God this abstract is terrible

[ithika]

Discuss the possibility that the dichotomy of nature and
culture as it came to be used to address human identity
(Hirst and Woolley) and a concern for cultural relativism essentially arose out of urbanism and urbanisation
associated with the Industrial Revolution from the late 18th century onwards.  Wherever possible cite specific urban forms and transformations and architectural works and
theories to substantiate your claims.

 

 

 

 

The study of the dichotomy of nature and culture has been a key philosophical and scientific study for many centuries. However, the Industrial revolution of the late 18^th century acted as a catalyst for many new ways of approaching this subject. It has often been surmised that things can only truly be appreciated by contrast – peace through war, for example. Perhaps this is why the Industrial revolution gave birth to such ardent study of whether humanity is a set element in mankind that would exist or could be awakened without any cultural exposure – whether it is a natural element – or whether humanity is simply a response to the culture that we are raised in. With the beginnings of Urbanisation, the difference between civilization and nature had become perhaps more apparent than ever before. Therefore it would make sense that intellectuals and academics would attempt to correlate human identity with the presence or absence of civilization. Interestingly, though the Industrial Revolution was unquestionably a product of civilization – machinery, industry, a machine-like culture where each of the masses had a part to play in the well-oiled social hierarchy, the architecture of the time perhaps shared more with the primitive huts that academics of the time, such as Laugier, discussed. Following the assumptions of such writers as Laugier, the Primitive Hut was a structure born of necessity – the form of the building dictated entirely by the needs of the builder, purely responding to the environment without confusing the form of the structure through preconceived notions of aesthetics. In much the same way, many of the buildings so common in the Industrial Revolution responded more to need than to aesthetics – great factories rose boxlike from the cityscapes, devoid, for the most part, of the opulence of more rural eras beforehand. This essay will discuss and analyse both contemporary modes of thought on human identity via nature versus culture, such as those put forward by Marc-Antoine Laugier, as well as some modern day discussions such as those by Hirst and Woolley. An understanding will attempt to be gathered of the effects that these and other philosophies may have had on the contemporary architecture and architectural movements, with reference to buildings in London before and during the Revolution.

Wow, the text is big.

It's alright for 3am.
HOWEVER it should, IMO, have footnotes. And MAYBE some mention of some kind of building that I am actually going to reference, rather than a dodgy and ambiguous "with reference to buildings in London before and during the Revolution."
And what kind of way is that to finish a paragraph, anyway?
Ah well, screw it, it's not like it's worth... anything. I can be confident in the knowledge that normally my abstracts are much better ('pure gold', she states arrogantly) and that my essay will be awesome, because the topic is interesting and I'm going to start it an epic three weeks before it's due.

Comments

[v01d3d.livejournal.com]

Three weeks? WOW! That IS Epic.

[bloodied-aura.livejournal.com]

:D I thought so@