Chilean Modern Architecture since 1950

1. Theory and Practice of Domestic Space between 1950 and 2000

The practice of architecture in Chile seems to have been closely connected with certain theoretical activities, which have accompanied the work of a significant number of architects as well as permeating the entire professional culture. This is fundamental to our understanding of architectural production in the second half of the twentieth century. Special attention has been given to the architecture produced in Chile during the last fifteen years, as reflected in international exhibitions and publications.1 In addition to social, political, or economic reasons, understanding how such a level of architecture has been attained in a small Latin American country must take into account the impact of this theoretical phenomenon. The peculiarities of this intellectual activity point to a strong focus on theory and to the presence of a variety of connections between theoretical thought and architectural practice. The discussion concerning the importance of architectural space is one example. Whether accepted, neglected, or rejected, this concept highlights the theoretical shifts that took place in the Chilean architectural environment between 1950 and 2000. By following the tracks of these alternatives, we can gain a better understanding of the ideas and values embraced by Chilean architects during that time. The importance attached to domestic design is one of the distinguishing characteristics of modern architecture. Designing a house has reached the status of a classic, in which the preferences and ideas of an architect are expressed. An architect’s thoughts about a house tell us a lot about his ideas concerning architecture as a whole—his concepts, convictions, and sensitivity. Thus, by following the evolution of house design, we can trace the path of Chilean architecture FernAndo Pérez oyArzun 1 theory฀and฀practice฀of฀domestic฀ space฀between฀1950฀and฀2000 2 FernAndo Pérez oyArzun through the second half of the twentieth century. The number of significant houses designed during this period will not only afford us a synthetic view, but also provide indications of underlying theoretical activity. Our purpose here is to present the houses themselves, and also to recognize the architectural convictions and preferences that underlie them—the theory that implicitly or explicitly supports architectural projects. theory฀and฀design฀during฀the฀second฀half฀ of฀the฀twentieth฀century The problem of striking a good balance between theory and practice has been a matter of dispute among architects since ancient times. In the first century B.c. Vitruvius defended the importance of theory as the basis for practice. However, agreement upon this question has still to be reached. Among modern architects, one can think of Le Corbusier, who wrote theory almost as much as he designed buildings . Yet other architects, such as Alvar Aalto and Mies van der Rohe, have been almost silent on theoretical issues.It would be erroneous to limit architectural discourse to what we find in architectural literature . Architects who not write for publication are still able to express their architectural ideas very effectively in their work. Thus, architectural thought can be found in different forms, varying from written discourse to its silent presence within architecture itself; each manifestation being capable of elucidating clear architectural positions. Nevertheless, throughout most of the history of architecture there have been repeated attempts to fix the theoretical component of architecture in a more explicit and systematic framework. Those who favor or oppose recognizing the significance of theoretical activity are influenced by cultural environments or by responses to individual sensitivities. Nevertheless, an increasing interest in generating theory seems to be apparent at moments when new attitudes toward projects emerge, requiring the support of an explicit theoretical discourse. The need to explain those new attitudes to others —whether colleagues or clients—gives importance to theoretical positions. In the Latin American context, the significance of Chilean theoretical activity during the second half of the twentieth century is quite remarkable. Not always explicitly connected with the profes- Theory and Practice of the Domestic Space, 1950–2000 3 sion, but always influential within practice, this theoretical component plays a significant part in architectural production. However, the Chilean case is not alone within the Latin American tradition of this field. Writings by Lucio Costa in Brazil in the early 1930s played a definitive role both in establishing modernism and in influencing the way avant-garde attitudes were understood within local cultures.2 Another interesting case is that of the Institute of Architecture in Tucumán, which in the late 1940s attempted to renew the teaching of architecture...