Probably not the point of the article, but as a biologist I feel it is important to note that the fractal pattern of natural forms is functional. Ornamentation is subtle design maximization, even if it is just ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny. Often it is an outgrowth of the organic way living creatures self assemble, a sufficiency our architecture could emulate.
See Christopher Alexander’s experiments and gorgeous books of process design.
Also, it is worth noting that SJ Gould has a whole essay where he explicitly compares the spandrels of gothic cathedrals with derived evolutionary structure. Maybe the Church has much to learn from Darwin after all!
Good points. I think the analogy with ornamentation in architecture is more with ritualized signaling behaviors and signaling patterns in plants and animals, though. As you probably know as a biologist, repetition and formality is a key signature of signals because it increases redundancy and reduces ambiguity. Architectural ornamentation uses features that look like living patterns — fractal self-similarity and patterned repetition — for non-instrumental purposes, to signal importance (as in a lavishly decorated bank or civic building) and to signal a communal orientation. People usually don't place as much ornamentation on loading docks because their function is purely instrumental. Churches and courthouses (used to) get more ornamentation because their function is social/communal.
Great article. Going off the idea of our need for pattern and repetition, I couldn't help but reflect on my "folk" understanding of information theory and the balance between repetition and randomness that creates information and meaning. Tossing repetition just creates white noise. Similarly, with music, creating music that doesn't use historical convention/pattern makes the music difficult to engage with or enjoy; but creating music that solely uses those conventions will bore the listener eventually. There is a balance between the cyclical/repetitive/patterned and the solely random/linear that is enticing to humans. There's something deeper to explore in our need for stability (repetition) and newness (randomness), and in our ability (or not) to accept new patterns as norms. Culture isn't static but it can't be unmoored. With that, I totally agree that Christians should be creating spaces that provide what the linear, modern/post-modern culture is not providing.
Thanks, Clayton! That's a good point — too much repetition just looks like death just as much as too much linearity/progress. My understanding of information theory isn't much better than "folk" level, either, but I think I was gesturing at the need for the balance between chaos and order with the references to fractal patterning and different kinds of ornamentation. If every building were ornamented the same way using only a few stale patterns, the effect would absolutely be alienating. But if one building draws from Regency architecture and another from Gothic Revival and another from, I don't know, classical Moorish design, the effect could be closer to the balance between variation and predictability that makes truly organic shapes come alive. The same is true in music, as you point out — the most appealing music plays with our expectations, sometimes fulfilling them, sometimes surprising us. But it's never just an ascending series of consecutive notes in one direction up or down the scale.
I should also point out that I really know very little about architecture. Maybe the combination of styles I mentioned above would look horrible. The point is that there are a *lot* of really good influences and resources for architects to draw on, if they ever again decide to think of buildings as civic projects rather than as ego boosters.
Here is a related article from Ross Douthat in the NYT. Thought you might find it interesting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/30/opinion/architecture-ideas-economics.html?smid=url-share
This is great! And true — we switched away from ornamentation because people like Adolf Loos argued us out of using it.
Probably not the point of the article, but as a biologist I feel it is important to note that the fractal pattern of natural forms is functional. Ornamentation is subtle design maximization, even if it is just ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny. Often it is an outgrowth of the organic way living creatures self assemble, a sufficiency our architecture could emulate.
See Christopher Alexander’s experiments and gorgeous books of process design.
Also, it is worth noting that SJ Gould has a whole essay where he explicitly compares the spandrels of gothic cathedrals with derived evolutionary structure. Maybe the Church has much to learn from Darwin after all!
Good points. I think the analogy with ornamentation in architecture is more with ritualized signaling behaviors and signaling patterns in plants and animals, though. As you probably know as a biologist, repetition and formality is a key signature of signals because it increases redundancy and reduces ambiguity. Architectural ornamentation uses features that look like living patterns — fractal self-similarity and patterned repetition — for non-instrumental purposes, to signal importance (as in a lavishly decorated bank or civic building) and to signal a communal orientation. People usually don't place as much ornamentation on loading docks because their function is purely instrumental. Churches and courthouses (used to) get more ornamentation because their function is social/communal.
Great article. Going off the idea of our need for pattern and repetition, I couldn't help but reflect on my "folk" understanding of information theory and the balance between repetition and randomness that creates information and meaning. Tossing repetition just creates white noise. Similarly, with music, creating music that doesn't use historical convention/pattern makes the music difficult to engage with or enjoy; but creating music that solely uses those conventions will bore the listener eventually. There is a balance between the cyclical/repetitive/patterned and the solely random/linear that is enticing to humans. There's something deeper to explore in our need for stability (repetition) and newness (randomness), and in our ability (or not) to accept new patterns as norms. Culture isn't static but it can't be unmoored. With that, I totally agree that Christians should be creating spaces that provide what the linear, modern/post-modern culture is not providing.
Thanks, Clayton! That's a good point — too much repetition just looks like death just as much as too much linearity/progress. My understanding of information theory isn't much better than "folk" level, either, but I think I was gesturing at the need for the balance between chaos and order with the references to fractal patterning and different kinds of ornamentation. If every building were ornamented the same way using only a few stale patterns, the effect would absolutely be alienating. But if one building draws from Regency architecture and another from Gothic Revival and another from, I don't know, classical Moorish design, the effect could be closer to the balance between variation and predictability that makes truly organic shapes come alive. The same is true in music, as you point out — the most appealing music plays with our expectations, sometimes fulfilling them, sometimes surprising us. But it's never just an ascending series of consecutive notes in one direction up or down the scale.
I should also point out that I really know very little about architecture. Maybe the combination of styles I mentioned above would look horrible. The point is that there are a *lot* of really good influences and resources for architects to draw on, if they ever again decide to think of buildings as civic projects rather than as ego boosters.
Brilliant!
Thanks, John — please feel free to share widely!