| Looking at the two structures together, you might not know which one is in India and which one is in England. They both use similar architectural motifs; they both have columns and pediments; they both have symmetrical facades. Both of the buildings seem monumental in their size and presence in the landscape. Both have some type of flat, clear area around them so that you can see the building better, and sense its impressiveness. So what is different here? | |
Click on the image for a close-up
Chiswick House
|
Click on the image for a close-up
Government House, Calcutta
|
|
The context is different. The British building exists within the context of Britain of the early eighteenth century, when people read the classics and wanted to emulate the ideal of Greek and Roman history. The Indian building exists within the context of colonized India; it is a building of the foreigners, one which displays and projects their presence in the subcontinent. Same forms, different meanings. What other interpretations can you come up with for these two buildings? What does it mean that they are both houses (and not courthouses, universities, or museums)? What other buildings look like these two? Could they mean something different entirely?
During this period the world was expanding. But the transplantation of architectural styles doesn't mean simply that the same old things were built in new places around the world. How do these two buildings help us to understand the way historical and political context shapes the meaning of similar works of art? |
|
