Posted by Pe Hadzi on February 26, 2004 at 14:18:15:
In Reply to: Re: Architects needed for design of new city on The islands of Parador posted by JWmHarmon on February 23, 2004 at 10:47:49:
The problem of the historian styles is, that it is just a copy of a image, the reasons and the sence why a romanesque church has been built in this kind is not a aesthetical product- it's a product of the philosophie and the understanding of the world and God. Architecture is in this case a mirror of the society.
Of course the Romanesque Style is a developed version of the Roman and Byzantine Style but the visions and new ideas has been integrated. So that are innovations in the mind-structure.
If you are using just the picture of a facade it's just the surface, no visions, no idea no sence, no spirit- just image and style: in the 18th Century they made that: Vienna is an example for this eclectic experiment ( like they did it on the hole world)- it's in the first moment interesting- but just facades- very booring. The interiors are in the most cases not interesting or strong- just a cheap way to show the power of the bourgoisie.
This kind of architecture has today a dangerouse contect to our society: it ignores the complexity of our society, how can we ignore the WW1 and 2, the revolution in the 68 and the postmodern ideas. Our society is very rich and should have the right to be thought about it. Traditionalism is in the most cases just a fear of the new. I agree that we have to learn from the past, it helps us to understand the today.
Me, as big fan of Venturi, like of course Las Vegas, it's unique on this world and much more honest then the traditional styles.
Especially if you know the original building and then the copies you see that the new ones have no spirite.
This building of Monticello has a nice top-room, the rest is a copy of the Rotunda from Palladio near Vicenca (Italy), this version is much less strong because this Mr. Jefferson didn't know exactly why he did the things like that: the questions of the renaissance of the 16th Century in Italy are already solved and were gone. Making copies is too boring, innovation has been until the 18th century an important idea, why should we stop to look to the future and look what dead architects could have thought. This dead architects would build in a new style if they would live today- there is no reason why they shouldn't!
To make a glass-house like Ph. Johnson is very traditional too, the same thing!
Types & Styles
Library Places Building Photos Free 3D Models Archiplanet