Sandi Banna

Assignment No. 2

10/06/2023

Throughout our past readings, it seemed like ancient societies used architecture as a form of

expression to tell stories about their beliefs, values, lifestyles, culture. Architecture was not just a

form of shelter to house these societies, indeed that did not seem to always be the purpose of the

creation of these spaces. Instead, these spaces were designed and created for these people to

connect themselves and the ideas they wanted to express to the land they occupied. Later these

relics and architectural pieces become history which we ponder and preserve. The challenge,

however, lies in trying to preserve history while designing new and modern spaces for people to

respond to our growing cities and our increasing housing demands.

I recently found that I personally really love and enjoy classical architecture way more than

modern. It is rich in culture, beautiful design details, value and symbolism, and in general feels

magical. Modern architecture, on the other hand, transmits different emotions to those who

experience it, not as rich in detail as classical is. Thus, it seemed very underwhelming for me to

combine both classical and modern architecture for the creation of more nuanced spaces, when

both are clearly different. The Acropolis Museum, however, started shifting my perspectives.

At first, I was bothered by the strong contrast between the stone used to build the original

Acropolis and the glass and metal used for the museum. Part of me felt like the museum was out

of place on the ancient site, as if it was taken from a different dimension and thrown on the site.

The modern glass with the projected displays seemed too modern to where they did not fit in

with the way I imagined the ancient city to look like. But, as I continued to read about why

things were designed the way they are and after hearing Tschumi’s lecture, I started appreciating
the modern architecture that while being integrated into the historic site highlighted it even more

and brought a focus to the ancient relics rather than the architecture of the museum. The

positioning of the museum, its orientation, and the way it responds to the existing Parthenon

view through the glass is a very clever way of connecting what remains inside the museum to

that outside of it. In my opinion, it also feels like a way of looking at the ancient world through a

modern lens, literally but also figuratively, in a sense that the world is always evolving, and

although our ancient architecture is super valuable to us, we have to keep designing. We are

designed to design. Creativity and design is what led ancient people to build the structures we

study today. It is an innate talent in our human race, to create art that expresses our humankind,

and it happens to integrate with our human need for shelter, protection, and home. Thus, we also

feel the need to protect these historical sites, or what is left of them at least. As it turns out, there

is so much beauty in the choices that affected the design of the museum. Of course, there is

beauty behind the reasoning, but there is also visual beauty and aesthetics. The combination of

glass and metal with stone is not as bad as I imagined, but actually really beautiful. The modern

design twists done on ancient historical construction gives the museum some interesting

character that heighten the value of the remains. This is the very beauty of art; the preservation of

historical architecture filled with history rich in culture through modern architecture. It is a sweet

reminder of our past and how we got here but also of how we have evolved and advanced our

thinking and continue to. And with that comes some sacrifice.

In our class discussion about the museum, we talked about how the designers made choices

about preserving some parts of the site and taking out others. This had to be a hard choice for the

designers, unless they just got rid of some parts for their own personal liking. However, let’s say

there was just nowhere to place some of the remains, or it would dramatically affect what could
be built on top of the site. What pieces of history are we willing to give up? Do we want to hide

it or completely erase it? Are we even willing to give up any pieces of history at all? At some

point, we will have to, because eventually, the world is changing. It will always keep changing.

So we need to get past some of the history we are trying to preserve to respond to our human

race’s growth and needs. It is just reality. However, we do not have to do so in a completely

modern way with disregard to our history. Instead we can utilize the simplicity of modern

architecture to hold some of our history. It is as if to say that what we were in the past and what

we are now both combine to make us who we are. It is part of our identity. This is why

architecture is more than just a structure. It is a beautiful vessel for our history.

Today, our AIAS chapter toured the Neuhoff site in Germantown, Nashville adjacent to the

Cumberland. This site is a very historical site, and as the architects on the project continue to

develop it for future housing and commercial use, they are very careful about preserving what

they can of the historical architecture that still remains. Seeing the combination of the raw

historical ruins with modern concrete, steel, glass is a combination I never thought I would love

so much. As I toured the site, I was quickly reminded of the Acropolis Museum and how they

were both approached similarly throughout the design process. I realized how beautiful

architecture is. Not only the type of architecture designed from scratch, but also that which is

combined with and responds to existing structures and ruins. Either way, all architecture has to

respond to some certain context, and history makes up some of that.