Roman Architecture

[Ludovicus]

These lectures, by Dr. Diana E E Kleiner , are in depth presentations from Yale University. Very worthwhile!

 

 

http://academicearth.org/lectures/intro-roman-architecture

 

1. Introduction to Roman Architecture

2. The Founding of Rome and the Beginnings of Urbanism in Italy

3. Technology and Revolution in Roman Architecture

4. Civic, Commercial and Religious Buildings of Pompeii

5. Houses and Villas of Pompeii

6. Habitats at Herculaneum and Early Roman Interior Decoration

7. Painting Palaces and Villas in the First Century A.D.

8. Exploring Special Subjects on Pompeian Walls

9. Augustus Assembles Rome

10. Roman Tombs

11. Nero and His Architectural Legacy

12. The Colosseum and Contemporary Architecture in Rome

13. Imperial Palace on the Palatine Hill

14. Civic Architecture in Rome under Trajan

15. Hadrian's Pantheon and Tivoli Retreat

16. Roman Life in Ostia, the Port of Rome

17. The Baths of Caracalla

18. Roman North Africa: Timgad and Leptis Magna

19. Baroque Phenomenon in Roman Architecture

20. The Rebirth of Athens

21. Architecture of the Western Roman Empire

22. The Tetrarchic Renaissance

23. Rome of Constantine and a New Rome

24. Discovering the Roman Provinces and Designing a Roman City

[caesar novus]

I have made several postings here about that course and others in the series. The original source of them is at http://oyc.yale.edu/courselist and gives you various format choices for loading on ipods or pc's. Unfortunately there appears to be no recent courses added when I last checked. Maybe someone can review the Greek History one; I know it has been mentioned here.

 

I took the Roman one just before going to see some of the same monuments in person (also took some other Roman architecture video courses). I am thankful it was made available, and it did deepen my understanding - but mostly in some indirect way that I can't put my finger on. Since it's a huge time commitment to view the whole course, I will nitpick a few things to show it's not entirely a free banquet.

 

There is an absurd emphasis on esoteric terminology. I don't argue with learning terms that you might need twice in your life, but she hammers in terms with no practical use for even specialists. Things that could be clearly communicated with 2 sensible words have to be compressed into one word nobody uses except on school tests. She apologizes for it.

 

I don't like her choice of monuments to cover. In person they seem runts of the litter, standing by more interesting things. In more than one case she seems to pick them because they were associated with a women, or some such thing other than it's own merit. I guess it's forgivable in cases where she had research experience at the monument.

 

BTW:

 

I can't help commenting on digressions she chooses to inject into the subject, which can reveal what stuff she is made of in terms of smarts and biases. She makes a big deal of 4 gelato spots in Rome and Florence. I would say 90% of American visitors to Italy are devoid of taste and cannot appreciate "good" gelato. Sure, they LOVE it, but are equally happy with crap flavors and crap vendors, just because they are all better than "vomit cream" from home. To respect her I hoped she would be within the 10% category of discerning taste.

 

I visited those places and cannot vouch for her taste. Borderline, unless they were just above the 90% level then fell in the year or so since her recommendation. Well, maybe this doesn't negate her scholarship since scholars may be nerds that develop other parts of their brains beside taste. Actually one place in Rome was acceptable, but already well known, and one flavor in a Florence place WAS remarkable.

 

The other kind of digression was predictable but annoying. The loony left political jabs weren't as flagrant as in a Berkeley Roman course (I don't knee-jerk criticize Berkeley, because I used to work with awesome engineering graduates from there). But the kind of patronizing left-is-good, right-is-bad came out in goofy ways like celebrating modern politician's physical likeness to a corresponding good or notorious emperor.

 

In another Yale course on Classical Music I got an insight into the eternal academic leftyness. It was done so ineptly and unconvincingly that it was revealed to be simple case of trying to appear relevant and edgy to the students rather than at all heartfelt! The professor is of impeccable qualifications (writing the textbooks, etc) but didn't want to appear haughty. He constantly tries to patronize the students with examples of pop culture, but from before they were born. He was so old that they sit uncomprehending when he tries to be a "hep cat" like he imagines youth admire. Also he gets his facts wrong when making comparisons in areas I know, from diseases to dates of impressionist paintings. I wish these professors would stick to what they know, but I guess they have to pander to the audience for their "ratings".

Edited June 8, 2010 by caesar novus