Ďaľšie referáty z kategórie
OV - Zhrnutie učiva (I. polrok) základných škôl (od štátna moc deliteľná tromi po Sme "Euroobčania")
Romanians an their monastic fife
|Jazyk:||Počet slov:||1 646|
|Referát vhodný pre:||Stredná odborná škola||Počet A4:||5.6|
|Priemerná známka:||2.95||Rýchle čítanie:||9m 20s|
|Pomalé čítanie:||14m 0s|
The 18th century (the Phanariot rule) brings about in Wallachia and Moldavia elements of Oriental influence in urban civil architecture, the number of religious constructions falling down, while in Transylvania, the Baroque dominated both religious (the Roman-Catholic churches in Timisoara and Oradea) and lay architecture (Banffy and Brukenthal palaces in Cluj and Sibiu, respectively). The first half of the 19th century, along with the stepped-up growth of urban life (with a population twice as big now) and Western-type modernization policy, would offer the architecture of the Romanian lands a combination of Romantic and Neo-Classical elements. In the second half of the century there appeared a national reaction that used to a great extent elements and forms of the old folk architecture. Ion Mincu (1852-1912) was the promotor of this trend and the founder of the Romanian school of architecture. Hisworks, the Lahovary House or the Central Girls' School in Bucharest, are among the achievements of this movement. Opposition to this trend brought about houses and administrative buidings erected in the spirit of French ecclecticism (the Justice Palace, the Central Post Office) or of the Rococo (the present House of the Men of Science, or the Cantacuzino Palace in Bucharest). That was a reason to nickname Bucharest "Little Paris". Other great architects, like Peter Antonescu (1873-1960), Horia Creanga (1893-1963) and Duiliu Marcu (1885-1966) stood out by their rejection of adornments and option for simple and functional forms. In the first decades of the 20th century, Romanian towns and cities still had a contrasting aspect, exhibiting a sharp difference between the downtown sumptuous buildings and the almost rural outskirts, while the villages remained, architecturally speaking, mainly mediaeval. Neverthelees, the first signs of town planning appeared in some urban districts (the first two - or three-storied blocks of flats or one-family house on two levels). Industrialization and fast urban growth, forced in the last two decades of the communist epoch, introduced in architecture longseries typified projects and pre-fab technology in the construction of blocks of flats, which would result into huge living quarters, levelling up the Romanian townscape. Unfortunately, nationalism, characterizing the last Ceausescu stage of Romanian communism, did not reflect in Romanian architecture; simultaneously with the demolishment of the traditional urban centres and the turning of the rural settlements into conglomerates of block of flats, Ceausescu imposed the erection of monument public buildings of a dull neo-classical solemnity. Proof of this intrusion of politics in the life of the city stands the huge palace built on Ceausescu's order in Bucharest, now the Parliament House.