Know your Architectural terminology?
- This topic has 23 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Pilasters are one type of engaged column, so to speak, but shouldn’t really be called engaged columns. A pilaster is like a column that has been run over by a steamroller, whereas engaged columns look like full columns that have been embedded in the wall to varying degrees- 1/4 engaged (3/4 exposed), 1/2 engaged (1/2 exposed) and 3/4 engaged (1/4 exposed). Or put another way, pilasters are always flat and engaged columns are always rounded.
3/4 engaged, 1/4 exposed?!
What the heck does that look like?!1/4 engaged are more common than some might often think; columns that appear to be freestanding are in fact 1/4 engaged in many cases, probably more often than not.
@ctesiphon wrote:
Pilasters are one type of engaged column, so to speak, but shouldn’t really be called engaged columns. A pilaster is like a column that has been run over by a steamroller, whereas engaged columns look like full columns that have been embedded in the wall to varying degrees- 1/4 engaged (3/4 exposed), 1/2 engaged (1/2 exposed) and 3/4 engaged (1/4 exposed). Or put another way, pilasters are always flat and engaged columns are always rounded.
ctesiphon, you are correct of course. I like the steamroller analogy although if I were to be pedantic I’d say that a pilaster, although “flat”, should still also have an expressed capital and base
@Graham Hickey wrote:
3/4 engaged, 1/4 exposed?!
What the heck does that look like?!
Found with considerable difficulty, I might add.
My original thought was that they’d be found in re-entrant corners of classical buildings, but nothing came up. I’ll be keeping my eyes peeled on the ride home.burge_eye-
Agreed.
I scoured in vain for a picture of a pilaster with incised decoration to the capital, i.e. where the decoration is carved into the body of the column rather than standing proud of it. 1930s classicism springs to mind. I’m sure such a thing exists, but I can’t find one. Even if I had, it wouldn’t have undermined your point, though. I was just trying to be cheeky.:)Hang on- just had a thought.
*scurries to archiseek gallery*
How about this?
Cheeky enough?;)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
