Ricky Gardner ARCH 323 David Fortin 2/28/12 Palazzo Canossa + Libreria di San Marco + Ornamentation Louis Sullivan,

arguably one of the greatest architects of the 20th century, once said It could only benefit us if for a time we were to abandon ornament and concentrate entirely on the erection of buildings that were finely shaped and charming in their sobriety. He, along with the rest of the Chicago school and even Frank Lloyd Wright, was a strong believer in only bringing ornament into the building if it was truly apart of the building. It should not be added on to an already existing building or design but carefully incorporated into the design and structure with meaning and purpose1. There are two main ways that people typically use ornament in architecture: structurally and sculpturally or non-structurally and added on purely for aesthetics. The second use makes architects such as Adolf Loos, a strong supporter of Louis Sullivan who took his ideals to radical extremes, cringe in fear. Loos believed that ornamentation wastes time money, resources, and labor and therefore was a hurt even to the national economy. He didnt understand why people would put so much time and effort and use so much money to add ornament to a building when they could make one just as beautiful or even more beautiful by using the structure and materials as ornament2. If used wisely, however, this aesthectic addition of ornamentation can make for an incredibly beautiful and extravagant building such as Sansovinos Libreria di San Marco. On the other hand, using ornament in a manner in which Louis Sullivan thought it should be used can create a beautiful and uniform composition that lacks the extravagance of buildings like the Libreria di San Marco, but adopts its own simple beauty in replace of that extravagance. Sanmichelis Palazzo Canossa is a good example of how a simple and uniform design with minimal ornament can still be beautiful without the extravagance factor. The two buildings, both started in the 1530s in Italy, show two very different ways to use ornament on buildings that are very similar in terms of size and layout. Sanmicheli, commissioned by the Marquis of Canossa to build the Palazzo Canossa for as a residence, adapted a mannerist style in which the ornament is minimal and used thoughtfully and
1 2

Alan Colquhoun. Modern Architecture. (Oxford : Oxford UP, 2002). Print. Adolf Loos. Ornament and Crime. Programs and Manifestos on 20th Century Architecture. Conrads, Ulrich. Cambridge; MA: MIT, 1971. Print.

compositionally to promote uniformity; while only 6 years later Sansovino, coming from the extravagant styles of the flourishing Venice, took a more elegant and highly ornamented style for his commission by the Venetian government on the Libreria di San Marco. The format and layout of the facades of the two buildings are where the most similarities can be found. They both have the two story format typical of both private and public Renaissance buildings of the time with vertical components that extend up past the balustrade in a rhythmic pattern. Outside of the sculptural figures found atop the balustrade on both facades, which are clearly used for the purpose of extending the vertical components past the roofline, the Palazzo Canossas faade is simple and minimal with only classical elements built into the faade for ornament. The simplicity and the stone work give the faade a very clean cut and precise feel, while the composition of classical elements creates an organized and uniform exterior. There is a very strong connection between the layout of this faade and Bramantes design for the Palazzo Caprini3. He takes a very similar layout to Bramantes classical one but puts a few small twists on it in a mannerist way. You can see Sanmichelis mannerist style start to come out in the use of the keystones in the main three arches and the windows on the ground floor. The keystones have an upward and outward projection that is reminiscent of Romanos Palazzo Te4. He then starts to play with a little bit of additive ornament on the keystones across the piano noble arcade, one of the few instances where the ornament was not carefully incorporated into the architecture of the faade. The faade of the Libreria di San Marco, on the other hand, is full of additive ornament and extravagant materials that, had Sansovino not very carefully planned out the design and placement of, could have turned out poorly. But Sansovino, being the master of Venetian architecture that he was, found a great balance between heavy ornamentation and uniformity. Not only did he manage to give the ornamentation a fluid and non-additive appearance, but he even found a way to make it blend it perfectly with the very diverse set of styles in the equally famous buildings surrounding it in the San Marco square5. The amount of ornamentation on the faade is incredible. Both stories are opened up by a series of pillared arches with a barrel vaulted ground floors. The keystones above each arch feature
3

Isabelle Hyman, and Marvin Trachtenberg. Architecture: From Prehistory to Postmodernity. (2nd ed. New York: H.N. Abrams, 2001). Print. 4 Christoph Luitpold Frommel. The Architecture of the Italian Renaissance. (London: Thames & Hudson, 2007). Print. 5 Ralph Lieberman. Renaissance Architecture in Venice, 1450-1540. (New York, NY: Abbeville, 1982). Print.

detailed images of lions heads, while the frieze above those consists of highly articulated garlands broken by oval windows and putti sitting atop each pier. Axial continuity is carried in both the vertical and horizontal directions, with an emphasis on the vertical to balance with the enormous length of the building, stretching a total of 21 arched bays across San Marco square. Spandrels on the first floor consist of detailed images of powerful river gods to match the Doric columns, believed to be a symbol of power and strength, while the spandrels on the piano noble show images of winged female figures to go with the ionic columns, believed to be a symbol of beauty and fragility6. A beautiful white stone called Istrian stone was used for the faade. It is a very expensive limestone similar to marble that was commonly used in Venetian buildings7. Massive piers line the ground floor with applied columns giving the building a look of strength and stability8. He uses the ornament in a unique manner with a strong integration of sculpture and architecture. Every ornament has a specific purpose and specific placement to create a unified work of art where the architecture and ornament come together perfectly; giving the faade and effect of rich and dense ornamentation that doesnt appear overwhelming or overly ornamented. The interiors of each building have very similar characteristics of the exteriors with the interior of Palazzo Canossa being slightly more ornamented than the exterior, and the interior of the Libreria di San Marco being even more extravagant than the faade. The interior of the Palazzo Canossa is has a very sculptural quality, seen most prominently in the main staircase of the residence with curvy and flowing shapes progressing upwards. Sanmicheli also decided to extend the courtyard through a garden out to the river, creating an open feel where the ornament is seen through the vegetation in the garden, one of the most natural and uniform types of ornament that can be used in architecture9. However, Sanmicheli did use quite bit more additive ornament than on the exterior, through the use of sculptural figures. In contrast with the garden, sculptural figures are typically one of the least natural and uniform types of ornament in architecture, especially when they are freestanding as many of the sculptures found on the interior are. The interior uses the same sort of clean cut stone used on the exterior, which can be seen as rather bland without the proper lighting that the exterior has. The Libreria di San Marco
6 7 8 9

Frommel Wolfgang Lotz. Studies in Italian Renaissance Architecture. (Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1977). Print. Frommel Frommel

on the other hand has one of the most breathtaking and extravagant interiors of any renaissance building, with gold and bronze plated gildings framing views and massive paintings done by several well known Renaissance painters and craftsmen. The elaborate nature and extravagance of the interior was well thought out compositionally as everything comes together so perfectly and naturally despite the additive nature of the ornamentation. The differences in the use of ornamentation in each building comes not only from their different styles and ideals, but also from the amount of money they had from their commissions and the amount of help they were able to receive through collaboration. Sanmicheli was commissioned by the Marquis of Canossa, who was from a very wealthy family in Verona at the time and wanted a Roman style Palazzo for his family10. Sanmicheli worked on the designs mostly on his own and referenced classic Roman style Palazzos for inspiration11. His budget was pretty large for a commission of the time but could not remotely compare to the commission of the Venetian government, who was flourishing in wealth more than any other European city at the time. Venice was the center of trade in the western world due to the success of Venice as a trade port in the Mediterranean12. They could get lots of materials from around the world easily and had the money to do so since their economy was flourishing. For example, the Istrian stone used for the exterior was most likely very easy for them to obtain through trade and they had more than enough money to purchase the expensive limestone, whereas Sanmicheli would have had a much harder time obtaining such exotic stone not only because of money but also the placement of the building in Verona. In addition to this, Sansovino had lots of collaborators that had some of the keenest minds in the Italian Renaissance. While all the beautiful carvings and gildings and ideas were designed by Sansovino himself, he needed a great staff of well known Renaissance artists and craftsmen to be able to carry out those details, something that Sanmicheli didnt have the option of13. Based off of the budget for the projects and availability of collaborative minds for each architect, they both did an amazing job of capturing exactly what they wanted to.

10 11

Frommel "Veronese: Myths, Portraits, and Allegories." Museo Currer. Fondazione Musei Civici Venezia. Web. 14 Feb. 2012. 12 Ennio Concina. A History of Venetian Architecture. (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998). Print.
13

"Veronese: Myths, Portraits, and Allegories." Museo Currer. Fondazione Musei Civici Venezia. Web. 14 Feb.

While Adolf Loos may not have approved of Sansovinos design for the Libreria di San Marco due to his ignorance in the use of resources, time, and money, in all reality he most likely furthered the flourishing economy of Venice since it became a symbol of extravagance and beauty which drove the economy there for years to come and still does today. Sanmichelis Palazzo Canossa would have better suited the ideals of Loos or Sullivan with its continuity in form and proper use of ornament. While nothing is technically right or wrong in architecture, ornament can be used in any way the architect pleases as long as they put true thought and meaning into every piece of ornament they add onto or conform into the building they design. Both the Palazzo Canossa and the Libreria di San Marco used very different ornamental tactics and both still stand out today as prominent Renaissance buildings.

Works Cited Concina, Ennio. A History of Venetian Architecture. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998. Print. Colquhoun, Alan. Modern Architecture. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2002. Print. Frommel, Christoph Luitpold. The Architecture of the Italian Renaissance. London: Thames & Hudson, 2007. Print. Lieberman, Ralph. Renaissance Architecture in Venice, 1450-1540. New York, NY: Abbeville, 1982. Print. Loos, Adolf. Ornament and Crime. Programs and Manifestos on 20th Century Architecture. Conrads, Ulrich. Cambridge; MA: MIT, 1971. Print. Lotz, Wolfgang. Studies in Italian Renaissance Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1977. Print. Trachtenberg, Marvin, Isabelle Hyman, and Marvin Trachtenberg. Architecture: From Prehistory to Postmodernity. 2nd ed. New York: H.N. Abrams, 2001. Print. "Veronese: Myths, Portraits, and Allegories." Museo Currer. Fondazione Musei Civici Venezia. Web. 14 Feb. 2012. <http://correr.visitmuve.it/en/mostre-en/archivio-mostreen/veronese-myths-portraits-allegories/2011/10/4609/verone-se-a-venezia-2-marciana1/>.