4 unités LC - Architecture Insights

Conclusion
Originality / Mass Production
Although Le Corbusier intended the ‘Unités d’habitation’ to be
built on mass, with several of these buildings in the one residential
quarter, and several of these residential quarters in towns all over
the world, it has perhaps been his greatest fortune that he did not
succeed. For the number of the ‘Unités’ – four in France and one in
Germany – although multiple, has been sufficient enough to
demonstrate his concept of the mass produced home, whilst still
being limited enough in number to achieve a certain sense of
originality with in each one. (For if a concept becomes too massproduced,
it loses its sense of value and becomes disposable.)
But each of the ‘Unités’ is still considered original in its design and
ideas, as the way of life they propose is really quite different to that
of the average housing block – the aesthetic and architectural
style, the independent apartments, the communal facilities, the park
setting… And as these housing blocks have established a certain
reputation over time, not only for displaying the characteristic
architectural style of Le Corbusier, but equally representing most
his radical social ideals, they have been set aside in for their
importance to the history of architecture and urbanism.
But not only are the ‘Unités’ unique from other housing blocks
(despite the concepts of mass production on which they were
based), they have also, over the years, established themselves as
unique entities from each other. For although the four studied with
in this thesis are all with in the same country, they have still, not
only certain physical variations, but more importantly, historical,
contextual and circumstantial variations that have shaped them into
what they are today.
213 214
Continuity / Flux
But it is not just the fact that there are more than just one ‘Unité
d’habitation’ that must be taken into account when considering the
merits and difficulties of the design. It is also the fact that over time
their situations and circumstances have varied, and in some cases
quite drastically.
Most of the ‘Unités’ in France have undergone a rather eventful
past, with changes, whether sudden or progressive, not only to the
buildings themselves, but equally with in their surroundings. And
the buildings are still in a state of change. For as this thesis
demonstrates, the state of the ‘Unités’ as it is reported today, is
only their state to this date, and can not be accepted as a current
state in the future.
But in assessing the states of the ‘Unités’ today, around half a
century since their conception and construction, it can at least be
said that their conditions have somewhat stabilised by comparison.
For now that they have reached the point when the oxymoron of
‘modern heritage’ is becoming a more widely recognised issue, the
older they get, the more valuable they are considered in terms of
heritage.
And now, the century has turned. And we are looking back on the
era to which the ‘Unités’ belong as a revolutionary point in history.
So although three of the ‘Unités’ were each once threatened with a
chance of destruction, their classification as national patrimony
makes such an event is now unlikely.