House of the Future vs. the Dymaxion House

The house of the future and the dymaxion house are comprable because they have very similar drivers. They are each an attempt at a dwelling that is mass produced, and easily transported. They are also similar in that they are clear reactions to the mentality of the people of the times in which they were designed. The effects of world war II are quite evident in the designs of both houses. Each seeks to be a sort of shelter. Each structure removes the inhabitants from the outside world and tries to make them safe from it. This is most evident in the houses efforts at a very sterile interior environment. A clear point of comparison is the curviness found in each place which makes it very easy to maintain, and in many ways maintains itself. The dymaxion bathroom is the best embodiment of this idea. The house of the future is made to have the ability to be cleaned by a damp cloth. Another main point of comparison is the clear inspiration by the car. Each house is always ready to move. The notion of being in a car is also captured by both houses. The interior is disconnected from the outside, protected. The sterilization of air is a direct parallel to air conditioning.

There is contrast where the car is concerned as well. With the dymaxion house, the car was used as inspiration due to its efficiency. This involves both the economy and speed of mass production as well as an efficiency of use of space. The inspiration of the car in the HOF seems to have more to do with its experiential qualities for the most part, rather than an efficiency of construction and cost. Another major point of contrast is the use of windows in each house. In the dymaxion house, there is a ribbon window that stretches around the entire structure, putting an emphasis on the horizontal world and surroundings immediately outside the house. It still conveys a strong feeling of enclosure, but allows a connection to the surroundings of the house. The windows are definitely about looking out from within the structure. From the outside, the windows don't give anything away, unlike the windows of the HOF, which are there solely to allow people to look in. This house is about turning in on itself and being completely self-sufficient. The windows are there against the architects' will and only further the sense of a little microcosm that is only concerned with itself.

Finally, there are just a few other points i'd like to mention. In each house, you get the sense that a new material is the driving force of the architecture. There are differences in execution here, though. Where the dymaxion house makes good, honest use of the plasticity of aluminum, the HOF is just a fake, made of plywood and coated to look like plastic. It is true, however, that these new materials were major players in the design of each house. The fates of these houses are fairly comprable as well. Each house "represented not infinite flexibility but a singular, self-supporting shape that would, like any other consumer product, be abandoned as soon as a new model came out". And it's true. Each house was practically thrown out before it was even given a real chance. Contributing to this is the fact that "the appliances [were] so closely integrated into the structure that to change the refrigerator would be like getting a larger glove compartment in a 'Volkswagen' dashboard - it would be simpler to get a new car". Each house's design was inheritely at a disadvantage because they could never be considered as viable options for long term living.