Dergiler / ICONARP International Journal Of Architecture And Planning / 2021 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1

One More Coincide Between Architects and Laypersons on The Aesthetics of Zaha Hadid’s Buildings

Sayfa
220–241
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Originality/ValueThis study is significant insofar as it is among the rare research studies that found there to be no differences between architects and laypersons but rather, similarities between them.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Purpose This study focuses on the subject of environmentalaesthetics and aims to identify the differences and similarities that emerge in the general aesthetic evaluations toward the individual style, particularly examining the physical and connotative meanings in the buildings by Zaha Hadid.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Design/Methodology/ApproachA survey was conducted to understand the visual aesthetic evaluations of architects and laypersons over 16 buildings of Hadid—an architect who managed to develop her own individual style.The visual images created were evaluated in terms of sensorialand physical concepts in order tounderstand whether there was a common language by evaluating the aesthetic perceptions of subjectswith different backgrounds, and to reveal the effect of individual style in forming a universal tongue.Descriptive statics, correlation analysis and independent t test were performed to conduct the evaluations.FindingsAccording to analysis results, the rhythm and organic lines of a building are the most significant elements for building façades and masses in aesthetic evaluations.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Originality/ValueThis study is significant insofar as it is among the rare research studies that found there to be no differences between architects and laypersons but rather, similarities between them.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Purpose This study focuses on the subject of environmentalaesthetics and aims to identify the differences and similarities that emerge in the general aesthetic evaluations toward the individual style, particularly examining the physical and connotative meanings in the buildings by Zaha Hadid. The study further seeks to understand how individual style fosters aesthetic awareness or common perceptions on a universal level without causing a cultural difference. Design/Methodology/ApproachA survey was conducted to understand the visual aesthetic evaluations of architects and laypersons over 16 buildings of Hadid—an architect who managed to develop her own individual style.The visual images created were evaluated in terms of sensorialand physical concepts in order tounderstand whether there was a common language by evaluating the aesthetic perceptions of subjectswith different backgrounds, and to reveal the effect of individual style in forming a universal tongue.Descriptive statics, correlation analysis and independent t test were performed to conduct the evaluations.FindingsAccording to analysis results, the rhythm and organic lines of a building are the most significant elements for building façades and masses in aesthetic evaluations. In addition, no significant differences regarding the dimensions of “liking”, “ornate”, “attractive”, “meaningful” and “warm” were found between the groups. Research Limitations/ImplicationsThe survey was conducted betweentwo different subject groups;architectsand laypersons. Specific parameters related to the sensorialconcepts of the buildings were used. These parameters included the concepts of liking, pleasant, complex, familiar, meaningful, ornate and warm, while for the physical characteristics of the buildings, the concepts of regular/ irregular, full/ empty, rhythmic/ arrhythmic, soft/ hard, meaningful/meaningless and symmetric/asymmetric were used. Originality/ValueThis study is significant insofar as it is among the rare research studies that found there to be no differences between architects and laypersons but rather, similarities between them.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Akça, B. Ö., Erdoğan, E. (2022). One More Coincide Between Architects and Laypersons on The Aesthetics of Zaha Hadid’s Buildings. ICONARP International Journal Of Architecture And Planning, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1, 220–241. https://ajindex.com/articles/538225

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Abercrombie, S. (1984). Architecture as art: an aesthetic analysis. Newyork: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. Ackerman, J.S. (1963). “Style”, Art and Archaelogy.Prentice, Englewood Cliffs,NJ, 174-186.Amer, M.,Attia, S. (2019). Identification of sustainable criteria for decision-making on roof stacking construction method. Sustainable Cities and Society, 47 (February), 101456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101456.
  2. Aydınlı, S. (1993). Aesthetic values in architecture. First Edition. Istanbul: İ.T.Ü. Faculty of Architecture Printing Studio. Basu, T, Ghosh, M. (2018). Visual perception of space and parametric design: A brief discussion, GSTF Journal of Engineering Technology, pp 1-11. DOI: 10.5176/2251-3701_4.2.185, Benedikt, M.L. (1979). To take hold of space: Isovists and isovist fields. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design. 6(1):47-65.
  3. Brown, G., Gifford, R. (2001). Architects predict lay evaluations of large contemporary buildings: whose conceptual properties?. Journal of Environmental Psychology,(21) 93-9.
  4. Canter, D. (1969). An intergroup comparison of connotative dimensions in architecture. Environment and Behavior, (1) 27-28.
  5. Chan, C. S. (2000). Can style be measured?. Design Studies, 21(3), 277–291.
  6. Devlin, K., Nasar, J.L. (1989). The beauty and the beast: some preliminary comparisions of ‘high’ versus ‘popular’ residential architecture and public versus architect judgements of same. Journal of Environmental Psychology, (9), 333-44.
  7. Devlin, K. (1990). An examination of architectural interpretation: architects versus nonarchitects. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research(7), 235-43. Erdoğan, E. (2010). Stil ve Tasarım Eğitimi. İstanbul: Yapı Dergisi, 342, 62-65.
  8. Erdogan, E., Akalin, A., Yıldırım, K., Erdoğan, H.A. (2010a). Aesthetic differences between freshmen and pre-architects. Gazi University Journal of Science, 23 (4), 5011-50.
  9. Erdogan E, Akalin A, Yildirim K, Erdogan H. A. (2010b). Students’ evaluations of different architectural styles. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, WCPCG-2010, 5, 875-881.
  10. Erzen, J.N. (2006). Çevre Estetiği. Ankara:
  11. Odtü Geliştirme Vakfı publishing, İletişim publication. Fawcett, W., Ellingham, T., Platt, S. (2008). Reconciling the Architectural Preferences of Architects and the Public. Environment and Behavior, Vol.40, No.5, 599-618.
  12. Greene, T.M. (1940). The Arts and the Art of Critisism. Princeton: Princeton University Press,5-12.
  13. Groat, L. (1982). Meaning in Post-Modern architecture: An examin