Something Sai said today that has been ringing in the back of my head since the morning. There is no pure style of architecture.
There is no style of architecture that exists in its own bubble of pure idea and form. It is always inspired by something. It is always connected to some other.
As we think about it and reminisce about the styles in architecture, sure, in the field of invention that may have affected the techniques we use to build but forms and elements.
I am sure Sai could explain it better than I can, however, the simple thought of it just made me realize how my life had been a lie.
I have always been so interested in learning about style in architecture. How Greeks started with the Fibonacci series, the Romans perfected it. How Gothics gained such heights by just innovative building techniques, Renaissance looked back to the masters. How modern architecture was like a rebel child who wanted nothing to do with its superficial predecessor, Neo-Classical. And that is me only taking about European architecture. There is a whole different series of evolution for Persian, Chinese and Indian.
But instead of these parallel rivers that I saw them to be, it turns out they may be the tributary of the same. There is a heavy influence of Indian style in Chinese architecture. Which could be traced back to the Buddhist influence, and vice versa.
There is also a heavy influence of Persian architecture in Indian architecture, which we call the Mughal architecture. But the mosaics in Persian architecture started only when Indian artisans brought their art to the great Persian Empire.
When you read through history and start to read between the lines there are many such examples that you come across which may seem surprising. Ideas that further prove the fact that architecture is like one big Banyan tree.
There is no style of architecture that exists in its own bubble of pure idea and form. It is always inspired by something. It is always connected to some other.
As we think about it and reminisce about the styles in architecture, sure, in the field of invention that may have affected the techniques we use to build but forms and elements.
I am sure Sai could explain it better than I can, however, the simple thought of it just made me realize how my life had been a lie.
I have always been so interested in learning about style in architecture. How Greeks started with the Fibonacci series, the Romans perfected it. How Gothics gained such heights by just innovative building techniques, Renaissance looked back to the masters. How modern architecture was like a rebel child who wanted nothing to do with its superficial predecessor, Neo-Classical. And that is me only taking about European architecture. There is a whole different series of evolution for Persian, Chinese and Indian.
But instead of these parallel rivers that I saw them to be, it turns out they may be the tributary of the same. There is a heavy influence of Indian style in Chinese architecture. Which could be traced back to the Buddhist influence, and vice versa.
There is also a heavy influence of Persian architecture in Indian architecture, which we call the Mughal architecture. But the mosaics in Persian architecture started only when Indian artisans brought their art to the great Persian Empire.
When you read through history and start to read between the lines there are many such examples that you come across which may seem surprising. Ideas that further prove the fact that architecture is like one big Banyan tree.
No comments:
Post a Comment