As Foucault suggests in an interview on “Space, Power, and Knowledge,” while architecture itself does not work directly on people, and through them governments, “it can and does produce positive effects when the liberating intentions of the architect coincide with the real practice of people in the exercise of their freedom” (Foucault 4). Not only can, as Foucault believes, architecture “produce positive effects when the liberating intentions…coincide with the real practice of people,” but it can be argued that not only does architecture influence the people around it who utilize it, it can also tell a great deal about the people who contrived and constructed it in the first place. The architecture of a place can say a great deal about the attitudes and beliefs held by the people of that place, whether a home, a city, or an entire nation. For examples, let us look to Gothic architecture, familiar to Europe, and Jeffersonian architecture, more commonly employed in the United States.
Ruskin provides six “characteristic or moral elements of Gothic…1. Savageness, 2. Changefulness, 3. Naturalism, 4. Grotesqueness, 5. Rigidity, 6. Redundance” (Ruskin Selections 16). Gothic architecture makes one consider the Middle Ages and form images of crusaders, plagues, and a number of other savage subjects. This is not to suggest that there is not beauty to be found in Gothic architecture, only to mention that the first impression can often be that the structure before the viewer represents more ruthless times. As Ruskin states, when the term “Gothic” was first applied to this form of architecture “it was intended to imply reproach, and express the barbaric character of the nations among whom that architecture arose” (Ruskin Selections 17). This concept is also notable in the form of “Grotesqueness,” in such objects as gargoyles, which further work to create an intimidating and sometimes frightening effect. However, this all adds to the character of the Gothic structure, which is also representative of the age in which it was constructed.
Although this present age cannot be said to be peaceful, public executions of the type discussed in Foucault’s text Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, where a man had the flesh torn from him and was then quartered and burnt, no longer occur, at least not regularly in the civilized areas of the world. Gothic architecture, though not the perpetrator nor the cause of these actions, still reflects the mindset of the people who were. Through the harshness and savagery visible on the exterior of such Gothic cathedrals as San Pietro Martire on the island of Murano, it is possible to glimpse the sometimes brutal nature of the ones who created it. Despite its beauty, there is still a darkness behind it, as Ruskin also realizes when he states that, “in Gothic sculpture, the shadow becomes itself a subject of thought” (Ruskin Selections 4).
In spite of this darkness, though, there is a freedom in the imperfection of these places. Particularly noticeable imperfections can be seen on the side of San Pietro Martire, where the building is not constructed of perfectly fitted, perfectly polished stone. This reflects the freer attitude belonging to Gothic architecture and often of Italy in general. There is less concern for perfection in Gothic architecture than may be found in, for example, Jeffersonian architecture.
Jefferson was one of the Founding Fathers of the United States of America and as such, his attitudes and opinions directly affected the founding of that country and, as a result, certain present day ideals. Jefferson was greatly influenced by Palladio and strove to imitate the classical styles, particularly in regards to the classical orders of the columns and in providing a dome on his house at Monticello (www.monticello.org). In comparison to the more rough-hewn look of Gothic architecture, Jeffersonian architecture appears practically sterile, with its neat, even columns all in white and precise octagonal shapes. Appearance is everything in Jeffersonian architecture, even to the point of sacrificing function; for instance, at Monticello, the second floor windows are structured so that the home looks to be only one story, which makes them completely inefficient as far as letting in natural light and looking through, but create the desired appearance from the exterior (www.monticello.org). The same can be said of the octagonal dome which rises above Monticello: it improves the appearance of the home from the outside, but the room within it is impractical for normal use (www.monticello.org). Monticello, and by association Jeffersonian architecture, is completely absorbed in the perfection of exterior spaces, with San Pietro Martire, and by connection Gothic architecture, is unashamed with a few flaws which provide the building with character.
These types of architecture speak greatly of the societies which influenced them. The Jeffersonian architecture, with its emphasis on external perfection over functionality, still rings true to the society of America today. In an age where plastic surgery rates continue to shoot up and people are more focused than ever on their external appearance and the “face they present to the world,” it becomes clear that the idea of Jeffersonian exterior perfection is still deeply engrained in the American psyche. Meanwhile, Gothic architecture, with its imperfection and the obviousness that it was constructed by imperfect human beings, speaks more of a culture which is willing to forgive a few flaws because they enhance the overall structure, rather than detract from it.
Gothic architecture, dark, savage, imperfect, but beautiful in its way, represents a society willing to embrace the humanity which creates the work, though still willing to punish an inordinate amount of the wrong kind of flaws. Jeffersonian architecture, on the other hand, represents a society which is more interested in exterior perfection than it is with the people who are on the inside. As Foucault suggests, while architecture may not be the single factor which determines the values of a people, when it is looked at in relation to a society’s values, it can be a very effective tool for analyzing the attitudes and beliefs of the people who created it.
Outside class source:
Jeffersonian Architecture: The Two Sides of the Coin.
No comments:
Post a Comment