Humans appear to be naturally attracted to bilateral, or axial, symmetry, usually used in the floor plan to structure the main movement route, and on the entrance facade. Perhaps the inspiration for symmetry in buildings is an idealised conception of the human body, although if this were the case, one wonders why the depiction of humans in these cultures, in painting and sculpture, often show the body in movement, rather than the static face-on view or pose, as can be seen in the very energetic sculptures of the Parthenon.
 |
Reconstruction of the Parthenon from Ancient Greece
Creative Commons licensed: https://www.rawpixel.com/image/431804/columns-greece
In Ancient China, the same dichotomy appears - in the example of the Forbidden City in Beijing the entire complex has all the major buildings lined up on a single axis, which takes on even more meaning, as only the emperor was permitted to walk on this central path. The narrow stairs on either side are for everyone else.
 | Hall of Supreme Harmony, Forbidden City, Beijing
Creative Commons licensed: https://www.flickr.com/photos/andyenero/6667341897
While there are several paintings from the Chinese Ming Dynasty that are formally posed and largely symmetrical, this is by no means the rule, as can be seen in this image from a scroll, where the composition is a play of curves, suggesting movement - a dynamic interaction of the two figures, enhanced by the stylised landscape features.
|
The use of bilateral symmetry in architecture is very seldom intended to express calm, even though, as one approaches that "perfect" centred view, there is often a sense of completeness. More often, this symmetry in the entrance facade is used to express power and authority, frequently combined with a significant change in level, forcing the observer to look up at the building before entering it, as can be seen very dramatically in the Forbidden City.
In most cultures that regularly used bilateral symmetry in architecture, this was reserved for religious and public buildings, and in some cases for the dwelling of the ruler. Ordinary buildings had a much less formal layout in plan and elevation. In Western architecture, this all changed in the Renaissance, when wealthy and powerful individuals started using this design principle as a way of portraying status. In the same era, architects started publishing books of their works and imaginary projects that promoted axial symmetry, even for fairly modest houses. Palladio's treatise, published as "The Four Books of Architecture" is probably the most famous, with his style being spread throughout Europe and into the countries colonised by European powers.
Over the next 300 years, axial symmetry in houses became so common for all types of buildings in the Western world, that the distinction between the ordinary and the significant became completely blurred. However, with the advent of Modernism in the 1920s and 1930s, the pendulum swung completely the other way - suddenly axial symmetry was taboo for any progressive architect, and only the most conservative architect or most insistent client would resort to this design approach.
These days, axial symmetry is seldom seen - there was a brief flutter in the 1980s with the Postmodern work of Michael Graves, but most of the buildings of the last 100 years have favoured asymmetry, even public and religious buildings.
Portland Building by Michael Graves
To some extent, this has eroded the "legibility" of the urban landscape, in that one no longer has the visual "anchors" of these very formally planned important buildings (compare a modern city with Edinburgh's New Town), but perhaps this makes for a more democratic and visually relaxed environment. |
|
|
|
Comments
Post a Comment