Ariès, Philippe. The Hour of Our Death. New York: Knopf, 1981.
Harris, Mark. Grave Matters: A Journey Through the Modern Funeral Industry to a Natural Way of Burial. New York: Scribner, 2007.
Harrison, Robert Pogue. The Dominion of the Dead. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.
Heathcote, Edwin. Monument Builders: Modern Architecture and Death. Chichester, West Sussex: Academy Editions, 1999.
Jackson, Kenneth T., and Camilo J. Vergara. Silent Cities: The Evolution of the American Cemetery. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1989.
Jupp, Peter C., and Glennys Howarth. The Changing Face of Death: Historical Accounts of Death and Disposal. New York, N.Y.: St. Martin's Press, 1997.
Mitford, Jessica. The American Way of Death Revisited. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1998.
Taylor, Mark C., and Dietrich Christian Lammerts. Grave Matters. London: Reaktion Books, 2002.
Ragon, Michel. The Space of Death: A Study of Funerary Architecture, Decoration, and Urbanism. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1983.
Yalom, Marilyn. The American Resting Place. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co, 2008.
Galileo broke space apart. To this day, notions based off his discoveries define our spatial relationships with the universe. Like it’s counterpart time, space as an experience seems to exist apart from the human brain. However, time seems to be a catalyst for space, propelling us through natural and built environments alike. Space accommodates our experiences, time directs these experiences. Space is our immediate experience, it is our now, or reality. As Faucault points out, space has not yet been "desanctified", this is clearly understood because space is an experience in which all of the senses are engaged and this emotional response causes visceral and spiritual reactions. That is why it important for space to suggest a direction. We are continually defining ourselves based on a point in space--we make ourselves relative. We allow our imaginations to guide us, we define our spaces by the utopias we imagine. In doing so, we elevate space to a higher standing. If something is perceived, then it is inherently unreal. In this way we have shaped our attitudes towards death. Along with the "individualization" of death, we have moved it's simple premise to something untouchable, something placed far away, something imagined. We foolishly mark gravestones in order to assert permanence, but we fail to realize the obvious impermanence of this action.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most interesting parts to the article "structure" is when the term structure is traced back to its use in biology. I believe that if we look at nature and how things have biologically formed a structural system, we can learn endless configurations of support systems. Herbert Spencer takes the idea further saying, “structure was always the outcome of a particular function: ‘distinct duties entail distinct structures,’ and ‘changes of structures cannot occur without changes in function.” The idea of form following function is brought up. Looking at nature and an example of a leaf, we can see this idea of a structural system formed for a specific function. The more light a plant has to absorb the broader the leaf must be, therefore the structural system will adapt and change to support expanding leaf. In architecture we see this idea in variations of building types. If a building must occupy a small amount of people the structural system will be small and simple. When another building will occupy a large amount of people the building structure will change to be more complex and more supportive.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most recent architects we see using this idea of natural structural system would be Santiago Calatrava. He uses the human body for design.