Philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein along with the Architect Paul Engelmann designed Stonborough Villa in Vienna. Wittgenstein disliked discussions amongst architectural experts, and never published his accomplishment in architectural magazines. Engelmann made several publications but left no records about the Villa or its design theory. Except for Wittgenstein's family and friends, Wittgenstein’s contribution to architecture was not widely recognized. In other words, the concept of Stonborough Villa is unknown.
This research looks to clarify Wittgenstein’s construction theory by utilizing the measurements of the Villa. The previous study revealed the role played by double doors of the Villa’s opening-closing mechanisms and the Dimensional system applied. However, during the study, inconsistencies between the Walls in the Main Floor Plan and the constructed building were found. This paper aims to clarify the relationship between the inner False Wall and the symmetrical wall surface of the Doors.
The field survey revealed the following two differences in the measurements.
A) The False Wall in the Breakfast Room Plan design was not constructed.
B) The False Wall built in Margarethe’s Room is not present in the Plan.
In other words, it can be inferred that the difference between the Main Floor Plans and the actual buildings is likely to have been produced by Wittgenstein who supervised the construction site.
With the presence of the False Wall on the inner wall surface to which the window openings belong, the wall from the right corner to the False Wall can be perceived as part of the Front Wall surface. In other words, according to the Plan, the center axis of the inner wall surface, and the location of the opening coincide, positioning the False Wall in a way that the inner wall surface has a symmetrical structure. The position of this internal axis line also aligns with the position of the center axis of the external wall surface and the False Wall constructed on the internal wall surface confirm that the False Wall creates a symmetrical structure on the inner and outer Plan of the Villa. However, the on- site results revealed that the False Wall of the breakfast room, which was planned in the design, was not actually constructed. As a result, regarding the symmetry of the wall surface, the balance of the inner wall surface is lost when the False Wall is absent, and only the symmetry of the outer wall surface remains.
In the existing Plan, Margarethe’s Room is the only area on the main floor which cannot be read as a symmetrical wall construction. The symmetric structure of the interior walls of the other main rooms are facing the exterior wall surfaces, while in Margarethe’s Room there is a two-door arrangement installed on the wall facing towards the exterior, they are not considered a symmetrical component. However, on the constructed wall surface of Margarethe’s Room, a False Wall is located at the right end portion, like in the inner wall surface of the breakfast room, the central axis of the window and wall coincides confirming the symmetrical order. The construction of the False Wall on the inner wall surface of Margarethe’s Room allows for wall structure symmetry like the one displayed in other main rooms. On the other hand, the Salon and Margarethe’s Room are connected by a Double Door; the glass door installed in the room side cannot be fully opened due to the False Wall interfering. This shows a preference for the aesthetic value over the practicality of the room. To summarize, Stonborough Villa’s False Wall was utilized to create symmetry, which is a crucial point of the architectural language of this structure.
抄録全体を表示