Resilience - Light: Magic or Method?
Light is said to be a favourite medium for architects. For a practitioner who has spent his career measuring building performance, I have become highly suspicious of the received wisdom by which many guide their affairs.
When the subject of light arises, it is hard for architects to avoid Le Corbusier’s definition of architecture from Vers Une Architecture: “Architecture is the masterly, correct and magnificent play of masses brought together in light.” This assertion is so commonly repeated that one might think all architecture students are told to memorize it. It has become a touchstone, but appears to be quoted more often than it is well used. Le Corbusier was a masterful sloganeer, but as architecture students find out, architecture in practice is much more than slogans.
The phrase “masses brought together in light” seems to imply a special “gathering” nature to light. Is light a magic quality that reveals good design? Or is it simply a tool that architects use to communicate form?
In the definition, the viewing position and the light source are both implied. The definition also refers to more than one mass. Perhaps this is a complex created by different intersecting masses. The viewpoint is most likely from the exterior. Masses are seen, not volumes. Notwithstanding the common use of “mass” and “volume” synonymously, volume is experienced from the interior whereas mass implies a view from the exterior.
The light source is probably natural, but there is no discussion of light colour. Natural light changes its colour over the day and over the seasons. The colour of light is extremely important to human physiognomy. It affects our biological response to the places we occupy. High colour temperatures for light suggest mid-day when we should be active. Low colour temperatures suggest evening times when we should consider resting. Offices use light temperatures near 4,000 degrees Kelvin. Residences can drop down to light temperatures of 2,700 degrees Kelvin. Le Corbusier wasn’t practicing in a time that permitted tuning light colour as we currently can with LED lamps, but he would certainly have understood the difference between a July sky and a November sky.
The more common metrics of light are illumination (luminance), contrast and glare. The tolerable ranges for these phenomena are characterized in the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) design handbook. Appropriate lighting is directly connected to occupancy of the space. The qualities of light are measurable and calculable. Photometric analysis is available from lighting manufacturers and suppliers as a design assist service. With the increasing use of LED lamps, the optics of lenses and diffusers in fixtures are becoming more important, requiring due consideration of location and applications. Just covering the ceiling with light fixtures is no longer an acceptable form of lighting design.
Ironically, many designers want to see dramatic lighting effects. Most often the dramatic shafts of light entering a large volume space make any task other than walking through the space difficult. The illumination is uneven and the contrast between light and shade is too high. Similarly, exterior shading devices that cast high contrast shadows across a desk surface make it impossible to work for the time those shadows are present.
Sharp shadows do help to make the complexity of assembled masses intelligible. The drawing technique of applying shadows to building elevations is so strong that students are often instructed to apply shadows to north elevations as if they were on the south.
This misapplication of shadows is one of the ways designers fool themselves into thinking that there is more to the design than there actually is. Wishful thinking is the worst architectural vice.
A forced honesty in description is one thing to be thankful for when architectural representation is created in 3-D modelling programs. Programs that tie a building site to the compass prevent designers lying to themselves regarding how a building will be perceived.
Understanding shade and shadow as a communication tool helps one see how Le Corbusier’s definition of architecture would help a designer analyze a building as an object. This is probably the real value of the definition and why it is repeated. If the parts of a building have clear relationships to each other, the whole building will be easier to understand. This benefits orientation and wayfinding in the final product. But the definition is internal to architecture and not intended for the public. It is part of a technical discussion of how one assembles a building well.
It has been commonly observed that architects speak their own language. One would hope that technical discussions of design were not completely obscure to the people that will own and eventually maintain the building under consideration. Closed jargon is a failure of communication, but at one time, it was thought to be an expression of the superior personal quality of the architect. If our clients believe that our words are outside of their possible experience and therefore can be ignored without serious issue, we should not be surprised that our participation in the creations of buildings is devalued.
The designed object, viewed from above, is a model representing a building. It is not how the building will be experienced once constructed. Quoting Vers Une Architecture might make one look erudite, but it not going to communicate to one’s clients.