t-arch

[t-arch]

The Narrative of Architecture

an architectural history manifesto by Tina Rungsawang  Aside from rare escapes to exotic beaches or tropical mountains, most of us are surrounded by buildings. We have become so familiar to these blocks that routinely prevail our visual perception to the point that we barely notice the significance in our faculty buildings or shopping malls around the city. But do these buildings really have significance? Is it only because of our acquaintance with these formations, or is it the fact that these buildings do not possess enough fascination to actually capture our attention? 

There is a major difference between a building and a piece of architecture. Architecture is the art of designing a building. Birds, ants, termites have all been building nests to house themselves and their peers since the creation of living beings. Even bee hives have indwelling sense of building with geometry and lightweight materials. Humans, however, developed architecture. It is more than just a mere act of building an enclosed space, as it can lift our moods, set hairs riding from the back of our necks, or even leave us feeling intimidated. It is the art of using an acknowledged enchantment to transform negligible shelters into a work of art.

Structures all over the world, ranging eras to eras, have been built from the the intangible beliefs from people of different civilizations and cultures. It is no surprise that the first real works of architecture taught in architectural history classes are those built for praising higher power; tombs and temples. From lectures to lectures, it is apparent that mankind has attempted to connect with the eternal and to build in harmony with the cosmos. The minds of these builders in the past designed architecture with the incessant thought of stories of the sacred, stories of strength and victory, stories of the wise. 

What architecture all has in common, from the most modest to the majestic of them all, is the powerful impact they leave behind to inspire ideas and actions of people from generation to generation. Aspiring architecture has the ability to create emotions to the inhabitants, to motivate, to relax. Architects are like magicians diddling stone, brick, wood, iron, steel and concrete into astonishing structures that raise our souls.

However, traveling through ancient civilizations to the development of the modern world, the number of people and architecture have grown significantly since the beginning of architecture. Unfortunately, this has not exactly lead to the growth of quality in architecture, in my opinion. Today, the majority of architects no longer use physical structures as a form of connection between humankind and the gods or as a source to make sense of our place in the worlds and universe. As I walk through Central World, a huge, major shopping mall in Bangkok, Thailand, I think to myself as to what feelings I am getting from this space, from the mixture of materials, from the lighting. I see plastered, curved ceilings with holes on them as ornamentation. Is it trying to convey a certain meaning to me? Are all these glass spheres hanging from the top of the glass roof trying communicate a certain emotion? The enclosed, air conditioned box was just an enormous, upscaled market to me. The ‘conceptual design’ of the structure, whatever it is, could not link my emotions to anything in any way.  

After technology has enabled architecture to be more rousing and stimulating, the ease has degraded the significance of crucial, pure inspirational aspects that were evident in history of architecture, now lost and demeaned. The mundane buildings like shopping malls and office buildings we now live our lives in have become such a familiarity that we do not feel the need of refined cultural environment. 

The art of architecture is practiced by architects who construct their works from the beliefs and stories of themselves and the people of their civilizations. The attempt in connection between mankind and god was prominent in the process of most notable early architecture in history, though not seen as much, if at all, today. 

During the times of Ancient Egypt, pyramids were built based on the strong basis of afterlife and the sun god. Their tombs ensured that the transformation from life to death was a successful process (Fazio, 21). This goal ultimately “led to the construction of tombs for royalty and the development of mummification to preserve the body” (Fazio, 21). With its brawny base, mastabas layers and the numerous trials to perfect the structure that still lasts thousands of year, the pyramid has built an image for itself through eras as a strong and intriguing architectural form. It now, today, even portrays a strong symbolism in our society. With a better understanding of the purpose and foundation of the pyramid structure, I can make assumptions of why the pyramid is used as logos and symbols for so many organizations. For a logo, companies would most likely choose something that symbolizes strength, unity, etc., of which the pyramid does perfectly. It definitely represents a strong foundation. This is stating the obvious. Looking into the symbol of the particularly obscure organization, the Illuminati, it shows more patent symbolism. The pyramid was  meant to be a place to ascend the Pharos to heaven. Not only does it represent robustness, but it also represents power and perfection, as it was what the Egyptians looked up to. It basically seems like the pyramid has the whole “package”, structurally, aesthetically, and spiritually. This example shows how strong credence has influenced the start of ancient architecture in terms of forms and their interaction with surrounding context to convey the connection between mortals and gods, all which continues to be effective towards the public today, even in non-architectural terms.

In Byzantine Empire, Christianity flourished along with its architectural forms. The Byzantine architecture consisted much of domed forms and dealt with centers, numerology and light. One of the most magnificent and adventurous buildings of all time is the church of Hagia Sophia (AD 532 - 37) or Divine Wisdom. This was by far the largest of the churches in Constantinople during that era.

The genius part of Hagia Sophia is the fact that the weight of the central dome is dissipated through smaller domes that surround it. The result is a huge central space uncluttered by columns, while the dome itself appears to float in space. Domed architecture have spread throughout different eras and to different places all over the world, with Hagia Sophia as a big influence. 

Hagia Sophia have influenced the design of some of the greatest mosques as well as cathedrals ever constructed. The Ukrainian St. Michael’s Golden-Domed Monastery, built in 1713, had much more Byzantine-influenced structures before the exterior was rebuilt in the Ukrainian Baroque style in the 18th century, though the interior remained in its original Byzantine style. The original cathedral was demolished by the Soviets in the 1930s, but was reconstructed and opened in 1999. The overall structure is still very much consisting of a hill of domes, like Hagia Sophia. Sprouting from the strong faith in God and Christianity, the construction of Christian architecture has left a distinct mark in the architecture timeline throughout history. 

Architecture derived from India has been so richly decorated with sculptures, shrines, carvings. This is because the architecture is derived from the understanding of religious culture.

The Great Stupa at Sanchi (250 BC - 250 AD) is the earliest surviving heroic architectural monument of India. This Buddhist shrine was built by the Mauryan emperor. The distinctive architecture comprises a shallow brick dome raised on a circular platform, surrounded by stone railings, as is the enclosed sacred platform at the top of the Stupa. There are four richly carved gateways. It is based on traditional chaityas, or circular burial mounds for the deceased village headmen.

The Stupa represents the world and is deigned both as a place for prayers and as a representation of the path that leads to Nirvana or divine understanding. Endlessness and rebirth, the believe cycle of the Buddhist religious, is expressed in the circular architectural form. The mast, representing the axis of the world, rises from the center of the dome to reach the cosmos. 

The Buddhist architecture of every region has its own unique character due to different cultural and environmental factors. The ancient Buddhist shrine is seen today in various countries, but the form and materiality have changed, constructed in a variety of sizes, proportions, colors and creative designs. The ‘high rise’ mast that reaches towards the sky still remains in the structure of stupas. 

During the Gothic era, architecture went through a revolution in terms of being aesthetically daring and inspiring. It is an attempt to “lift our everyday life up to the heavens, the touch the face of God, in the highest stone vaults, towers and steeples that contemporary technology allowed” (Glancey, 53), which definitely leaves prominent imprints us emotionally. With the emphasis of light illumination and soaring heights, the style has influenced architecture throughout Europe. Spanish Gothic architecture represents a massive, absurdly broad design that symbolized the might of the Catholic Church and the monarchy. The bombastic and aggressive forms of this style leaves a bold impression on people, giving them a chilly feeling of power and timid waves.  Light is presented through architecture to convey many types of atmospheres and feelings. The Gothic era has developed new measures with innovative structural techniques, resulting in some of the most inspiring and daring buildings with revolutionary aesthetics. The aim of architects at the time was to build as high and with as much glass as possible, making caskets of light. These lights illuminated decorated naves, aisles and choirs. With the flying buttress being the key device in high building, big buttresses and walls of massive heights allowed light to illuminate beautifully ornamented structural features, in both interior and exterior views.

Being that cathedrals are the most dominant forms of Gothic architecture throughout Europe, a high amount of light also gives the space a feeling of enchanted connection to higher powers. This concept of space and light has definitely stuck throughout different eras. Modern architecture today has been influenced by many aspects of Gothic architecture and its luminous lighting methods.

The beliefs and stories that become the basis of great architecture throughout history did not come only from religion and gods. There were also great ideologies in victory, politics, literature and the sublime. Though not built to exactly connect humanity to heaven, significant architecture have been constructed with the passionate belief in certain virtues in different cultures and eras. 

Architecture during Ancient Greek focused highly on proportions, coming from the perfect body proportions of Greek gods. The Temple of Poseidon, built in 460BC, consists of the Doric proportions and shows strength and manliness. The larger columns show masculinity and act as gates into a place where god and humans live in coed. The column styles serve today as a basis of Classical architecture.

The Greeks originally came up with the first true form of democracy, which has influenced many political orders around the world, most prominently the United States of America. This influence can also be seen through the architectural forms of the American capital buildings, like the US White House in Washington, D.C., designed by James Hoban and built between 1792 and 1800, which has Doric columns at the front. This most certainly had the same purpose of showing strength and masculinity just as the Temple of Poseidon did.

Unlike the older civilizations like Egyptian and Greek, Roman civilization was not based on any supernatural higher power, myths or afterlife at all. Rome has its own urban history and is considered one of the first successful urban cities in history. 

The Romans incorporated Etruscan and Latin civilizations and adopted many customs to enhance their empire and keep their big populated land in order. Because of the large size in population, Rome had to keep things organized, resulting in great orthogonal city planning. The Romans were really the first to consider space in their architecture in order to accommodate to the large number of citizens. They developed many organized systems for their urban city, including the sewage. 

To me, Ancient Roman Empire sounds much like New York City today. The city planning of the Manhattan borough was created through the grid system, much like how the Romans planned their city orthogonally. New York City is a very crowded place where space was limited and the creativity in designing a space was crucial. 

Rome had multi-story apartment blocks called ‘insulae’ that housed a wide range residents. The insulae were meant for a mass accommodation and were several floors high. These buildings were mainly made to meet residential needs. Just as any other urban city would follow the idea of building for a mass population and residential needs, New York City perfectly depicts that adaptation. The city is filled with sky reaching buildings that house countless families, all lined up to accommodate to the huge population. 

As Le Corbusier had stated, “If one remembers the Greeks one feels that the Romans had bad taste.”

This is probably true if you consider the aesthetics of the structures themselves in each different empires, but the Romans definitely had better strategy in obliging to the needs of the people. It seems as if architecture then was not so much to please the eyes, but more to create a functional, compact space for the crowded empire. 

New York City has definitely followed the footsteps of Rome and their high principle of making their city a workable space, consisting of urban aspects that function at their fullest and assist the lives of those in the crowded metropolis rather than beautifully crafted structures that were meant for staring. 

After Rome, there was a time of Romanesque. Italian Romanesque architecture is an architectural style in the Medieval period of Europe. Also known as ‘Roman-like’, the style is greatly influenced by the Byzantine and Christianity architecture, but much more refined due to its state of surrounding environment. During its era, the form was taken mostly by castles and churches, churches being the more dominant in this type of style. Churches were places where people went to gain knowledge of religious practices and believes. The structure of this style is massive and very solid, giving the sense of strength. The form relies on its thick walls and piers. The style also consists of different types of vaults and dressed stone. Ornamentation is not of importance in this style as compared to the previous styles of architecture.

Architecture in America today has been influenced by the Romanesque style, mainly seen in colleges and learning institutions throughout the country. I believe the adaption is so prominent in places relating to knowledge and practices because of the utility in the style during the Medieval times, which were used in churches. They have the same purpose as college buildings. The style adapted by University of Southern California used many of the same features as the traditional  style, only with more simplified arches and windows. The use of stones as material, though not exactly local or common in architecture in America, was also adapted in the building. 

Romanesque architecture consists of pure forms. By using pure forms in places like churches and educational institutions, I believe the surrounding context of the architectural environmental helps stimulate stability in the mind of people going into practice of religious believes or educational knowledge. The interesting part is, why choose thick, heavy architectural style for institutions of the current day? Why choose ‘darkness’ over something more modern, simpler, something ‘lighter’? I think the use of this intriguing, sophisticated style triggers a certain feeling of being in a somewhat sacred place, as if you’re learning in an actual church. The style, including arches, flying buttresses, stone materials, etc. gives off a sense of being in something grand, something majestic and historical. I think this type of environment gives power and acts as a motivator for scholars to achieve more in such a solid, ardent domain.

During the Gothic age, architecture had direct translations of the manifestation from the Bible. The luxurious ornamentations on different cathedrals told stories. However, as architecture moved into the Renaissance, there was rediscovery in the interest of antiquity, in translation and rereading of classical literature and philosophy. Rather than religious-based structures, there was more emphasis on secularity; manifestations in reason, objective inquiry, logic, order and achievement. 

This sounds quite similar to the manifestation of Greek architecture. The Renaissance style appreciated order, logic, and proportion, much like the Greek. This, once again, references to the past. 

Through Ospedale Degli Innocenti, the architect, Brunelleschi, exacted proportions, order, balance and reason, as seen through the spacing in between every column, arch, bay, windows, etc. Even the bays are perfected cubed in all axis. This piece is rigid and exact, with the expression of harmony and logic, not Gothic-like. The architecture still proves to be moving through its use of analogous congruity. 

After the Renaissance, Baroque style came into the architecture with the intentions of breaking the rules of the previous generation. It is counter reformation of the Renaissance. Architect Gian Lorenzo Bernini designed Sant’andrea al Quirinale (1658 - 1670) in Rome with the elements of Baroque. 

The structure has a facade that embodies concave and convex forms, which are forms that would not have been approved during the symmetrically, orderly and proportionally based period of Renaissance.The stairs are curved, bent pediment to show fluidity. Rather than the emphasis of pure geometry, Baroque embraced ‘deformed’ geometry, with shapes like ovals and elliptical forms. The distinctive features of this style of architecture make it stand out greatly.

Then there was Romanticism. Romanticism is a movement that insisted of strong beliefs in Phenomenology, emphasizing on the metaphysical conditions, how people saw things and how they are affected by things, the sublime. In terms of architecture, it is about how a person’s body responds to the space and form, not about the space and form themselves. Romanticism is not completely flamboyant like Baroque; it has logic, but still shows much emotional values. Such emotions like horror, terror, awe, and the feeling of being overwhelmed were the focus in the logic of creating aesthetics. 

Giovanni Battista Piranesi was an Italian artist and scholar that made money out of the Grand Tour fad by selling drawings architecture to tourists. What was so attractive about his drawings was the exaggeration, the romance, the perfect line of trees, the geometric gardens, exaggerated and perfected proportions, etc. He took what was physically in front of him and slightly adjusted it on paper to bring out the sublime.

Later, Piranesi started drawing from various sources of architecture, creating an imagined mix of different pieces of all over the world with exaggerated scale and details, resulting ultimately in an intense design environment that was very evocative. His drawings continue to this day to be influential, especially through his opiate-dream-like prison drawings, which showed ambiguous, continuous, extreme spaces. His drawings obviously evoke intense emotions to any viewer. 

It is evident that sublimity can be felt through visual aesthetics, as we see through drawings and architecture, but romanticism exposed this overwhelmed feeling through many types of media, including music. Romantic music, despite the title, does not necessarily mean romantic love, but more of music that is very passionate and expressive. It attempts for listeners to feel deep emotions and power. 

Romantic music emphasizes lyrical, songlike melodies with adventurous modulation and rich harmonies. It explores a wider range of pitch, dynamics and tones, making it very dense and weighty. This is what evokes sublimity, evokes terror and overwhelms the listeners. 

An example is Symphonie fantastique, by Hector Berlioz. It is one of the earliest examples of a romantic tone poem; a piece which attempts to tell a story through instruments alone without the any singers or texts, with themes revolving doomed love, opium and witchcraft. The track builds up intense feelings through its wide range of dreamy, fantasizing, adventurous tones to more passionate and dramatic ones.

And now, we enter the 20th century. This century has shown to be a big flipping point in the history of architecture we know today. This century has developed fast, rising our civilization at a speed not known prior. Over the centuries, new technologies have allowed architects to practice their art with greater deftness, but also to make more mistakes than were possible at the time of the building of the pyramids or the Pantheon. And, just as “the great world of religions tend to get watered down and split into sects and warring factions with the passing of generations” (Glancey, 10), so has architecture. 

Art Nouveau was most successfully practiced in the decorative arts. The artists chose themes involving symbolism, especially in terms of eroticism; their designs often processed dreamlike and exotic forms. The richly ornamented and asymmetrical style has influenced even architecture. This type of style was very radically different compared to the styles prior 1890’s. 

Vienna Secession attempts to create a modern style without historicism. It was founded in 1897  in Vienna, Austria, by a group of artists, sculptors, architects, and designers. The building itself, however, rejects more lively and Art Nouveau expressions; it advocates rational construction, simplicity and honest use of materials, which will turn into an influence on modern developments to follow this period. 

A monumental mass and geometrical pure forms, such as horizontal rectangles and cubes, are dominant in the composition, while still holding bits and pieces of the ornamentation aspects of classical styles, though the ornamentations are much less detailed and used much more sparingly. As compared to the styles before this time, which may have included ornaments of religious figures, detailed vegetal forms, etc., the ornamentation done in Vienna Secession is much less refined. More emphasis is put on function, light and air. It is this mix that has created a step in contemporary architecture. This was the start of the transition that would lead to Modern architecture, the style that has greatly influenced the world we live in today. 

Stepping into the birth of Modernism, Frank Lloyd Wright is considered to be the revolutionary father of American contemporary architecture. His works were strongly influenced by the arts & crafts movement, resulting in works revolved around natural materials mixed with industrial aspects of the developing lifestyle. He had abstracted human life + machines to create his pieces. 

Frank L. Wright was all for pure forms, geometric shapes, open flow within his space and definitely no rigid pitched roofs.In his piece, the Robie House, he had created a living space that was very horizontal. It was a transitional space between nature and the way humans lived inside (interior/exterior), almost like incorporating the natural world into the working lifestyle. There was no clear line between man and nature. Frank L. Wright was also very much an American at heart who took pride in putting in essences of midwestern style, like the thin horizontal bricks that made stream-like lines on the outside of the house.  

His use of material was very natural and organic, but the way everything was built (including the furniture) was in a very industrial manner (machine-like modular lines, etc).  

Le Corbusier whose birth name is Charles Edourd Jeanneret had changed his name only in architecture to be more general, even modular, just like his style of work. He was inspired by early Modern art (those by Fauvists to Cubists, as he was also an artist) for his creations, resulting in honest forms in architecture. Le Corbusier’s architectural work had created its own movement. He was into functional, non-ornamented houses that resembled factory buildings. He saw no problem in basic geometric forms with smooth, plain walls and small windows (this seems normal to us now because we’re all living in it, but back then it was absurd to live in a space with no ornamentation and big windows).

Villa Savoye is probably one of his best known structures. The curves within the interiors were inspired from the turns of the automobile, giving a sense of how inspired he was by not only modern art, but the modern lifestyle of the developing, industrial world. He avoided pitched roofs to rid of the pre-war styles, where social classes had existed. Le Corbusier was a big supporter of equality in living. This building is based on an open plan, with the use of non-load bearing walls to allow the plan to be as versatile as possible. The modular design is a result of Le Corbusier’s studies in the golden section and human proportions (think of the Greek architecture with human proportions, and take away all or ornamentation). 

To compare these two architects, both have very similar thoughts on how contemporary architecture should be during the post-war period, one in America and one in France. They both rejected the rigid styles prior their movements. Both appreciated pure forms, non-ornamentation and embraced the industrial periods. Le Corbusier was more into the thought of Utopia, where everyone lived with equal share without class division, and the ultimate pure forms while Frank Lloyd Wright was more into the classic American midwestern prairie with organic materials. Both architects are the extreme influences of architecture today.

As mentioned in the text by Le Corbusier, architecture is the “masterly, correct and magnificent play of masses brought together in light”. Pure forms such as cubes, cones, spheres, cylinders and pyramids are the primary forms that are distinct without ambiguity to our eyes. Everyone, from children to the elderly, can agree that these pure forms are the most beautiful forms. Pure forms have been used endlessly throughout the history of architecture. The Egyptians, Greeks and Romans have based their architectural structures on these forms, for example the Pyramids, the Temple of Luxor, the Parthenon, the Coliseum and Hadrian’s Villa.

According to Corbusier, Gothic architecture is lacking aesthetics values due to the fact that is it not based on these forms, but rather more complex geometry. It is not plastic, it is drama. However, Villa Savoye and compare them to those structures of the Ancient Greeks. Yes, perfect proportions are applied, yes there are pure forms, but is this piece really that moving?

I feel that the pure forms of the Ancient Egyptians and Ancient Greeks are much more intriguing than those of Le Corbusier himself. Who is he to say that Gothic architecture is lacking aesthetic values when it is Gothic architecture that has the magical powers to give a passerby the overwhelming feeling of fear, yet charm them at the same time? It is because the architects in ancient times left a bigger purpose in their pieces of architecture, which gives their structures more charm, more stories, compared to the intentionally insipid works of Modernists. 

As seen in the 1967 French film “Play Time”, modern style consists mainly of manufactured colors of grays, cubicles, and an unfriendly, antiseptic environment that is overtly pristine. Everything is so uniform and redundant that the nature of life is nearly completely taken out of context within this style. In other words, Modernism is lifeless.  

One influential photographer in particular had perfected the art of putting life into modernist architecture. Julius Shulman showed in his documentary, Visual Acoustics, how he had not only captured and publicize American modernism but also helped create the architecture itself over his 70-year long career, as his images had marked him the preserver of architectural legacies. But for such an influential style of architecture, why would there be a need of such a spectacular photographer and outrageous techniques just to put life in a space? This suggests the dullness in the architectural form itself, without fancy artificial lighting and concocted scene-setting. 

Modern architecture started during the industrial period, when the conventional rigid ways of building were outdated. Architect Mies van der Rohe from Germany is a well known figure in this movement. During the time, modernist architects insisted that modernism is not a style, but rather buildings that focus purely on functions. Of course, today we know that modern style buildings turn out to represent “function” rather than be truly functional. “Function” has turned into the style of modernism.

These buildings are based on factory structures to represent the industrial age. Modern homes are minimal and supposed to be as functional as possible, “meant for the working man” (though no worker could ever afford a modern home at that time!). 

Mies’s Tugenhadt House is an example of modern architecture, with the flat roof, open plan, front yard defined by pure grid, and the abundant use of glass to give the structure a lightweight, opened feeling. 

Though modern architecture does not involve much ornamentation, Mies likes to see the building as an ornamentation itself, being an ornamentation of materials. His buildings are abstracted into nearly ‘nothing’, as seen in his use of very light lines and minimal, pure materials and furniture.

After modernism, there was expressionism in architecture. Expressionist structures aim to express internal emotions and thoughts with a utopian outlook, just like the idea of expressionist paintings.

The TWA Terminal at JFK was built in 1956, designed by Eero Saarinen. The structure expresses the excitement of travel, as shown through the non-static shape that is representing the flight of birds. This building is the ultimate definition of form follows function, as it has created the system of how terminals work at the modern airport up until today. The structure does not express function alone, unlike modernist architecture, but it also expresses symbolism, history and ideas. 

While modern structures are focused on pure functions and use of honest materials and openness, expressionist architecture creates distortions of form for an emotional effect, as it really tries to express the inner experience. The architecture itself is truly seen as a work of art. I feel that, though this came after true Modern architecture, the expressionist style definitely has the ability to give inhabitants more excitement and pleasure, from both inside and out, through its basis of building out of expressions and reference from various objects and stories. 

After World War II, revolutions struct most of the western world in practically all aspects, including architecture. What architects had tried to do decades prior to this time, all the ‘functionality’ based concepts and ‘non-presentational’ architecture, had shifted to what we call Post Modern. Post Modernism revolves around the idea that nothing is original, it is all representational. Robert Venturi, the writer of Complexity & Contradiction, had even mentioned that modernism itself was a representation, a representation of functions. 

Post Modernism is multivalent and semiotic. Robert Venturi has his own way of perceiving architecture, seeing values in complexity and richness of meaning in the building, from the visuals to the process. Unlike Mies, Venturi believes in “More is NOT less” and that architecture should possess “both-and” qualities rather than the popular “either-or” in modernism. Venturi introduces ambiguity as one of the elements that is crucial in the architecture of complexity and contradiction, relating it to the richness of both form and meaning within the architecture. 

By giving importance to complexity, this does not mean Post Modernism is turning time to the styles prior Modernism. It is simply appreciating both history and function; both pure forms and ornamentation on its surface to enhance building, something Modernism advocated tried to avoid. Venturi’s theories could be seen in his own mother’s house, the Vanna Venturi House, designed by Venturi himself. 

The design seems deceptively simple. This house has a sense of symmetry, yet the symmetry has been distorted, i.e. the facade has five windows on each side of the house, but the arrangement of the windows is completely different. He had also used the arch on the facade, a classical element, as an ornamentation rather than for functions, showing that even a distinct structural piece could be used for non-structual purposes. It is referencing to the past, with a new purpose. 

This practice of referencing the past could be seen often in Thailand as well. It is quite common (and important), I believe, for Thai architects to always incorporate traditional Thai architectural elements such as the Thai wood ornamentation and the gable-end on the roofs. Many buildings possess both the traditional variables and the more contemporary aspects within a single building, merging the past into the present. This style, through its reference to cultural values and stories from the past, has the ability to bring the dwellers of the architecture to feel certain senses, much more than Modernist architecture. These senses, however, would probably be much less strong compared to those brought by architecture prior to the 20th century. 

What we see today, in the 21st century, is mainly suburban housing, identical sky-scraping condominiums, luxurious shopping centers and arrays of office buildings. We see Junkspaces. Junkspace explains the properties of certain architectural space that are built to the purpose of trapping inhabitants in a surrealistic environment; where time and space seem to be taking a halt through different techniques, such as the number and placement of light openings, shapes and orientations of pathways, and the removal of all devices that tell time. Good examples of Junkspaces are shopping malls and casinos. These spaces are practically seamless, alluring the visitors to an everlasting visit with the help of air-conditioning, fire-shutter, hot air contains, etc. The disorientation of the interior space and the solid, enclosed walls give the users absolutely no idea of the direction they are face, the time, the weather. This allows the users to be worry-free and stay as long as they want, shop until the mall closes or gamble until their wallets are empty. Rem Koolhas disapproved of Junkspace. But it is quite inevitable, I believe, to run away from Junkspaces in the current environment. 

Today, there are more people and exponentially more architects than there have been in any time in the history of civilization. Sadly, I feel that many architects no longer build in terms of connecting the architecture to a story, to gods, to the sacred, to the cosmos. Architects now seem to be building for banal, fashionable and profitable reasons that reduce architecture to a vainglorious pursuit. Yeah, architects have always had big egos, probably since the founders of the pyramids, but at least back then they had a heart that built for the sake of their beliefs and their culture. Architecture today has lost its identity! The very time in history when technology allowed buildings to be more thrilling than ever, the results turn to be lackluster, some even demeaning.

For example, look at the Islamic Center on Wall St. in New York City, also known as Park51 or the Ground Zero Mosque, that has brought up controversial issues from different groups of people in the United States. The initial building was nothing out of the ordinary, as it blended in quite well with the rest of the buildings on the street. After the September 11 incident, that initial structure had been physically affected, so an architectural proposal was made to mend the fractured structure.

The design of this new mosque, however, has definitely changed from the traditional ways of Islamic architecture. The structure looks very modern and would probably not strike any pedestrian as an Islamic center in any way, lacking the staple elements of actual minarets, domes, etc, though the height of the tower is similar to the minaret, or ‘tower of light’. The facade could be seen as an imitation of Islamic decorations and ornamentations, though very obscurely. and I personally feel, a bit tacky. The reason for this form is most likely due to its urban surrounding, being in the center of one of the most popular urban cities in the entire world. 

There are mixed reactions to this architectural proposal, most being negative. The modernity of the mosque has weakened the visuality of traditional Islamic mosques, which hold much cultural and artistic values and holiness. It has also been brought up by groups of people that this proposal somewhat resembles the two towers that were taken down on 9/11, making the structure very ‘disrespectful’ as it is set so closely to the site of the incident.

This is not to say that every single architect today are undignified. There are, of course, still architects working today who are as great as those in the past. For example, take the China Pavilion.

The China Pavilion at Shanghai’s 2010 World Expo, also known as the Oriental Crown (due to the fact that it resembles an ancient Chinese crown) is made of traditional dougong brackets, which have been used in traditional Chinese architecture for over 2,000 years. This style includes wooden brackets layered between the top of the columns and crossbeams, which was often used in the Forbidden City and Summer Palace. The structure and red color of this pavilion display is to express traditional Chinese culture through architectural form with a modern twist. Afterall, the dougong style is something that identifies Chinese architecture, acting as a stereotypical image of the contemporary world. The prominence of strong traditional architectural features mixed with modern designs definitely leaves a striking impression of the nation’s long history in cultures, structures, strength, and unity that brought China to be the powerful country it is today. 

Culture and beliefs are the basis of great architecture that have left the world in awe with countless visions and imaginations, even after thousands of years. Without the key ingredients to the construction of quality architecture, the uninspiring forms and structures that lack cultivation and sophistication will only leave empty messages to the public, emotionally and physically. In the current world, architecture is simply a mimic. No longer do most architects design from their hearts, their beliefs, their cultural roots, but rather from inspirations seen in architectural books at Kinokuniya and from their neighboring buildings. Due to the ease of technology, no sincere thoughts need to be put in to construct a building, no cultural values needed. The identity seen in different parts of the world in the past are now replaced with junkspaces in every country. You can walk around a mall in the London and it would give you no different feeling from the one you get while walking around a mall in Bangkok. A bird’s eye view photograph of Hong Kong will probably look almost identical to that of any other urban city. The structures of today do not charm the society anymore. If we truly want to live vapid lives, then sure, the artless world of air-conditioned shopping paradises and indistinguishable suburban housing estates are exactly what we get. Even with the strong promotion for Green Architecture today, I feel there still needs to be a sense of imaginative belief in the souls of the present architects, keeping the stories and values that have ignited the art of building from the beginning of this field that have lead us to where we are now. 

[t-arch]

sublimity in Romanticism

Romanticism is a movement that insisted of Phenomenology, emphasizing on the metaphysical conditions, how people saw things and how they are affected by things, the sublime. In terms of architecture, it is about how a person's body responds to the space and form, not about the space and form themselves. Romanticism is not completely flamboyant like Baroque; it has logic, but still shows much emotional values. Such emotions like horror, terror, awe, and the feeling of being overwhelmed were the focus in the logic of creating aesthetics. 

Giovanni Battista Piranesi was an Italian artist and scholar that made money out of the Grand Tour fad by selling drawings architecture to tourists. What was so attractive about his drawings was the exaggeration, the romance, the perfect line of trees, the geometric gardens, exaggerated and perfected proportions, etc. He took what was physically in front of him and slightly adjusted it on paper to bring out the sublime.

Later, Piranesi started drawing from various sources of architecture, creating an imagined mix of different pieces of all over the world with exaggerated scale and details, resulting ultimately in an intense design environment that was very evocative. His drawings continue to this day to be influential, especially through his opiate-dream-like prison drawings, which showed ambiguous, continuous, extreme spaces. His drawings obviously evoke intense emotions to any viewer. 

It is evident that sublimity can be felt through visual aesthetics, as we see through drawings and architecture, but romanticism exposed this overwhelmed feeling through many types of media, including music. Romantic music, despite the title, does not necessarily mean romantic love, but more of music that is very passionate and expressive. It attempts for listeners to feel deep emotions and power. 

Romantic music emphasizes lyrical, songlike melodies with adventurous modulation and rich harmonies. It explores a wider range of pitch, dynamics and tones, making it very dense and weighty. This is what evokes sublimity, evokes terror and overwhelms the listeners. 

An example is Symphonie fantastique, by Hector Berlioz. It is one of the earliest examples of a romantic tone poem; a piece which attempts to tell a story through instruments alone without the any singers or texts, with themes revolving doomed love, opium and witchcraft. The track builds up intense feelings through its wide range of dreamy, fantasizing, adventurous tones to more passionate and dramatic ones. 

[t-arch]

Baroque and Deconstructivism

After the Renaissance, Baroque style came into architecture with the intentions of breaking the rules of the previous generation. It is counter reformation of the Renaissance. Architect Gian Lorenzo Bernini designed Sant'andrea al Quirinale (1658 - 1670) in Rome with the elements of Baroque. 

The structure has a facade that embodies concave and convex forms, which are forms that would not have been approved during the symmetrically, orderly and proportionally based period of Renaissance.The stairs are curved, bent pediment to show fluidity. Rather than the emphasis of pure geometry, Baroque embraced 'deformed' geometry, with shapes like ovals and elliptical forms.    

This logic could be compared to that of Deconstructivism. This style is characterized by ideas of manipulation and fragmentation of the structure's surface, turning banal shapes into non-rectilinear ones. Though Baroque is evidently much less extreme in terms of distortions in forms, the concept of shifting shapes is very much the same as what Deconstructivism did to Post Modern architecture. 

[t-arch]

The Renaissance and Modernism

During the Gothic age, architecture had direct translations of the manifestation from the Bible. The luxurious ornamentations on different cathedrals told stories. However, as architecture moved into the Renaissance, there was rediscovery in the interest of antiquity, in translation and rereading of classical literature and philosophy. Rather than religious-based structures, there was more emphasis on secularity; manifestations in reason, objective inquiry, logic, order and achievement. 

This sounds quite similar to the manifestation of Greek architecture. The Renaissance style appreciated order, logic, and proportion, much like the Greek. This, once again, references to the past. 

An example of a Renaissance architecture is Ospedale Degli Innocenti (1419).

Through this piece, the architect, Brunelleschi, exacted proportions, order, balance and reason, as seen through the spacing in between every column, arch, bay, windows, etc. Even the bays are perfected cubed in all axis. This piece is rigid and exact, with the expression of harmony and logic, not Gothic-like.

Interestingly, though Modernism claimed itself to be distinct and purely functional, not referring to any historical style, the elements of Renaissance architecture and Modernist architecture are extremely comparable. Both styles have used Vitruvius' principles in their structures, though the appearance of the two styles are completely different. The Renaissance emphasized on perfect proportion, symmetry, geometry while Modernism paid attention to simplicity, pure forms and functions. Nonetheless, we can say that the Renaissance developed from Gothic just as Modernism developed from Classical. As Renaissance reduced the religiously related ornamentation to mainly secular, modernism reduced ornamented volumes to simple geometric forms with no excess. 

[t-arch]

Rem Koolhaas & Junkspace

Junkspace explains the properties of certain architectural space that are built to the purpose of trapping inhabitants in a surrealistic environment; where time and space seem to be taking a halt through different techniques, such as the number and placement of light openings, shapes and orientations of pathways, and the removal of all devices that tell time. Good examples of Junkspaces are shopping malls and casinos. These spaces are practically seamless, alluring the visitors to an everlasting visit with the help of air-conditioning, fire-shutter, hot air contains, etc. The disorientation of the interior space and the solid, enclosed walls give the users absolutely no idea of the direction they are face, the time, the weather. This allows the users to be worry-free and stay as long as they want, shop until the mall closes or gamble until their wallets are empty. 

Rem Koolhas, however, disapproved Junkspace. But it is quite inevitable, I believe, to run away from Junkspaces in today’s environment. Koolhaas tries to compensate between the space junk, the bigness and the design. This also leads to context. Bigness, in the past, had been done before (look at the pyramids of the Egyptians!). Today’s bigness is based on the surrounding contexts. According to Koolhaas, Manhattan is a place where culture of congestion is present. Its ‘bigness’ became the means to provide residents functional spaces in the limited available space, resulting in stacked floors of skyscrapers. 

[t-arch]

Post Modernism + Complexity & Contradiction

After World War II, revolutions struct most of the western world in practically all aspects, including Architecture. What architects had tried to do decades prior to this time, all the 'functionality' based concepts and 'non-presentational' architecture, had shifted to what we call Post Modern. Post Modernism revolves around the idea that nothing is original, it is all representational. Robert Venturi, the writer of Complexity & Contradiction, had even mentioned that modernism itself was a representation, a representation of functions. 

Post Modernism is multivalent and semiotic. Robert Venturi has his own way of perceiving architecture, seeing values in complexity and richness of meaning in the building, from the visuals to the process. Unlike Mies, Venturi believes in "More is NOT less" and that architecture should possess "both-and" qualities rather than the popular "either-or" in modernism. Venturi introduces ambiguity as one of the elements that is crucial in the architecture of complexity and contradiction, relating it to the richness of both form and meaning within the architecture. 

By giving importance to complexity, this does not mean Post Modernism is turning time to the styles prior Modernism. It is simply appreciating both history and function; both pure forms and ornamentation on its surface to enhance building, something Modernism advocated tried to avoid. 

Venturi's theories could be seen in his own mother's house, the Vanna Venturi House, designed by Venturi himself. 

The design seems deceptively simple. This house has a sense of symmetry, yet the symmetry has been distorted, ie. the facade has five windows on each side of the house, but the arrangement of the windows is completely different. He had also used the arch on the facade, a classical element, as an ornamentation rather than for functions, showing that even a distinct structural piece could be used for non-structual purposes. It is referencing to the past, with a new purpose. 

This practice of referencing the past could be seen often in Thailand as well. It is quite common (and important), I believe, for Thai architects to always incorporate traditional Thai architectural elements such as the Thai wood ornamentation and the gable-end on the roofs. Many buildings possess both the traditional variables and the more contemporary aspects within a single building, merging the past into the present.

[t-arch]

Life in Modernism

How can you put life into modernist architecture? As seen in the 1967 French film "Play Time", modern style consists mainly of manufactured colors of grays, cubicles, and an unfriendly, antiseptic environment that is overtly pristine. Everything is so uniform and redundant that the nature of life is nearly completely taken out of context within this style. 

One influential photographer in particular had perfected the art of putting life into modernist architecture. Julius Shulman showed in his documentary, Visual Acoustics, how he had not only captured and publicize American modernism but also helped create the architecture itself over his 70-year long career, as his images had marked him the preserver of architectural legacies. 

Shulman's photographs of Southern California's modern homes of the mid-20th-century came alive through his compositions of carefully posed models against sleek furnishing and magnificent landscapes. He strayed far away from the unpleasant monochrome, robot-like atmosphere of what most would see in modernist architecture, but rather promoted these structures as unique compilations of mass, shadow and light. These photographs come to life, even on black and white film! His techniques have definitely set the standard of how architectural photography should be up until today. 

Pierre Koenig's Case Study #22, photographed by Julius Shulman  

Drake Residence, photographed by Julius Shulman 

[t-arch]

modernism onto expressionism

Modern architecture started during the industrial period, when the conventional rigid ways of building were outdated. Architect Mies van der Rohe from Germany is a well known figure in this movement. During the time, modernist architects insisted that modernism is not a style, but rather buildings that focus purely on functions. Of course, today we know that modern style buildings turn out to represent "function" rather than be truly functional. "Function" has turned into the style of modernism.

These buildings are based on factory structures to represent the industrial age. Modern homes are minimal and supposed to be as functional as possible, "meant for the working man" (though no worker could ever afford a modern home at that time!). 

Mies's Tugenhadt House is an example of modern architecture, with the flat roof, open plan, front yard defined by pure grid, and the abundant use of glass to give the structure a lightweight, opened feeling. 

Though modern architecture does not involve much ornamentation, Mies likes to see the building as an ornamentation itself, being an ornamentation of materials. His buildings are abstracted into nearly 'nothing', as seen in his use of very light lines and minimal, pure materials and furniture. 

After modernism, there was expressionism in architecture. Expressionist structures aim to express internal emotions and thoughts with a utopian outlook, just like the idea of expressionist paintings.

The TWA Terminal at JFK was built in 1956, designed by Eero Saarinen. The structure expresses the excitement of travel, as shown through the non-static shape that is representing the flight of birds. This building is the ultimate definition of form follows function, as it has created the system of how terminals work at the modern airport up until today. The structure does not express function alone, unlike modernist architecture, but it also expresses symbolism, history and ideas. 

While modern structures are focused on pure functions and use of honest materials and openness, expressionist architecture creates distortions of form for an emotional effect, as it really tries to express the inner experience. The architecture itself is truly seen as a work of art.

[t-arch]

Frank Lloyd Wright vs. Le Corbusier

Frank Lloyd Wright is considered to be the revolutionary father of American contemporary architecture. His works were strongly influenced by the arts & crafts movement, resulting in works revolved around natural materials mixed with industrial aspects of the developing lifestyle. He had abstracted human life + machines to create his pieces. 

Frank L. Wright was all for pure forms, geometric shapes, open flow within his space and definitely no rigid pitched roofs.

The Robie House

In his piece, the Robie House, he had created a living space that was very horizontal. It was a transitional space between nature and the way humans lived inside (interior/exterior), almost like incorporating the natural world into the working lifestyle. There was no clear line between man and nature. Frank L. Wright was also very much an American at heart who took pride in putting in essences of midwestern style, like the thin horizontal bricks that made stream-like lines on the outside of the house.  

  His use of material was very natural and organic, but the way everything was built (including the furniture) was in a very industrial manner (machine-like modular lines, etc).  

Le Corbusier whose birth name is Charles Edourd Jeanneret had changed his name only in architecture to be more general, even modular, just like his style of work. He was inspired by early Modern art (those by Fauvists to Cubists, as he was also an artist) for his creations, resulting in honest forms in architecture.

Le Corbusier's architectural work had created its own movement. He was into functional, non-ornamented houses that resembled factory buildings. He saw no problem in basic geometric forms with smooth, plain walls and small windows (this seems normal to us now because we're all living in it, but back then it was absurd to live in a space with no ornamentation and big windows).

  Villa Sovoye is probably one of his best known structures. The curves within the interiors were inspired from the turns of the automobile, giving a sense of how inspired he was by not only modern art, but the modern lifestyle of the developing, industrial world. He avoided pitched roofs to rid of the pre-war styles, where social classes had existed. Le Corbusier was a big supporter of equality in living. This building is based on an open plan, with the use of non-load bearing walls to allow the plan to be as versatile as possible. The modular design is a result of Le Corbusier's studies in the golden section and human proportions (think of the Greek architecture with human proportions, and take away all or ornamentation).

   To compare these two architects, both have very similar thoughts on how contemporary architecture should be during the post-war period, one in America and one in France. They both rejected the rigid styles prior their movements. Both appreciated pure forms, non-ornamentation and embraced the industrial periods. Le Corbusier was more into the thought of Utopia, where everyone lived with equal share without class division, and the ultimate pure forms while Frank Lloyd Wright was more into the classic American midwestern prairie with organic materials. Both architects are the extreme influences of architecture today. 

[t-arch]

Art Nouveau and the Vienna Secession

Art Nouveau was most successfully practiced in the decorative arts. The artists chose themes involving symbolism, especially in terms of eroticism; their designs often processed dreamlike and exotic forms. The richly ornamented and asymmetrical style has influenced even architecture. This type of style was very radically different compared to the styles prior 1890's. 

  Vienna Secession attempts to create a modern style without historicism. It was founded in 1897  in Vienna, Austria, by a group of artists, sculptors, architects, and designers. The building itself, however, rejects more lively and Art Nouveau expressions; it advocates rational construction, simplicity and honest use of materials, which will turn into an influence on modern developments to follow this period. 

The Vienna Secession

A monumental mass and geometrical pure forms, such as horizontal rectangles and cubes, are dominant in the composition, while still holding bits and pieces of the ornamentation aspects of classical styles, though the ornamentations are much less detailed and used much more sparingly. As compared to the styles before this time, which may have included ornaments of religious figures, detailed vegetal forms, etc., the ornamentation done in Vienna Secession is much less refined. More emphasis is put on function, light and air. It is this mix that has created a step in contemporary architecture. 

The Churrigueresque ornamentation style

[t-arch]

China Pavilion

The China Pavilion at Shanghai's 2010 World Expo, also known as the Oriental Crown (due to the fact that it resembles an ancient Chinese crown) is made of traditional dougong brackets, which have been used in traditional Chinese architecture for over 2,000 years. This style includes wooden brackets layered between the top of the columns and crossbeams, which was often used in the Forbidden City and Summer Palace. The structure and red color of this pavilion display is to express traditional Chinese culture through architectural form with a modern twist. Afterall, the dougong style is something that identifies Chinese architecture, acting as a stereotypical image of the contemporary world. The prominence of strong traditional architectural features mixed with modern designs definitely leaves a striking impression of the nation's long history in cultures, structures, strength, and unity that brought China to be the powerful country it is today. 

[t-arch]

Light in Gothic Architecture

Light is presented through architecture to convey many types of atmospheres and feelings. During the times of ancient Greek and Rome, temples such as the Pantheon used amounts of light within the structure to touch certain sacred elements within the temple, passing through the dome from the sky, representing a source of power and knowledge sent from heaven to earth.

The Gothic era has developed new measures with innovative structural techniques, resulting in some of the most inspiring and daring buildings with revolutionary aesthetics. The large scale of Romanesque Architecture was shrunken to enable more light into the space. The aim of architects at the time was to build as high and with as much glass as possible, making caskets of light. These lights illuminated decorated naves, aisles and choirs. With the flying buttress being the key device in high building, big buttresses and walls of massive heights allowed light to illuminate beautifully ornamented structural features, in both interior and exterior views.

Being that cathedrals are the most dominant forms of Gothic architecture throughout Europe, a high amount of light also gives the space a feeling of enchanted connection to higher powers. This concept of space and light has definitely stuck throughout different eras. Modern architecture today has been influenced by many aspects of Gothic architecture and its luminous lighting methods.

Beavais Cathedra, France

[t-arch]

Romanesque Architecture in America

Italian Romanesque architecture is an architectural style in the Medieval period of Europe. This is between the age of Roman Empire and Renaissance. Also known as 'Roman-like', the style is greatly influenced by the Byzantine and Christianity architecture, but much more refined due to its state of surrounding environment. During its era, the form was taken mostly by castles and churches, churches being the more dominant in this type of style. Churches were places where people went to gain knowledge of religious practices and believes. The structure of this style is massive and very solid, giving the sense of strength. The form relies on its thick walls and piers. The style also consists of different types of vaults and dressed stone. Ornamentation is not of importance in this style as compared to the previous styles of architecture.

Detall de la Catedral de Worms in Germany

Architecture in America today has been influenced by the Romanesque style, mainly seen in colleges and learning institutions throughout the country. I believe the adaption is so prominent in places relating to knowledge and practices because of the utility in the style during the Medieval times, which were used in churches. They have the same purpose as college buildings. The style adapted by University of Southern California used many of the same features as the traditional  style, only with more simplified arches and windows. The use of stones as material, though not exactly local or common in architecture in America, was also adapted in the building. 

University of Southern California in America

Romanesque architecture consists of pure forms. Pure forms are sophisticated and pleasing to the general eyes. By using pure forms in places like churches and educational institutions, I believe the surrounding context of the architectural environmental helps stimulate stability in the mind of people going into practice of religious believes or educational knowledge. The interesting part is, why choose thick, heavy architectural style for institutions of the current day? Why choose 'darkness' over something more modern, simpler, something 'lighter'? I think the use of this intriguing, sophisticated style triggers a certain feeling of being in a somewhat sacred place, as if you're learning in an actual church. The style, including arches, flying buttresses, stone materials, etc. gives off a sense of being in something grand, something majestic and historical. I think this type of environment acts as a motivator for scholars to achieve more in such a solid, powerful domain.

[t-arch]

Buddhist Architecture

Architecture derived from India has been so richly decorated with sculptures, shrines, carvings. This is because the architecture is derived from the understanding of religious culture.

The Great Stupa at Sanchi (250 BC - 250 AD) is the earliest surviving heroic architectural monument of India. This Buddhist shrine was built by the Mauryan emperor. The distinctive architecture comprises a shallow brick dome raised on a circular platform, surrounded by stone railings, as is the enclosed sacred platform at the top of the Stupa. There are four richly carved gateways. It is based on traditional chaityas, or circular burial mounds for the deceased village headmen.

The Stupa represents the world and is deigned both as a place for prayers and as a representation of the path that leads to Nirvana or divine understanding. Endlessness and rebirth, the believe cycle of the Buddhist religious, is expressed in the circular architectural form. The mast, representing the axis of the world, rises from the center of the dome. 

The Buddhist architecture of every region has its own unique character due to different cultural and environmental factors. The ancient Buddhist shrine is seen today in various countries, but the form and materiality have changed, constructed in a variety of sizes, proportions, colors and creative designs. The 'high rise' mast that reaches towards the sky still remains in the structure of stupas. 

Golden Stupa in Thailand

White Horse Stupa in China

 Stupa Kalachakra in Spain

[t-arch]

Islamic Center, New York City

The Islamic Center on Wall St. in New York City, also known as Park51 or the Ground Zero Mosque, has brought up controversial issues from different groups of people in the United States. The initial building was nothing out of the ordinary, as it blended in quite well with the rest of the buildings on the street. After September 11 incident, that initial structure had been physically affected, so an architectural proposal was made to mend the fractured structure.

The design of this new mosque, however, has definitely changed from the traditional ways of Islamic architecture. The structure looks very modern and would probably not strike any pedestrian as an Islamic center in any way, lacking the staple elements of actual minarets, domes, etc, though the height of the tower is similar to the minaret, or 'tower of light'. The facade could be seen as an imitation of Islamic decorations and ornamentations, though very obscurely. The facade also lets a high amount of light into the building, giving it a sense of sacredness within the building.  The reason for this form is most likely due to its urban surrounding, being in the center of one of the most popular urban cities in the entire world. 

There are mixed reactions to this architectural proposal, most being negative. The modernity of the mosque has weakened the visuality of traditional Islamic mosques, which hold much cultural and artistic values and holiness. It has also been brought up by groups of people that this proposal somewhat resembles the two towers that were taken down on 9/11, making the structure very 'disrespectful' as it is set so closely to the site of the incident.

[t-arch]

Byzantine architecture and its influence

After the fall of Rome, Christianity flourished along with its architectural forms. The Byzantine architecture consisted much of domed forms and dealt with centers, numerology and light. One of the most magnificent and adventurous buildings of all time is the church of Hagia Sophia (AD 532 - 37) or Divine Wisdom. This was by far the largest of the churches in Constantinople during that era.

The genius part of Hagia Sophia is the fact that the weight of the central dome is dissipated through smaller domes that surround it. The result is a huge central space uncluttered by columns, while the dome itself appears to float in space. 

Domed architecture have spread throughout different eras and to different places all over the world, with Hagia Sophia as a big influence. 

Hagia Sophia have influenced the design of some of the greatest mosques as well as cathedrals ever constructed. 

The Ukrainian St. Michael's Golden-Domed Monastery, built in 1713, had much more Byzantine-influenced structures before the exterior was rebuilt in the Ukrainian Baroque style in the 18th century, though the interior remained in its original Byzantine style. The original cathedral was demolished by the Soviets in the 1930s, but was reconstructed and opened in 1999. The overall structure is still very much consisting of a hill of domes, like Hagia Sophia.

[t-arch]

space in Ancient Rome and New York City

Unlike the older civilizations like Egyptian and Greek, Roman civilization was not based on any supernatural higher power, myths or afterlife. Rome has its own urban history and is considered one of the first successful urban cities in history. 

The Romans incorporated Etruscan and Latin civilizations and adopted many customs to enhance their empire and keep their big populated land in order. Because of the large size in population, Rome had to keep things organized, resulting in great orthogonal city planning. The Romans were really the first to consider space in their architecture in order to accommodate to the large number of citizens. They developed many organized systems for their urban city, including the sewage. 

To me, Ancient Roman Empire sounds much like New York City today. The city planning of the Manhattan borough was created through the grid system, much like how the Romans planned their city orthogonally. New York City is a very crowded place where space was limited and the creativity in designing a space was crucial. 

 Rome had multi-story apartment blocks called 'insulae' that housed a wide range residents. The insulae were meant for a mass accommodation and were several floors high. These buildings were mainly made to meet residential needs. 

Just as any other urban city would follow the idea of building for a mass population and residential needs, New York City perfectly depicts that adaptation. The city is filled with sky reaching buildings that house countless families, all lined up to accommodate to the huge population. 

Just as Le Corbusier had stated, "If one remembers the Greeks one feels that the Romans had bad taste."

This is probably true if you consider the aesthetics of the structures themselves in each different empires, but the Romans definitely had better strategy in obliging to the needs of the people. It seems as if architecture then was not so much to please the eyes, but more to create a functional, compact space for the crowded empire. 

New York City has definitely followed the footsteps of Rome, consisting of urban aspects that function at their fullest and assist the lives of those in the crowded metropolis rather than beautifully crafted structures that were meant for staring.