Guerrero House
- 26.03.2011 .
- Maarten P. Kappert .
- Tags .
- Category:
- Architecture & Interior design
- Object:
- Articles + Villa
- Share .
- 23 comments
This is one gorgeous house.
Guerrero House, located at Vejer de la Frontera, Cádiz, Spain, was designed by the famous Spanish architect Alberto Campo Baeza.
The play on light, space and proportion is extraordinary. A small opening in an 8 meter high square wall is the only entrance. Center of the house is the 9 x 9 meter central square, which has a ceiling of again 8 meters high.
All these bold measurements together aid to what Campo Baeza calls the construction of a luminous shadow. Now that’s poetry.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Beautiful, i love how its seen by the outside, and the inside looks confortable, the only thing i have doubt are the chairs, they seem to be akward.
I think I love everything about this house. Gorgeous indeed.
those chairs are Model 3107, by Arne Jacobsen. An absolute classic!
is that an IKEA POÄNG i see? or am i badly mistaken
I think it is Vincent. I thought exactly the same. Quite surprised, but nothing wrong with it.
Beautiful.
This is a fine example of elegant minimalism, but there’s far too much dead space for such a house to be livable. I just couldn’t see anybody using the patio.
Truly bold and elegant. The denial of a view is a gutsy move, but it seems to do the site justice. (Don’t just look, go outside and actually be in the landscape.) Contrary to Sam’s point, I think the sparse volume would be calming.
@Barenburg yes, nothing wrong at all. i was sitting in the exact same chair at the IKEA store yesterday, and almost bought it on the spot. it is THAT comfy.
i’ve seen it before… and always like it’s form solution…
Love it
Wonderful architecture. Truly inspired. But horribly decorated. WHAT on earth is all that IKEA CRAP doing in there? Someone ran out of hard cash or what? IKEA has no place in homes like that. None what so ever.
I’ve been in structures that are open only to the sky and have felt both trapped and vulnerable. This design is almost the antithesis of a home. What nugget of information am I missing that elevates this wonderful sculpture to wonderful architecture?
I love this. Grass around the house would make it even better.
I don’t know. The house is beautiful, especially the courtyard which is very nice and abstract. But for some reason the space inside always makes me doubt. It could be the furniture and its placement but it just doesn’t do it for me. It seems there is no reason to do anything within the main space, no intention given to make an arrangement. I don’t know. I know this house for some time no and it alwsy make me feel slighty akward (the inside that is)
If I’m reading the plan correctly, there should be six other rooms on top of the one we’re seeing. It would be interesting to see what they look like. Judging by the size, they should create quite a contrast to the open space in the centre of the house. Perhaps that would offset some of the agoraphobic tendencies that a few of you have mentioned. Regardless, interior designer of the place should still be shot.
Maybe it’s the height of the room in relation to the low placement of the windows that makes the space feel strange (for a nothern European who wants as much light inside as possible instead of blocking it)
Although I really like the work of Campo Baeza, in this case I don’t understand his choice of closing the house itself, taking into account the fantastic context in which it is.
@Art, I think there are only 3 rooms (plus de kitchen and 2 bathrooms), all of them at the same level as the main space: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_U4PwlzFqHnU/Se8pKhTZHqI/AAAAAAAAORQ/nc1cznCuTYo/s1600-h/IMG_4016.jpg
I was considering the same thing as Carlos. It’s great if the actual view is pretty bad, but given it is located in a rather nice (albeit not awesome) lush green natural location, seems an odd choice to blot out the environment in such a severe way. Inside, I imagine an oasis of peace and light against an onslaught of crushing populace, overdevelopment an urban sprawl; stepping outside, I wonder where the threat went.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s very nice inside. It’s just not connected in any way to the very nice outside. Replace the opaque white walls with structural glass for a mutual triumph.
@Carlos, ctd: Interesting point to consider and you’ve put a finger on the spot! But I think there’s a finer point to this cut-off approach. Ultimately, it’s about control: Unless you own all the land around the site you’ll never be able to secure peace of mind and stability (and it is a rather contemplative house – just think of the courtyard). But if you wall the surroundings off, you are forcing them to adapt to you and not the other way around. If you want to take in the nature – just leave the house. Bring your chair outside, or take a stroll. Yes – it goes against the standard operating procedure of realty where the scenery is a part of the sales pitch. But it makes a lot of sense from minimalist point of view. You either have scenery or you don’t (in this case, I guess you can say that the scenery “has you”). You will never have to worry about the surrounding changing, and that’s a sort of comfort, too. Also – if we think of homes as private retreats, nothing says “leave me alone” better than erecting walls around it.
Stupid design. Ridiculously high walls. You totally cutoff the outside and then plant some trees. WTF?! And that white looks so discomforting. Imagine specks all the time.
I will gladly undertake the exercise of slapping some sense into the fools who came up with this.
Does the house come with people hired to clean the house weekly?
Awesome. Feels a little like the ‘Truman Show’.