Grace Brooks - Formal Analysis I Portfolio - YSoA by gracebrooksdesigns

FORMAL ANALYSIS Grace Brooks

Yale School of Architecture Fall 2021 Prof: Peter Eisenman TA: Hannah Mayer Baydoun

BRUNELLESCHI Chisea Di San Lorenzo Basilica Di Santa Spirito

Florence, Italy - 1470

Florence, Italy - 1487

Through the examination of the formal and spatial organization of Brunelleschi’s Chiesa di San Lorenzo and Basilica di Santa Spirito, there is an apparent systematic module repetition governed by perspectival design. The critical difference between the two churches lies in the resolution of proportional perfection. Brunelleschi conceptualized the new Renaissance ideal of beauty by using the visualization of perspective through proportion to invent a new formal language. San Lorenzo, completed in 1470, is comprised of a modular grid consisting of interlocking arches, columns and entablatures that make a self-supporting system that can repeated. As one of his earlier designs there are places within the church including the aisles, entry sequence and elevation composition that are not quite resolved and result in awkward spaces. Santa Spirito, completed in 1487, as originally drawn by Brunelleschi himself, is his final resolution of perspectival design that perfects the module spacing and proportion to create a hyper-perspective space. The critical difference between San Lorenzo and Santa Spirito is the mathematics of the grid layout in plan to create a proper perspectival experience of the space free of awkward intersections. The difference between the two buildings is manifested in the entry sequences. The 2-1-1/2 grid layout is apparent in both churches, but in San Lorenzo the rule is broken to accommodate a central main entrance which results in an awkward aisle interstitial space between the nave and the chapels. In Santa Spirito we see the grid layout rule is continuous all the way around the plan which results in two off center entrances. By not breaking the rule in Santa Spirito, Brunelleschi creates a seamless hypostyle experience of space created by the perspectival proportion.

ALBERTI Tempio Malatestiano

Rimini, Italy - 1468 (unfinished)

Alberti creates a historical paradox by layering different architectural elements and ornaments from various periods of architectural style. This can be seen in the interior and exterior elevations of the front façade of Tempio Malatestiano The critical relationship between interior and exterior lies in the expression of the entrance with the layering of the temple front and the triumphal arch through a protruding entry sequence leading to an interior space layered with gothic figures and ornaments on top of existing Roman structure. The front façade of Malatestiano consists of both the triangular temple front directly above the door as well as a wider arch appearing to be unsupported by columns as ornament of the center piece of the façade. The columns beneath the temple front are purely ornamental as well as the other columns on the rest of the façade. This is due to Alberti’s expression of importance of the compromise wall and column. Again, Alberti is layering two different antiquity techniques, expressed at the same time. On the interior of the building, gothic like figures are placed are framed by Greek and Roman pillars applied to an existing wall. While it may appear as if Alberti is paying homage to historical architecture, he is constructing a historical paradox that shows little care for existing motifs and structures.

BRAMANTE Cloister at Santa Maria Della Pace Rome, Italy - 1482 Palazzo Ducale Urbino Urbino, Italy - 1454 Bramante’s design was dependent on intense rigor and resolution through systematic proportion. The resolution of the corner conditions at the cloisters of Santa Maria Della Pace and Palazzo Ducale at Urbino is indicative of Bramante’ use of solid and void to assert rationality and proportion into the built environment. At Santa Maria Della Pace Bramante uses subdivision of the square plan to get to an arcade with 16 piers, which is the perfect number according to Vitruvius. This subdivision technique is portrayed through the expression of solids, Roman order columns, on both the ground level and the second story. There are four types of orders used on the arcade, Tuscan, ionic, Corinthian and composite which are indicative of Bramante’s use of solid to affirm rationality. At the corner, the combination of orders result in Ionic column being compressed and Tuscan pilasters applied on either side that are as small as possible to make sure they are no wider than they are deep. Bramante’s extreme rigor and systematic approach results in consistent resolutions without the breaking of the square vaulted bays exterior to the arcade At Palazzo Ducale in Urbino, we see the use of void to reinforce the proportional relationships set out by Bramante seen by the thinness of the composite columns used. Due to this thinness, the corners are a thicker structural member which is resolved through the innovation of two right angle piers to support the upper stories. Because the proportions are expressed through void in plan and elevation, the corners must be resolved with two columns and piers. At the second story we see a different style of pilasters applied directly above the ground level columns as an extension of their rationale. At the corner we see again two larger piers that are extended past the entablature of the flanking partial piers. Both designs show Bramante’s strict rigor of proportion and rationale but is expressed through different styles of columns and perceptions of solid and voids.

RAFFAELLO Expulsion of Heliodorus, Stanze di Raffaello

Apostolic Palace, Vatican City - 1513

The Expulsion of Heliodorus constructs a complex perspectival painting and deep space architecture using a rigorous perspectival proportion system that explores new geometries and scales as a departure from previous Renaissance architects. Raffaello brings in the exploration of the circle, octagon and sphere in this painting, using concentric semicircular frames and arches, a column-arch-dome system and octagonal projections. In order to construct this painting, there is clearly a system of proportion used, similar to Bramante, to lay out the plan, elevation and subjective view. Additionally, the use of the semi-circular frame, shows an exploration of perspectival deep space that adds a layer of scale consideration not seen in previous Renaissance architecture. In the past the perspectival system was set up as an abstract concept and experimentation of object building. But in Raffaello’s painting we see the use of people to provide context to the grandeur of the architecture and occupants of space. This implies a consideration of human scale within the greater proportional system and the practice of space building. Figures within the painting are working in conjunction with the frame of the painting to construct two perspectives happening at the human-architecture scale and the viewer-painting scale, layered and nested within each other.

05 MICHELANGELO Laurentian Library

Florence, Italy - 1571

The staircase at the Ricetto is indicative of a part to whole design motif maintained by Michelangelo throughout the design process. The two flanking rectilinear stairs are an homage to classical architecture and order. The addition of the center staircase, as requested by the Pope, brings into question how the procession from the lower level of the Ricetto up to the main level of the library might be accentuated and resolved to create a unified sculptural staircase entry with appropriate scale. The articulation of the staircase was a long process that ended as a manifestation of the iterative process and the joining of new and old approaches to design. The rectilinear steps on the side indicate a mathematical and rigorous approach to geometry, whereas the central oval shaped steps with three landings indicates an abstract approach to form building. It is the critical point of the banisters and railing as well as the landing that the stair becomes a homogenous sculpture that is the idealistic example of the mannerism movement. The staircase is obviously proportionally substantial in comparison the classical staircases. The ovular broadening steps is indicative of the compositional focus of the Mannerists in comparison to the perspectival proportion system of the past.

SERLIO House of the Illustrious Prince

Book VI: On Habitation, 1537

The House of the Illustrious Prince to be built in the Countryside is indicative of the Mannerism period as it is an exploration of different geometries used in tandem to create a unified whole without using a systematic or symmetrical approach. Serlio uses concentric hexagonal geometries to develop plan that develops from in the inside out. With a courtyard in the middle with a hexagonal colonnade at the perimeter, it is implied that there is symmetry in the building, however Serlio falsifies this implication in the next ring of spaces outward from the center. Using poche as technique, similar to the work of Michelangelo, he nests different geometries of spaces that break the symmetry of the concentric hexagon. In Book VI Serlio states, “Variation is always a fine thing provided that variety is not vain and ugly.” I am arguing that in this plan he executes this idea of harmonious variation through the use of two systems; concentric outward expanding hexagons and asymmetry of the interior poche spaces in order to create a balanced part-to-whole relationship of the plan. By setting up these two systems he creates a method in which he breaks the symmetry rules of the past in order to explore a new mode of geometric exploration, indicative of the Mannerism movement.

PALLADIO Il Redentore Venice, Italy - 1592 San Giorgio Maggiore Venice, Italy - 1610 Palladio intellectualizes historical methodologies of the Renaissance to set the framework for systems theory that is still apparent in modern, postmodern and contemporary architectural theory. Previous designers of the Renaissance take use a proportion system set determined by the human body. However, Palladio makes a commentary on architecture as a whole discipline by employing multiple systems at work which sets the rationalist framework for systems theory. Systems theory in a contemporary context can be defined as, “cohesive groups of interrelated, interdependent parts that is bounded by space and time, influenced by its environment, defined by it structure and purpose, and expressed through its functioning.” In application to Palladian design, we see interrelated elements, meaning each one is an iteration of the previous, used to create subgroups and units within a larger plan or façade to create a larger complex building that is connected to the city at large. Palladio uses this “hodgepodge” of units to create a balanced system that acts in both plan and elevation. Il Redentore and San Giorgio Maggiore are both examples of Palladio’s application of historically informed systems integrated to create balanced compositional plans and façade. In both facades we see elements that are clearly drawn from iconic historic architecture, different structural systems working in tandem, and a layering of ornament and style. The plan is no exception with clear thresholds and divisions between spaces governed by different organizations. Despite the lack of continuity and repetition, Palladio is able to create a harmonious system by understanding how each unit, style and subgroup impact and respond to eachother.

08 VIGNOLA Villa Guilia

Rome, Italy - 1553

Vignola orchestrates a series of distinct experiential space along a main axis that gradually transitions from compressed spaces to expanded spaces in order to create a crescendo effect. The main axis of implied procession is interrupted by a compressed threshold that frames a view into the subsequent space. The project is framed on either end of the axis by a “compressed” Nymphaeum and a grand or “expanded” casino that use similar geometries and architectural elements but have juxtaposing experiences due to the articulation of views. Vignola is focused on the sectional composition of all of the subsequent views as seen by the attention to the increasing scale of the ornaments, columns and arches moving towards the casino in order to orchestrate this crescendo affect.

BORROMINI San Carlo Alle Quattro Fontane Rome, Italy - 1638 Sant’Ivo Alla Sapienza Rome, Italy - 1642 These two works by Borromini are indicative of the assertion of power by the Catholic church during the Counter-Reformation. By creating intense, massive spaces that deny the human scale, Borromini imposes a domineering form as a representation of the Catholic Church’s central power. Centrality and verticality are the driving principles in both Sant’Ivo and San Carlo. From the ground level up, there is an apparent increase in complexity, mass and ornament moving towards the ‘splendori celesti’, which implies the power, pomp and glory of God and those who worship him. All of the movement, light and thus emphasis, is pushed towards the center of the plan in both buildings. This methodology of heightening and focusing the space is used in both churches, but Sant’Ivo is a more resolved iteration of this effect based on the logic that informs the plan geometries. San Carlo’s ovular organization creates multiple focal points in comparison to Sant’Ivo’s singular resolution of curvilinear geometry.

BERNINI & RAINALDI Santa Maria Di Monte Santo Santa Maria De Miracoli

Rome, Italy - 1678 Rome, Italy - 1679

The twin churches designed initially by Rainaldi before taken over by Bernini, depict the difference between a Mannerist approach to design and the newer Baroque approach seen in the plan geometries and façade frontality. Santa Maria Di Monte Santo was more influenced by Bernini as we see the façade and plan altered from Rainaldi’s original concentric plan seen in Santa Maria de Miracoli. Monte Santo’s ovular plan is, in general, a departure from classical thought, but it also brings a new perspectival appproach into the discussion. Designed to be seen as twins at the entrance to the city, the two facades were intended to be identical by Rainaldi. However, the ovular geometry of Monte Santo breaks the geometry on one axis but it preserves the appearance of the façade from the center of the Piazzo. This shows a subjective approach in comparison to Miracoli Greek Cross symmetrical plan that preserves the frontality of the façade more indicative of a Mannerist objective approach.

NOLLI & PIRANESI Nolli Map Campo Marzio

Rome, Italy - 1748 Rome, Italy - 1765

The depictions of a future Rome by Nolli and Piranesi demonstrate a prioritization of Roman values. Nolli clearly values public space as a part of Rome’s future as he draws it as the figure within the composition. The public space is also extended into the churches and other religious sites within the city, which not only shows value in the public but in religion. Nolli argues with his maps that religion and public access are crucial elements to be a part of Rome’s future and gives little attention to the ancient ruins outside the newer parts of the city. Piranesi on the other hand values such ancient ruins as being at the core of Rome’s power. The Campo Marizo depict a fantastical Rome derived from the aggregation of ruins and a history of nobility. Unlike the Nolli maps the Campo Marizo lacks a clear distinction between figure and ground and instead relies on density to portray a future Rome built on a history of power. In summation, the Campo Marizo values the historical relevance of Rome’s urban future, where as the Nolli Maps place value on the people as a new form of urbanity.

ST. PETER’S BASILLICA Bramante, Raffaello, Michelangelo, Borromini

Vatican, City - Begun 1506 Completed 1615

St. Peter’s final iteration encapsulates the intersections within the representation of divinity through architecture over time. By layering different motifs and manifestations of the divine by a series of architects, St. Peter’s becomes the sempiternal body of Catholicism.

Our first drawing looks at the different understandings of divinity through a larger systematic scale.First, Bramante’s plan illustrates St. Peters in a Greek cross configuration, holding the fidelity of the plan and centrifugal scheme as relating to the divine. As a result, the axes are bound within the confines of the plan, turning the notion of divinity inward to create a more insular scheme. Next, Raphael’s iteration brings in the notion of perspective, elongating the nave in a barrel vault. This extension, reinforced by the entablature, extends the axis outward, extending divinity beyond the confines of the container. Next, Michelangelo’s iteration is interested in the experiential through the monumental dome. As a result, the axis is extended infinitely upward. While this iteration reverts back to the Greek cross configuration, the extension of the steps forward still suggests extension of the nave axis. Finally, Bernini’s configuration maintains all prior notions of divinity, but adding the Baldacchino to add scale to those within, as well as the plaza to add scale to the rest of Vatican city and connect St. Peter’s and its extension of its axes to the surrounding context of the city. The second drawing is a more specific analysis of the resultant conditions of the church as manifestations of the representations of divinity by the different eras of architects layered together. From Bramante’s fidelity to the plan we see a level of rationalism exhibited by a symmetrical center of bases and pilasters supporting the dome. From Raphael we see perspectival motifs reinforced by the barrel vaults and the entablature leading the occupants to the divine center. From Michelangelo there is an experiential quality to his contributions seen by the articulation of the dome as an encapsulation of divinity enhanced by the glowing light of the clerestories. Finally from Bernini’s contributions we understand the baldacchino as the marking of St. Peter’s remains as the true divine center of not only the dome but also the Vatican city and the Catholic institution.

Drawings completed in collaboration with Samantha Hrusovsky