ARCHITECTURE AND PHOTOGRAPHY:

DETAILS IN THE SHADOW

by

GUYR. GIERSCH, B.U.S., B.F.A.

A THESIS

IN

ARCHITECTURE

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty

of Texas Tech University in
Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for
the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

iy Approved

December, 2001
 / ^ 3 5 ^^5
11

T3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

^^p • ^ Thomas Merton stated that "No man is an island."' 1 believe this clearly reflects how

we are continually influenced and shaped by the individuals in our lives. 1 would like to

thank the members of my committee, Dr. Michael A. Jones, Urs Peter Flueckiger. and

Phillip Mead. These men have not only provided important input but have provided

inspiration because of their love and commitment to architecture and the teaching of it.

I would like to thank all those who have encouraged me on this journey and provided

financial support. My mother has always been an inspiration and influential in her

encouragement of the many challenges I take on. She deserves special thanks for her

support both spiritually and financially.

Others who have been of invaluable help along this journey to solve word processing

problems, programming problems, and photographic problems are Alfred Brice, Charles

Elliot, Ansley Fanning, Kate Dougherty, Kelly Stokes, Szelyn Lim. Jane Henry, Taylor

Calloway, Bill Ivey, Heather Partain, Cindi Eastland, and the staff at Hertner's Camera

Store.

I should like to thank also the support of Judy Tolk, Tammy Cooper, and a Fairy

Princess in a Black Locust Forrest who at least in the imagination of a child always helps

make dreams come true.

11
 TABLE OF CONTEXTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS li

ABSTRACT v

LIST OF TABLES vi

LIST OF FIGURES vii

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION: ARCHITECTURE AND PHOTOGRAPHY 1

1.1 The Reason for the Study 1

1.2 Methodology 1

1.2.1 Survey 1 3

1.2.2 Survey 2 4

1.2.3 Survey3 5

1.2.4 Survey 4 7

1.3 Architecture and Photography: Details in the Shadows 9

IL SCARPA AND HIS AESTHETIC VIEW 16

III. SEEING AND THE PERCEPTION OF ARCHITECTURE 28

IV. SEEING AND SYMBOLS: ARCHITECTURE AS LANGUAGE 33

V. THE ROLE OF PHOTOGRAPHY AS A RECORDING MEDL\ 42

VI. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS 46

6.1 Survey I 46

6.2 Survey 2 54

111
 6.3 Survey 3 60

6.4 Survey 4 62

VL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 125

WORKS CITED 129

IV
 ABSTRACT

Architecture communicates through shape, form, color, massing, context, s\mbolic

and iconographic meanings. Meanings found in the detailing particulariy stimulate an

aesthetic experience according to the 20'^ century architect, Cario Scarpa, and theorist,

Marco Frascari. Individuals, especially architecturally trained, when examining

architecture, should recognize aesthetic content and symbols. Therefore, when looking at

a particular building, each should take photographs that are similar in subject matter and

context.

To test this hypothesis, photographic images from published and unpublished

sources of Scarpa's Brion Tomb were collected and analyzed to determine whether

individuals with architectural education capture the same aesthetic qualities that are to be

found there. To

gain a better understanding of the motivation for taking photographs submitted for this

study, questions were asked of the participating students and faculty.

The findings of this study support the hypothesis that photographs can capture and

communicate aesthetic qualities in architecture as demonstrated by the similar percentages

of photographs found in each architectural image category, even though each participant

recorded them at different times of the day and year.

 LIST OF TABLES

2.1 Monuments of Carlo Scarpa 17

6.1 Data Table Showing Breakdown of Views by Publishers and Authors 68

6.2 Data Table Showing Breakdown of Views by Faculty and Student 69

6.3 Table Showing Top Ten Views of Publishers and Authors 70

6.4 Table Showing Top Ten Views of Faculty and Students 71

6.5 Researcher's Survey (Survey 4) of Brion Chapel Slides 72

6.6 Top Categories for Author/Publisher and Student/Faculty Groups 51

6.7 Summary of Student/Faculty Survey 61

6.8 Summary of Percentages Greater than 5% 65

VI
 LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 Canova, Three Graces in the Gypsoteca museum, design Cario Scarpa 20

4.1 San Francisco de Assist 35

4.2 Cross at corner of Brion and ViUage Cemetery 39

4.3 Drain detail from water entrance Brion Chapel 39

5.1 Amiens Cathedral 42

6.1 Exterior detailing of Chapel 50

6.2 Interior of Chapel showing detailing in ceiling, walls, floor, and altar 50

6.3 Entrance to the Brion Cemetery from the Village Cemetery 50

6.4 View of Propylaeum from inside the Brion Family Cemetery 73

6.5 Exterior of Chapel showing examples of detailing 75

6.6 Propylaeum as viewed from the Pavilion 76

6.7 View inside the entrance wing looking toward the Pavilion 79

6.8 View inside Propylaeum looking toward the Arcosolium 81

6.9 View of Pavilion looking south 83

6.10 View of detailing of supports on the Pavilion 85

6.11 View looking north ofthe Labyrinth from the Pavilion 86

6.12 Arcosolium and Sarcophagi 88

6.13 Tile detail of underside of Arcosolium 90

6.14 Closer view of Sarcophagi 92

Vll
6.15 Aerial view of fountain in front of Sarcophagi 93

6.16 Detail of joint ofthe roof of the Arcosolium 94

6.17 Canal detail 95

6.18 Family Tomb 97

6.19 View of Propylaeum looking south 99

6.20 Entrance to Chapel via the Lych Gate 100

6.21 Viewof south walkway and entrance to Chapel 102

6.22 View of Chapel interior looking toward Altar 103

6.23 View of Chapel interior looking through round opening to the Altar 105

6.24 Interior view of door leading from Chapel to Cypress Garden 107

6.25 Exterior view of Chapel from Cypress Garden 108

6.26 Viewof details of Candle Rod and Cmcifix 110

6.27 Floor drain on the step leading from Chapel to Cypress Garden Ill

6.28 Holy Water dispenser 113

6.29 Counterbalance system for glass door 115

6.30 Detail of wall cutout on Propylaeum 117

6.31 Detail of four steps to/ircosolium 118

6.32 Four steps from village cemetery into the Propylaeum 120

6.33 Lych Gate 122

6.34 Comer detail of wall 124

Vlll
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION: ARCHITECTURE AND PHOTOGRAPHY

1.1 The Reason For The Study

Architects believe that architecture has meaning. This meaning is to be found in the

expressive detailing of a structure, and it is communicated to the viewer. It is the purpose of

this research to determine, through a variety of analyses and surveys, that architecture does

communicate in this way, and those photographs of architecture can capture the same

aesthetic qualities that are communicated.

1.2 Methodology

In order to gain a solid foundation for researching and analyzing data for this study,

the following methods were identified and developed.

An initial literature search, was carried out to identify sources of relevant information

on:

1. aesthetics - in general and architectural,

2. perception,

3. photography,

4. Carlo Scarpa and the Brion Tomb,

5. Symbiotic/iconographic communication.

Support for the hypothesis that photographs taken of architecture would capture the aesthetic

and symbolic content thus demonstrating that architecture communicates on man\ levels
required investigations into each ofthe topics listed. Architecture invades and is m\ aded b\

all disciplines and thus a background into the relevant subjects identified is appropriate.

Even before the general accessibility of photographs in the cultural milieu it was

recognized that photographs extended the range of human vision to include the impossibK

small and the impossibly far away, but particulariy the 'hidden" - that which lies below the

surface of all things that demand a spiritual, artistic, or metaphysical response. This research

sought to discover, through the use of photography, whether one architectural subject would

inspire similar responses in designers. Architecture is an appropriate subject as many believe

that some buildings communicate on an intellectual level -Architecture' - and some do not

- they remain mere (sterile) objects.

The process of photography required these photographers to become more involved

with the architecture at a level where detailing has taken on an essential role. The intellectual

'presence' ofthe detail seems to demand of these photographers that it be recorded, that the

aesthetic experience must be captured for future delight. This notion is based on the

assumption made by Zube, Brush, and Gy that 'beauty" is a phenomenon that can be

perceived by the sense and referred to the contemplative faculty ofthe perceiver. This action

has the power to evoke responses drawn not only from the immediate experience but also

from accumulated experiences.' The test ofthe presence and intensity of beauty is a sensation

of pleasure and the gratification which accompanies the desire to repeat the experience on any

level. Why do so many photographers of different cultural backgrounds and professions -

' Zube, Ervin H. Robert O. Brush, and Fabos Julius Gy, ed. Landscape Assessment
Values, Perceptions, and Resources {^txoudshwxg, Halsted Press, 1975), 107.
architect, photographer, writer, student, and lay tourist - capture similar \iews and. in the

case of this research, have similar verbal responses if they are not responding to specific

intrinsic beauty that is contained within the architecture?

With discussion, with the research committee the Brion Tomb v\ as selected for study.

The criteria for selection were:

1. building must have symbolic content

2. building must be large enough to demand a range of
photographs to be taken
3. the building must be well-known and published internationally
so that a range of published photographs would be available
4. the building must have been visited by a number of students
and faculty from the College of Architecture at Texas Tech
university as well as by the researcher
5. there must be a substantial number of photographs from each
participant to warrant inclusion
6. students and faculty must be current at the College of
Architecture for reading availability

Ofthe number of buildings reviewed for this study, the Brion Tomb met all the criteria. It has

been visited by Texas Tech architecture students every year since 1994: it is a cemetery.

which automatically suggests symbolic and metaphoric content - religious and otherwise; it

has a range of building/detail types; and thus it is well-known and well-published.

1.2.1 Survey 1

Photographs from the literature search were incorporated with those from the students

and faculty and placed into categories determined by the researcher. This was Survey 1 (see

Tables 6.1 & 6.2). Photographic data was collected from ten published architectural treatises,

monologues, articles, and books containing photographic views ofthe Brion Tomb. Those

3
sources produced 296 photographs. Between 1992 and 2000 1,252 unpublished photographs

taken in Italy by Architecture faculty and students of Texas Tech Universitv were collected

as well. Ten participants (two faculty members and eight students) submitted photographs.

This brought the total to 1,548 photographs.

The photographic views of the Brion were placed into fifty-seven categories that

describe what a particular view is and whether or not that view is a general, view, or a

detailed view (see p. 39). This data once collected was placed into an Excel spread sheet

program and analyzed (see Table 6.1).

1.2.2 Survey 2

The second survey (Survey 2) involving four written questions, was given to the ten

members ofthe student/faculty group (see pp. 54 - 60). These open-ended questions were

asked in order to gain a broader understanding regarding why those photographs were taken

by each person. It was assumed that each photographer felt an empathy with the subject

which demanded the photographic response and that each could describe what it was. This

is based on parameters from Ian Laurie's analysis for landscapes. He defined beauty as a

recognizable quality which arouses pleasure in the senses. The sources for beauty are

recognizable qualities which arouse pleasure. The sources for beauty are intrinsic formal

qualities which occur from the object's form, and they create physiological, emotional, and

psychological relationships within the observer, and form the foundation for the analysis of
the data used in this research.' Form is an important concept as well since the formal qualities

within art are color, texture, scale, proportion, line, etc. and these are the formal qualities of

architecture and most assuredly the landscape which Laurie is talking about as well.

1.2.3 Survey 3

A third survey (Survey 3) was conducted with the student/facult\ group using

photographic views selected by the researcher from published sources and the author's

photographs. This survey involved thirty-one black and white images representing the

majority of views photographed by faculty and students. Published views were selected so

that each participant from the College would have the same image (never one's own) to

respond to (See the following list and Figures 6.4 - 6.34).

1. Entrance to the Brion Cemetery from the Village Cemetery.

2. View of Propylaeum from inside the Brion Family Cemeter\.

3. Propylaeum as viewed from the Pavilion,

4. View inside the entrance wing looking toward the Pavilion,

5. View inside Propylaeum looking toward the Arcosolium,

6. View of Pavilion looking south,

7. View of detailing of supports on the Pavilion,

8. View looking north ofthe Labyrinth from the Pavilion.

9. Arcosolium and Sarcophagi,

^ Laurie, Ian C. "Aesthetic Factors in Visual Evaluation." In Landscape Assessment:

lvalues. Perceptions, and Resources {^Xxoxxdshouxg: Halsted Press. 1975). 107.
10. Tile detail of underside of Arcosolium,

11. Closer view of Sarcophagi,

12. Aerial view of fountain in front of Sarcophagi,

13.Detail of joint ofthe roof of the Arcosolium,

14.Canal detail,

15.Family Tomb,

16. View of Propylaeum looking south,

17. Entrance to Chapel via the Lych Gate,

18. View of south walkway and entrance to Chapel,

19. View of Chapel interior looking toward Altar,

20. View of Chapel interior looking through round opening to the Altar,

21. Interior view of door leading from Chapel to Cypress Garden,

22. Exterior view of Chapel from Cypress Garden,

23. View of details of Candle Rod and Crucifix

24. Floor drain on the step leading from Chapel to Cypress Garden,

25. Holy Water dispenser,

26. Counterbalance system for glass door,

27. Detail of wall cutout on Propylaeum,

28. Detail of four steps to Arcosolium,

29. Four steps from village cemetery into the Propylaeum,

30. Lych Gate,

31. Comer detail of wall.

Those surveyed were asked to explain what prompted them to photograph similar views.

Laurie assumed that beauty is recognized, and therefore, each participant would react

similarly. Thus, this survey was conducted to see if the photographic views ofthe Brion

selected would support this hypothesis and, in turn, demonstrate that architecture

communicates and creates an aesthetic response through its detailing. Those photographers

with architectural training should respond similariy to the stimulus and thus capture images

of great similarity. Black-and-white images were chosen in order that the participant would

focus on the object depicted and not be influenced by color. The students and faculty who

had taken similar photographs were queried with regard to what prompted them to photograph

the similar view.

The responses were placed into four categories: pragmatic, iconographic, memor>, and

poetic. These categories were established in order to quantify and qualify the data and to

establish any connection between photographic and aesthetic content of architecture.

1.1.4 Survey 4

A final survey (Survey 4) was conducted with two faculty members, two students, and

the researcher (see Researcher's Survey Table 6.5). These participants were selected to test

the results identified in the previous surveys. Each of these participants had studied the Brion

Tomb seriously, though one ofthe faculty participant's visits had been seriously hampered

by torrential rain and thus his photographs were limited to what could be taken under the

circumstances. Nevertheless, for the purpose ofthe research, it was deemed fit to include his

work. The rest of this group had taken a large number of photographs warranting serious

7
review. This survey involved viewing their slides and photographs of the Brion Chapel

simultaneously. Using a series of predetermined categories ofthe Brion Chapel as follows:

1. Exterior view at a distance 23. Roof detail above altar

2. Exterior view close-up 24. Edge detail wall
3. Cloister walk 25. Entrance door
4. Cloister walk to four steps 26. Entrance door hinge
5. Detail along cloister walk 27. Circle opening in Chapel
6. South Entrance 28. Doors behind altar
7. Sacristy 29. Floor detail
8. West wall corner 30. Holy water dispenser
9. Water element 31. Exit door to Cypress garden
10. Entrance water detail 32. Altar
11. Altar door exterior wall 33. Circle door detail
12. West elevation 34. Alabaster windows
13. West elevation 35. Ceiling detail
14. West elevation detail 36. Door handles
15. Altar door w side 37. Cross detail
16. Altar door e side 38. Candle detail
17. West door general 39. Windows in Chapel
18. Altar door e detail 40. Altar detail
19. Over the wall 41. Drain detail
20. Cloister walk detail 42. Wall detail
21. Window detail 43. Hinge detail
22. West door detail. 44. Window door detail.

established by the researcher, the students and faculty were asked to arrange their

photographic images in the established order for viewing purposes. Each participant had a

projector. This was important because simuUaneously viewing five to six photographs taken

ofthe Brion Chapel from similar vantage points produced a dialogue with discussions and

criticisms erupting regarding certain views. This dialogue provided further evidence

supporting the thesis that a photographic record of architecture, especially captured by the

architecturally educated, reflect the aesthetic qualities embedded in the architecture. The

findings are indicated in Table 6.5.

8
1.3 Architecture and Photograph\: Details In the Shadow

IVe do not d^ell because we have buih, but we build because we dMcll.
Poetic images are developed to communicate this sense of dwelling and
through those images' architects and photographers give life meaning
through the works they create.^

The researchers endeavor of this thesis sought to establish a relationship between

photographic documentation and the aesthetic content of architecture. Are photographs of

buildings mereh a record of existence, or do serious photographer's document images that

communicate in a wa\ that attracts and stimulates broad attention in the \ iewer?

It is hypothesized that architecture communicates through its form, shape, color,

massing, context, symbolic and iconographic meaning. This range of design elements can

awaken deeply rooted feelings or resurrect learned facts and cultural knowledge embedded

in the mind. Though each viewer w ill be aware only of his own response to the particular

architectural detail, there will always be a response, positive or negative, and for those who

are looking closely at the architecture it is usually an aesthetic response. For some, the

reaction may be intuitive, predicated on a cultural upbringing, and for others it may spring

from a theoretical background leamed in design school.

It is further h\ pothesized that those w ith architectural training isolate their responses

when they photograph architectural details. Photograph} allows those indi\ iduals to focus

on a particular detail to the exclusion of what is immediateK adjacent. The feature in

quesfion is recognized through an aesthefic sense. Consequent]}, if architecture transmits

meaning through its size, materialit}, detailing. st}le. or s}mbolic content, then an

' Heidegger. Martin, Poetry. Language. Thought (New York: Harper and Row. 1975):
148.

9
examination ofthe photographs from an} building taken b} photographer^ will indicate wbat

mterested them, what was photographed and the frequenc}. One ma} therefore deduce that

photographs taken b} every photographer are in some wa} important functional]}, and/or

aesthetically, and are powerful or beautiful, thus indicating the images" communicative

power. If there are few photographs of a subject, i.e.. ignored by the photographers, then the

subject matter may be insignificant from a functional, aesthetic, or a symbolic view point and

fail to communicate to the worid at large. In other words, photographs ofthe same \ iew s or

details will be taken many times because the architecture itself demands it, but especially b}

persons with architectural training.

The analysis used in this thesis is based on parameters used in Ian Laurie's anah sis

developed for landscapes. This approach is predicated on the assumption that beauty is a

recognizable quality that arouses pleasure in the senses, that the sources for beaut}' are

intrinsic formal qualifies which occur from the object"s form, and that ph}sio]ogica].

emotional, and psychological relationships arise within the observer.^

Photographs of Carlo Scarpa's design forthe Brion Tomb at San Vito d" Altivole. ItaK.

taken from international publications ofthe project and by students and faculty who have

visited the site were collected and analyzed for similarit} to determine if aesthetic qualities

were the driving force behind each decision to photograph. Did the degree of order and unit}

in formal relationships which produce a pleasurable aesthetic feeling, for example, achieve

recognition in each ofthe photographers? A follow-up questionnaire w as administered to the

students and faculty participating to determine if this was the case.

'Laurie. 107.

10
 Beauty is a formal quality ofthe philosophy of aesthetics and as such will be used in

this paper to designate the total aesthetic experience that an individual has when viewing

architecture.^ Some commentators, like John Dewey, separate matter and form when

describing their aesthefic viewpoint. Dewey, in his paper entitled "Aesthetic Factors in

Visual Evaluafion," subscribes to the idea that matter and form cannot be separated. In this

scenario the form of an object refers to sense, and matter refers to substance. One might, for

instance, describe a Greek temple as beautiful where the temple takes on the form of beauty

in the sense experience, or one might describe it in terms of proportion which relates to the

temple's form. Which of these observations is correct? Both are because perception is

contextual. What is viewed and perceived is based on a shift in interest and attention. When

photographs of architecture are taken and subsequently viewed they confer an aesthetic

experience which encompasses both sense and form.

Form and sense is inseparable. To experience beauty we experience the form. Take,

for example, the reading of a poem. If the words touch us aesthetically and sensually, do we

consciously consider simultaneously the meter and the rhyme ofthe poem? Probably not, for

both the form and the sense combine to produce the aesthetic appreciation. The poem can

be dissected intellectually to discover the inner structure which helped to produce the innate

feeling.

On the other hand, architecture and photography may appear essentially dumb,

inchoate, and restricted. Each becomes clarified and concentrated not by the brain working

laboriously over them, nor by escaping into a worid of mere sense perception, but through the

Dewey, John. Art As Experience (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1958). 129-133.

11
creation of new experiences as matter is ordered through form to produce the aesthetic

feeling.

The aesthetic experience resulting from viewing an object can be examined at n\o

levels as suggested in the words of Umberto Eco when he discussing two wa}s of walking

through a wood.^ One method is to penetrate the wood as quickly as possible to reach the

destination. The other way is to walk carefully through the wood in order to discover w hat the

wood itself is like. Eco uses these ideas to illustrate ways of negotiating a narrative text w here

a 'model reader ofthe first level" wants to know how a story ends while the "second level

reader" uses the same text for discovery, even self-revelation. Thus, Eco identifies tv\o t}pes

of participants. Level I viewers simply examine the given information for the facts, or

experiences at a passive level of participation. These readers never go beyond the form ofthe

object to gain an aesthetic response. Level II readers use their imaginations combined with

past experiences to discover something new and unique in the text under examination.

Viewing architecture can be compared to reading since they are both concerned with

visual stimuli which actuate a thought process. The Level II viewers will continually be

drawn back to the object to realize new experiences. They do not allow the form to interfere

with the experience but allow it to connect the sensual with the form to produce the

experience.

Cario Scarpa created an architecture which realizes the sensual response through

attention to the form. His design for the Brion Family Tomb achieves this through the

^ Eco, Umberto. Six Walks In the Fictional Wood (Cambridge: Harvard University Press
1994), 27-28.

12
detailing of architectural nuances which stimulate new thoughts while awakening memories

of previous experiences in the viewer. Is it obvious in the many similar photographs

published of it?

The individual elements comprising each of Scarpas architectural detail can

communicate aesthetic or symbolic qualities. Examples at the Brion Tomb include the

concrete sliding gate, the West Entrance ofthe Dead, w hich suggests the stone in the entrance

of Christ's tomb which was rolled away, or the vertically sliding glass gate before the Pavilion

which requires the user to bend down when opening it. thus mimicking the fetal position

before rising again - suggesting birth and rebirth, or death and resurrection. Further more, the

w ater washing down the gate suggests baptism.

Photographers, particularly those who possess some architectural knowledge or

artistic awareness can capture, in their photographs, the original poetic intentions of the

architect. This is evident in the many photographs ofthe Brion Tomb. For example, a series

of photographs ofthe interior ofthe chapel ofthe Brion taken by Guido Guidi show how

light moves behind and across the altar throughout the day.^ The poetry of dancing light is

created by the careful architectural detailing of Scarpa, and it has been clearly recognized by

many photographers.

In order to support the several hypotheses already stated, photographic views ofthe

Brion Tomb from several sources were used to analyze them for:

I. similarit} of images among the photographers:

^ Olsberg, Nicholas. George Ranalli. Jean-Fran9ois Bedard, Sergio Polano, Alba Di

Lieto, and Mildred Friedman. Carlo Scarpa Architect: Intervening With History
(Montreal: The Monacelli Press, 1999), 178-181.

13
 2. aesthefic content:

3. content meaning recognized by the photographers.

Photographs taken by published architectural authors, architecture facult}. and students w ere

examined for these qualities. The information was analyzed based on the frequency particular

views and details were recorded. The researcher contends that when a specific detail has a

high incidence of record then it can be considered as significant. The Architecture." in its

form and/or meaning, has communicated to the photographer (viewer), however abstract it

may be, on a high aesthefic level. These images appeal to the Level II viewer, though, of

course, a more passive participant may also be stimulated in some less conscious (cerebral)

way.

Interviews were conducted by the researcher with each faculty and student

photographer in order to obtain an overview of their original photographic intention. This

interview data identified the photographer's aesthetic involvement with the Brion Tomb, and

how each wanted to document that experience.

Architecture and photography concretize moments of beaut} and provide visual

expressions for existing and new ideas. Photography and architecture are each a celebration

of life where light is captured, held in a manner that defines the space and allows

communication. Experience of space is communicated through aesthetic ideals that take on

social, ideological, scientific, philosophical, or religious meaning.

Life is intimately related to things and places. The ability to see establishes a person's

location in the worid and also provides a sense of belonging. Language is a tool which

provides meaning and understanding of the known worid. Dwelling, according to Martin

14
Heidegger,^ allows poetic images of aesthetic experiences to be developed. Tho^c poetic

images are capable of being communicated through a variet} of means. Architecture and

photography are two such means that allow people to capture and communicate a sense of

dwelling. The Brion Tomb enlightens on those levels.

It was anticipated that the results of an examination of specific photographic images

would demonstrate that each photographer had recognized instantaneous]} 'Architecture" (at

both macro and micro levels) because ofthe resulting symbolic and/or aesthetic message that

was communicated to the photographer and, in turn, to the viewers of his or her photographs.

Heidegger, 148.

15
 CHAPTER 11

SCARPA AND HIS AESTHETIC VIEW

The most transitory of things, a shadow, the proverbial emblem of all that
is fleeting and momentary, may be fettered by the spell of our natural
magic,' and may be fixed forever in the position which it seemed only
destined for a single instant to occupy.^

William Henry Fox Talbot's statement, written in 1839, describes man's attempt to become

eternal by capturing what is fleeting. Time is the element in which moments inescapabK

pass, but through photography and architecture that a moment can become frozen in time.

Carlo Scarpa has been able to create architectural monuments that describe in fixed

moments a record of our existence on earth, the journey from birth to death. He has

captured the spirit of human existence in his designs for tombs and monuments through the

use of architectural detailing in a way that transforms light and shadow into a recognizable

symbolic language.

Scarpa viewed life as an art form.'° For him, architecture was poetry fully realized

when the form reached its maximum expression through the choice of materials and

detailing. His formal language, depended upon his ingenious use of materials to capture

light and shadow in the details sufficient to convey to the observer to a deeper, visceral

plain. While the monuments he created appear to isolate events in time, observers notice

^ Haworth-Booth, Mark, intro., "Photography and Time." Aperture (No. 158 Winter
2000), 3.

^^ Duboy, Philippe, Peter Noever, The Other City Carlo Scarpa Die Andere Stadt
(Beriin: William Ernst and Sohn, 1989), 8.

16
that time is not frozen; a heightened awareness is created ofthe passing of their own sojourn

on earth and of their own mortality. Death cannot be escaped.

It is with his designs for the Brion Tomb, San Vito d'Altivole, ItaK. that Cario

Scarpa most aptly applies his mature vocabulary in his aesthetic approach to architecture.

The development of his aesthetic symbology and ideology are expressed sequentially in the

following monuments to the dead: ^^

Table 2.1 Monuments by Cario Scarpa

Date Monument
1940-1941 Tomb of Vettore Rizzo (unrealized) San Michele Cemetery. Venice.
Italy
1943-1944 Copovilla Family Tomb San Michele Cemetery Venice, Italy
1951 Verritti Tomb with A Masieri San Vito Cemetery,Udine, Italy
1955 Pedestal for a ceramic statue by L. Leoncillo (demolished) Gardens of
Castello, Venice, Italy
1960 Zilio Tomb San Vito Cemetery,Udine, Italy
1967-1969 Project for a monumental cemetery Modena, Italy
1968 Installation design for a monument to the Women ofthe Resistance
Statue by Augusto Murer with S. Los Castello Gardens, Venice, Italy
1969-1978 Brion Tomb with G. Pietropole, C. Maschietto Cemetery, San Vito
d'Altivole (Treviso), Italy
1970-1983 Masieri Memorial with C. Maschietto, F. Semi Dorsoduro Venice, Italy

1975 The monument to the victims ofthe massacre in the Piazza della Loggia
and commemorative columns for the second anniversary with F.
Rovetta, Brescia, Italy
1978 Tomb for the Galli Family with M Pastorino,Nervi Cemetery, Genoa,
Italy

'^ Los, Sergio, Carlo Scarpa: An Architectural Guide (Verona: EBS Editorial Bortolazzi-
Stei, 1995), 123-135.

17
These eleven projects reflect a maturing vocabular} that demonstrates the influences on

Scarpa of Le Corbusier who instilled in him the desire to find new forms in the techniques,

materials, and structural discipline of an industrial culture.'' Josef Hoffmann and Charles

Rennie Mackintosh, whose attention to tectonics, craftsmanship, and materials and their

involvement with Art Nouveau had a profound infl uence on Scarpa. '^ The Vienna Secession

shaped Scarpa's profound sense of decoration.''* This is cleariy demonstrated throughout

his entire oeuvre. The detail within the detail. The manner in which wood and metal come

together; the play of color. He delighted in the pleasures of seeing how distinctive materials

with substantial properties could be wedded. Scarpa would follow this line; one that

maintained architecture as an art, as an outgrowth of pictorial thinking. Drawing provides

a connection between seeing and knowing, of thinking in images. This ability separated

Scarpa from his more functionalist contemporaries.

Scarpa had a long and fertile relationship with Frank Lloyd Wright's architecture.

Wright's work reflected the interplay of building and the natural environment. This is

reflected in many of Scarpa's projects, especially those ofthe post-war period that reveal

how the study of Wright's concem with the question of tradifion, the influence of Japanese

traditions, and the manner in which these symbolic ideologies can be communicated using

'2 Olsberg, et al, 12-14.

'^ Los, Sergio, Carlo Scarpa (Koln: Taschen, 1993), 8-10.

14
Scarpa, Cario, "Can Architecture Be Poetry? Paper delivered at the Academy of Fine
Arts, Vienna, November 16, 1976. In Dal Co, Francesco, Giuseppe Mazzariol, Cario
Scarpa:The Complete Works (New York: Rizzoli International Publications. Inc., 1985),
283.

18
architectural detailing.'^ Scarpa's involvement with Wrights work stre^^cd the symbolism

inherent in simple geometric forms.'^ His architecture was organic as oppo^^cd to the "bare-

box" Modemism. Simple geometric shapes emphasized b} light and shadows reflect the

integral decoration Scarpa used to communicate the symbolic in his architecture His

iconography touches the deep inner recesses of our minds to reveal aesthetic meaning in the

work.

Light illuminates and gi\ es meaning to space and provides room for the objects

contained to come into existence. Both photography and architecture depend on light to

illuminate their beaut}. Sergio Los calls this ability "creafing space in the light."'^ Scarpa

was a master at manipulating space using light to produce an aesthetic experience. For

example, Scarpa uses light dramatically to make the sculpture come aliv e in the Canov a

Sculpture Gallery, or spiritually the way light is used to create a range of moods as it strikes

the variform surfaces ofthe concrete walls at the Brion (see Figure 2.1 ).

'^ Ibid.. 48-49.

'^ Crippa. Maria Antonietta Crippa, Marina Loffi Randolin. eds. Carlo Scarpa: Theoiy
Design, Projects (Cambridge: The MIT Press. 1986).56-58.

'^ Los. Carlo Scarpa, 8.

19
Figure 2.1 Canova, Three Graces in the Gypsoteca Museum design Carlo Scarpa
Source: Gu} R. Giersch

In order to fully comprehend the quality of Carlo Scarpa, the architect/designer, it

is necessar} to understand his histor} and the influences that helped shape his aesthetic.

Carlo Alberto Scarpa was bom June 2, 1906, in Venice.'^ W hen he was two }ears

old, his parents moved to Vieenza w here his mother managed a fashion shop while his father

commuted to Venice w here he w as employed as a primary school teacher. During the early

years of Scarpa"s life he cut out dress pattems for his Mother. He worked with two-

dimensional paper pattems and translated them into three-dimensional objects. This had a

definite influence on the future career of Scarpa. From childhood, he realized how a

patterned drawing became a dress constmcted of a variet} of materials. Such crafting of a

dress is similar to the design and crafting of glassware and architecture. This humble

beginning from a pattem (plan) to dress (three-dimensional object) established the

'* Giordano. Sandro. "Biographical Profile.'" In Dal Co. 305-306.

20
foundation of his architectural aesthetic where drawing became the intellectual tool to reach

the truth.'^

Scarpa completed primary school and entered the Technical High School in Vieenza.

During those early years he was deeply influenced by the Palladian architecture of this cit}

and the Veneto. Scarpa commented that becoming an architect was a given based on his

childhood experiences of playing in the light of Palladio's Basilica.-"

In 1919, his mother died and the family returned to Venice. Scarpa, on leaving

school, failed the entrance examinafion to the Venice Academy of Fine Arts. He applied a

second fime in 1920 and passed. His course of study followed the traditional Beaux-Arts

curriculum in painting, sculpture, architecture, and design.^' He graduated in four years

with a diploma as a teacher of architectural drawing.^^

In 1926, Scarpa was employed as an instructor of drawing at the Insituto

Universitario di Architettura di Venezia (lUAV). It is during this time that he was

introduced to the intellectuals of the day. His broad interest in the arts and philosophy

resulted in a lifelong pursuit of building a significant library which contained 4,052 volumes

at his death.^^ The books, many banned and unpublished in Italy, introduced him to the

'^ Brusafin, Manlio, In Duboy & Noever, 319.

2'Crippa, 13-14.

'' Olsberg, 10.

' ' Giordano, 305.

-• Vendramin, Raffaella, "Cario Scarpa's Library." In Dal Co, 307

21
aesthetics of Corbusier, Hoffmann. Los. Mies \ an der Rohe, and W right.'' V\ hile at IL.A V.

he received commissions to design interiors which led to his lifelong involvement w ith the

Venice Biennale and exhibit design in general. The Biennale attracted artist and architect

alike, and the exhibifion design experiences regularly gained became part of Scarpas

architectural vocabular}.

The word which probably best describes the influence on Scarpa's career is

eclecficism. While at lUAV, his eariy paintings are cleariy influenced b} Paul Cezanne,-'

Pablo Picasso, Henri Matisse, and Fernand Leger who pioneered respective!} the st}les of

cubism, futurism, and pointillism.-^ These influences appeared in his eariy designs for the

various Murano glassworks, and were continually encountered throughout his life in

drawings of anatomical details scattered amid his architectural renderings.-^

While designing glassware at the Murano factories, the important role of

collaboration between artist and craftsman was recognized and full} developed. This

interplay with those who actually make the glassware, buildings and furniture continued

throughout Scarpa's life. In all of his projects this symbiotic relationship reigned supreme

in achieving the highest aesthetic design, quality, and the exceptional execution of his work.

Leaming did not stop at these interrelationships for Scarpa incorporated the brilliant

pallets of Paul Klee and Piet Mondrian and later the transcendent spiritualit} ofthe paintings

-'Dal Co, Francesco "The Architecture of Carlo Scarpa." In Dal Co 24-95.

-^ Crippa, 16-17.

'' Ibid.. 14.

-' Dal Co, 28.

11
of Mark Rothko which influenced his unique Byzantine-\ enetian color scheme^ for the

interior spaces of w orks such as Castelv ecchio and Banco Popolare. both in Verona.-' Light

took on a persona of its own which communicated the unique character ofthe space and

objects contained within. This is cleari} illustrated in the Canova Plaster Cast Galleries.

1955-57. in Possagno. These are not casual spaces where objects can be arbitrarih located

and ignored. The} are careful]} planned and demand that the spectator becomes personalK

involved on a visceral level. W hen viewing the "Three Graces" one feels the dance of this

sculptural piece as light moves across the surfaces and creates a fluid environment where

these women of ethereal grace and beauty become animated and converse metaph} sicalK.

[B} placing them in a certain light that special diaphanous light [it] becomes,
for Scarpa, a remarkable tool of architectural critique. It is preciseh that
remarkable light, which reveals the illuminated sculptures and which
"traduces'* Canova by offering a new interpretation, that constitutes the
typological content ofthe museum Scarpa "opens the discourse" concerning
this content by means of a specific "compositional system," distinguished by
the use of specific figurative elements, ranging from trihedrons of the
openings which produce that remarkable, specific light to the steps that
accompany the visitor throughout the tour, from the materials used all the
w a} to the arrangement that gives the sculptures life, as if the} were persons
themselves.-'

The early impact of Palladian architecture of the Veneto coupled with the

architectural works and writings of Corbusier. Alvar Aalto, and Wright coalesced into

Scarpa's eariiest formal architectural language, though it was Wright"s work that ravished

me."^^ Weight's influence resulted in imitation at first while Corbusier had a deeper

-^ Crippa. 5.

-'^ Los, An Architectural Guide, 8.

^^ Dominguez. Martin. "Interview with Cario Scarpa." In Dal Co, 297.

23
philosophical effect on Scarpa" s architecture. Scarpa and W right concerned themsel v es with

tradition, how experiments in composition miaht give rise to new st\]es based on older

traditions. The major difference is that Wright worked at making his own architectural

language into a tradition while Scarpa concerned himself with making use of past

experiences to dev elop his language into a poetic expression of form. He was unconcerned

with establishing an ideolog}." He discovered an architectural tradition firmh rooted in the

past and integrated it together with forms previous]} considered incompatible in the

architectural aesthetic. This notion is demonstrated in the large-flange beams which cut

through the lower galleries of Castelvecehio. Here ancient and modem do not collide but

instead compliments each other, canying and supporting, not in conflict, but in harmon}

and beaut\. This architectural piercing speaks on many lev els to the viewer

Corbusier"s idea that architecture exists as a poetic emotion that it is experienced

as beauty, is part of the ven- fabric of Scarpa"s architectural intentions.^- His ideas

conceming the significance of developing architecture from the large scale plan, section, and

elevation, the importance of massing, and the use of color have lasting effects on Scarpa" s

architectural language. Scarpa interprets Corbusier"s rationalism and does not see his texts

as a series of formulas for a praxis, but acknowledges the power of imagination as the

driving force in developing an architectural language. Corbusier"s influence is considered

fundamental in the formation of Scarpa's poetic sensibilities. Scarpas aesthetic was based

"Crippa, 31-32.

^-Ibid., 31.

24
on the concept that what is created must be functionally perfect. There is a trcedom of

purpose not masked by decoration that allows the beautiful and useful to be expressed.

It IS reasonable to consider Scarpas built structures as points of departure where

observers are given time to see before selecting from a variety of directions for

interpretation. In his inaugural speech at the University Institute of Architecture in Venice

for the 1963-64 academic year he proposed architecture as poetry.^^ He continued to

support this theme stressing it again in a paper entitled, "Can Architecture Be Poetr} ^"

delivered to the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna in 1976.^' For Scarpa, architecture had to

be harmonious, as in the face of a beautiful woman where all the proportions are perfect.

Not all architecture meets this eriterium.

During the speech in 1976, Scarpa explained how Hoffmann and Ruskin influenced

his great sense of decoration.

Naturally the artist I most admired and who taught me most was the one that
was most widely published in German reviews, Joseph Hoffmann. In
Hoffmann there is a profound expression ofthe sense of decoration, which,
in students accustomed to the Academy of Fine arts, led to the idea that, as
Ruskin claimed, "Architecture is decoration." The reason for all this is very
simple: essentially I am a Byzantine and Hoffmann, basically, has a
somewhat Oriental character ~ the character of the European who looks
toward the Orient.^^

In Venice, the most Byzantine of European cities, Scarpa worked, taught, and developed

his architectural vocabulary, one that combined the skills of the craftsman, the unique

" Ibid., 47-49.

^'Dal Co, 283.

'' Scarpa, 283.

25
combinations of materials, and a poetic sense of detailing. His details described ""the sense

ofthe wholeness of inseparable elements,"' according to Louis Kahn.-'^ Here Scarpa found

the poetry to reveal myth and ritual. Light and shadows allow a dialogue to occur in the

details, objectifying the connections of the historic past and present into a statement of

beauty which communicates to the observer.

Kahn and Scarpa developed a long-standing relationship before meeting in 1967.

For Kahn, 'the structure is a design in light." The vault, the dome, the arch, the columns are

structures related to the character of light. Natural light gives moods to space by the nuances

of light in the time ofthe day and the seasons ofthe year, as it enters and modifies the

space.'^^ This understanding of light clearly applies to Scarpa's ability to express a language

that communicates by controlling and manipulating light through well crafted details.

In another poetic statement, Kahn forwarded the proposition that a building begins

with light and ends with shadows.^^ Between the light and the darkness lies the shadow; the

shadows create the interest that Scarpa's detailing so aptly expresses. Scarpa would take a

flashlight to the site at night to investigate the types of shadows that would be revealed.

It is also in light and shadow where photographers capture the aesthetic of a building

or create a new aesthetic. Glimpses ofthe artist's intent can be viewed photographically and

reflected upon repeatedly. There is an interplay between architect and photographer where

36
Ibid., 14.

" Buttiker, Urs, Louis Kahn: Light and Space (New York: Watson-Guptill Publications.
1994), 10.

^Mbid., 10.

26
what is communicated in three dimensional spaces is captured and communicated through

a two-dimensional image. It also provides a tangible way for determining what has been

considered worth photographing, which is particulari} applicable in this study b} studying

the images produced similar minds, those ofthe facult} and students of Texas Tech.

")?
 CHAPTER III

SEEING AND THE PERCEPTION OF ARCHITECTURE

Seeing comes before the word but experience shades how we see. These two

qualities are where the paradox lies. How can one experience anything without sensorv

input? If the experience shades what is seen, how does seeing and experience work

concurrently to produce an aesthetic experience?

It is proposed that a model exists in Einsteins 'Theory of Relativity." In the

quantum world, particles behave according to how they are treated and express both w ave

and particle function. Here, energy and matter are one and the same. In this world matter

can become energy and energy can become matter based on the relative position of the

observer. This reflects the dichotomy ofthe aesthetic experience in terms of form and sense

where both exist concurrently and yet can be analyzed and experienced separately.

Seeing produces experiences and in tum experience tempers what one sees. These

events create a language of beauty through data gathered through sensor} input channels.

This language will reflect political, social, ideological, philosophical, or religious values that

are incorporated into the art of a culture. Norberg-Schultz further describes architecture as

a work of art that concretizes higher values, that architecture is the visual expression of ideas

that mean something because it brings order to reality.^^

^^ Norberg-Schultz, Christian. Intentions in Architecture (Cambridge: The M.I.T.

Press, 1997), 22.

28
 Heidegger defines the language generally used as the "House of Being" where

humans dwell in language. To dwell in language people listen and respond to a world where

the language is poetic. When used poetically, the 'House of Being" is opened to dwelling."'

To dwell involves experiencing an aesthetic that has been incorporated into the work,

whether it is architecture or photography.

Architecture as a form of poetry is a language perceived and understood on a

personal level. This type of experience can be broken down into two subcategories; the

social or common cultural experience, and the universal experience which is ubiquitous to

all." The universal is the realm ofthe combined aesthetic experience where sense and form

are blended into a sensation of beauty.

Universal experiences involve spontaneous unconscious reactions to architecture.

They are defined by reactions independent of culturally reinforced symbolic associations.

The detailed elements of architecture can describe the dynamic nature which becomes the

existential expressions of symbolic meanings enabling the shared experience of architecture.

Beauty is then the totality of experience.

The dynamic nature of architecture common to all cuftures is motion, weight, and

substance. These are experienced in the natural and built world. When confronted by the

world of form there is always a subconscious response at the dynamic level, yet the s} mbolic

associations derived are culturally and experientially formed.

40
Ibid., 44.

" Thiss-Everson, Thomas, .Archetypes In Architecture ( Oslo: Norwegian University

Press, 1987), 21-25.

29
 An object's qualifies exert an effect on an individual that require an ev aluation."*-

This evaluation and the level at which it occurs became the basis of perception and the

aesthetic experience. This is the Level II perception. Architecture experienced passiv cK

at Level I reduces the involvement ofthe imagination for Level I activity is rooted basicalK

in simple reflection and not actively involved with making broader, non-aligned, and more

creative connections. Level I viewing rarely allow the aesthetic qualit} to become a

substanfial part ofthe experience. Passive observation is the day-to-day experience of life

where there is rarely any subjection to self-reflection. Without self-reflection there is no

aesthetic experience.

Just as passive experience denies the imagination so does viewing in a literal manner.

Literal perception aims at belief and the desire to realize the rightness or wrongness of what

is observed. The intent is to discover facts to describe empirically observable phenomena.

Thought and experience are inseparable, they both depend on each other because we cannot

describe an experience without thought and experience does not exist without thought.'^

The viewer whose imagination is active can understand the unity in the architecture

observed." A case in point, verbalizing the word walk' to a dog and perceiving the

reactions ofthe dog to it is understanding at the basest levels. When a person hears the word

'walk' it suggests a variety of interpretations. Listening to music creates similar

'^ Amheim, Rudolf The Dynamics of Architecture (Berkeley: University of Califomia

Press, 1977), 4-7.

'^ Scruton, Roger, The Aesthetics of Architecture ( Princeton, Princeton University Press.
1979), 77.

"Ibid.. 93-102.

30
interpretations through harmony, melody, movement." It is the imagination w hich leads us

to the greatest understanding. If imagination does not lead to a new experience then it has

not led to an understanding ofthe aesthetic experience.

Art possesses a variety of formal qualities such as balance, variation, color, harmon}.

etc., that artists and critics over the centuries have generally agreed upon and taught to this

day.'^ If these qualities are what makes art then it would seem that there are generalK

agreed upon criteria to categorize and classify art. However, this is not the case. Why do

art lovers repeatedly find new stimuli in pictures, sculpture, architecture, music, etc.?

Using the imagination, perception allows the observer to enjoy architecture or art as an

aesthetic experience beyond the literal, formal level of known facts, and beyond the stage

ofthe formal qualities of art, beliefs or edge and is instead the enjoyment resulting from new

experiences occurring each time the art is viewed. '^

There are two levels of perception. The first occurs with the literal experience based

on knowledge. The formal qualities of form, shape, color, harmony, etc., are the elements

of the first level. The second level, where new experiences occur, requires a deeper

understanding of the parts as they relate to the whole, in order to produce a meaningful

encounter.

"Ibid., 81.

"^ Sandstrom, Sven, Architectural Psychology: A Sociological Theory of Aesthetic

Visual Estimation and Use (Oslo:) 400-401.

4^ Scruton, 87.

31
 Level 1 photographers will simply view the architecture and capture images that

communicate form, shape, color, harmony, etc. They may recognize the aesthetic content.

but probably through intuition. However, the Level II photographers, because of a deeper

understanding of architecture will be able to photograph buildings with a deeper

understanding and the resuhing images will reflect that deeper understanding.

32
 CHAPTER IV

SEEING AND SYMBOLS: ARCHITECTURE AS LANGUAGE

Mankind is, by nature, a visual species. Neurological studies have shown that the

occipital lobe is one ofthe larger parts of our developed brain. It is the location for input

and analysis of visual information. Seeing is the major mechanism used to experience the

world. Experiences are translated into visual and verbal language that allows the

communication of events to others. This background forms the foundation of our

knowledge ofthe universe. The explanations of experiences from a culture embraces stories,

myths, and cultural icons that are the very personae of a civilization. The m}ths are the

basis ofthe culture's creative soul. It is a rhetoric which communicates what was seen in the

past. Those myths are imbedded in the very fabric of the art, music, and literature of a

culture. They are the basis ofthe aesthetic experience.

Viollet-le-Duc and Ruskin held the belief that leaming to draw would educate the

mind to see. These views were held a century later by Cario Scarpa - "1 draw because I want

to see", and his pupil, Mario Botta, "I draw to build." More importanfly:

I [Cario Scarpa] studied at the Academy of Fine Arts in Venice. They taught
us a lot of usefiil things. We learned to draw with all the different techniques
of representation. I think schools of architecture ought to concentrate more
on these techniques, like classical free hand drawing. If you teach students
to draw, the better ones get an eariier idea of what they'll be able to do later
on...'«

4S
Dominguez, Martin, "Interview with Carlo Scarpa." In Dal Co, 297.

33
Seeing is the manner in which both objectification and the objectified come into existence.''

This type of seeing is involved with Eco's Level II observation. ^° The second lev el observers

take the various paths presented to them by the artist. They take time and care to see. to

experience the visual or auditory art that has been presented, and to recognize at some part

ofthe artist's life that has been expressed in the work they perform. The work can also serve

as a mirror to reflect some part of our own lives or to stimulate us into a dialogue regarding

new symbols to explain our experience. The work reaches deep within our psyche and

creates a symbol-system that allows us to be related to that symbol-system.

Symbol-systems involve language and the arts.^' Our worid is actually constructed

of objects to which we give names. The names given do not explain the experiences which

bring about objectification; they only represent a cultural agreement that there is a

commonality of experience represented in the symbol. This is the nature of a cultural

aesthetic understanding.

Consider an apple. When looking at an apple or a representation of an apple there

is instant recognition because ofthe agreed cultural convention regarding what the apple is.

However, knowing the apple requires us to experience the apple on levels beyond mere

visualization, ft can be felt, tasted, carved, flavored or it also comes in a variety of shapes,

sizes, and colors. What is experienced when an apple is seen is dependent upon each

'^ Frascari, Marco. Monsters of Architecture: Anthropomorphism in Architectural

Theory (Savage: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc., 1991). 105.

^° Eco, 5-11.

5' Norberg-Schultz, 55-59.

34
individuals knowledge ofthe apple. All share a certain commonality in the thing that we

call "apple."

This experience can be deepened when we view photographs of apples. The

photograph can be simpK beautiful and the reason for the aesthetic experience is to be found

not only in the formal qualities ofthe apple but also in the intrinsic sensual qualities ofthe

apple which simply appeal to the e}e. An} symbol is thus translated b} each individual

experience. With more experience an individual can understand a symbol"s deeper

meanings. The more an individual is willing to see. the more those experiences will be

broadened. Each time a symbol is revisited those events will be shaded with what

experiences we have already had.

It is possible to experience an entire range of emotions through an image. Take for

instance the following image of St. Francis of Assisi in Ranchos de Taos (Figure 4.1).

Fi2ure 4.1 San Francisco de .Assisi. Source Guy R. Giersch

What information can be experienced from the viewing? Do the curved lines ofthe walls

and steps that are covered with snow awaken in us a sense of refuge that can be found

blanketed within the walls? Does the cross atop the bell tower offer hope*^ How man}

human events have taken place within the walls? What ofthe hands that built these walls':*

What about the mass of earth carried, formed, and placed to make the walls'^ Are the walls

smooth or rough? What ofthe sacrifice the community made to build and maintain those

walls? Where did the vigas come from to make the beams in the ceiling? What events has

the tree witnessed among the faithful who come to worship? These are but a few of the

questions that an image can generate.

Charles Morris developed a 'Theory of Signs,' or semiotics, in an attempt to develop

a language to talk about signs." He combined syntactics, the study of the relationship

between signs and semantics, the relationship between signs and reality; and pragmatics, the

relationship between the symbol-system to evaluate how they influenced the users. Morris

looked at these interrelationships as a threefold process to explain how the rules for the use

of signs in daily life are not formulated in a specific manner but instead represent a character

or tradition. Semiotics are a method to look at the symbols we use in our everyday lives and

to analyze those symbols as a language. The language is created to explain the complex

relationships between the form ofthe object and its sense qualities.

It is possible to apply this process to the arts and look at the language of symbols

within art. Marco Frascari called the symbols found in architecture "monsters.'''' What are

" Ibid., 59

^^ Frascari, 13

36
the monsters found in architecture, what is the origin of those monsters, and how are they

created?

Monsters emerge as the common characteristics in the theor} and

pracfice of buildings because they reveal the sign transformations
implicit in architectural projects They are the joints between
physical reality and artistic expression."

Within buildings we find many symbols of our culture as we find allegories in other art

forms. The models are first subject to the artist who directs them, and then they are subject

to the viewer who approaches them. The act of viewing allows the perception and aesthetic

experience ofthe architecture to take place.

Umberto Eco, in his Theory of Semiotics, discusses the importance of ""direcfly

viewing" architecture through shifting angles of vision.^^

'Suppose we are looking at an Italian Renaissance palace with an

ashlar-work facade. If the palace were drawn or photographed one could
understand the architect's 'idea', the so-called, 'form' ofthe artifact and other
drawings could provide one with the plan and the entire set of geometrical
rules which directed the builder. But when the palace is directly viewed
something else happens.

Not only does it take time to comprehend, imposing a shifting angle of vision,
thus introducing time as one of the indispensable components of the
architectural experience. But also the material itself, with its unevenness and
its tactile stimulation, adds something to our conceptual understanding. The
architectural system has given rise to a certain number of units, i.e. stones or
a certain size; each is clearly a pertinent element of a segmented masonry-
continuum. But what about the inner texture ofthe individual stones, since
undoubtedly much of the appeal of ashlar work derives from this factor?
Modern aesthetics would say that aesthetic enjoyment brings into play even
the microstructures of the material from which is made. Which is true
enough, except that a semiotic definition of these microstructures must go on

"Ibid., 17

^' Eco, Umberto, Semiotics (Bloomington, Indiana University Press 1979). 26:

37 \
 to say that the} represent the pertinent elements of a further segmentation of
the material in question, thus suggesting the possibilit} oiamore basic form
ofthe expression. Aesthetics is not onK concerned with hyper systems such
as the V arious connotations that the work of art convex s above and beyond its
immediate communicative appearance; it is also concerned with a whole
series of hypostructures. '-^..

Directl} view ing architecture takes time to comprehend and that it is time that indispensably

allows for the aesthetic enjo}ment which brings together the "h}per s}stems." that is the

connotations that the work of art convc} s. above and beyond its immediate communicativ e

appearance but also the, •h}postructure.' that is those parts which make the whole. The

details are the hypostructure' that allow the "h}perstructure' to exist, and a photograph of

those details allow time for a viewer to contemplate and thus have an aesthetic experience.

However, the ambiguit} and polyvalence found in ever} work of architecture may

be just the reasons for pleasure to be developed; it allows the viewer to contribute his/her

own interpretations regarding what is perceived; it flatters his/her intelligence in a wa}

enabling contrasting dissimilar ideas to join and reveal new interpretations. These must be

elements embedded in the design which act as signs ripe for interpretation. Those that are

obvious, the cross for example, a Christian sign, ma} not be as stimulating as an abstract

sign such as those embedded in the drainage channel at the water entrance ofthe Chapel at

the Brion Tomb (see Figures 4.2- 4.3).

^' ^ Ibid., 265

38
Figure 4.2 Cross at corner of Brion and Village Cemetery: Source Guy R. Giersch

Figure 4.3 Drain Detail from Water entrance Brion Chapel: Source Guy R. Giersch

Regardless of the time in the history of the races a symbolic language has been

invented to explain existence within the cosmos. Heidegger related the methods by which

people associate with the cosmos as dwelling which can only be obtained through building57

He summed up the process in three statements:

'^ Leach, Neil, ed. Rethinking Architecture: A Reader in Cultural Theory (London:
Rutledge, 1997), 100-102.

39
 1. Building is really dwelling.

2. Dwelling is the manner in which mortals are on the earth.

3. Building as dwelling unfolds into the building that cultivates growing things

and the building that erects buildings.^^

Building will resuft in creation and creation will bring forth the concept of techne which in

ancient Greek means knowing.^'^ In order to know we must see and understand what is

present. Knowing allows creation to take place. The creations will be the symbols we use

as language as well as the language we use in building the worid in which we dwell. The

symbols will be incorporated into the very foundation of our built environment to give

meaning and substance to our world. The aesthetic experience will thus incorporate the

symbols of our built environment.

Hersey called the symbols found in architecture 'tropes.'^° They represent the

corporeal nature of classical architecture. Columns represent trees, garlands symbolize the

decorations placed on sacrificial bulls, skulls embody a reminder of our finite existence,

entablature stands for the table for offerings. Our built environment is based on the

intellectual practice of architecture.^' In designing architecture there is a demonstration of

ideas, tropes, through the drawings and construction.

^Mbid., 102

^Mbid., 120-121

^*^ Frascari, 14-15

'' Ibid., 16-22

40
 ft is not enough to design in the mind because architecture requires a visible

language in order to be communicated. That language demands the incorporation ofthe

body in the project. The physical act of drawing requires thought being converted into line

which in turn converts two-dimensional space' into three-dimensional space. When the

project is constructed space is the visible demonstration of the ideas of the architect.

Finally, there will be the actual joining of the language of the mind and the physical

construing of that which can be seen.

It comes back to seeing. Whether one looks outwardly or inwardly, it is the visible

world that forms the basis for symbols, tropes, and one's experiences. Tropes are

incorporated into the language for our creative acts. Architecture becomes a visible

expression of an aesthetic experience. The features ofthe Brion Tomb have these aesthetic

qualities aplenty, and they have been captured by the photography taken by the Texas Tech

subjects used in this research.

41
 CHAPTER V

THE ROLE OF PHOTOGRAPHY AS A RECORDING MEDIA

In 1856, William Morris wrote ofthe passion he felt at seeing Amiens

Cathedral in the Oxford and Cambridge Magazine.^- He included an explanation for two

similar reactions that had occurred when he saw Amiens in an eariier visit in 1855. One w as

the wonderful feeling, a deep inner connection to the past which arose in his breast. The

other was a love that he felt was imparted by the original stonemason into the very stone of

the cathedral. Morris described the stones as alive, and he recorded his experiences with

photographs. Morris felt that photographs liberated his architectural vision where, upon

their reviewing, he could recall the emotions and artistry ofthe buildings once visited (see

Figure 5.1). Morris would recount the joy of visiting Amiens over and over again by

viewing his photographic images. Morris was able to rekindle his aesthetic experience

through photography.

^^^^^^^^^^^E/ ^E T ^ 1

1 '•- f I
!

i '• • •
Bt u:: ^ ^ ^ ^ B

ir >* 1
[• J I H H ^ ^ ^ H
^^^^^^F ft-

^Kli ,_7lT

IdlS
Figure 5.1 /aniens Cathedral:Source Columbia Online Media

^'- Miele, Chris. William Morris On Architecture. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,
1996), 11-12.

42
 Photography is a very important media for recording the worid in which we live. In

the 1850s, Edouard-Denis Baldus, Hippolyte Bayard, Henri Le Secq, and Gustave Le Gray

were commissioned by the French government to photograph historic buildings before the}

were destroyed during Haussmann's renovations of Paris. The photographic record that

Baldus and his fellow photographers produced has provided a preservation record that is a

vivid and poignant historical description of Gallic culture." There have been countless

others who have contributed to this documentation of our environment both built and

natural. Photography records not only form, the style, color, texture, etc. of a building, it

also records something about the character and aesthetic quality of a place.

Ezra Stoller, the great American photographer of architecture, wrote that it was the

architecture which really interested him, and that photography was simply the medium used

to communicate the ideas he had of it.^' If the photographic representation of an

architectural form is to be successful, it must be able to communicate to the viewer. What

is communicated depends upon the visual preferences ofthe photographer and ofthe viewer.

How authentic is the photograph? Does the photograph communicate a true and faithful

representations ofthe object are questions to be answered by both photographer and viewer?

Photography itself can have a powerful effect on architecture, not only as a means

of record but through its communicative power it can be an aesthetic force for change or

^" Horenstein, Henry and Russell Hart, Photography (Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall,
2001), 8.

^' McGrath, Norman. Photographing Buildings Inside and Out (New York: Watson-
Gupthill Publicafions, 1993): 17.

43
influence.^' However, it should not be assumed that pictures represent s}mbols or factual

recording of the visible worid. Pictures may represent the photographer's deeper

interpretations not easily captured in words, but in the frozen moment ofthe photographic

image. ^^

Nearly every effective photograph has an architectural quality because it is built with

light. By isolating an image one captures a moment that will not return, but one also has

seized a moment that can be revisited and analyzed for new and different meanings.^^ It is

possible to experience the photographic interpretation of the architecture as a pleasing

sensual element of texture, contrast, rhythm, space relationships, scale, and monumental ity.

The photographic view can express relationships with the environment, light use, the view

points of birds or worms, and of beauty or squalor. The understanding can be found on a

factual level or can penetrate deeper into the psyche where each individual viewer uses

experiences to create new understandings and to have an aesthetic experience.

Photographs can suggest ways in which our own observations might become more

informed and refined.^^ Like architectural experience, photographic impressions require

^'' De Mare, Eric. Photography and Architecture (New York: Frederick A Praeger, Pub.,
1961): 17.

^^ Hirsch, Robert. "Why People Make Photographs" Photovision: Art and Technique
Vol. 1. No. 2 (July/August 2000): 8.
67 Ibid., 13.

^'^ Busch, Akiko. The Photography of .Architecture: Twelve I'iews (New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1987), 13-16.

44
active participation by an observer in order to complete it.^^ Meaning is not intrinsic in the

experience, ft is established through a fluid relationship involving emotion and analysis.

Both architecture and photography can communicate long before they are understood. Good

images like good architecture will teach the viewer not to read it b} provoking responses

from the viewer's inventory of life's experiences. Meaning may not be found in the actual

image but instead is found in the interstices, and it is here that the multiple meanings are

bom out of a meditative process and beauty is experienced.

^"^ Scruton, Roger. The Aesthetics of Architecture (Princeton: Princeton University Press.
1979), 91-95.

45
 CHAPTER VI

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

6.1 Survey 1

During the course of this research, a total of one thousand, five hundred and forty -

eight photographs of the Brion Tomb have been viewed and sorted into fiffy-seven

categories. The first survey involved the investigation of ten published architectural

treatises, monologues, articles, and books containing photographic views produced two

hundred and ninety-six ofthe photographs. The following are the published sources used:

1. Canadian Center, Olsberg, et al, Carlo Scarpa Architect: Intervening with

History,

2. Crippa, Carlo Scarpa: Theory, Design, Projects,

3. Dal Co, Carlo Scarpa: The Complete Works,

4. Duboy, Les Cahiers de la Recherche Architecturale,

5. Los, Carlo Scarpa,

6. Los, Carlo Scarpa:An Architectural Guide,

1. Noever, 77?^ Other City Carlo Scarpa Die Andere Stadt,

8. Saito, Carlo Scarpa,

9. Yale, Curator was Ranalli, Carlo Scarpa: Drawings for the Brion Family Tomb,

10. Zugman, Architecture in the Box: Architectural Photography 1980-1995.

The remaining one thousand two hundred and fifty-two came from eleven

unpublished sources, and were photographs taken in ftaly by architectural faculty and

students of Texas Tech University between 1992 and 2000. The photographic data was

46
collected and analyzed using an Excel spread sheet program that calculated totals and

percentages (see Tables 6.1- 6.2). These images were analyzed and placed into one offift}-

seven categories established by the researcher. The following are thefift}-seven categories

that were developed for Survey 1:

1. Propylaeum from the village cemetery 30. Chapel general view S side
2. Propylaeum from park 31. Chapel General view W side
3. Inside Propylaeum to Pavilion 32. Chapel door main entrance
4. Inside Propylaeum to /\icosolium 33. Chapel door detail
5. Pavilion exterior view 34. Chapel door hinge detail cypress
6. Pavilion interior view 35. Chapel Floor bronze cross
7. Pavilion joint details 36. Chapel Altar detail
8. Medftation pond 37. Chapel candle holder
9. View of/^cosolium looking N 38. Cross detail
10. View of/ircosolium looking S 39. Chapel floor drain Cypress grove
11. View of Arcosolium looking E 40. Holy water font
12. View of/^cosolium looking W 41. Detail Chapel pond
13. Tile detail of Arcosolium 42. Glass door
14. Detail of Arcosolium 43. Counter balance system
15. Sarcophagi 44. Cable system (park)
16. Sarcophagi detail 45. Walkways
18. Family Tombs looking N 46. Four steps Arcosolium
19. Family Tombs looking S 47. Four steps in Propylaeum
20. Family Tombs looking E 48. Bench Pavilion
21. Family Tombs looking W 49. Tile details of walls
22. Detail of Family Tomb 50. Floor detail in the Propylaeum
23. Down spout Family Tomb 51. Cypress walk to the Brion
24. Family Markers 52. Details of walls
25. Ambulatory entrance 53. View Propylaeum to Village tombs
26. Concrete door behind Sacrisfy 54. Lych Gate
27. Chapel interior view general 55. Lych Gate detail
28. Chapel interior view detail 56. Aerial view.
29. Chapel exterior detail 57. Comer, Brion and Village Tomb

The categories for placement were based on naming what was viewed and considering if the

photograph was a general view, a detailed view, or a specific detail. Photographs placed in

47
the general view category were images that were more panoramic in nature. A photograph

of an entire building would be considered a general view. A detailed v levv vv as a photograph

that isolated parts of a structure. As an example a photograph of a door showing trim,

hinges, door handle, and type of wall material would be placed in the detailed view categor}.

A photograph of a hinge or a close-up ofthe actual texture of a concrete wall would be

considered to be a specific detail.

The photographic data showed that the majority ofthe photographs ofthe published

work, 52%, concerned themselves with broad, general, views of the Brion compared to

32.8% of the photographs from unpublished sources. The majority of published

photographs reflected a tendency in print to present overall, generalized views ofthe major

structures ofthe Brion Tomb for the benefit of a lay audience, those who have little or no

knowledge of the project. Such photographs included overall views of the Propylaeum,

Arcosolium, and the interior and exterior ofthe Chapel (see Figures 6.4,6.5,6.12,6.22, and

6.25). The unpublished sources contained a significantly higher incidence of photographic

views of more specific, often small scale, detailing that is found throughout the Brion (see

Figures 6.13, 6.16, 6.26, and 6.27).

It is impossible to know what photographs the published authors had at their

discretion to select from for their books and articles, but their articles are generally broadly

descriptive in nature, thus it is quite likely the photographs were chosen similariy to provide

the reader an overall impression ofthe architecture to elaborate upon the narrative.

The photographs ofthe unpublished sources indicate a broader level of viewing. The

detail images result from definite choices made by each ofthe faculty/student photographers

48
as they investigate the site. The intentions behind the pictures, slides and prints are reflected

in the statements these photographers were required to provide through a written

questionnaire and oral interview.

When each category was analyzed, the detailed views ofthe walls were the largest

contingent with 13.9% ofthe total published photographs and 14.8% of those submitted b}

the faculty/student group (see Table 6.2). The detailed views of the walls included

photographs ofthe tile detailing, the stair-stepped ziggurat, the cantilevered walls, comer

details, cutouts in the walls, and the play of light and shadow on the shapes and texture of

the concrete used in the construcfion ofthe walls (see Figures 6.8, 6.13, 6.16).

The detailed views of the Chapel's interior and exterior also indicated a high

incidence of interest for both the published and unpublished photographers (see Figures 6.1

and 6.2). Published general views ofthe Chapel's interior represented 8.8% ofthe total,

more than twice the percentage ofthe unpublished photographs ofthe faculty/students (3%).

When the detailed views ofthe walls are added to specific architectural details ofthe walls,

such as the bronze rainwater down spout ofthe Family Tomb, the floor drain on the chapel

exit to the Cypress Garden, and the counterbalance system, the total number of photographs

taken by faculty/students rises to 67.2% while the authors/published views rises to 48%.

This indicates that the majority of photographs taken by faculty/students shows a

preponderance for detail which is consistent with the research hypothesis that photos are

taken mainly of things that provoke interest. Can ft be determined that this interest is

stimulated by the aesthetic content?

49
 it
5

Figure 6.1 Exterior detailing of Chapel: Source Guy R. Giersch

Figure 6.2 Interior of Chapel showing detailing in ceiling, walls, floor, and altar: Source
Guy R. Giersch

After the initial analysis of one thousand five hundred and forty-eight photographs

provided in Survey I was completed, a chart based on the top ten categories for the

published and unpublished sources was compiled to enable a more detailed comparison to

50

5^
i
be made to gain a better understanding of the data (see Tables 6.3 - 6 4). As the

author/publisher group had an equal number of views of the L}ch Gate and of the

Arcosolium looking north, both w ere included to increase their total to eleven categoriesi see

Table 6.6). The following are the categories for both:

Table 6.6 Top Categories for Author/Publisher and Student/Facult} Groups

Author/Publisher Student/Facult\

1. Details of walls 19.8% 1. Wall Detail 26.1%

2. Chapel exterior detail 18.4% 2. Chapel interior view detail \5.9%
3. Chapel interior v iew general 9.2% 3. Pavilion joint detail 12.3%
4. Chapel interior view detail 9.2% 4. Meditation Pond 8.9%
5. Propylaeum village cemeter>' 7.7% 5. Chapel exterior detail ".9%
6. View of Arcosolium looking Nf 7.2% 6. Fountain detail 7.5%
7. Pavilion exterior view 6.8% 7. Detail of Chapel Pond 6.0%
8. Propylaeum from park 6.3% 8. Detail of Arcosolium 5.7%
9. Inside Propylaeum to Pavilion 4.4% 9. Chapel interior general \ iew 5.3%
10. Lych Gate 3.9% 10. Walkways 4.7%
11. Famil} Tombs looking w est 3.9%

When the groups were compared, 207 (69.9% ofthe 296 photographs taken by the

author/publisher group) represent their top eleven views. Of the total number of images

taken by the students/facult}. the top ten views number 697 (55.7%) of the 1.252

photographs taken). Both of these percentages suggest that there was an overall tendenc}

to take photographs which captured the rich iconography in the Brions architectural details.

51
This data supports the thesis statement that serious photographers do record in their

photographs the aesthetic intent that is found in the detail of Cario Scarpa's Brion Tomb.

The variety of details ofthe walls, 26.1%, was significantly higher when compared

to the other types of photos taken in the student/faculty survey. The author/publisher group

also contained a high number of photos of details ofthe walls, 19.8% of all photographs

published. As mentioned earlier, wall details include the following: views of the

cantilevered perimeter walls, comers, interior and exterior, where walls meet, detailing of

cutouts in walls, tile details, and the ziggurat and other articulation features making up the

detailing see Figure 6.3).

Figure 6.3 Example of Exterior of Chapel Showing examples of Ziggurat detailing wall
texture, ponds mufti-levels, angles, hard and soft edges, etc: Source Guy R. Giersch

The wall details are significant by themselves, yet when the percentage of all the

images ofthe Chapel are added (the Chapel interior views, interior details, exterior details,

and pond details surrounding the chapel) they account for 35.1% ofthe student/faculty

views compared to 40.2% ofthe publisher/authors' views. Based on the percentages, the

52
photographic views ofthe detailing in and around the Chapel represents a significant record

that is reflected by the data (see Table 6.5).

The number of general views ofthe Brion was significanth lower than the number

of photographs of details for both student/facult} (13.8%) and for publishers/author groups

(43.4%). This should be expected. One photograph ma} be made up of man} individual

elements. For example, a general perspective v iew ofthe Chapel can include the wall forms

and massing, ziggurat details, windows, doors, comers, thresholds, roof details, rainwater

details, intemal and extemal paving, color, texture, and overall materialit\. Each element

can be isolated or photographed in a much more focused context. For example, a threshold

w ill contain the intemal and extemal paving material, but. in the case of an extemal door,

it may also have some system for removing w ater. as occurs at the Chapel door (see Figure

6.27). The author/publisher group has more of a balance between general and detailed

views. but this can be explained by the need to clearly illustrate the written description - a

picture is worth a thousand words - especially in the limited space allowed by the publisher.

The high percentage of detail photographs for this group indicates that there is recognftion

by the publishers ofthe significance ofthe details that are important enough to have been

included in the publications.

It is possible to look at the data and simply conclude that architecture that is rich in

detail is made up of a variet} of photogenic images that demand to be recorded.

Unfortunately, this is not a sufficient explanation because it does not address why the

(students/facult}) shot more poetic details than pragmatic solutions. Perhaps it is because

they awaken memories of previous experiences or analogous images which communicate

53

1
at various levels to the photographers isee Figure 6.10. 6.12. 6.16. 6.20. 6 21). The

photographs not only record the poefic observations, but they have been isolated and refined

ft is the camera's abilit} to isolate details that provide us with a tool to revisit the

architecture in a specific manner in order to gain a deeper insights and to elaborate on our

own responses to the architecture.

6.2 Sun, e\ 2

The data in the Second Surve} helps shed some insight into this idea. Four open-

ended questions were asked of the 10 members of the student facult} sur\e} group

conceming their photographs ofthe Brion. The questions were posed in order to obtain a

general understanding regarding wh} each individual took the photographs the} provided

for this stud}. The questions were as follows:

1. \\ hat have you leamed from taking }our photographs'^

2. Do }'0u see a relationship between photograph} and architecture?

3. What do }0U find when }ou look at }our photographs ofthe Brion Tomb'^

4. If you could go back would }0u photograph differentl}\' If so how and'or what"^

Once the questionnaires were completed and the data compiled, oral interviews were

conducted for clarification conceming the answers.

Question One asked: "W hat have you learned from taking your photograph?"

Ninet} percent (90%) of responses reflected the idea that the process of photography

required the photographer to look, to understand the detail. The following are the responses

ofthe student'facult} group:

54
Faculty I. After traveling to ftaly for several years, I see the same buildings
each year but seeing those buildings in different light has allowed me to learn
more about a building, and to delight in the detailing and the message it
conveys.

Faculty 2. Drawing and photography is the best way to capture the details.

Student 1. I've learned that details do make a difference. People see them
and experience them; and I use my camera to record them.

Student 2. In photography there is a harmony in its composition. Mainly

with black and white photographs I learned to see into voids of darkness as
well as the figures that are actually present.

Student 3. Photographs help me to look at detail. It is interesting to compare

the perception ofthe picture I'm taking at that moment in time and the result
of it. Sometimes the emotion of that moment is captured by the picture and
most times it is not.

Student 4. I've become more aware of textures and the level of details
present in the object I photograph.

Student 5. I am always learning from seeing the finished transparency or

print. Each time I try something different or take a shot that someone else
might not attempt. I am more often than not surprised by the result and
pleased with good ones that tum out. Taking risks has its rewards, and
shooting more film increases those odds as well. From this process I am
continually leaming.

Since a photograph is a moment frozen in time of something that caught my

eye, it is always a pleasure to go back with anticipation and relive the
moment through the image. Our daily lives are made up of so many of these
moments from all we experience, that one cannot help but think that there
were so many images not captured.

Student 6. Details make up a building. If there weren't details, the building

wouldn't exist.

Student 7.1 have learned to look more critically at objects and forms for they
appear differently thorough a photograph than in person

Student 8.1 have leamed to look and see detail and composition. Sometimes
the emotion ofthe moment is captured in the photograph ofthe detail.

>>
 Question two asked: "Do you see a relationship between photography and

architecture?"

The answers to this question were more varied, yet all the respondents
communicated the idea that photography was able to provide a record ofthe details
that are found in the architecture. The following are the responses:

Faculty 1. Using a camera helps [you] to understand architecture better, ft

provides the ability to capture ideas that allow you to interpreted what you
see, color, light. Architecture demands to be photographed.

Faculty 2. Things which change in an instant can be captured. The 2-

Dimension] of the photograph can be used to express [the] 3-D [three-
dimensions] ofthe architecture. Pictures can be powerful and transmit ideas
of a design in one picture. They encourage you to go there. When you
photograph a detail of a master [architect] you become surprised at what you
chose to photograph when you get your photographs processed.

Student 1. Absolutely. It not only allows me to record places and spaces that
I may not have the opportunity to go back and see, but it also leads to
inspiration when I go back and look at the photographs.

Student 2. Yes, because with both there is an element of imagination in the

impact of photos and architecture. It helps to pay attention to details in all
of my surroundings.

Student 3. Photography can be a mere representation of architecture or it can

capture certain aspects of it. Sometimes I find that photographs romanticize
and glorify architecture by [the photographer] choosing only to see certain
things [in a certain way].

Student 4. Yes, photography forces you to examine a building more in depth.

You are forced to look at the parts that make up the whole.

Student 5. This is especially true with detail and architecture. No matter how
many times I look at something I can always see something that I did not see
before. The play of light at different times of day or times ofthe year. The
role shadows have of bringing out detail or causing it to fade awa}. The
process of bringing a photographic image to life from the play of light and
dark could also be said for the architect - the thoughts and designs of his
mind's eye coming to light and being made real. The mental process of

56
 seeing something that is not there - putting the idea, detail, of paper and then
finally seeing it come to life in the buift form for all to see.

Student 6. Yes, photographs capture the words of architecture. Buildings

have their own language that is spoken through the details to tell a stor}.
Photographs can capture those details like words in a book.

Student 7.1 do because ofthe visual stimulation that is inherent in both. The
facade of a building can actively affect an observer much the same way as
a picture.

Student 8. Yes.

The answers given by the student/faculty group support the idea that details in
photography are important and that they can repeatedly communicate to the observer
on a variety of levels.

Question Three asked: "What do you find when you look at your photographs

of the Brion?"

Each photographer had a different answer but each reflected the importance of
detail in architecture. This is evident in the following answers:

Faculty 1. Particular slides create sequences and those sequences demand

taking a different view ofthe same subject. Some ofthe photographs make
the architecture look heroic.

Faculty 2. I am surprised at what was captured. People who look at my

photographs select different view points. The love for detail is immediate in
the image. I made the best of the situation for the light wasn't always
perfect.

Student 1. The most interesting thing I found from looking at my

photographs, and some ofthe best photographs others have taken, is that
there is a weighfless quality to these photographs. In the images that capture
the feelings ofthe space, [in] the best [ones] I cannot tell which way is up or
down. The variety of detailing of a simple material, concrete, into a
multitude of shapes, forms, and details creating an endless and ever-
changing assembly of spaces, vistas, and moods.

57
 Student 2. Mainly I see in ever} part ofthe tomb there is a secret to be
unlocked. I think that it is present [from] the layering [of] the tomb's walls
to the site planning in the tomb.

Student 3.1 liked to look at how nature was incorporated into the Brion.

Student 4. I find examples ofthe way light pla}s off of different material b.
be it water, concrete, metal, or porcelain.

Student 5. The careful molding of a single material, concrete, into a

muftitude of shapes, forms, and details creating an endless and ever-
changing assembly of spaces, vistas, and moods. The Brion Tomb stimulates
the mind. It is a celebration of life and the many small details that make it
whole. The masterfulh detailed concrete walls and buildings embody a
living space of green plants and life-giving water. The limited use of marble,
brass, bronze, steel, and alabaster among other materials make them ev en
more significant. Like special moments in life that shine brightl} for a
moment and fade out of focus - to be cherished in ones memories. The
controlled uses of special material for fine details define focal points and
give a sense of celebration w hen encountered.

The molding of stark, lifeless material, concrete, with all the geometric
bending and folding, sometimes with abrupt edges and changing directions
could represent the path of one's life with all its twists and tums - and then
for a defining moment - Jo}. a bright spot appears, a light piercing through
an opening or a glow through a w indow. a reflection off the vv ater. the flower
of a water lily - in all a balance, a celebration of material and life - harmon}.

Student 6.1 see simplistic details of beauty. Scarpa is so simple in what he

does but }et the outcome is all these intricate details. It is neat to see
something so simple become something so elaborate. A lot of times
something more simple is more beautiful.

Student 7. I missed some details based on personal observation, and that I

took several shots from a very close distance to m} subjects. I also have
noficed how much light pla} s a role in delineating the forms and edges.

Student 8. Detail ever}yvhere.

The last question of this section asked of each student/facult} member to v isualize

acfion on a retum visit. 'Tf they could go back how would they photograph

58
differently?" Each individual had a personal vision of what they would like to experience

The following are the responses:

Faculty 2. Photograph} is an intuitive experience. Photograph} is ofthe

moment, ft allows }ou discover} [again] once you print. [You] can't repeat
the initial experience. I would make sure I had slide film and I Would tr}- to
capture more detail of the tomb. 1 would be seeing the Brion as a more
matured architect [now].

Student 1. There is an experience I recorded in mv' photographs and. no. I

would not photograph differenth.

Student 2.1 think that I would look at the elements in a different wa} which
would bring out different compositions in the photos. Ever} time I look at
the tomb. I see. interpret things, that I have never noticed before.

Student 3.1 would tr} to focus on capturing people's reactions to the Brion
Tomb.

Student 4. Yes. I vv ould spend more time at the Brion b} m} self I would like
to experience the natural sounds ofthe place and become immersed in the
spirit ofthe place. To be free to explore and photograph the Brion without
the intrusion of others has the possibilities of being a spiritual experience.

Student 5 Yes. since it w ill not appear the same as when I saw it before
because of nature's wa} of shining a new light on the subject. I would use
a better qualit} film Provia FlOO instead of Sensia 100. and I would like to
see how some other black and white films would show contrasts and details.
After looking back over m} photographs I have seen even more details and
spaces I would like to explore further, in more detail, and from different
angles. Another goal v^ould be to retake images that did not tum out as well
as I had hoped, or that I remember but did not shoot. I can sa} from m}
second trip to cities and towns of northem ItaK, that I was ev en more
ov erwhelmed than the first time. I knew my vv ay around and as a result saw
how things had changed, scaffolding had come down, and more detail
seemed to pop out and grab m} attention.

Student 6.1 would have taken black and white photographs and adjusted the
aperture better.

Student 7. I would probabK have taken more composed, obscure shots

instead ofthe ""documentation " t}pe of shots. I took several extreme close-

59
 ups that left out some ofthe surrounding elements. The Brion seemed to
bring me down into the detail level with my photography.

Student 8.1 would take a flash to help define depth.

The fact that the responses elicited a variety of ideas is indicative ofthe poetic that

was communicated through visual stimuli to create an aesthetic response. These responses

reflect the importance of detail as an integral part of architecture to communicate, making

the invisible visible.

6.3 Survey 3

A student/faculty photographic survey. Survey 3, ofthe Brion using photographs

from the published sources and from the author's collection was conducted. The survey

used thirty-one black and white images representing the majority of views photographed by

faculty and students (see Figures 6.4 ~ 6.34). This survey was conducted to see if these

photographic views ofthe Brion produced responses which reflect the research hypothesis

that architecture communicates through its detailing to create an aesthetic response. Black-

and-white images were chosen in order that the observers would not be influenced by the

color and focus more on the details before them. Students and faculty participants were

shown each photograph and if they had indeed taken a similar photograph asked to

remember what prompted them to take it.

From the responses to the photographic survey questionnaire it becomes obvious that

the photographs served as a springboard for a deeper, poetic understanding of the

60
architecture. The comments reflected a variety of interpretations which fell into four

categories; memory, poetic, iconographic, and pragmatic.

Figures 6.4 ~ 6.34 contain the summary ofthe Survey 3 results. Facult} 1 comments

are always from the same individual just as student 1 comments, etc., are always made b}

the same student. The summary of statements was analyzed and categorized according to

one ofthe following four subheadings. Memory, meaning that the statement related to a

past experience. Iconographic, the statement contained an obvious symbolic reference,

such as a cross. Poetic statements include those that have phrases that are metaphorical,

analogous, metonymic or tropic, such as giving a building the characteristic of soaring.

Pragmatic statements are factual statements ofthe obvious.

The results of these statements are in Table 6.7.

Table 6.7 Summary of Student/Faculty Survey 3

Total % of 3 65
Memory 51 13.9%
Poetic 125 34.2%
Iconographic 19 5.2%
Pragmatic 170 46.5%

Pragmatic responses seem to dominate. However, the aesthetic responses include

all statements falling into the memory, poetic, and iconographic categories. Together they

total 195 responses (53.5 % ofthe total). When compared to the pragmatic a seven point

difference which is significant. The concept that good architecture is a combination ofthe

pragmatic and the aesthetic suggests a balance of right brain and left brain activit}.

61
Vitruvius, in his Ten Books of Architecture declared that architecture must hav e firmness,

commodity, and delight.' The results of this particular survey support this notion.

Based on the average percentage of responses of Survey 1 that are of a

poetic/aesthetic nature (55%). and the similarity in the percentage of poetic/aesthetic

photographs by faculty/students ft appears that each has captured a majority of images

which they consider aesthetically appealing. Their photographs are similar and their verbal

responses (53.5%) reveal a variety of ideas directed toward a more aesthetic level of

commentary. All agreed that in photographing the Brion they were required to look more

rigorously and be aware ofthe detailing which caused the aesthetic response.

6.4 Survey 4

A final survey, (see Table 6.5), was conducted with two faculty members and three

students. They were asked to participate because of all those who submitted slides and

photographs used in the earlier surveys this group was the most intense regarding the

seriousness of their photographs and the number of photographs submitted. This survey vv as

more focused and intense. It involved viewing systematically their slides and photographs

of only the Brion Chapel. Using predetermined categories the group was asked to arrange

their photographs for viewing purposes. Each person had a slide projector which allowed

for simultaneous viewing of slides in each category. Students and faculty were able to

comment freely on each other's photographs. This process of simultaneously viewing and

^" Vitruvius, The Ten Books of Architecture (New York, Dover Publications. Inc. 1960),
13-16.

62
smaller group interaction allowed a more personal v iew of interpretation ofthe detailing to

take place.

However. Faculty' member 1 visited the Brion on a day wften there was foul weather

and therefore the number and range of photographs were severe!} limited. mainK to interior

shots. Faculty member 2 had visited the Brion Tomb on 10 occasions and Student 2 had

visited it twice. Therefore, no great conclusions can be drawn as a group, but rather

individualh where anahsis of each persons slides can be rewarded . Students 1 and 2 and

Faculty 2 provided the greatest input.

The photographs taken b} the five individuals vv ere similar in composition. Perhaps

this vv as to be expected as all the photographs were ofthe same subject taken b} people w ith

an architectural education and familiar with the building, through lecture and publication.

However, this is the more pragmatic response. Another response, a more intellectual one,

would suggest that the similarities were contained in the messages conveyed to each ofthe

photographers through meaning encoded in the detail, the semiotics of architecture, as

discussed in two previous chapters, "Architecture and Photography" and "Seeing and

Symbols."

Another interpretation regarding the similarit} ofthe captured images places the

emphasis on the sign content ofthe details and architecture which were so outstanding that

they demanded to be captured. Significantly, while the interpretations of each view by each

individual varied depending on each person "s cultural background, the similarity ofthe

images recorded the accompan} ing responses suggests a universality in the responses of

each photographer.

63
 Two hundred and forty-four slides were viewed and located into forty-four categories

established by the researcher. The criteria used to establish these categories were based on

the categories previously established for prioritizing all the buildings comprising the Brion

Tomb. This survey provided an opportunity to dissect further what had originally been

placed into seventeen general categories in Survey 1 (see Tables 1 - 2, lines 25-43). This

enabled the Chapel images to be more judiciously located in one of forty-four categories by

the researcher (see Table 6.5). An analysis ofthe data generated supported the hypothesis

that photographs of architecture stimulate an aesthetic experience which is interpreted

through a variety of responses.

If Faculty 1 and Student 3 are removed from Table 6.5 because of their small sample

size and focus is placed on Faculty 2(111 photographs). Student I (61 photographs), and

Student 2 (40 photographs) there are six categories that attracted any attention by having a

response of greater than five percent of the views taken of a particular view. Those

categories are listed in the following table with examples and percentages of the 216 slides

of that group respectively (see Table 6.8).

64
Table 6.8 Summary of Percentages Greater than 5%

View Faculty 2 % FaculU 2 Student I % Student 1 Student 2 % Student 2 % of 216

#41 Drain detail 7 7% 3% 5.0%

5%

#10 Entrance water 12 11% 5.55%

detail

#27 Circle opening 6% 3% 13% 6.48%

in Chapel

#32 Altar 3% 8 13% 10% 6.9%

#6 South entrance 8% 5% 10% 7.9%

65
 View Facult\' 2 % Faculty 2 Student 1 % Student 1 Student 2 % Student 2 % of 216

•
#38 Candle detail 2 2% 11 18% 3 8% 7.9%

^^^|K'H'

/ ^ examination ofthe percentages reveal that these six views account for 38.1 percent of

the total. If all ofthe possible detail views found in Table 6.8 of Faculty 2 and Students I

and 2 are added together they would total 166 photographs. This would represent 76.8%

ofthe total number of photographs taken for the group. This too would be significantly

higher than the earlier findings in Survey I where the number of detail views for the

student/faculty group equaled 67.2% but this could be anticipated considering the greater

interest of this group to take photographs.

Further review of Table 6.5 reveals that ofthe categorized views that in 57 instances

either one ofthe faculty or ofthe students took more than one photograph ofthe same view

while only 47 times was only one photograph of a particular view taken. This would appear

to indicate when more than one photograph was taken that there was more interest accorded

to a particular portion ofthe architecture by the photographer.

During the session two distinct comments, relevant to this study, were documented

by the researcher. Student I commented that although the different views ofthe exterior

wall ofthe western side ofthe Chapel are similar each revealed unique shadow and form

differences in every photograph examined. Student 5 commented that the picture inftially

thought to be general was, on viewing later, specifically contextual. This suggests that the

66
photographer's understanding ofthe interrelationships of details of Faculty 2 and Student

I & 2 to the architecture and architecture to the environment may be intuitive or recognized

subconsciously foftowing instruction.

Photography allowed the three-dimensional world of architecture to be captured in

a moment in a two-dimensional world where light and shadows create depth. The camera

provides an opportunity to understand architecture since photographs can be viewed

repeatedly providing the opportunity to gain new and more substantial insight into

architecture and the world inftexists. The pictures are powerful because they can transmit

ideas of design in one.

67
Tab e 6.1 Breakdown of Vi<;ws by Authors/P ublishe rs Note:1'op eleven views are his ilighted.
Canadian Crippa Crippa% DalCo DalCo% Duboy Duboy% Los Los % Los/guide Los/guide Noever Noe\er Saito
Propylaeum from villaae Saito" 0 Yak Vale% Zugman Zugmai K.i.il"..
1 2.5% 3 13.6%
2 Propylaeum from park 1 7 5% 1 4.8% 2 6.9% 6 5.9% 1 9.1% 6.9%
1 8 3% 1 4 5% 2 16 5.4%
3 Inside Propylaeum to Pavilion 1 4 8% 2 15 4 % 6 5,9% 1 9 1% 4,4%
2 5.0% 1 13
5.9% 1 3.4% 3
4 Inside Propylaeum to 1 8.3% 2.9% 2 6.9% 9 3,0%
5 Pavilion exterior view 2 6 9% 1 1 0% 1 3 4% 5 1 7%
2 5.0% 1 5.9%
6 Pavilion interior view 2 9.5% 1 7.7% 7 6.9% 1 4.7%
1 2.5% 3.4% 14
7 Pavilion ioint details 1 0 3%
8 Meditation pond 1 4.8% 1 7.7% 0.7%
1 8.3% 2 9.1% 2
9 View of Arcosolium tnokin? N 1 3.4% 1 lO^o 1 9 ]'>„ 6 2 0%
1 8 3% 1 4 5% 1 5 9% 9 5%
10 View of Arcosolium lookiim S 7. 2 15 4 % 7 6 9% 1 9 1% 15 5 1%
11 View of Arcosolium lookina E 1 3.4% 1 3.4% 1 0.7%
1 8.3% 1 4.5%
12 View of Arcosolium looking W 4 3.9% 6 2.0%
1 8 3%
13 Tile Detail of Arcosolium 3 2.9% 6.9% 6 2 0%
14 Detail of Arcosolium 1 1.0% 1 0.3%
1 3.4% 1 0.3%
15 Sarcophaui
1 5.9% 1 1.0%
16 Sarcophaui detail 2 0.7%
17 Fountain detail 5 4.9% 5 1.7%
1 5.9% 2 6 9% 1 1.0% 1.4%
18 Family Tombs lookinu N 4
2 2.0% 2 0.7%
19 Family Tombs lookinu S
20 Family Tombs lookinsi E 2.0% 1 9 1% 3 1.0%
21
1 69% 2 0 7%
Z.j/o 1 7.7% 6 5.9% 8 2.7%
22 Detail of Family Tomb
0
23 Down spout Family Tomb 0
24 Family markers 0
2b Ambulatory entrance 2 6.9% 1 1.0% 1 9 1% 1 6 9% 6 2 0%
26 Concrete door behind sacristy 1 3 4% 1 0 V'„
27 Chanel interior view ueneral 2 5.0% 3 25.0% 3 13.6% 1 4.8% 14 13.7% 3 K; •>% 26 8,8%
28 Chapel interior view detail 7 17.5% 2 9.1% 2 11.8% 1 7.7% 1 3.4% 6 5.9% 19 6 4%
29 Chapel exterior detail 3 7.5% 3 25.0% 2 9.1% 1 4.8% 1 7.7% 3 10.3% 18 17.6% 1 9.1% 6 20, / % _ 38 12.8%
30 Chapel ueneral view S side 1 2.5% 3 10.3% 1 9.1% 1 .^ J % 6 2 0%
31 Chapel ueneral view W side 1 5.9% 1 7.7% T 18.2% -) 6 9°.o 6 2 0%
32 Chapel door main entrance 1 5.9% 1 0.3%
33 Chapel door detail 1 3.4% 1 0.3%
34 Chapel door hinsie detail 0
35 Chapel floor bronze cross 0
36 Chapel Altar detail 0
37 Chapel candle holder 0
38 Cross Detail 0
39 Chapel floor drain Cypress 1 3.4% 1 3.4% 2 0.7%
40 Holy water font 1 4.5% 1 0 3%
41 Detail chapel pond 1 2.5% 1 4.5% 1 4.8% 1 1.0% 4 1.4%
42 Glass door 0
43 Counter balance system 4 10.0% 4 1 4%
44 Cable system (park) 0
45 Walkways 1 5.9% 1 0 3%
46 Four steps to Arcosolium 0
47 Four steps in Propylaeum 1 7.7% 1 0.3%
48 Bench Pavilion 0
1 0.7%
40 Tile details of walls 1 5.9% 1 7.7%
50 Floor detail in the Propylaeum 0
-1
51 1 5.9% 1 3 4% 0 7° 0
11 5 22.7% 4 23.5% 11 52.4% 1 7.7% 2 6.9% 6 5.9% 1 9.1% 41 13.?%
52 27 5 %
5", 0
•^4 ") 5 0° 0 3 10 3° 0 3 10 3% 8 2 7%
1 1 5.9% 1 3.4% 3 J.0%
55 2 5%>
0
56
0
57
T) 17 21 13 29 102 11 29 296
Total 40 12

68
Tab e 6.2. Breakdown of Vi ews b^/ Facult y and Students Note Top ten views are hiahliahted.
Slnrlnnt SliiHpnl SliiflnnI SliiHpnl T>„. SliidnnI SlliHpnl ^1
1 Propv laeum from \ illage cemclcrv ^Illdenl Sliidcnl4 SlnHmtS SlnHnnt S"/„ SliiHent 6 StiiHmt 6 % SliirinnI SniHnnI 7% SinHnnI X Sli.HrnrX",
3 1.6% 3 4 SliiHrnI SliiHrnl9", F.nnillv F.nniltv F.ni-iill\ F.7riillv Tol.nl Total " j ^
4.5% 3.4%
2 Propv laeum from park 3 2.3"/o 1 2.4".,, 3.X"„ 15 .^..'
7 711 „
1
8 4.2% 4 6.0% 3 2.5"/o 4.2"., 2 . 6 " II
3 4.(1% 1 2 7% 5 3.9"'i, 1
3 Inside Propv laeum lo Pavilion 1 2.4"/o 4 5.r/o 4 (1.9" II 2. (>"-,,
1.5% 3 2.5% 1 1.3%
4 Inside Propv laeum to Arcosolium 1 11 2.4",, 16 1.3%
1.5»/„ 2 1.7%
Pa\ ilion cxlcrior vic« 3 1.6»/o 1 2 (14",i 7
1.5% 4 3.4% (1.4"ii
6 Pa\ ilion interior \ lew 3 2.3"/, 2 2.5% l,7"i,
8 21 I 7 " II
1 1.3"4,
7 Pavilion ioint details 31 16.3% 1 1 3"„ 7 (14"„ 4 II 3 " i ,
10 8.4"/o 2 2.7% 2 i4% 4.7%
8 Meditation pond 6 35 7.6%
10 5,3% 1 1,5% 2 1.7% 86 6.9%
1 1.3% 2 5 4% 4 3.1% 1 2.4% 1 8.0%
9 View of Arcosolium looking N 3 1.6% 1 1.3% 37 59 4.7%
1,5% 6 5.0% 1 2.7%
10 View of Arcosolium lookinn S 5 3.9% 2 6.5% 7.6% 12 2.6% 36
2 1.1% 2 1.7"/,, 2.9%
View of Arcosolium looking E 1 2.7% 1 (1.8% 2 4.8% 6 6 1.3"/o
II 4 2.1% 14 l.l"„
1 1.3»/„ 2.(l';i
12 Vicvx of Arcosolium looking W 2.5"/, 9 16 l,3"ii
1 1.3% 3 9.7% 2 7 l.5"/i,
13 Tile Detail of Arcosolium 4 2.1"/, 11 0.9'/,
1 1.5"/, 1 0.8"/o 2 6.5"/i 1 2.4"/, 2.5"/i, 7 1 l"/i, U<
14 1 •'"i.
2,6% 2 3.0% 11 9.2% 6 8.0% 7 5.5% 3 7.1% 2
15 Sarcophagi 6 1.3% 40 3.2%
1 1.5"/, 5 4.2"';, 7 l.6"„ .7 1 !"i, 13
Ui Sarcophagi detail 3 1.6% 1 0 " II
1 2.7"-,, 4 3.1"',, 14 -,7
17 Fountain detail 7 3.7% 4 6.0%
3 (l",i I.X"/i,
5 4.2% 3 4.0% 2 5.4% 6 4.7% 2 6.5% 3
IX Faniih Tombs looking N 7.1% 1 1.3% 19 4.1% 52 4.2%
2 1.1"/, 6 5.(1% 1 2.7% 3.9%
7 1 3.2'/i 1 l.3"„ 7 l.7"„ I X " II
19 FanuK Tombs lookmg S 2 1.7"/, 7';
1 (1.8% 2 4.8% 1 (1.2'!ii 0.5%
20 Famih Tombs looking E 1 0.5% (,
1 1.3% 3 (1.7"/„
21 Familv Tombs looking W 0.4%
1.3% 2 5.4% 2 6.5% s
22 Detail of Familv Tomb 1 8 l.7".i, 1.(1%
9 4.7% 13
23 Down spout Famih Tomb (1.7%
2 1.1% 1 1.5% 1 1.3"/o 9
24 FamiK markers 0.3%
1 0.5% 4
25 Ambulatorv entrance
.7 1.1% 0.5%
2 5.4"/o 3 6
9.7"/, 1 2.4"/,, 8 1.7% l.l"/o
26 Concrete door behind Sacristv 1 (1.5"/i, 6 9.(1% 14
4 3.1% 2 (1.4% fo%
27 Chapel interior view general 9 7.6% 7 13
9.3% 1 2.7% 4 5.1% 14 30% 2 8.3% 30%
28 Chapel interior view detail 18 9.5% 9 13.4»/o 10 8.4% 3 37
4.0% 3 8,r% 5 3.9% 3 9.7% 5 n.9"/o 12 15.2% 32 7.0% 11 45 8% 8 9%
29 Chapel exterior detail 6 3.2% 8 11.9% 4 3.4% 7 9.3% 111
1 0.8% 4 12.9% 8 10.1% 13 2 8% 4 16 7% 55 4 4%
311 Chapel general \ icw S side 2 l.I"/, "; 2.5"/u 5 6.7'!i, 3 8.1% 3 2.3"/ii 1 2.4"., 1 l.3"„ "> S"„
II 2,4",, 1
X3"„ 31
31 Chapel general \ icw W side 3 2.5% 2 2.7% 2 4.8% 2 0.4% 9 0 7%
32 Chapel door main entrance 2 2.7% 2 0.4% 4 (1 '^"/u
33 Chapel door detail 1 0.8% 3 2.3"/, I 2.4% 3 0.7"/o 8 (1 6%
34 Chapel door hinge detail c\ press 2 3.0»/o 1 0.8% 1 0.8% 1 1.3"/, 5 1.1% 10 0.8%
35 Chapel floor bron/e cross 1 1.5% 1 2.7"/o 1 1.3% 4 0.9"/, 7 0.6%
36 Chapel Altar detail 2 4.8% 2 0.2%
37 Chapel candle holder 10 5.3"/, 2 2.5% 8 1.7% 20 1.6%
38 Cross Detail 3 12.5% 3 0.2%
39 Chapel Hoor drain Cv press gro\ c 1 1.5% 1 0.8% 1 2.7% 12 2.6% 15 1.2%
40 Hol\ w ater Ibnl 1 1.5"^ 7 5.4% 1 2.4"/, 2 2.5"/,, 4 11 9"i, 111 (1 X";,
41 Detail chapel pond 4 2.1% 2 3.0% 5 3.9% 2 6.5% 4 9.5% 3 3.8% 22 4.8% 42 3,4%
42 Glass door 9 4.7% 1 0.8% 1(1 2.2"/., 2(1 1.6"/.,
43 Counter balance sv stem 4 2.1% 1 1.5% 1 0.8"/o 3 2.3% 1 1.3% 1 0.2»/o 11 0.9%
44 Cable svsteni (park) 3 1.6% 7 1.7% 1 0.8% 2 2.5% 2 04% Id (1.8%
45 Walkwavs II 5.8"/, 1 1.5"/o 3 4.0"/o 2 5.4% 4 3.1% 1 2.4% II 2.4'!i, 33 2 6% \
46 Four steps to Areosolium -> l.I"',. 4 6.(1"/, 1 1.3% 3 2.3"/o 1 3.2% 1 2.4% 1 1.3% 1 0.2"/„ 14 1.1"/,
47 Four steps in Propv laeum 1 0.8% 3 0.7"/., 4 0.3"/.,
48 Bench pa\ ilion 1 0.2% 1 0.1"/,
49 Tile details of walls 3 3.8% 2 (1.4»/o s 0.4"/,
50 Floor detail in the Propv lacuni 1 0.8% 2 0.4% 3 0,2%
51 Cvprcss walk to (he Brion 7 l.l"/i, 2 02%
52 Details of walls 20 10.5% 5 7.5% 8 6.7% 20 26.7% g 21.6% 39 30,5% 6 19.4% 9 21.4% 12 15.2% 54 11.7% 1 4.2% 182 14.5%
.^3 View Propv laeum to Village tombs 7 5.9'1„ 1 2.7"„ 1 1.?'.!(, 4 (19",, 13 1 ii"„
54 Lvch Gate S 7.5"/, 3 2.5% 2 2.7"/o 2 2.5% 2 0.4% 14 11"/,
'i'i L\ch Gate detail 1 0.8% 2 0.4% 3 02%
56 1 (1.2% 1 0 1"/„
Aerial \ lew
57 1 l.3"„ 1 (1.2% 2 0.2"/.,
19(1 67 119 75 37 128 31 42 79 460 24 1252
Total

69
Table 6.3 Top Ten Views by Authors/publishers
Wail detail Total Total % of 207 Propylaeum from village cemeter>' Total Total % of 207 Inside Propylaeum to Pavilion Total Total % of 207
41 19.8% 16 7.7% 4.3%

Chapel Exterior view 38 18.4% View of Arcosolium looking N 15 7.2% Family Tombs looking W 3.9%

Pavilion Exterior view 14 6.8% 11 Lych Gate 3.9%

Chapel interior view general 26 9.2%

*• '^.^ja?'

13 6.3% Total number of

Chapel interior view detail 9.2% Propylaeum from park
slides
207

70
Table 6.4. Top Ten of Views by Faculty and Students
Total Total % of 697 Total Total %of 697
Example of wall detail 182 26.1% Fountain detail 52 7.5%

Chapel interior view detail 111 15.9% Detail of Chapel Pond 42 6.0%

'-» . • - J l M-

Pavilion joint detail 86 12.3%

^ ^

Detail of Arcosolium
J 40 5.7%

Meditation Pond 59 8.9% Chapel interior view general 37 5.3%

Chapel exterior detail 55 7.9% Walkways 33 4.7%

Total 697

71
Tab e 6.5. Researcher's Survey of Brion Chapel Slides
Faculty 1 Faculty 1% Faculty 2 Faculty 2 % Student 1 Student 1 % Student 2 Student 2<'o Student 3 Student; 3%
1 Exterior view at a distance 9 8% 1 2% 1 4°o
2 Exterior view close-up 4 4.0%
3 Cloister walk 1 2% 1 4%
4 Cloister walk to four steps 2 3% 2 5% 1 4%
5 Detail along cloister walk 2 2.0% 1 2%
6 South entrance 9 8% -1
5% 4 10% 1 4%
7 Sacristy 1 1.0% 1 3% 2 8%
8 West wall comer 3 20% 1 1%
9 Water element 2 2% 2 3% 2 8%
10 Entrance water detail 12 11% 2 8%
11 Altar door Ext. wall 2 3% 1 3% 1
12 West elevation 2 2% 1 2%
13 Comer view detail 1 1.0% 2 8%
14 West elevation detail 4 4% 1 2% 1 3% 2 8%
15 Altar door w side 2 2% 1 3% 1 4%
16 Altar door E side 1 2% 1 4%
17 West door general 1 7% 5 5%
18 Altar door E detail 3 20% 7 11% 1 3%
19 Over the wall I 2%
20 Cloister walk detail 1 1%
21 Window detail 1 1%
22 West door detail 1 7% 7 7%
23 Roof detail above altar 2 2%
24 Edge detail wall 5 5%
25 Entrance door 1 7% 1 2% 3 8% 2 8%
26 Entrance door hinge 1 2% 2 5%
27 Circle opening in chapel 1 7% 6 6% 2 3% ^ 5 13% 1 4%
28 Doors behind altar 2 2% 1 2% 3 8% 2 8%
o
29 Floor detail J 3% 3 5% 1
30 Holy water dispenser 2 2% 1 2%
31 Exit door to Cypress garden 2 2% 1 2% 1 3%
1 1 4%
o 2 8%
32 Altar J 3% 8 13% 4 10%
33 Circle door detail 1 1% 1 3%
34 Alabaster windows 1 1% 2 3%
35 Ceiling detail 1 2%
36 Door handles 1 1% 1 2% 1 3%
37 Cross detail 4 27%
38 Candle detail 2 2% 11 18% 3 8%
39 Windows in Chapel 4 4% 3 8% 1 4%
40 Altar detail 2 2% 1 3%
41 Drain detail 7 7% 2 3% 2 5%
42 Wall detail 1 2% i
43 Hinge detail 4 4% 2 3%
44 Window door detail 1 1% 1 2%
Total 15 111 61 40 25
1

72
Figure 6.4. Entrance to the Brion Cemetery from the village cemetery also called the
Propylaeum. Source: Saito: Poetry Made Visual: The Maestro's Riddles, p 34.

Faculty 1:
- Reminded me of Propylaea
- Athens Acropolis
- Entrance, Threshold
- Symbiotic idea associated with the two overlapping circles.
- Offset stairs - position and compatibility
- Part of a sequence started two hundred yards further back.
- Reticulation, Materiality
- Detail centered above the opening.
- Changes in landscape growing over entrance.

Student 1:

I took a similar photograph. The reason why I took this photo is because this is the
point of arrival. When you see this almost "indiscriminate" structure aligned along the
axis ofthe cemetery you are struck by not only how important it is but also how small it
is. By important, I mean to the world of architecture and to the village that surrounds it.
By small, I mean in relation to what I thought it was going to look like.

73
Figure 6.4 Continued.

Summary:

^"""^^^^^ Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 3 3 3

Student 1 1 2

Totals 3 4 5

74

I
Figure 6.5. View of Propylaeum from inside the Brion Family cemetery looking back at
the village cemetery. Source: Photograph by Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Obvious meanings associated with double entwined circle.
- Red and blue colors of perimeter of circles and their associated meanings.
- Canal passing by.
- Poetic and practical use of water - meaning/washing

Student 1:
- Texture of concrete
- Proportion ofthe rings to the wall
- Color ofthe tile

Student 2:
- Dueling circles placed against a calm horizontally enhanced wall.

Student 3:
-1 liked the colored tile used to accentuate the circles

Student 4:
-1 photographed the interlocking circles at a closer range with a person standing in the
overlapping space. I was intrigued by the way the outlines of circles framed the face of
the model.

75
Figure 6.5 Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 2 1
Student 1 1 1
Student 2 3
Student 3 1
Student 4 1
Totals 3 2 7

76
Figure 6.6. Propylaeum as viewed from the Pavilion.
Source: Photograph by Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Articulation of wall - broken in a way.
- Use of wall articulation to suggest joining of void and solid - maximize.

Student 1:
- Water reflects color ofthe tile
- How the bridge goes over the water

Student 3:
- Interesting space

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 1

Student 1 2
Student 3 1
Total 2 3

77
Figure 6.7. View inside the entrance wing looking toward the Pavilion. A glass door that
slides into the water below keeps the Pavilion the only private section ofthe
cemetery. Source: Saito: Poetry Made Visual: The Maestro's Riddles, p 41.

Faculty 1:
- Meanings embedded in thresholds - entwined circles, glass gate.
- Corporeal issues regarding the opening ofthe gate.
- Sense of order in one direction of floor, contrasted in the other direction.
- Relationship of parts to overall meaning.
- Subtle relationships of drain weeps to pattern in contrast and its subdivision.
- Contrast of metal ( precise) and contrast (fluid) details in floor.

Student 2:
- Pathway makes you pay attention to steps you make (symbolizing steps you make in
life).
- Path is confusing in floor pattern yet simple when looked at straight forward.

78
Figure 6.7 Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 4 3
Student 2 1 1
Total 5 4

79
Figure 6.8. View inside Propylaeum looking toward the Arcosolium. Source: Saito:
Poetry Made Visual: The Maestro's Riddles, p 40.

Faculty 1:
- Play of shadow - real-world, shadow world- which is more accurate?
- Contrast of shadow to light - inside to outside - sidelight to overhead light smooth to
rough etc.

Student 1: - The light streaks

- The ceiling and its composition
- Texture and composition ofthe walls
Student 2:
- play of light can enhance a room.

Student 4:
- This view interested me because I was looking at the tomb from a new perspective.
-My return journey caused me to reexamine what I had just experienced.

80
Figure6.8 Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 1

Student 1 J

Student 2 1 1

Student 4 1
Total 1 2 5

81
Figure 6.9. View of Pavilion looking south from inside the Brion. Source: Canadian
Center For Architecture: Carlo Scarpa Architect: Intervening With History, pi 55.

Faculty 1:
- Echoes of St. Zeno
- Ambiguity of materials
- Issues of proportion
- Light and dark
- Surface textures
- Echoes ofthe labyrinth
- Hidden and large details
- Water

Student 1:
- Relation of people to the structure
- Details, details, details

82
Figure 6.9 Continued.

Summary:

^ ^ ^ Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 2 5
Student 1 2
Total 2 7

83
Figure 6.10. View of detailing of supports on the Pavilion or family Meditation Chapel.
Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Abstraction of early Christian details at San Zeno.
- Scale difference in the hemisphere.
- Rhythm of verticals
- The challenge of seeing

Student 1:
-1 photographed each of these columns. Details imparted a sense of delicacy.
- All in the component of light

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 3
Student 1 1
Total 1 4

84
Figure 6.11. View looking north ofthe Lab>Tinth in the meditation pond from the
Pavilion. Source: Duboy: Carlo Scarp: Les Cahiers de la Recherche
Architecture, p 65.

Faculty 1:
- Definition of space
- the medie\ al labyrinth
- Freeze/thaw c\ cles and their destruction
-The Island of Pap\rus
- The Leonardesque pulle> system
- The wall with the e> e
- The tower ofthe church
- The Asolo hills be> end
- The enclosing wall
- The integration of all of these elements

Student 1:
- Relation of tomb to the church
- The greenness ofthe grass
- Color contrasted with starkness of concrete and texture

85
Figure 6.11 Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 2 4 4
Student 1 3
Total 2 4 7

86
Figure 6.12. Arcosolium and Sarcophagi. Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Meaning - Arch: - Sky
- Coverlet
- Bridge
- Sarcophagi - Nursery
- Cribs
-Love
- Rocking
- Leaning
- Suggested vertical movement
- Play of materials - Change of texture
- Contrast of material
- Landscape - Gradual deterioration back into nature of tomb
- Contrast of man-made and natural
- Mown and rough
- Canal -Water and all its meanings
- Tanks- One to be filled with the death of Mrs. Brion
- Suggestion of theater
- Design suggests water basin with no water
- Contrast of two forms the angular and smooth curves
- Notion of roof with famih tomb
- Use of metal details on both tombs
- Rhythm setup by design
- Ambiguity, metaphor, and analog) constantly in play
- Articulation of edges

87
Figure 6.12 Continued.

Student 1:
- Relationship of tomb with surroundings
- Green as earth, green as heaven above the tombs
- It is earth floating above, and protecting
- The composition ofthe parts and how they relate to the whole

Student 2:
- Bridge that connects life to death
- Always sheltered and kept in God's care

Student 4:
- The arc and the very defined stream caught my attention. I wasn't sure ofthe
significance ofthe two circles at the end ofthe stream, but their circular form contrasted
with the ziggurat detail seen in almost all other areas ofthe tomb.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 4 10 10
Student 1 1 3
Student 2 2
Student 4 1 1
Total 4 14 14

88
Figure 6.13. Tile detail of underside of Arcosolium. Source: Saito: Poetry Made Visual:
The Maestro's Riddles, p 80.

Faculty 1:
- Color suggesting clouds/sky
- Color children's coverlet
- The names in ivory letters ofthe owners ofthe tomb
- The line ofthe sun across the heavens
- Man, in death, still at right angles to the journeying heavens
- The contrast of wood and stone

Student 1:
- The green tiles and its relation to the granite sarcophagi

Student 2:
- Joining of two members (people) together in a life

89
Figure 6.13 Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 3 2
Student 1 1
Student 2 1
Total 1 4 3

90
Figure 6.14. Closer view of Sarcophagi. Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Compassion
- Love
- Cheek-by-cheek
- Nursery
- New bom - new death
- Invasion of nature
- The end ofthe straight and narrow
- The empty tank wishing to be filled

Student 1:
- The water trough
- The level change
- The movement or sense of movement by the tomb and the bridge that covers and
transcends the earthly.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 8 1

Student 1 2 2

Total 10 3

91
Figure 6.15. Aerial view of fountain in front of sarcophagi. Source: Saito: Poetry Made
Visual: The Maestro's Riddles, p 84.

Faculty 1:
- Theatre
- Balls
- Breasts
- The continuing ofthe species
- Pendant crucifix
- The living watch the dead, and their own mortality
- Geometrical patterns, rhythm, etc.

Student 1:
- The details ofthe concrete
- The story ofthe water trough
- The details and precision of craftsmanship

Student 3:
- The objects are punctured with circles

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty I 4 4 1
Student 1 1 2
Student 3 1
Total 5 4 4
92
Figure 6.16. Detail of joint ofthe roof of the Arcosolium. Source: Saito: Poetry Made
Visual: The Maestro's Riddles, p 84.
Faculty 1:
- Passages of time
- Interaction of materials
- Reactivation ofthe internal corner
- Material isolation
- Half and whole - one gathering the other objects
-Why?

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 3 2
Total 3 2

93
 •i

I
Figure 6.17. Fountain detail Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Non-bilateral symmetry with symmetrical objects.
- Canal - undeviating, cleansing, to its uUimate conclusion
- Transporting
- Contrast of surface and bottom
- Concrete edge and grass - flush, level, non-overflowing
- Chaos at end of canal - before isolation
- Articulation
- Insides of canal trench

Student 1:
- Water reflects the sky and this trough leads to the tomb as well as the church

Student 3:
- One element leads you to another and another and another

Student 4:
- The axis ofthe stream to the arc is very powerful. The contrast between grass.
concrete, and water draw attention to this area ofthe tomb.

94
Figure 6.17 Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 3 5
Student 1 1
Student 3 1
Student 4 1 1
Total 4 8

95
Figure 6.18. Family Tomb Source: Saito: Poetry Made Visual: The Maestro s Riddles,
p90.

Faculty 1:
- House form for dead
- Crack in form
- Head ofthe god
- Mausoleum
- Details of slits, projections, surfaces, etc.

Student 1:
- The aspect of form and weightlessness
- The detailing ofthe concrete
- The height of entry into this area
- The gutters along the side

Student 3:
- Slits and holes create a visually stimulating image

Student 4:
- The massive form ofthe ziggurat adjacent to the walls ofthe tomb
- commands the observer to photograph it.

96
Figure 6.18 Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Icongraphic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 1 2
Student 1 2 2
Student 3 1 1
Student 4 1
Total 1 5 '

97
Figure 6.19. View of Propylaeum looking south. Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Connection - Temple to propylaeum
- See canal interpretation
- See wall interpretation

Student 1:
- The wall and its relation to the entry
- How the water relates to each ofthe spaces
- The story ofthe troph of water

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1
Student 1 I 2

98

fcv
Figure 6.20. Entrance to Chapel via the Lych Gate. Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- The way of Ephesus - road to Damascus
- Ruins
- Nature returns its favor
- Vertical and horizontal articulation

Student 1:
- The details ofthe step backs that have become a signature of Scarpa
- This signature conveys weightlessness

Student 3:
- Repetition of lines

Student 4:
- The verticality ofthe walls and the highly detailed use of a single material overwhelms
the observer. The intrigue of not knowing what is beyond the bend is also a major factor
in my decision to take this photo.

99

Ks
Figure 6.20 Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 2 1
I
md

Student 1 1 1
Student 3 1
Student 4 1 1
Total 2 4 3

100
Figure 6.21. View of south walkway and entrance into the Chapel.
Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- External altar
- Faith suspended
- Oriental inclusion

Student 3:
- Scarpa and his "excruciating" detail

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 2 1
Student 3 1
Total 3 1

101
Figure 6.21. View of Chapel interior, looking toward the altar, showing ceiling and wall
detail. Source: Duboy: Carlo Scarp: Les Cahiers de la Recherche Architecture.
p80.
f
Faculty 1:
- Bilateral symmetry
- Reflection from the other world
- Memories of tomb of Galla Placidia - Ravenna
- The route, clearly marked, the crossing, the meanings ofthe circle through the e\e
- The pyramid - Egypt
- The pointing ofthe way to heaven
- The enclosure of space
- The openings - onto - The waten. world
- Our origins
- The Jordan/Red Sea etc.
- Venice

Student 1:
- The relation of light to space
- A place of solemn s\mmetr>. \et small items like the torch create a significant
asvmmetrical stance.

102
Figure 6.22 Continued.

Student 3
- Sacredness of space

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 7 5 2
Student 1 1 2
Student 3 1
Total 7 7 4

103
Figure 6.23. View of Chapel interior looking through round opening to the altar.
Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Facultv 1:
- The Chinese garden - memories of nature and intelligent owner
- Fragility of
- Articulation of sky
- Contrast - textures, materials, pattems, light,
- Articulation of edges
- Definition of edges

Student 1:
- The tile work
- The entrance via the circular opening
- The light quality
- The alabaster w indows
- The windows of doors behind the altar
- The stepped back elements on the ceiling

Student 3:
- Circular door frame framing rectilinear shapes
- Combination of all components
104
Figure 6.23. Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 3 3
Student 1 6
Student 3 2
Total 1 3 11

105
Figure 6.24. Interior view of door leading from Chapel to Cypress Garden.
Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Art of layering
- Mondrian
- Oriental notation
- Contrast between clarity and opacity
- Contrast between old and modern
- Contrast between access and trespass

Student 3:
- Symmetry

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 3 2 3
Student 3 1
Total 3 2 4

106
Figure 6.25. Exterior view of Chapel from Cypress Garden. Source: Guy R. Giersch

Faculty 1:
- The chapel as fortress
- Walking across the Red Sea
- The sunken city - Zemmen Wath
- The tolling of church bell at midnight below the surface ofthe lake
- Buttressing of lake walls
- The idea of 'speakers' (audio) at windows
- Sources on non-bilateral symmetry
- Islands
- Corporeality
- Lights of passage

Student 1:
- The floating quality ofthe church
- The alabaster windows
- The finish ofthe concrete
- The step back on the roof
- Water and how it makes things, the church and the wall appear to float

Student 2:
- The building could be so simple in form yet have so many intricate details (Layering of
concrete, horizontal board impressions)

107
Figure 6.25 Continued.

Student 3:
- Calm water creates another plane.
- " mirror-like"

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 3 3 3 1
Student 1 2 3
Student 2 1
Student 3 1 1
Total 3 6 4 5

108
Figure 6.26. View of details of candle rod, on the left and holder for cmcifix on the right.
Source: Saito: Poetry Made Visual: The Maestro's Riddles, p 124.

Faculty 1:
- Scarpa detailing - Use of form
- Use of cutaway
- Use of material
- Idea of constmction
- Nature of attachment
- Signaling motion
- Faith in geometry
- Contrast of forms

Student 1:
- Details ofthe torches
- What the materials were

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 7
Student 1 2
Total I 9

109

SB
Figure 6.27. Flood drain on the step leading out of Chapel to C\ press Garden. Source:
Saito: Poetry Made Visual: The Maestro's Riddles, p 126.

Faculty 1:
- Marvelous detail - Suggestion of function
- Poetic/magic detail
- Moving of water - real or imaginary
- Love of detail - Raise circular nuts will be polished by feet
- Contrast of color w ith rest of metal
- Direction
- Contrast in materials - surface treatment
- Form and rhythm
- Delineating entrance/threshold - passage of time and spirit

Student 1:
- Texture ofthe concrete
- Two different materials, mixing steel/concrete
- The path ofthe water
- The suggestion ofthe abstraction to other things: figure, features, anatomy

Student 4:
-1 photographed the drain with one ofthe doors closed because I didn't think to open
the door. The highly detailed and sculptural metal drain stood out from the
concrete floor, drawing my interest.

110
Figure 6.27. Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 4 7

Student 1 3
Student 4 1 1
Total 5 1 10

111
Figure 6.28. Holy Water dispenser. Source: Saito: Poetry Made Visual: The Maestro's
Riddles, p 112.

Faculty 1:
- Repetition of forms
- Shock ofthe hygienic
- Shock of (of color)
- Shock of smoothness of porcelain enamel
- Shock

Student 1:
- The whiteness ofthe material
- The operation ofthe device
- The detail in the mechanism
- How the light plays a part in all ofthe above

Student 2:
- The worship bowl even has the symbol of an eternal life (on earth and heaven) in the
shape
- The small dueling circles is the place to find yourself (God, Son Holy Spirit)

Student 3:
- Contrast of smooth white porcelain with concrete

112
Figure 6.28. Continued.

Student 4:
-1 took a similar photograph ofthe holy water font, but from a different angle. The
smooth porcelain and ziggurat detailed sliding mechanism formed a smiley
face', at least to me. Viewed from above it like a face winking at you.

Summary

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 3 1 1
Student 1 4
Student 2 2
Student 3 1
Student 4 1 1
Total 6 6 7

113
 1]

Figure 6.29. Counterbalance system for sliding glass door. Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Act of motion
- Motivated acts
- Leonardo drawings
- The invisible (the gate) being made visible. We know how it opens by layout of pulley
system.
- Weight of to be overcome
- Arrows of St. Sebastian

Student 1:
- Ingenuity
- Leonardo de Vinci, and how it could relate to one of his machines
- Expression of movement
-Material ofthe device, and how this contrasts with the concrete

Student 2:
- Everything in life connects together in a chaotic manner.
- The round circles connecting at different distances from each other.

Student 3:
-Placement of objects make for interesting and playful composition

114
Figure 6.29. Continued.

Summary

Memor\ Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Facultv 1 1 3 1 1
Student 1 1 1 2
Student 2 1 1
Student 3 1
Total 2 6 I 4

115
 J3

Figure 6.30. Detail of wall cutout on Propylaeum. Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Definitive edge
- Colorful conclusion
-Hem of Christ's garment
-Geometry

Student 1:
- The color of tile
- Texture of concrete to tile
- The edge and how it is finished

Student 3:
- The highlighted edge

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 1 2 3
Student I 3
Student 3 1
Total 1 2 7

116
Figure 6.31. Detail of four steps to Arcosolium Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- Silent noise
- Noisy silence
- Corporeal reaction - up, down, sideways

Student 1:
- The steps and the sound produced
- The tombs relation to sky

Student 3:
- Contrast of light and shadow creating a dark floating space beneath

Student 4:
-1 photographed the steps because they are not centered one above the other, but rather
are staggered from side to side.

^
>«

117

a
Figure 6.31. Continued.

Summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 2 1
Student 1 2 2
Student 3 1 1
Student 4 1 1
Total 6 1 4

••^i

118
 :>

Figure 6.32. Four steps from village cemetery into the Propylaeum. Source: Saito: Poetry
Made Visual: The Maestro's Riddles, p 35.

Faculty 1:
- Joy of non-bilateral symmetry
- Location of heart
- Eyes on the world
- Eyes on the next world
- Love, hate, boy, girl, married, widowed
- Materiality
- Edge of steps
- Shade & shadows

Student 1:
- Arrival and how I felt
- The light and the patterns if produced and the textures it illuminated
- The floating steps
- The designated path one must follow upon arrival. Options are available but not many
travel.

Student 2:
- Walkway very enclosing yet not stuffy because ofthe "light at the end ofthe tunnel'
119
Figure 6.32. Continued.

Student 3:
- bold geometry

Summary:

^ ^ - ^ ^ Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty 1 6 2

Student 1 4
Student 2 1
Student 3 1

Total 11 3

120
Figure 6.33. Lych Gate. Source: Duboy: Carlo Scarp: Les Cahiers de la Recherche
Architecture, p 166.

Faculty 1:
- Stone before Christ's tomb
- roller - stone
- Steps to resurrection
- The weight of sins
- The unrelenting horizon line

Student 1:
- Tried to remember the sound ofthe door
- The rhythm ofthe concrete
- The detail ofthe latch
- The texture ofthe concrete and its relation to eh trees and the grass
2:
Student 2:
- Entrance gate conforms to the environment
- Way of movement is hidden in gate
- Heaviness creates a fearful emotion from entering, but the height is low enough that
you can see over the gate.

Student 3:
- Lure ofthe quiet way
121
Figure 6.33. Continued.

Summary;

Memor\ Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Facult\ 1 2 3 1
Student 1 1 3
Student 2 1
1
Student 3 1 1
Total 2 6 7

122
Figure 6.34. Corner detail of wall. Source: Guy R. Giersch.

Faculty 1:
- The defensive city
- The strong city
- The city ofthe dead
- The correspondence of east and west
- The oriental mark
- The magical connection
- The detail ofthe metal support

Student 2:
- Egyptian look
- Signifies a burial place of prominent member of society
- Helps to enhance the outer wall

Student 1:
- My first glimpse into the tomb and what 1 was about to experience
- The floating quality
- The detailing
- The reduction ofthe corner
- The texture and color within the texture

Student 3:
- Monolithic wall looks thinner with cuts punched out
- Very strong shadows
- Bold cuts with concrete planes

123
Figure 6.34. Continued>

summary:

Memory Poetic Iconographic Pragmatic

Faculty I 1 5 1
Student 1 1 4
Student 2 1 1 1
Student 3 1 2
Total 2 8 7

124
 CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The aesthetic response to architecture is complex. It involves an awareness ofthe

pragmatic as is suggested by the data produced in all ofthe surveys. Survey 1 compared

published photographs to photographs produced by architectural students and faculty.

The results indicate a tendency for photographic views to be more general among the

authors, 52% while the student/faculty group tended to have more photographs of detail,

67.2%. The probable reason is that the published photos are subject to limited space and

are selected for a more general audience. The faculty/student photograph that what

interests them. For the research purpose, the details provide the most important results.

The rest of the research is thus focused on the faculty/student group. This data from

Survey 1 supports the hypothesis that individuals in the student/faculty group would tend

to take photographs of details that provoked their interest.

Views can generate a variety of responses regardless of whether or not they are

general or specific. This is indicated in the results of Survey 2 w here the student/faculty

groups were allowed to make free responses to questions about why they selected

particular photographic views of the Brion Tomb. Survey 2 used a series of four

questions which asks for responses as to why particular photographs had been taken.

Ninety percent (90%) ofthe responses indicated in some manner the idea that detail was

important or that the detail demanded to be photographed. This further supports the

hypothesis that photographers mainly respond to the detail contained in the architecture.

125
 Survey 3 involved a student/faculty survey of the Brion using photographs that

were similar to photographs that each individual had taken. The\ were asked to respond

to each ofthe images by describing in writing why they had taken a similar photograph.

These responses were placed into four categories: Poetic (34.2%), Memory. (13.9%).

Iconographic, (5.2%), and Pragmatic, (46.5%). Poetic, Memory, and Iconographic

statements are those that have their roots in aesthetic experience. It is therefore

appropriate to combine this group of statements to total 53.5%. Although the responses

indicate a greater tendency to respond to architecture aesthetically rather than

pragmatically the two categories are quite close, there being a 7-point spread.

The result of data analysis supports the hypothesis that architecture does

communicate through its details. The Brion Tomb as the subject for this study is famous

for its pragmatic use of materials while the exceptional detailing that is to be found there

often relies on the pragmatic to communicate aesthetically.

Survey 4 involved three students and two members of the faculty in a more in-

depth viewing of one portion of the Brion, the Chapel. Analyzing the three larger

samples provided by Faculty 1 and Students 1 and 2 perhaps some conclusions can be

made even though the sample size is extremely small (see Table 6.5). Based on the data,

the altar and candle holders that are located at the altar accounted for 14.3% ofthe total

photographs taken. If the Altar detail (#40), Ceiling detail (#35), Alabaster windows

(#34) and Roof details above the Altar (#23) are added, the total percentage for all of

these views is 21.2%. The average, 21.2%, is almost one quarter ofthe recorded images.

These images are devoted to the location of 'God in the Chapel". Did Carlo Scarpa

126
recognize this and concentrate his design efforts on this -functionar aspect of the

Chapel? It IS beyond the scope ofthis paper to debate this issue. However, given that a

significant percentage deals with the Altar and its context within the Chapel this could be

significant.

One might explain the interest in the altar because of the number of elements

which make up the whole as compared to other portions of the Chapel. What of the

windows? When open, they impact the wall and the comer both internally and

externally. Because they are unusual, they attract attention. Also, they are made of

alabaster and sufftise the light entering the Chapel. This stimulates memories of the

alabaster windows in the Tomb of Galla Placidia in Ravenna where each photographer

has previously visited. Was it this aesthetic connection between a twentieth century

building and a similarly small tomb built in 420 A.D. that created the desire to

photograph them? Did a mental reflection on the on the similar qualities of light in both

tombs awaken an aesthetic experience in each photographer?

These are the sorts of questions that need to be posed in a more thorough

investigation ofthe relationships between architecture and photography and the potential

for educating designers.

For future studies, it would be beneficial to use the following procedure to collect
data:

1. Give each participant one role of film and require they take photos of
the same building, at the same time period, within a set time frame. Two
hours would probably work well.

2. Require written notation of each photograph written after taken. This

information should include information about why and what was the
photographer interested in.

127
 3. Collect and process the film.

4. Give each participant a written questionnaire to fill out conceming w h>

they photographed each view as they were taking it. This will be
compared with the notes taken after each shot.

5. After the photographs are processed establish a meeting where the

photographs can be simultaneously discussed and evaluated. The need to
be recorded for later comparison. Provide the same questionnaire to
evaluate what new responses might occur when each participant to views
their photographs again.

The Brion Tomb represents pragmatic solutions for aesthetic concepts. They are

from the hand and heart ofthe 'Architect', Carlo Scarpa, who oversaw the crafting ofthe

Brion. Authors, faculty, and students of architecture who have visited the site

understand and respond to the poetics of the space. It is captured in their photographs

and in their words.

This is a very preliminary study. The Brion Tomb is recognized for its detailing

and the amount of information written about the aesthetic qualities are well known. This

initial study indicates that the hypotheses, that individuals trained in architecture

similarly respond aesthetically to careful detail, and this aesthetic response provokes the

individual to take similar photographs that intimately connect the photographer to the

aesthetic response. Finally, that much can be learned from the experience, particularly in

the education of architects.

128
 WORKS CITED

Books

Alexander, Christopher, Sara Ishikawa, Murray Silverstein. Max Jacobson. Ingrid

Fiksdahl-King, and Shlomo Angel. A Pattern Language: Towns •
Buildings • Construction. New York: Oxford University Press. 1977.

Allsopp, Bruce. A Modern Theory of Architecture. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,
1977.

Arnheim, Rudolf The Dynamics of Architectural Form, Berkeley: Universit\ of

Califomia Press, 1977.

Bachelard, Gaston, Translated by, Maria Jolas. The Poetics of Space. Boston: Beacon
Press, 1969.

Berger, John. Ways of Seeing, New York: Penguin Books Ltd., 1972.

Buckland, Gail. Fox Talbot and the Invention of Photography. Boston: David R. Gudine
Publisher, Inc., 1980.

Busch, Akiko. The Photography of Architecture: Twelve Views. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1987.

Buttiker, Urs. Louis I. Kahn: Light and Space. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications.
1994.

Crippa, Maria Antonietta Crippa, Marina Loffi Randolin, ed. Carlo Scarpa: Theory,
Design, Projects, Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1986.

Dal Co, Francesco, and Giuseppe Mazzariol. Carlo Scarpa: The Complete Works, New
York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1984.

De Mare, Eric. Photography and Architecture. New York: Frederick A Praeger, Pub.,
1961.

Dewey, John. Art As Experience. New York: G.P. Putnams Sons, 1958.

Duboy, Philippe, ed. Les Cahiers de la Recherche Architecturale. Marseille: Editions

Parentheses, 1986.

129
Eco, Umberto. Six Walks In the Fictional Wood, Cambridge: Harvard UniversiU Press.
1994.

Eco, Umberto, Semiotics, Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1979.

Frampton, Kenneth. Modern Architecture: A Critical History. New York: Thames and
Hudson Ltd., 1996.

Frampton, Kenneth. John Cava, ed. Studies in Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of
Construction in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture.
Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996.

Frascari, Marco. Monsters of Architecture: Anthropomorphism in Architectural Theory.

Savage: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 1991.

Gernsheim, Helmut. Focus On Architecture and Sculpture: An Original Approach to the

Photography of Architecture and Sculpture. London: the Fountain Press.
1949.

Harris, Michael G. Professional Architectural Photography. Oxford: Focal Press, 1998.

Hirsch, Robert. Seizing the Light: A History of Photography. Boston: McGraw Hill,
2000.

Horenstein, Henry and Russell Hart, Photography. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall, 2001.

Kruft, Hanno-Walter. Translated by Ronald Taylor, Elsie Caallander, and Anthony

Wood. A History of Architectural Theory From Vitruvius to the Present.
New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1994.

Kiiller, Rikard, ed. Architectural Psychology: Proceedings of the Lund Conference.

Stroudsburg: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc., 1973.

Le Corbusier, Translated by Frederick Etchells. Towards a New Architecture. New York:

Dover Publications Inc., 1986.

Leach, Neil, ed. Rethinking Architecture: A Reader in Cultural Theory. London:

Rutledge, 1997.

Los, Sergio. Carlo Scarpa. Koln: Taschen, 1993.

. Carlo Scarpa: An Architectural Guide. Venice: Arsenale Editrice srl, 1995.

130
McGrath, Norman. Photographing Buildings Inside and Out. New York: W atson-
Gupthill Publications, 1993.

Miele, Chris. William Morris On Architecture. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

1996.

Mulhall, Stephen. Routledge Philosophy Guide book to Heidegge and Being and Time.
New York: Routledge, 1996.

Nesbitt, Kate, ed. Theorizing A New Agenda for Architecture: An Anthology of

Architectural Theory 1965-1995, New York: Princeton University Press.
1996.

Noever, Peter, and Philippe Duboy. The Other City Carlo Scarpa Die Andere Stadt.
Berlin: Emst and Sohn, 1989.

Norberg-Schultz, Christian. Architecture: Meaning and Place. New York: Rizzoli

Intemational Publications, Inc., 1988.

• Intentions in Architecture. Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press, 1997.

Olsberg, Nicholas, George Ranalli, Jean-Francois Bedard, Sergio Polano, Alba Di Lieto,
and Mildred Friedman. Carlo Scarpa Architect: Intervening With
History, Montreal: The Monacelli Press, 1999.

Pevsner, Nikolaus. The Sources of Modern Architecture and Design. New York:
Frederick A Praeger, Inc., 1968.

Ranalli, George, curator. Carlo Scarpa: Drawings for the Brion Family Cemetery. New
Haven: Yale School of Architecture, 1984.

Rosa, Joseph. A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman.

New York: Rizzoli, 1994.

Rutherford, Richard. The Death of a Christian: The Rite of Funerals. New York: Pueblo
Publishing Company, 1980.

Ruzicka, William T. Faulkner's Fictive Architecture: Natural and Man-made Place In

the Yoknapatawpha Novels. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms
International, 1984.

Saito, Yutaka. Carlo Scarpa. Tokyo: Atsushi Saito, 1997

131
Salazar, DuniaV. "The Function of Form: Meaning in the Work of Carlo Scarpa." MA.
thesis., Texas Tech University. 1997.

Sanoff, Henry. Visual Research Methods in Design. New York: van Nostrand Reinhold.
1991.

Scruton, Roger. The Aesthetics of Architecture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

1979.

Sobieszek, Robert A. ed. The Architectural Photography of Hedrich-Blessing New

York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1984.

Tufte, Edward R. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Cheshire: Graphics

Press, 1998.

Vitruvius. Trans. By Morris Hicky Morgan. The Ten Boos of Architecture. New York:
Dover Publications, Inc. 1960.

Zugman, Gerald. Preface by Carl G. Lewis and Peter Noever, Essay by Carl Pruscha.
Architecture in the Box: Architectural Photography 1980-1995. New
York: Springer-Verlag Wien, 1995.

Zube, Ervin H. Robert O. Bmsh, and Fabos Julius Gy, ed. Landscape
Assessment: Values, Perceptions, and Resources, Stroudsburg, Penn:
Halsted Press, 1975.

Journals

Bohringer, Hannes. "Places of No Retum." Daidalo 38 (Dec. 15, 1990): 17-134.

Carter, Brian. "Intricate and Intimate." Architects' Journal 210 (5) (July 29, 1999): 63.

Cook, Linda J. "The Italian Way of Death." Landscape Architecture (Feb. 1991) 66-69.

Doubilet, Susan. "Exhibitions: In Montreal, A Scarpa Show." Architectural Record 18

(9) (Sept. 1999): 61-62.

Frascari, Marco. "The True and the Appearance: The Italian Facadism and Carlo
Scarpa." Daedalus 6 (Dec. 1982): 37-46.

Futagawa, Yukio, ed. "Carlo Scarpa: selected Drawings." GA Document 21 (Sept. 1988).

132
Haworth-Booth, Mark, intro. "Photography and Time." Aperture (158) W'inter 2000:

Hirsch, Robert. "Why People Make Photographs Part 1." Photovision: Art and
Technique Vol. 7(1). July/August 2000: 8-9.

• "Why People Make Photographs Part II." Photovision: Art and

Technique 7(2) September/October 2000.

Hyett, Paul. "Italy's Master ofthe Complex Narrative." Architects' Journal 204 (2) JuK
11,1996:25-29.

Itoh, Tetsuo. "Architecture A La Carte." ^ + f/. 1 (Jan. 1986): 8-9.

McKean, John and Simonetta Daffarra. "The Other Garden City: Scarpas Brion Tomb."
Architects Journal 202 (18) (Nov. 9, 1995): 27-32.

Murphy, Richard. "Historic Additions." Architects' Journal 187 (20) (May 18, 1988):
24- 29

."Time Traveler." Perspectives (Sept.l994):38-39.

Nakamura, Toshio, ed. Architecture and Urbanism Extra Edition: Carlo Scarpa (Oct.
1985).

Nicolin, Pierluigi. "Carlo Scarpa: The Brion Cemetery-tomb at San Vito de Altivole: His
Most Important Work" Lotus International 38 (1983): 45-53.

Powell, Robert. "Carlo Scarpa: Architecture and Poetry." Journal ofthe Singapore
Institute of Architects (Nov/Dec 1988): 25-28.

Riegl, Alois. Kurt W. Forster and Diane Ghirardo trans. "The Meaning of Monuments
and Their Historical Development." Oppositions 25 (1982): 22-51.

Seddon, George. "The Brion Cemetery." Landscape Australia 2 (May 1991): 146- 153.

Simpson, Barry. "Master ofthe Margin." Canadian Architect 44 (9) (Sept. 1999): 20-23.

Stem, Michael A. " Passages in the Garden: An Iconology ofthe Brion Tomb."
' Landscape Journal 75,(1) (Spring 1994): 38-57.

Tsang, Phoebe. "In Celebration of Collaboration." Building Design 1276 (Sept. 6. 1996):
2.

133
 PERMISSION TO COPY

In presentmg this thesis m partialftilfillmentofthe requirements for a master's

degree at Texas Tech University or Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, I

agree that the Library and my major department shaU make it freely available for

research purposes. Permission to copy this thesis for scholarly purposes may be

granted by the Director ofthe Library or my major professor. It is understood that

any copying or publication of this thesis for financial gam shaU not be aUowed

without my ftirther written permission and that any user may be liable for copyright

infi-ingement.

Agree (Permission is granted.)

Stilldeiit Signature Date

Disagree (Permission is not granted.)

Student Signature Date