The Acropolis and Xiangyang Palace were both constructed around the same time period but were geographically and culturally far apart. In class, we began to compare and contrast these two great cultural centers. In keeping with the discussion of circles, groves, and stacks, both of these sites were the cultural centers of the empire (circles) and architecturally reiterated the mass of inhabitants (groves) in the fortification of the place (stacks). Scale plays a big role as well, not only to emphasize that size does matter, but also that within the context of a hierarchy of scale, diving through the multiple layers leads to the hearth. Xiangyang Palace is more proportionate and balanced (despite being over four football fields in length!) where as the Acropolis itself winds it way through the site to the Parthenon that is the Athenian's concept of the ideal perfected. Both sites set the architectural precedent for their cultures with these sites. They had impressive technology built of materials found within the immediate environment, built to last an eternity. This is seen with the large stone construction at the Acropolis and the 1000 terracotta soldiers buried below the landscape.
cat, this is a great bp that really explains the concepts that we have been discussing in class and that have been included in the readings. the sketches are a great addition, and your explanation paragraph is very helpful in expressing the ideas that are formulated around both of these sites. keep up the good work!
ReplyDelete