humanities

humanaities4.docx

Everyone has seen examples of buildings which may serve a functional purpose, but which are either aesthetically unpleasing or simply do not fit the surrounding environment. Such a building may be called an “eye sore,” a “folly,” a “boondoggle,” or just plain “ugly.” Frank Lloyd Wright and his mentor, Louis Sullivan, were among Twentieth Century architects who held the philosophy that buildings should reflect and enhance their environment. This activity will enable you to evaluate an example of architecture as a work of art and see its contribution to the human experience. View Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater at HOUSE FOUR: The House on a Waterfall—Fallingwater, Edgar J. Kaufmann House, Mill Run, Pennsylvania. 1935–37 [PDF file size 352 KB]. From the photos and other information presented on this page and from other sources you may find, evaluate the work using the critical analysis example at the conclusion of Chapter 4 as a guide ( critical analysis is down below) . You will also want to refer to Chapter 4 and the accompanying PowerPoint for the technical terms and concepts necessary for the analysis( I will attach power point file separate so that you can use the terms to build up the analysis)

. Be sure to include all points of the outline (minimum one full page in length).

Be sure to include a convincing, inclusive conclusion at the end of your critical analysis and a bibliography of at least two sources that you used to prepare your analysis, one of which may be the class text. Do not use and cite Wikipedia."

Write a 500-750 word critical analysis. Follow APA style, using the Excelsior College Library resources on learning to use APA Style.

The following very brief example illustrates how we can use our own personal response as a starting point along with some of the terms explained in the chapter to form an outline and then develop a critical analysis of a work of art. Here is how that might work regarding Baghdad-born and London-based architect Zaha Hadid’s Lois and Richard Rosenthal Center for Contemporary Art in Cincinnati, Ohio ( Fig. 4.34 ).

Outline	Critical Analysis
Personal reaction	An inventory of initial personal reactions to the museum includes sensations like dynamism, warmth, and friendliness, and these play off other sensations like awkwardness, cramping, and edginess. Fundamentally, I like looking at the building. It has a terrific sense of movement caused by its almost inverted pyramidal design; that is, the top is wider than the bottom. That, however, is where the awkwardness comes in. It feels like the building defies gravity and might tip over at any minute. All the jutting angles and pure rectilinear forms seem edgy and sharp without much sense of softness, but at the same time, the building seems warm, open, people friendly, and human in scale.
Structure	The specific structure of the building remains hidden, but the openness of the first, third, and fourth floors suggest steel cage. Knowing that the edifice is an art museum suggests the need for large, open areas, meaning that the walls probably are curtain walls hanging from the skeleton. She has effectively employed cantilever, which gives the building most of its dynamism.
Materials	The architect has used a variety of materials: glass, steel, concrete, and perhaps other materials in the decorative rectangles appended to the front and side of the building.
Context	The building seems squeezed into its context, sandwiched among larger buildings that tower over it in the rear, and similar-sized buildings that partner it along the street to its left. Ms. Hadid has made maximum use of the site, however, letting the building rise vertically, and yet at street level she has set the tower back from the perimeter of the site. The open space around the building creates its own envelope of environment.
Space	The extensive use of glass opens the building to view, and we see open public areas and some of the galleries, which appear to allow the free flow of movement required for viewing art in a museum context.