Our ideas of architecture, what it is, stem from Vitruvius' 10 books of architecture. I suggest the Loeb Classical Library editions. Another source to look at would be Louis Mumford's The City in History. He says architecture began with the notion of a citadel and buildings expressing power, and evoking "respectful terror". However architecture is defined in theory, its historical definition is a starting point. wc
________________________________ From: Frances Kelly <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2009 12:22:33 PM Subject: RE: Architecture and Philosophy Frances to Chris with thanks... It may be that making or framing a "global" theory of architecture will not be possible. If this outcome proves to be so, then perhaps a more philosophic relativism might be in order, so that there could be several general and special and universal theories of architecture. The current polarities of architecture as art and as not art or "nonart" would seem to warrant at least a pair of theories. Another marginal problem with a theory of architecture for me is just exactly what the object of the theory might really turn out to be; that is to say, would architecture be the object of the theory, or would theory be the object of the theory. You wrote... Would it be a discovery if Francis proved that it is not possible to frame a philosophic theory of architecture?
