In Cedric Price’s “The Invisible Sandwich”, the author explains how design transcends the physical aspects such as materiality and aesthetics and exudes intangible properties. For example, spatial relationships between different floors of a buildings produce unique qualities for each story. Having distilled the building into abstract terms, Price believes that architecture should serve to “extend the value and usefulness of human life” (Price, 12). In other words, a building should function as a beneficial change. Using sculptures as a comparison to architecture, Price stresses on the requirement for flexible design in preparation of future uses of the same volumes. Also, the writer believes that the architects’ purpose in design includes the
…show more content…
As juxtaposing the two buildings make look from the exterior, they employ similar implicit geometric arrangements, “8 units in length, by 5 ½ in breadth, by 5 in height”, when assembling the floor plans (Rowe, 3-4). Utilizing two examples with seemingly contradicting architectural languages, Rowe clarifies that the interpretation of these buildings should not look at the contextual qualities such as temporal position on a historical timeline and location; rather, the analysis should focus on the objects in isolation. Even though Rowe discovers many parallels between Palladio’s work and Le Corbusier’s, he does mention the justifications for the geometric forms differ for the two architects. Correspondingly, Rowe collocates the two rationales; “Palladio is concerned with the logical disposition of motifs dogmatically accepted… while Le Corbusier… contrasts the new system with the old and is a little more comprehensive” (Rowe, 4). Based on this contradistinction of principles, Rowe infers that during the Renaissance period, architects manipulated mathematical ratios to ultimately achieve absolute natural beauty. In addition, from the logic of ideal geometry Rowe delineates the difference between perceptual and conceptual. For Palladio geometry operates to improve the visual aesthetics or the perceived beauty of a building while for Le Corbusier
As juxtaposing the two buildings make look from the exterior, they employ similar implicit geometric arrangements, “8 units in length, by 5 ½ in breadth, by 5 in height”, when assembling the floor plans (Rowe, 3-4). Utilizing two examples with seemingly contradicting architectural languages, Rowe clarifies that the interpretation of these buildings should not look at the contextual qualities such as temporal position on a historical timeline and location; rather, the analysis should focus on the objects in isolation. Even though Rowe discovers many parallels between Palladio’s work and Le Corbusier’s, he does mention the justifications for the geometric forms differ for the two architects. Correspondingly, Rowe collocates the two rationales; “Palladio is concerned with the logical disposition of motifs dogmatically accepted… while Le Corbusier… contrasts the new system with the old and is a little more comprehensive” (Rowe, 4). Based on this contradistinction of principles, Rowe infers that during the Renaissance period, architects manipulated mathematical ratios to ultimately achieve absolute natural beauty. In addition, from the logic of ideal geometry Rowe delineates the difference between perceptual and conceptual. For Palladio geometry operates to improve the visual aesthetics or the perceived beauty of a building while for Le Corbusier