Basically Vitruvius piece was on laying out a Roman city. What fascinates me about Vitruvius is his way of describing architecture. My way of describing architecture would have a lot of modern terms to it but also a technology side. While Vitruvius didn't have modern examples or even techniques. Everything was done completely by hand.
I do agree with Vitruvius in that one should have more of an expanded knowledge on different subjects but do you really need some of this knowledge to understand architecture? Like astronomy, Vitruvius states, "If one has no knowledge of these matters, he will not be able to have any comprehension of the theory of sundials." I can understand how in Vitrucius's time this would have been helpful but in ours I'm not quite sure.
Also, I do not think that knowing medicine is an extremely important thing. There are different ways in understanding the healthiness and unhealthiness of sites. A lot of the things stated in Vitruvius's book has to do with his time. I do think his book is very useful into understanding the philosophy side of architecture.
No comments:
Post a Comment