Counterpoints

Final Point

First I would like to start with by saying this unit really helped me understand the different concepts of modernism, such as deconstructionism. It really helps explain the time of when these certain places were built. Everything is so linear and simple. They most prominent idea of modernism is that form is all that matters, not function. An example of this would be the sydney opera house. Yes, it is visually pleasing but the acoustics do not work. It has been fixed, but it still does not truly do operas their full justice. Another example is the college life insurance company. It has firmness and delight, but zero commodity.

Another characteristic modernism struggles with is warmth. People dislike modern design because it feels cold. The rise of interior design changes this. It helps interiors feel warm and also makes the clients happy.

Today, people try to combine modernism and classism and it rarely seems to work. There is no longer any language, but more so a conjunction of different ones. People fail to build and incorporate things from history to make them better then they once were. Design has become more disposable now. It has been degraded in such entertainment as HGTV. These 'designers' believe a room can be designed in an hour. True designers such as Charles and Ray Eames design in a holistic way of thought and consideration. We, as interior architecture students, have been taught things such as process. People need to follow Boullee's concept of just simply having an idea. He built a cenotaph for Newton and realized during that time it was impossible to build. Designers need to learn that the first idea isn't always the right one, and they can be simply left alone.

When we talked about these places working like machines, I thought to myself, that that could have never been put more perfectly. I like all of the different relationships of machines. The fact that technology is constantly coming up with new, advanced ideas for machines, and architecture is ever evolving, the two just go hand in hand. The Villa Savoy was my favorite example of being a machine. The car that had been invented during that time was one of the main inspirations for the Villa Savoy. It's radius created the actual shape of the building. I find that so inventive and it truly expresses what is happening in society at the time.

One thing I wanted to also touch on is what I learned as a whole from this semester. This class was taught so differently then any other class I've ever taken. I loved listening to the discussions because they were so interactive. I was taught in such a creative way that I have learned so many new concepts that I can apply through out my career. I look at architecture (and chairs) so different now and I feel like I can truly understand it. I love the fact that I can walk into a present day building and know what inspired certain things. The other day, I was walking with a friend to the EUC and she commented on the design of the library, and I knew exactly what to say. I like watching movies with my family and knowing the chairs that come on the screen. After taking this, I feel so much more rounded as a designer. I feel I have grown this semester more then any other, mainly because of this class. I hope to be a teacher assistant one year so I can listen to it all over again. Thanks for such an eye-opening semester :)

Reading Comp No. 7

My group, the black sea, was chosen to chose a piece from the collection called "In the Studio". This collection was very captivating to me, and laid the idea of studio out. A studio is where people create their own identity, and show it through art. the ideas and perceptions they have of themselves are expressed by contour lines and movement. All of the pieces used the media of pen or pencil and other everyday art utensils, which somehow related back to being a student. We all start off with the easy materials, then work our way into using better quality ones after having some experience. I feel this related to the audience and I on a personal level. The piece that I wanted to study most was Paul Cadmus', "Dancer with the red hairband". The simplicity of the drawing combined with the title itself is what creates the story in this piece of art. It makes your mind wonder. This type of art is what I enjoy looking at; simple, yet touching. The style used in the piece was cross hatching. Cadmus used it for shadowing. The fluid lines make the drawing feel like this moment was a pause in the time of business and that this part of action, was crucial to put onto paper. Again, making the mind wonder of what this dancer could be thinking about. All of the pieces in the studio collection remind me of the beginnings of ideas. Like they are trying to find inspiration for their projects, or just inspiration for themselves. Creating an identity is something that will last a lifetime. Massey said that the accent is placed on process rather then form (pg 216), and I believe this statement fits well into this idea of going through a process to create an identity rather then focusing on the exact form of your work.

My diagram showed the idea of the possible future outline that the dancer will make. I did this because this is how the drawing made me personally feel when I analyzed it. I used simple, swift lines to show movement and dance.

Reading Composition No. 6

[1]

Art Nouveau became a very common theme across numerous nations in the 20th century. Combining art and nature was a designers new way of introducing modernism and new production methods. America was not the only nation to use this declaration of being it's own independent country, but also Paris and Berlin, who countries who have been through many different eras, have also began to adapt the art nouveau style.

In Paris, France, Hector Guirmard, who is known for his metal work in metro stations, began to alter all of the decorative characteristics he was putting in his buildings. He was designing carpets, furniture, wallpaper, mosaic floors, and even door handles. One of his buildings was the Castel Beranger apartment complex. The most exciting space of the house was the entrance. Putting to use his good reputation for iron work, he made the front gate entrance with art nouveau style. The gate is asymmetrical, the ornament was inspired by naturalistic themes, and the 'dynamic whiplash' is used many times (Massey, p. 40). These same characteristics are shown throughout the house. The shapes used in the gate are also placed along the hallways, carpets, banisters, and in the colored glass. This demonstrates the use of stylistic unity by incorporating all of the same art nouveau characteristics throughout many things in the building.

Castel Buranger Entrance

In Munich, Germany, Henry Van der Velde, Art Nouveau was also known as 'Jugendstil', which translates into 'young style'. This fits this style well considering it is new, and is being experimented with. It originates from young designers throwing away the old and just focusing on the new. Van der Velde had designed a bathroom for an art nouveau exhibit, but then moved onto bigger things. He designed the interior of Francios Haby's Barbour shop in 1900. His style is art nouveau, but with a more german take on it' it's different then Guirmard's. He used surface decoration of shapes on the walls, and has swooping cabinets that are completely symmetrical. He always did something people did not entirely approve of; he left light fixtures and pipes completely exposed. (Massey, p. 44) I thought this picture put Henry's view of art nouveau in an interesting way...

[2] When I saw the word "machine", I automatically thought of the Villa Savoy. It was created by Le Corbusier and placed in a suburb in Paris. Not only does this house look like a machine, but it acts as one too. In society, cars were invented and becoming more and more advanced. Le Corbusier used them as part of his inspiration. The actual radius of the first floor is based of the radius of a car. It is interesting that the house function as a machine, just was the car whom inspired it is a machine. The house appears to be 'lifted free of the earth' by the columns supporting it (Roth, p. 531). The roof is made of gardens (p. 532) which gives the appearance almost of the house growing out of the landscape. The floor plan is very open, which allows smooth human movement, just like a machine should run.

This picture shows the new ideas of modernism; straight linear lines, some bold color, ribbed windows, and abstract shapes.

[3] Massey, p. 72

Reflections Summary

Jasmine Jones

Jasmine's introduction to her essay makes me feel very interested to keep reading. Her idea of evolving architecture beginning with a simple thought is so true. She states that fact then once one person thinks of something, other people join in, and these thoughts tun into actions. People produce these thoughts because they are curious of what else is out there. These curiously thoughts then turn into revolutions; a change in what is happening in their current time. People are done with order and classism, and are ready for something new. She states the idea that trading of all different cultures is what put new ideas into people's minds. Everything was new, especially materials. I agree with her thoughts of eastern inspiration on western products, we discussed this a lot in class and in our reading comprehension. She then goes into the idea of the industrial revolution and mass production. To support the growing population and job opportunities, mass production was needed; not this made by hand stuff anymore. The need for craftsman became scarce. Glass and iron were the new materials and they opened many new doors for architecture. I enjoy reading her essay, as along with the others, because we all discuss different important topics of the units. It's nice to hear what stuck out to other people.

Her picture fit well with her essay. She describes this design era as 'overwhelming' in the sense that it is rapidly changing. She states, that as the ferris wheel goes round, it always comes back to where it started to cater to new groups of people. How philosophical!

Ebony Grey

Ebony jumps right into the idea of testing the boundaries of classical design. She begins to talk about the Crystal Palace as the 'kick off' for the industrial age because of the use of new materials, glass and iron. I liked how she put that this era was a time for exploration for designers. The Crystal palace was built for people all over to bring their goods to sell. She states this building as a utilitarian design, and not made for beauty. I disagree. This building was beautiful for the soul fact that people had never seen anything like it before, and that is why people were drawn to it. She then describes the life cycle of iron. It started off with the Crystal Palace, then extended to train stations, shopping centers, and libraries, then eventually led to the building of skyscrapers.

These ideas of mixing design and moving away from the typical classism leads to new design ideas. She ten discusses the idea of eastern influence, which Jasmine previously discussed. She looks at this unit as exploring ideas, and about finding a new language.

Kacie Leisure

Kacie starts off explaining revolution and all the different steps. I believe this is an appropriate intro to the start of discussing this unit. She begins with the gothic revival at Strawberry Hill in England. She points out specific details such as the gothic art, and references heavenward, all characteristics of the gothic style.

Just as the other two people I have summarized, she points out the eastern influence on the west in regards to design language. She references the four aspects of design, which was a good tie to make! She states that these new western designs were an "escape" of what they were used to. Patterns on plates and bowls became used on western carpets and fabric. Silk was also being imported and used for clothing. She then ties all these influences to the Royal Pavilion building in England. This building made her think it should be in India, which I agree. It looks like it came out of the movie Aladin. The reference is made to the banquet hall, where it appears that everything was just shoved into the room and onto the walls, hence, introducing clutter. She then continues to state the presence of gothic style still prevalent in today's designs.

Alternatives Summary

Anna Behrent

Anna's observations of the cathedrals are similar to my own. The fact that society and what was happening at the time effected the design is obviously apparent. I liked how she put the purpose behind building these cathedrals: "The religious people were attempting to make the church beautiful to draw people in". Beauty is what made people fascinated with going to church. The 'cover of the book', as you would say, made people want to read it. I also enjoyed reading her speculation about the Chateau Chambord. Combining geometric shapes, Gothic influences, and newer aged architecture to create a completely different meaning then before is something that I wish was focused on more. When analyzing historical spaces, whether they be the same or not, it would be interesting to know the different purposes. The idea of these shapes used to create something beautiful, turned into the idea of stacking. I like that she explained this concept of the 'life' of shapes. Each 'stack' had a different purpose. I learned from her point essay that the materiality of the floors changed with upward progression. The stones were rough on the bottom floor, symbolizing the space for workers and servants, and as the buildings grows, the stones become smoother and refined just as the people do. Then, she proceeded to lead her essay into the next unit by explaining refinement and alteration were on the way. Her essay flowed so well, and definitely explained things that I didn't catch onto in class. It was insightful to read!

Thinking outside of the box, and helping architecture to constantly grow.

Leslie Canipe

I like how Leslie went in depth of explanation of the gothic style of architecture. She stated, "An important strategy of gothic movement is that within a single building the entire universe must me expressed." This reminded me of the pantheon when the world was presented in a scientific way. I think there is a connection to these buildings of great importance in the way they try to explain or demonstrate the world. These buildings achieve this all in many different ways, verticality being one of them. Her application of "ecstasy and exultation" is very true. The church tries to draw people in by appearance and convinces them they need a 'fix' and then after they have been drawn in, they are then hoped to be exalted.

For her next paragraph, her description of transformation into the Renaissance describes it just right. She states that the idea of protection fades away and the new concept of comfort comes in. There are many different styles and rules become vague. She speculates that this is when our principles of design come into our society. Theatricality is also born, her analogy fits the description of baroque perfectly. Theater becomes the whole idea of architecture during this time.

Kathryn Frye

Kathryn's speculations of the renaissance being an alternate to the ancient world is interesting to me. She follows along with Anna in her ideas of shapes and geometrics creating something more. Her opinion says that the renaissance was more about the private homes and their hearths, rather then the public spaces that have been previously discussed in Anna's and Leslie's.

The statement that verticality is reached through the shape of circles, (domes), is very true for religious cathedrals. Man is the measure, and through the grand verticality of the dome is a place where heaven meets man as an individual. The connection she made by that idea describes the idea of verticality in the renaissance perfectly to me. She goes on to describe the ways of the renaissance, and basically says this era was kept inside a fence. No rules were broken, and everything was based on balance and function. This shows great contrast into the next era of baroque.

Her picture of the Laurentian Library clearly demonstrates the conversion of renaissance to baroque. Michelangelo starts to break the rules of architecture this era has created. The image shows three stairs merging into one, which demonstrates the over flowing of boundaries.

Point : Reflections

The switching of breaking the rules, and obeying the rules seems so interesting and abrupt to me. From going to the Renaissance and human measure to baroque where that idea is completely thrown away. The baroque period focuses on the facade extending beyond just the face of the building. A good example of this concept is the Palace of Versailles. The boundaries themselves, or therefore, lack there of, create the experience and the progression of space. The overflow of naturalistic details swallows the space. It is about bringing the outside in, and creating a more whimsical feeling through out the space. The hall of mirrors especially creates this holistic experience. Every wall space has a mirror, which only enhances the aura of nature by means of reflection.

Other buildings are being built in France that portray the same architectural characteristics. The Louvre is one mile long, and was literally stamped with repeated classical details. Because the scale of the Louvre is so large, the classical details seem watered down. The scale of a lot of the buildings is growing for the soul fact that the middle class is growing and rising. This is when the idea of making things seem grandeur then they actually are. The front facades tell a completely different story then the inside does. The Palace de Vosges was built for middle class residents. The exterior facades are all identical and have a 'wealthy' appearance, when in all actuality, the rooms this exterior contains are very small in scale. This residential building just screams with contrast.

Another big thing we discussed in class is the revolution. Revolution corrects the excess, aka baroqueness. Extra curves and frill were taken out of furniture after the revolution. But then in the 1820's, curves come back and furniture is about movement and flexibility. This is a direct reflection of Roman influence.

Another fact I learned that I found interesting was about the White House. The white house was built with an Irish palace influence, whom which hate the british (oxymoron?). A fire was set to the house, and it was practically destroyed. Then, it was restored back exactly to what it was before. This symbol supersedes moving forward in design. I think this concept is still true today for some designers. They are constantly trying to copy Charleston houses, or victorian houses. Why not move forward and create something new?

In the 19th century, glass and iron are introduced. This completely changes the idea of architecture. Glass and iron allows spaces to be larger and grandeur. It also allows buildings to have curves and bends. The Crystal Palace built in 1851 was six football fields long made completely out of glass and iron. It was a place meant for people from all classes, and for people from anywhere in the world. It was meant to be a show of goods that all the different kinds of people bring. Again, bringing back the idea of contrast from inside to out, the decorative goods themselves speak a different language then the sleek exterior that contains them.

Some things never stay in the past, and people are constantly stuck on the ideas that have already been thought of.

Reading Composition No. 5

[1]

During the Renaissance period, design was ever evolving. It was constantly changing and always advancing rapidly. Structural aspects were being rendered to add scale, lightness, and industrialism. Stone was out, iron and glass were in. They were used structurally, because even a thin piece would hold a great amount, and they were also used decoratively. Iron was easy to bend. This new revolution or decoration carried on into house hold items, which provided things such as light. Candles were simplistic and had one simple purpose, to illuminate. Time went on and moved into the Rococo period, and interiors began to be filled with 'stuff' and things became more gaudy. The candlestick also transformed along with the time. They were more naturally decorated and smaller in scale in contrast to the simple, large ones from before in the Renaissance(image pg. 47). Oil lamps were also introduced and became used more as a decorative piece( image pg. 23). Today, we don't have much use for candles, unless the power goes out of course. Now we rely on electricity and light bulbs. People use candles now for pure effect; either for smell, or for lower light to create a 'mood'. But even certain types of light switches can do that today. Oil lamps are used purely for decor. The candlestick and oil lamp were practically useless after the light bulb and flashlight. They are just merely a decorative accessory now, kind of like they were in the Rococo and Renaissance time period. The methods used for light are constantly changing, and each old method is thrown away for it's original purpose.

Harwood Pg 23

Oil Lamp

[2]

Artifact: Clothes

Western

Eastern

The Eastern influence is apparent here. The idea of tight corset dresses was carried over to the west. Although it is now shown in the western influence, the pattern in the eastern dress is also carried into many other western patterns not only in a dress, but upholstery, furniture and carpets.

Space: Room

Western

Eastern

Even though an Eastern space is not shown, I could not help but draw the influence between this pattern and the many items of furniture in the space. The pattern shows a tree with flowers, buds, and fruit like pictures. The pattern influence was carried into the upholstery on the chair and also on the large cabinet. The feel of "blooming" is shown in both the eastern and western picture. The curvilinear lines in the eastern pattern is also displayed in the lines of the western furniture. The legs of the chairs, tops of the mirror, and cabinet show curvilinear, feminine lines.

Building

Western

Eastern

This eastern Chinese Tea house is very obviously related to the Palace of Amalienburg. The feminine, outside/nature, light palette, and curvilinear lines are all attributes of the Rococo style. Even though the outside of the palace is square, the inside speaks a different language. The curves go beyond the limits and all rules are broken.

Place

Eastern

Western

This Eastern and western cityscape are taken from Belgium and Pennsylvania. The colors and scale are both similar. The use is for socializing and retail. The symmetry of the buildings is also alike, so is the symmetry of the windows on the buildings.

Counterpoint Projects

Point : Alternatives

The topics of the church that we discussed this unit was interesting to me. The ideas incorporated into the architecture was something I thought about, but never understood. We talked about long churches vs. circular churches, both of which communicate important aspects of gathering to worship. Circular churches generically have better acoustics, but also communicate equality because of it's shape. Because building concepts weren't developed that well, these spaces could only accommodate smaller groups of people. Circular spaces usually contained a dome, which spoke a strong language of verticality connecting humanity to heaven. The pro's also create the con's in this case; since there is the idea of equality, how do you designate the power of the alter? It also does not allow large groups to worship. Long buildings however, show the progression of initiation to death and show a clear leader. Then, over time, circles and squares began to combine.

[Taken from notes]

For example, the Hagia Sophia stacked circles and squares.

After the Gothic era began to subside, the re-birth of Renaissance was thriving. Humanity was revived, and also was man as a measure. The idea of controlling the view was key, and having a horizontal shape enabled this. The Villa Barbaro displayed this new concept very well. Reach, scope, and size are three words the described the goals of the building; 'reaching' across the land, having a broad 'scope' of sight, and scaling down to human 'size' and having man as the measure.

After the Renaissance comes the Baroque period. This period is about breaking all of the rules the Renaissance created. In the S. Maria Novella, the front facade was extreme and 'squished' onto the front, but was completely lost throughout the rest of the building. There was only surface decoration, no depth. In the Ospedale Innoceti (hospital), accidents are celebrated in the structural columns around the front. The corners were exaggerated by having an extra column for stability. Symmetry is thrown away as this era carries on. The Palazzo Medici is completely asymmetrical, especially on the first floor. The ideas of an ideal city were disappearing.

As the baroque period moves on, the front facades begin to over flow into the rest of the building. The palace of Versailles push the boundaries and bring the outside in by creating a holistic experience. The hall of mirrors and decor of flowers and nature almost make the walls themselves absent. While in France, the Renaissance stays strong. The Louvre is classicism repetition and almost 'waters down' this characteristic because of it's grand scale. This creates an idea around architecture to create things more 'grand' then they actually are. The Palace de Vosges was built for the middle class as a residence. It's very grand in it's exterior facades, but pretty normal on the inside. It was created to look better then it actually is.

We are still in the Renaissance today. Designers are still experimenting with boundaries and rules. We have grasped the concept of having ideas, and simply leaving them just an idea. Boullee designed a cenotaph for Newton. It was rather large, and practically impossible at the time. Architecture at the time was in a revolution.

Revolution: "a drastic and far reaching change in ways of thinking and behaving"

Nothing is ever impossible,

and there are no such thing as rules.

Reading Composition No. 4

[1] In the 18th century, many of the artifacts have the same characteristics. Geometric shapes such as circles on the canopy of the Osterley Park bed, and symmetry
and balance in the Windsor chairs were introduced and copied. Obviously not all artifacts are going to identical; they each portray their own style touching on naturalistic, minimalistic, and intricate characteristics, but there is always some characteristic that is carried on in all of them.

“The purest architecture, that most suited to fundamental human needs and basic human society was what had appeared at the dawn of civilization,” (Roth pg.443). I believe this refers to the beginning of architecture when the needs of human beings was the sole purpose of all buildings. delight, balance, harmony, scale, symbol, were never taken into consideration. The 18th century begins to incorporate these elements into their civilization, which then also effected the architecture. The Nathaniel Russel house exterior was created with the idea of great summery and balance in mind. The windows on the second and third floors were evenly spaced beside and on top of each other. It is very naturalistic, but delightful at the same time. The interiors begin to introduce surface decorations.

Surface decorations elaborated the space, some more extreme then others (Gunson Hall vs. bedroom of Marie Antoinette). All surfaces began to show more decoration, while the interior stayed modest and symmetrical. Surfaces such as window frames, walls, door frames, furniture, fabric, everything began to flourish. I believe this was society's idea of breaking out of their shells architecturally and adding interest to their spaces they created.

The civilizations all had their own meaning for their purpose of their architecture. America was demanding attention to the fact they were becoming more independent, while England uses the decoration as a tool for education. They used their resources well (Eastern influence), and just enhanced what had already been done. All civilizations are growing at this point and the architecture is only growing along with it.

[2] In the 18th century, architecture has become less vertical and gaudy, and has transformered into more simple, interesting design. In stead of building up, we begin to build out. Buildings ar less refined and more naturalistic. Stone is out, wood is in. Balance of plans is developed and the true focus of human needs becomes evident and becomes more practical. Upper class is no longer the focus for architects, but instead, the needs of the middle and lower class are most important.

For example, in Boston the idea of drenching the spaces and furniture with decoration is simplified by just simple circular shapes. Cheaper materials are used. Boston adapted English influence from the idea of overhangs. England used the over hangs to protect by passers from waste in early morning. Modest fabric is being used more commonly, but only as rugs. Furniture now has no upholstery.

St. Augustine was influence by the Spanish. Minimalistic patterns were derived from their excesively decorated ones. There is great contrast between the wood floors and the neutral walls. Iron as a material is introduced, and is used to create art in the doorways (Spanish influence). Spain has always influenced Florida (Spain discovered Florida), and it is very evident in their style of architecture.

New Orleans, in contrast to the other two American states discussed, veered away from circular shapes and focused more on rectangular. Wood and natural themes still occur. Storage is booming. Their cabinets adapt the double door, two story, compartment, just like the historical one we discussed in class. Verticality is still out, and they focus more on the horizontal way of building. Steep roofs are used more commonly, thanks to the French influence.

New York breaks up the pattern and decides to stick with verticality as key. They create an empire using scale and greatness, which has still made New York City such an impact today. Still today, all you see is LARGE skyscrapers. Balance and symmetry is still portrayed in these building though.

As you can see, each US State has carried a little bit of the cultures from the Atlantic over into the new world, whether it's the idea of simplicity, verticality, or naturalism, influence is definitely shown. All classical influence was not evident, just gaudiness and clutter. That is why it was good for the new world to refer back to civilizations from the 18th century not just for architectural influence, but government as well, just as Roth says to “To reinforce the nature of republication government” (pg.459).

[3]

The idea of balance and shapes is how I created this floor plan. It flows for human needs and keeps the center of the house sacred. Rooms for storage, sleeping, eating, reading, entertaining, and such are placed around the center of the home. Porches incorporate the nature and extend the symmetry beyond the walls of the home itself.

[4] The idea "Flaunting" and theater became ideal during the Baroque period. The dramatic architecture was flamboyant and made bystanders interested. The Catholic church was growing and the reformation happened during this period. The church was rather bland before the idea of drama was introduced. The church became infatuated with the publicity of this theatrical style that was abruptly being introduced. To bring society into the catholic church and turn them away from protestant religion, drama plays and skits were used in the catholics favor. The 'old fashioned' idea of love and manly chivalry was being brought back into the eyes of society through the drama plays. "Theater became a metaphor for social role-playing as well as a school where spectators learned to improve their own performance at Town or Court.” This new idea to influence society was an asset to the catholic church, thanks to the newly introduced idea of "theatrical architecture".

Point : Foundations.

For the foundations chapter, I feel we really focused on the idea of culture shaping different pieces of architecture. Different traditions are carried on while others are forgotten and replaces by newer, modern ones. The limits of buildings are tested. The idea of Minimalism and just focusing on the simple demanding needs of a human being are now being exaggerated and made more into an art form of more then just 'necessities'.

New methods are developed for more efficient firmness and for larger scale. Square is out, circle is is. Arches, vaulted ceilings, and domes are introduced. Scale is larger then usual, creating verticality symbolizing something more. In Cathedrals, verticality stands for many things; strength, christianity, and heaven. This symbolism is there for humanity to feel like they are 'connected' to God. Stacking is also developed. This idea of design was efficiently shown in the coliseum in Rome. The stacking enabled this building to be easily emptied in just 15 minutes. Arches were also used. Arches and stacking enabled the scale to be large and wide. This is contrasting to the coliseum in Greece, where instead of being built on top of the land, it was built into the land. I still feel they used the idea of stacking with the seats, but it played not nearly as big a role of firmness as the stacking does for the Roman coliseum. Stacking doesn't only serve the purpose of firmness, but also symbolizes power; the higher up you go, the more power you obtain. Steps always mean something. Whether it is getting you from one place to another, it is also leading to greatness.

Mesopotamia started to develop the idea of temples, axial progression of initiation to death. Teotihuacan ("city of the gods"), contained a sun temple, a moon temple, which signified that of the living and the dead. They developed the sub-theme of graphics which told stories of how their world worked. The mountain of the city (which was man made), was of large scale and separated the sun and moon temple. Next in line would be the Egyptian civilization. They were very stable and it is shown in the detail of the buildings. In the hypostyle hall, the massive columns have swirling stories of pharaoh's and their power. Size does matter! The pyramids are another demonstration the pharaoh's power in Egypt, but only this time, is displayed after their death, while they are in the 'afterlife'. Largeness=Power, more largeness= more power. The beacon at the top was made of gold and was put there to shine in the sun and supposed to shine down the four corners of the pyramid to extend to the four corners of the earth. I found this concept extremely brilliant and symbolic.

Another very important thing we talked about during this unit were the principles, elements, connections, and amplifiers of design.

Principles: balance, unity, harmony, contrast, repetition, proportion, unity

Elements: line, space, form

Connections: organization, coherence, clarity, parts to a whole, order

Amplifiers: color, texture, value (light)

The lectures and projects of this class keep opening my mind expanding the way I think about things. I like that we exaggerate on the ideas of architecture we may or may not know. I like hearing it and I love learning more and more about the ideas, concepts, details, everything of historical architecture and how it still ties in today with our surroundings.

Our modern day pyramid.

the LOURVE.

Reading Composition 3.

[1] Vertically, symbolism, culture, and era all play important roles in the building and architecture of a cathedral. Some cathedrals are completely balanced in harmony and symmetry while others are more off center and unique, but they all serve the same purpose; it is the culture that makes their architecture tell the story of their beliefs and purposes. Some of the cultural traditions of cathedrals are carried on from era to era, and then some new traditions are created. When all is said and done, they are put on display for all the community and the world to see.

My main cathedral to analyze is the Cologne cathedral of Germany. It is certainly a building of vast scale which demands immediate attention of anyone who lays their eyes on it. It is very 'upright' in in stance in comparison to it's surrounding city and also compared to the Salisbury cathedral of England. Salisbury is also shares very grand details of architecture, but in contrast to Cologne, it has lower, more relaxed structure that plays along with the green, soft, landscape. The entrances of the two are also different. Cologne has two large 'spikes' to declare it's entrance while Salisbury only has one. The exteriors of the two are very different from each other, but share the same style of Gothic architecture. I believe this is because of the space and the people surrounding the two. From the airplane views of the two, I gathered my own speculations of the cities that home them. The Cologne cathedral is in a very rural looking setting, similar to my view of Manhattan. There are rural type buildings, few trees, all gray of color, a river, large bridges, etc. As for Salisbury, it is surrounded by a grass lawn, trees, and warmer colored buildings. I believe this is the reason for the low, agriculturally involved architecture of the Salisbury in contrast to the Cologne which is in a city environment. It needs to be a strong symbol for all the hustle and bustle. Strange enough, as different as their exteriors are, the interiors are almost identical. They both share axial progression of initiation and contain clerestory windows so naturally illuminate the religious space. They have the details of vaulted ceilings and arches, both of which tie into the Gothic theme of the exterior architecture. Even thought these two cathedrals were built at different times and in different places, but still have numerous things in common. I think this happened because the architectural traditions of cathedrals are timeless and carry on from generation to generation. Therefore, the cathedrals share many of the same characteristics even when they're built years apart.

Amiens and Cologne are similar structurally and floor plan wise. One main thing they have in common are the two towers that indicate their entrances. Historians say that these towers represent certain regions. I believe this to be a valid point in different societies and would promote unity among these different regions considering they are set on the same cathedral. These two cathedrals stand in cities among other cathedrals (sister cathedrals) that also share the same characteristic making it a regional style that was adapted. The buttresses were also a common characteristic among these cathedrals. They were added for structural support making the buildings more complex, massive in scale, and also stronger structurally (I also believe to add delight). They also share the axial progression characteristic when entering. They also have vaulted ceilings which will leave the people in awe as they enter. Even though these cathedrals were built during the 'dark ages', they are so innovative and creative.

The Cologne cathedral and the Florence cathedral of Italy are probably the most diverse out of the cathedrals I have already discussed. The Cologne has numerous 'spikes' along with large towers. Florence has one small 'spike' and adds a dome into the new idea of cathedral architecture. Florence still carries Gothic characteristics along with it but adds the new inovative idea of a dome. It was truly a break through for a religious gathering space. All of these cathedral's main idea was verticality to the heavens. Adding a occulus to a dome takes that concept to a new level. It is like heaven shining down in on the people practicing worship and religion (just like the pantheon's dome). It is almost like Florence was trying to break away from the tradition and add something new to the old. Which is true, why create something that's already been copied and created before? The church still symbolizes the same thing it always had, it just uses the dome now, instead of the tower, to portray that.

[2] The whole purpose of architecture in the renaissance era was to focus on older building methods and forms to respond to societies functional needs (particularly Roman architecture that is still standing, Roth). This was because the Roman empire had just been destroyed, and Christianity was the only thing people could lean on. Life had changed drastically.

The area, of what can be seen, in this photo seems to be rather minimalist, just like historical homes, where function was the only thing that mattered and there was no such thing as delight. The woman seems to be standing in what looks like a kitchen. There is a carrot on the floor and she seems to be making something. The windows and door looks like they lead to outside. Roth says in 'Understanding Architecture' that the kitchen is typically in the back of the house which I assume is where the door in the picture leads.

In this time, the fireplace was the center of the home. Families where the center of society in this time. The 'Great Hall' is where everything happened in the household; sleeping, eating, entertaining, socializing, everything. Tapestries and screens provided warmth. The giant stone walls provided protection for the family. These structures showed zero axial progression, unlike the cathedrals previously discussed, instead, the rooms were almost put there with zero thought about any architectural elements such as balance and harmony.

Reading Comprehension 2.

[1] Hersey explains how greek art typically always contains sacred trees withgods and godesses in the branches. Also in Greece, there would be groups of trees or a tree in honor of a death and their remains would be accompanied by sacraficial matericals such as bones, horns, flowers, weapons, spears, and skulls. The temples colomns at the time were also made of wood, aka sacred tree trunks. I completely agree with these historical facts Hersey explains in this exert becuase I recall from History & Theory Design I, certain greek structures like the parthenon have symbols like flowers, swags, weapons, and skulls that were used as motifs. They are still incorporated in more recent buildings, not just in Greece, but everywhere to symbolize what the greeks intended them to symbolize.

[2] Personally, I feel motifs, frescos, and other architectural details would never be able to predict the future, but only tell stories of the past. No where on any historical architecture does it give any indication of internet as the source for our information. Yes, these historical pictures tell us details of the past which we then add to our history. These historical facts are then publicized on the internet and other such media, which then we can also discover.

[3] The pyramids of Egypt and the temple of Queen Hatshepsut are very different for the sole fact of culture and the difference between male and female. The purpose of the pyramid was to hold a powerful king, have large scale, for the top to glisten and "shine to all four corners of the earth". It is much simpler, it has no noticeable openings, and it is surrounded by flat desert. As for the temple of Queen Hatshepsut, it is built in to the side of a very large scale rock, therefore making it less noticeable and making it appear less powerful. The fact that it is not the most tallest thing around (the rock is taller) shows a more feminine characteristic, whereas the pyramid is the tallest thing around, which shows a masculine characteristic. The queen's temple has many columns and an entrance that draws the eye to it first when first looking at it. It has nothing shiny that is eye catching. The reason I feel she did this is because for one she wanted to do something different then the queen, she wanted to create her own afterlife name for herself, and two, to create something that was more feminine and let the king have his spot light.

[4]

Peristyle Temple from Greece

Temple of Horus at Edfu of Egypt

Similarities:

Columns, motifs, large scale, power, they tell stories, both are for religious purposes, same material

Contrast:

One made completely of columns while the other has actual walls with columns, larger scale drawings then the other, one entrance way vs. numerous entrances, one level of scale on one and numerous scales on the other.

Greece really focused on axial progression in their religous areas while Egypt did not.

[5] The Egyptian furniture pictured in Harwood seemingly looks light weight. I can tell the material is wood. The different variations of the legs and actual seat parts range from skinny to medium size. No pieces are bulky or thick which helps keep the pieces not so heavy. In contrast, the furniture at Geza is made of stone and is big and bulky, which obviously adds a ton a weight.

[6] The urns show the contrast of male and female which brings me back to the Queen's Temple vs. The Pharaoh pyramids. The pyramid is big because it was built for a mad and the temple was small because it was built for a woman. This picture is kind of the same way, the man is being served by the women showing more power to the male. Grecian culture did not fully value women, sole strength of their nation depended on the male. Women were used for child baring and serving pharaoh's and other important males.