Blog Post 3: Xianyang and the Acropolis

     I believe that, while there are similarities between the Xianyang Palace and the Acropolis, they are more different than they are alike.  This conclusion is evident when looking at three different aspects:  the building's purpose, how the building was seen by the common people, and the building itself.

     The Xianyang palace was built as that--a palace.  It was meant to be a representation of the emperor's power and influence; this is reflected in the fact that the palace's rooms was filled with wealth.  It is also apparent in the so-called "Terracotta Army" that stands below the palace.  This army faces south, where the emperor's enemies would have been located when the palace was built.  These two facts--the wealth-filled rooms and the "army"--indicate that the palace was meant to intimidate.  The Acropolis, however, was not intimidating but inviting.  It was a place of worship, built not for any emperor but for the Greek gods themselves.  The Acropolis was a welcoming place, meant more for the Athenians themselves than for any outsider.

     In the same way, the Acropolis was revered by its own people, but in its approachability.  Every four years a massive procession involving all Athenians made its way to the Acropolis, where there was a great festival to the gods.  Despite its size, the Athenians did not fear the Acropolis.  On the other hand, the Xianyang palace was only used by the emperor and his staff--common people had no reason to ever enter it.  Its reverence stemmed from its "untouchability," its distance from the everyday man.

     Finally, the buildings themselves are two completely different structures.  The Acropolis is very open dotted with buildings, each of which was constructed by a different person at a different time for a different purpose.  The Xianyang palace is not like this at all--it is one large building, built at one time and overseen by one person, for the purpose of serving the emperor's needs.  Thus, it is obvious to even the most casual observer that, while both structures are impressive, they are polar opposites of one another.

Reading Response 3: The Colosseum as a Symbol of Rome

       The Colosseum represents one of the most perfectly planned, supervised, and constructed buildings in history.  Despite being built in the first century C.E., it still remains largely intact, and might still be complete if it weren't for earthquakes in 1231 and 1349.  It was a powerful cultural symbol of the Roman Empire during its height, and even today remains one of the most easily recognizable structures in the world. 

     The Colosseum, while not the first theater to be built in Rome, was in fact the first theater built as a freestanding object.  It could hold fifty thousand spectators, who would gather to watch various events.  The large capacity was possible because of the Roman's innovative idea to combine two smaller, half-circle theaters to form one large oval-shaped space that could host multiple events.  The Colosseum is most famous for hosting gladitorial fights, but it also hosted the exhibitions of wild animals, a variety of games,and public punishments.  The skill and precision that went into the Colosseum's construction is apparent in multiple aspects of the historical and modern record.

     The name of the Colosseum's chief architect is now unknown, but he must have been very famous in his day.  This is because the Colosseum was being constructed by multiple work crews in several areas and over a long span of time--it would take a master architect and supervisor to successfully coordinate such an effort.  The Colosseum itself is an incredible structure, both in size and in detail.  It is divided into four stories:  the first three each utilize a specific style of column (Doric, Ionic, or Corinthian), while the fourth is adorned with brackets that allowed for awnings to be stretched over the audience.  However, while these columns seem to be more ornamental than structural in purpose, the truth is in fact the opposite.  The columns bear much more weight than is immediately obvious, while the vaults bear much less.  This is an incredibly risky, yet ultimately powerful, construction choice that helps make the Colosseum that much more impressive.

Some final thoughts:
--  Built in 80 C.E. and remains standing, a clear indicator of well-planned and executed construction.
--  Host to many different events, the last of which (public punishments) was not ended until the 8th century.
--  An awe-inspiring structure that perfectly balances function and beauty, the Colosseum remains an impressive cultural icon.

Image sources:
--http://www.sacred-destinations.com/italy/rome-colosseum
--http://www.legionxxiv.org/colosseum/
--http://www.aboutroma.com/colosseum.html

IAR RR 2: The Rise and Fall of Babylon and Its Impact on Modern Life

IAR Blog Post 2

QUESTION:  DO ENVIRONMENTS INFLUENCE RITUALS, OR DO RITUALS INFLUENCE ENVIRONMENTS?

ANSWER:  Mesopotamians and Egyptians, despite being thousands of miles apart, were similar in their ritual beliefs.  Both had extensive pantheons, and both believed that food was necessary not only for humans, but for their gods as well.  Thus, both societies sacrificed food to their respective gods.  However, there is a striking difference between the food that was sacrificed.  Egyptians were able to hunt animals such as various birds, antelopes, and gazelle; therefore, their sacrifices included much more meat and animals.  However, Mesopotamians did not have the same luxury, due to the scarcity of animals in their region--their food sacrifices consisted much more of crops and breads.  This indicates that the environment influences the ritual:  the presence or scarcity of meat was reflected in the Egyptians' and Mesopotamians' sacrifices, respectively.  Does this mean that rituals have no influence on the environment?  The answer, quite simply, is no.

     Stonehenge supports the idea that rituals influence environments.  While it is not the only such structure in England, it certainly stands out, and its very presence is perplexing.  The stones that remains today came from a quarry 30 kilometers (18.5 miles) away, and since the average weight the stones is 26 tons, a great effort must have been put into transporting them.  Since it is highly unlikely that such energy would be expended on something insignificant, we must assume that there was some great purpose to Stongehenge's creation.  The general consensus is that Stonehenge is a ritual site, but what these rituals might have been has been lost to time.  Thus, the society that built Stonehenge did so because of powerful ritual beliefs.  They modified their environment to meet their rituals; therefore, the belief that rituals influence environment also holds true.

     The only conclusion we can draw, therefore, is that both statements are true.  Both the environment and the ritual influence each other equally, in a symbiotic relationship where neither aspect has the upper hand.

IAR In-Class Assignment: Circles, Groups, Stacks

 

     The circle that I chose for this assignment is a fountain on the High Point University campus.  I picked this because this fountain is the first structure one encounters when one gets on campus.  Because circles are a representation of equality, the circular fountain symbolizes equality in education--that all students, no matter what their background, are equal, and the fountain's placement at the entrance to campus indicates that this is the school's most important belief.

     My dorm building, Reynolds, serves as my choice of group.  Tight-knit groups have always been an integral part of human society, and this is no different in today's day and age.  This is reflected in this building, in which approximately 350 people live in very close quarters.  The close proximity of the residents promotes new relationships, which has and always will be important in modern civilization.

     I chose the Jackson Library to serve as my stack for this assignment.  The library consists of floors of books, each stacked on top of each other to form a massive structure that exists solely as a house for knowledge.  This enormous library is filled with most, if not all, the knowledge that humans have acquired over the centuries.

     I think these three design themes have survived for so long because they are simple representations of the most important aspects of human life.  The circle is a physical representation of belief systems:  how there is one incredibly important thing (for example, a god), and many lesser yet equal things (humans, subservient to the god).  The groups are examples of human society--from the days when people huddled around campfires, to today when college students live in such tight quarters, closeness has always been a staple of civilization.  Thus, groups are a reflection of that closeness that makes civilization possible.  Finally, stacks have a two-fold meaning.  Gathered resources were stacked in order to keep better track of them; an architectural stack is an echo of this.  Secondly, a stack can be seen as a way of reaching towards the sky, which is where many early societies believed their gods resided.  Thus, a stack was an attempt to be closer to the gods, and while this idea has died out over time, the stack remains as a symbol of power and authority.

IAR 221 Reading Response 1

IAR 221: Design Autobiography 1

     As you can (hopefully) see, my name is Robert Harrison Prince, and this is my first post for IAR 221.  Our first assignment is to "post an image of yourself along with a meaningful, well-designed object that tells something about you as a designer or an appreciator of design."

     The object I decided to write about is my Moleskine pocket planner.  It may not seem like much to some people, but to me this notebook is a life-saver.  I got it back in early December, to help me keep organized and on top of all the stuff I have to do.  Again, to some of you that might not be a big deal but I've always been something of a procrastinator, so it's important that I keep a detailed schedule.  But enough backstory.

     The reason I chose this object is because, to me, it symbolizes order and organization.  It is first and foremost a weekly calendar, a tool that proves incredibly useful to someone as disorganized as I.  It is small, easily carried in one's pocket. It is a simple shade of blue--no fancy patterns, no bright colors, nothing that grabs the attention of an onlooker.  Just a dark shade of blue.  Despite having only been in use since late December, it is well worn, with many of the pages having already been written on.  It is well-constructed, sturdy, and reliable.  It is, essentially, a physical representation of myself.  I am organized, or at least trying very hard to be.  I am on the smaller side, and do not stand out in a crowd.  Despite being only nineteen years old I have a fair amount of life experience (that's what I get for having a father in the Air Force).  And, last but certainly not least, I am reliable.  Trustworthy.  Always available to lend a helping hand.

     This notebook and I are incredibly similar, but only to someone who knows me very well.  To a total stranger, this notebook is something else entirely.  It can be seen as a sign of weakness, I imagine.  "He needs a notebook to help him stay organized?" someone might say to themselves.  They might see the book as a crutch, as an extension of a disorganized mind.  One might look at this notebook and wonder exactly how much I have to deal with on a daily basis that I feel the need to carry a planner with me at all times to manage it.  Some might see it as a hindrance--it takes up an entire pocket, and a stranger might wonder if it is worth carrying around all day long.  "Just use the calendar on your phone," one could say.  "It would be much more efficient to do that than to use that thing."  And they're probably right.  But I'm old-fashioned that way.

     And that is perhaps the most noticeable characteristic of this notebook--it is old-fashioned.  Nowadays, everyone has their schedule with them on their phones or their laptops or their PDAs.  And while I do have my schedule on my computer as well, my notebook is my primary resource for my schedule.  This is highly unusual, and very "yesterday".  People could have a hard time understanding why I feel the need to rely on such "old" technology.  And I don't think I could even explain it to them.  The notebook is just more suited for me.  It fits me.  It's much easier to use and faster and more reliable than anything I've come across.  It simply works.

     That is perhaps the most important reason I chose this planner as my object for this design autobiography:  it works.  It may be outdated, or old-fashioned, or even obsolete.  But at the end of the day, when my phone and my computer are dead and I have no way to charge them, the book is there.  When the Internet is down and I have no way of looking at my syllabi to see what I have going on in class this week, the book lets me know.  It takes little effort to prepare and maintain, and that effort goes a long way.  And, when it's all said and done, that's what the book and I truly have in common:  we are both solid.  No matter what happens, we are willing and able to get the job done.