In the last post here, it was supposed that elements of architecture could be viewed as either analytical or creative. Elements that are analytical can sometimes overlap with those that are creative. For example, a wall on its own can be analysed but also represents the most deconstructed "chunk" we can define to usefully create architecture. (Obviously a wall can be deconstructed further to a series of planes, or even further to a series of points, but these are not useful in a creative sense because it is impossible to build a plane - every physical object must have a thickness).
Take for example a colonnade. This is a series of columns joined by their entablature and is an example of an analytical element. It is viewed as a single analytical element, however, it is constructed of many creative elements: columns. In this way, the manner in which creative elements act together can create analytical elements.
Let's take this example further. Often a colonnade will have a wall close by. A wall: another creative element. If this wall represents the front of the building, the colonnade becomes a portico. However, if this wall represents an internal courtyard it becomes a peristyle.
This is a clear demonstration of how the arrangement of different creative elements can form different analytical elements. Further to this, it shows how one elements may perceptively change by the arrangement of other nearby elements.
Why does this matter? What is the difference between a creative and analytical element to someone using a building? Aren't colonnade, portico and peristyle just names that we have invented?
I will consider these questions in the next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment