Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Republicanprofessor

Nice lecture, but why are the Versailles gardens so rigid and constrained? Why aren't they more exhuberant and ... well "baroque"?


9 posted on 01/23/2006 11:23:39 AM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: x
Nice lecture, but why are the Versailles gardens so rigid and constrained? Why aren't they more exhuberant and ... well "baroque"?

Well, Louis XIV wanted control and not exuberance (at least on the exterior of his palace). That's why it is the third style of the Baroque (and one with which we are perhaps the least familiar). England also had stiff, classical Baroque forms, (but they did enjoy a looser, "English" garden that was actually modeled after gardens in the Far East.)

The last image shows the "English" gardens of Stourhead in England.

Thus St. Paul's in London, by Sir Christopher Wren, has much that is solid and classical. Only the twisting, curved towers have the exuberance true of the Italian dynamic illusionistic style seen in Borromini's Church of St. Agnese. (I like the way the facade--the front part of the second church--actually curves inward. Very unusual.)

Does that answer your question, in a roundabout way? The French under Louis XIV wanted a classical, controlling style, from facades to gardens.

14 posted on 01/23/2006 11:58:41 AM PST by Republicanprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson