Architecture Aesthetic: Hagia Sophia

Front view

i liked the exterior, the interior ,Bleh! Overall Istanbul was one of my most favorite cities i have travelled to

Have you been inside, OP?

It needs those 4 towers.

If you saw it without the towers it would look gross, elephantine, trumpian. It needs the counterpoint. (Compare with Taj Mahal.

It looked different and was quite revolutionary when it was built. Keep in mind the interior would have ben far more ornate and glittering Centuries of Islamic alterations and many copies built throughout the Islamic world have altered our perspective. The towers and some of the surrounding buildings are not part of the original construction.

I am specifically talking about the exterior.

breasts and penises

Have you ever been inside, OP? Or seen it in person?

Photos can ever do justice to a massive interior space, which can feel like an alternate universe if it's fabulous enough.

First of all, the minarets (i.e. the towers) were a much later addition to the building when the Muslims took over Constantinople and turned the Hagia Sofia into a mosque, and they're not at all what people marvel about.

The great marvel is the dome. Whether you think it's impressive or not, no one had ever built a dome anything close to that height before --it was not even thought possible before then to build a dome of that size. There were few buildings of that height in the entire world when it was built in 537 CE, much less with a dome atop it and a hollow interior.

The building is still impressive on the outside given its sheer height and age, but when you enter into it its revolution in aesthetics is really remarkable. The huge dome seems to float in the air high above your head because there are small windows all along its circumference that let in the light. There's no other building in the world that quite has that effect.

R8 I should have mentioned that I'm specifically talking about the exterior. My bad. But yeah, that interior looks heavenly.

Here's an article that explains how they built it 1500 years ago.

Without ever having actually seen the exterior, you're offering an opinion on the exterior, OP?

It's all about the interior...

[quote] It needs those 4 towers.If you saw it without the towers it would look gross, elephantine, trumpian. It needs the counterpoint. (Compare with Taj Mahal.

It doesn't at all need them aesthetically.

The minarets were only built a full 900 years after the Hagia Sofia was built because it was turned because they served a practical function: they allowed a muezzin to climb to the top of the each of them to call the faithful to prayers at the appointed times.

They've only been there for the last 500+ years--for most of its existence, the Hagia Sofia was without minarets. At the link is an artist's rendering of the church just after it was built, centuries before the minarets and the later external halls were added.

[quote] breasts and penises

Yes. It is a fundamental need in design aesthetics.

R9 So, the marvel was rather building a domed structure of such a scale than the meticulous ornaments that the Roman aesthetics had before.

It's a fat, squat dome.

St Pauls in London is the best-shaped dome,

The Washington Capitol is an oversized St Paul's. De trop!

It was the only building of its kind for 1000 years until the great gothic cathedrals. Its not famous for the finesse of its exterior massing and volumes, you dolt.

Wasn't it the world's largest interior when it was made?

The overall structure was intended to keep a building with a massive interior standing for thousands of years in earthquake country, which has been accomplish. The damn thing is nearly 1500 years old and has withstood God knows how many earthquakes, who cares if the outside isn't girlishly pretty enough to please the OP!

It's breathtakingly beautiful in person, OP. For me and my travels? It's matched only by the Sistine Chapel.

[quote] It's a fat, squat dome. St Pauls in London is the best-shaped dome, The Washington Capitol is an oversized St Paul's. De trop!

Honey, they weren't all made at the same time.

The Washington Capitol could never have been built without the engineering achievements Wren made when he built St. Paul's nearly two hundred years previously, and Wren could never have built St. Paul's had he not had the example of the Hagia Sofia.

Just because they are all around for you to see now does not mean they were built with you in mind to one day compare the three of them. It may seem hard to believe, but the history of architecture is not all about [italic]you.[/italic]

I wonder how we can translate this magnificent structure built in 537, to a modern equivalent architectural accomplishment.

The past 100 years seem to be ever so focused on the next world's tallest building. Sadly, the only other extraordinary feat of architecture seems to be the surgical work required to build Kim Kardashian's ass.

Architecture Aesthetic: The Parthenon

People always talk so fondly of this building like its a masterpiece of classical civilization. But I just don't see it as something so remarkable. It looks like stuff I built with my blocks as a kid. Ornaments gone. Crumbling. A pile of blocks with dramatic cheesy night-time lighting effects. It looks like decrepit building in a park in a rust belt city like Cleveland. My eyes are those of a lay person though. I'm no expert. But still, I find it bleh. Any DLers wanna opine?

'Architecture Aesthetic' is about the person who perceives it.

An Amazonian has a different aesthetic to an Esquimaux.

I prefer the Nashville Parthenon to the Athenian.

Architecture Aesthetic: Villa Savoye by Corbusier

People always talk so fondly of this building like its a masterpiece of the modern architecture. But I just don't see it as something so remarkable. And I'm not even hung up on the classical and industrial references. The pillars look like paper straws. The rooftop ornament like a skate park. The whole structure looks like a strip mall accountant's office on top of a parking garage. My eyes are those of a lay person though. I'm no expert. But still, I find it bleh. Any DLers wanna opine?

Please, R36!

We can only deal with one at a time.

The 3 building so far have NO similarity.

The OP whinged that the Hagia Sophia looked like a fortress, IMHO that was at least partly deliberate. Ever hear the old hymn "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God"?

Both the inside and outside are mean to represent the might of God and the state religion, Massive religious structures are meant to make the individual to feel small, powerless, and humble, and to make them feel safe and protected when they're on the inside. The structure is intended to reinforce the spiritual and secular power of the church which currently owns it, as well as staying up for thousands of years in earthquake country.

Design Aesthetic: Jean-Michel Frank What's the hoopla about? Look's like the faculty smoking room on a mediocre state university campus. Ran out of money to finish the decoration. I think my grandfather had that chair in his TV room. My eyes are those of a lay person though. I'm no expert. But still, I find it bleh. Any DLers wanna opine?

Translation: I'm an ignorant cunting troll.

R17 the US Capitol dome is significantly smaller than St. Paul’s, which is indebted to St. Peter’s, which is naturally indebted to Hagia Sophia, and the Pantheon.

St. Paul's is an optical illusion neither interior nor exterior gives a true impression.

Pantheon - what you see is what is there.

A rendering of what the original Hagia Sophia was like, before they added the minarets and Islamic imagery.

I'm scandalized that it is a mosque again.

Well OP, I suppose this could be a way of announcing that you've never left the US.

You might have chosen a much worse overrated Ancient monument if you'd seen any of them.

Too many domes all clustered together with the minarets looking like last-minute additions. It just looks cluttered and crowded without breathing space.

For some reason, the Disney Hall in Los Angeles comes to mind. Looks terrible (maybe) in photos, but I liked it when seeing it in person. Talking about exterior.

Byzantine churches exteriors were quite bland. Although the exterior of Hagia Sophia was originally clad in grey Mamara marble. It was stripped away and painted day glow red by the Turks. It really was all about the glittering gold interiors. When my Brit ancestors were living in mud huts if they stepped inside they would have been shocked and awed.

Istanbul is such an amazing city. If you haven't been there, don't pass judgment . It's one of the most interesting places.

R38 My point was exactly about the exterior being bland. But like some other posters wrote earlier, I can appreciate that it was first structure of its kind with domes at such a size and height to exist.

R39 I am not passing judgments on the entire city of Istanbul, you twat.

Culinary Arts: Soufflé au fromage

Everyone oo-la-las about this dish. I just don't get it. Giant cheesy popover. Happy Hour bar food at TGIF. What am I missing?

R23, R26, R29 and R41 All these boring ass replies make you an actual troll desperate for attention. Va te faire foutre!

ta gueule connasse!

^^ Go shit in a milk, you troll.

The bland exterior is not unlike Roman buildings like the Baths of Caracalla, it was all about the interior space, which was larger than anything before it, or after it, until the gothic cathedrals. You have to remember how utterly stupendous it was for something built in 537 AD.

R45 Yeah, after some of the replies along with yours, I see it was the stature of the structure that stood strong. I suppose, earlier for me, it was the stark departure from the Greco-Roman aesthetic that felt like a downgrade for an empire that was borne out of Rome. I appreciate the response.

The exterior has been marred over the centuries by huge buttresses added to support the dome, which had collapsed several times. The building was really beyond the engineering capabilities of the time. You can see that in the base of the dome which isn’t quite round. The exterior would have certainly looked more harmonious originally, but it still would have been rather utilitarian.

R45 that’s an amazing pic.

I’ll admit I think the minarets look better than without.

Some buildings are more impressive, imposing, interesting, important than they are beautiful.

I live in the city with the world's largest gothic cathedral. It's is so large and complex and, because of inability to see the building as a whole from a distance, a building that is always seen as parts or glimpses of a while that can be seen only from an aerial perspective. It's a whole catalogue of gothic architecture played out in different ways in different facades or wings or corners of the building. It has four facades and fifteen doors, but even seeing all of a single facade is fairly impossible.

It's a building designed not to be a perfect, pure form whose silhouette is immediately recognizable, it's a building whose immensity and richness is to be taken in first in framed glimpses and then in sheer walls that take time to see and understand, and finally the interior is designed as a sort of jewel box within a series of jewel boxes. The drama and complexity and quality of a building unfolding like a flower is what creates a powerful and memorable image. It was meant to be too much, a narrative that has to be experiences not just seen.

The Hagia Sophia is a similar building. A thousand views of its exterior could each show a very different scene, and each only a partial view. It impresses and unfolds as a series of experiences, not a single and certainly not a simple picture.

Total agreement with OP. Architecturally there is nothing fascinating, nothing particularly beautiful, nothing revolutionary. And the interior has absolutely nothing to envy to many Gothic Cathedrals unlike what I've read above. Anyway it is now a mosque, as every time Muslims are in power they erase history or destroy it

Two words for you OP:

Charlie Hebdo

Architectural masterpieces are more found among gothic buildings, OP.

Hagia Sophia isn't a museum anymore btw, it's a mosque now. Thanks to Erdogan who fancied himself as the new ruler of the Ottoman Empire.

Erdogan is one of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood whose Islamism he practices. Trump's buddy is one of those who imports Salafist mosques into Europe, but Merkel protects him. I thought he was going to calm down once Biden becomes President but apparently the financial interests are more important than the genocides that this scum does for several years and more recently on the Kurds in Syria or The Armenians in the Nagorno-Karabakh. Erdogan can go so far as to threaten Greece, the cradle of Western civilization, or France, the first and oldest USA allies, arming jihadists in Africa or turn Hagia Sophia into a mosque or imprisoned hundreds of journalists no one moves.

Also Erdogan is homophobic as fuck! Google him and several articles will appear on his homophobic policy.

NATO needs to sanction and replace him. He's a lonatic and dangerous. The EU should tell him in no unmistakable terms that if he doesn't stop they'll take Constantinople back.

Prime Minister Mustafa Kemal Atatürk who was in office 1923- 1938 established the separation of religion and government that became an integral part of Turkey laws until Erdogan began gutting them since he came into office in 2014.

Originally Hagia Sophia and most of the Gothic cathedrals would have massively dominated their respective skylines. HS, without the distracting minarets, would have been a great dome hanging against the sky. You can still get a sense of the impact of some of the cathedrals today in less built up areas: Durham, Ely or Chartres.

Important question: how do you pronounce Hagia Sophia ?

Disney Hall? Ugh. Awful building and absolutely wedged into a space far too small for it.

One of Geary's signature style buildings was constructed at Bard College in the Hudson Valley. With room to breath and in a wooded setting, it looks quite spectacular. On the outside. The inside of the main auditorium is pretty damned dreary.

Bard ran out of money so the interior is stripped down.

R58 The H is silent. The G is soft.

AA-YEE-AA SOFIA.

I’ve been there. I thought it was beautiful. Like big churches from the same era. So many details to see. Istanbul is a great city to visit.

One thing I learned in Art History classes is to appreciate artworks for being the first to do something. Like much of early art - not the most beautiful but a meaningful advancement. The sense of scale reminded me of St Peters - and the fact that it was done so long ago made it more impactful and meaningful. But I agree that in and of itself, it’s not the most amazingly beautiful or impressive building.

I also didn’t love Istanbul. Seems like everyone I know says Istanbul is one of their favorite cities. It’s definitely interesting and historic - but not the most beautiful or fun or interesting. Worth seeing once or twice - but have no great desire to rush back.