The question is what makes Guggenheim Bilbao, the Suleimaniye and the Tomb of Humayan the spaces that they are if their functions are ignored for a moment. Such comparisons can be ominous at times, but can trigger the way we look at our own approach to design of buildings and sites.
Which layers of architecture, when stripped off buildings, reveal the archetypes associated with designed space that has moved us personally/emotionally in some measure.
Upon discarding factors like technology, material, symbolic intent, metaphysical aspiration, the building Form and even other buildings around, one is left with rather mundane(?) aspects like the building’s positioning w.r.t. natural features and climate, the role of light within the form, the reading of its silhouette, the sense of sound(s) associated with the building, the approach, view from near and from afar and the way the sky paints itself on the building.
A comparison of images of the three buildings suggests an ensemble of these factors that have contributed to these and perhaps all those buildings about which many of us have experienced a timeless quality, albeit momentarily.
What is it that drove Messers Gehry Sinan & Ghiyas and others like them to aspire for fluid expression? How did they cope and emerge alive from the epiphanies at every face and corner of their creations? What was their moment of "blinding clarity" -as the oxymoron goes- like?
Which layers of architecture, when stripped off buildings, reveal the archetypes associated with designed space that has moved us personally/emotionally in some measure.
Upon discarding factors like technology, material, symbolic intent, metaphysical aspiration, the building Form and even other buildings around, one is left with rather mundane(?) aspects like the building’s positioning w.r.t. natural features and climate, the role of light within the form, the reading of its silhouette, the sense of sound(s) associated with the building, the approach, view from near and from afar and the way the sky paints itself on the building.
A comparison of images of the three buildings suggests an ensemble of these factors that have contributed to these and perhaps all those buildings about which many of us have experienced a timeless quality, albeit momentarily.
What is it that drove Messers Gehry Sinan & Ghiyas and others like them to aspire for fluid expression? How did they cope and emerge alive from the epiphanies at every face and corner of their creations? What was their moment of "blinding clarity" -as the oxymoron goes- like?
Though it is made out to be in the case of the three examples, it is definitely not as simple as crumpling up paper/ superimposing domes/drawing octagons And they did not achieve this only through "verbal architecture" -for sure.
“…Kya talaash hai, Kuchh pata nahi/
Bunn rahe hai dil, Khwaab dum-ba-dum…” (-Kaifi Azmi; Pyaasa ,1959)
Clueless about the Quest, yet, the hearts weave dreams (Trans. SGR)
No comments:
Post a Comment