What stood out to me the most about the Rossi reading was his approach to studying the history of different cities, as well as his ability to categorize its different components. Rossi understood that cities could not be looked at like one looks at a design plan, that culture and and individual components must be looked at when studying a city. He uses Nantucket, Providence, and Galveston as an excellent example of this type of approach. “The market in Providence, towns in Nantucket….all seem to be, and are, constructed out of preexisting elements that are then deformed by their own context” (Rossi 15). This kind of analysis isn’t strictly bottom-up, but there is a connection to be made between these two types of architectural analyses. In order to truly comprehend, understand, and appreciate a city, the structures need to be appreciated within a context, not exclusively by what they physically represent.
Rossi also draws attention to structures that are incomplete, which was very surprising to me because normally I would look at incomplete buildings as something to be looked over or disregarded. However, much value can be taken from buildings that never reached their full potential. “When a project or form is not utopian or abstract but evolves through the specific problems of the city, it persists and expresses these problems both through its style and form as well as through its many deformations” (Rossi 18). What Rossi is trying to express is that interrupted structures can be studied to see specific issues within a city. This is important as there can be an overarching theme among different incomplete structures, which architects can then use to better problem solve. Again, it is imperative that these structures be studied as this is not something that can be studied through a city plan. Rossi understood that solutions can be found in the finer details, as long as the larger picture is not neglected.
Citiation
- Rossi, Aldo. The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, MA: The MIT press, 1982.