INGLÉS II – TRABAJO PRÁCTICO Nº 1

TEXTO: CONDIT, CARL. W. (1964). Chapter I: Architecture in the Nineteenth Century.

The Chicago School of Architecture. A History of Commercial and Public Building in the
Chicago Area, 1875-1925. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London. (1º
Parte)

1- Lea el título, la información bibliográfica y la primera oración de cada uno de los tres
párrafos. Reflexione sobre el posible contenido de este texto.

2- Observe lo expresado en cursiva y negrita. Determine su significado según contexto:

Párrafo 1

a) …to create, in short, a new style

b) …the later development…

Párrafo 2

c) …those technical and aesthetic qualities of the artistic product that grow directly and
organically out of the conditions of human existence and out of the aspirations and powers
of human beings.

Párrafo 3

d) …the latter half of the eighteenth century…

e) …the social and economic revolution brought about by…

f) …yet it represented a force…

g) … the traditional techniques of construction eventually fell hopelessly short of meeting

the requirements and taking advantage of opportunities…

h) …but as the century moved on revivalism grew increasingly out of touch with the
realities of the time.

i) …and modern urban life with the deeper-lying emotional needs of the human spirit.

3- Descubra el referente de lo subrayado en el primer párrafo.

4- Explique las ideas vinculadas por but en el primer párrafo.

5- Desarrolle el planteo sobre el carácter dual del logro arquitectónico y técnico de la

escuela de Chicago.

6- ¿Cuáles son las tres perspectivas de interpretación para el análisis de la arquitectura de

esta escuela?
7- Descubra el referente de lo subrayado en el segundo párrafo y explique las ideas
vinculadas por But en este mismo párrafo.

8- ¿Qué ocurre con las construcciones que poseen un estilo genuino?

9- Descubra el referente de lo subrayado en el tercer párrafo.

10- ¿En qué consistió el fracaso de la arquitectura del siglo XIX?

ARCHITECTURE IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

1
The architectural and technical achievement of the Chicago school marked the
establishment of a new style of architecture, but at the same time it was the culmination of
a structural evolution that extended over the century preceding it. This dual character was
reflected in the two major developments of the school, which existed side by side
throughout the central portion of its history. One was highly utilitarian, marked by a strict
adherence to function and structure, and was in great part derived from certain forms of
urban vernacular building in Europe and the eastern United States. The other was formal
and plastic, the product of a new theoretical spirit and the conscious determination to create
rich symbolic forms – to create, in short, a new style expressive of contemporary American
culture. Thus the architecture of the Chicago school must be interpreted from several
standpoints: first, in terms of the structural techniques and building forms from which it
grew; second, in relation to the architectural dress, so to speak, of the revivalistic building
of the nineteenth century; and finally, in comparison with the later development of the
stylistic revolution which it set in motion.
2
Style in architecture represents or stands for those essential characteristics of
construction, form, ornament, and detail that are common to all the important structures of
any definable period in history. But it also stands for those technical and aesthetic qualities
of the artistic product that grow directly and organically out of the conditions of human
existence and out of the aspirations and powers of human beings. We rightly feel that the
buildings of a certain style – if it is a genuine style – symbolize in their form the realities of
man’s experience and the attempt to master and give adequate emotional expression to
those realities. These buildings are constituent facts of man’s history, and their revelation is
a part of truth itself.
3
The refined architectural classicism that became dominant in the latter half of the
eighteenth century eventually faced the social and economic revolution brought about by
the large-scale application of steam power to industrial techniques and by the new
mechanical inventions that accompanied this application. The first clumsy steam engine
might have seemed remote from the proud dignity of the Royal Crescent or Cumberland
Terrace; yet it represented a force that soon engulfed all the arts and all the modes of action
of Western civilization. In the face of this unprecedented phenomenon, the ancient and
vital art of architecture was threatened by powerful disintegrative forces. With respect to
utilitarian needs, the traditional techniques of construction eventually fell hopelessly short
of meeting the requirements and taking advantage of opportunities presented by the new
age of mechanized industrialization. Architectural revivalism struggled bravely with the
social and technical forces of the age and frequently produced functionally successful and
aesthetically valid works of building art, but as the century moved on revivalism grew
increasingly out of touch with the realities of the time. The ultimate artistic failure of
architecture in the nineteenth century can be stated very simply as the failure to form a
consistent style. It was the failure to provide, in its own vocabulary, an aesthetic discipline
that would combine the expression of science, technology, mechanized industry, and
modern urban life with the deeper-lying emotional needs of the human spirit.