Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
ARCH 5290.01 Theory/History: Streetwalking in Rome from Piranesi to Post-Modernism Prof. Kay Bea Jones Spring Semester Pre-Italy 2014 [email protected] Tuesday and Thursday 10:30 am-noon KN 236 office: 292-9449
Course Description Architecture 5290.01 will build on knowledge aquired in the KSA history and theory sequences by amending exposure to works of literature that reinforce analyises of structures, monuments, and landscapes, especially those that will be encountered during the subsequent period in Rome. Part One of the two part history/theory sequence will deepen students’ knowledge of architecture and urban innovations, with particular focus on the City of Rome. Students will strive to assess current conditions in the modern-‐ancient city through mapping exercises to recognize those formal orders that have persisted for centuries to define the Eternal City. Discussions of selected readings will be augmented with submissions of textual reviews. This text-‐based learning will result in blog proposals to track discussion during field studies in Italy. Streetwalking in Rome from Piranesi to Post-‐Modernism will interrogate important tangible and ephemeral images from the Roman Forum, the drawings of Piranesi, the reflections of notable Grand Tourists, and current cinema to reinforce the multi-‐layered manifestation that is the palimpsest city of Rome. Coordination with design studio and representations courses will allow students to develop experiential skills for researching, observing, diagraming, sketching and interpreting public architecture and urbanism. Deep knowledge of important structures requires situating them in physical, historic, and cultural contexts. Inter-‐relational experiential learning is the methodology of this course focused on Rome. In addition to close readings and critical analyses of texts, graphic investigations will develop visual literacy. students will discuss selected readings to situate artifacts in varied conceptual domains from ancient to contemporary periods that often remarkably coexist. This simultaneity and the imaginations provoked by great transplants to Rome, including Piranesi, Goethe, Freud, Vidal, and others, will be examined via original documents and interpreted individually and in groups as each student prepares his/her own Grand Tour methods for in situ experiential studies. Course Structure Tuesday and Thursday class meetings will include lectures, reviews of assigned readings, and group discussions. Exercises in response to weekly topics will vary. Each assignment will accrue 10 points of the student’s final grade. Participation in class discussion is critical to deep comprehesion and individual learning. The final exercise will ask students to design and begin a blog—either inidvidually or using a collective class format—with the primary entry valued at 25 % of the course grade. The is intended as a platform for continued dialog and documentation of learning while abroad.
2
Blog and Timeline Digital communications provide powerful tools for the intellectual development of the traveler. In addition to wide dissemination of reflections from Rome, regular blogging will update and expose the voyager’s journal allowing students to discuss ideas with one another, while more widely sharing their expereinces, drawings, and contemplative exercises. Readings provided on Carmen will furnish the basic theoretcial platform for understanding the city of Rome and its wealth of architectural resources for critical assessment. The 2013 Timeline gave us a graphic to situate works from the history of the Ancient Empire to the contemporary capital along with key non-‐western developments in art and architecture. The Timeline will be revisited as a tool for ongoing assemblage of weekly additions to expand the field of reference. Course Schedule WEEK 1: Jan 7: Introductory lecture: “Elements of Rome/lessons of Rome.” Review Italy 2013 output.
assign Genius Loci glossary. Discuss Blog and Timeline. Read: Norberg-‐Schulz, “Rome” from Genius Loci and Le Corbusier’s “Lessons of Rome.” Jan 9: Recitation: discuss Norberg-‐Schulz “Rome” and Le Corbusier’s “Lessons,” [Glossary due]
Read: Watkins on Roman Forum and Piranesi and review Corner on mapping
WEEK 2: Jan 14: lecture: “Annunciations.” Discuss Forum and Piranesi’s etchings. Bring one 11 x 17 copy of a Piranesi to class on 1/16—identify subject and date. Jan 16: Pin up Piranesi’s. [notes on Watkins and Corner due] Read: Sennett and Rossi. define the urban artifact by identifying 10 examples with explanation
WEEK 3: Jan 21: lecture: tbd. Discuss Rossi [urban artifact examples due + graphic map of 3 of Sixtus V networks] Jan 23: continue discussions of Urban Artifact and “Discovery and Invention” in Sixtus V’s plan Read: Yourcenar and Geothe
WEEK 4: Jan 28: lecture: tbd [notes on Yourcenar and Goethe due] discuss Piranesi’s views and Carceri
Read: Ghirardo—Chs 1 & 3 Jan 30: Discuss modern origins of Italian state and architecture Read: Ghirardo—Ch 4 and Casciato
WEEK 5: Feb 4: lecture: tbd [notes on Ghirardo and Casciato]
Feb 6: Discuss Neorealism and post-‐war architecture Read: Gregotti and Eco
WEEK 6: Feb 11: lecture: tbd [notes on Gregotti and Eco]
Read: Lefebvre /Regulier and Murphy—screening of Roman Holiday Feb 13: Discussion of modern Rome Read: Jones, KB and Vidal
WEEK 7: Feb 18: screening of Roman Holiday
Feb 20: [essay on Rome—with discussion informed by last 4 writings]
BLOG proposal first draft entry due on February 25. Link to be sent to Prof. Jones via e-‐mail by 5 pm.
3
Readings Norberg-‐Schulz, Christian, “Rome.” Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture,. pp. 138-‐166. LeCorbusier, “The Lessons of Rome,” Towards a New Architecure, 1927. pp 153-‐173. Watkin, David, “Life in the Forum in Antiquity,” pp 1-‐29, “Visiting the Forum with Piranesi,” pp 30-‐73. The Roman Forum, London: Profile Books Ltd., 2009. Forma Urbis, Nolli Map, Lanciani Map, et. al. and James Corner’s Mapping Richard Sennett, “Streets Full of Life, invention and discovery,” The Conscience of the Eye: The Design and Social Life of Cities, New York: Knopf, 1990. pp 150-‐168 Rossi, Aldo, The Architecture of the City, Introduction and chapter one, pp.21-‐61, Oppositions Books, 1982 Yourcenar, Marguerite, “The Dark Brain of Piranesi,” The Dark Brain of Piranesi and other Essays, pp 88-‐128. New York: Farrar Strauss Giroux, 1961. Goethe, “Rome,” Italian Journey, pp128-‐176. Translated by W. H. Auden and Elizabeth Mayer, Penguin Classics, 1970 Ghirardo, Diane, “Building a New Nation,” pp-‐13-‐42, “War and its Aftermath,” pp. 131-‐154, “The Economic Miracle,” pp. 155-‐184. Italy: Modern Architecture’s in History, London, Reaktion Books, 2013. Casciato, Maristella, “Neorealism in Italian Architecture,” pp. 25-‐53, Anxious Modernisms, Goldhagen and Legault. Gregotti, “Reconstructing a History,” The Italian Metamorphosis, 1943-‐1968. Edited by Germano Celant, New York: Guggenheim Museum Publications, 1994. 557-‐564 Eco, Umberto. “You must Remember This….” The Italian Metamorphosis 1943-‐68. Edited by Germano Celant. New York: The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, 1994 Murphy, Amy, “Traces of th Flaneuse from Roman Holiday to Lost in Translation,” pp. 33-‐42, Journal of Architectural Education, 2006. LeFebvre, Henri and Catherine Regulier, “the Rhythmanalysis of Mediterranean Cities”, Writings on Cities, pp 229-‐240, 1986. Jones, Kay Bea, “Rome’s Uncertain Tiberscape: Tevereterno and the Urban Commons” http://www3.iath.virginia.edu/waters/Journal6Jones.pdf Vidal, Gore, “At Home in a Roman Street” Architectural Digest, 1984. Expecations and Evaluation Grading will be based upon a student’s full participation and dynamic interaction with classmates in the following modes: Completion: Fulfillment of assignments ; Communication: Graphic and verbal ability to express theoretical design ideas clearly and effectively; Complexity: Level of formal and theoretical difficulty; willingness to take risks and probe new terrain Criticism: Ability to respond to comments provided by informal and formal criticism Consistency: Persistent, responsible project development evident through the production of work; Intellectual curiosity: transcending assumptions to discover and expose deep knowledge with a persistent belief in the Grades will be assigned as A, A-‐, B+, B, B-‐, C+, C, C-‐, D+, D, E, and I. Grading is based on a comparison with other students in the course, with students who have taken the course previously, and with the instructors’ personal expectations relative to the objectives of the course and Knowlton School standards. Grades will be awarded in accordance with University Rules: For the grade of "A," the student must satisfy the course objectives excellently; for "B," in an above average manner; for "C" in an average manner; for "D" in the lowest acceptable manner; and an "E" denotes that the student has not satisfied the course objectives. Grade Distribution: Reading reviews or exercises: 6 @ 10 pts each 60% due weekly Summation and Blog proposal 25% due Feb 25 Evidence of effort and participation 15%
4
Attendance all students are expected to attend each class and participate fully. Any unexcused absence from a class can result in a grade reduction. Three unexcused absences are grounds for failure in the course. Deadlines missed due to valid circumstances must be documented and discussed with the instructor. Late work without documentation of a valid excuse cannot be accepted. Retention of Work The Faculty reserves the right to retain, recall or reproduce student work for display, publication and teaching purposes at any time prior to the student’s graduation. Students should be sure to save copies of assignments before submitting them for evaluation. Academic Misconduct (University Rule 3335-‐5-‐487) In accordance with University regulations, all instances of alleged academic misconduct will be reported to the Section Head and the Committee on Academic Misconduct. Academic misconduct is grounds for failure in the course and may be grounds for further discipline. Academic misconduct includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism and cheating. Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to, the submittal of any type of creative work that is not one's own for academic requirements as in the copy of others' designs; and the submittal of design work that has not been primarily carried out, both in concept and fabrication, by a student. The instructor reserves the right to question students who are suspected of violating these policies.
