Following the signing of President Trump's new executive order that makes classical and traditional architecture the preferred style for federal buildings on Monday, the American Institute of Architects promptly responded with a public condemnation.
"The AIA does not, and never will, prioritize any type of architectural
design over another," declares the latest response.
When an early draft of this federal style dictate was floated in February, the institute already condemned the attempt, tweeting on February 4th: "The AIA strongly opposes uniform style mandates for federal #architecture. Architecture should be designed for the specific communities that it serves, reflecting our rich nation’s diverse places, thought, culture and climates. Architects are committed to honoring our past as well as reflecting our future progress, protecting the freedom of thought and expression that are essential to democracy."
On February 7th, the AIA penned a letter to President Trump opposing "political appointees as the arbiters of architectural taste." Later that month, former presidents of the AIA followed up with a letter denouncing the proposed executive order.
Now, that the action, "Promoting Beautiful Federal Civic Architecture," has been signed into law, the AIA renewed its opposition and announced that it work with President-Elect Biden to reverse the executive order.
Following is the December-21st statement in its entirety:
AIA condemns executive order mandating design preference for federal architecture
AIA to work with President-Elect Biden to reverse the executive order.
WASHINGTON – Dec. 21, 2020 - The American Institute of Architects (AIA) unequivocally opposes the executive order, “Promoting Beautiful Federal Civic Architecture”, signed by President Trump.
The executive order dictates an architectural style preference for federal courthouses and certain other federal buildings to be mandated by government agencies. The order attempts to promote “classical” and “traditional” architecture above other design styles. The order also incorrectly vilifies the General Service Administration’s (GSA) Design Excellence Program.
Communities should have the right and responsibility to decide for themselves what architectural design best fits their needs, and we look forward to working with President-Elect Biden to ensure that,” said EVP/Chief Executive Officer Robert Ivy, FAIA. “Though we are appalled with the administration’s decision to move forward with the design mandate, we are happy the order isn’t as far reaching as previously thought.”
The AIA does not, and never will, prioritize any type of architectural design over another. In February, AIA members sent over 11,000 letters to the White House condemning the mandated designation of “classical” architecture as the preferred style of all federal courthouses, all federal public buildings in the Capital region, and all other federal public buildings whose cost exceeds $50 million.
The executive order requires extensive justification to use anything other than the preferred design style. While the executive order makes mention of incorporating regional design traditions, in practice it would still cut local voices out of a critical part of the design process. It inappropriately elevates the design tastes of a few federal appointees over the communities in which the buildings will be placed.
The AIA will continue to support The Design Excellence Program, which maintains a style-neutral approach that focuses on community-centered decision-making, demonstrated architectural skill, and public input. The diversity of American architectural achievement is a national treasure that must be continued.
More critical protest is also expected from other industry organizations and academics that had previously voiced opposition in response to the February draft.
Follow Architect's ongoing coverage of this topic via the "Making Federal Buildings Beautiful Again" tag.
121 Comments
let's hope this is a priority and doesn't get buried under all the fixes president Biden will have to manage.
Don’t hold your breath
AIA will probably ban their members from designing courthouses soon enough anyway, so I see little reason to worry.
The AIA does not, and never will, prioritize any type of architectural design over another.
Didn't the AIA just ban its members from doing certain types of prison design? Whether you believe it or not, the AIA is promoting social change issues -- affordable housing, climate change, etc -- over style issues lately, following the trends. The problem here is that the Democrats and Pop Media has lost interest in style (which is incorrectly dismissed) while the Trump Right manipulates it as another winning culture war. The NYT Arch Critic says he's "demeaned" to have to talk about style, or maybe he means architecture altogether. But you know, he'll grudgingly do it for Trump, or if the University of Wherever gives him 15k in an envelope. It seems vague social justice is more important that all of this building design mumbo jumbo anyway.
What is missing? A public-expert interface to explain how "style" is substance -- and forever changing to face new ideas and issues. Many so called modern buildings are still clinging to the past as well--that SOM building is not a great example of what we should be building.
social Justice is their style. It’s all about style.
Rule 1.403: Members shall not knowingly design spaces intended for execution.
It could be said that a few architectural styles violate the 8th Amendment.
Also "Prison" is a program, not a type. Get your words straight.
Prison doesn't necessarily mean execution centers and frankly, it really doesn't matter where you kill someone. If there is a wall, they can still shoot the person. Just saying? No walls are needed for lethal injection. Electrocution just needs sufficient electrical service. I think it's kind of moot of a rule by the AIA, anyway. Not that execution should be the penalty for every kind of crime. I'll leave that there because it's an inherently controversial topic and that calm civil discussion is practically impossible.
Interesting enough, many of the images in this article demonstrate to many why the EO came about. Most, if not all, professional designers and organizations that have written on this topic since the EO first surfaced are opposed to the EO. On the other hand, recent polls show the public is more favorable to the classical language in the EO. ( If anyone is interested in those polls, let me know here and I will include them later. ) Other than the free will of professionals being challenged (the EO does not say non-classical can't be proposed), I see the so-called restrictions really as a challenge. Does anyone think that the classical language can't be expressed effectively in today's designs for the types of buildings the EO addresses? Are designers that unimaginative and creative? How does the classical language inform designers? What say ye?
Oh, shit. If THE PUBLIC is more favorable to something it MUST be the right choice.
Even if you take the critique of modernism/brutalism in good faith, why is it necessary to restrict style to narrow defined classism. Aren't there new styles waiting to be discovered? Isn't America all about free enterprise, finding the next best thing? Renaissance style was once "modern" to the Founders compared with middle age Gothic styles.
Even so, I'm not convinced these trad vs. mod polls are trustworthy. Polls were pre-cooked by a side by side comparison (below link) done by a traditional group. Missing are any recent modern federal buildings, or well-liked federal modernism such as the Gateway Arch. Or the MIA great architects of today -- Blackwell, Ban, Holl, etc in US Federal architecture.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-14/classical-buildings-beat-modern-ones-in-u-s-poll
Smith,
Is there anyone on this site who's ever even done a neoclassical building? It seems like there is a long list of problems with trying to do it, regardless of how people feel about the style or meaning. And I'd love to hear from someone who actually builds this sort of stuff... if they exist haha
Honestly, it isn't even the classical style that is the issue. The problem with this executive order is that it arbitrarily restricts federal buildings built to be designed and built to specific styles. The problem is, if the executive order isn't flexible enough to respond to architectural context, it would result in a Federal building designed out of context with the architectural style(s) of the area where such a building is built.
In architecture, the classical language has informed designers, engineers and its patrons for 2000+ years. It is not intellectually void. This is the same for other classics: music, art, literature. If you have studied a classic, you may be informed. It may instruct or challenge you. Thus, any style, if codified (that is it has known attributes), it is a language. Do stripes and plaids disturb you? Would you wear them together? You could. You'd stand out. Why don't we see you ever wearing stripes and plaids?
An executive order stating that Mod fashion is the preferred fashion of bureaucrats would be equally flawed .
I wore stripes and plaid once, to a thesis review with my advisor. He commented on the combo, and I did not understand the problem nor did I care. Jokes on him tho, as I also was wearing plaid pattern loafers in addition to my striped shorts, and plaid top. Rules of fashion are stupid.
Stripes and plaid and kente cloth and velvet...awesome:
AIA Directory of past members for Mead of Mead, McKim, and White
There is a general neglect of historical context being expressed by the American Institute of Architect's leadership. The AIA was founded in the Victorian Age and the work of Architects produced some of the most important movements of Architecture like the Gilded Age. Classical Language correctly fused with the Modern Language with Gothic Revival, per Oxford. The impeached President's Executive Order doesn't harm Architects with progressive and comprehensible skills.
Oh, if there's no harm then it's columns and domes all around, folks!
The United States Capital building was designed schematically by a Doctor, finished by a builder/architect, and mastered in cast iron structure after the wooden dome burned down. Transitioning from the original schematic Pantheistic dome reference to the 19th Century completion of the Georgian / Federal style building, with the current dome, progressed the Republican synthesis of Architectural language, while Bulfinch mastered the current contractual excellence that influenced the American Institute of Architects.
Source: Roth, L. M. (2001). American Architecture: A History. Canada: Icon Editions: Westview Press.
A canadian source on US architecture history?
“Doesn’t harm Architects with progressive and comprehensible skills”
Roth is an American; the print came from Canada; I am not sure if they used Oregon mills for the paper.
I honestly have no clue what your point here is supposed to be.
Modernism ended in 2014 after a revival period. Just look at chairs for a clue to how to speak.
Still not sure how any of that is relevant to this coversation.
Leland is/was (not sure but at least when I was there he was still a professor) a professor at the University of Oregon. I wouldn't know where the paper in the book is from because it really depends on where it is printed. I think it would be more sensible to print from material resources that are prevalent and renewable in the locality of the printing.
It’s a courtesy of respect for the author; you guys can probably just use Costco’s hamermill bright white, it’s generally good enough.
In my time there at University of Oregon, I'm pretty certain I had met him. I'm pretty certain sustainable practices used in the process of printing of the books would be of some importance which does not explicitly dictate that the paper used comes from Oregon.
However, I think he was more concerned about content of the book than he was concerned about all the publication printing logistics details.
Architects can use the book to understand the history of the capital building. It is an important guide to progressive language that can allow design to inform and progress the beautiful language studies in emergence that exist in Classical language. My senior project was seminal in translating meaningful tectonics in a civic forum and further explored in Beverly Hills with Architect Anthony Poon. Classicism is good for the future.
Not all federal buildings are for Civic purposes. I don't recall that many of us are opposed to classical / traditional architecture just because it's classical/traditional. Context matters but this is something of dialogue and debate. Some may find that classical architural style doesn't fit the culture of the people which some of those arguments, I don't agree with wholly. Some simply associate it with "white power" which I don't personally agree with because some reject all prior architectural styles before the 1960s civil rights era. This is more of their personal reasons and I don't personally agree with correlating tectonic elements and form to cultural philosophy especially with a style that has been in use by differing cultures over milleniums. My criticism of the EO is clearly about inappropriate level of restriction of styles just because of one person's personal tastes without sensible regards to local context. I would like the architect to have freedom to determine the appropriate design and style in consultation with the client (be it the Federal government). Not all federal buildings are civic halls.
The impeached president correctly pointed out the failure of the current GSA qualified Architects. They’re the client, and they aren’t asking for criminal activity.
???
Even modern work, as defined by the second and third millennium, has confluences with Classical language. Gothic Revival and Italian Gothic show Tuscan Order in some works. The intentional expression of Classicism has some corse in Architecturally significant fenestration that can calm the corporate detailer with Modernity; however, the client of Federal work is clear that buildings need to be good enough.
I'm trying to figure out the connection between your different thought lines. Not sure I am following your thought lines or understand what your point is.
Civic Malls have a variety of governance. Los Angeles even has a shaft of a Corinthian column for residential units. Federal buildings are all civic in nature, not unlike the agora adjacent to the acropolis having a civic nature.
Ugh.... federal prison? military barracks? I think the list goes on.
Military barracks are usually under 50000 per building in construction, but Biden might ponder the edifice. Prescott has a frieze over split face for their juvenile justice center. The narrative is just okay for justice.
^000 50 Million
Not all federal buildings (not talking "federal style") are buildings like the Capitol. You think the CIA or NSA offices need to be built in neoclassical style or the likes in all locations?
It will be interesting to see what Biden does with the EO; I hope the government designs a GSA pre-approved corsing and frieze for the United States of America Architectural style. Contemporary building technology can afford plumb walls.
Countries do like to brand themselves. Architecture as branding seems about right for America. Especially branding themselves with the architecture originating from another country...
have concluded that architecture / architects are caught in no mans land between a corrupt consolidated media (NYT Arch critic is “demeaned” to talk about architecture, but will gladly take 15k to discuss “social change” gobbledygook) and Trumpism which cynically exploits the degradation of media and abandonment of culture. Just look at the kind of critical pop culture darlings of the last 30 years: Tony Soprano, Walter white, Don Draper. Whereas any popular marvel hero — or competent figure — is laughed at and ignored by the elites. In the past, the best architects were commissioned in New York, Chicago, DC. Now they work in obscurity in Arkansas, Canada, China.
Chemex, I'm curious what kind of social change you think *isn't* gobbledygook? Social change is happening constantly.
Well, I give them credit for one thing; no more tired tropes. Other than that filled with stupid.
Another fan of “tactical urbanism” I see. What will be the latest distraction while real estate interest complete the real “social change”
Lot of noise over nothing.
Which part?
Hmm, and I was looking looking forward to gold-plated acanthus leaves and naked caryatides. Oh, well. Let's wait for the next, soon to come, fascist to rule the already decaying USA, with "classy" taste.
preferred "style" for federal buildings, a la Saddam
Did you have to go that far to prove your point? Look closer to your own country.
my country? what's yours?
Orhan, the joke is that the photo is Trump's penthouse.
Often times, nouveau riche never leaves the clan, here in "our" country also.
hahaha! what yours is mine. stop cannibalizing other cultures.
Page 118 of The Hermitage (1) shows one of the many rooms at the Hermitage, with one of the many Architects who designed the unique expressions that embody the Architectural work. Architects need to understand what a correct finish grade is in public work. Coordinating with Kalban on the Beverly Hills Visitory Center allowed for the Architect of the Core and Shell to add a light gray raised panel to a transparent wall. Reference: (1) Piotrovsky, M. (2004). The Hermitage, A Tour of the Halls and Rooms. Saint Petersburg: The State Hermitage.
Seth, do you need help?
The International Published lifestyle shouldn't have dropped me to poverty. Classicism is the easiest way to fire most of the mistakes employed in Architecture right now.
you DO need help
Seth is a bot.
tduds, please don’t be disrespectful, you speak too rural; I’m a Californian residing in Arizona.
Still not convinced.
Good for you, Seth. What cult do you belong to now? It's dry heat, we understand.
I am a Christian; the basic deity of God has three out-workings evident from the Classical Antiquities to men and women that sought the love of God. Per the most respected religious definitions and consequential belief sets, Christianity is not an occult / cult. However, Christianity believes in the supernatural power of God and the powers of darkness that forsook God. As a general desire to seek God, my Architectural research has proven the general accord of historical regard that the Bible holds true. Architecture is not dry heat, it is the business of profound style .
Antonio, one advantage of Classical language is the fact that it corresponds to the Civic correctness that made the United States possible. Classicism celebrates health and beauty, and, the general abuses of power that extended from sub-genres like Georgian, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, can easily be undone with Contemporary skill. I hope UC Berkeley takes the right turn with the second quarter of the 21st Century of the Current Era.
Some straight up GPT-3 babble right there.
So convincing that the AI recommends your full firing from Architecture & Design .
Orhan, I am dissatisfied in the United States of America's handling of estates and gold. The West needs to be first world about finance and gold bars .
The AIA's boldness continues to impress.
and the nation's poet ought to write in iambic pentameter
We're not going to learn anything about architecture or civic order and representation or even, especially beauty from this Executive Order, not from the proponents. We might learn something about the players and their game, however, those who were able to get Trump's attention for a few minutes. The survey Black Orchid links is from the National Civic Art Society. Justin Shubow is president, and here is a sampling of the board members:
Marion Smith, Chairman
Mr. Smith is a civil society leader and expert in international affairs, and has been executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation (VOC) since March 2014.
Christian Charnaux, Vice Chairman
Mr. Charnaux is Chief Growth Officer of Inspire Brands, a multi-brand restaurant company whose portfolio includes more than 4,600 Arby’s, Buffalo Wild Wings, and R Taco locations worldwide.
David Talbot, Treasurer
Mr. Talbot is Chief of Staff at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation.
Neal B. Freeman
Mr. Freeman is Chairman of the Blackwell Corporation, an advisory firm with clients in communications, defense, and wealth management.
Richard R. Hough III
Mr. Hough is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Silvercrest Asset Management Group.
Thomas D. Klingenstein
Founder and principal of Cohen, Klingenstein LLC, a New York City investment firm.
Seth Levey
Mr. Levey is a Public and Government Affairs Advisor at ExxonMobil Corporation.
etc.
https://www.civicart.org/leade...
I assume the same or similar got T's ear.
No practicing architects.
Marginal civic exposure, if any.
One architecture professor (classical).
*and*
(this is breathtaking in this day and age)
They're all white boys!
Ah, wonderful. Architecture by Committee. Funny, because that is very much what the Victims of Communism would suffer under at the hands of their dictators. taste by Decree! submit! This "country" is so into its Period of Decay.
Sec. 4. President’s Council on Improving Federal Civic Architecture. (a) There is hereby established the President’s Council on Improving Federal Civic Architecture (Council). (b) The Council shall be composed of: (i) all of the members of the Commission of Fine Arts.
And others, from the EO. The members of the Commission of Fine Arts include Justin Shubow:
https://www.cfa.gov/about-cfa/...
All Trump appointees.
It should be noted that there is expertise and diversity on the Commission. I can't comment on them.
What a waste this childish conversation is while IT and computer networking professionals are allowed to use word ‘architect’ freely everyday. We couldn’t even protect the name that our profession has for centuries. President’s executive order is the least of our problems. Sad.
Protectionism is the last refuge of the incompetent.
Sure. It’s very competent when non professionals call themselves ‘architects’.
How old are you?
Very competent question.
Answer the question Muppet.
Speaking to some responses above I say: "Can any of the opponents of the EO define what the Classical Language actually is and now it can inform a designer? What say ye? I very much want to know what you think both pro and con, but not in generalities or short one liners. Stand before this screen and respond with enlightenment as best your abilities allow. What do you personally think, not what you have been told.
You're missing the point. Whether it's intentional or not is unclear.
why would we do that? Who are you to request something like this?
It's obvious that traditional architecture has very little support from our architectural schools but in a Democracy, we don't need the government dictating style. Someday our Architectural institutions will open up to the pluralism that exists in all other aspects of modern culture, but until then, Trump should keep his tiny criminal hands off architecture.
it’s obvious that you never worked as an architect on any government project. Low rank bureaucrats are the ones dictating the ‘style’ not the President.
From my reading, many contributors above are merely expressing national politics that has embedded itself well in their reasoning. It would be more helpful to hear constructive input, both pro and con on the subject EO.
Smithacton what do you see as the benefit of a federally-required limitation on style? And if it *does* have a benefit, should it stop with architecture, or also be extended to telephones and cars and fashion?
Perhaps this link may suffice: https://www.whitehouse.gov/pre...
unbelievably poorly written, this must have been that Miller ghoul.
"Classical architecture encompasses such styles as Neoclassical, Georgian, Federal, Greek Revival, Beaux-Arts, and Art Deco."
I would fail anybody writing this phrase in a class.
Con: Mandating any one style over another restricts design freedom, stifles creativity, and kills innovation. Mandating *this particular style* is blatant cultural dogwhistle and not really about architecture.
Pro: There is no pro.
Correct, because this decision, from the "president" was not a political statement. It's a philosophical one, coming from a group of magnanimous, bright minds, solely dedicated to the betterment of the common people and style, especially all the Victims of Communism, that have been denied style all their poor lives. They are the very ones that deserve a serious, fair and balanced discussion over what is to be imposed on them by their Mast.., sorry, bos..., no, "leader' (because he really is). So, yes, let's not get involved in politics, especially that "disgusting", weakening, retrograde liberalism creeping up in the minds of our saintly youth - you know, the ones that don't use drugs, or listen to warp, marry soon after high school graduation, go to church (the right church) - because this is not a political matter. It's a... 'esthetician' one. Like multi-color nails. So, let's discuss. But let's pray first (the right pray, of course)
Got it. So discuss now below.
Look up "sarcasm". I personally despise retrograde fools that are repelled by progress or progressive concepts. Pray, pray, pray.
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!
More here: https://www.archdaily.com/907907/best-submissions-to-the-2018-architecture-holiday-card-challenge/5c181bcd08a5e5c8b90001fc-best-submissions-to-the-2018-architecture-holiday-card-challenge-image
Classical or Modern Architecture? For Americans, It’s No Contest
In a poll, traditional buildings soundly beat modern-looking ones, regardless of age, geography or political preference. Should that matter?
More: https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
Yes...
This survey is the one sponsored by the National Civic Art Society. See above. Those polled were shown groups of two pictures of buildings, one traditional, the other modernist of some stripe, and asked which they preferred.
I'm reminded of intelligence tests given to immigrants about a century ago, during the IQ craze that has persisted—and led, I think, to the SAT. To take care of language differences, immigrants were shown pictures incomplete in some way and asked to complete them. For example, they were shown a tennis court without a net. Many poor immigrants had never seen a tennis court before and didn't know what to do. (from Stephen Jay Gould's The Mismeasure of Man)
Most people, even the very literate, have little knowledge of or experience with architecture. They will respond according to what they know, and we see the traditional architecture everywhere, all our lives, in the buildings, in books, in movies, on our money. It will be the first choice. They may be seeing modernist work for the first time, and it will seem strange. More exposure, and their views might change. My point isn't that we shouldn't value the fine examples of traditional architecture. My point is that this survey is wholly bogus.
As with anything, humans may be uncomfortable with something, but not really know why. Many factors are at play and most are really not understood but factor into our lives daily. Anyone can pull up in their minds things that totally provoke them and others that totally embrace them. One does not need to be an "expert" in a field to react to the products of the the experts. Take cars as an example, some are more appealing than others in style and performance. Others are graded as duds. That is the same for architecture. There are a few classic cars that are still on the road and displayed. Duds have been crushed. The wrecking ball and explosions have taken down many a building.
you are not providing any evidence for any of your claims, just word salad and babble, so much for intellectual honesty; you can't spin your delirium forever, eventually all crooks are exposed. like trump.
If you compare a classic Shelby Cobra to a Toyota Camry, most people would pick the Cobra... could they afford it? Would it be practical? Would it be efficient? These abstracts are so limited in their comparison it hurts.
The point is styles come and go. Even in their time, there are duds. Then again, winners that seem to stay around longer. Take Frank Lloyd Wright's Falling Waters (https://fallingwater.org). Who among you do not like that?
Tired of this conversation. 70 million "people" voted for a scam artist, grifter, immoral, indecent punk, again. That's their level of taste, education, intellect, self-respect or self-awareness. North American or not, if that is their measure of style or anything related... Uff, tired. I need to trim my toenails. More productive.
Sorry you can't contribute something to the conversation. Maybe next time.
You are not actually contributing anything either. Like a Trumpian fool, you are merely trying to stir a controversy that doesn't really exist. So, keep self-playing with your "intellectual discussion" on this minor issue. And place a column where it's best placed, preferably a Corinthian one.
Autoresponse: Sorry you can't contribute something to the conversation. Maybe next time.
I don't always agree with Chemex, but this is the best thing that's been said on this thread:
Aren't there new styles waiting to be discovered? Isn't America all about free enterprise, finding the next best thing?
We (the US) are a country founded on trying something radically new that would allow more people to flourish. Now we're a bunch of scaredy cats.
Recall when the AIA said little to nothing about any of the candidates and how architecture (and by effect- people) could benefit from their platforms. Following the election, leadership essentially took the proverbial knee, agreeing to work with the administration. Now here we are, arguing about "what it looks like" as if that is more important than "does it work right."
Yes, some of ya'll will argue "style x" is more appropriate because... But that doesn't really matter does it. If a colonnade or a brise soleil is more appropriate to address rapidly changing climates, demographics, and resource availability so be it.
Think style can be an amalgamation of many layers -- physical and visual. Much of the nostalgia for the old or "style" is something that touches both our senses and mind -- a porch that both cooled the house and added visual interest. A bride soleil does the same and adds texture to the facade. A colonnade adds a certain ennobling quality to an otherwise drab entryway--seems the eye can quickly decipher when these elements are arbitrary or adding to the building. Or when the volume is being shifted meaninglessly to try to add visual interest. Which is why we should not discount or deny the past nor try to recreate it, but learn from it and apply that as the Bauhaus tried to apply old ideas of craft and art to new means of production.
Not sure where you are directing directing your point. I never said throw x out.
Don't want to quote your own blurb back here but you just said style is irrelevant to function. Which I am saying that style is just the visual appearance of function--function having more variables than just climate.
Yes, you omitted two of the 3.
You also decided to miss the point of using the word "or" and not "instead of." But this is all fine...
If the clients want classical architecture they can get it, but they don't apparently?...As for what they do get, of all the buildings I've ever worked on, the federal ones had about the least design freedom for the Architects. The clients were controlling, and the VE was wild.
I would LOVE for every federal project to be Classical for a while. They will all end up as Stripped Classical, or some cheap mutated hybrid, and people will be upset that they are even uglier... And probably just blame modernism or architects or something...
I think it's all a little deceptive, since the EO is about the classical style(s?), but my sense is that public opinion is more about ornament... Does anyone else think the two are being conflated?
The question to me is what a particular style communicates in the work as a whole. Most that are familiar with classical architecture, can readily describe its basic attributes in terms of its elements. But, can they do so without using any familiar terms like columns, or Greek/Roman etc.
Why would someone try to describe these buildings without using terms relevant to their design?
Is your point to suggest that the way professionals or laypeople would typically describe these buildings is missing the real design aspects? The proportions, the symbolism, the motifs, the construction techniques?
Let’s take music. Do you describe a work by its notes? It’s cords? So for a work of architecture do you describe it as slabs, blocks, bricks, beams, boards,
Let’s take music. Do you describe a work by its notes? It’s cords? So for a work of architecture do you describe it as slabs, blocks, bricks, beams, boards,
I am not sure what happened. I didn't finish the preceding and somehow it was entered twice. Continuing. Another example would be describing a human. There are the anatomical aspects that can be used to set a human apart from other living organisms. Then there is the being itself as a person. For example, let's take a favorite of criticism. President Trump, as a human or a person. Anatomically (as in seriously), he can be described like other humans as a composition of major components and subcomponents (e.g., arms, hands, fingers, nails, etc.). But as a person, there are different descriptions that are less scientific (objective) and more subjective. Without dwelling on this, if you were to describe classical architecture (as in the EO), you can be objective and/or subjective. Stepping back somewhat from the elements of the Work and addressing classical as a style, it is more than just its elements. Take it as a composition. Any human can be taken as a whole verses just the sum of its anatomy. Likewise, a music composition is not a bunch of notes and cords arranged in some order. It is a statement by its creator that is much more than elements. So, what is a classical architectural definition that is more than its elements? The same can be said for other styles. Each is more than the sum of its parts.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.