Development of criticisms on le corbusier’s perspectives on nature

Until now Le Corbusier has been accused of the sin separating modern architecture from nature. However, Le Corbusier had never insisted that his architecture was disconnected from the outer world, rather he had tried to establish a close relationship between the built environment and nature. The purpose of this study is to track where the negative perception of Le Corbusier’s perspective on nature was originated from and how it had been developed. In the 1920s, Le Corbusier’s attitude on nature reflected in his abstract and mechanic architecture was blamed by Häring and Wright who supported the concept of Organic Architecture. Later on, the interpretation of Hitchcock and Gideon strengthened the bias on the separation between architecture and nature in Le Corbusier’s theory and practice. Even though Le Corbusier’s attitude towards nature had changed significantly in the 1930s, the schema of the 1920s was fixed by both his supports and dissenters as his international influence of works and theory of the 1920s became greater. New theoretical interpretation on Le Corbusier in the 1960s, suggested by Rowe and Eisenman did not change the stereotype view but reinforced it. In the 1970s Rowe provides a complete version of abstract schema on architecture and nature by expanding Gideon’s interpretation of Le Corbusier to the city. After the 1980s, there have been ongoing efforts to reevaluate Le Corbusier’s thoughts and works on the landscape, it is hard to say that the theoretical view on his perspectives on nature is changed much. Le Corbusier’s influence and contribution on forming the framework of the modern landscape still remains to be further discovered.