| May 9, 2009 4:21 pm

balancing-barn-by-living-architecture-and-mvrdv-squ-mvrdv-balancing-barn-su.jpgThere is a reason why the tuxedo hasn’t changed in more than a century.  Put simply, there is no need for it to.  Unlike other things, it doesn’t need to evolve or mold itself to the fashions of the current age.  It’s just fine the way it is.  It’s traditional.

And barn architecture should be traditional.  They are practical buildings, and as a result should be made of relatively impractical things.  That means natural materials.  Most of the structure should be made of wood (preferably oak) or stone with big timbered logs being an even better choice. Steel and concrete can be acceptable, but edge out on the tacky side.

Thus, there is only one word to describe the structure being proposed by MVRDV and Mole Architects near Suffolk in the United Kingdom: travesty.  (Though monstrosity comes remarkably close as well.)  First, they are proposing an “open” architecture with beautiful bay windows and gobs of free-space.  While barns can certainly be open, they should not include bay windows.  Have you ever seen the type of slime a dedicated horse can produce?  Second, it’s made out of modern materials: specially treated steel and composites …  and it’s cantilevered.  Words do not even begin to describe how wrong it is to cantilever a barn.  (Even if it is really a vacation home that some hack decided to call a barn.  I would never house animals, much less people in such a disgusting and clearly unsafe building.)

Traditional barns are so much better.  Traditional barns have character.

John Moulton Barn - Mormon Row - Grand Teton National Park Hi Ute Ranch - Park City, Utah

Winter Barn in Utah - Park City

Wagon Wheel and Barn - Morgan, Utah

Utah Farm near Capitol Reef National Park

Comments

No Responses to “Barn Architecture”

Care to comment?