IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

The Similarities and Differences between Classical Architecture and

Modern Architecture in Design Methods and Aesthetic Theories
To cite this article: Yu Jiang 2019 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 267 052017

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 119.152.214.81 on 07/03/2020 at 07:49

IWRED 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 267 (2019) 052017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/267/5/052017

The Similarities and Differences between Classical

Architecture and Modern Architecture in Design Methods
and Aesthetic Theories

Yu Jiang
University of Jinan, #336 Nanxinzhuang West Road, Shizhong District, Jinan City,
Shandong
cea_yuj@163.com

Abstract. On the surface, classical architecture and modern architecture have huge differences
in image. The difference in image between classical architecture and modern architecture
shows the difference in design methods and aesthetic theories between the two types of
architectures. But in essence, the design methods and aesthetic theories used in these two types
of architectures have commonalities. This paper analyzes the design methods and aesthetic
theories of classical architecture and modern architecture, and explains their similarities and
differences.

1. Classical and Modern

Since the 1920s, the image of architecture has changed dramatically. With the progress of the modern
architecture movement, architecture has gradually changed from classical to modern. If compares a
classical architecture with a modern architecture, the difference in their image is obvious. This
difference in image shows the difference in design methods and aesthetic theories between the two
types of architectures.

Figure 1. The difference in image between classical architecture and modern architecture
In the long classical period, mankind created a splendid classical architectural culture. Great
classical architectures, such as the Temple of Parthenon, the Colosseum of Rome, the Notre Dame de
Paris, the Palace of Versailles have become indelible cultural imprints in human history. In the
classical period of thousands of years, the architects of the generations have successively summed up
the experience and formed a classical architectural design method and aesthetic theory represented by
the column architecture. Under the guidance of this design method and aesthetic theory, architects can
design beautiful classic architectures.

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
IWRED 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 267 (2019) 052017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/267/5/052017

Today, classical architecture has withdrawn from the stage of mainstream architecture and replaced
by modern architecture with different styles. It has been nearly a hundred years since the birth of
modern architecture. In the past a hundred years, the design methods and aesthetic theories of modern
architecture have developed from scratch and become more and more abundant. Under the guidance of
these design methods and aesthetic theories, modern architects from generation to generation have
created new forms of architecture.
On the surface alone, the design method of classical architecture is very different from the design
method of modern architecture. But from the perspective of aesthetic theory, these two design methods
have inherent commonalities. In the classical period, we accumulated a lot of excellent design
experience. If we can correctly understand the differences and commonalities between the two design
methods, then the design experience accumulated by classical architecture can be absorbed by the
design methods of today's modern architecture.

2. Proportion, Scale and Level

From the perspective of aesthetic theory, the design methods of classical architecture and the design
methods of modern architecture have inherent commonalities. It is precisely because of the inherent
commonality of aesthetics that architects can design pleasant buildings whether using classical
architectural design methods or modern architectural design methods. This paper believes that the
commonality between the design method of classical architecture and the design method of modern
architecture is mainly reflected in the following three points.

2.1 Proportion
In “Vers Une Architecture”, Le Corbusier pointed out that “(the baseline) has existed since the birth
of the architecture.” [1] Since ancient times, the baseline method has been one of the basic design
methods adopted by architects. Le Corbusier explained the method of the baseline intuitively through
the following diagrams. According to Le Corbusier's explanation, we can see that the method of the
baseline is applicable to classical architecture, and it is also applicable to modern architecture.

Figure 2. The baseline

Both the design method of classical architecture and the design method of modern architecture
pursue proportional harmony. Proportion is one of the core elements of classical architectural design
methods. Architects in the classical period are based on the rigorous pursuit of proportionality,
forming a classical architectural design method and aesthetic theory represented by column
architecture. In modern architectural design methods, the proportion is also one of the core elements.
Numerous modern architects have repeatedly discussed this in their theoretical work. One of the cores
of the baseline method is to emphasize proportion. Le Corbusier pointed out that “the baseline is the
satisfaction in the spiritual realm, which leads to the exploration of ingenious proportions and the
proportion of harmony. It gives the works a coordination.” [2] Through Le Corbusier's explanation,
we can see that proportional harmony is a core element in both the design method of classical
architecture and the design method of modern architecture. At this point, the two design methods are
common.

2.2 Scale
Both the design method of classical architecture and the design method of modern architecture pursue
scale coordination. Scale is also one of the core elements shared by the two design methods. The

2
IWRED 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 267 (2019) 052017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/267/5/052017

understanding of scale needs to be done from a human perspective. Whether it is a classical

architecture or a modern architecture, its users are all human. Both types of architectures pursue scales
that are compatible with human feelings. Le Corbusier pointed out that “he (human) established order
in the measurement. He measured with stride, foot, forearm and fingers. When he used the foot and
forearm to establish order, he created control over the whole The modulus of the building; therefore
the building fits on his scale, is comfortable and comfortable for him, and fits his own measure. It fits
the human scale: this is the main point.” [3] In the pursuit of scale coordination, the baseline is also a
powerful tool for architects. Le Corbusier pointed out that “(the baseline) is necessary for the
rationality. The baseline is a guarantee of anti-arbitrariness. It satisfies reason.” [4]
Coordination of scale is one of the foundations of the aesthetics of architecture. In an architecture,
the scale of coordination forms a unified rule. Under the constraints of the unified rule, the beauty of
architecture forms a coordinated whole. This applies to both classical architectural design methods and
to modern architectural design methods. At this point, the two design methods are common.

2.3 Level
Both the design method of classical architecture and the design method of modern architecture pursue
rich levels. In a beautiful classical architecture, pillars, gables, sculptures and other components will
form rich levels. These levels are one of the reasons why this classical architecture can produce beauty.
There is also rich levels in a well-designed modern building, which is one of the reasons why this
modern architecture can produce beauty. When designing an architecture, building rich levels under
the constraints of proportion and scale is the most basic design method for architects. Le Corbusier
explained this through a architecture he designed. Le Corbusier pointed out that “The whole of the
facade of this architecture, both front and back, is under the control of the same ‘A’ angle, which
determines a diagonal, which has a large number of diagonals. Parallel lines, and their vertical lines
constrain all secondary factors, such as doors, windows, walls, until very small details.” [5] The
parallel lines of these diagonals vary in length and form rich levels on the architecture. These levels
are one of the reasons why this architecture creates beauty. In the process of enriching levels, the
baseline is also a powerful tool for architects.

Figure 3. Rich levels

In an architecture, the rich levels is one of the reasons why this modern building can produce
beauty. This applies to both classical architectural design methods and to modern architectural design
methods. At this point, the two design methods are common.

3. Facade and Block

Although at the level of aesthetic theory, the design method of classical architecture and the design
method of modern architecture have commonalities, classical architecture and modern architecture
have huge differences in image. This paper believes that this phenomenon occurs because architects
face different basic objects when designing architectures. In the classical period, building technology
and building materials were relatively backward. Classical architectures use mainly beam-column
structures or arch-ring structures of wood and stone. With such a structural system, architects are
greatly limited in their architectural design. Architectures based on such a structure generally form a
continuous facade. Such a facade is the basic object of the architect's aesthetic treatment. The
structural materials of modern architectures are mainly reinforced concrete and steel. Architects are
relatively less restricted in their architectural design, and architects can design more freely.

3
IWRED 2019 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 267 (2019) 052017 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/267/5/052017

3.1 Facade
In the classical period, the facade of architecture was the aesthetic basic object of architects. In
classical architecture, the architect mainly uses the method of adding components to the facade of the
architecture. On the surface of classical architecture, we will see exquisite columns, delicate lines and
magnificent sculptures, through which the architect enriches the facade of the architecture.

3.2 Block
For modern architecture, block is the aesthetic basic object of architecture. Le Corbusier pointed out
that “Architecture is a brilliant, correct and clever performance of some of the combined block in the
light.” [6] Le Corbusier also pointed out that when a modern architecture uses block as the basis of its
aesthetics, the components of the classical building will collide with the block. Therefore, the
components of classical architecture are not suitable for modern block architectures. In modern block
architectures, the architects use the components that fit the block to enrich the architecture's skin.

4. conclusion
On the level of aesthetic theory, the design method of classical architecture and the design method of
modern architecture have commonality. However, due to the different basic objects of aesthetics, there
is a huge difference in the image between classical architecture and modern architecture.If we can
correctly understand the differences and commonalities between the two design methods, then the
design experience accumulated by classical architecture can be absorbed by today's modern
architecture.

References
[1] Le Corbusier and Chen Zhihua translated 2004 Vers Une Architecture. Shaanxi Normal
University Press. p 59
[2] Le Corbusier and Chen Zhihua translated 2004 Vers Une Architecture. Shaanxi Normal
University Press. p 65
[3] Le Corbusier and Chen Zhihua translated 2004 Vers Une Architecture. Shaanxi Normal
University Press. p 62
[4] Le Corbusier and Chen Zhihua translated 2004 Vers Une Architecture. Shaanxi Normal
University Press. p 59
[5] Le Corbusier and Chen Zhihua translated 2004 Vers Une Architecture. Shaanxi Normal
University Press. p 69
[6] Le Corbusier and Chen Zhihua translated 2004 Vers Une Architecture. Shaanxi Normal
University Press. p 24