UCT APG History and Theory of Architecture V APG3000F 19 April 2023

Asemahle Ntoyakhe (NTYASE001)

Emlin Hendricks (HNDEML001)
Saffron Myrdal-Ward (MYRSAF001)

CLASS ATTENDANCE: Salama and Salingaros

TOTAL MARKS: 10
Read the abstract of the article “Nikos A. Salingaros: A New Vitruvius for 21st-Century
Architecture and Urbanism?” together.
Then divide the article so that every person has some of it to read. A possible way of
dividing is suggested below:
114-117/118 + 125-126
118-121/122 + 126/127
122-124 + 128-129
Each group member reads their section (there are some overlaps on the pages).
Then get together and discuss the following questions. Answer each in approximately 30-50
words. After completion, photograph the page and upload to VULA and then also submit the
hard copy. You may consult further reading and/or use AI to assist but you should reference
and acknowledge all external resources.
1. What was the main premise of Vitruvius? (1)

Marcus Vitruvius Pollio is commonly seen as the ‘first theorist of architecture in Western
history’ (Salamana. A, 2007). His written text, ‘De Architectura’, is a compilation of his
theories, the most notable of which is the theory that there are three criteria which
define architecture:
• Convenience/Commodity
• Durability/Firmness
• Beauty/Delight

Vitruvius' basic idea was that architecture should contain three essential qualities: Firmitas
(firmness), Utilitas (commodity), and Venustas (delight). These three ideas came to be known
as the "Vitruvian Triad." Firmitas denotes a structure's longevity and stability, Utilitas its utility
and usefulness, and Venustas its beauty and aesthetic attributes. A successful structure,
according to Vitruvius, should have a harmonious balance of all three of these traits.

2. What do you understand as an “Anti-Vitruvian” architect? (1)

UCT APG History and Theory of Architecture V APG3000F 19 April 2023

‘Modern and Post-modern movements were anti-vitruvian in nature’ (A. Salama, 2007). Based on
the before-mentioned quote, it could be said that an Anti-Vitruvian architect is one who practiced
Modern and Post-modern architecture. Mr Salama further goes on to say that ‘architects are
always in a continuous search forrecognition and fame. Such architects have no regard for the
values of Vitruvian architecture, which also deeply considers the social issues of buildings and how
they are inhabited.
An "Anti-Vitruvian" architect is one who rejects the traditional principles of Vitruvian architecture,
which emphasizes durability, functionality, and beauty. Instead, an Anti-Vitruvian architect might
prioritize experimental designs, challenging conventions and rejecting traditional notions of what
constitutes good architecture. They may prioritize abstract or theoretical concepts over
practicality or commercial considerations, pushing the boundaries of what is possible in terms of
form, materiality, and space. Anti-Vitruvian architects may be influenced by avant-garde or radical
movements, and may seek to provoke or challenge the viewer's perceptions of space and form,
rather than providing a straightforward solution to a problem. They also immerse themselves in a
practice of self-expression and exploration – creating a basis for feelings and beliefs rather. They
can be architects who only partake in the world of the rich and present themselves as
starchictects that creates acknowledgement of the building without there necessarily being
poetry in its form that is usable.

3. Salama introduces the article by first referencing Vitruvius. How does he relate the
work of Salingaros to Vitruvius? (2)

Salama connects Nikos A. Salingaros' work to Vitruvius' work by emphasizing how Salingaros
develops and updates the Vitruvian triad of "Firmitas, Utilitas, and Venustas" for the current
context of architecture and urbanism. Salingaros' work highlights the importance of an
architectural approach that integrates both objective scientific principles and subjective human
experience, echoing Vitruvius' concept of balancing functionality, durability, and beauty.
Furthermore, Salingaros' architectural and urbanism theories contain insights from complexity
theory that Vitruvius could not have predicted. Salingaros, like Vitruvius, attempts to establish a
set of universal principles that may govern the design and construction of structures and towns,
but he adapts and expands on Vitruvius' ideas to answer contemporary issues, according to
Salama. He describes how Salingaros’s work would shape a better environment as would the
ethical responsibilities taken on by Vitruvius.

4. What Salingaros’ main critiques against deconstructivism? Hint: it is not only

contained in the sentence that refers to the “main argument of the manuscript”
(Salama, 2007:125). (2)

‘The main argument of this manuscript lies in Salingaros’ belief that architectural deconstruction is
not a new thing’ (A. Salama, 2007). He links the movement modernism to post-modernism as an
example of the creation of opposite ‘isms’ used to act in opposition to each other once they have
become irrelevant and imperfect. Simply put, deconstructivism follows this pattern by affirming
itself as the opposite ‘ism’ to constructivism.
The fundamental criticism of deconstructivism, according to Salingaros, is that it is a self-
referential style of architecture that puts form above function and lacks coherence and meaning.
He claims that deconstructivist architects frequently design buildings that are difficult to live or
UCT APG History and Theory of Architecture V APG3000F 19 April 2023
utilize, with fragmented, disorienting, and uncomfortable areas. Salingaros also critiques
deconstructivism for focusing too much on surface aesthetics and novelty rather than adding
fundamental structural principles that improve human well-being. Deconstructivism, according to
Salingaros, is an example of architecture that has lost sight of its function and the demands of its
users, resulting in a type of art that is detached from the human experience of the built
environment.

5. Salingaros views “urban phenomena as components of a complex system” (Salama,

2007:127). What do you understand as the parts and relationships of this complex
system? (2)

Salingaros views urban phenomena as components of a complex system, highlighting the need to
understand the interrelationships between different elements of the built environment. He
emphasizes that urban design should incorporate insights from complexity theory to create cities
that are adaptable, resilient, and sustainable. Salingaros identifies the importance of hierarchy,
emphasizing the role of networks and scaling in shaping urban form.
He also stresses the need for mixed-use developments that support a range of activities, as well as
the importance of creating connections between urban areas and natural environments. Overall,
Salingaros' approach to urban design emphasizes the need for a holistic, systems-level
understanding of the built environment that takes into account the interdependent relationships
between different elements of the city.

6. According to Salama Salingaros had two main aims with his book “A Theory of
Architecture”. These are “Derive laws for how matter comes together to define
buildings that give pleasure to human beings,” and, “Explain, using scientific
arguments, why people derive pleasure and satisfaction from some forms but not from
others” (Salama, 2007:128). What do you understand as his main arguments for
having these as aims? (2)

Nikos A. Salingaros had two main aims with his book "A Theory of Architecture". Firstly, he aimed
to derive laws for how matter comes together to define buildings that give pleasure to human
beings. This goal reflects his broader approach to architecture, which is grounded in the idea that
buildings should be designed to promote human well-being and support the needs of their users.
By developing a set of scientific principles that can guide the design and construction of buildings,
Salingaros seeks to establish a more rigorous and objective basis for architectural practice.

Secondly, Salingaros aimed to explain, using scientific arguments, why people derive pleasure and
satisfaction from some forms but not from others. This goal reflects his interest in the
psychological and physiological dimensions of architectural experience. By understanding why
certain forms and structures are more pleasing or stimulating to human beings, Salingaros argues
UCT APG History and Theory of Architecture V APG3000F 19 April 2023
that architects can create buildings that better support the needs of their users and promote
human flourishing.

To achieve these aims, Salingaros draws on a wide range of disciplines, including mathematics,
neuroscience, and complexity theory. He argues that the patterns and structures found in nature
can serve as a model for architectural design, and that the human brain is wired to respond to
certain forms and patterns in a positive way. By developing a rigorous scientific understanding of
the principles that underlie architectural experience, Salingaros hopes to establish a more
coherent and effective approach to architectural design that is grounded in both objective and
subjective considerations.

Salama, AM., 2007. Nikos A. Salingaros: a new Vitruvius for 21st-century architecture and
urbanism. Nexus Network Journal, 10(2), pp.337-346. Online:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26502823_Nikos_A_Salingaros_A_New_Vitruvius_for_21
st-Century_Architecture_and_Urbanism. 1 April 2023.