UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date:___________________ I, _________________________________________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of: in: It is entitled: This work and its defense approved by: Chair: _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ Syntactic and Semantic Role of Ornament in Architecture A thesis submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE In the school of Architecture and Interior Design of the College of Design, Art, Architecture and Planning (DAAP) 2007 By Haritha Bothireddy B. Arch, Anna University,India, 2004 Committee chairs: George Thomas Bible, Aarati Kanekar, Nnamdi Elleh ABSTRACT This investigation on the shift in the role of ornament as a semantic and syntactic element in architectural practices focuses mainly on the design processes of renowned architects Carlo Scarpa and Peter Eisenman. By critically analyzing the works of these two architects based on their treatment of ornament in the Brion Cemetery and Aronoff Center for Art and Design respectively, this dissertation will aim at gradually defining the function of ornament based on the notion of ‘Re- membering’ and the importance of memory in representing architectural elements metaphorically. Exploration of the design processes of the two architects will be developed on a site located at the intersection of Gilbert and William Taft Avenue in Cincinnati, Ohio in which only a fragment of the demolished First Presbyterian church of Walnut Hills remains. Two continuous sites located in front of the church bell tower will be taken for the purposes of this study. Due to the church’s historical ties with the Lane Seminary, Underground Railroad and Harriet Beecher Stowe, a design of a park with follies will be developed in the first site that acts as a transition space linking the design of an auditorium building with a library located in the second site. The design will attempt to compare the methods used by Scarpa and Eisenman for creating form and ornament, as well as explore the relation of ornament to remembering. i TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I: Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………1 Ornament and its function…………………………………………………………………4 Ornament and Semiotics……………………………………………………………………8 Re-membering- Memory and Reassemblage……………………………………..17 Ornament and Grammar…………………………………………………………………..22 PART II: Peter Eisenman and Aronoff Center………………………………………………….29 Henry N. Cobb’s “A Note on the Criminology of Ornamentation: From Sullivan to Eisenman” …………………………………………………………….33 Laugier’s interpretation of the classical system…………………………………35 iii PART III: Narrative language of Carlo Scarpa…………………………………………………..41 Vittorio Gregotti’s Exercise of Detailing……………………………………………..41 Marco Frascari’s The Tell- the- Tale…………………………………………………..42 Brion Cemetery………………………………………………………………………………..45 PART IV: Site Study………………………………….…………………………………………………….54 Design program and program for ornamentation……………………..………...57 Design Process…………………………………………………………………………………62 PART V: Reflection…………………………………………………………………………………………68 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………..72 iv PART I: INTRODUCTION Ornament traditionally represented the historical and cultural values of society in a given time period. Ornament has been a method of architectural communication organized through a narrative process developed by the use of tropes in order to provide an identity to a building and the society. The use of motifs, entablatures, pediments and other elements in classical architecture depict the use of ornament in a small scale compared to the overall form of the building. Hence, ornament could be considered as ‘form’ in a small scale and the building as a whole was the larger form from which ornament was generated. This means that ornament came after the structure was built and hence played the function of surface application or decoration. The irony in this discussion is that classical ornamentation was also ingrained with the structure of the building as seen in Doric, Ionic and Corinthian columns. These ideas will be discussed based on George Hersey’s theory relating to classical Greek architecture. In modern architecture, buildings were not devoid of ornament but progressed from being an additive element on a facade to an element inherent with the structure. Ornament played a different role during modernism when the works of Venetian architect Carlo Scarpa came to light. He provided interesting metaphors and analogies through the detail of joints and also by the use of montage of materials to relate heterogeneous elements in a building. Scarpa treated the joint as a tectonic condensation; a way of joining the part to the whole. The details that Scarpa delivers were mainly 1 influenced by the cultural and historical context of a place, which was Venice in his case. The use of details as a metaphorical representation for communicating architecture can be seen in all his projects such as the Olivetti showroom where he placed a dark marble container filled up to the brim with water and a metal sculpture in the middle. This drew a metaphor that gave the idea of tension of overflow representing the threat Venice faced by natural forces of flooding. In the architecture of Scarpa, ornamentation arises not only based on the need for details but also to capture certain views of the landscape especially seen in the Brion Cemetery design. The role of ornament extended from being a small scale element on a façade to a tectonic expression and then into a series of metaphors for representing stories of the city and building. It could be said that ornament played the role of a generative component that produced form. As of today, this generative component of ornament has become an explicit tool for the design process as seen in the Aronoff Center for Art and Design by Peter Eisenman which is an addition to the existing Alms and Wolfson building in the University of Cincinnati campus. This explicit nature establishes creative design rules through geometry in order to externalize the design process. Based on these ideas, the thesis will focus on three important aspects. Firstly, the potential sources of ornament in architectural history will be identified. Secondly, the various functions of ornament through history will be understood by applying the concepts of semantics and syntax. Thirdly, the role of ornament in the realm of ‘Re-membering’ will be developed to bolster the argument for the unique need of ornamentation in architecture for the twenty first century. These theories will be further emphasized 2 by attempting to provide a definition for ornament and what could be unveiled from the design processes of the Aronoff Center and the Brion Cemetery. A specific process for the purpose of this dissertation will come to light based on these interpretations. 3 ORNAMENT AND ITS FUNCTION In order to understand ornament in architectural practice, it is necessary • To provide definitions from history of architecture • To understand its role and necessity and • To interpret its function based on its relation to the structure of a building. To define ornament is as difficult as defining the profession of architecture due to its multifaceted nature. Nevertheless, some definitions from history of architecture by renowned scholars such as Vitruvius, Leon Battista Alberti, John Ruskin and Henri Focillon will be considered for the purpose of this study. At the most basic level, let us consider a definition from the Oxford dictionary which states that ornament is “an accessory, article, or detail used to beautify the appearance of something to which it is added or of which it is a part.” This is one of the weakest assumptions because ornament has always been related to an additive element and never integrated into the structure of the building and also the fact that its sole function is to provide beauty. A better definition for ornament comes from the Dictionary of Architecture & Construction which states that “in architecture, every detail of shape, texture, and color is deliberately exploited or 4 added to attract an observer.”1 We can give credit for the fact that ornament here relates to detailing which is then exploited to create ornament. Alberti always placed beauty on a higher pedestal than ornament. For Alberti beauty is “that reasoned harmony of all the parts within a body, so that nothing may be added, taken away, or altered, but for the worse….. ornament may be defined as a form of auxiliary light and complement to beauty. From this it follows, I believe, that beauty is some inherent property, to be found suffused through all the body of that which may be called beautiful; whereas ornament, rather than being inherent, has the character of something attached or additional.” 2 Joseph Rykwert clarifies the difference between beauty and ornament by stating that “beauty is the overall intellectual and primary framework - the essential idea- while ornament is the phenomenon- the individual expression and embellishment of this frame.”3 There have been several definitions for ornament although most of them are tainted by the use of the term ‘added.’ Several misconceptions of understanding ornament exist even in the present architectural practice. Some relate ornament to excessiveness, artificiality, superfluity, triviality