This is a link to some of my sketches I made.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4bJg-s7RXLINmsySm1XMkRTYVlmOFpNZ3VHOGw1MDZvekhF
Professor Montgomery
This is a link to some of my sketches I made.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4bJg-s7RXLINmsySm1XMkRTYVlmOFpNZ3VHOGw1MDZvekhF
The development of lower Manhattan was changing for the better. New architects were creating essential buildings. A lot of the architecture were the beaux-arts style. Architects were creating things with classical influence while still wanting to be unique and stand out. The characteristics of most of the architecture we saw on our trip were dramatic, with sculptures and subtle detailing with tall columns creating grandeur entrances.
The City Beautiful movement was an important evolvement in the architectural world at the time. There was a lot of capital coming in, so to show the power and abundance. Architects would create things that could be seen from far away.
When arriving on Wall Street and Broad Street, You can see the mark that the dutch era had left. The widths of the streets were more prominent than most. So you can still see a little bit of the early dutch influence in particular streets were given higher key. If you look down on Wall Street, you could see the hint of where the old wall used to stand. Standing
Another factor of that era was on how to build a building and the three fundamentals things to keep in mind. A Base, A middle, and An end. When looking at buildings built in that era like the Woolworth. The base of the building is thicker while the central piece is taller than the last part gets thinner. Brooklyn Bridge marked a new era of engineering and architecture. The connectivity between Brooklyn and lower Manhattan quickly sparked the development of urban planning for Brooklyn.
Each of the buildings we saw is a unique treasure to New York City’s Architecture. Each marked a period in time where change was inevitable; wanting to stand out and be different was a must and embracing the old, but craving something fresh was part of design developments. Accepting the outline of streets that were here before and creating a new experience walking down a building was imbedded into the layout and spaces.
The Frick Museum and Guggenheim are two very different spaces. The circulation of exhibit spaces. The placement of arts and sculptures are opposite from each other. The Frick Museum is constant while Guggenheim changes within its walls. While most people go to The Frick to see the art and tour the space, Others mostly go to Guggenheim to see the building itself.
Guggenheim was created and built off-ramps. The movement of people through the space is embedded in the design of Guggenheim. Unlike most museums, there’s no room exhibit but exhibit halls which you experience walking up or down the ramps. The skydome is the primary source of natural light within that space of the museum — the art changes, hosting many different types of art or events. One system I think is impressive with Guggenheim Is that even with the museum walls tilting, the art pieces are straight. The Guggenheim is the only Building of Frank Lloyd Wright in New York City. Which I think brings value and crowd to the place.
The Frick is historical and is a reminder of the beauty that is classical art. Each piece is a moment of history frozen in time. You go from one exhibit space to another, which creates a unique experience with each different area. It has the garden court, with tall columns and a skylight that fills the room with natural light. It intertwines nature within the moving of each area. A never-changing museum that holds so much value. It’s there to spark and educate the interest of anyone who loves fine details.
Unlike the Frick, Guggenheim was created to be a museum; it was designed with the thought of circulation in mind. Different from most museums. Its exhibit spaces are elongated through the ramp walls. For anyone who goes to visit, You are meant to go to the 6th floor then walk down to the lobby. While walking down, You can enjoy the art pieces as you go. Guggenheim is also here to educate, but I think the architecture shadows it. The Frick was once residential; it wasn’t made to be a museum, which has its benefits. Unlike the Guggenheim, The Frick has many different sources of natural light not just from one sky-dome but from windows as well. To me, the natural light that comes into the spaces helps anyone walking touring feel better. Both Museums have there unique contribution to the Architectureture of New York.
© 2024 ARCH3522 NYC Arch, FA2019
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
Recent Comments