[ad_1]
 |
Neo-trads have a tough time distinguishing issues, moreover vaguely realizing what seems to be "previous" and what seems to be "new", therefore why they put all trendy and all pre-modern structure in simply two baskets. However they might be stunned to know that there was a time when neo-classicist architects handled medieval structure the identical method many individuals deal with modernism in the present day. That’s to indicate that criticising what has simply preceded is nothing new or authentic. It's one thing people have at all times accomplished. William Benham notes that the additions of Inigo Jones on the Previous St. Paul's Cathedral have been "altogether incongruous with the previous constructing … It was little question lucky that Inigo Jones confined his work at St Paul's to some very poor additions to the transepts, and to a portico, very magnificent in its method, on the west finish." Critically although, it seems to be like the identical form of pastiche Robert Venturi would preach and encourage centuries later with postmodern structure. https://preview.redd.it/cda0odax5qpc1.png?width=550&format=png&auto=webp&s=5febadf8062108167cce24dc4fbe4a41077f55ed https://preview.redd.it/xqtyzavy5qpc1.png?width=550&format=png&auto=webp&s=ffdd0fc1051c1555ca4dc6b8008042ad7d3cfa6b submitted by /u/Thalassophoneus |
[ad_2]
Source link
