This essay presents a comparative study of the sociological assumptions implicit, and to some extent explicit, in the work of two famous architects, Charles Rennie Mackintosh and Le Corbusier. The inhabitant implied through the architectural practice of Le Corbusier resembles Elias's homo clausus (closed person), the mode of self experience viewed by Elias as the dominant one in Western society and one which sees the individual person as a ‘thinking subject’ and the starting point of knowledge. Mackintosh's designs, in contrast, imply individual people closer to Elias‘s homines aperti, social beings who are shaped through social interaction and interdependence. This paper demonstrates how, as well as fulfilling social, cultural and political needs, architecture carries, within in its designs, certain assumptions about how people and how they do, and should, live. The adoption of an Eliasian perspective provides an interesting insight into how these assumptions can shape self-experience and social interaction in the buildings of each architect.
