Beauty and our home part. 2

author: Mieczysław Aleksander Sowiński, MA

Photo No. 3: The "Tyberiusz" project single-family house - source: - access date: September 7, 2009 Sequentially from the left: the front of the building and the ground floor plan

Nothing has changed in the impressions and feelings we had while watching the first project from photo 1. The next ones do not surprise us with anything special, and especially we do not find any additives in the building that do not fulfill any function in the building, but only constitute a decorative element. An example of such an addition can be the stairs of the "Tiberius" project in photo number 3. Both the terrace at the back of the house and the stairs to the main entrance could be an unnecessary expense for some people and require simplification. But how much they are needed from an aesthetic point of view! These are expensive additions, but so necessary to soften the harsh and flashy shapes of the rest of the building. CONTENTS

2.2 The aesthetic aspect

We cannot say anything with certainty about the moment when the external image of single-family houses began to be taken care of. There is no such period in the history of architecture when efforts were made to show aesthetic values in residential buildings. The oldest and most famous civilization to us is the Egyptian civilization. The pharaohs were considered gods, and their homes were magnificent palaces where functionality was mixed with beauty. The word "pharaoh" meant "great house" (per-aa) and was used to describe the royal palace. When building a house for a pharaoh, it was also built for a revered god, who was also considered a pharaoh. A similar pattern of an anointed ruler of God, or even a god, can be found in many other nations. Over time, the so-called sacred, worshiped to god, began to merge with the profane, building according to the needs of the ruler, not the god-ruler. When the aesthetic values of the building began to be taken care of not because of the god who lived in it, but because of the human being, it was this moment, in my opinion, that should be considered the beginning of the architecture of residential houses.

Why was this moment a breakthrough? According to the previously adopted definition of a single-family house, that is, more generally speaking, a residential building, it should not only meet the housing needs that were surely met by caves and shelters of prehistoric peoples, but also the aesthetic needs of man. These are the needs that began to be met when the sacred and the profane were joined together.

As in the past, also today, caring for the aesthetic value of single-family buildings is a privilege of the wealthier class of our society. The constant striving to cut costs has led to the fact that the beauty of the building is discussed at the level of selecting the colors of the facade, the arrangement of the plot around the building, or the shape and color of the tiles. The buildings are angular and, despite their youth, are often unsightly. Architecture departments issue development conditions in which the matter of external appearance is not treated with due diligence. Anyway, it is difficult to expect that state officials care about the aesthetics of the buildings, when their overriding goal is to obey the law, in which nothing is said about aesthetics except the obligation to keep the building clean and tidy.

Other people - apart from government officials - having a significant impact on the beauty of modern single-family buildings are architects, planners, their professional organizations, academics and writers. Among the latter is David Watkin - lecturer in the history of architecture at the University of Cambridge, author of many publications. Here is how it describes the current trends in architecture:

“It is obvious that, at the threshold of the new millennium, we wonder what this new era should look like. Architecture seems to have three essential options: still flourishing postmodernism, with flashy, playful decoration added as a commercial packaging, high-tech architecture with its constant display of science-fiction close-up technologies and, finally, a return to traditional architecture rooted in timeless languages: vernacular and classical. All these three types, sometimes combined, have their followers. " [17]

All of the above-mentioned - officials, architects, artists and others - are not able to support the same definition of beauty with one voice, and what is more, it is common to believe that it cannot be defined. The built-up landscape that surrounds us often resembles this diversity of views. Can today's investors be required to build buildings that are not only functional, but also aesthetically valuable? Recalling here the Kantian definition of beauty and its assumption of a relatively objective sensus communis subjectively conceived in the judgment of taste, we should demand that contemporary builders should make their buildings aesthetically valuable.

When choosing a project, we mainly focus on its price. So at the very beginning, a certain verification of our dreams of building a dream house is carried out. The vision of paying ten times more money for someone's intellectual work can wake many investors from sleep. Gazeta Wyborca wrote about it at the end of August in an article titled What the Poles like. If a house is a manor house with a balcony. [18]

The single-family houses we erect have been devoid of any additions that make sense only from an aesthetic point of view, but functionally do not work at all. It is a pity to spend money on fancifully folded pillars or extensive stairs wrapped in lianas-shaped balustrades.

It would be a mistake to reflect on the importance of the aesthetic values of architecture without paying attention to their necessary relationship with the functional aspect of the building. What a building looks like is as important as what it is used for and what it fulfills its purpose. Regarding the inseparability of these two functions, Roger Scruton writes:

“Many may still doubt, in this state of our deliberation, that aesthetic values can be given a central place in our experience to which we are compelled, as thinking beings, to agree with our morals. Therefore, we ask why do we need aesthetic values? A constructivist might say that aesthetic values are about 'what something looks like' when the important thing for him is 'what its true purpose is' or 'what it really does'. […] There is no clear distinction between 'what it looks like', 'what its purpose is' and 'what it can do'. In the art of building, considering 'what something looks like' and a justified understanding of the end of someone's action are inseparable. "[19]

How the building looks is as important as what it is for, what we feel when looking at its external form is just as important as our understanding of the concepts that underlie it.  CONTENTS

Chapter III.

Straight line, circle and wavy line in nature and architecture


3.1 What are the lines and where do they appear

Each figure can be described with lines. There is no need to convince anyone about their existence. The problem begins when we want to describe one of the observed lines. Without going deeper into the subject and based on mathematical knowledge, many of us will recognize the existence of a straight line and a circle as a fact. For some, these are basic shapes that allow us to describe the reality that surrounds us. We learn about them in schools and we are instilled in their existence from an early age. But in fact, they are only an image and our unreal simplification of the reality that surrounds us. From observation and after careful reflection, we know that there is no such thing as a straight line and a circle that presuppose a certain perfection. There is no perfection in the world around us, and certainly not something perfectly straight or flat. Everything that we observe after closer examination turns out to be at least slightly curved, or at least slightly uneven.


Photo 4: Wavy line. Source: G. Deleuze, The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque, Minnesota Press Minneapolis 2004, p. 15.

Apart from the line derived from the hypothetical, unreal world, there is one more type of line: a wavy line. There are those who assume that a wavy line is a derivative of a straight line and a circle, and one cannot speak of a separate entity such as a wavy line.

However, my position is that there is only one line: a wavy line. Its examples can be found in the reality that surrounds us, while the straight line and the circle are an idealistic image of a man and exist, but only as the subject of our considerations, and the most frequent place of their occurrence is our mind. Sometimes the idea of a straight line and a circle tries to reach real reality, first in the form of drawings, for example computer drawings, then in architecture. However, upon closer examination of this line, we will see that in fact, there is some inequality in it again.

What really matters is the impression each line leaves on the recipient. In computer drawings and then in architecture, each of us will see a straight line regardless of whether it is really straight or not. Assuming its existence, we assume the existence of a perfectly flat surface. The same applies to the wheel. The world of geometry tries to break into real reality and builds its colonies, first in the world of drawing, then in the world of architecture.

Apart from the two lines - the wavy line and the straight line - there is one more type of line which is derived from the wavy line and occurs in the world of thoughts, in the world of spirit. Accepting the existence of this world presupposes my support for the duality of the reality that surrounds us. I will write about this line in the next part of my work.  CONTENTS


3.2 Waviness of matter

It is so much better with nature that we can observe it directly, where the object of observation (e.g. a specific flower) is something empirically given and thus difficult to undoubtedly. It exists independently of us, the observers, and we have no influence on its external image. The shapes we observe are the result of millions of years of evolution. One of the few common features of the creations of the surrounding nature is the ability to describe each of them with a wavy line. It is probably enough to refer only to our senses, but let's look at how the diversity of nature was emphasized by Ingarden:

“[…] It is not the geometry with its properly shaped planes, polyhedrons, spheres, etc., that prevails in organic nature. Here, despite all the phenomena, such as symmetry, which appears in the organic world, the rule is rather a special irregularity, constant deviations from the shapes of abstract geometry. At the same time, despite the preservation of a certain general type (e.g. the shape of an oak leaf or, for example, the shape of a human ear), not only the "same" parts in different individuals differ greatly in shape, but also analogous parts of one and the same organism (e.g. individual leaves of the same oak) differ in details from each other in various ways. "[20]

The multitude of shapes occurring in nature, the amazingness of the line describing the matter was the subject of delight for many artists over the centuries. In recent times, the greatest tribute has been paid to its period, which in Poland is called the secession. People most often admired the beauty of flowers, women and various types of stems. Above all, however, the wavy line was worshiped, because it was in it that the features that best described the surrounding reality were found. Here is how Mieczysław Wallis talks about the Art Nouveau curve:

“[…] Art Nouveau, like Far East painting and graphics, did not pursue illusionistic effects, it operated with a line and a flat spot. The line therefore played a greater role in it than in the art of the full Renaissance: Art Nouveau was even more 'line art' than that one. Of the various types of lines, Art Nouveau particularly liked a long, flowing, curved, wavy line, a line that seems to be in motion. It could be said, Crane wrote, that the wavy line not only suggests movement but also describes its direction and strength. It is actually the line of motion. <<[21] Grasset thought similarly: >> […] each curve gives an idea of movement and life […], the curve's route should be full, rounded, closed and harmonious like a stalk full of juice <<.[22] Thus, many art historians see one of the main features of Art Nouveau in a delicate wavy line. Admittedly, there are works of art with crooked lines that do not belong to Art Nouveau, and there are works of Art Nouveau in which there are no curved lines: yet the twisting and bending curve line is the most common and striking feature of Art Nouveau. "[23]

There are many reasons for the fascination of Art Nouveau with the beauty of nature, because, as I have already mentioned in my work, people are most drawn to what is changeable, unique and unpredictable. Nature has these qualities in abundance. The wavy lines appearing in it are different from themselves, that it is impossible to match one of them with a similar one. These and many other properties make us inclined to attribute the quality of living creatures to the wavy line, such as: independence, individuality, uniqueness. I am far from "reviving" the wavy line, I only mean the impressions that accompany us while watching it.

We also perceive a certain relationship between the amount of its occurrence and its organic nature. The more wavy lines there are in a thing, the more life it has. We do so, the more so because it is precisely man in his external form that is full of waviness and roundness. For example, let's take a look at the shapes and impressions that accompany us while visiting a cavernous rock, eg Łokietek. Assuming that we do not know its squiggles, we will be delighted to admire its wavy shapes. Compared to human shapes, the rocks are somehow more hewn, carrying some potential for horror and hostility. They are a completely different type of wave than human. No wonder, because rocks have no life in them. But it is different with human waviness. By observing our body, we see that there is not a single place in it that we could consider perfectly simple. But it becomes like a rock wave as it dies and disintegrates. There is another type of waviness in man, about which I will write in the next chapter of my work.

When we observe an object from a distance, many of us become deluded. The observed thing may appear here and there as a straight line or a circle. However, when we look at it closely, it turns out to be wrinkled. While examining the world around him, man looks for simplifications that will allow him to understand him faster and more fully. It is precisely such simplifications in the exploration of the world that have occurred in the way it is described. It is much easier for us to remember a world that consists of repetitive elements, in this case geometric figures. Nature hates repetition, so it creates new shapes, the number of which is impossible for us to assimilate, so we simplify it.

Another opinion on the repetition in inanimate nature is given by Gilles Deleuze:

“In fact, it is only inanimate nature that can repeat itself, with a difference of similar dimension, since it is a certain outer shell (side) that enters the interior of the body; animate nature, in contrast, covers an inner shell (the side) which necessarily contains other species of organisms, such that this time wraps within itself an inner shell containing other organisms: »Each piece of matter can be conceived as a garden full of plants and as a pond full of fish. However, each branch of a single plant, each representative of an individual animal, and each drop of their liquid body parts is in itself an equally similar garden or pond. Thus, the inorganic cavity comes to be non-folded and simple, while the organic fold / fold is always multilayered, variable, intermediate (conceived by the inner shell {side}). Matter is doubly folded, the first by elastic forces, the second by plastic forces, but neither of them is able to move towards the other. So the universe is neither a great living being, nor is it some Animal in itself [...] " [24]

The waviness of matter is not only its outer side, the one that we can see with our senses. It is also realized in the interior of matter thanks to its ability to infinite divisions into smaller and smaller organisms, but very complex, containing another infinity. In this reality, the undulation is intertwined with the multiplicity and abundance of life. Other parts of matter possess this life in abundance, such that they can give it whatever is born of it. The problem raised by this work is not served by ever-reaching considerations on the multitude of waviness in the matter. There is only one fact: matter waves not only outside, but also inside itself. This happens not only in its organic form, but also inorganic.

Below are some examples of matter waviness:

Photo 5: The fruits of white currant. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009

Photo No. 6: The face of a woman. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009

Photo No. 7: A spider's web with drops of water. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009

3.3 Bushiness or wave of spirit.

Throughout the ages there have been many philosophers who have tried to prove the existence of spirit. The most convincing of them all is the modern philosopher Descartes with his well-known saying, "I think, therefore I am" (cogito, ergo sum). We are most confident in the world of thoughts

"So what am I after all? Something that thinks. What does it mean something that thinks? That is, something that doubts, understands, comprehends, argues, contradicts, wants, does not want, imagines and feels. It is certainly quite a lot, if it all belongs to my nature. But also, why shouldn't this belong to me? Am I not the one who at the moment doubts almost everything, who understands and comprehends some things, who makes sure and acknowledges some, and contradicts others, who wants and wants to continue to get to know them, someone who does not want to be deceived who imagines many things (sometimes even against his will) and feels a lot, as if by the action of the sense organs? [...] It is self-evident that I myself am the one who doubts, understands and desires, and that no further explanation is needed here. "[25]

By proving the existence of thought, we are proving the existence of spirit. Do thoughts have limits, do they have edges, do they move along a line? It is certainly the case that from some thoughts other thoughts arise, and from these others more emerge. In my opinion, there is a kind of "bushiness" of movements within our thoughts that seem to resemble neuron dendrites or a bushy bush. There is no straight or wavy line here. For the sake of simplicity, it can be assumed that in the world of thought there is a specific kind of line consisting of an infinite number of points, from which points a line may begin with properties similar to the one from which it originates.

Deleuze sees this world a bit differently:

“If Descartes did not know how to get out of the labyrinth, it was because he was looking for the truth of continuity in rectilinear paths, and the truth of freedom in the straightforwardness of the soul. He knew as little about the inclinations of the soul as he knew about the curves of matter. "[26]

He did not only criticize Descartes, but in one of the chapters of the book The Fold referred to here, entitled Folds on the soul, he develops his thought in the following way:

“[…] What is collapsed is only virtual and currently exists only in a shell, in something that wraps it. From now on, it is not just a point of view that contains something; or is one, but only as an instrument, but not as a final cause or for a finished work (entelechia). The inclusion or the inevitability has a confinement or wrapper condition which Leibniz takes in his famous formula of "windowless", which point of view does not sufficiently explain the problem. When we interfere, it is done continuously, or it contains something of a finished work that is neither a view, a place, nor a point of view, but what remains in the point of view, which occupies it and without which the point of view does not. would exist. That something is necessarily a soul, some object. The soul always contains what it understands from its point of view, in other words, a tilt. The deflection is an ideal condition or a virtual reality that currently only exists in the soul that envelops it. So the soul is that which has folds and is full of folds. Folds are in the soul and at the same time they really exist not only in the soul. This has long been the case in >> natural concepts <<: they are pure virtuality, pure forces whose deed is contained in their external structure and the folds inside the soul, and whose finished work contains the inner work of the soul (internal distribution). This is also true in the real world: the whole world is only a virtual reality existing only in the folds of the soul that transmits them, the soul containing inner pleats by which it endows itself with a representation of the entire world. In the subject we move from deflection to inclusion, as well as from the virtual world to the real world, a deflection describing a fold, and inclusion describing the soul or object, that is, what wraps the fold, its ultimate cause and the finished work. "[27]

So, the soul has folds, pleats, irregularities. It has placed itself within and governs our beliefs. The process is quite complicated, and it reports its connection with the real world, which is said to be separated again by a wavy line, a fold. No one has experienced the world described above directly, it is a position derived from certain assumptions, the consequence of which is the acceptance of the existence of the soul and the folds that define it.

The above description certainly appears clearer in its original language. Not wanting to capture anything from such a complicated thought of the author of the text, I decided to quote a longer fragment of it, which in my opinion is very important in the entire course of proving the existence of folds in the intangible world of our thoughts.

Photo No. 8: The Neuron and its Dendrites. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009


3.4 Lines in architecture

Originally, the most common line in architecture was a wavy line. Building materials commonly used by man - especially wood - forced him to introduce large innovations in line with the generally accepted assumptions of functionality and minimization of production costs. I have already mentioned this before. Over the centuries, considerations about buildings, including single-family houses, took place in the imaginary world of drawings. There, people used the tools available to them, which assumed repetition, symmetry and the possibility of matching one part of the building to another (connecting the living room with the dining room, the dining room with the kitchen). All this was done using ubiquitous straight lines. What's so strange about that? It seems nothing, as long as artistically gifted people have ceased to deal with architecture. It is not about having drawing skills, but about the ability to convey emotions through the creation of a work, and in this case through works of architecture. A similar position can be found in the summary of the Verona concept:

“Among the theories of art he knows, only the concept of Verona was noteworthy for Tolstoy. Although the latter did not manage to define art more precisely, he understood, however, that it could not be described by the vague notion of "beauty", and he rightly saw that its most important feature is the expression of emotions. "[28]

Architects became mainly engineers, thereby distancing themselves from their original artistic sources. Art is primarily a form of communication. It presupposes the content and the recipient. It differs from ordinary dialogue in that emotions are the content of the message, and human works are the tools. Applying this definition to contemporary works of architecture, it can be said that they have long ceased to serve as a source of social communication of emotions. In the Middle Ages, the soaring towers and windows were supposed to direct thoughts and feelings towards God, who, according to the commonly accepted belief, inhabited the skies. Art Nouveau architecture was supposed to glorify the perfection and beauty of nature,

Photo 9: Casa Milo by Antonio Gaudi. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009

Photo 10: Gothic Church. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009

which, according to Stanisław Lem, is not that perfect again in its designer's endeavors[29].

The great artist-architects struggle and try to combine admiration for beauty with functionality in one work. In the case of great engineers-architects, however, the emphasis is on functionality and utilitarianism, and only then is it bent to aesthetic requirements, if at all. In the process of architectural and artistic communication, limiting oneself to using only straight lines and circles is a challenge similar to writing a poem using only consonants. Let us look at the problem described above through the eyes of Leon Chwistek, a twentieth-century art philosopher:

“But why exactly are windows supposed to be vertical? Why should the veranda lines be straight? Is maintaining a straight line in today's reinforced concrete buildings not a coincidence of an automatic repetition of shapes that were dictated by the simple necessity of using stone or brick? This question seems decisive. It entails a whole series of detailed questions relating to the shape of the rooms - especially living rooms, boudoirs, etc., to the indoor device, etc. All this leads after a moment of reflection to the conclusion that if we do not want to identify comfort with what we are used to, we must break essentially with the straight line in architecture. "[30]

The radical nature of the above position indicates that the problem of reigning in the architecture of a straight line requires a solution not only in theoretical but also practical considerations.  CONTENTS

Chapter IV.

The emotional value of the line


A straight or wavy line can be the carriers of certain values that are released only in the context of the work as a whole, in this case, for example, a single-family house. Observing the line itself without the context in which it is placed does not give us any strong impressions, the most complete of which are those that arouse a sense of pleasure in us.

The subject of impressions arising during the observation of architecture was the subject of deliberations by Jadwiga Sławińska, who in one of the chapters of her book thus modernises Theodor Lipps' Theory of Empathy[31]:

“The forms of various objects, e.g. architectural objects, evoke certain feelings in the recipients, which they in turn transfer to the observed objects. This process makes it possible to feel into the works as if they were endowed with psyche. This leads to uniting with them in aesthetic contemplation and finding in them one's own values and desires, only somehow stronger, more lush and richer. Architecture is all the more valuable the stronger the feelings it is capable of arousing. We associate the emotional states caused by the perception of architectural works with the works themselves, not only in the sense that we realize that we owe our moods to them, but that we ascribe these moods to them. It feels as if the building is really smiling at us or, while reflecting, unfazed, looking at us glumly. However, no one thinks that the architectural work is really alive; our sensations are in this case similar to those we feel towards living creatures endowed with psyche. "[32]

Architecture is a collection of straight and wavy lines, which I think should be looked at separately, which I will deal with in the following parts of my work.   CONTENTS

4.1 Impressions when considering a straight line

A straight line is often associated with an attack, because when an animal attacks, it does so in a straight line, when something falls from a high or flies at us at high speed, it happens in a straight line.

There is a concept of a simple man and a simpleton. The latter is a boor and a bastard, in other words he is a bad person who does evil to other people. The term simple man has a completely different meaning. It is a person who accepts the world as he perceives it directly, basing his knowledge to a large extent solely on personal experience. A simple person is someone who can be easily manipulated, but also someone dangerous because of his non-reformable views. The impressions in the reception of such a person are already more positive than in relation to a simpleton, although not so enchanted by them.

Are there any other variations of the word simple? There are many of them, e.g. a simple solution, a simple road, simply, as simple as a wire (like the construction of a flail). Basically simple is something that is dangerous, easy to handle. A straight line introduces monotony. The lack of volatility means that we quickly get bored with it. Whatever, moving in a straight line, can gain faster speeds, it can endanger our lives. In a straight line, it is best to spot someone on a flat area, it is worse to hide from the impending danger. We often say that simple solutions are the best, but even more often these solutions are only the foundations for further innovations, which in the end appears to be more complicated than simple. We are most concerned about the crossing of straight lines, the greater the angle, the more we fear. The most common angle between two lines in architecture is the right angle. This is the angle at which two bodies collide in the most painful way. The angles are usually gray and gloomy, it is easy to hide behind them or in them to, for example, hurt someone. The sharper the angle of intersection of the planes, the more damage it can cause (a knife). An example may be Stefan Symotiuk's reflections on the practical philosophy of space functioning in Chinese civilization:

“Only the attack is >> simple < <! I odwrotnie: gdzie prosta, tam agresja (…) Można by nawet zauważyć coś więcej: formy proste geometrycznie są dla istot żywych monoton­ne, monotonia zaś jest sama w sobie czymś groźnym.

Here we will stop at the following observation: for a community of sedentary people subjected to quiet, monotonous, long-term work, everything that is sudden, quick, violent, impulsive, offensive is dangerous and it is easy to identify the rush with evil. Sudden downpours and droughts, swift streams and winds, aggressive riders from the Mongolian steppes - all this could have resulted in the aversion to the straight line as an attribute of attack in Chinese culture. In the demonology of this nation, evil is that which rushes blindly ahead, by rushing, pushing, mindlessly posing a threat to the peaceful natives. This is also the explanation for the susceptibility of Chinese architecture and urban planning to wavy structures. Roads of villages, roofs of houses, ornaments of robes and tools are full of graphic squiggles that are supposed to hinder the route of movement, create discomfort for ghosts and demons who would like to introduce their crazy runs and flights here. The complexity of shapes in Chinese painting, in lettering graphics, a liking for kites winding in the wind, etc., expresses the spirit of resistance and magical protection against what is simple. "[33]

Chinese civilization is much more experienced than the European one, if only because of the passage of time. According to her, the wavy line comes from the world of thoughts, from the imperceptible world of spirits, while only the path leading to perdition is straight.

4.2 Impressions while considering the wavy line

We have become used to the wavy line since we became aware of having awareness of ourselves. We have always liked creatures similar to ourselves the most, as Epicharm and Xenophanes already spoke of in the 6th century BC:

“No wonder ... that we like ourselves and that we think we've grown up beautifully. After all, a dog considers a dog to be something most beautiful, and likewise an ox, an ox, a donkey, a donkey, a pig, a pig.

If bulls and horses and lions with arms and legs could paint with them and create works like humans, horses would paint gods like horses and give them bodies, and bulls like bulls, giving them the shapes that the species has. . "[34]

It is true that it is a text more literary than a philosophical one, but when uttered by such famous sages at the time, it makes us look for a deeper meaning than merely stating the obvious facts of the relativity of aesthetic values among various species of animate creatures. The most beautiful, according to the ancients, was man, not only because of his beautiful soul or interior, but also because of the shapes that describe him. Already in ancient times, they were considered the most beautiful of all shapes.

A few centuries later, already in the 1st century BC, the above-cited literary and philosophical considerations found their outlet in a very practical treatise by Vitruvius On Architecture, Books X, which until the modern times was treated as the bible of architecture. Here is what Vitruvius writes about the symmetry and perfection of man:

"Symmetry is a harmonious harmony resulting from the members of the work itself and the interdependence between specific members of individual parts and the work as a whole. [...] The composition of churches is based on symmetry, the laws of which architects should strictly obey. Symmetry is born of a proportion known in Greek as άυαλογία - analogy. Proportion is the application of a fixed modulus to each work, both for the members of the building and for its whole, hence the law of symmetry. No building can have a proper layout without symmetry and good proportions, which should be based strictly on the proportions of a well-built man's body. "[35]

The wavy line soothes us and makes us positively disposed, especially when it is combined with intersecting straight lines. An example of this is the design of buildings in which such contrasts have been applied. The roundness and waviness are most familiar to us, we are used to seeing it and often associate it with fluidity. We are positively influenced by the fluidity of sounds of some musical instrument or piece, fluency of expression, fluidity of movements, fluidity of events, and at the same time their variability, variabilism are other manifestations of very broadly understood waviness. Antonio Filarete wrote about the psychology of arcs in the 15th century, showing that pointed arches, and thus the sharp crossing of straight lines, is negatively perceived by humans and is unpleasant for the eye:

“The reason why the arches are full of more beautiful than the sharp ones: There is no doubt that any thing that somehow hinders vision is not as beautiful as one that can be freely followed with an eye that is not obscured by anything. When you see a full arc, nothing disturbs the eye when viewing it, this is also the case when you look at the wheel, the eye embraces it at first sight and it is active without any obstacle, it is also the case with a semicircle, the eyesight without inhibition goes from one end to the second. However, it is different with the pointed arch. "[36]

All the organic reality that surrounds us is folded. Looking at one fold, we see other folds in it. It happens thanks to the ever closer and more precise penetration into matter, which in its final, smallest manifestation is not an indivisible point, but a fold that connects everything. Here is how the above thesis is presented by the French professor of philosophy Gilles Deleuze while interpreting the thought of Gottfied Leibniz, the 17th-century philosopher:

“[…] A flexible or flexible body still has congruent parts that form a fold so that they are not divided into parts but rather infinitely divided into smaller and smaller folds which always retain some coherence. […] The fold is always curled inside itself, like a grotto in a grotto. A part of matter, the smallest element of a maze, is a fold, not a point that is never a part, but simply the end of a line. This is why parts of matter are either mass or aggregate as a correlate of the elastic compressive force. Thus, the absence of folding is not the opposite of folding, but follows the fold to the next fold. Molecules >> turn into folds << which >> strange transformation is happening constantly <<. Folds of wind, water, fire and earth, and underground folds of ore veins in the mine. In a system of complex interactions, certain ripples of >> natural geography << refer to the impact of fire first, and then water and winds on the ground; and the veins of metals in mines are similar to conical forms, sometimes ending in a circle or ellipse, other times straightening into a hyperbola or parabola. " [37]

The omnipresent wave makes us begin to define the reality that surrounds us. Because if we assume that the more waviness, the more life there is in an organism, then it is easy to come to the conclusion that waviness is a manifestation of life, and the more it is, the more attractive what we look at seems to us. I will return once again to Deleuz's interpretation of Leibniz's thought:

“Organic matter can be defined by its ability to bend its parts and stretch them out, but not indefinitely, and to the extent that each species has been assigned to it. […] To develop means to strengthen, to grow; on the other hand, folding is a fading away, a reduction in, "moving away into the corner of the world". However, a simple metric shift does not explain the difference between the organic and the inorganic, the machine and the motivating force. It would not show that the movement is not simply from one larger or smaller part to another, but from fold to fold. When some part of a machine is still a machine, its smaller part is not the same as the whole of it. "[38]

Photo 11: Allen Jones. Source: U. Eco, History of beauty, Rebis, Poznań 2005, p. 15.

To conclude the above considerations, I dare to say that we like what is folded, the waviness of the surrounding world, in which the other person is the most attractive in terms of aesthetic values. Man has the most waviness and curves that suit us. As we age, we shrink and curl up inside ourselves, and what used to be firm and round then becomes flat and not as wavy and attractive as it used to be.

Photo No. 12: Model. Source: U. Eco, Historia urzydoty, Rebis, Poznań 2007, p. 165.

Chapter V.

Is it possible to compromise between a straight line and a wavy line in architecture? Is beauty in the architecture of single-family houses just an ornament or maybe something else?

             By compromise, I mean coexistence. Earlier in this work, I indicated that the full language of an architect-artist is to use a straight line and a wavy line in his works, as well as all variations of the above lines. Everything else depends on the intensity of their occurrence. If in a single-family building most of the shapes are rectangles and triangles, and the wavy line is only the outline of communication routes inside the building, then in this case it can certainly be said that the proportion of straight lines in relation to wavy lines has not been maintained. It is extremely difficult for us to see the beauty in such a building, as long as it has not been decorated with small architecture around the building, vegetation, color, facade structure and, for example, undulating tiles in unremarkable color. The situation is quite the opposite when most of the lines in the building are wavy - semicircular lines: the roof, the body of the building, window openings, balconies - gently changing from one shape to another. Assuming that the proportions are kept and symmetry is not abandoned, such a work may appear beautiful. I am deliberately omitting the issue of functionality here, because with today's development of construction technologies and design ideas, it is possible to build what was once completely impossible.

Generally and in simplified terms, it can be said that a straight line symbolizes attention to functionality, while a wavy one can provide the building with aesthetic qualities. The compromise between the lines is just as necessary as it is between functionality and beauty in single-family houses:

“Buildings are places where people live, work and pray, and a certain form is imposed on them from the beginning by the needs and desires that the planned building is to fulfill. When it is impossible to compose a piece of music without assuming that it should be listened to and, consequently, appreciated by someone, it is certainly possible to design a building without intending to admire it - without intention, that is, to create an aesthetically indifferent thing. Even if some aesthetic qualities emerge in architecture, we still find a strong imbalance with other art forms. For no piece of music or literature can have a feature by which we can say that it is so, either because of the functions of music or because of the functions of literature, such features are unattainable. Of course, a musical or literary work may have a function, as is the case with Pindar's waltzes, marches, and odes. But these functions are not derived from the essence of literary or musical arts. " [39]

The greatest danger on the way to beautifying the architecture of single-family houses is their decoration, i.e. better or worse forms of softening the sharpness of building shapes. Outside, this is achieved by planting plants (trees, shrubs), building fountains, and painting in soothing colors. Inside the building, curtains, curtains, tablecloths, paintings, sculptures, fireplaces, and colors serve a similar purpose. What if all these extras are missing? The rectangular and triangular building disfigures the surrounding landscape. Roman Ingarden in his lectures on aesthetics in April 1960 spoke about the "prostheses" we use, which are supposed to give an illusory impression of beauty:

“When it comes to architecture, for example, we'll have some trouble seeing the forms of the organism in it. Naturally, there are many decorative moments in architecture that are taken from the organic world, but not so much from the human world, but mainly from the world of plant forms. Man also appears in architecture, but as an element of sculptural decoration, e.g. a great Gothic portal will be decorated with a multitude of various saints, human figures, etc. But it is already a sculpture applied to architecture as a decorative element, it is not a pure architectural element. "[40]

In angular buildings, there will almost always be an element of undulation, and that is us, if we use it. For the outside observer, there will be many disproportions and mismatches between man and his work. The lines in angular buildings are long and therefore "heavy" compared to the filigree lines of a man who hides many details and surprises. Certainly, the beautification of the buildings with the aforementioned accessories is very useful and desirable. However, as I said before, this is an uncertain form of caring for the aesthetic dimension of our homes.

When looking for beauty, we first perceive it in another person and would like similar impressions to last during our contact with other organic and inorganic creations. On the other hand, when we deprive a man of all the so-called accessories and decorations, he remains a beautiful object of our delight in an undamaged form. However, this is not the case for buildings. CONTENTS

Chapter VI.

Practical solutions. Gaudi and others

At the very beginning, I present photos of already completed projects that are very popular among investors.

Photo 13: Construction of a dome house in Poland. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009

Photo No. 14 The interior of the dome house. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009

In these types of buildings, it is possible to combine functionality with commonly understood beauty. The only problem is how to furnish them, especially when you want to use wood for it. In addition to domed houses full of rounds and spherical shapes, there are also Richard Buckminster Fuller's geometric domes, which are full of angularities, but the angles used in them are obtuse and you can rarely see acute or right angles. It is a kind of compromise between round ball-shaped houses and currently placed square blocks of single-family houses.


Photo 15: Detached House, Fuller Dome. Source: - access date: September 7, 2009

At some point in his life on earth, man decided to [...]

Logo Alians