Classical Values :: A Good Archetype The

A Good Archetype The

A Good Archetype

The Arch of the Minneapolis Train Station (featured in today's Bleat) reminded me of that gaping hole left by the savage destruction of the Twin Towers New York, and the nagging problem of what to put in it. While Lileks is not happy with the pointless nature of the Minneapolis arch (nor with the fact that a perfectly good street was destroyed in the bargain), he's nonetheless impressed by the grandeur of the thing:

It’s huge. My GOD it’s huge. The arches - which serve no function; they're purely decorative - are meant to echo the Stone Arch Bridge, an historic railroad structure that’s now a pedestrian walkway, and part of the extraordinary new riverfront redevelopment. It’s lovely, and it’s impressive, but for heaven’s sake look at the SIZE of that thing.

I can certainly see Lileks' point about the pointlessness of arches which serve no function, and the Minneapolis arch array is a bit, er, modernistic for my tastes.

But what about majestic arches that do serve a function? What is function, anyway? While an arch like the one in today's Bleat would seem to elevate form over function, if we look at the history of single, standing arches, their form often IS their function -- provided, of course, that the function is the representation of an important idea.

A good discussion of Roman arches (with nice links) can be found here

Roman arches were huge, and like the arches featured by Lileks, not intended to be functional in the sense of going anywhere, but unlike the latter the Roman arches were there to make an important statement, in a majestically imposing, esthetically pleasing way.

Examples:

Triumphal (Titus) And check out the view of the Roman Colosseum through this view of the same arch.

Triumphal (Constantine)

Or (for a more modern, French example) how about both Triumphal and Commemorative?

If the French can celebrate their victories and memorialize their dead, why can't we?

In my earlier blog on the subject, I complained about the demoralizing aspect of that gaping hole, and, noting New York's incredibly rich Classical architectural heritage, proposed a Classical solution. Admittedly, my satirical suggestion of reproducing the Colosseum and holding a series of victory games will never be on the Republican or Democrat agenda. But still, I am genuinely surprised that not one architect has considered the importance of having at least a Classical element. This makes no sense to me, as the history of the city, its architecture, and the nature of the events of September 11 evoke one theme:

LEST WE FORGET

Something is called for which will meet the test of time. The image of the arch (whether triumphal or commemorative) will do that. Literally, they span human history.

They don't take up much space, especially when you consider that the World Trade Center area covers sixteen acres.

And, considering that the preexisting nature of the demolition, we don't have to tear down a perfectly good street in Minneapolis to build one.