well, another thing first: I 've written the book review for my the "history of finnish architecture"-class today (only first part, still have to write 4 6-page essays on different topics... puh!). The book is called: WOOD, STONE AND STEEL Contours of Finnish Architecture.
Therefore I started thinking about what is the essence of architecture in their point of view. And I guess it is that in Finland architecture has always been more related to urban development and urban space than I ever heard at home. Something I have always missed! Great country! (see below this post for details about the book and what I mean in special - it's not a finished version more the first one... but I have to move on to other essays).
Back to Florians question: what is the expectation/imagination/prejudices about Germany?
ok first: we can repair everything. A prejudice that is especially popular among Estonians I guess... have no idea why.
second: everything is clean... and really, to hear that from a Finn is a funny thing... Probably the same thing Florian mentioned about Buenos Aires. In the mornings it is soooo clean and even in the evenings. Unless it is Friday or Saturday (when Finns always get other persons!!!).
third: it seems that everyone wants to live in Berlin... why in hell?? too big, too much people, too few green areas, too dirty! why I understand it: street art!, open-minded people (at least more then in other parts, but I guess its due to the size... ), there is only one city that can regarded to be a city in germany: berlin....
what I didn't think about Finns before I arrived...
1. they get REALLY crazy on Friday and Saturday evenings... there is no comparison in Germany at all....
2. that they really wear reflectors everywhere (especially since the clock was changed to wintertime last weekend)
and what I just noticed... there is a typical face for Finnish men (not all, but a lot) but not for women! (I haven't seen the typical Finnish women yet... probably that's why I am always considered to be Finnish... and how Vuokko said once: "You are not looking Unfinnish." -> ok!)
and the other thing about today: its Finnish and Swedish Pyhäinpäivää - All Saints' Day/All Souls Day - Allerheiligen. Finnish because it is celebrated on the 1.november everywhere else. But Finns do not like to have public holidays during the week (they would miss a working day) so they celebrate it on the nearest Saturday... And I did not notice it at all: I was wondering that the internet-journey planner did not offer me the normal bus-route to school (I had to go by bus 'cause my bike is broken since yesterday), but did not really think about it. So I took the suggested tram, right in front of my window and went to school, was even wondering on my way that there are so many people drinking on a Saturday morning (but I don't really think about that any more, since Finns just get more crazy then they are normally on the weekends). So I arrived school, wanted to go to the library: closed... didn't think why... there was a handwritten sign: closed on 5/11 from 5pm and 6/11... so wanted to print something at media lab... Of corse I did not know the code for my key so I was standing some minutes in front of the entrance. Then a teacher was coming, also wanting to go inside but did not know her code... and I was telling that I wanted to enter through the library.
she: it's Sunday today!
I: what?
she: All Saint's Day!
ok... I did not know this at all.. Later I tried to enter the shop to buy stuff to repair my bike: closed... normally shops are even open on Sunday... seems that Finns take All Saint's Day, also renamed as All Soul's Day, cause Finns are not catholic at all, very serious. On my way back I realized this lot of flags hanging everywhere... And when I say everywhere I mean everywhere: I also did not realize before that there are flagpoles all around me.. even on a lot of residential buildings (city district of Vallilla is the best example... but it's also a 1930th workers disctrict, so it makes some sence...)... that's what I experienced and learned today... looking forward to Finnish Independence day now... 6/12... I won't forget that!!! =D
Book review
WOOD, STONE AND STEEL Contours of Finnish Architecture. Riitta Nikula. Keuruu: Otava Publishing Company Ltd, 2005. 208
In 2005 the art historian Riita Nikula published her first book trying to give “a general picture of building in Finland over the centuries”: “WOOD, STONE AND STEEL Contours of Finnish Architecture”.
Nikula has been professor in art and architecture history at Helsinki University and wrote her PhD about the Töölö region in Helsinki. She is regarded to be a generalist historian of Finnish architecture and has published books on several different Finnish architectural topics.
In her preface Nikula says she intends to readers who want to get an overview about the situation and the “crucial historical forces behind th[e] building work” in Finland. Her aim is to make the reader understand the countries architectural appearance, inspire them traveling around in Finland and explore Finnish architecture themselves.
The structure of the book follows natural order of centuries, although sometimes it is hard to differ history in that sense: Beginning with a widespread overview of landscape and history, which offers a basic understanding of external drivers, live and building technologies until the Middle Ages, Nikula goes on in chapters of centuries from 16th to 20th century. This is still an understandable structure but titling and content of substructures becomes confusing in some different manners: The main interest is obviously in the 19th and 20th century, which can considered to be natural in reviewing Finnish architecture, but at least similar main focuses for all the centuries and going more into detail where necessary (19th and 29th century) would have been helpful. Especially because of obviously “extra-chapters” such as “[The Vaasa of Carl Axel Setterberg]” already the table of content becomes confusing and the reader is left alone with the same feeling while reading through the book.
He also misses Nikula’s conclusion about what is the essence of Finnish architecture in the end. In the last paragraph she tries to lead the reader’s thinking into future: Nowadays Finnish towns grow but industrial jobs are being shifted to abroad, economy is still restructuring and agriculture a stable component of uncertainty. “All these will affect architecture in Finland in the decades to come.”
What makes it also hard to follow the steps of development is that building types, such as churches, are not treated continuously but within the order of centuries. One has to say that this comment questions the whole book structure, but since it is the decision between sorting things by time or by type, each variant has it's own strengths and weaknesses.
Content wise the chosen topics seem to be very suitable to give an overview about Finnish architecture in general: Nikula emphasizes town and urban development as a big part of architectural and social development throughout the whole book. To me it seems that is the big difference to architectural understanding in other countries: A lot of architects, urban designers and just normal people in other countries do not consider urban and open space in the way as it is emphasized in “WOOD, STEEL AND STONE Contours of Finnish Architecture” already since the 16th century and in Finnish society in general. This can considered being my personal essence of the book. In comparison to what I have learned about and seen in central Europe’s architectural history, urban development seems to be more in the focus of decision-making in Finland.
The way Nikula explains facts to the reader and relates them inside the subchapters is very easy to understand, even for a reader who is not familiar with features of Finnish architecture. At the same time she uses some architectural terms the reader has to know, but since architecture is a big part of everyday life one can consider the reader to know most of them.
For each chapter Nikula gives a broad overview of what happened in social life and technical development, and what that means to building and architecture, before leading to the subchapters. Whereas these descriptions are very short and therefore easy to keep in mind while reading through the chapter, the reader feels bombed with facts of building years in the subchapters: on page 41 there are mentioned seven churches and eleven years related to them. The exact dates might be interesting to historians, but to inspire “usual” readers exploring architecture it would have been more interesting to relate and compare the buildings as steps of development in a meaningful manner. Sometimes the reader even wished to get less but more detailed examples, but since this book is made to give an overview it might be ok that way. The most important point about that is that text and figures would have been more obviously related to each other. Since there are no figure numbers that could be mentioned in the text, it is hard to follow figures while reading. Nevertheless the reader enjoys having pictures and since architecture is a lot about visual sense making and I as a foreigner am not very familiar to Finnish geography, would have wished to have more maps explaining where several places are. For the reader who wants to travel through Finland because he has read Nikula’s book, it would also be good to have two more things: First footnotes for further reading and secondly a table of places in the end of the book, where he could find the mentioned places sort by city or region.
In general it can be said that in her book “WOOD, STONE AND STEEL Contours of Finnish Architecture” Riitta Nikula achieves the goal to make readers interested in Finnish architectural development. I have myself taken a lot of notes about places I want to see and why. Although for planning a tour through Finland the reader needs further information, Nikula’s book is a good starting point to get to know one’s own interests. Since it is not the book’s aim to be a tour guide through Finland, it can be said that Nikula succeeded although there are weaknesses in relating text to pictures and places to each other, and ordering the content.
No comments:
Post a Comment