Architecture: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #072

by Andrew Ballantyne

This highly original and sophisticated look at architecture helps us to understand the cultural significance of the buildings that surround us. It avoids the traditional style-spotting approach and instead gives us an idea of what it is about buildings that moves us, and what it is that makes them important artistically and culturally. The book begins by looking at how architecture acquires meaning through tradition, and concludes with the exoticism of the recent avant-garde period. Illustrations of particular buildings help to anchor the general points with specific examples, from ancient Egypt to the present day.

Genres: Architecture, Nonfiction, Art, History, Science, Engineering

132 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2002

Reviews

[Stephen Bagley]

Boooooooring
TL;DR: The Parthenon is important. It has columns. People came along many centuries later who also liked columns. People don't like columns as much now.

***

I can see lots of people reviewing below that mention they thought this book would nod slightly more to the technical considerations of architecture (the maths and engineering etc.) rather than the philosophy of the discipline. Well I have to respectfully disagree, because I don't think the book really does either. I would have loved to learn more about either of those aspects but the sole purpose of this book seems to be listing off notable (predominantly Western) buildings, describing who built them and what they look like. I know this is A Very Short Introduction, but my god, this feels like a very superficial introduction.

Example in point, from the chapter (ironically titled) 'Buildings have meaning':

'...The meaning of medieval buildings has undergone the most extraordinary shift over the years. The most spectacular buildings of the medieval age are the great French cathedrals, such as Bourges, which were made so as to appear as if they were constructed out of little more than coloured light. Complex and ingenious arrangements of stone made this possible... blah blah BLAH...'
At no point does Mr Ballantyne stop to explain why the french cathedral builders designed the building in this way, what ideas inspired this design, in essence what was the meaning of the architecture to them. Nor does he attempt to explain what it might mean now (admittedly a much trickier question). He just describes the buildings at great length, then goes on to explain how the buildings and various features have fallen in and out of favour to present day. There's nothing meaningful in it.

Throughout this book I kept asking myself the same question: Why? Why did these architects design these grand buildings as they did? Why did later architects seek to emulate them? What did these buildings mean to the people who designed them? What was the theory or the ideas that informed the praxis?

To some extent even the descriptions felt superficial. Given the highly descriptive nature of the book, I was at least expecting a description of the key features of architectural movements. Ballantyne talks at great length about Gothic, Neoclassical, Romanesque, Baroque etc, but doesn't really attempt to pin down what these mean, he just describes more examples.

I feel like I don't need to cover this in any great detail as it has already been mentioned by others, but obviously the book is very focused on the West and this harms the objective to provide a very short introduction to architecture. I feel that if Ballantyne had attempted a more global outlook it might have forced him to answer a few more of the 'why's instead of just describing buildings. I also thought it was pretty elitist to describe the architect of the Pyramid of Giza, the Pantheon and Maison Carrée as 'unknown' or 'anonymous', whilst he described the traditional cottage in Figure 2 as having 'no architect'. Why? Someone clearly thought of it, was influenced by the culture around them, designed it and saw those plans realised.

As you will infer from the above, I generally felt quite frustrated reading this and at times bored. I will look out for some other books on the subject to compare.

...and just to reiterate: The Parthenon is important. It has columns. People came along many centuries later who also liked columns. People don't like columns as much now.

[รพีพัฒน์ อิงคสิทธิ์]

ไม่ง่ายเลยที่จะสรุปสถาปัตยกรรมเป็นแบบ VSI คือจับแนวทาง/แนวคิดได้คร่าวๆ แต่สุดท้ายพออ่านจบก็แทบจับอะไรไม่ได้เลย ส่วนตัวมองว่าผู้เขียนกังวลเกินไปเรื่องที่ว่าไม่มีแนวคิดไหนถูกต้องในการจัดหมวดหมู่ศิลปะ ก็เข้าใจนะ แต่ก็ช่วยจัดหมวดหมู่ที่เถอะเพราะไม่อย่างนั้นก็คงจับอะไรไม่ได้จากการอ่าน (ฮา)

[Nadirah]

This was sadly a snoozefest despite such a fascinating subject, and the author himself acknowledged that the selection of architecture discussed is very Westernized (but then took no pain to address it in the narrative beyond acknowledging it because he doesn’t think it’s worth addressing, I guess). Fellow Malaysians would do better to read “Our Architecture” by Dr. Tajuddin Rasdi instead, which is more illuminating, concise, and a great actual discussion of architecture and what it’s capable of achieving.

[mar cuenta]

ÇOK MUTLUYUM OKUDUM VE ANLADIM
Dili gerçekten güzeldi -goodreadsde dnf olmadığı için hala okuyor gözüktüğüm mimarlık 101 den çok daha anlaşılırdı- ve illüstrasyonları da iyiydi
Short Introduction olarak görevini yaptı aslında ama keşke teknik, matematik ve terimler tarafına da biraz girseydi sadece tarih, önemli binalar ve kültür hakkında olmak yerine
Architecture hakkında öğrenmek için çok iyi bir kitap ama gerçekten mimar olmak nasıl bir şeydir ne yapılır hakkındası eksik
Bu arada non-fiction kitap bitirdim -hem de bir ay dolmadan- IM SO PROUD

[Rhiannon Farr]

I learned a lot about architecture considering I previously knew shit all about architecture 👍

[Scott Mitchinson]

Having read a fair number of the VSI series and on a wide range of topics, I feel this was the one to struggle with the format the most. As a previous reviewer mentioned, there are overly long paragraphs; some of which stretch over two entire pages. This does make reading the book more arduous than is necessary. In addition, there are a large number of building photographs with separate text describing the building. Some of these figures are referenced from pages of the main text, which often covers similar points as the building specific text.

This aside, the content is interesting and it's certainly a worthwhile read for anyone interested in architecture. The book discusses the philosophical and cultural aspects of building and references a selection of building which demonstrate the points. It is not an introduction to the practice of architecture and it is not an encyclopedia/timeline of architectural styles. As a VSI, it's better for it.

[Daniel Wright]

This is more about the artistic styles and the "philosophy" (if that is the right word) of architecture than about what architects actually do (which is actually quite mathematics/engineering related). Still, that's pretty much what I was expecting, so no disappointments there. However, for the sake of brevity, the author ends up being rather un-systematic, so while much of what he says is interesting, he doesn't seem to get to the point very much. A reasonably worthwhile read all the same.

[Daniel Beck]

I think I learned some things about how architecture as a critical discipline works, but not at all as a practice of planning buildings. But this little book took me weeks to read because the author apparently never heard about this cool new thing called paragraphs. I'm optimistic that the books in the "Further reading" section will prove more fruitful.

[James D'Ambrosio]

A more suitable title for this book would have been "Western Architecture: A very short introduction for people who already have a grasp of architecture". I don't see it as a suitable introduction for someone who doesn't already have many cultural and architectural references.

It is centered around a western understanding of architecture, and this is stated a some point in the book.

The language used is difficult to read as it was intended to be of a conversational tone. The author claims this to be his stylistic choice, but it comes across as lazy and inconsistent throughout the book. The language used is unnecessarily negative, or judgemental and also binary at times (good & bad, right & wrong). Nuanced opinions are mostly only presented with a really really maybe perhaps long stick when there is risk of the architect being perceived as snobby (which they unfortunately seem to have a tendency to be).

The book presents many personal or commonly held architectural opinions as irrefutable facts. This is not acceptable, or helpful.

That being said, as someone with a relatively broad cultural understanding of the West and an appreciation for architecture, I was able to approach this book critically and I appreciated that it got me thinking about what kind of architect I would like to become. So, in that sense, it served as a useful introduction to architecture for me.

Overall, it was a good very short introduction to western architecture for someone who already knows a bit. I found the approach of presenting the idea of "architectures" quite interesting, in that there are many ways to interpret things.

I would not recommend this book for someone who is completely new to architecture, there are better introductions to architecture out there.

There was a quote at the beginning which I particularly thought was relevant, the idea that through Architecture, we are able to learn about what is important to us as individuals and as a society. Looking at the way we are taking a long time to change the construction industry to build more sustainably, it is evident that we still live in a society that values money more than the planet that we live on.

[André Habet]

a solid introduction into architecture. Liked how restrained Ballantyne is in his description of architectural forms. The text is never grandiose in its romanticism of architecture while still recognizing the ways that built forms contain within them a sense of values and needs according to areas. I would love a follow-up to this text that looks at a non-Western canon of architectural forms not designed by architects but pre-colonial groups, and contemporary indigenous communities to further disrupt Western notions of architecture and desirable aesthetics through the use of contemporary building materials. Appreciated that Ballantyne was forthright about his biases due to his training and area of expertise that makes the focus on primarily Western European, North American, and Orientalized structures understandable although still underwhelming.

[Reinhardt]

A fantastic mini intro to architecture.

Covers the cultural context of architecture as well as the political and economic influence. It provides as good grounding into the meaning of buildings, meaning the changes depending on cultural context.

Covers rural cottage to prominent national landmarks. What they mean then and now. How to determine architectural merit, or at least persuade your client of the merit of an architectural idea.

Includes a mini history of a few significant buildings and how the fit into history and why they are meaningful as opposed to other prominent buildings that may have less ‘meaning.’

Handy mini glossary and timeline at the end.

Recommended.

[M. Ashraf]

Architecture
#72 A Very Short Introduction
I hoped for more pictures and visual aides on the beautiful architecture fro around the globe with more details, as the book did not intended for planning nor technical aspect on the subject rather critique and idea I would have liked more examples... Ancient Egypt is not only the Pyramids :/ :/ :/
Did not like it that much but a good read nonetheless!

[Aron]

Don’t really get why some people found this hard to read. I found it a quite pleasant read. I loved how the author makes you think about buildings and their intersection with cultural meanings, which is how he defines architecture. Along the way you learn about the Western architectural canon and the myriad ways this canon influences contemporary building design. Highly recommended.

[Chatgemini]

A difficult book to write. Any subject involving art and abstract ideas is a tough one to describe and so is Architecture. While the going was not easy, the author has been able to get across some of the key aspects of this art.

[Jeneva Izorion]

เป็นเล่มที่พาทัวร์อาคารต่าง ๆ รอบโลก ไม่ได้เน้นที่ประวัติศาสตร์เท่าไหร่ แต่เน้นให้เห็นว่าวัฒนธรรมที่เราอยู่มีผลต่อการ appreciate งานสถาปัตยกรรมมากน้อยขนาดไหน และชี้ให้เห็นว่างานที่มีชื่อเสียงต่าง ๆ มันโดดเด่นเพราะอะไร อ่านละก็นึกถึงสมัยเรียน Western Art เหมือนกัน สมัยนั้น อ. ก็เมาท์มันเหมือนกัน

[Carlo Mazzanti]

Liked it. Enjoyed it much less than a concise introduction to western architecture. Probably because it has less pictures and is too short for details. Emphasis the non-academic sides of architecture, which is arguably very important, but I like being a tourist, so-

[Carl Denton]

cute

[Jules]

An excellent introduction put all the pieces on the table so you can take this fancinating subject further.

[sydnee]

Wasn’t necessarily focused on what I wanted to learn about architecture, but it is a short introduction. Somewhat hard to read and I feel like I will not remember a thing I read.

[Meg]

was so bored

[Anita]

It's pedantic and patronizing in it's simplicity, even an introduction should do more than list the two types of atchitecture.

[Rajita P.]

เริ่มต้นมาอย่างดี คอนเซ็ปของเล่มก็น่าสนใจ ภาพประกอบยอดเยี่่ยม หากแต่อ่านไปจนจบไม่พบว่าตัวเองมีความเข้าใจสถาปัตยกรรมในแต่ละยุคสมัยมากขึ้นเท่าไหร่นัก เหมือนได้เกล็ดเล็กเกล็ดน้อยพอสนุกมากกว่า

[Josh]

I’d say this book did its job!

[Laura]

Just like some other reader, I would have wished this book to have contained more about the actual work of architects, whereas it's more about the cultural aspects of architecture.

[Maori Pérez]

It is a valid introduction to western architecture, with some cool ideas to begin with the topic.

[tala]

I took a months long break reading this book in which I lost hope about everything to do with my academics and then regained it and fell in love with architecture again. Anyways I liked this!

[Petr Moschner]

Není na škodu si po čase připomenout základní vývoj architektury. Nemohu říct, že bych z knihy byl nadšený. Ale donutila mě přemýšlet nad tím, přečíst si ze stejné série knihu na téma, o kterém nic nevím. Protože koncept krátkých knih na složitá témata od Oxfordu mi přijde skvělý.

[Drsenorita]

Excellent!

[Jonathan Hays]

At 116 pages the book is obviously way too short for a comprehensive survey of Western architecture. Rather it provides a philosophical overview of the field, focusing on 25 or so buildings to make its points.

To give a flavor of the book, here is a pithy quote:

"It is possible to imagine alternative canons, based around the telling of different stories about architecture, that would generate a different choice of buildings. That would amount to a radical departure, whereas the aim of this book is to introduce a selection of buildings of acknowledged merit. Once a building has an established place in the canon then it does one no good as a novice to challenge its place there. There is no doubting the merit of the Parthenon or Bourges Cathedral, and if we go round telling people that we're not impressed with them then that stands as a judgement on our understanding, which can be discounted, not on the buildings, which continue to be seen as outstandingly good. This is the means by which fine buildings become great buildings. They cross a threshold and become unassailable, as any attempt to denigrate them simply undermines the credibility of the critic. If one is not impressed with the pyramids, then one had better learn to be impressed by them."

There is an interesting but also short annotated bibliography at the end of the book. I have reproduced the book list below.

The Buildings Around Us by Thom Gorst

The Four Books of Architecture (Dover Architecture) by Andrea Palladio

Sir Banister Fletcher's A History of Architecture. (Twentieth Edition) by Sir Banister Fletcher

A History of Architecture: Settings and Rituals by Spiro Kostof

A History of Western Architecture, 5th edition by David Watkin

Home: A Short History of an Idea by Witold Rybczynski

A Place of My Own: The Architecture of Daydreams by Michael Pollan

How Buildings Work: The Natural Order of Architecture by Edward Allen

How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They're Built by Stewart Brand

The Ten Books on Architecture by Vitruvius Pollio

Abbot Suger on the Abbey Church of St. Denis and Its Art Treasures by Abbot of Saint Denis Suger

On the Art of Building in Ten Books by Leon Battista Alberti

An Essay on Architecture by Marc-Antoine Laugier

Towards a New Architecture (Dover Architecture) by Le Corbusier

[Elior]

A fairly speedy overview of the cultural meaning and philosophy of high culture architecture, providing some interesting nuggets of information though being rather chattier and a bit scattered than systematic. It will provoke the reader with practically no prior reading in architecture at all, such as myself, with a better sense of how to look at and appreciate high status architecture. For its gaze is very much at the level of high culture, discussing famous museums and cathedrals and ancient temples and modern high rises, rather than the proletarian commonplace buildings of society one most often actually sees.

Contains 25 black and white photos of buildings discussed, which is nice, but a device capable of looking up photos on Google Images will be very handy to have along.