 |
[email protected] |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
The Symbolic Expression in the Material Form in Public Spaces
Goda Sūdžiūtė
Full-Text PDF
XML 370 Views
DOI:10.17265/1934-7359/2023.07.003
Department of Architectural Fundamentals, Theory and Art, Faculty of Architecture, Vilnius Tech, Pylimo st. 26, Vilnius 01141, Lithuania
The article explores the topic of symbolic expression in the physical elements that form urban public spaces. It is done by giving an overview and analysing spaces that hold a widely-recognised symbolic value. The author discusses the means of encoding and perceiving meanings in the spacial composition, physical form and materials of its elements, and other aspects that influence the sensory or psychological perception of the observer. At the same time, different theoretical approaches to the perception of space are discussed, addressing not only architectural theory but also the ideas proposed in the fields of philosophy, fenomenology and cultural studies.
Architectural symbolism, memorials, public spaces, urban spaces.
[1] Norberg-Schulz, C. 1974. Existence, Space & Architecture (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Praeger Publishers.
[2] Eco, U. 1984. Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
[3] Fisher, J. 2009. “Architektur: schweres Kommunikationsmedium der Gesellschaft.” In Architektur der Gesellschaft. http://www.bpb.de/apuz/ 31929/architektur-der-gesellschaft. (in German)
[4] Merleau-Ponty, M. 2005. Phenomenology of Perception. London, New York: Rotledge.
[5] Hall, S. 1980. Culture, Media, Language. London, New York: Routledge.
[6] Davis, V. 2004. Understanding Stuart Hall. London: SAGE Publications.
[7] Eco, U. 1973. Function and Sign: The Semiotics of Architecture. In Rethinking Architecture, edited by N. Leach. London, New York: Routledge.
[8] Čiupailaitė, D. 2017. “Architektūra kaip ne/su/si/kalbėjimas. Virtualus architektūros muziejus.” Accessed May 10, 2023 https://sociologai.lt/2017/architektura-kaip-nesusikalbeji
mas/. (in Lithuanian)
[9] Arnheim, R. 1997. Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. Oakland: University of California Press.
[10] Berleant, A. 2012. Aesthetics beyond the Arts. London, New York: Routledge.
[11] Lefebre, H. 1991. The Production of Space. Oxford, Cambridge: Blackwell.
[12] Benjamin, A. 2010. Writing about Art and Architecture. Melbourne: re.press.
[13] Eisenmann, P. 2020. “Peter Eisenman: Field of Otherness.” Interview with the Louisiana Channel.
[14] Carmody Groarke studio. 2009. 7 July Memorial. Accessed May 10, 2023. https://www.dezeen.com/2009/07/07/7-july-memorial-by-carmody-groarke-2/.
[15] Benedikt, M. 1974. For an Architecture of Reality. San Francisco: Praeger Publishers.
[16] Drėmaitė, M. 2020. Kablys be Kablio—nebe Kablys. Accessed May 10, 2023. https://www.bernardinai.lt/2020-03-28-kablys-be-kablio-nebe-kablys/.(in Lithuanian)
[17] Gokaitė, G. 2021. “Mindaugas Navakas išbandė visas skulptūros medžiagas, o jo ‘Kablys’ išlieka permainų ženklu.” Accessed May 10, 2023. https://www.lrt.lt/naujienos/kultura/12/1387003/mindaugas-navakas-isbande-visas-skulpturos-medziagas-o-jo-kablys-islieka-permainu-zenklu. (in Lithuanian)