I am interested in aesthetics and the topic of church architecture -- does it really affect how we understand theology and the liturgy? How should we understand styles of architecture? Is there the "right" style?... One thing I appreciate in the Islamic culture is how all their mosques have the same aesthetic, no matter where they are, so you always know if a mosque is present in the neighborhood... But meanwhile Christians have been dabbling in modernist architecture, making churches that feel utterly atrocious... Like this is supposed to be a Roman catholic "cathedral" A good article: https://www.thrillist.com/travel/nation/ugliest-cathedrals-in-the-world And then look at this article.. VERY interesting: Is public architecture dysfunctional? A new poll shows that Americans prefer traditional architecture to later modern styles in public buildings, and researchers are finding explanations in neuroscience. https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2020/10/23/public-architecture-dysfunctional It all seems intuitively "right"... There is a classical style, and Christian churches should partake of that style, and abhor modernism in our aesthetic....What do you all think?
I'm torn on this. I love Classical and Gothic architecture, especially for churches. Give me all the spires and flying buttresses and stained glass! Moar! Moar! But this is an aesthetic appreciation on my part. The part of me that cares about theology reminds me that Christian services in ancient times were held in people's houses (and still are in many parts of the world). A humble storefront church in a strip-mall is no less God's house than a mighty cathedral. The people are the church, not the building they worship in. And yet...ugly architecture reflects a certain ugliness in the culture, I think, and the relentlessly ugly American modernist architecture in the post-WWII era is a physical manifestation of American spiritual malaise. Beauty in architecture requires a deep appreciation of the metaphysical -- something even the pagan Greeks and Romans understood, but which we seem to have lost. I love America, but our civic architecture is generally awful. Generic and utilitarian when it isn't simply just aggressively ugly. It's only when we fall back on neo-Classical, Gothic, and Victorian architecture that we can create beautiful buildings. I do confess a love of Art Deco, which in my view was the last really beautiful American artistic design movement. (Midcentury Modern can occasionally be used to good effect, but that whole chrome-glass-blondewood esthetic is often deployed gracelessly, especially in public buildings.) I blame Le Corbusier and his fatuous followers for a lot of this mess. Just look at this horrible abomination.
I agree. I'm not a fan of modern architecture in general but especially not for churches. All of the new, trendy cathedrals just make me sad. I've felt blessed that there are very few of these in my state, but we're seeing this with the Benedictine sisters in the next town over. They are the sister monastery to my Abbey. They came over from Switzerland at the same time as the monks, and we helped them build their monastery which is over one hundred years old. They are demolishing it starting next week and replacing it with what can only be described as an office building (an ugly office building at that).
I think people tend to feel excited about departures from the traditional "rectangular block building" look. Up to a point, that is... one can go too far and the designs can get ridiculous. But as for churches, I would advocate for a consistent "traditional" look that is recognizable and emotionally comforting to those who grew up attending such buildings. (Again, up to a point.)
Could you explain what you mean by the same aesthetic? I could show you lots of mosques and you wouldn't know it was but for the sign outside.
Right there are some urban mosques in my city that look like completely indistinct from a grocery store next to them… So either the Muslims go big, or they don’t even try, whereas the Christians at least always try and put a cross outside or something But what I meant is, when the Muslims do have the means, they have a plot of land big enough, they’ll always build a traditional mosque; whereas Christians today have no idea what their style is In Nigeria a lot of capital was allocated lately to build a big capital mosque and a big cathedral next to one another (to represent the two big faiths in the country) Well this is what the Muslims built, and this is what the Christians built:
I think the architecture of mosques may be somewhat constrained by Islamic theology. As I understand it they do not permit any form of images in their mosques. They also, I believe, tend to follow what Arab countries do. A mosque often has a dome and a tower called a minaret from which the faithful are called to prayer. On the other hand Christianity has never, to my knowledge, had any particular set design for its churches. Early Christians had to meet in secret out of necessity. When the Roman Empire formally approved Christianity as its state religion Roman buildings were adopted for use and Roman architecture was followed. Throughout the ages Christianity has often adopted the architecture of the time and place to build its churches. Of course, for a long time so-called gothic architecture prevailed and churches often had a cruciform plan. I think one gets used to whatever one was familiar with in one's younger days. As we age we tend to reject or dislike contemporary things such as modern architecture. I personally prefer a so-called 'traditional' church on the cruciform plan and, vaguely at least, gothic in architecture. That does not mean all modern architecture is bad or that I dislike it all. Another thing which I believe commends older architecture is that buildings were once built to last. Churches from the Middle Ages and earlier are still standing. We here in the UK are awash with Victorian architecture. I once lived in a lovely Victorian house. Now we live in a modern one. I prefer the former. Whilst such old architecture is still around much of what was built in the 1960s is now undergoing expensive major repairs or being demolished because the buildings were so badly designed.