Talk:Classical order

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Architecture Portal This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale.

WikiProject Echo has identified Classical order as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Macedonian or Portuguese language Wikipedias.

	Greece Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Classical order, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Mid	This article has been rated as a Mid priority article
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Hmm. Named something else? But unless the word 'classical' and 'order' are in the new title (Orders of classical architecture or some such) it will be less useful.

Or perhaps Classical orders of architecture. --Stephen Gilbert

Fine with me. I'm perhaps too close to the issue, because the term 'architecture' seems redundant. There aren't 'classical orders' in any other fields - classical forms, classical types, classical literature. --MichaelTinkler

There are classical orders in mathematics. But they're pretty obscure, and I doubt anyone will be writing an article on them any time soon. --Zundark, 2001 Oct 29

Contents 1 Changed category 2 Moved article 3 This text has been lifted from another source without credit. 4 "Modern approaches"

[edit] Changed category

I changed the category from 'Ancient Roman architecture' to 'Architecture', since the classical orders were neither invented by nor limited to the Romans. - Burschik

[edit] Moved article

I've moved the article from classical orders to classical order, as we should use the singular in article titles.

"Classical orders" means the orders used in Classical architecture. "Classical order", a characteristic for example of the versification and poetic vision of John Milton, is quite something else. Ideological consistency is a point of dogma rather than a neutral array of ideas. Remember Thoreau's dictum!. --Wetman 22:20, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"Classical orders" is the plural. A quick Google shows that the singular is used far more often to refer to the architectural orders than to the concept (although a link to an article on it would be most welcome!). A search of Britannica, for instance, returns almost thirty uses of "classical order" (many more, incidentally, than the plural), all referring to the architectural concept. Warofdreams 12:22, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm confident we agree that this article concerns the Classical orders. Individual Wikipedia articles treat the Doric order, the Ionic order, the Corinthian order, even the Tuscan order, and ought to treat the Composite order too. When one is discussing the classical orders as a concept, the natural entry (think of the reader before you think of Wikipedian consistency) is the "Classical orders". Those Google hits simnply reflect the obvious fact that most reference are to an order being used in a particular building, not to the concept, as discussed for example by John Summerson, The Classical Language of Architecture. It was an unnecessary move, that's all. No problem, as long as there's a redirect. --Wetman 17:10, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] This text has been lifted from another source without credit.

"From the first formation of society, order may be traced. When the rigor of seasons first obliged humans to contrive shelter from the inclemency of the weather, we learn that they first planted trees on end, and then laid others across to support a covering. The bands which connected those trees at top and bottom are said to have given rise to the idea of the base and capital of pillars; and from this simple hint originally proceeded the more improved art of architecure."

This text comes directly from Masonic handbooks. Further, it has nothing to do with classical orders qua architecture as it is and should be moved to a discussion of "classical architecture" in terms of later European symbolism. Failing that, it should be cited.

It's an idea fashionable ca 1760-1600. Let's can it. --Wetman 05:44, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Modern approaches"

This section is too uncomprehending in toto to select an example. Someone who understands what "modern/Modernist" implies and has read any modern architect's dictum on the orders could easily improve this section. --Wetman 05:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)