Roman Reaction Paper

If you look closely, the Romans in a way revolutionized Greek architecture to create a new style of their own. Compared to the Greek structures, their structures had very similar elements involved such as in the columns they built. Even though it is obvious that the Romans used the same columns as the Greek, the Romans went in a new direction and added the arches and domes. One thing we can definitely differentiate from the two eras is that Greek architecture mainly derived from the inspiration of religion and Gods while Roman architecture displayed newfound engineering skills and also, prestige. When I think about the Roman era, back in Junior school when we studied about the Romans in a basic level, I remember thinking about how the Romans had a large number of places to socialize in, such as in bathhouses, etcetera. I was right! You can spot the Roman architectural style mainly in the public dwellings they built, unlike the Greek, who made their structures which the main purpose was for the worship of their Gods, although even in the Roman period, religion still played its part.

I think the Roman era marked the start of a new direction for architecture. From the prehistoric up to the Greek period, we saw patterns of structures being built based on religion whereas in the Roman age, they started considering the public and the growing population even more and more. I guess you can say, the growing population became a problem and the solution to this problem created the new Roman architectural style. I also read somewhere that there was also a shift in materials used by the Romans. They started using a new building material- cast concrete, as it was cheaper and required less work to handle. I conclude by saying, although the origin of ideas did come from the Greek, the Romans created and improved these ideas to create structures that make an impact even on modern architecture today.

Greek Reaction Paper

Today, we can still experience Greek architecture through the remains of the large numbers of temples. Even though Religion was the centre of all Greek architecture, their temples then did not serve the same purpose as churches today, they also stood as storage for “treasury.” Treasury, referring to the offerings made by the Greek people to their statue Gods. Another structure which related to religion included the tholos (also known as the circular temple), for example the Tholos of Theoderus at Delphi.

I noticed that Greek architecture created more and more public dwellings, apart from the basic places of worship and residential areas. The version of ‘theatres’ back then were not only places where people performed but also places where they had public meetings. The Theatre that fascinates me the most is the Epidaurus Theatre. I’m fascinated by its massive size and its ability to pass for a modern structure. It can still be seen today.

As for the materials used, I believe that they used were the same materials used from the previous periods, such as wood, mud brick and clay. Material wise, they did not use anything new. But, they used these materials to create structures that had religious, civic, domestic, funerary, or recreational themes.

Within the Greek style, it is divided into two parts. There was the Doric and Ionic style. I noticed that the Doric had a more formal approach, while the ionic seems more decorative and relaxed. Later, there was a development on the Ionic and it is called the Corinthian style, which is an even more ornate version of the ionic style.

Although the Greek had many architectural ideas, they we’re not able to carry out and deliver them, provided the materials they had back then and the conditions they were under but the Roman’s in the next area, were able to revolutionize the Greek style to create a new style that they would later call their own.

Egyptian Reaction Paper

Before ‘doing my time’ in CSB, I remember switching in between channels over the television and most of the time, finding myself landing on the discovery channel. About 78 percent of the time, they we’re always showing a session on ‘discovering’ pyramids and how all these hosts would wrestle their way going through dark alleyways, reading hieroglyphs carved on walls and how they would be searching for a forbidden tomb with treasure and etcetra. I mean, a tomb is meant to be a burial place for the dead isn’t it? Why all the twists and turns? Why all the extravagance? Why not just a tombstone like everyone else? Why the waste of material and work for the dead? Well, after reading about the Egyptians in depth, questions answered. Nothing was more important to the Egyptians than eternal life. They highly believed in life after death and so, the pharaohs would plan their pyramid before they passed away, including what belongings they would bring along and the slaves that he would need. I read somewhere that this would apparently “make things easier for the pharaoh to travel to the afterlife”. This was supposedly the same reason why their pyramids were shaped in that manner; it helped the pharaoh climb to the heavens, through the sunrays (despite the earlier shape of the early tombs, the Mastabas, where they were made masmataba (;, more rectangular in shape than pyramidal). What fascinates me here is that there is no assurance in life after death, yet they go through with all the hard work just to get their pyramids built. I think the main reason why we are so captivated about pyramids today is because of their originality and the story behind every line and point on a pyramid and why were they designed that way.

As an architecture student, I can learn from Egyptian architecture and apply it to my work today. It ‘shines a light’ on design and purpose and tells me how important it is to consider function behind every design I create. A building should not look a certain way just to make it look ‘pretty’ but because a structure looks that way because of the natural factors that affect the design limitations. One way or another, it also suggests where I should draw a line when it comes to applying art in designing a structure.

West Asiatic Architecture

Sketching for the prehistoric architecture was WAY easier than sketching for the west Asiatic architecture. Why? Well, it’s obvious. During the prehistoric architecture, it was all basic. Rocks on rocks, lean to shelters, huts – everything was made out of pure purpose for shelter and with no intention of making those shelters ‘beautiful’. What started out as drawing slabs of rocks piled up on top of each other for prehistoric architecture became drawing structures for the west Asiatic architecture that was more complicated, detailed, en Grande and some even, to me, was over the top. Literally. LARGELY, over the top.

I think by that time, the people had become civilised. This was reflected in the way their structures were built and the difference between the prehistoric architecture and the west Asiatic architecture became vast. Before, everything was assembled using natural ‘raw’ materials and even though during the Babylonian-Persian era, they used most natural materials as well, since they were plentiful, during the Assyrian era, they started to appreciate materials which looked beautiful and appealing to the eye such as the Persian tiles and the coloured limestone, which they incorporated into their designs. This, to me, was one of the movements of ‘evolution’ of the architecture back then. Instead of using materials that were dreary and common, they used materials that looked more appealing for their structures such as Susa and Persepolis. They also acknowledged the resources that were plentiful to them such as crude( in which they made sun dried bricks, which were also covered in alabaster by the Assyrians), bitumen (used as ‘cement’), stone, colored limestone, rood timbers and Persian tiles.

Another difference we can see from the prehistoric-west Asiatic architecture is the sizes of the structures. From the Babylonian period, we already start seeing the sizes of the towers, structures and they intend to build like the ziggurats, palaces and empires. What we know, is that they built their extravagant structures as a form of contribution to their kings and Gods.

Architecture to them did not only mean basic shelter needs anymore, but also became a form of display of their knowledge and skills in craft and arts.

R.I.Pretend

Philosophy: What you see is what you get.

Concept: Skin and bone

Design Concept: No opaque walls, glass to allow transparency.

Working concept: Honest, Open, Transparent, Direct.

Philosophy : Dare to differ.

Concept: Animated building.

Design concept: Use of lines and curves to create flow of movement. Lively and fun. Unsymmetrical.

Working concept: Lively, expresses movement/mood, uncontemporary.

Philosophy: Architecture is also about considering the surrounding environment.

Concept: to blend into the environment with use of elements that relate to an area.

Design concept: Roofs are made to look like shells from a distance.

Working concept: adaptive. relative.

Updated Personal & Class Logos.

Class Logo.

Personal Logo.

those three architects

ZAHA HADID.

My favourites from her works are the bergisel ski jump in Innsbruck, Austria, the contemporary arts center in cincinnati, ohio

& the MAXXI National Museum of Arts located in Flaminio, Italy.

"In modern times, people used to live in cookie-cut

ter houses, drive the same cars and wear similar clothes. But people these days want to have their own personality and uniqueness. The same goes for buildings and houses" -Zaha Hadid

To me, her work portrays the 21st century architecture to the fullest extent. I like the way she interprets modernization in her designs and how she defeats the prototype of men and architecture. Her designs are always something new and different.

I also admire the fact that she

branches her designs into fashion as well. In 2009, she collaborated with Lacoste to create a high end, high fashion pair of boots. Her logo "Zaha Hadid for Lacoste" is displayed on

the sole of the shoe.

To be perfectly honest, being new to architecture, there are only a few architects that i know of. At this stage, I am only able

to recognize architectural structures and not of the architects behind them.

My favourite structure of all

time would have to be the Eiffel tower. Designed by Engineer, Gustave Eiffel. Despite the Eiffel's very criticized beginning, it turned

out to be one of the most visited towers visited today.According to Gustave, the whole design of the Eiffel tower depended mainly on its primary concern, wind resistance.

The metal structure of the Eiffel Tower weighs 7,300 tonnes while the entire structure, including non-metal components, is approximately 10,000 tonnes."

Danish Architect, Jorn Utzon is the architect of another one of the world's most well known structures, the Sydney Opera house located in Australia. Hosting performances every night, it is also one of the world's busiest. When Jorn Utzon created this, he wanted a very expressionist design. The shape of the roof represents shells.The shells are covered in a material so that from a distance, it looks white. I think he made the roof look like shells because with the music and performances coming from the operahouse, it catches the concept of beautiful sounds coming from empty seashells.

-

Reaction paper1 - prehistoric architecture

From what i understood from the presentations made this week and from what i can remember, prehistoric architecture were basically attempts made by the "early humans" in building structures to defend/protect themselves from natural factors. These natural factors include the weather, predators and even from their human enemies.

The desire to protect themselves from these natural factors resulted in basic constructions such as:

-HUTS

These we're made by hunters as temporary shelters during the Paleolithic period. Wooden posts helped erect these huts while stones pinned down the base of the walls to the ground. These huts always had an oval la

yout.

-BEEHIVE HUTS

these huts we're made during the bronze age. This structure was also used as shelters. The stones were piled in a downward manner, so rainwater

could not seep through and reach the interior.

-TENTS

these tents, also known as "teepees" were made of long wooden sticks/timber which acted as a frame which held a material (animal skin) which acted as the exterior. Rocks pinned down the animal skin to the ground

.

-LEAN TO

These was an arrangement of lumber which was supported on one side by wooden posts which inclined one side of the roof.

Early architecture was not only influenced by the natural factors, but was also influenced by religion. During the neolithic age, also known as the New Stone age, the neolithic people built temples and burial grounds for the purpose of religion.

The structures that were built during

that time were:

-TOMBS

There we're different types of tombs that we're created. Ther

e was the stand alone menhirs, these was just a single slab of st

one implanted to the ground, also known as monoliths. Single slabs of rock were called monoliths, whereas trilliotons (trilliths) were three slabs of stone. Where two of the stones would be upright and one slab of stone would be piled on top lying horizontally. Dolmen were three slabs of stone implanted into the ground while one large rock would sit on top of the three.

There we're also circular arrangements of menhirs which

we're also known as cromlechs.

-TUMULI

These were burial grounds, protected by a mound of soil or stone.

other structures included igloos, hogans and trullos.

It is unsure of how the neolithic people mounted the rocks during the creation of the menhirs, but it is suggested that they used a wooden wheel to help support the weight of the rocks.

I think that prehistoric architecture is important for all of us aspiring architects because we need to understand where the origin of architecture was and how it came about. We need to know the basics of what forms of shelter we can provide for people and we can aslo use these basic structures and "evolve" them into a modern creation. Back then, everything was built not because people wanted to indulge in the luxury of their homes but because of the basic means of survival. Unlike today, where the trend is that, almost all new structures are built to provide enjoyment and comfort to the people.

--

I once read somewhere that we should try to “make ordinary things extraordinary.” My take on this saying is that I think, that almost every architect/designer/engineer or anyone from

any other related profession lives by this quote - they take a simple plan, sometimes even the most insignificant idea and transform it into something unique that others are taken aback and would start to wonder how did such a magnificent creation start from such an unusual design.

I think that architecture is the combination of art and science in designing, not necessarily only buildings but also other objects that are based on an architect’s personal style, design and also, skills. Of course, there are also other factors that are taken into consideration during the planning process as they affect the outcome of an architect’s work such as the natural surroundings of a project’s site.

I want to become an architect because I want to be able to create and be part of something that contributes to society and to the built environment. I like designs that capture the eye and that stands out from the everyday, traditional compositions. Such as the School of Design and Arts building that we are in now. Compared to the other buildings surrounding SDA, SDA is definitely “different.” – To me, it represents modernization, and personally and honestly, I prefer modern everything. Back in High School, they built us a new campus which had a more modern approach. In a small way, the design mimicked the “less-is-more, skin and bone” concept, where there were glass windows everywhere which gave it more of a “bare” feel. Even with its simplistic modern touch, I think all of the students, myself included, opted for this compared to our old boring building.

I also admire eco-friendly architecture, as times like these; nature is not really being taken into consideration, although concepts such as the “solar panel roof” where panels are installed on roofs to conserve energy are becoming more and more popular. Although sometimes, eco friendly architecture may not look as “refined” as normal architecture and may not look very appealing to the clients, it creates a sense of new direction in today’s architectural designs.

In ten years time, I picture myself starting off by designing remarkable residential areas, hotels and resorts as that were what originally made me attracted to architecture. If it we’re actually possible, I would also like to design a structure both from the interior and the exterior.

I have not physically seen many outstanding architectural works before partly because of the lack of travel (: but I’ve seen one in particular, the Malaysian Twin Towers which never fails to amaze me. The famous height of the towers has always seemed to fascinate me and that is the kind of impact that I want to create on the people and on the society – to amaze and to inspire. I hope that maybe in the future that that would be one of the things that I will be able to accomplish.

(photo credits, wikipedia. edited using pse)

--