The reading was was quite interesting this week. When I look at the layering present in buildings I don't normally think of it as transparency and the comparison of painting to building and pointing out how each is tansparent really helped to make it clear.
The idea of literal vs. phenomenal transparency I believe is pretty interesting. While one focuses on materials and their transparency the other looks at composition and layering. The Bauhaus is pretty literal in elevation with the large expanse of glass that extends outward from the solid prism that is the main structure of the building. On the other hand, Le Corbusiers Garches Villa portrays a more phenomenal transparency with an elevation rich in layers of horizontal bands and stipp windows.
One question comes to my mind though. If we are considering a building or space as transparent, are we only looking at either elevation or plan? Corcusier's Garches Villa is extremly phenomenal in elevation but are we also considering the depth of the space and its transparecy. When looking at Gris' and Delaunay's paintings Rowe ans Slutsky mentioned shallow and deep spaces felt in the paintings through their transparecy. Does this idea apply to buildings as well? It seems like the main focus is either in elevation or plan but shouldn't we consider both in order to grasp a true idea of transparency?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment