From David Mayernik,
August, 2001
Dear Poliphilo,
I perceive two
tendencies among "classical" architects today, both of which
preclude a true Humanist renaissance: attempting to restart
the tradition only from first principles, and explicit (or
sometimes implicit) copying. Starting from first principles
and attempting to regenerate the tradition from scratch will
mean it may take generations (or centuries) to catch up with
our cultural predecessors, and the principles may be so
reductive that they preclude some of the more complex
aspects of the tradition; on the other hand, literally
copying the pinnacle of the tradition is not tradition at
all, but merely the appearance of it, and lacks the capacity
to solve new problems or extend our predecessors'
accomplishments. I think it is only by full immersion in the
best of our cultural heritage that we can extract from it
all the complex lessons from the past, assuming we want to
emerge with the capacity to create a new, living Humanist
tradition.
A Renaissance artist acquired his
craft by learning to work in the manner of his master, and
when he had done so (or even, exceeded it), he was qualified
to embark on his own career. In the same way, we should
apprentice ourselves to the past to learn its skills; but
this is only a prelude to our embarking on our own with
these skills to solve the new problems that we encounter or
set for ourselves (which can not be done by literally
copying the work of our masters). The paradox of the
Renaissance apprentice is that his (or her) temporary
surrender of ego did not preclude a dynamic cultural
evolution where each generation continually strove to exceed
the accomplishments of its teachers (think of Michelangelo
in the studio of Ghirlandaio). I am just as optimistic for
us today, but it requires a real immersion in the mind of
our ideal past in order to have the skills to create a
living, dynamic tradition - or the possibility for a new
Renaissance.
A quote that sums up what this meant
for Rome in the 15th and 16th centuries:
"There is first the archaeological impulse
downward into the earth, into the past, the unknown and
recondite, and then the upward impulse to bring forth a
corpse whole and newly restored, re-illuminated, made
harmonious and quick."
--Thomas H. Greene, "Resurrecting Rome: The
Double Task of the Humanist Imagination", Rome in the
Renaissance: The City and the Myth, Binghampton, NY:
Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies,
p.41
Do
we have the optimism to be that courageous, or the courage
to be that optimistic?
Back to Letters Index