Check out Mies and the late Mr. Johnson's work. They were big fans of
the golden. To the best of my knowledge, neither was a 19th century
person.
-jc
On Feb 1, 2005, at 1:32 PM, Cuyler Page wrote:
> >>I tend to use it for placement of elements, more so than the actual
> size and shape.
> The beautiful old 1877 Grist Mill and its accompanying store building,
> both pioneer log structures, were both thoroughly designed using the
> Golden Ratio. Inside dimensions of the whipsawn log store were
> accurate to the third decimal point, the inside width being 16'-2".
> Not a standard number, but everything measurable in the building fit
> into the system or game plan. Door and window sizes and placements,
> fireplace location and dimensions, rafter tie height and the resulting
> ceiling - all were multiples and divisions of Golden Ration
> proportions, everything linking together is an amazing and delightful
> continuous chain of calculations when one went on a hunt of
> discovery. Things I never expected fit into the system through the
> buildings, including plans and elevations. The game was often very
> elaborate, like good music, full of mental twists and turns, including
> things like the width of fascia boards in different areas being
> proportioned to the size of the gable, and all being proportioned to
> the Golden Ratio standard.
>
> I have found the same in other buildings from the late 1800's more
> often than I expected, including industrial buildings with thorough
> Golden Ratio proportions. It seems that whenever a designer began
> to use the GR system, it was often used down to the finest details.
> It certainly isn't universal, but like good jazz, once you feel it and
> get to like it, you get hooked. The problem is when someone becomes
> myopic and doesn't look for the other systems, or lack of any system,
> in buildings too. Lots of those !
>
> cp in bc
|
