Viollet-le-duc

“For him, the art of designing was ultimately a rational activity in which beauty is largely a by-product” (Hearn 1990). Hearn shows that Eugène-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc believes that the first copper vessel has the most style because one can easily justify that it is the most rational choice for which the vessel should be shaped. The vessel has been designed to be fully functional in every way, the tapering of the copper at the top to insure that none of the liquid is spilt; the handles are formed to match the natural shape of a human hand and the flat bottom so that the vessel will not topple over when full with liquid. It may look simpler and not as ornate as the other two vessels Hearn reassures us that “While a rational design is not necessarily beautiful, a beautiful design is not necessarily rational.” (1990)


The third, most modern vessel has been altered so much that it is no longer a rational design and in doing so it does not possess style. In this case the vessel does not follow the first rule of designing “form ever follows function”, evidently this coppersmith has to compete with the other two and has to come up with something original so that the public will choose his design over the other two. But the elongation of the handles has caused this vessel to lose majority of its functionality because it cannot be stored upside down. Violet-le-Duc justifies that when altering a design of something it should not lose the original intention for which it was designed: “The portion of the structure that is traditionally most susceptible to aesthetic elaboration should be largely predetermined by the functional requirements” (Hearn 1990).


Viollet-le-Duc talks about Roman Architecture’s advancement from the Greek Doric temple. He is impressed by their alteration of the original Doric style which was rigid and very template like style of Architecture. “proceeded then to devise various structural solutions to the problems raised by the different sizes and shapes of spaces in a complex arrangement. Yet, while the structural schemes were ingenious the builders always ended by decorating them with a luxurious but irrelevant veneer of Greek forms.” (Hearn 1990) This reiterates the previous point that the Romans should have just stuck to the simple, beautiful structures they created instead of just throwing some Greek style decorations around the place which have nothing to do with the function.


I agree with his conclusion that one should not ever compromise the function of a design in order to make it more aesthetically pleasing. When designing or “improving” one should always keep in the back of one’s mind the intended function of the design and not stray away from this intention. This does not mean that one should be afraid to edit a previous design, just as long as it benefits the function of the design. It is very rational to choose a simpler design that works than to choose an elegant one that is useless.