Western and eastern architecture

Cultureand traditions have been an important component in influencing the development and creation of both Chinese and Roman architecture. It is through these norms that standards and perceptions of beauty are created. Each facet is deeply rooted in its ability to showcase the variety of actions from the structural foundations towards internal arrangements. These ideas then constitute the relevant ideas that have transformed the way construction and design is manifested within the boundaries of each culture.

In the end, these differences created similarities and differences in approaches that harnessed each one’s individuality and contribution to the world today. On one aspect, we see the Roman architecture which bases its definition and construction of structures and buildings under a prescribed standard and format. These prevailing concepts have evolved through time under the pioneering Roman thinkers during the time.

Under this process, a system for construction was introduced with by using important tenets such as geometry andmathematicsthat denote synchronization and order of things. Through this, the Romans advocate the relevance of proportion, both in exterior and interior design. It is through this that they are able to create their own distinct mark such as the formation of tablinum, atrium and peristyle courtyards. Comparing this with Chinese architecture, it can be argued that the overall design and architecture is considered to be free flowing.

The plan captures the relevance of aesthetics by capturing the elements of nature and blending them accordingly with the both in the interior and exterior of the structure. It is through these actions that the idea of harmonization and being one with the overall surroundings becomes important. In addition, incorporation of natural elements such as trees and plants are also some distinct facets practiced by the Chinese. Moreover, adopting relative natural elements to these structures also necessitates generating freedom and ability to garner wholeness.

Seeing these relevant differences, there are also similarities between these distinct approaches in viewing architecture and design. One relevant parallelism that can be seen in this process is that both approaches denote a system and standard of measurement and design. Though the Chinese may not be too strict about this and often tries to cover this up, the two ideas exhibit relevant attention to such facet and helps them apply significant ideas that contribute the creation of magnificent structures.

Another significant similarity between these two styles is their ability to dig deep within their cultural backgrounds and affiliations to come up with standards and processes of how to construct and design structures. Take for example, the Chinese model for Buddhism and its relevance with being one with nature (Zen) has been the core concepts that generate such buildings. On the other hand, for the Romans, it is their constant passion for architecture and magnificent design that has enabled them to come up with ideas such as Coliseums, arched domes, and public baths.

These similarities in turn foster their individuality as each approach makes their distinct mark in the overall application and design process. It may be true that each one possesses similar building foundations however; each one targets a different path in its application. With their ability to fabricate unique sets of designs, both the Chinese and Romans were able to create a framework that is encompassing and facilitative towards the growth of their relative inventiveness and capture the essence of their cultural heritage and practice.