Architecture as Space
Architecture as Space
Bruno Zevi
When reading “Architecture as Space� the first thing that caught my eye was the explanation of architecture being in forms of the different views of plans, and not seeing them as different spatial views. I have always thought of architecture as sculpture with interior space, which I have gathered through building plans. I never made the connection that you have to physically see something in reality and see it in its “fourth dimension� to grasp the thought of architecture. I just always put two with two. As I was reading the article I asked my roommate, what is your definition of architecture? She said, “the different views in drawing plans.� After reading the article I realized that she was correct but that is true in the 2-dimension form. That architecture isn’t the drawings on paper, it’s the physical form of those ideas, and more it’s the human interaction that we have with environment that the architecture holds. I understand and agree with the article that architecture isn’t just the schematic or construction drawings it’s the physical reality of the structure.
As said before, I have always thought of architecture as sculpture with interior space. As said in the article, it is something that man is physically inside. Unlike every other form of art, you view the 3D structure through the outside along with the in side. It’s something that you can describe and draw on plans but to physically be in it and be able to see every angle and dimension, including perspective, exact color and natural light, the creativeness of details with materials, you cannot obtain these things in a realistic and exact way. These things all create space. Zevi gives the definition of architecture as space. I had never thought of it this way, because it’s too broad and many things that aren’t architecture could fit under this category. Like the ocean or desert, or a rowboat, or box.
Space is a good description because it covers all aspects of architecture, including the architecture that doesn’t include man inside the structure, but I also think it’s a bad description because we could use this noun to describe many things. We use “space� to describe a characteristic or feature of something. The car had plenty of “space�. The ocean had all the “space� in the world. The airplane seat was in a tight “space�. I don’t like the definition of space for something that is so unique and influential of the world. Something so powerful, like the Chartres Cathedral, gets to be defined as a plain word of space.
To be more specific of what architecture is we look at the obvious, as stated in the article, interior space. Something I hadn’t thought about were the things that don’t hold interior space, like bridges, obelisk, fountain, or a monument.
I can see the point made, what makes it architecture is the human relationship and connection with a structure. Like the Vietnam Veterans Memorial by Maya Lin. 
It doesn’t hold man inside, but around it. The relationship and connection associated with the wall puts it under the architecture category. It could be landscape architecture, because of how the area is arranged for human to interact with, but I see the memorial as a structure, a sculpture. A bridge, I see as architecture. It has all of the physically structured requirements, external form, internal organism, the muscles, and skeleton. And it’s connection with human interaction. The Eiffel tower I see as architecture. It’s not enclosed but it’s, yes, a monument, but the human eye is in it. 
Just like the Statue of Liberty. Although I truly believe that if you aren’t physically occupying it, then it’s not architecture. Like Monument of Garibaldi. 
What is the difference from this to a pyramid, or the Parthenon, or the Nike of Samothrace? The Nike of Samothrace is a statue. It has a base and a form of movement. 
What is the difference of that to the Parthenon? The Parthenon is the monument of Athena. It has a statue inside, except you physically have to enter a structure that holds interior space. 
So the difference from the Parthenon to a pyramid is that a pyramid is a monument and structure and is only meant for one single human, and that is the being who is buried at the bottom of it. 
The area around it is for the other humans to interact at the spirit of the burial grounds. That is not what makes it architecture though, because a head stone does that. It’s the single presents of that one person; it was created for human kind. And now back to the Monument of Garibaldi, it is a monument, not architecture, because it is not meant for the occupied reason of human kind.
I do understand the conceptual relationship with Urban Space, or Urban Architecture, as I would like to call it, because of the relationship of humans and a structure that takes place outside of the “architecture�. As before I used the example of the Veterans Memorial. This consumes the relationship of human interaction, so I would agree that is architecture. Like Central Park, which was designed to look that way so that NYC would interact with it. 
That is where Landscape Architecture comes in. But I believe that there is a huge gap between Architecture… and … Landscape Architecture. Because to me the actual definition as discussed earlier is a 3D structure/sculpture that obtains human interaction through interior space. I understand that Central Park has a sky for a ceiling and a fence for walls, but it’s missing the 3D structure/sculpture aspect. So to say that Urban Architecture is actually Architecture I think is a big stretch. People often categorize them in the same group. Are you going into Landscape or Residential? Well to start with there are many kinds; bridges, monuments, skyscrapers, etc. But they do not all exceed the definition of what architecture truly is, a 3D structure/sculpture that obtains a connection with human interaction through interior space.
Key points covered just for clarification: What is Architecture? Argument of Space. Phenomena of man in architecture. Interior space. Physical Structure that makes Architecture. Human connection with architecture. Urban Architecture