Carlo Scarpa’s approach and theory to designing with existing buildings is an innovation that is relevant to buildings even today. The Castelvecchio museum is one of his greatest projects, and thoroughly reveals his way of working. Scarpas intention was not only to restore an aging building but to do so in a way that creates dialogue between the new and the old. By careful work of demolition and preservation, he literally cuts, shifts and adds elements to the existing building in order to create an exhibition of the building’s past, and its connection to modernity.
Taking a design that was once used for events, now abandoned and derelict, and reinventing its potential to be used by all to enrich their lives and provide a social and content atmosphere is a goal of attaining. It will be something extraordinary to redesign a building and mix existing features to make a new design that everyone can appreciate. “Instead of downplaying the 110-year-old building, S&T made enthusiastic use of the old timber floors, brick walls and open trusses, celebrating heritage alongside contemporary design.” (Arch Daily). No matter what materials, space, or structure is being used within a design, in the end, it is always about the creativity for its achievement. “Creativity is about play and a kind of willingness to go with your intuition. It’s crucial for an artist. If you know where you are going and what you are going to do, why do it?” (Freshome). Capturing memories and expressing them into a design that tells a story that has never been told is what makes this project, inimitable; it cannot be special if it was heard or seen before. Everyone has a way of
The author traces the disruption of the museum architecture and the development of the museum as an independent building type. She highlights four key stages of its architectural formation associated with four time periods. They are Arcadia and Antiquity, Metropolis and Modernity, New Century, A New Aesthetic, and Recent Reactions: Fragmentation, Contradiction, expression.
The Denver art Museum, a very strange looking building at first sight. Well I guess the question to ask is strange to what? Because everything is relative. So the Denver art museum architecture is very different relative to the buildings around it. To me it looks like an explosion of shapes, Boxes and triangles and wedge shaped objects flying from the center of creativity. As said earlier the architecture is strange or vastly different relative to the buildings around it, but when you push your views aside and look at the building for what it is, you see that it is art. The detention of “architecture” is the art or practice of designing and constructing buildings, so by this, every architect is an artist. Some are much more conventional, some are expressive, they design and express buildings to resemble something different. So I looked a second time at the building and saw not just a strange looking building but a giant piece of artwork, expressing 10 different building designs in one building to house the artwork of many others. As I entered the building I saw the artwork of the building was not just exterior. Yet, Inside, even stripped of all the art work it still, the building itself was still art. With expressive lines and shapes, the layout of the building was expressing new and old, fancy and plane architecture all into its own beautiful piece of artwork. Nothing about the building was ordinary to a general standard of 21st century architecture. But expressive art,
Boston’s ICA situated at Fan Pier in South Boston represents a shift from preconceived architectural constructs to more innovative forms. The building’s position in the middle of a currently undeveloped urban landscape gives it a striking entity that engages the viewer in a way that facilitates its various functions as a contemporary art museum. Furthermore its structure and location alter the population’s understanding of museum architecture as it has traditionally been defined, that it is a “shell” that contains significant artistic work. A visual paradox becomes evident between
The Dome of the Rock (688-92) is a building project which demonstrates a particular way of achieving uniqueness in architecture. Architectural uniqueness can be established by introducing the same building form and materials in a slightly different way, complimenting its surrounding. Again, this uniqueness can be achieved by having a completely different building vocabulary, contrasting with its surroundings. In this context, this essay will investigate what type of architectural uniqueness the Dome of the Rock possess and how this uniqueness has been achieved through various architectural elements.
Towers, cubes and ramps were designed for exhibits, with functionality and lighting in mind. White plaster was used for the exterior and titanium-zinc alloy for the roofs. Vitra Design Museum has curved ribbon-like areas that break up the more angular style of the building. Gehry’s design embodies the relationship of art and architecture to create a unique style.
They envisioned a museum with a “minimalist approach, simple, and not over complicated ” since they wanted to avoid economic excess and return to essential design. But for them the term affordable would not mean cheap or lack of beauty, the museum should attract the community and engage it. The vast area allowed the creation of a museum in which the community could interact with the building and its surroundings.
From the observation tower the horizontal building’s three parallel bands can be seen that extend into the lush landscape. The architects’ concept was to immerse the museum in nature by creating a set of three bracketed pavilions under one roof surrounded by gardens. The roof can be seen as
For too long architecture has been synonymous with creating and building things - new things, and it is time for that narrow scope to be redefined to include the redesigning of already existing structures. In densely populated cities such as New York because of issues such as cost and space availability, the average architect might end up working renovation projects rather than full scale new built projects and this is where adaptive reuse comes into play. Adaptive reuse as defined by Burchell and Listokin is “a process of revitalization that utilize a sequence of simultaneous methods of planning, making inventory, acquiring, managing and reusing surplus of abandoned real estate .” But more than that, adaptive reuse has economical, historical
Jane Jacobs compared old buildings to a “necessary ingredient in city diversity,” which emphasizes the essentiality to city’s aesthetic value and economic vitality. Jacobs believes that both characters are indispensable to city’s public life and people’s social life. In addition to more discussion on the implication of building preservation in terms of economic vitality, Jacobs also believes that communities often develop a physical attachment to the people, places, and events in the past. Therefore, retaining the “sense of old places” becomes even more critical to generate the “sense of community”, especially along with the fast pace of globalization and urbanization, building preservation also means to preserve the heritage for the future
Sixthly, artists are able to explore, interpret and reinterpret the city’s heritage in dynamic ways.
Heritage buildings, structures and places reflect the history of a city, the unique architecture. While Australia cannot does not have buildings which have stood for centuries, the collection of buildings and places of special significance tell a story of where we came from, what we as a city have achieved, who we are as a society and our cultural expectations. The importance of heritage in our built environment is well recognised; heritage buildings may be significant for aesthetic, historic social, spiritual or technical reasons, (The Australian Institute of Architects, 2008#). Architects convey a vision, providing an opportunity to create a reality; this is vital in the integration of heritage conservation and urban development.