Jump to content

Firmness, commodity, and delight: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Venustas: Expanding article
→‎Venustas: Expanding article
Line 10: Line 10:


== Venustas ==
== Venustas ==
{{lang-la|venustas}} ({{lit}} "of [[goddess Venus]]") carries strong association with the erotic love, so Alberti changed it to {{lang-la|amoenitas}} ("pleasure") in the 15th century. He also split the the beaty into essential {{lang-la|pulchritudo}}, the beauty of proportions, and superficial {{lang-la|ornamentum}} that only goes skin-deep ("auxiliary brightness"). Much later [[Le Corbusier]] held the view that beauty in architecture stems essentially from good mathematical proportions. The distinction between the two sides of beauty was watered down in the early 20th century when ornament became to be though of as an integral part of the building; both were completely fused together by [[Bauhaus]] with its explicit "goal, ... the great building, in which the old dividing-line between monumental and decorative elements would have disappeared for ever" ([[Walter Gropius]], 1935).<ref name=britannica/>
{{lang-la|venustas}} ({{lit}} "of [[goddess Venus]]") carries strong association with the erotic love, so Alberti changed it to {{lang-la|amoenitas}} ("pleasure") in the 15th century. He also split the the beaty into essential {{lang-la|pulchritudo}}, the beauty of proportions, and superficial {{lang-la|ornamentum}} that only goes skin-deep ("auxiliary brightness"). Much later [[Le Corbusier]] held the view that beauty in architecture stems essentially from good mathematical proportions. The distinction between the two sides of beauty was watered down in the early 20th century when ornament started to be thought of as an integral part of the building; both were completely fused together by [[Bauhaus]] with its explicit "goal, ... the great building, in which the old dividing-line between monumental and decorative elements would have disappeared for ever" ([[Walter Gropius]], 1935).<ref name=britannica/>

After introduction of [[aesthetics]] in the 18th century, the emotional impact of the buildings was thought to include not just the beauty, but sublimity, picturesqueness, even ugliness. The latter, for example, was proposed to express in architecture the virtue of [[manliness]].<ref name=britannica/>


== Utilitas ==
== Utilitas ==

Revision as of 22:10, 29 June 2024

Firmness, commodity, and delight (Latin: firmitas, utilitas et venustas) are the three aspects of good architecture declared by the Roman architect Vitruvius in his book "De architectura" ("On architecture", 1st century BC). The literal meaning of the Latin phrase is closer to "durability, convenience, and beauty", but the more familiar version is derived from Henry Wotton's liberal translation of Vitruvius, "The Elements of Architecture" (1624):[1] "Well Building hath three Conditions; Commodity, Firmness, and Delight".[2] The theory of architecture has always been concerned with this interrelated triad of structural integrity, proper use of space, and attractiveness. However, the relative importance of each component varied in time, and new elements had been introduced into the mix (cf. John Ruskin's "The Seven Lamps of Architecture" that include "sacrifice" and "obedience").[3]

Evolution

The order of words chosen by Vitruvius, with structural integrity coming before the utility, can be explained in two ways. Either the emphasis on firmness was driven by an understanding of architecture as an "art of building", or by fact that building frequently outlive their initial purpose, so "functions, customs, ... and fashions ... are only transitory" (Auguste Perret), and architecture's true impression is in the construction.[3]

While popular again nowadays, the original order of words was modified in 15th century by Leon Battista Alberti who moved the commodity to the first place in the triad. This order was repeated in the 16th century by Andrea Palladio in his "I quattro libri dell'architettura" (Italian: l’utile o comodità, la perpetuità, e la bellezz) which was apparently the source for Wotton's translation.[3]

19th century brought the new material and construction techniques that allowed architectural forms seemingly defying the laws of gravity, and societal changes that forced a rethinking of proper spatial arrangements. This gave an additional momentum to the idea, first expressed in the late 18th century by Jacques-François Blondel, that beauty ("decoration") is the only worthy aspect of the architectural theory, while the space planning and structural analysis should be left to practitioners (and later, to other disciplines). These considerations had affected teaching of the architectural theory for a long time, but they eventually went out of fashion, and, since the 1960s, the education of architects returned to the synthesis of structural, spatial, and perceptual elements (postmodernism as envisioned by Robert Venturi) or architectural phenomenology of Christian Norberg-Schulz.[3]

Venustas

Latin: venustas (lit. "of goddess Venus") carries strong association with the erotic love, so Alberti changed it to Latin: amoenitas ("pleasure") in the 15th century. He also split the the beaty into essential Latin: pulchritudo, the beauty of proportions, and superficial Latin: ornamentum that only goes skin-deep ("auxiliary brightness"). Much later Le Corbusier held the view that beauty in architecture stems essentially from good mathematical proportions. The distinction between the two sides of beauty was watered down in the early 20th century when ornament started to be thought of as an integral part of the building; both were completely fused together by Bauhaus with its explicit "goal, ... the great building, in which the old dividing-line between monumental and decorative elements would have disappeared for ever" (Walter Gropius, 1935).[3]

After introduction of aesthetics in the 18th century, the emotional impact of the buildings was thought to include not just the beauty, but sublimity, picturesqueness, even ugliness. The latter, for example, was proposed to express in architecture the virtue of manliness.[3]

Utilitas

Firmitas

References

  1. ^ Gelernter 1995, p. 63.
  2. ^ Black 1853, p. 490, Note 1.
  3. ^ a b c d e f Roger Scruton, Peter Collins, “Commodity, firmness, and delight”: the ultimate synthesis at the Encyclopædia Britannica

Sources

  • Roger Scruton, Peter Collins, “Commodity, firmness, and delight”: the ultimate synthesis at the Encyclopædia Britannica
  • Gelernter, Mark (1995). Sources of Architectural Form: A Critical History of Western Design Theory. Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-7190-4129-7. Retrieved 2024-02-12.
  • The Encyclopaedia Britannica, Or Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, and General Literature: Ana - Ast. Black. 1853. Retrieved 2024-06-29.