- briefly compares and contrasts the two bridges’ designs, environs, and how people choose to frame and depict the bridges in their photos
- a notable point in where the bridges differ is the cable structuring attached to the supports. the Brooklyn bridge extends in a spiderweb-esque design from the the tops of the bridges arches while the Golden Gate bridges cables laterally descend from the the top cable that runs the length of the structure.
- If we analyze the compositions of the photo’s depicting we can also see a difference in how they are viewed. It seems a favored method for photographers to shoot the internal structure of the bridge taking up the frame with its impressive web of wires. While the view for the Golden gate bridge tends towards the bridges profile, each taking the impressive attributes the structures hold. The Golden Gate Bridges awesome size and the Brooklyn bridges elegant complexity.
- It’s also interesting to note the environment of the bridges. The brooklyn bridge connects city to city, it symbolizes a modernity. The Golden gate bridges strong iron structures jut from the sprawling land into the ocean, the city a distant hint on the landscape, its becomes a things of nature.
- hypothesizes what the differences in the bridges reveal about the times in which they were built
- i think the Brooklyn bridge is largely influenced by functionality. built in the 1800’s , it says to me that the plethora of wire and stone structuring was used to create a lasting structure that would endure time and the growing population of the city.
- The golden gate bridge, built later, to me says an aesthetic view was used in its design. The structure is confident in its durability with reduced amounts of cables. It has an openness that allows it to both blend the land while remaining impressive. The 1930’s , the decade in which the bridge was built saw an influx of technology, cars where gaining popularity what with the second wave of immigration on the heels of world war ones end. I think it was built to illustrate the prosperity of California to arriving individuals as well as the rest of the country.
- hypothesizes what the persistence of these bridges (each has been renovated and reinforced, but not redesigned or replaced) suggests about the beliefs and/or values of New York City and San Francisco.
- I think the persistence of the bridges are reinforced by there presence. The largess of structures strike a visual symbolism in the minds of those who witness it. It no longer is just a bridge or way of transportation but a landmark of the very country it resides in. It is what tourist flock to snapping pictures of their vacations, It is what locals base directions from and what textbooks imprint on there pages. The bridges become an iconography that represents and identity for the places of there origin which is why i think they are protected from the constant evolution of societies.
When I read your post I really liked the way you analyzed the views of the bridges and how photographers choose to shoot the internal structure of the Brooklyn Bridge and the size of the Golden Gate Bridge. I also liked your thought on the functionality view of the Brooklyn Bridge and the aesthetic view of the Golden Gate Bridge. Nice Job!
thank you, i’ve taken a couple of art class where composition and functionality were points we would evaluate and realized i saw a lot that in the photo’s.
I think your take on the Brooklyn bridge being built for functionality more than anything else is true. It was built in a time before cars became popular. Which shows just how functional it has become for the state of New York. Also liked your opinion on the Golden Gate showing the prosperity of California. The bridge was built during the dust bowl era. Thousands of people had to think that the Golden Gate was the symbol that would secure their futures.
Thanks. I had forgotten about the dust bowel era, how i’m not entirely sure but when you mentioned i that was a great thing to think about as well. Even though most state were settles by the building of the Brooklyn and Golden gate bridges they were not the prosperous places we know now. most states and cities in the west didn’t really develop until thirty or forty years ago. it’s definitely interesting to examine.
Hey Indea! I really like your post! You went into very descriptive detail on both of the bridges. The way you described the structure, photo depictions, and environment are really good. I also like how you point out what each of these bridges means to each city, such as the economic possibility for San Francisco during the Dust Bowl era and then the functionality and foresight of a large booming city for New York City. Great post! Pete
thank you ! i think bridges are structurally very pretty but it wasn’t until this post that i really gave it much thought, it was really interesting thinking about the ‘why?’ , why were they built? why are they still here.