On the contrary, the relationship between the two is complex and multidimensional.
However, the relationship between print and architecture is actually complex and not a simple binary opposition.
The research of Robert Darnton, Nicholas Barker, and Michael Suarez marked three classic models of book history research.
Therefore, the relationship between printed matter and architecture is not diametrically opposed.
This article will take the first architectural treatise “On Architecture” by Leon Battista Alberti (hereinafter referred to as “Architecture”) as an example to diachronically reveal that the conceptual changes carried by printed matter are symbiotic rather than antagonistic to architecture.
Darnton emphasizes placing books in the social activities of “authors, publishers, printers, booksellers, and readers” to understand them [5]; Buck places books in the life cycle of “publishing, producing, distributing, receiving, and surviving” to examine [6]; Suarez emphasized the geographical differences in book publishing and dissemination [7].
The medieval church was built without relying on norms, and the formulation and promotion of architectural principles in print destroyed the vitality, creativity, and regionality of the building, thereby killing the building.
First of all, if printed matter is to replace the function of architecture as a carrier of ideas, it must be perpetuated.
Today, there are three main aspects to the interpretation of this contradiction: First, Hugo expresses the previously expressed human ideas (Lapens é e), which were mainly expressed and disseminated in the stained glass windows, murals, and sculptures of churches, and this is fully reflected in Notre Dame in Paris.
Key words: scroll illustration; Alberti; Architectural concept; Architectural theory; Print 1.
The Symbiosis of Printing and Architecture: The Transformation of Architectural Concepts in the Illustrations in the First Volume of “On Architecture” Luo Yuansheng | Department of Architecture, University of Leuven, Belgium Abstract: In 1832, Hugo solemnly announced in “Notre Dame de Paris” that printing triumphed over architecture: “This will kill it” (Cecitueracela).
Compared to scholars’ detailed research on illustrations in “On Architecture”, frontispieces have not received sufficient attention from scholars due to their unique location and relative independence from the main content.
He believed that the death of architecture actually represented the death of all handicrafts.
Thirdly, Frank Lloyd Wright [3] believes that printing is a “metaphor for machines”, while architecture represents traditional art.
This article takes the two first illustrations in the 16th century and 18th century editions of Alberti’s “On Architecture” as examples, and reveals the transformation of architectural concepts behind the images to illustrate that the relationship between architecture and printed matter is not simply either one or the other, but rather harmonious coexistence and even mutual achievement.
Lewis Mumford believed that “the true crime of printing is not in its value as a substitute for architectural recording ideas, but in its ability to perpetuate architectural values in text.” [2] Since the Renaissance, architecture has relied on printed works to survive, solidifying the way architectural design is done.
This article will focus on comparing the opening illustrations of the 16th and 18th century editions of “On Architecture”, analyzing the changes in expression and content between the two, revealing the transformation of their architectural concepts, and rethinking the complex relationship between printed matter and architecture.
.
Moreover, the misappropriation of the contradiction between printing and architecture to the dispute between machines and handicrafts was actually intentional by 19th century modernists to promote new construction techniques.
Therefore, this article not only focuses on the “process” of printed materials, but also focuses on the differences between their versions and regions.
Therefore, this article also benefits from Pankowski’s three-stage analysis of Renaissance images.
Introduction: Will “print” stifle “architecture”? In “Notre Dame de Paris”, Hugo proposed an issue that has had an impact so far on the contradiction between print and architecture: “Cecitueracela” (which will kill it), which means that print can pose a fatal threat to architecture (Figure 1).
But Gutenberg printing replaced churches, making pages the main medium for recording human thought.
The seemingly clear discussion above the title page of Notre Dame de Paris and the chapter “This Will Kill It” in the year 11832 edition actually simplifies the contradictory relationship between architecture and print.
Among them, printed images have played an important role in architectural treatises since the Renaissance.
Although “Notre Dame” can be printed by tens of thousands, a fire can instantly destroy Notre Dame; However, the prerequisite for printing to be “permanent” is that it needs to be disseminated and read.
The mass production of machines has made traditional art forms arbitrarily copied and appear cheap, and modern architecture will replace traditional architecture [4].
Thousands of dusty volumes are far less powerful in spreading ideas than a towering building.
The works of Anthony Grafton and Alina Payne also demonstrate the importance of this “integration of image and architecture” approach to the study of Renaissance architectural history.
Secondly, “strangulation” refers to the specification of architectural design principles in printed books that makes buildings lose their vitality.
Secondly, Mumford’s view actually ignores the temporal and spatial dimensions of printed matter.
The ideas in printed matter can actually play completely different roles in different times and regions, bearing the changes in architectural concepts and values, which are also important components of architectural vitality.
As the book says, “High buildings will eventually collapse, and printing will kill churches.”.
