[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Both squares have been laid on axes of important avenues(Champs Élysées and Whitehall, respectively).They are large, plain slabs with verticaldominating elements in their centres (Luxor obelisk and Nelson's column, respectively).From the most important places on both Squares, there open views showing quasi an-cient frontages of "national culture temples" (the Madeleine Church and the National Gal-lery, respectively).So the Classicism survived also the 19th century, when it was entan-gled in the historism and the eclecticism.It also played a considerable role in the 20thcentury.In the early 20th century, classicism served as the continuation of tradition indefiance of the modernism.(pic.27) In 1930-1950 it served totalitarian architecture.In the79Toporow, WÅ‚adimir.2000.Miasto i Mit.Published by SÅ‚owo Obraz Terytoria.GdaÅ„sk, 260 p.62p r z e s t r z e Å„ i FORMa  12new Millennium it plays a role there, where investors need to emphasize gravity.In orderto satisfy that need, they even transform classicism on the pattern of fashionable styles,e.g.high-tech.The outcome of the Baroque Roman novelty was the rebuilding of Paris by Georges-Eugène Haussmann in the period of the Second Empire.The metropolitan ambitions inthe architectural aspect, modelled after the Vatican Counter-Reformation, were reasonsfor selecting the Neo-Baroque.The examples include Alexander III Bridge, Opera de-signed by Garnier, as well as other structures.In terms of urban architectural planning,just like 200 years earlier in Rome during the papacy of Sixtus V, Haussmann carried outradical demolitions of the depreciated, chaotic yet picturesque urban fabric, and intro-duced giant avenues with monumental squares, edifices, and monuments.In that way,the great French urban planning and architectural experiments: modernist, late modern-ist, postmodernist, and contemporary have a well-founded background and tradition.Twenty years ago, the architectural vision of Roland Castro: Le Grand Paris  Le Parisdes Cinq Paris.Banlieux 89 (The Great Paris  Paris of Five Parises, Suburbs 89") be-came a town planning sensation.Another surprise by like-minded authors included thesecond edition of the so-called Great Paris Map.80.Its highly promising counterpart be-yond the ocean is a grandiose idea of revitalization of the northern Manhattan.The ideais promoted by Michael Bloomberg, the New York City mayor, and is calledPlaNYC 2030.8111.NEW INSPIRATIONSTendencies towards surprisingly innovative creating have for ages been similar, and as-sumedly still unchanging.They last and constitute a specific creative continuum.It hap-pens so despite changes in significant factors of the general nature: historical, political,economic, and social, or, to put it in more detail: cultural, artistic, urban planning and ar-chitectural, or professional ones.In old times, it was architecture, which was primary,while urban planning was secondary to it.Nowadays, since the domination of the law oflarge numbers, this is urban planning that comes first, and then the architecture.Thosegreat changes, occurring within last 200 years, mean, first of all, the following: two indus-trial revolutions, the resultant two great political and social revolutions (the French andthe Russian), great epoch-changing wars (the Napoleonic war, two World Wars), and,finally two quasi cultural revolutions of the last century: the modernist and the postmod-ernist one.All existences specified above have been structurally interrelated.As far asthe field of research presented herein is concerned, they influence changes in the ap-proach to the development of space and, in the end, manifestations of timeless tenden-cies to design with an intention of creating a surprise.All those, who are interested in contemporary architecture and town planning may easilyclaim that they live in interesting times.There is no deficiency of surprises, the atmos-phere is not boring, and there is no stagnation.On the contrary, one may judge, morethan once, that perhaps too many things happen and in a highly chaotic way.Currentarchitectural trends, when considered comprehensively and non-selectively, have aptlybeen described in English: anything goes.Last four decades have brought fascinating or shocking changes in architecture, townplanning, and landscape.That period has also contributed a multitude of spatial andmeaning forms.When viewed at the background of majestic and slow evolutions of stylesin former history, it is surprising.One should relate it to the development of postmodernistculture, its maturation, attempts at classification (increasing notional existences), typol-80Castro, Roland i in.2009.Le Grand Paris  Le Paris de 2030.Published by Délegué à la Rénovation desBanlieues.Paryż, 30 p.81KosiÅ„ski, Wojciech.2008.Serce Å›wiata Manhattan.In: Serce miasta.Red.Gyurkovich, Jacek.Published byPolitechniki Krakowskiej, 282 p.WOJCIECH KOSIC
SKI, Twórczość architektoniczna  jako niezwykÅ‚ość 63ogy, axiological selection (hindered by the undermining of traditional values as bases forappraisal).Yet this is not the theory but practice, which is the main stimulant of the feelingof surfeit and chaos.And the reason is, first of all, the eruption of creativity.An artistic surprise of such a great format that one could consider it to be a cultural turn-ing point, which was given the name of postmodernism, was the first performance ofKrzysztof Penderecki's St.Luke Passion in Münster Cathedral in 1966 (cf.Section 6above).The epoch-making work was, among other things, an expression of wearinesswith idle experiments in modern music of preceding years.The architectural analogiesare unavoidable, simply obvious.In the spheres of architecture and town planning that new era began formally in the verysame year 1966, simultaneously, but independently, at both sides of the Atlantic, uponthe publication of two striking books.These were: Aldo Rossi's "The Architecture of theCity,"82 and Robert Venturi's "Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture".83.Both ofthem initiated new approaches to the perception of tradition and novelty.The date coinci-dence of the appearance of those both publications was quite unexpected, though it wasa characteristic signum temporis.Both books in a similar way have performed their roles,critical for an intellectual consideration and creative stimulation.The were  just like theirsubject matter  an evident surprise.On the one hand, they included the criticism ofmodernism, on the other built a receptive approach to the new.Still, in opposition to themodernism, they promoted that novelty based on the principles of cultural continuity, re-spect for tradition, and recognizing of the context.They also communicated all that actu-ally developed in the more mature period of postmodernism, around 2000: the new read-ing of the aesthetics, and sustainability in investment factors and nature factors.The epoch, which preceded postmodernism in the second half of the 1960s was a greatsurprise, but a negative one [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]