ in their written discussions,” says Gordon. MH+D talks with Gordon about commodity, firmness, delight, and comfort and how they apply to architecture today.

Q: Can you explain those three conditions and how they translate into design?
A: The first is commodity, or shelter—seemingly, the most basic provision of architecture. Shelter is defined as “something that provides cover and protection.” All architecture is shelter. However, not all shelter is architecture. In taking this point a step farther, architects are not necessary to produce architecture, as famously argued by Bernard Rudofsky in his seminal 1964 MoMA exhibition and book, Architecture without Architects. Of course, in today’s regulated and well-defined world we have laws that define architecture and require that its practice be performed by licensed “architects.” But, I digress.

The second condition is firmness, the defiance of gravity and the elements. Firmness includes the need of a building to durably defy vertical forces of gravity and horizontal forces, both seismic and wind. It also includes keeping the elements at bay by maintaining the undesirable and threatening on the outside—rain, snow, ice, cold, unwanted animals and people, etc.—and safely protecting the valued contents of our life on the inside—belongings, costly conditioned air, loved ones, etc.—through the use of roof, walls, foundation, and so on. We value sturdy, substantially constructed buildings. And, it’s why cheaply constructed, flimsy buildings are not durable. We want our buildings to last!

The third condition is delight, or beauty. One definition of beauty is “the quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit.” Most architects avoid discussions of beauty (too easily construed as “style”). They prefer to discuss proportions, pattern, form, fenestration, etc. Some architects believe a building should embody ideas. The interpretation of those ideas lies in the domain of the observer. Hence, the old saying, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder!” Nonetheless, most people (architects included) experience delight in a thoughtfully designed building that gives balance to the senses. And, as Oscar Wilde once remarked, “In matters of importance, style is everything.”

Q: How do these conditions relate to each other, if at all?
A: In short, the three conditions are independent. We have many examples of well-planned buildings that are not of beauty. Likewise, we are all aware of beautiful buildings that don’t work so well. Contrary to architect Louis Sullivan’s maxim, form does not necessarily follow function. Commodity, Firmness, and Delight—and Comfort?—vary in application depending upon the specific needs and priorities of a project. Sometimes one predominates, sometimes the other. As such, the art of well-building requires a prudent balancing of Sir Henry’s three conditions.

Q: What does the fourth condition you propose—comfort—mean in architecture?
A: “The appearance of [the word] ‘comfort’ to signify a level of domestic amenity is not documented until the eighteenth century,” writes author Witold Rybczynski (in his book Home: A Short History of an Idea). That’s because, as he explains, until then no word was needed “to articulate an idea that previously had either not existed or had not required expression.” A descriptive definition of comfort is provided by architect Christopher Alexander: “Imagine yourself on a winter afternoon with a pot of tea, a book, a reading light, and two or three huge pillows to lean back against. Now make yourself comfortable.”

In MH+D’s continuing collaboration with AIA Maine,
we present to you each month a design concept from an architect’s point of view.