The fourth of
Ten things in my class on science, technology and design -
[link]
The argument moves on with new approaches to understanding architecture, in particular medieval military architecture - castles in Europe.
To be discussed - Matthew Johnson and Michael Shanks on castles. In particular an address to the concept of "function".
Contrast primary and secondary function in relation to castles - ie primary function military|secondary function symbol of power?
NB the distinctions between design and intention as opposed to reception and consumption.
Matthew introduces
- perception
- social difference
- and landscape (architecture)
to help unpack the "black box".
So - "what is architecture?
- it is as much about movement, event, ritual, performance, material, public/private
as it is about stone and mortar and strength/engineering
For architecture think "place/event".
Buildings are not "empty boxes" - they are "black boxes".
They are processes - verbs.
Think of the pyramids in this way too.
Another issue - war. For war, think system and network.
- war is culturally embedded
- war is dispersed
- war is heterogeneous
and the castle, as place-event, is part of this heterogeneous network.
NB also - unpacking the black box that is the medieval castle reveals some new insights - eg the relationship of public and private embodied in castle latrines - garderobes opening out onto the main outside walls of a castle (answering the question "what has military power and function got to do with the bodily functions of the medieval aristocrat?" - "a lot")
Readings and Resources
Behind the Castle Gate.pdf
Private and Public.pdf
Dunstanburgh
Posted at Apr 30/2005 11:56 AM:
Dave Daly: On the subject of public vs. private... we drew a link between castle windows and the idea of celebrities/celebrity today. It seems that another aspect of the affair is distance. The appeal is not just being able to see the elite figure. It's also the ability to be close... but not too close.
Analogies: view through the castle window; celebrity vacation photo with a telephoto lens in a supermarket tabloid; photo of the president meeting with a cabinet secretary (better if it's one-on-one, even better if it's at Camp David; still better if POTUS is wearing a polo shirt); even the nightly national news.
It's about seeing a personal side of a public elite but not actually knowing the elite personally. "Did you hear the latest gossip about Angelina Jolie?" (Does it matter? Does it affect my life?) "Peter Jennings was saying last night..." (It wasn't a personal message to you.)
Windows in castles allow the common folk to have a link with the elites (and perhps vice versa?) without all the fuss of an actual relationship.
Posted at May 04/2005 10:07 PM:
[Karen Loh]: If we think about how the people in the past might have designed castles, we can envision better the network and systems involved in producing the grand architecture we now see. Assuming there was an architect and his client who desired a certain type of castle. We can see then that in order to meet each other's criteria, they must have come up with a design plan through joint effort, bearing so many things in mind--physics, ideal living environment, material, manpower, etc. It is easy to overlook the brainpower, manpower, foresight and planning that produced all the stone and mortar we now see in pictures.
Posted at May 31/2005 11:23AM:
[Aaron Smith]: I think T.E. Hulme put it very aptly:
"Old houses were scaffolding once
And workmen whistling."
