While recently re-reading Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead, I found many issues confronted in the book that go well with our class. Ayn Rand also touches on the Ontological arguments with her philosophy of Objectivism. Though interesting, it does not pertain too much to our current progression in class.
Here are two quotes of note from the book that I will be discussing;
“Every piece of it is there because the house needs-and for no other reason. You see it from here as it is inside. The rooms in which you’ll live made the shape. The relation of masses was determined by the distribution of space within. The ornament was determined by the method of construction, an emphasis of the principle that makes it stand” (page 136)
“Because the beauty of the human body is that it hasn’t a single muscle which doesn’t serve its purpose; that there’s not a line wasted; that every detail of it fits one idea, the idea of a man and the life of a man. Will you tell me why, when it comes to a building, you don’t want it to look as if it had any sense or purpose, you want to choke it with trimmings, you want to sacrifice its purpose to its envelope – not knowing why you even want that envelope?” (page 165)
One of the themes in the novel is the use of old architectural styles in modern designs of architecture. The protagonist (or antagonist to some), Howard Roark, has a very unique style of design that is fairly antipodean to the established norm. Roark focuses on designing buildings that only employ designs that are needed and serve a purpose. He does not utilize columns where they are not needed, he does not add facades to buildings superfluously or for "aesthetic" beauty. It is because of this dedication to creating the way he desires that I believe he is engaging in the creation of true art. The reader witnesses the rise and subsequent fall (of sorts) of Roark throughout the novel as he attempts to survive in a world that is so utterly opposed to him.
His methods of design demand contemplation on architecture today as well. When we look at buildings today they seem to be either fairly classical or "modern". What Roark argues and I would tend to agree with is that innovative design is not superfluous in anyway and must serve a purpose. Otherwise it devolves to mere mimicry. After considering this I would suggest that not only emotion and meaning be used as the drive for art and the pursuit of beauty, but purpose as well. Though meaning and purpose are very similar conceptually, I would suggest rather that purpose is more distinct. Meaning can be abstracted quite easily, though it would benefit from a broad view of it's context in order to benefit someone contemplating the meaning of a given occurrence. Purpose however, when taken in the proper light I believe it deserves, is rather encompassing and demands full context in order for it to fulfill it's full meaning. Purpose provides not only meaning but direction. To put it in terms of mathematics, meaning would be a scalar while purpose would be a vector. Purpose helps drive true art and makes it not a singular occurrence but all of the occurrences that led up to the inception and actuation of the art as well as every occurrence concerning the piece afterwards. Purpose is something that is eternal and will take many forms before reaching a climax.
No comments:
Post a Comment