|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
tomagucci
Joined: 25 Feb 2008
Posts: 3
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 11:36 pm Post subject: Ornamentation and thoughts on it |
    |
|
What is everyones opinion on ornamentation in regards to use and meaning on todays buildings. I have read many reports on the meaning of ornamentation on older classical buildings however is the use of ornamentation today just for pretty decoration?
Or do you think it is used just like in the classical times in which the actual ornamentation on windows and doorways actually meant something in relation to the rest of the building. What is your guys' opinion on something that is built modern, however in a classical style such as Royce Hall at UCLA? it is built in a lombardian romanesque style and has many uses of ornamentation, however do you guys think it is able to be read?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
csintexas
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 1303
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
What was the meaning of ornamentation on older classical buildings?
_________________
Chris Stewart
Modern Texas Home Project |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Madimel
Joined: 06 Feb 2008
Posts: 109
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The purpose of ornamentation of old classical building was to denote the wealth of the owner.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tomagucci
Joined: 25 Feb 2008
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| so what does everyone think?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lekizz
Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 954
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It can be vewy pwetty! But on a more serious note, architecture for thousands of years has referred back to earlier styles. Decoration can be particular to a region, or can hark back to renaissance classicism, or just be irreverrent kitsch. It often represents a tradition, or a continuity which people need and understand. And yes, decorative detail can involve tremendous skill and craftsmanship, which just has to be admired.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djswan
Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 333
Location: Montana, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It tells a story.
_________________
The definition of architect is "Master Builder".
I am a builder and there are no masters.
"I'm not one of those who in expressing opinions confine themselves to facts"
Mark Twain |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 1048
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The root of much in architectural ornamentation is elaboration of the joints, spaces, connections, and working parts in the conceptual structural and weather-control systems of a building.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1819
Location: Miami, Florida
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ornamentation does indeed tell a story...historically, throughout many periods and all regions designers, builders, craftmen, owners would express various aspects of the building and their values through these details. There is so much to this topic that we could write a very elaborate thesis on this alone but I want to address the most interesting aspect of the original question which is in relation to contemporary buildings: I'm amused by the fact that Royce Hall was built the in same year as the Barcelona Pavilion. This has many repercussions in that regard...ornamentation was in the throws of a revolution, somewhat. A lot of this stemming from the technologies that allowed structure and space to be free of one another.
Fast forward to today and my contention is that PoMo has bastardized Modernism so badly that there is a reversal towards ornamentation, but still without the same reverence as ages ago. Now it's akin to stripping music down to the percussion section alone and rhyming to the beat and later adding tracks of melodies over the refrains in order to make it more palatable. Now we see moldings, trim and arched gypsum drywall with reveals senselessly mis-replicating historic ornamentation. But it remains clear, at least to me, that surfaces and objects devoid of interest leaves the inhabitant of said space wanting and therefore the psychological effects of ornamentation is fundamental to the answer to your question. It's all about perception of space.
mx2.5
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
birgco
Joined: 01 May 2007
Posts: 254
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Are we forgetting that historically one of the most important influences contributing to ornamentation in architectural thought and design .......
................................................ is .......................................
religion  .
Did I say that?
Yes, there, I said it. ............... but I would never admit it in public....
........................................and may *** forgive me.
But I digress.... think of the thousands of arches, finials, crosses, steeples, gargoyles, minarettes, obelisks, domes, 17/12 pitched roofs,etc., etc., etc.,
all pointing to heaven in glorification of the S*p*e*e B*i*g!!!!
and how many of those religious ornamentations snuck (snuck??) into popular residential, commercial and public buildings?
and let's not forget the "secret" inscription at the top of the Washington Monument, which everyone knows is L*u* D*o.
and remember, you didn't hear it from me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 1048
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Like most good things in architecture, good ornament is working at many levels...
Take a look at any of the great Gothic churches - say, Chartres:
http://www.GreatBuildings.com/cgi-bin/gbi.cgi/Chartres_Cathedral.html/cid_chartres_jai_040.html
I'd suggest that the overall physical scheme of ornamentation is largely functionally-based, in terms of implementing and celebrating the building's particular structural attitude toward gravity and other major forces; in terms of enclosure, shedding water, and lighting the interior; entry and wayfinding; etc.
Within that overall broad scheme of ornamentation, the specific character of ornamental elements, from mouldings and drip-edges to rose windows and statuary, is driven thematically by the specific use of the building, in the case of a cathedral, overtly religious, and according to the client (and builders') doctrine.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1819
Location: Miami, Florida
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tomagucci
Joined: 25 Feb 2008
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mx2, i agree very much with your train of thought, your words have given me a whole new light on the idea of ornament in the modern sense. After reading your comments, i view royce hall as an unsuccessful attempt at a romanesque revival because the building does not function like it should. It is merely copying a basilica and chaning the images on the tympanum without fully integrating the ornaments to add to the rhetoric of the building as a whole.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Architect
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 184
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Architecture, even crappy architecture, isn't 'fixed' or restricted to certain timeline. You can't clearly demonstrate a 'truth' in architectural form or timeline which would justify the preclusion of past architectural expressions. So yeah, as more and more time passes of course you will see a greater range of architectural expressions occuring at the same time. Because like I said, you can't clearly demonstrate 'truth' in one paticular architectural expression over another.
You just don't have that depth of understanding - sorry.
In the broadest terms I agree somewhat with Kevin "...driven thematically by the specific use of the building,".
In the purest sense I don't understand the superficial/academic concept of 'ornamentation'. I understand all elements of pure Architecture in terms of rhythms, major and minor (etcetera). And its the minor rhythms which 'adorn' (as in complement, much like the leaves and bark etc., of a tree) the major elements of a coherent Architectural composition. Very groovy stuff indeed, especially when it comes to concepts such as syncopation et al. as seen in terms of structural function.
So, for me to speak of the relevance of one project over another built within the same timeline, ("Royce Hall vs Barcelona Pavilion"), is completely irrelevant. Matters of 'taste' have no place in Architecture.
But I enjoy the discourse, I'll even fan that fire just for the fun of it!
Take care...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1819
Location: Miami, Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The greatest irony of modern students is how easily the mind is polluted by ideas of "purity" which has somehow given license to do anything, all the time...meanwhile browbeating anything of classic beauty. Anyone who attempts to dispell "truth" is but the fool forever chained to watch the shadows pass by on the walls of the Allegory of the Cave...a scenario that oftens describes our profession. For it is but a mere shadow of truth to accept the notion that time, nor ornament, has any sense in Architecture. If anything, any half witted wanna-be architect would natually sense that time and the issue of ornament are as fundamental to architecture as anything could possibly be. Architecture is the very existence of a building experienced over time. The elements of surface, perhaps even tactile, could be...no...is best expressed through ornamentation. Hell, even the infamous "purist" himself made a lot more than less when covering up his columns to better delineate the structure...Mies may have coined less is more but even he decorated his structures, no matter how minimally he added ornamentation or not.
The attempt to describe spatial flow as syncopation as a substitute only demonstrates the misunderstading of what ornamentation is. Once you have your cylindrical cake, you can smother it in icing and sell it for a few dollars. Next time I recommend some trim, fleur de lis, maybe even a candle to make it more inviting...but more importantly, to make it more familiar and comfortable for the those who are actually buying and eating it.
mx2.5
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Architect
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 184
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
...brief redaction by moderator...
I wasn't using the word 'syncopation' to describe spatial flow. So, slow down, go back, and re-read my words. And if need be don't hesitate to use dictionary dot com, ok?
The attached photo is of the Fawcett residence by F.Ll.W. Note the structural patterns. Or, as Wright would say "Integral ornament structure-pattern made visibly articulate."
The word 'syncopation' is a word of structure. NOT space. I don't remember F.Ll.W. ever using it. But he has done as I do, and that is use the terms of music theory to describe Architecture. And come to think it, the quote "Music in stone." was said to descride some building long ago, could have been during the Baroque period.
I digress.
If you'd like, I will post as many photo examples as you need so that you'll begin to understand that ornamentation, in it's purest form, is a structural rhythm as important to a building as are it's main structural elements.... then you won't need dictionary dot com at all.
And as for your allusion to Bauhaus and it's imprisoning mantra (s) ie. "machine for living in", that too has long since been relagted to the passage of time ...if indeed it was ever relevant to begin with.
Take care...
|
Filesize: 60.98 KB
Filename: Fawcett_reidencE.jpg
Viewed: 76 Time(s)
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
