Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
44
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, the coloured studio. Berlin-Dahalewitz 1926.
Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus, (Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927).
“This will of constructing in lively way is the effective tradition of building.”
Bruno Taut
Vitruvio
International
journal of
Architecture
Technology and
Sustainability
Volume 2 Is 1
45
ABSTRACT
1 Antalya International University, Department of Architecture
In 1926 Bruno Taut built his own house in Berlin-Dahlewitz. The German architect had already declared his
ideas of housing in the book Die neue Whonung (1924) exemplifying the new concept of modern living-style,
according to Neues Bauen. In other theoretical writings he defines the Neues Bauen in relation with new needs,
tendencies and aesthetics of architecture, referring to important issues as climate, topography and tradition. The
book Ein Whonhaus (1927) stigmatizes the coeval construction process of his house: the thirteen chapters are
a detailed analysis which give evidence to every technological and morphological choice. Taut focuses on the
relationship between architecture and landscape, type of furniture, functional plan layout, use of glass; especially
he enlightens the reader as to the use of colour as a construction material. The house has an unconventional
shape, it is a quarter of a circle; in his writings the architect painstakingly explains the impressive plan. With the
book Ein Whonhaus Taut delivers to memory his home design, transforming process and ideas related to the
modern house. He breaks through conventions and changes the notions of what Modernism could produce. The
paper highlights the theoretical production related to the architect’s own house as praxis for doing architecture,
emphasizing Taut’s contribution to a dialectic mutual relationship between theoretical and architectural practice,
in order to achieve a more conscious and effective design process.
KEYWORDS
Neues Bauen, Modernism, theoretical writings, praxis process, colour
Architectural practice and theory:
the case of Bruno Taut's house in Berlin-Dahlewitz
Paola Ardizzola1
https://doi.org/10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2017.7496
46
1. INTRODUCTION
Ein Wohnhaus (A house for living), the book Bruno
Taut wrote in 1927 a year after the construction of his
own home in Berlin- Dahlewitz and about its building
process, is a small masterpiece of describing and
illustrating architecture. We could state that book
and house are by some means interchangeable; the
one says about the other and complete the other.
It is a modern operative means that is related to
the concept of militant action of architecture, which
requires a careful exegesis in order to attest its
necessity of emphasizing all those premises that are
prerogative of Modernism. Through his writing, the
architect intends to subvert the traditional image of
the house as a symbolic object, almost sacred and
unchangeable, thus giving breath to a new idea of
architectural space as an object of use created for
the individual, which focuses on man’s needs and
demands according to the functional, social and
human perspective. The house must be conceived
as an architectural object completely subjected to
the man and not the reverse; hence, the necessity
for an architectural design process tightly planned
for the individual. He validates the concept also in
the choice of taking photos of his architectures while
individuals are interacting with them, far from a mere
aesthetical and self-celebrating process of the built
space. As Taut himself states, «It is not interesting the
appearance of the spaces without men. It counts only
the appearance of the men within the spaces». (Taut,
1927. It. ed. 1986). Starting from the second decade
of the twentieth century until 1938, the year of his
death, Taut systematically carries on an intense writing
activity which comprises about four hundred writings
including books, articles, essays, etc. Between 1924
and 1927 the architect writes the trilogy that covers
issues closely related to the construction of new
architectural projects: Die neue Wohnung. Die Frau
als Schöpferin (The new house. The woman as creator,
1924), Bauen. Der neue Wohnbau (Building. The new
residential building, 1927) and Ein Wohnhaus in 1927
as well. Until 1931, Taut is living the ‘Berlin golden
years’ during which he is the undisputed protagonist
of the construction season related to the Siedlungen,
a building type capable of generating a new and
successful urban morphology of residential units for
workers. The architect pays attention and reconciles
constructive functionalism and aesthetic reasons of the
Neues Bauen, thanks to a special care of psychological
and human factors in relation to new social needs. The
new technology and the functionalism are not justified
because of a new trend in architecture, but rather they
are related to the concept of enhancing the quality of
life within the private sphere of workers’ life. Nobody
could have stated to have built in Berlin has Taut did,
indeed in less than ten years he will construct about ten
thousand housing units according to his revolutionary
concepts, giving a new face to the city thanks to the
new residential typology of the Siedlung. Thus it is of
fundamental importance to consider the theoretical
apparatus of his books because they represent the
idea of architecture that the German architect sets up
in those years.
2. THE POETICS OF HOUSING
In the history of architecture, there are not many
cases where the architect is both designer and
commissioner; in this specific condition the project
often assumes strong symbolic meaning representing
the world itself of the user-architect who, showing a
room on one’s own, exposes the inner aspects that
concern the private sphere and involve the person
in his entirety. Therefore on one hand Taut builds for
himself and his family, on the other hand he points the
way - through the written word too - of a possible new
architectural type.
The basic idea of the Dahlewitz project arises from
the awareness of wanting to create a functional
and adaptable space that is flexible to the different
needs. A space which can change, adjust itself to
the necessities of those who inhabit it and that can
be strongly related with the surrounding context, in
search for continuity between exterior and interior.
The prodromal concept of this functional and
constructive flexibility can be found already in the
publication Die Auflösung der Städte (The dissolution
of the city) written in 1920: by dissolution Taut refers
Vitruvio
International
journal of
Architecture
Technology and
Sustainability
Volume 2 Is 1
47
to dissolution of old forms of the bourgeois city,
meant as liberation from their strict compulsion. In a
book’s table Taut draws an ‘architectural box’ with a
single compartment whose shape can change freely,
according to light necessities and space needs. It
does not refer to the box of Cubism of course, which
derives from a formal vision, but it is rather a changing
space which adapts itself according to the necessities
of those who live in. The inner walls are mobile so that
the interior of the house can easily follow any desire
of flexibility in using the space. As Taut emphasizes
in the written comment added to the drawing, in this
large cell each member of the house can easily be
isolated; closets are not an obstacle because all are
cabinets within the wall. Anything else is mobile; each
wall has a different colour also outside, as well as the
ceiling. Taut continues: «Different lifestyle contents
create different forms of life (...). At the beginning,
there is just a 'box' of a single living compartment.
The form varies according to the wind, sun and
position. Division into homogeneous walls are
composed always in different ways. (...) The House is
transformed like the man, movable and stable at the
same time». (Taut, 1920. It. ed. 2008).
Therefore he does not speak of form and function but
about contents, from which new forms can take life.
In the Dahlewitz project there is a new form that can
be immediately identified: it is the unusual plan, a
quarter of circle (Fig.1) that is beyond any typological
scheme, a desecrating geometry that seems to
defy the rationalist rules of the right angle. Also the
common perception is impressed, so much so that
Taut’s house is satirically defined by the contemporary
Berliners ‘the cake’s slice’. (Melis, 1982).
But Taut is not interested in designing per se
desecrating forms, rather in composing a shape,
which is the result of the interior functions and of
the close relationship between the interior and the
specificity of the place. With strict logics he states:
«The convexity of the plan is a factor which affects
the spatial economy: the circle in fact, in relation
to the length of its circumference, is the figure with
the largest surface. Moreover the plans that deviate
from the dogma of the right angle and of the
rectangle offer many favourable possibilities of use
and arrangement of space». (Taut, 1927, It. ed. 1986).
The form of Dahlewitz becomes the symbolic space
whose poetics is related to the image of the circle:
it is the expression of a harmonious social life where
the relations among the parties become immediately
obvious. A one-to-one correspondence between man
and the house is established, between the individual
and the most intimate space of his everyday life;
indeed home, deprived of human presence, does not
reflect its true vocation of fostering and enabling the
sociality among individuals. Taut corroborates this
concept in such a sharp way already in 1924: «The
successful environment, without the inhabitants is
nothing and remains 'empty'. It takes consistency and
becomes 'full' and finished only with humans who live
there». (Taut, 1924, It. ed. 1986).
Figure 1.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, aerial view from north.
Berlin-Dahalewitz, 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus
(Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927).
48
The architect's task is thus to reify the ‘social culture’
in which he operates becoming a mediator between
the project itself and the absolute values it represents.
Here therefore the book written by Taut in conjunction
with the project, in this light takes on a profound
significance related both to artistic expression and
functional characters, aimed at helping the sociality of
the space, whether individual or collective.
3. HOME, A SPACE
FOR HUMAN EXPERIENCE
A major component of Taut’s design process is the
rational use of the house and related spaces. But the
word ‘rational’ evokes immediately that Rationalism
which was far from the main goals the architect wanted
to achieve. His aim is to facilitate the functions that
take place in the house so as to generate a ‘human
experience’ which has to be simple, clear and
sympathetic.
It is precisely in the functionalism and in the distributive
characters that Taut combines the spiritual values of
the house as a place of intimacy, with the space of the
outside world.
That is why the architect describes and justifies the
spaces and the details of his own home with great
wealth: the functionality of the plan (Fig. 2), the reasons
of colours both inside and outside, the details about
the technical devices. To which extent he takes into
account the practical requirements is demonstrated,
for instance, by his efforts in facilitating the housewife
work: in designing the plans the architect is always
careful to locate the kitchen so that it is easily accessible
from the living room (Fig. 3); the closets are mainly wall
cabinets to ensure the least possible obstruction. In the
house there is no more room for the useless furnishings
which take room and make the space heavy; only what
is really useful belongs to the house.
The natural sunlight has relevant influence in the design
choices; that is why Taut decides to treat the two main
fronts, east and west, in a complete different way in
terms of colours. The black of the convex east façade
emphasizes and supports the unusual distribution
Figure 3.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, ground floor plan. Berlin-
Dahalewitz 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus
(Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927)
The cake’slice and the service spaces.
Figure 2.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, the paths’ lines. Berlin-
Dahalewitz 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus
(Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927)
The drawing emphasizes the functionalism of the design.
Vitruvio
International
journal of
Architecture
Technology and
Sustainability
Volume 2 Is 1
49
of openings; it counter poses the white of the west
façade, ‘sullied’ by the yellow and black frames of
the windows and by the large black top cornice. The
choice of different colours on the fronts is also related
to energetic reasons, as the architect Winfried Brenne,
who restored the house, has stated: «Alongside
aesthetic standpoints, energetic considerations played
a considerable role for Taut. The white on the inclined
wall surfaces beams warmth back during summer,
while the black east façade ‘sucks the morning sun’s
light and warmth into the house’». (Brenne, 2008).
Taut uses mainly light colours at west (Fig. 4) in harmony
with the warm light of the afternoon and darker and
warmer shades at east (Fig. 5), to intensify the cold
light of morning. He summarizes the relationship of the
blue sky and red sun light in the red-blue dialectics,
which originates from the suggestions induced in
Taut by the poetic colour interpretations of the poet
Paul Scheerbart. Taut wrote: «Game of blue and red:
enlightened directly from the sun they emit perfectly
identical reflexes, to the clear light of day red becomes
clearer, almost pink, and blue accompanies it with a
darker and deeper shade; then the twilight comes and
blue with the increasing darkness becomes more and
more clear, almost white, while red becomes darker
and darker, almost black. Alternating changes. The
lamp – the human light – makes them rather similarly
muted and mild. In this manner the cosmic game of
double light of red and blue arrests». (Taut, 1922. It.
ed. 1976). Thus behind a specific technical choice,
the architect adduces functional, practical and poetic
reasons.
The colour is used to a large extent inside. Thanks to the
use of colour, the living room becomes an expression
of the family life, the bedroom is designed to express
the function of resting; the kitchen is the uncontested
functional realm of the woman. The purpose is to
differentiate each room and every function that takes
place in it; the colour choice is always functional in
relation to the room and the individual. We could
state that this choice is conceived according to the
revolutionary concept of ‘environmental psychology’
which focuses on the needs of the individual instances.
The windows and the doors, in addition to the functional
value of internal/external connection, thanks to the
Figure 4.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, north-west front. Berlin-
Dahalewitz 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus
(Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927)
Figure 5.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, east front. Berlin-Dahalewitz
1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus (Franckh’sche
Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927). The rounded
east front is dark grey, in contraposition with west white front.
50
colours announce in the interiors the external vivacity.
Even radiators and pipes, which in common practice
are muffled with neutral colours, here are highlighted
in red and blue or yellow (Fig. 6), like the ribs of a living
organism whose internal physiology ensures the life
itself of the building body, and therefore they should
not be hidden but rather emphasized. In Ein Wohnhaus,
in order to better specify his colour’ choices, Taut gives
advice by attaching the Baumann colours’ tones as
exemplification of colour shades (Fig. 7).
The architect pays particular attention also to the
orientation of the surfaces: the intensity of the morning
light is different from that one of the afternoon and
he does not compromise on these specifics. Indeed
he makes of it a strong point to getting the maximum
colour yield. He specifies: «The continuous change
of the incidence angle of light produces changing
perspectives (...). The dye must bring out the volume
of the complex. The vibrancy of colour and its different
brightness permit from time to time to expand the
perspective planes to some degree, or to restrict them».
(Taut in: Pitz, Brenne, 1980). The architect likens the
chromatic composition to the musical one: behind the
careful attention to the use of colour there is the wish
to express a new kind of musicality whose execution is
entrusted to the different shades of colours, so much
rich so as to overcome the ranges of the ‘instrument’
itself. It can be said that this intimate search reveals the
romantic essence of Taut, peculiarity that confirms his
figure as outsider within a prevalent rationalist concept
of the Neues Bauen which considered the white colour
as an almost absolute must.
Considering the plan layout, on the terrace it turns to
be a ninety degrees angle which ostentatiously seems
to indicate a specific direction – towards the garden – as
symbolic direction toward the future (Fig. 8). The angle
and the curved line are the expressionist legacy which
is reified without jeopardizing the dogmatism. Indeed
the flat roof which closes the image of the house on top
seems to be the confirmation by Taut of adhering to
the logic and the features of Modernism. But also for
this choice, there is an extremely interesting motivation.
Taut’s use of the flat roof is neither a simple pursuit of
formal gratification, nor a strong ‘break with the past’
reaction; it is possible to introduce the hypothesis
Figure 6.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, the coloured studio. Berlin-
Dahalewitz 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus
(Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927).
that the roots of this choice should be searched for in
the theory of ‘climatologic’ architecture first launched
by Taut in a 1925 article entitled The Aesthetics of
Berlin Buildings: «Referring to its global setting and in
comparison to all other metropolitan cities, Berlin has
the advantage to possess and enjoy a hinterland and a
characteristic landscape: the Mark, having remnants of
an old culture and traditions present to a certain extent.
On the other hand, there still exists some virgin land with
Vitruvio
International
journal of
Architecture
Technology and
Sustainability
Volume 2 Is 1
51
Figure 7.
Bruno Taut, the Baumann colours’ tones used in the house.
Berlin-Dahalewitz 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus
(Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927).
the quality of a rural setting that magnetically attracts
intellectually equipped people or those with elevated
entrepreneurial skills, from far and wide. Referring to
this characteristic of Berlin, I would like to underline
an architectural and aesthetic feature that seems to
have been long neglected [...]. In all the theories of
Architectural Aesthetics – Taut continues – there is little
concern for climate, but according to me, this factor
plays an important role [...]. The landscape related
character of the lowlands is the horizontal that reigns
everywhere. All the components of the landscape are
adapted and in the Mark are accentuated with the
horizontal line of the pine forests far beyond the water’s
surface. The winds easily sweep the territory away, and
the view is never obstructed till the horizon [...]. All the
constructions, which were built in this area till the 70s’
of XIX century, demonstrate a similar feature: that is the
extreme terseness of the contours and a great love for
52
Figure 8.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, first floor plan. Berlin-Dahalewitz
1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus (Franckh’sche
Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927).
Figure 9.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, the glass surface on the
east front. Berlin-Dahalewitz, 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein
Wohnhaus (Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co.
Stuttgart, 1927).
simplicity [...]. From Eastern Prussia to the Bergisches
Land, the most stripped down solution of cube and
roof is found […] in the simplest houses. There is always
a recognizable attempt to push this concision to the
limit, up to the very elimination of the view of the roof».
(Taut, 1925).
The elongated surface made of glass prisms, which
runs throughout the convex front, can be considered
the real focal point of the entire house (Fig. 9). It has the
power to unify the inner vertical space of the two floors
by bringing light to the stair-element: from here, the
light irradiates in the entire house. The different tones
of the natural light, changing incessantly during the
day, provides the richness of different colour’s nuances.
The sharp angle of the top roof covering the balcony is
also made of prismatic glasses, which filter the light to
the space below giving light to all the bedrooms. The
balcony is the place the three bedrooms are facing to,
thus they are connected in this interesting semi-private
filtering space.
4. THE TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
OF DAHLEWITZ AS THEORETICAL
WRITING
The book Ein Wohnhaus, as already pointed out,
relies on the synergistic action between text and
image. The index itself discloses the framework Taut
means to give the publication, thanks to the chapters
which go straight to specific issues closely related to
the construction of a house for living: it goes from
Vitruvio
International
journal of
Architecture
Technology and
Sustainability
Volume 2 Is 1
53
the analysis of ‘Type’ to ‘Glass Architecture’, from ‘Set
table’ to ‘Bedrooms’ then closing by focusing on ‘Roof
and attic’ and ‘Garden’.
The third chapter, ‘Architecture and landscape’ is
crucial to reveal clearly the importance of continuity
between interior and exterior space (Fig. 10),
prerogative of the modus operandi of many masters
of the Modern Movement. Taut does not hesitate to
explain: «Particularly when it is a house built in an open
space, there must be not a clear demarcation between
exterior and interior. The whole house is certainly
the result of its interior functions; to the same extent
however it is determined by its relationships with the
existing conditions in the place of construction, from
the position in relation to the sun, from the garden,
the landscape and finally from the neighbourhood».
(Taut, 1927. It ed. 1986). Although the book basically
presents a disciplined building practice with strong
educational value on the construction of his home,
according to Taut’s intentions it rises to a wider
significance, traceable in all his buildings.
Even though Taut was keen in using the new concrete
technology, together with the prefabrication and
the standardization of the construction site (the
experience with the Siedlungen), for his own house
he prefers to rely on the very well established
bauen tradition, choosing the traditional technique
rather than the skeleton and the filled walls type.
It is opportune to remember that Taut’s education
includes also the studies in a technical building school
which trained him on construction sites already when
he was only seventeen years old; thus he had also a
deep knowledge of traditional construction methods
through a serious practice since early years of his
interest for architecture. Despite the fast development
of the new technology and materials between the
two World Wars, this was still a common practice:
«However the same path to a manner of housing
architecture reduced to a few house-types and based
on industrial prefabrication was also taken by those
planners who distanced themselves decisively from
Neues Bauen and announced their intention to take
up and use historical, traditional and landscape
features of the region in their designs». (Krauskopf,
2013). But in Dahlewitz there is also a combination
Figure 10.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, view of the garden from the
living room. Berlin-Dahalewitz, 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein
Wohnhaus (Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co.
Stuttgart, 1927).
of technology: inside, there are no supporting walls;
there are only two massive pillars at the centre of the
house. The very interesting thing is how Taut explains
in the chapter ‘the type’ a possible combination of
solutions for achieving the final aim of the project,
questioning on the concept of the house as machine
and the rationalistic approach: «The main mistake
of the rationalizing fashion, as such, is to identify in
the fact that industrial production in series is referred
schematically to an overall object, the house done
and completed, which presents in reality very different
and diversified structures. In its correct interpretation
the need for a rationalization means rather that the
individual elements, which will form a whole thing, are
first of all analyzed regarding to their function; later the
most simple production system will be studied and at
the end only the individual elements will become the
subject of industrial production. Therefore let’s not
think of the house as a machine but rather of every
single part, windows, doors, cabinets, walls, etc.,
which we can later compose as needed». (Taut, 1927,
It. ed. 1986). Therefore, Taut conceives the house as
a combination of different elements which can be
combined in diverse ways, according to the need,
54
rather than a ‘compact object’ to be standardized
in its complexity. By this meaning, the general idea
of the type is more related to an abstract concept.
While talking of ‘type’, the architect seeks a universal
value when he writes: «Beyond the vast or reduced
dimensions of this house and the number of rooms,
rather even beyond their specific distribution, for those
who think in healthy and simple way it will be always
essential the fundamental tendency. Thus common
sense determines in the easiest way the concept of
‘type’». (Taut, 1927, It. ed. 1986). In the description of
his home in Berlin Dahlewitz, Taut highlights the new
way to derive the form of a building from landscape,
light direction, relations with the cardinal points and
individual lifestyle of those who live it. But along with
– and before – functionalist instances, practical and
functional aspects that a building have to fulfil, the
architect of Koenigsberg stresses the social needs,
psychological factors, the needs intimately human of
the individual; a praxis of architectural doing which
focuses on the individual and his intimate needs, that
must take shape in a proper form which is suitable
for the new consideration of the human component.
Thanks to these considerations, that justify the design
choices, Taut declares: «For us, what belongs to
the soul must be considered equally logical as the
material component and this with the same sensitivity
of that. The colour, for example, we associate it to
the laws of diurnal brightness, we can work with it to
centralize or belittle the contrasts of the buildings with
each other depending on the position of the sun and
the kind of road, and we distribute it into the interior
spaces of the building according to the destination of
each room, to refined criteria regarding length, width
and height, with respect to the type and disposition
of doors and windows, the orientation of these and
more – in short: also the colour is used according to
functionality, but not without sensitivity, which
rests on an completely different basis». (Taut, 1929).
According to such a sensitive aim, he designs
Dahlewitz in every detail, starting from the landscape
scale up to the specific interior layout space scale (Fig.
11); the interior design includes objects as lamps,
tables, working areas designed specifically just for
this house as unique features (Fig. 12). This attentive
design from macro to micro scale epitomizes the
absolute control of the space of a real Baumeister of
Modernism.
There is a last but not least aspect to be considered
about the book Ein Wohnhaus: Taut was also very
much engaged in shaping the editorial layout of his
books, so as it could express the best possible way
of showing his ideas inspired by an holistic approach
toward architecture and to an overall vision of the
world. Right in Ein Wohnhaus, the German architect
brings an important editorial innovation. In the text
he uses pictures according to a ‘film language’ of the
visual sequence, at that time extremely innovative
if thought applied to show the built architecture:
Figure 11.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, view of the kitchen. Berlin-
Dahalewitz, 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus
(Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927).
Vitruvio
International
journal of
Architecture
Technology and
Sustainability
Volume 2 Is 1
55
photographs guide the reader through the building
along a specific sequence; to every single figure is
repeatedly opposed an images sequence that evokes
a path, as the shot of the cine-camera. It is also used
the expedient of displaying the same detail on double
page, photographed from two different angles in a
logic of perceptual kinematics. Despite this innovative
use of iconography, photos selected by Taut intend to
show architecture in its daily use, without any special
and spectacular effects.
5. CONCLUSION
After the brief journey throughout the intimate house
of the German master, we wonder about the final
message of Taut’s house in Dahlewitz. Whether it has
didactic targets, or aims to be a good example of
Neues Bauen, sanctioned by the specific theoretical
writing Ein Whonhaus, which is supposed to stigmatize
the good principles for the modern living. What we
can find out in this project is the ‘fundamental value’
Figure 12.
Bruno Taut, Bruno Taut house, detail of the stair and of the lamp.
Berlin-Dahalewitz, 1926. Source: Bruno Taut, Ein Wohnhaus
(Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e Co. Stuttgart, 1927).
which summarizes all the spatial and emotional
values, as described by Gaston Bachelard: «The
house, quite obviously, is a privileged entity for a
phenomenological study of the intimate values of
inside space, provided, of course, that we take it in
both its unity and its complexity, and endeavor to
integrate all the special values in one fundamental
value». (Bachelard, 1994).
It is the German architect himself that shows us this
fundamental value, when he states: «The house for
living actually is the most immediate realm of human
life, its first and last product». (Taut, 1927. It. ed. 1986).
Nowadays, it would be easy to copy Taut. But it
was not easy to be Taut. He has broken through
conventions and changed our notion of what an
architectural culture can produce, without taking into
consideration the risk of being an outsider within his
coeval cultural milieu. In the era of the perfect, pure
and white Rationalism, he was using colours without
inhibitions, colours as joy of life, as exploration of
human reactions for a sympathetic approach toward
space. He was obstinate in searching through colour
a different spatial ‘line of attack’, contemplating
functionalism and the gemütlich at once, for a new
comfort strictly related to psychological human
necessities as well.
Ludwig Hilberseimer is a witness of Taut’s obstinacy:
in his book Berlin architecture of the 20's (1967)
narrates how Taut showed a room painted in dark
red to him, Mies van der Rohe and Hugo Häring: «It
looked like a butcher’s shop. The atmosphere was
aggressive. How could he expect that someone might
live in such a room? Taut’s response was that we did
not understand anything about colour. We added
that he must have been colour-blind…He behaved
always according to a motto he borrowed from
Scheerbart: ‘Character is merely obstinacy, I move in
all directions’». (Hilberseimer, 1967).
Far from the dogmatic verities of the Modernism, Taut
would have said: Dahlewitz is just a house. But aware
of the deepest meaning of the term: so to say with
the Italian philosopher Gianni Vattimo (Casabella, n.
485, Nov 1982), Ein Wohnhaus, the Dahlewitz house
for living, is the logic and congruent outcome which
shows how living comes before building.
56
REFERENCES
Bachelard G., The poetics of space, Beacon Press, London, 1994
Brenne W., Bruno Taut. Meister des farbigen Bauens in Berlin, Braun
Verlag, Berlin, 2008
Hilberseimer L., Berliner Architektur der 20er Jahre, Reihe Neue
Bauhausbücher, Mainz, 1967. It. ed. Architettura a Berlino negli anni
Venti, Franco Angeli, Milan, 1979
Krauskopf K., Standardization and the landscape. Traditionalism
and the planning of Housing Estates in Germany between the two
World Wars. In Meganck L., Van Santvoort L., De Maeyer J. (eds.),
Rationalism and Modernity, Leuven University Press, Leuven, 2013,
pp. 161-179
Melis P., Bruno Taut’s own house at Dahlewitz, Domus 1982, 4/June,
pp. 24-29
Pitz H., Brenne W., Die Bauwerke und Kunstdenmaler von Berlin,
Sentor für Bau und Wohnugswesen, Berlin, 1980
Taut B., Die Auflösung der Städte, oder: die Erde, eine gute
Wohnung, Folkwang-Verlag Hagen. 1920, It. ed. La dissoluzione
della cittá. La terra come buona abitazione. Archigrafica, Naples,
2008
Taut B., Frühlicht, Ullstein, Berlin, 1922, It. ed. Frühlicht. Gli anni
dell’avanguardia dell’architettura in Germania 1920/22. Mazzotta,
Milan, 1974
Taut B., Die neue Wohnung. Die Frau als Schöpferin, Klinkhardt &
Biermann, Leipzig, 1924, It. ed. La nuova abitazione. La donna come
creatrice, Gangemi, Rome 1986
Taut B., Aesthetik der Berliner Wohnungsbauten, Bauwelt, June
1925, p. 97
Taut B., Ein Wohnhaus, Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung W. Keller e
Co. Stuttgart, 1927, It. ed. Una casa di abitazione, Franco Angeli,
Milan, 1986
Taut B., Die neue Baukunst in Europa und Amerika, Julius Hoffmann,
Stuttgart, 1929
Vattimo G., Abitare viene prima di costruire, Casabella, 485, Nov
1982, pp.48-49
Vitruvio
International
journal of
Architecture
Technology and
Sustainability
Volume 2 Is 1
57
