Straight, fluted columns that rise to the full heights of the buildings, capitals that add to the grandeur and beauty, and grand, elegant roofs with triangular pediments. With symmetrical, relatively simple shapes, many buildings of Philadelphia seem to project grandeur and simple beauty. They are all kinds of monumental buildings that diligently serve a unique purpose on their own, starting from the 30th Street Station to old National Bank, and to an art museum. Looking at the buildings as one excurses through the center city, one would wonder if they would be exact copies of the Pantheon or Parthenon. The buildings have the same façade but with altercations and modern materials. In a modern setting and in the center city of Philadelphia, they seem surprisingly harmonious and balanced with their surroundings, rather than standing out or being awkward. Is it just the artsy and historical atmosphere of Philadelphia that embraces diversity? I concluded that these neoclassical buildings were not only made to be mostly similar to those of classical Greece and Rome but also seemed to feature certain “adjustments” from the original Greco-Roman style. Because the buildings serve different functions today than they did 2 centuries ago, they have been built to reflect and make convenient use of the building. What is seen outside should reflect the intended use and surroundings of the building. I wanted to analyze how architects of the neoclassical period took the classical design and reflected and imbrued that standard of beauty in modern buildings.
I took current Ritz Carlton building on 10 Avenue of the Arts, which used to serve as a bank as Girard Trust Building, or Mellon Plaza, as an example of my analysis. At the first glance, the building’s façade seemed to be directly taken from Pantheon of Rome, with its domed hat also. But is it really so? I wanted to test my hypothesis. I wanted to look into it, by the architect built it so that it accords to this class book Vitruvius’s standard of Greco-roman architectures and how the ratios play in it. What part echoes of the past and what to the 1900s? This building will serve as an example of how Neo-classical architects made use of old principles and applied to fit modern society and surrounding) The architect of Ritz Carlton Building in Philadelphia while delivering elegance and beauty of Greco-Rome, adjusted façade so that it fits the modern use and function. It altered what was unnecessary to modern surroundings and made adjustments.
First, I wanted to check where in the parts in this Ritz-Carlton building corresponds to the architectural formula that Vitruvius has set, especially the ratios. I mostly stuck to the front façade, and based my analyses on observable part of the building. I took a photograph, taking it from in the very middle and as far out as possible and adjusted the photograph using Photoshop, considering the perspective and where I was standing at. I could then measure the height and which had to be diminished as he same rate with the width, etc. After my measurement, I delineated the big lines and silhouettes and calculated a ratio to each other, which seemed to give me meaningful number; most of them were. And Indeed, there were several points that was consistent with points in the Vitruvius’s book III which described traits of Ionic columns, that gave the building its elegance, simplicity, and balance. I first could find the recurring ratio which is said to be golden ratio which was first part of the in the book III Vitruvius’s description ratio on human body. I calculated the big ratios from the silhouette. Result was relatively accurate to the golden ratio. Ratio of width to height of the central, protruded portico part was 1.69. The result was 1.50 without colossal the frieze included so average visual would be very close to 1.618, the golden ratio, I could conclude. Then I divided the building by a vertical axis in the middle and compared the height of the
