Kindergarten Chats - Architecture Essay

Ancient Rome is one of the greatest and most influential societies in the history of the world. From the basic rules of how the Roman Empire is set up to the infrastructures in the city, the strict hierarchy of Roman social structure can be reflected clearly all over the whole ancient Rome. In fact that “public architecture presents people with the official view of a society and provides the background against which its individual markers live their lives.”1 With the great desire of Roman for entertainment and their special taste for blood, the amphitheatre is considered as the most popular and most representative type of the entertainment building in the ancient Roman culture. And

An architect’s intention on how his or her design is to be viewed can be misconstrued in a variety of different ways. For example, dissecting the compositional and formal design of a building, with or without knowledge of the architect’s actual intent, is completely up to the interpretation of the person or persons researching or viewing the design. In my own research about the compositional and formal design of the Margaret Esherick House, designed by Louis Kahn, I have come to realize, with the help of scholarly resources, the direct intention of Louis Kahn’s design; in which this paper will come to analyze and explain. While compiling research about the Esherick house, I came across a very informative book, The Houses of Louis Kahn, written by George H. Marcus and William Whitaker. The Houses of Louis

The cultural of the Roman Empire was a melting pot of the religious and cultural influences of the conquered societies that had been assimilated into the Empire. The various religions and cultural practice created a complex pantheon of “gods.” Ever larger temples and statues were erected to bring glory and honor to cities and give honor the Emperor. Additionally, cities would host gladiatorial games to bring honor to the Emperor. These events and building projects were facilitated by those who sought to bring greater glory and honor upon themselves with Roman society.

One of the main bases of Roman culture is Religion. In fact, almost everything the Roman citizens did revolved around beliefs, gods, and goddesses. Not only was their way of living affected by religion but the progression of advancement in infrastructure and early forms of technology were as well. By examining Roman baths and temples, defixiones, and Romanization of the provinces of the empire it is clear that religion helped to shape Roman advancements in infrastructure and early forms of technology during this time. Aquae Sulis and its baths are a perfect example of how religion affected Roman life and culture.

“Once the colosseum had been built it seems to have become the model for many, if not most, of those that followed” (Hopkins and Beard 2005, 24). The Colosseum stands proudly upon the villainous Emperor Nero’s once grand Valley of the Golden House, projecting the munificence of Imperial Roman Architecture of the Flavian period. Its ultimate design could be said to be formed through purpose or function. However, this does not do justice to the importance of architecture within Roman society (Thornton and Thornton in Lyes 1999, 2). The functions whether it be religious or otherwise, of the Colosseum were irrelevant to the

The Greeks made there temple as a city works project, creating jobs as the celebrated their victory against Persian Might whereas the Romans centralized wealth allowed those who had the means to do as they pleased. Both cultures in today’s world care for the ancient structures: the Italians maintaining their structure as best they could throughout the ages whereas the Greeks had to regain their independence lost since Alexander the Great in order to regain control of their ancient structures in order to restore them.

Leon Krier was criticised for publishing a costly monograph on Albert Speer’s architecture (1985)in which, while acknowledging the crimes of the Nazis and the man, Krier nonetheless claimed the book’s only subject and sole justification was “Classical architecture and the passion of building” (cited by Jaskot, ‘Architecture of Oppression’, 2000). Discuss this claim, the controversy and the issues (historical, philosophical and ethical and possibly others) they raise. Can architecture, Classical, Modern or otherwise, be autonomous from politics and valued independently of the circumstances of politics and history that adhere to it?

The Roman Empire is one of the most well-known countries in recorded history. And this is primarily because it continues to awe people via it 's architecture, military, art, philosophy, and technology. But one of the greatest footprints Ancient Rome has left for us to study and admire is its culture. As in any society, culture in the Roman Empire was of great importance. The Romans had many beliefs, behaviors, and customs, but one of the things that stood out the most in their culture was their religion. Roman religion is no longer in practice (Scheid and Lloyd 1). However, the enthusiasm that it 's followers had still exists today. Ever since the time that Roman religion was just the religion of one city in the Mediterranean region (Rüpke 3), people have always been marveled by the interesting and spectacular uniqueness of Rome’s religion that has survived throughout the decades of human curiosity.

The Romans method in making their architecture was to put a twist in their designs. So in the Roman temples, unlike the Greeks temples, were small and varied in their structure. The Romans incorporated the Greek use of columns on the temples facade and the use of the triangular pediment. The word “Basilica” is Greek for “Royal.” For the roman theaters they had a similar concept, but they add more seats were the chorus would play.

Architecture should be nurturing, responsive and alive, dynamically shifting spatial balances, organically expressive forms, subtly luminous colors and biologically healthy. To achieve such life-enhancing architecture, it has to address all the body senses simultaneously and fuse our image of self with experience of the world. By strengthening our sense of self and reality, architecture serves its all-important function of accommodation and

THIS WAS TO SHOW POWER AND WEALTHINESS. THE ROMANS LIKE THE GREEKS USED THE TEMPLE AST HE CHEIF ARCHITECTURAL FORM. BUT, UNLIKE IN EARLIER GREECE, ROME WAS THE CENTRAL NUCLEUS OF THE STATE'S RELIGION, RATHER THAN EACH POLIS SUPPRORTING ITS OWN. IN THE HEART OF THE CITY THERE WAS A FORUM.

This book was written by Juhani Pallasmaa with regard to ‘Polemics’, on issues that were part of the architecture discourse of the time, i.e. 1995. It is also an extending of ideas expressed in an essay entitled “Architecture of the seven senses” published in 1994.

As the saying goes “Rome wasn’t built in a day,” however long it took to build the capital, the days, months, years, centuries of work can be viewed as a long lasting landmark which paved the way for new and challenging architecture to come (How Roman architecture influenced modern architecture [sa]). According to Tony Rook (2013: [sp] ch.2) the typical Roman temple shows the Etruscan tradition combined with the Greek one. Although some of their premature concepts were acquired from the ancient Greeks and Egyptians, Roman architects transformed the body of architecture for all time to come, offering buildings and structures that has never been before, along the side of public buildings and infrastructure that could be used by

Different architects have different styles because they are trying to get at different things. Architecture is not just about making something beautiful anymore, it is about trying to get across a set of ideas about how we inhabit space. Two of the most famous architects of the twentieth century, one from each side, the early part and the later part up until today each designed a museum with money donated by the Guggenheim foundation. One of these is in New York City, it was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. The other is in bilbao, Spain, and it was designed by Frank Geary. My purpose of this paper is to interrogate each of these buildings, glorious for different reasons, to show how each architect was expressing their own style.

Architecture can be viewed with two different types of properties. Properties that can be seen like shapes, their composition, the spaces they create and, the colours and textures that make up their appearance. These properties are considered to be visual while other properties are considered to be abstract. These properties can only be described using words; the meanings behind the architecture and the stories that can be told about it. The context, its cultural background and its function also affects how we view architecture. The question is, what