Main Idea:
In terms of Aesthetics and search for beauty, I'd disregard any factors that would affect my belief and my perspective of my own life. I'd even disregard my religion, but it's not about that I hate religion; It's just in this world alone, I am only me. I'm the only one who can be myself, so if I let something affect me, it's not me anymore. It's not from my own justification and reasoning, because as an individual, I should take control of my own life belief.
Just like the famous Filipino quote "Nasa Diyos ang gawa, nasa tao ang gawa."
Yes, it should be like that. Whatever I'm going to do in this world, it is going to be my decision. Faith is just there, but I should not let that justify who I am.
Everyone should search for their own identity because that's by far the best thing to do for a living. When you find the 'prime' you, the peak of yourself, your life couldn't get any better.
Influences on why they thought this way, historical, family background, religious?
As a young man, as I encounter countless problems in life, sometimes even unbearable problems; step by step, I'm slowly diminishing myself away from my faith.
I can't spill all my hardships here because some are very confidential, but a little hint is that, it's all about family problems.
It's true that the one that you love, can make you strong and weak at the same time. Family, someone that's been with you since you were born inspires you, but at the same time, when everything fails, you feel like you too also fail.
Definitions of Beauty and/or Art in your terms Aesthetics in architecture
For me, beauty in architecture, as long as you're inspired and fueled to design a certain structure, it is beautiful. When we work with inspiration, that's beauty for me. Because everyone have different perspective on what's beautiful, so its really up to the designer and his philosophies.
Design makes structures look good, but philosophies makes it more stronger and invulnerable.
Let's say for example the Holocaust Museum, some people might consider it ugly and too complicated, but what makes it interesting is the story behind the design, which is really more important for me.
One thing I wrote in my Manifesto: "If a building is beautiful, but doesn't have any explanation about it, it's pointless."
Effects of your way of thinking to society (art, politics, etc.) when you become an architect
In art, I might be able to express some of my emotions and feelings, and maybe even others experiences. Arts that would lead them to find themselves. Arts to move them, arts to inspire them, arts to push them and make them open their eyes to reality and become the real them.
As long as I breathe, I would think of endless possibilities to aim more, to reach more and to become more.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Monday, April 18, 2011
AESTETA: Seatwork #1
CORONADO, Philippe Jiro L. AESTETA January 18, 2011
Is our perception of beauty socially/culturally dictated or something innate/inborn/inherent?
A persons perception of beauty is based through a persons way of living. Some people live within themselves the beauty that their culture holds. Some people feel that self-expression is beauty, wherein they do not look at a certain object the way people normally look at it. They have their own standards for a thing to be beautiful. Everyone has their own definition of beautiful. For some, the more ugly a thing is, the more it is beautiful.
Personally, I am a more self-expressive person. When I see a beautiful thing, I stand by it because I believe that judging an objects beauty is against a person’s free will. No one should tell others what is beautiful because it denies their self-expression on what is beauty. I also think that our perception must be inborn/innate/inherent because I saw a phrase at one slide at the presentation that says “Forced to be fat.” I just thought a while ago that, what if that person has her own standards to be beautiful? What if she finds being a fat girl ugly? Another though that I had was what if the Chinese women didn’t want to have a tiny feet? They are forced to have those because others told them that is beautiful.
Everyone should be treated equally. Everyone has to be beautiful in their own expressive way. Everyone was born with self thinking; we should let themselves use it.
I’m usually not fascinated by barong tagalongs and Filipinianas though it’s part of my culture as a Filipino. I’m usually not a fan of Piko, Tumbang Preso and other Filipino games though I played a lot of it during my childhood. I am more fascinated by coats and ties because I find it very universal, neat and can make you very good-looking. Culture will always be there but at the end of the day, you, yourself should know what is beautiful for you.
HSTARC2: Reaction Blog (Arts & Crafts)
Just like the previous art movements (Art Deco & Art Nouveau), Arts & Crafts was also a movement of art. I think this is the most basic style of art. I think that, this wasn't really an influencial movement that time because during those times, people are having a thing with modern architecture, and aesthetic art. Then, I actually learned that this movement was created for rebellion to the "better" art movements.
Looking at their structures and furnitures, it only has a basic shape, basic materials (wood, bricks). It doesn't really wear an attractive look. Although it's a bit of organic and floral, romantic and medieval. Arts & Crafts was also, basically anti-industrial. They hated the use of machineries
The most basic common characteristic that I notice is the use of triangular roof, the use of wood and bricks, circular and arched windows, chimneys.
They properly observed the idea of "truth to material". They wanted to emphasize the clarity and how the materials were used. They were very simple and straight in short words. In todays term, I remember furnitures like those as "antiques". They were the conservative type of art movement that time. It's very old looking and not very pleasing to stay with. (Just my personal opinion :-D)
RomanesqueGothicRenaissanceBaroque/RococcoAmerican ArchitectureGrowth of European StatesIndustrial RevolutionArts & CraftsArt NouveauBeaux Arts + Neo GothicArt DecoBauhausInternational ArchitectureLouis SullivanFrank Lloyd WrightLe CorbusierLudwig Mies van der Rohe
Looking at their structures and furnitures, it only has a basic shape, basic materials (wood, bricks). It doesn't really wear an attractive look. Although it's a bit of organic and floral, romantic and medieval. Arts & Crafts was also, basically anti-industrial. They hated the use of machineriesThe most basic common characteristic that I notice is the use of triangular roof, the use of wood and bricks, circular and arched windows, chimneys.
They properly observed the idea of "truth to material". They wanted to emphasize the clarity and how the materials were used. They were very simple and straight in short words. In todays term, I remember furnitures like those as "antiques". They were the conservative type of art movement that time. It's very old looking and not very pleasing to stay with. (Just my personal opinion :-D)
____________________________________________________________________________
HSTARC2 Blog update:
HSTARC2: Reaction Blog (International Architecture)
Blossomed in 1920's, International Architecture was an architectural style that framed the next generations. This was the peak of Modern Architecture in the 1920's. It's a variety of different countries that adopted the different elements and characteristics of Modern designs.
In Europe
Europe had the big three. Europe had prime Architects Walter Gropius, Mies van der Rohe and Le Corbusier. As you go through images of their structures, you'd never observe that they have some of the same design philosophies that they use in their structures. Most of their structures were characterized by simple forms (The Bauhaus started the use of simple forms, the use of squares + triangles + circles), they didn't like ornamentations, primary materials that consists of glass, steel and concrete.
 |
| Barcelona Pavillion by Mies van der Rohe |
I also saw some quotations from famous Architects that affects their design philosophy.
- Ornamentation is a crime
- Truth to materials
- Forms follows function
- Machines for living
I can sense that they were really perfectionist. All of them were following the quotation "God is in the details" Those 4 Architects were so perfectionist. With their respected structures, in changed the landscape of Architecture and introduced Architecture to the world with a different perspective.
In America
The United States of America, also had their own big three. A group composed of Architects named Louis Sullivan, Frank Lloyd Wright and Philip Johnson.
 |
| Toronto-Dominion Centre Toronto, Canada |
Philip Johnson started the movement in 1932 at the Museum of Modern Art. This was made because International Architects wanted to separate with functionalist principles. If you're going to look at their buildings, it has all the same characteristics, no ornaments, heavily glassed, majority materials are steel etc.
____________________________________________________________________________
HSTARC2 Blog update:
Arts & Crafts
HSTARC2: Reaction Blog (Growth of European States/ Neo Classicism)
Growth of European States
(I don't know if this is included but here's a short introduction to it. )
It was when King Louis XVI was still the king of France. He failed to fulfil his promise to the people, that's why the France had the French Revolution. Later on, the Legislative Assembly decided to suspend the king from his position, and should be imprisoned, and then sentenced to death.
This started the progress of European countries. Just because the carelessness of a king postponed the rise of these European countries.
The Rise of Europe
Basically, the Rise of Europe started when colonialism started. The trade of materials started in the Atlantic ports. Colonialism really showcased the changes that has transpired through the Western Countries, shown at the Architectural features it made. We can recall the different types of Architecture in the Pre-Colonial Era. They borrowed ideas from one another and just modified it more. This was a crucial part of Europe because this was also the time where their economy was rising because the trades from other countries; attracted the high classes to demand to protect their properties. In this era, ownership also was born. Everyone was naming their lots and houses which leads to Capitalism (my blog), but that's a different story already.
____________________________________________________________________________
Neo Classicism
 |
| The White House; Washington, D.C. |
Neo Classicism means the revival of the classic and ancient Architecture. Neo Classicism was an architectural type that had 1/4 Rococco, 1/4 Late Baroque and 2/4 Classical Greek characteristics.
Its architectural elements are:
- Symmetrical shape
- Tall columns
- Triangular pediment
- Domed roof
The best example in today's Neo Classicism is The White House in Washington DC.
____________________________________________________________________________
HSTARC2 Blog update:
Arts & Crafts
International Architecture
Sunday, April 17, 2011
HSTARC2: Reaction Blog (Le Corbusier)
 |
| Windows of Secretariat Building in United Nations Headquarters |
Jeanerete was a really talented man. He was more than just an architect, he was a painter and an interior designer. He concentrated more with buildings and structures made up of steel and reinforced concrete. He traveled so many countries that's why International Architecture was his forte. He taught in Le-Chaux-de-Fonds in Switzerland, due to the war happening in Paris.
Jeannerete was also a painter; in 1918, Le Corbusier met Cubist painter Amedee Osenfant. He influence Le Corbusier to paint. Since then, the two were perfect partners when it comes to art movements. They even made their own art which was later on to be called as Purism (Something I never have heard.)
Like Wright, Jeannerete also had many wives. Women whom he met at a ship, and he'd make nude paintings of her; Then to a dress-maker and a fashion model. (Architects really do have the swag. :> Hahaha.)
Le Corbusier was also famous for stating the 5 points of Architecture.
 |
| Villa Savoye; Paris, France |
- Open floor plan independent from the supports
- Vertical facade that is free from the supports
- Long horizontal sliding windows
- Roof gardens
- An innovative urban planner
A couple of his famous quotations:
"The house is a machine for living in."
"By law, all buildings should be white."
Jeannerete was also an interior designer.
____________________________________________________________________________
HSTARC2 Blog update:
Growth of European States
Arts & Crafts
International Architecture
HSTARC2: Reaction Blog (Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright)
Louis Henry Sullivan
This blog wouldn't be complete without mentioning Sullivan as the "Father of Skyscrapers". He went to MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). I think he was really smart knowing that he could graduate both highschool, one year earlier and pass up the next two years in MIT. He entered the Institute at a tender age of 16. Then, he transfered to Philadelphia and had a job as an architect under Frank Furness
He only stayed under Furness for a year, because Furness had to let him go because of the Long Depression. He went back to Chicago where his parents were located. Together with Mies van der Rohe, Sullivan renovated the burned city of Chicago. In summary, Sullivan really liked tall buildings, he liked office buildings, banks and churches (most of his works are in Chicago, but some of his works aren't there anymore.). He also liked the use of classical columns and designed some columns of his own, and the use of ornaments in his interiors. He also used arches in his buildings.
"Form follows function"
Then, Louis Sullivan was a mentor to...
Frank Lloyd Wright
To be frank, Frank Lloyd Wright was a theft.
FLW was a prideful person, he didn't want anyone to step on him, even his mentor Sullivan. When Wright was still under Sullivan, he didn't able to jive well with the other draftsmen of Sullivan. It's because, some of Sullivan's draftsmen said that Sullivan didn't treat them well too. So maybe, the other draftsmen got jealous of Wright because Sullivan was all eyes on him all throughout.
Wright was also financially unstable that time because he was too costly on his things, he was a materialistic architect. Sullivan then, guaranteed Wright a financial-free job by offering him a 5-year-contract extension, but Wright was too demanding that he even asked Sullivan to pay a part of his house, as a cream of the crop in Wright's marriage with his first wife. Sullivan was really under Wright.
Few projects came and the tragedy between Sullivan and Wright came. Wright claimed some of Sullivan's work which made him very angry, Sullivan was offended and fired Wright as soon as he knew everything. Then they didn't had any communications for the next 12 years.
But behind of all the drama and stories and soap operas that happened, Wright was a good architect. His characteristics for his were 1.) Flat roofs, 2.) Coned roofs, 3.) and structures that has a lot of squares and rectangles as its mother form.
And of course, during his later years, he was more in to organic forms. One of the best examples of this was his infamous Falling Waters.
RomanesqueGothicRenaissanceBaroque/RococcoAmerican ArchitectureIndustrial RevolutionArt NouveauBeaux Arts + Neo GothicArt DecoBauhausLouis SullivanFrank Lloyd WrightLudwig Mies van der Rohe
 |
| Merchants National Bank, Jewel Box |
 |
| Wainwright Building |
"Form follows function"
Then, Louis Sullivan was a mentor to...
Frank Lloyd Wright
 |
| Prairie House |
FLW was a prideful person, he didn't want anyone to step on him, even his mentor Sullivan. When Wright was still under Sullivan, he didn't able to jive well with the other draftsmen of Sullivan. It's because, some of Sullivan's draftsmen said that Sullivan didn't treat them well too. So maybe, the other draftsmen got jealous of Wright because Sullivan was all eyes on him all throughout.
Wright was also financially unstable that time because he was too costly on his things, he was a materialistic architect. Sullivan then, guaranteed Wright a financial-free job by offering him a 5-year-contract extension, but Wright was too demanding that he even asked Sullivan to pay a part of his house, as a cream of the crop in Wright's marriage with his first wife. Sullivan was really under Wright.
 |
| Falling Waters |
But behind of all the drama and stories and soap operas that happened, Wright was a good architect. His characteristics for his were 1.) Flat roofs, 2.) Coned roofs, 3.) and structures that has a lot of squares and rectangles as its mother form.
And of course, during his later years, he was more in to organic forms. One of the best examples of this was his infamous Falling Waters.
____________________________________________________________________________
HSTARC2 Blog update:
Growth of European States
Arts & Crafts
International Architecture
Le Corbusier
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)