Architecture

Neoclassicism is a movement of the revival of a classical style of ancient Greece and/ or ancient Rome in decorative arts, literature, architecture, and music. One such movement was dominant in Europe from the mid-18th to the 19th centuries. Neoclassicism focuses on symmetry, primarily with the use of circles and squares. The use of triangular pediments and domed roofs is also prevalent among Neoclassical architecture. These characteristics were affected by the Age of Reason’s ideas that architecture should be logical and balanced instead of over decorative. Neoclassicism was influential in the decorative arts too.

Furniture was designed by designers and produced by furniture makers. One famous architect who designed furniture is Robert Adam. In contrast to the cabriole style leg, he used straight legs and he designed his own patterns on the backs of his chair. Robert Adam’s decorative arts can be seen in the interiors, such as in the Etruscan Room (figure 1) at Osterley Park House. Here, Robert Adam uses classical Roman decorative motifs inspired by Herculaneum and Pompeii. Adam also designed flat grotesque panels, which were inspired from Roman mural painting. figure 1

Although neoclassical architecture was primarily influenced by Roman and Greek architecture, it become a movement of its own, with its own standards and leading figures. The Rotunda (figure 2) by Andrea Palladio was inspired by the Pantheon in Rome. It in turn, was inspired by Brunelleschi’s double walled pointed arch dome. The large windows used became know as Palladian windows, which is a prominent feature in neoclassical architecture. The Rotunda then influenced the Chiswick House (figure 3) designed by Lord Burlington. The Chiswick House has a simple symmetrical plan and consist of many Palldian style architectural elements.

The Chiswick House then influenced Thomas Jeffreson’s Monticello in the United States. figure 2figure 3 By the late 18th century, Thomas Jefferson had embraced the neoclassical style in his designs for Monticello (figure 4) and the Virginia State Capitol (figure 5). Monticello was based on the neoclassical principles of Andrea Palladio. Monticello is similar in appearance to the Chiswick House. The Virginia State Capitol is the first Neoclassical building in the United States, inspired by the Mason Carae, with Etruscan stairs, portico, and triangular pediment. Jefferson advocated Neoclassicism as the official rchitectural style of the United States, also known as the Federal style after the American Revolution. For Jefferson, it implied new democracy by tracing its roots back to Greece, the origin of democracy. (figure 4)(figure 5) Neoclassicism was more than just an antique revival; it was a reaction against the over decorative Baroque Art and the Rococo Art of the times. Striving for equality after the revolution of United States and France, Neoclassicism quickly expanded and influenced Europe and North America in decorative arts, literature, architecture, and music.

In the end, it also lead people to a new way of thinking. Bibliography Buie Harwood, Bridgate May, and Curt Sherman, Architecture and Interior Design through the 18th Century. Encyclopedia Britannica, NEOCLASSICISM, http://lilt. ilstu. edu/jhreid/neoclassicism. htm Architecture 411, Neo-Classical Architecture, http://www. architecture411. com/notes/note. php? id_note=6 GreatBuildings, Neo-Classical Architecture, http://www. greatbuildings. com/types/styles/neo-classical. html

Abstract art is an artistic style that utilizes both color and form to create a piece that is non-representational.  Its general purpose is to capture the intrinsic qualities of the object that it is depicting. Abstraction is a new way of representing the surrounding world that departs from the utilization of traditional methods.

There were several movements throughout art history that helped shape modern abstraction and develop a clearer purpose of these works.  The four chief movements in abstract painting included: Cubism, Futurism, Abstract Expressionism and Post-Painterly Abstraction.

Abstract paintings are meant to be thoughtful contemplations in their own right, the meaning interpreted by the spectator.

Cubism is a radical movement that was a turning point in the world of Western art during the early twentieth century.  The Cubists, as they were referred, did not depict naturalistic representations, but preferred compositions of shapes and forms that “abstracted” from the conventionally perceived world.

“They dissected life’s continuous optical spread into its many constituent features, which they then recomposed, by a new logic of design, into a coherent aesthetic object” (Kleiner, 2003, p. 795).  The Cubists’ rejection of traditional forms is an illustration of the early twentieth century’s new avant-garde attitude.

These abstract works were born out of the public’s idea that the world was not necessarily a concrete Newtonian world, these notions brought out by the modern physicists of the time including Einstein.  “One of the basic meanings of Cubism is that a work of art depends upon both the external reality of nature and the internal reality of art” (Rosenblum, 1966, p. 58).

The artistic revolutionaries, Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque, are often credited for starting the Cubism movement.  The aim of these artists was to dissect the forms of their subjects.  This dissection was then put onto their respected canvasses for the viewer to witness.

“Their type of Cubism involved analyzing the form and investigating the pictorial elements in order to convey meaning” (Kleiner, 2003, p. 795).  A prime example of this type of abstract painting is the work “The Portuguese” by Georges Braque.  In this piece, he dissects the form in the work and uses muted browns as his color palette.

  This subtle use of color was meant to draw the viewer’s eye to the form of the piece and to not be distracted by the color of the work.  The complexity of the work is apparent by the large intersecting planes that make it a guess at what the subject could possibly be.

That was one of the aims of Cubism, to make it a mere impossibility to arrive at a finite meaning of a piece.  The constantly shifting imagery makes it hopeless to arrive at a final reading of the image.

The movement of Futurism was a mere extension of the aims that the Cubists were trying to achieve with their work.  The main difference between the Cubists and the Futurists were that the Futurists had a sociopolitical purpose.

  These artists were angry over the political and cultural decline of Italy; therefore, they decided to propose revolution through both the literature and art of the time.  “When the Futurist manifesto was first launched in 1910 by the painters Boccioni, Carrà and Russolo, its primary aim was to bring Italian painting on to the European scene and oppose all forms of provincialism” (Ballo, 1958, p. 14).

  The aim of these compositions was to launch Italy towards a glorious future.  They felt the need for war in order to erase the country’s past.  The Futurists had extremely radical ideas; they called for the destruction of libraries and museums, in order to start anew.  The art of the Futurists focused on motion, in both time and space.

  The forms within their paintings were not purely abstract.  “Futurism encouraged a new boldness of execution and a more adventuresome exploration of effect” (Taylor, 1961, p. 22).  The blending of Futurism and the ideas of Cubism is evident in the composition by Gino Severini entitled “Armored Train.”

This work encompasses the act of motion as well as the idea of revolution.  The painting features group of soldiers upon a train shooting at an unknown target.  In abstract fashion, the artist depicts all of the objects into planes.

The purpose of these types of pieces was to promote war and to inspire revolution.  Therefore, the ideas behind this artistic and political movement led to the fascist regime that would emerge in Italy during World War II.

A departure from abstraction would rule the art world following the Futurist movement.  It was not until the 1940s, that works of abstraction would gain popularity again.  “Abstract Expressionism, the first avant-garde American movement, would emerge in New York during the 1940s” (Kleiner, 2003, p. 859).

This movement would produce paintings that were abstract in form, but would also express the state of the artist’s mind.  The aim of these artists was to reach out emotionally to the viewers of their works.  This movement was inspired by the popular psychiatric theories of the time.

These artists attempted to broaden their artistic processes by expressing what Carl Jung referred to as the “collective unconscious.”  These artists were able to achieve this by turning inward in order to create their work.  The compositions typical of this movement were wild and full of energy.

The artists of this movement intended to have the viewers of their work understand the content through their own intuition.  These painting were meant to be felt and to express a person’s absolute emotions.

The Abstract Expressionists felt strongly about the importance of freedom.  They aimed for people to see their pieces without memory or association.  As artist Mark Rothko explained, “Instead of making cathedrals out of Christ, man or life, we make it out of ourselves, out of our own feelings.

  The image we produce is understood by anyone who looks at it without nostalgic glasses of history” (Kleiner, 2003, p. 860).  This movement had two central groups: the gestural abstractionists and the chromatic abstractionists.

In gestural abstraction pieces, the composition relied on the expressiveness of energetically applied color.  Meanwhile, the chromatic abstraction works used color’s emotional resonance as their central focus.

The most famous gestural abstractionist artist would likely be Jackson Pollock.  By the 1950s, he was comfortable with the abstract style and was creating his own unique paintings.  Pollock was best known for using mural size canvasses and composing his paintings out of drips and splatters of paint.

These compositions were reminiscent of spider webs and were full of energy.  His methods of composing his pieces (using sticks and brushes, he flung and dripped paint) emphasized the method of creation.  Pollock wished to create art that was equally spontaneous and choreographed.  His technique was to immerse himself into his work as he created.

His painting rejected the traditional aspects of painting and became abstraction in its truest form.  The paintings contained no central focus and were representative of internalized feelings.

The downside of this type of this was the more Pollock “pushed his imagery toward abstraction, the wider became the range of possible interpretations and the greater the risk of misinterpretation” (Cernuschi, 1992, p. 132).

The energy behind the compositions in the method of chromatic abstraction was muted in comparison.  “Chromatic abstraction did not pretend to have any philosophical or moral claims at all.  The works in this genre meant to specify sensations and appearances in the immediate environment” (Frascina, 1985, p. 116).

  The emotions that they wish to convey in their works were displayed by their use of color.  These works were simplified observations of objects.  Their main feature was “zips,” which were lines that ran from one side to the painting to the other.

These zips were not meant to be seen as specific entities, but rather as accents that give energy to the paintings.  This method of simplification used in chromatic abstraction enabled the artist to express his feelings by the mere use of color.

Art has been around for so long that it has become an integral part of a human being’s life. A thorough observation of all forms of art speaks of one common significance – art as the so-called “universal expression of the soul. ” The ancient carvings in an Egyptian cave, the soothing melody of a harp, the beautiful words of a poet, and the abstract objects in a painting all define art as timeless, pure, and perfect. But how far can a universal language serve mankind? Can an old fine-tuned guitar or a gold-textured jug stand as a man’s ally in his lifetime?

It is somewhat ironic to admit to ourselves that we have gotten so used to the notion that the most beautiful will never be the most useful. One form of art though that has stood apart from this irony is architecture. In its most basic explanation, architecture is both a combination of a work of art and science to build and erect buildings. For a builder and designer called the architect, architecture is a monumental task. First, because it is an art that speaks of meaning; and second, because its completion will serve more than man’s desire for beautiful things.

Architecture stands so unique from the rest of all artistic forms. A building will stand tall and proud for the entire world to see long after the beauty of the most expensive painting loses its appeal for the eyes. Architecture has a dynamic role to play and to sustain. One vivid example of its difference from all arts is a home. Inside a house are walls with paintings in every corner, an elegant piano in the living room being played by well-trained hands, and a long hallway lined with slender China vases about a foot tall.

Over time as the family living inside the house grew up and changed physically and mentally, so is their treatment for all these pieces of art. The hands that once played the piano may later find other interests to pursue, one or two of the vases gets broken into pieces because of carelessness or accidents, and the paintings may one day be moved to another room where no one can eventually look at them. Helpless and unhappy ways for these arts to retire. But not for the house.

Children go to school, attend college, and get married but they always come back to the house that has been there since their birth. A few repairs here and there over the years, fresh interior and exterior paints, and an installation of new household technologies may be a part of the family’s growth but the house remains a house. A shelter and a fortress for mankind. It has protected the family from vicious storms and heavy rains, from the terrible heat of summer, from the freezing temperatures of winter. Above all, it has become a symbol of the family’s traditions and cultures.

It no longer portrays a spacious neat place where children, parents, relatives, and friends can gather around comfortably. It has grown into something the inhabitants can be proud of because its structures and textures have been transformed into a representation of status, wealth, achievements, educational degrees, and even religion. This is only a brief and simple example of the importance of architecture in ordinary life. Moving on to a broader and global view of the existence of architecture, we find buildings and establishments housing larger groups of people.

From the family who lived in the house with occasional visits from friends and relatives, we shifted our eyes towards the cathedral or mosque in the city that symbolizes its flock of followers that goes in and out to worship and pray. There is also the hospital that is structured to accommodate as many sick patients as possible and the palace or mansion that epitomizes the actions and behaviors of a certain type of government and ruler. Bridges made of wood or steel provide a passage for fast and accessible transportation.

The St. Basilica of St. Peter in the Vatican became the seat of Catholicism in the world. Buckingham Palace symbolizes the royalty as the reigning ruler of Great Britain and the White House the powerful effects of a nation’s unity. The Chrysler Building exemplifies a wealthy businessman’s passion for automobiles. Not only does architecture speaks of religion, government, and education, it also evokes feelings. The Great Walls of China was both a protection and defense from enemies in ancient Chinese times.

Taj Mahal was a man’s undying profession of love for his wife and The Statue of Liberty was a gift of one nation to another. Architecture is more than an expression of our joys, anguish, rage, victories, and problems. Architecture must follow a strict set of guidelines before expressing man’s varying emotions. Tradition and culture lead the guidelines and principles in erecting and building. A man must design and create in accordance to the period or backdrop a piece belongs. Through architecture, the community and its inhabitants can speak to another generation their beliefs, rights, and traditions.

When a building, a bridge, or a church has served its function, when we have declared architecture as more lasting than the rest of the arts, and when we have given the establishments too much credit for serving us loyally, we seek and desire for something more from them. As we evolved mentally and emotionally, we develop dissatisfaction for simplicity, plainness, and mediocrity. We use our common senses to start discerning that which is not plain, simple, and mediocre and the greatest tool for this task is our philosophy.

And what better way to apply philosophy in architecture than to criticize a structure for its beauty or ugliness. Once we have applied this philosophy, we discover how sad our evolution has become. As our societies change forth into what we call a modernized world, our “modern” minds would dispose or discard slowly and gradually the old ways and traditions. There is no longer that appreciation for the artistic sides of things. They have been dismissed as impractical, costly, and useless, turning everything we create into mere thresholds of function (McElwee, 1996).

With this realization, we go back to our dissatisfactions. Plainness and ugliness cannot stay visible forever, we consciously decide. It is no longer enough for a church to be just a place of worship. It has to speak through its design, color, and texture the religion of the people. To build a bridge is not only to nail pieces of wood and steel together and cover them up with solid cement. It has to be shaped in elegance and style. Monuments are not only a plain sculpture of a legend’s bust or body. It could be a palace or a beautiful arched tower. A business establishment is not merely a tall building.

Its concept of design could be stemmed from a businessman’s view of a successful life. Even a house or an apartment is not at all roofs on our heads and walls on our sides. It could be an outstanding structure among its surroundings. This is a tremendous challenge for architecture. It has to serve its basic purpose and function and at the same time pass the critical judgment of philosophy, in this case, the philosophy of art and beauty called aesthetics. Of course, there are always exceptions from judgments and scrutiny. Poverty and economic instability are one.

In modern America, the poorest have to live in dilapidated housings where shelter is the only option to survive the cold and the heat. The lower-class struggle every day to earn a penny for food and clothing. An idea to build a beautiful and spacious home is too bleak to consider. Some might just dwell under the bridges or lie down on the side of the streets. However, modernization has almost found itself among the groups of the poor. It has created, too, a concept that a structure that serves a role other than functionality is simply preposterous. Style, color, and beauty are not among the plans of the design.

They are costly and time-consuming for the owner. Architects are distressingly left with no choice but to build a cheap establishment that takes fewer amounts of time and effort. The concept of architecture has solely described the kind of life a man has with technologies around him. There is no longer a place for art and beauty in a vehicle and mobile revolution. A house or an apartment in this period is no longer designed with curves, arches, and elegance, but with dull straight lines that accommodate enough appliances and technologies, the dwellers have in their life.

Aesthetics can help our modern minds get back to the original fundamentals of architecture: that beauty is included together with function and structure (Gatto, 2002). There is so much more in architecture than anything found in a painting on a wall, a sculpture of a goddess, a song of an opera, and a rhyme in a poem. But one should never forget that architecture, too, could stand beside these forms of art and be functional and beautiful at the same time. What then are the criteria for beauty? Do we build houses, towers, and bridges the way we paint a picture or write a song?

In a way, we do but, along with the history it represents, there are aesthetic values to consider. There has to be art and science in architecture. It is the aesthetic value of a piece of architecture that separates distinctly its function and purpose from the beauty and art in its form. It involves a calculative thinking of a mathematician and an expressive feeling of an artist. Beauty in architecture competes with beauty in nature. While nature has been the most beautiful and timeless piece of art ever created, architecture, too, has a responsibility to play as nature to man.

A construction of an object has to make the nature in the background looked more beautiful and appealing. It does not destroy or diminish the surrounding to where it stood. Considering the background was a barren piece of land, the object doesn’t make the whole picture look uglier, boring, and dry. It has to stand out as a distinction from the place, like a garden in a dessert or a lighthouse in a terrible storm. And of course, its beauty has to sustain its purpose. To design and to build is also to preserve its function and appeal.

It takes a specialty and an education to criticize a piece of architecture according to its beauty. According to Scruton, as cited in A Weekly Dose of Architecture website (2006), calling a painting or music beautiful is different from calling architecture beautiful. Only the keenest of eyes equipped with aesthetic knowledge can understand architecture’s details of structure, function and beauty. Beautiful for man is what he perceives as pleasurable to his senses. The colors of a painting, the sound of music, and the grace of a ballerina catches the eyes, the ears, and the sensations.

It is man’s most basic instinct of his judgment of beauty. That which delights and pleases him is beautiful. That which irritates and disgusts him is ugly. What makes certain things labeled as the opposite of beauty? A look at the surface of beautiful objects evokes timeless joy and appreciation. But to understand why it has delighted us takes a thorough observation and scrutiny of our eyes and minds. Beauty is an association and combination of the aspects of art – color, structure, shapes, texture, etc.

A right combination of colors, a perfect variation of lines and angles, and a precise proportion of each shape constitute a very attractive model of beauty. As mentioned earlier, man’s mentality evolves and changes. Our judgment for beauty deepens together with our intellect. Our feelings towards pieces of architecture vary over time depending on the type of piece. We may have an understanding tolerance for a house or a store lacking in repairs but we don’t give considerations to a government hall, a church, or a huge commercial building to become less than what they were originally created for.

There are certain levels of judgment applied to different degrees of art. An architecture that houses, sustains and encompasses a great number of dwellers requires greater attention and care for beauty and its preservations. Judgment is not only based on evolving intellects and mentality. So, too, can our emotions and beliefs towards certain things affect our taste for beauty. Religious biases, political dissents, racial and intellectual discriminations among other things provide a pre-conceived notion of how we view and react to things and objects.

The grandeur of the Vatican may look commanding and dominant for others who see Catholicism as not entirely the perfect religion around. The White House may disgust other countries because of the government’s overbearing tactics in war. Even the handsomely restored Germany may forever be treated with dread and despise by the Jews affected by the nightmares of the holocaust. This is what the great German philosopher Immanuel Kant pointed out (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2006). The man simply has this idea inside his head about a certain object. Through these ideas, he forms his judgment and reactions to it.

So when the object has been made visible in front of his eyes, he already discerns it as beautiful or ugly. There is none of the hard work done in a careful assessment and scrutiny of every tiny detail. According to Kant, there are at least four factors to consider in making a judgment of beauty. A man has to experience joy and delight in something he sees as beautiful. The perfect blend of colors in a rainbow makes him smile that is why he calls it beautiful. Our judgment has to agree with almost everyone else, in fact with the whole universe, making the object universal.

The object has to have a role to play other than for display and viewing and creation simply has to serve its purpose that it has been designed for. In Kant’s Critique of Judgment, he emphasized the importance of an experience of observing beauty before judgments as to how and why it is called beautiful are being set up. In Christopher Alexander’s Nature of Order, Book 1: The Phenomenon of Life, he pictures the present generation of architecture as lacking in life (Mehaffy, n. d. ). He blamed architects for the sluggish attitude in designing and constructing buildings.

Architects have developed a similar attitude with the people, that in a technology-ruled and fast-paced world we lived in, we neglect to put details in architecture that breathes life. According to him, life is the most fundamental foundation of a structure. Life is breathing and moving. Architecture should be based on this and not on the robotic and mechanistic way our technologies convey. In our modern scientific way, the use of art has slowly been diminishing. Before it happens completely, let us bear in mind that without beauty in it is like a lonely statue of a hero standing out in a cold hard rain.

The statue has no life and it no longer feels cold or heat. But architecture is an essential part of our life. So its essence and foundation must breathe life. We must take comfort not only for the roof it provides above our heads but also for the pride it makes us feel because of its beauty. Architecture is both a responsibility and a privilege to provide and attract. It has to welcome and not to frighten anyone away. It has to project a remembrance of its existence and not to kill all the memories forever. Even an old uninhabited castle’s haunted feeling depicts the lives of the powerful family who once lived there.

But in our time today, the ugly unoccupied building gives us the shivers not because of the memories left there but of the hideous structure of the place. Architecture should never lose its beauty. After all, its ability to be the symbol of both science and art is what sets it apart. A house, a church, a store, a town hall, and a community that is devoid in beauty lack the true essence and purpose of life – creation. If we are indeed too practical, busy, and perhaps too frugal to incorporate art with our dwellings, then we are better off to live in cold hard unshapely caves.

Five Points of Architecture

Five Points of Architecture

Le Corbusier is one of the most important designers from the twentieth century. He is known as one of the innovators of modern architecture due to many of his thoughts and‘recipes’within architecture. One of his most celebrated was ‘The Five Point of a New Architecture’that he had explained in ‘L’Esprit Nouveau’ and the book ‘ Vers une architecture’, which he had been developing throughout the 1920s.

Le Corbusier’ development of this thought altered the architectural promenade in a new manner, which was presented in 1926. [ 1 ] The five points are as follows: pilotis, the roof garden, free program, free facade, and the horizontal window. Le Corbusier used these points as a structural footing for most of his architecture up until the 1950’s, which are apparent in many of his designs.

The essay‘Les Cinq points d’une architecture nouvelle’by Le Corbusier focuses on inquiries that are raised within architectural design, proposing a foundation and agreement in it. Similar texts for illustration the advancement of‘cellule’and figures of the Maison Standardisee, do non hold relation to the design procedure of the five points.

The Modulor, which is the survey of proportions of the human organic structure graduated table that is used as a system to be after a figure of Le Corbusier’s edifices, is another theoretical effort, which did non accomplish a proper relation to the design procedure and besides the architectural hunt for signifier that personifies the five points. On the other manus, these thoughts can be portrayed more freely as ‘merely theoretical ideas’ . [ 2 ] One exclusion is the construct of the tracis regulateurs ( modulating lines ) , which uses proportions of geometry in edifices. It predicted certain thoughts behind the five points in a figure of facets.

The first point is the piloti, which are columns or wharfs that elevate a construction off the land. The fact that the construction is lifted provides many functional advantages. As the pilotis raise the edifice off the land, it allows circulation beneath the house, which frees the edifice site, and allows a private road, parking infinite, or a garden to be placed beneath the house. The pilotis provides many advantages, and besides new constructional possibilities. The artistic minutes every bit good as the drawn-out utility are the consequences of those‘recherches assidues’and those‘acquis de laboratoire’[ 3 ] . The same country is besides gained on the level roof. This country is known as the following point, which is the roof garden. This is to equilibrate the green country that was already used by the edifice and substituted it onto the roof, which is so used for domestic intents.

Free program is the following point, which means the floor infinite can be arranged freely without the concern for back uping walls into suites. Replacing interior supporting columns from walls spliting the infinite, and traveling the construction of the edifice to the outside is a manner to accomplish this. Le Corbusier designed an unfastened floor construction called the Dom-ino house in which the theoretical account removed supporting wall and the back uping beams for the ceiling. This innovation was most unexpected at clip ; it was a‘forecast of the potencies of strengthened concrete, of mass-production, of human graduated table, of the modern mill.’ [ 4 ]

The frame did non depend on the floor programs of the house, giving the designer freedom when planing the inside. Free facade is another point. It is the ability of planing the facade freely as the walls are non-supporting, which is the consequence of the free program. The following point is the horizontal window. This allows the facade to be cut along its full length. By making so it allows maximal light, better airing and besides gives positions of the environing pace, which is apparent in the Villa Savoye.

The five points were demonstrated in many of Le Corbusier ‘s architecture throughout his calling. One of first designs that Le Corbusier attempted to include the points in was the Maisons Citrohan. The house was developed through different versions. Numerous elements of the houses design turned out to be indispensable factors, which make up Le Corbusiers manner. Certain features of the Maison Citrohan can be detected in most of the Villa in the 1920’s. [ 5 ]

Maison Citrohan introduced the‘five points of new architecture’ .The house was elevated by pilotis leting free circulation on the land, and besides consisted of a reinforced-concrete frame construction, which was achieved from the Dom-ino’s constructional system. The unfastened infinite created by the pilotis and the level roof increases the little country that already exists. It besides had a roof garden/terrace. Le Corbusier voiced himself on the topic of the Maison Citrohan in the first volume of the‘Oevre compldte’:“Stuttgart, c’est I’occasion enfin! “ .Le Corbusier did non talk of single objects or designs ; he talked about the changeless development of an thought stretched over many instances. [ 6 ]

Le Corbusier studied the indispensable doctrines of Egyptian, Hindu, Byzantine, and Grecian architecture in‘Vers une architecture’ ,which is a aggregation of essays that supports survey of the construct of modern architecture. [ 7 ] Egyptian and Grecian architecture were peculiarly of import for Le Corbusier ‘s application of the five points. From Egyptian architecture, Le Corbusier acquired the thought of symmetricalness and repeat.

In add-on, Le Corbusier obtained the impression of motion and reverses from Grecian architecture. The lesson of regular repeat from Egyptian architecture, as mentioned above, provided the thought of utilizing repeat in perpendicular supports that Le Corbusier would subsequently use to his architecture as “ a changeless graduated table, a beat, a reposeful meter ” .

Le Corbusiers design theories were put in pattern to a certain degree within a figure of his designs such as the Maison Cook, the Villa Stein, and besides at the Villa Savoye. In these edifices‘the regular grid of columns served as a foil to the organic forms of the curving walls and stepss, which together combined to form a pleasant architectural promenade with unsymmetrically balanced views’harmonizing to the lessons of Grecian architecture. [ 8 ]

Similar to the Citrohan House, the Villa Stein had a roof, which became a patio garden ; on a regular basis spaced structural wharfs, which allowed freely curved interior dividers, and besides horizontal Windowss that extended across frontages. The Maison Cook was a patio house. The upper floors of the house were supported by concrete piloti, and the land floor consisted of a unfastened program which had a parking infinite, entry, and a patio. The roof was besides used as a garden patio. Le Corbusier wanted to demo that the dividers of the suites on each floor were independent of structural supports, therefore the dividers were curved. [ 9 ]

The Villa Savoye follows the five points best purely, and can be considered as a reinforced program of Le Corbusier’s five points. The exterior maintains the thought of symmetricalness as all four lifts are truly similar, which consist of horizontal Windowss and gaps running the breadth of the facade at the 2nd floor degree, supported by on a regular basis spaced pilotis. [ 10 ]

Within the points, the free program is the most of import in the design, where the big wall curves freely between the pilotis on the land floor, which reflects the thought of the ‘free plan’ the strongest.

Equally much as the five points have contributed to the development of modern architecture greatly, some points such as the horizontal Windowss are non necessary in footings of the designing of good architecture. Besides the thought of the roof garden has been criticised over the old ages for leaking, it besides would be considered really unusual in domestic houses in states such as the UK, as they use the more traditional pitched roof as it seems more homely.

Furthermore, Le Corbusier abandoned the thought of the piloti shortly after some point ; his ulterior work does non purely follow the points. Le Corbusier’s‘Five Points in Architecture’pronunciamento, as explained above, has had great influence on modern architecture. This is apparent in The Villa Savoye, which summed up the five points, which turned out to be a chef-d’oeuvre of the twentieth century design and one of the greatest plants by Le Corbusier. The five points have allowed a broad assortment of thoughts and possibilities within planing architecture even to this twenty-four hours such as the usage of free facade in Zaha Hadid’s Performing Arts Center in Hague ( 2010 ).

Modern architecture and traditional architecture

Modern architecture and traditional architecture Nowadays, as we known the architectural community has had a strong and continuing interest in traditional and modern architecture. Architecture, this word possesses an immense creativity in itself. Usually, when we hear this word, picture of creative design of physical structures flashes in our mind. Integral to the identity of any country is its architectural heritage, combining modern and traditional architectural designs or product of the blend between splendid modern and traditional architecture.

Based on what have found, architecture has been Rosen down into many categories to fit the lifestyle of people in a particular place at a particular time. There are basically two types of architect which are modern architecture and traditional architecture. According to architect Eric Spry, the word “modern” provokes such strong reactions in the world of residential architecture. Some people might imagine wonderful homes of steel and glass with open, flowing floor plans; others might imagine sterile homes that feel like museums, complete with men in red suits watching carefully that nothing is touched.

Strong pinions abound about modern architecture, as they do regarding the wide variety of other architectural styles. Five hundred years ago, Native Americans was built with adobe and Europeans built with stone. Homes had thick walls, small and deep- set windows, and small interior rooms. Technologies such as steel later allowed large expanses of space and large expanses of glass. In our lifestyles today are considerably different than the lifestyles of 50 years ago, let alone the lifestyles from 100 or 200 years ago. Architecture must represent the way we live today, not the way we lived hundreds of years ago.

Remember parlors? Not many would. These were sitting rooms common a hundred years ago where guests were greeted. Our lifestyle changed, and parlors were weeded out. (Discover Modern Architecture’s Appeal . Eric Spry). What is a modern architecture mean? Modern architecture is known as the movement of architecture that began in the 20th century, it is also architecture that is characterized by the simplification of forms and subtraction of ornaments, modern architecture can be some of the most futuristic, colorful, innovative designs ever. Traditional vs. Modern Architecture’ (Ranches . 011). Modern architecture these days there are so many materials that architects can use to create different effects on buildings. In history, Modern architecture developed during the early 20th century but gained popularity only after the Second World War. For decades, modernism became the dominant structure for institutions and corporate buildings even up to the recent period. Architectures of this type exhibit functionalism and rationalism in its structure. (What is the difference between post-modern and modern architecture?. 000). Characteristics of modern architecture include he functional requirements of the structure, lesser ornaments used and eliminations of dispensable details, and the application of the concept of “form follows function”. ‘Comparative investigation of traditional and modern architecture’ (A. S. Delia, M. A. Ensnare, T. Zachary Beverages . 2011). Generally, modern design is simple, sober and features minimal accessories. The modern design is characterized with angular frames, low profiles, geometric and abstract patterns in textiles, upholstery as well as in artwork.

Natural materials like linen, leather and teak wood are mostly used. The lines are unembellished as well as straight. In modern design, the furniture is often raised from the floor with the help of legs in order to create an airy and open atmosphere. Colors used in modern design are neutral shades that are highlighted with splashes of color. Walls are generally cream and white in color. Floors are mostly made of cement or bare wood. In addition, sculptures and paintings are used as an integral part of modern design.

If you are in the process of designing or renovating your home, you may be wondering whether to include modern design in the design layout. Well, the terms – modern is closely related and people tend to use the terms interchangeably. However, in the world of design and d©core, both the terms represent distinct and different styles. To be modern a building should be light and airy, it must push technology to its limits even effecting new invention in the process; to be architecture it must provide utility, stability, commodity and delight and all of this done in sympathy with Nature.

Being novel is not to be confused with being modern. ‘Sustainable systems in Iranian traditional architecture’ Avid Iraqi , Sabina Kabuki Madman . 011). As result, architecture has been going backward since the mid-20th Century because the technology available at the time still has not been fully utilized, for example, space frames, and especially the engineering concepts of Businessmen Fuller, such as geodesic domes large enough to cover entire cities and his lightweight temerity towers; such technology is essential to conserve scare resources in order to assure economic growth, as well as to provide for increases in population. Modern & Traditional Houses’ can Weiss. 2009). Basically ,a modern home should represent how we live today. It should reflect current construction methods and materials. It should have integrity by avoiding trends. Modern architecture offers an opportunity for an original beauty, not by imitating another style from another time or place, but by considering the present and, with imagination, creating a fresh aesthetic. Secondary, we might ask what is traditional architecture?

Traditional architecture is that way of building which makes serious use of the familiar symbolic forms of a particular culture of a particular people in a particular place. It is different from modern buildings because of their method of construction, to because of their age or their listed status. Traditional buildings have an appeal due their special character, history and location. Furthermore, when looking for a property to buy it’s easy to fall in love with an old building. ‘Architecture – modernism vs. traditionalism’ (Lance Baker . 2011).

Traditional architecture is the term used to categorize methods of construction which use local anesthetically available resources and traditions to address local needs. Some believed that, by using local practices, such as using local materials in construction, building costs will decrease, hence being economically more advantages. By the professor Lucien Steel, traditional architecture requires a high ethical commitment to the people, their places, their beliefs and their particular traditions. This commitment is not a slavish one, nor is it a servile opportunism.

Ethical attitudes are not reducible to the uncritical acceptance of dominant sets of values and moral conventions. They require the distinction between civic and private virtues on one hand and willful customs and obsolete practices of false morality and corrupted policies on the other. So if modernity in some way would contribute to discern the most appropriate and the cost efficient, the most human and the most ecological aspects of the contemporary potential, every traditional architect and city-builder couldn’t be but a committed modern.

Traditional architecture and city-building are based on a positive philosophy of life, on faith in humanity, on respect of environment and historical cultures as a common heritage of mankind, and on an inviolable legacy of genius and know-how from proceeding generations of craftsmen and committed citizen. Traditional architecture and city-building imply a sense of modesty and humility of he individual creator within the sacred creation of the universe, as well as the powerful intuition that concepts of beauty, harmony, Justice, truth, rightness are embedded in permanence and universality.

Tradition forwards a selected knowledge, a tested experience as well as an heritage of models, types, techniques and formal vocabularies. It is a dynamic process, an on-going effort and development, not a static heritage of dogmas and immutable recipes. Tradition shoulders the responsibility of carrying on an inherited culture beyond the contingencies and improvisations of the moment. In order to remain vital, alive and relevant it needs to be earned, consolidated and enriched by each single generation in the perspective of universal ideals of civilization.

It implies a constant effort of appropriation of knowledge, experience and cultural values, a permanent effort of intellectual, artistic and material reconstruction. (Tradition and Modernity in Contemporary Practice. Lucien Steel). Traditional architecture are mainly classified as historical buildings that have a lot of character and culture incorporated into them and artists were commissioned to put some color into the building giving each one an individual stamp.

Now a day’s traditional architecture is the widespread form of building since many years, constructed through traditional way of building methods by local builders without using the services of a professional architect. Due to western influence, architects are not using traditional architecture techniques now that are based on climatic conditions. Building materials has different categories from mud- plastered to reed-thatched to timber-framed in accordance with the availability of local material. Some houses are built to withstand earthquakes, while others can be built quickly if washed away by heavy monsoon rains.

In some areas where there are limitations of building material, natural materials such as mud, grass, bamboo, thatch or sticks are used, instead of transporting materials from far place which is a blot on sustainability practices, for semi-permanent structures which require regular maintenance and replacement. The advantages of such traditional architecture are the construction materials are cheap and easily available and relatively little labor is required. As the needs and resources of the people change, traditional architecture evolve to include more durable materials such as tones, clay tiles, metals etc.

Though they are more expensive to build, they are very durable structures. In Asia climate has a major influence on traditional architecture. High thermal mass or significant amounts of insulation characterize buildings in cold climates. Lighter materials are used to build buildings in warm climates and designed for sufficient cross-ventilation through openings in the fabric of the building. In areas which have high levels of rainfall, flat roofs are avoided, even in areas with flat roofs, water harvesting techniques are being used. (Traditional Architecture In Asia . 2010)

The overall effect of traditional houses is like walking through a well-curates art exhibit, where people can admire the buildings. The density of different buildings and stores satisfies the pedestrian’s need for visual interest. It is a key part of what we call “walkabout’. This is what made historic downtowns beautiful in a way that no government or philanthropist could recreate today, and why historic preservationists nurse a broken heart with every lost structure. Traditional and modern architecture have mostly been seen as antitheses, impossible to reconcile, especially in Africa.

They appear to belong to efferent ages, utilize different materials and methods, and encourage or support different lifestyles. This essay aims at seeking points where a merging of principles may be attempted between the two positions. Compare from both of them, modern building has very good facilities including toilets, kitchen etc. And more over the design is very different. They are designed according to the requirements and also the life would be much easier there in the modern building. (Traditional vs. Modern Architecture 2011). But on other hand, traditional house have great design too.

It is graceful and warm and inviting. It is also beautiful. Of course traditional house can’t guarantee that the roof isn’t going to leak, the windows are properly sealed and the kitchen appliance is in the working order. Traditional house cannot guarantee for it. ‘Modern apartment building or traditional house ? (Teenage. 2011) The fact that modern buildings are prevalent proves modern style has its own advantages. In my country, population explosion has been a headache and the following problem is where to settle those extra citizens.

Since the land is limited, one good solution is replacing those old buildings which occupy large space with tall and thin modern buildings. Also, modern buildings usually have the same and simple structure so that they can be finished in a relatively short time, compared to the traditional ones. As a result, modern buildings augment the efficiency and make it possible to meet the increasing large demand of house nowadays. Furthermore, as modern buildings are always applied with advanced technology and theories, people can gain more security when living in such environment.

But, there are many people still strongly recommend the traditional style. Specifically, unlike the modern style which can be seen everywhere, traditional buildings representing unique cantonal culture only exist in certain countries. In this way, those building can be built for special use like tourist attractions. This would bring a great profit and earn the country a good fame. In addition, buildings with traditional sense are a good way to memorize the past history and display the ancient scenes. As a result of this, some new buildings are necessary to be built in traditional style but not all the buildings.

Modern buildings still play the key role in today’s society and will gradually expand its affect zone. ‘Some people think all the new buildings should be built in traditional style? (Elise. 010). However, modern buildings often use steel infrastructure, where the interior columns carry most of the loading. Since this type of construction is lighter per floor, they can be built higher, cheaper, and quicker. What are the differences between ancient and modern buildings? Monsoon. 2008). For the opposite, most ancient buildings had load bearing walls, which limited their height, and accounted for the thicker walls.

This also resulted in a lot less available window space. In fact in today society, one of the most significant problems accompanying with the population exploration is house problem, so more and more KY-scrapers instead of traditional buildings are built. As far as this phenomenon is concerned, some people think that we should construct much more buildings in traditional styles. Admittedly, there are some reasons for those people who stand for constructing building in traditional way. First of all, the traditional buildings may possess more aesthetic values and historical meanings.

Compared with the modern ones, the traditional buildings contain paintings or characters relating to the past certain age or dynasties; which endow more value to the buildings. Secondly, he traditional buildings often provide more spaces to house owners or renters; thereby making the living condition much easier and more comfortable. (Modern and traditional architecture 2010). However, maybe we do not think that we should build our building mainly in traditional way. Firstly, it is decided by the present social phenomenon that the number of population living in the planet nowadays has never appeared even before.

Correspondingly, we have to build most our living houses in a way that never come before. Besides that, constructing our building in a modern way is also an integral part of sustaining ecosystem. Let us try to imagine that if we all build our house in traditional way, take china for example, which traditional buildings are usually one or two layers, and can it accommodate the present 1. 3 billion population . The might be a possible we could build a few numbers of buildings in traditional style which in order to hand down the traditional culture.

But based on the social condition, most of our buildings should still construct in modern way. But , can modern and traditional architecture coexist? In today’s world anything is possible for example Instead of painting beautiful designs on the wall, en can Just use wall paper instead which can be replaced or removed at any time. The thin line between modern architecture and traditional architecture is that Modern architecture explores mainly with the interior features whereas traditional architecture is mainly worked on the exterior features.

Therefore modern architecture and traditional are definitely able to coexist. ‘To what extent do you agree or disagree? -modern & traditional building(Cathy. 2009). There is also a vast difference between modernity as an attitude and modernism as an architectural style. Modernity as an attitude, according to me, can co-exist with tradition. Modernity deals with transformation and change in the present and tries to incorporate it in buildings. Thus, it keeps changing with time. The standard steel frame and glass construction which was ‘modern’ during the early 20th century is no longer modern today.

The beaux-arts style of architecture dominate the architecture of public buildings from 1890 to 1920 because the style was first popularized during the well attended Columbian Exposition of 1893. This style was to be emulated by many entities far and wide. The term “Beaux Arts” refers to the from about 1890 to 1920 and encompasses the French Renaissance, the Italian Renaissance, and the neoclassical Revivals.

In addition, most of the leading American architects of that period had been academically trained many of whom had trained at Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris.

These facts, together with the fact that America was emerging as a dynamic industrially powerful nation and was becoming a world power at the same time, were proof that America had arrived. Added together, these facts pushed the citizens of the nation to desire architectural proofs of their aspirations and desire to prove to the word that America was a cultural and political equal to any nation in the world. The Beaux-Arts style is extravagant reflecting the attitude and taste of the industrial barons of this pre-tax era. Their homes were flamboyant and theatrical reflecting a desire to flaunt their wealth.

The Beaux-Arts style fits this desire precisely. These industrialists gave commissions to these architects to build their sumptuous residencies in fashionable neighborhoods and exclusive summer enclaves. These grand houses reflected the desire for “conspicuous consumption. ” This spirit of grandeur prompted many cities to erect grand public buildings as well. Every city aspired to outdo its neighbor. The American dream was to emulate the lead of the industrialists and proclaim their wealth and solidity. Public libraries, train stations, town halls, courthouses, office buildings, even prisons manifested this grandeur.

Because this style is classical in nature but grand in scale, the buildings are more extravagant. This style is theatrical. Elaborate moldings, pilasters, wreaths, garlands, festoons, dentils, cartouches and figure sculpture all are a part of this style. This proclaims to the world power and wealth. Exactly what the era was about. This reflected what the nation’s psyche was about during this period. Bold, new, powerful, and wealthy. This nation was finally a force to be reckoned with. No longer a colonial appendage, but a country equal to any and all.

Beaux Arts, French for “fine arts,” describes a type of American architecture that was popular from 1890 to 1920. They have two roof styles: flat or low-pitched hip roof or a mansard roof. These buildings often feature decorative garlands, floral patterns, or shields on their walls. The facade often has quoins, pilasters, or columns with Ionic or Corinthian capitals, and masonry walls of light-colored and smooth stone. Arched, pedimented windows were common. The first story uses stonework joints that are exaggerated, giving it a rusticated look, although the facade is usually symmetrical.

There are several reasons why Beaux Arts style was a dominant choice of public building architecture from 1890 to 1920. Beaux Arts buildings were a popular architecture choice in prosperous urban settings in cities such as Washington, D. C. , New York, Boston, St. Louis and San Francisco, as well as Newport, Rhode Island. They were big, elaborate buildings to build, and their construction one was a way to show off your wealth if you were rich. Beaux Arts buildings were the style of choice for rich American industrial barons, for example.

However, when the Great Depression hit in the late 1920s, these large buildings became too costly to build and maintain, and over time several were destroyed. Some have been preserved as public museums, schools, and clubhouses. Another reasons why they were dominant in public building style in America is the French influence. Americans who served in France during World War I saw examples of these buildings and helped make the style popular when they returned home. Americans who studied at France’s Ecole des Beaux-Arts, the best architectural school in the world at that time, advocated for this style of building when they returned to America.

The Ecole also favored formal planning for the spatial relationships between buildings. This helped drive the American City Beautiful movement, which was popular during this time period. This idea also influenced AMERICAN ARCHITECTURE PAGE 3 the Beaux Arts-style employed by designer Richard Morris Hunt for Chicago’s 1893 World Columbian Exposition. After this, other large cities, including Cleveland, Philadelphia and Washington D. C.

, used these formal design ideas in planning suburbs with massive parks and boulevards that were lined with landmark Beaux Arts-style houses. A further reason why Beaux Arts was a popular architectural choice is their roof’s appearance. The mansard roof became popular in attached urban town houses because it reduces the apparent height of the upper-floor living space as compared to other nearby buildings. It also gave the homeowner a full upper story of attic space to use, and so it became popular to use this style of roof in remodeling older buildings as well as for new ones.

There were tax implications for this style here as well: in France, where the mansard roof originated, expanding a home ‘s “footprint” – adding additional rooms on the ground and increasing square footage – meant that the owner would be required to pay heavier taxes on the structure. Building “upward” – expanding square footage vertically rather than horizontally – constituted a “loophole” which helped the property owner to avoid increased taxation on his home. The Great Depression may have brought an end to the cost feasibility and popularity of these lovely structures.

From about 1933 onward, homes that were constructed were smaller, plainer and more utilitarian. Fortunatly for us, but happily several of the old Beaux Arts have been preserved for our enjoyment and study in cities across the country, including San Francisco, Portland Oregon, Chicago and Rochester New in cities across the country, including San Francisco, Portland Oregon, Chicago and Rochester New York. Even in times during which real estate markets fall, classic old homes such as Beaux Arts houses and buildings continue to command top prices.

Mannerism refers to a time of European art that began around 1520 in Italy, and lasted until around 1580 to 1600, when the Baroque style of art and architecture began to replace it, but it did continue in many forms until the 17th century. The characteristics of Mannerism include artificial qualities that go against the harmonious, natural elements of High Renaissance art, and a great deal of sophistication, complexity and innovation in design.

Michelangelo was one of the greatest practitioners of Mannerism for several reasons. Elegance and innovation are two of the primary elements of Mannerism, and Michelangelo certainly practiced both those elements in his art. Some of his greatest architectural and artistic endeavors contain these elements, combined with sophistication in the design and execution of the works such as the Sistine Chapel’s ceiling. The paintings on the ceilings have stood the test of time, and retain their beauty, complexity and eloquence even today.

In addition, the concept of painting on the ceiling of a wondrous piece of architecture was also one of Michelangelo’s innovations, illustrating how he actively participated in the Mannerism movement. In architecture, Michelangelo also excelled as a Mannerist. “Mannerist architects were no less interested in ancient classical architecture than were their predecessors, but they found other qualities in ancient Roman architecture to exploit. In fact, they often displayed an even greater knowledge of antiquity than did earlier artists” (Italian Mannerism or Late Renaissnce, 2009).

Michelangelo’s greatest architectural achievements, such as the Laurentian Library in Florence, helped indicate he was a Mannerist by its’ obvious breaking of many architectural rules of the time, showing not only its elegance, but its novelty and sophistication, as well. Michelangelo uses classic design in his building, but adds a new way of assembling them throughout the design in novel and unusual motifs. In the Palazzo Farnese in Rome, Michelangelo used unnatural and manufactured views throughout the building, another trademark of Mannerist buildings. Many architects view Michelangelo as one of the geniuses of the movement.

His, “Medici Chapel in San Lorenzo was executed, in Vasari’s opinion, ‘in a style more varied and novel than that of any other master,’ and ‘thus all artists are under a great and eternal obligation to Michelangelo, seeing that he broke the fetters and chains that had earlier confined them to the creation of traditional forms” (Italian Mannerism or Late Renaissnce, 2009). Michelangelo knew how to push the envelope in design and execution, and was interested in change, rather than copying other styles, which are also elements of the Mannerist style of architecture.

His greatest Mannerist achievement is St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, a massive project that took him over 18 years to design, and was not completed before his death. This beautiful building was dominated by a huge dome that would have been incredible had it been completed during Michelangelo’s life. Later changes to the building altered the dome and its effect on the overall building design, but it was one of his greatest achievements, and the innovation and spectacular dimensions of the design helped cement Michelangelo as one of the premier Mannerist architects and artists of the day.

Mannerism eventually fell out of favor in Europe, and was replaced by other forms of architecture, including the intricate and detailed Baroque, which followed Mannerism. It was one of the greatest epics of Italian architecture and design, led by one of the greatest artists of all time, Michelangelo. Works Cited Italian Mannerism or Late Renaissnce. (2009, January 16). Retrieved from Italian Mannerism: http://www. cartage. org. lb/en/themes/arts/Architec/MannerismArchitecture/ItalianMannerism/ItalianMannerism. htm Janson’s History of Art. (2007). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc.

Pantheon, temple dedicated to all the gods. The Pantheon of Rome is the best-preserved major edifice of ancient Rome and one of the most significant buildings in architectural history. In shape it is an immense cylinder concealing eight piers, topped with a dome and fronted by a rectangular colonnaded porch. The great vaulted dome is 43. 2 m (142 ft) in diameter, and the entire structure is lighted through one aperture, called an oculus, in the center of the dome.The Pantheon was erected by the Roman emperor Hadrian between AD 118 and 128, replacing a smaller temple built by the statesman Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa in 27 BC.

In the early 7th century it was consecrated as a church, Santa Maria ad Martyres, to which act it owes its survival (see Architecture). The term pantheon also refers to a building that serves as a mausoleum or memorial for eminent personages of a country. The most famous example is the Church of Sainte Genevieve in Paris, designed (1764) in the classical style by the French architect Jacques Germain Soufflot.It was later secularized, renamed the Pantheon, and used as a temple to honor the great of France. Built in Rome, AD c. 118-28, in the reign of Emperor Hadrian, the Pantheon is the best preserved and most impressive of all Roman buildings. It has exerted an enormous influence on all subsequent Western architecture.

The Pantheon asserts the primacy of space as contained volume over structure in the most dramatic fashion.From the time of the Pantheon onward, Roman architecture was to be one of spatial volumes. The Pantheon was designed and built by Hadrian to replace an earlier temple established by Agrippa (the misleading inscription in the entrance frieze refers to this earlier edifice). The existing structure is an immense round temple covered by a single dome, fronted by a transitional block and a traditional temple portico of eight Corinthian columns carrying a triangular pediment.