Though the history and development of renaissance architecture is very well documented, and the amount of information now available on the topic is overwhelming, there is hardly any discussion on why the renaissance architects and their patrons rejected the style of Christian architecture that was developed over a period of a thousand years and looked for inspiration in an architectural style which was based on the idol worshipping culture of Greek and Roman period.
The explanation of this seemingly puzzling phenomenon is actually quite simple. Architecture, it is said, is the ultimate status symbol of a civilization, as the architectural monuments reflect the best a particular civilization has to offer in terms of architectural creativity, development of technology and the wealth of resources for construction. In the entire history of architecture, the rulers everywhere have appropriated form and design concepts from the architecture of the earlier civilizations. Mughals in India borrowed heavily from the exquisite stone masonry details of the Rajput architecture, which the British rulers followed later in their design of New Delhi.
As Manfredo Tafuri has said, architectural styles do not follow one another in some teleological scheme. The presence of in our midst of architectural monuments from all the earlier civilizations makes all architectural forms simultaneously relevant to the present day. This makes all the past architecture an extensive vocabulary of architectural forms, from which a designer can borrow and work on for his current work, irrespective of the relevance of the actual function of the historical building which inspired the form. That is why the form of a Greek or Roman Temple was adopted for a Church, and an obelisk from the Egyptian architecture inspired the form of Washington monument.
But why should the architects and their patrons in the renaissance period go back to the classical architecture, instead of the more relevant tradition of Chirstian architecture? The answer lies in the interpretation of the earlier Christian era as dark ages by the historians in the renaissance period. This era, marked by domination of the Church on almost every aspect of life was seen as repressive and inhuman, and the architects and their patrons did not wish to be associated with any symbols of this period in their design.
Interestingly, the pointed arch, which gave flexibility in terms of span and height in Gothic architecture, was banished in the renaissance period as barbaric and without discipline. The term Gothic has been derived from the word Goth, the name of the barbaric tribe which raided Rome and was responsible for the ruin of many Roman monuments.
Another interesting fact is that earlier Christian architecture was carried out by the freemasons, hence the development of the styles was based on traditional building techniques, which changed from place to place, while the overall from of church remained almost identical. The renaissance architecture is dominated by the first generation of architects, who were painters and sculptors, and wanted to conceptualize the project before construction, hence it was based on ideas and not methods of construction.
The discovery of classical texts in this period, including many treatises on architecture, gave the fresh start the renaissance architects and their patrons needed. The renaissance architecture, by its re-introduction of the semicircular arch, is based on strict regulation of the spans and ornate in nature. Its rejection of the stained-glass windows gave rise to large opaque wall surfaces in the interior of the church, which the renaissance architects, who were essentially artists, converted into beautiful paintings. Whereas the gothic ceilings are full of intricate configurations of ribs, the renaissance architects chose the semi-circular vault for the ceiling as a backdrop for their paintings.
The influence of renaissance architecture on the neo-classical architecture of the 18th and 19th century, goes on to show that in spite of the great development of building materials and technology, no new style of architecture can emerge unless there is a change in the concepts of architectural design. A new style of architecture needs a fresh set of ideas and concepts about the design, and it can come into reality if these ideas and concepts are accepted by their patrons and the society at large.
No comments:
Post a Comment