2000.11.20
9 November 1778
Yesterday morning I was looking through the recent Taschen (www.taschen.com) publication of Piranesi's complete etchings, and therein I noticed that Piranesi died on 9 November 1778. With respect to my last post here, I'm now at least pleased that information seems to be 'participating' with my obscure architectural /theoretical researches /entertainments. (I'm not here trying to refute Paul's most recent post, re: information not being able to participate, indeed I'm become quite respectful of all the posts of late--plainly put, there is so much offered that is worth thinking about, plus add alternative views to.) At the very least I'm now mostly happy that Helena, Eutropia, Constantine and Piranesi still manage to exhibit signs of life. Architectural aesthetics and theories provide such an enormous fertile field, that is seems very true that the best way to enjoy it all is to plant seeds, supply some nuturing, and then watch some tremendous fruit bearing growth emerge.
Piranesi, as far as I can tell, was the most recent past architect/theorist to give architectural homage to Helena. Four plates in the Antichita Romane vol. III depict Helena's (ruined) mausoleum in Rome plus her sepulcher (which is now in the Vatican Museum). In vol. II of the Antichita Romane there are four plates that depict (what is today called) Santa Costanza, (originally the mausaleum of Constantina, the daughter of Constantine, and the grand daughter of Helena and Eutropia), plus Constantina's sepulcher (which is now also in the Vatican museum in the same room as Helena's sepulcher). Piranesi also offers a reconstructed plan of the original Constantinian basilca (it was quite huge) built over the catacomb where St. Agnes was buried, to which Santa Costanza was originally attached.
It was through my research of St. Agnes (on April 1, 1999 - Holy Thursday) in relation to my ongoing research of Piranesi's Ichnographia Campi Martii that I first found out about St. Helena. (I wrote about how all this relates within Piranesi's large plan of the Campo Marzio in a paper I delivered in Brussels a year ago next Saturday.)
Anyway, since what's occupying most of the writers here at architecthetics is what guiding structure there might for architectural aesthetics today, I suggest looking at various episodes that happened exactly here at architecthetics throughout 1999 -- at the base of a lot of it is the notion of what is trustworthy and what is not trustworthy. Here are some examples, starting with Marcus' post of whether a sculpture can be architecture; my mistrust of Paul's view of Frank Lloyd Wright; Hugh's mistrust of Duchamp's urinal (as faux ready-made); the (dubious?) nature of architectural photography; Alex's mistrust of "hero" historicism.
[I like it most when I read people's true feelings versus projection of feelings that are 'supposed' to be had.]
|