- Parallel Montage - Final Project

With the invention of the motion picture camera by the Thomas Edison company in 1894, the moving picture was born. The unpaved frontier of cinematography and editing would be explored over the next hundred years as film emerged as an art form. The development of the montage would arguably prove to be the filmmakers greatest tool in telling stories on the screen. Sergei Eisenstein described the montage as the combination, “of shots that are depictive, single in meaning, neutral in content- into intellectual contexts and series”. Eisenstein explains that cinema at its core, relies on montage, the juxtaposition of colliding images, to create something “graphically undepictable” (Eisenstein, 30). The concept of parallel montage stems from this, defined in cinema as the alternation of shots occurring in differing geographic locations, in order to emotionally heighten a thematic link (not necessarily explicitly defined) between them. The history of the parallel montage stems back to literature, within the works of Charles Dickens’ novels. Pioneer film director D.W. Griffith would take Dickens’ idea and apply it to the motion picture. His second feature length film, Intolerance, utilized the technique to the extreme, weaving together four separate stories thematically linked by the titular motif. While the film proved to be a massive flop, it set an experimental precedent. The development of the method would become a central component of modern editing and filmmaking practices. In this paper, we will explore the mechanics and history of the parallel montage, along with several modern examples that stretch and develop the technique.

Within his collection of essays, Film Form, Sergei Eisenstein breaks down the mechanics of montage, establishing it as the predominant force of film artistry. He begins by describing it in relation to the Japanese hieroglyph:

“The point is that the copulation (perhaps we had better say, the combination) of two hieroglyphs of the simplest series is to be regarded not as their sum, but as their product, i.e., as a value of another dimension... From separate hieroglyphs has been fused - the ideogram. (Eisenstein 29-30)”

Just as two hieroglyphs seemingly fuse (or using Eisenstein’s words, “collide”) to express an abstract concept, the combination of shots in film are able to express meanings of depth beyond simply existing temporally side-by-side. Rather than filming an event from one single angle of perspective, instead the montage disintegrates “the event [into] various planes (Eisenstein, 34)”. The audience existing as outsiders, piece these fractured shots of the occurrence together, forming congruence. Eisenstein is quick to refute the idea of the shot being a “building block” of montage. Rather than the cinematographer paving out any kind of singular absolute meaning to the montage, he asserts the importance of the individual drawing their own conclusion. Drawing comparisons to the Japanese haiku, the combination of lines of poetry are able to unite under a psychological response. In her essay On Photography, Susan Sontag makes the claim that “photographs are more memorable than motion pictures...” as they are a “neat slice of time”, while film exists as “a stream of underselected images, each of which cancels its predecessor” (Sontag, 13). Eisenstein would disagree with Sontag, as the importance of each shot in context of the other accomplishes what photographs cannot.

The concept of parallel montage (also known as parallel editing) takes these elements of ideogrammatic expression and complicates them through the separation of geographic distance between shots. This complex addition brings new storytelling potential using the temporal and spacial elements involved. Eisenstein explains how, “the superimposition of two elements of the same dimension always arises a new, higher dimension” (Eisenstein, 49). In alternating between shots occurring in different places, the filmmaker heightens the illusion of diegesis within the film, essentially creating a “higher dimension”. This ability to form another fictional world is not exclusively present in film, yet few other mediums are able to capture the frantic sense of reality quite as effectively. Eisenstein attested that parallel montage allows one storyline to “emotionally heighten... the tension and drama of the other.” (Johns, 77). Writer Timothy Johns continued with Eisenstein’s statement, arguing that “paradoxically, the separation of storytelling into parallel lines brings it emotionally together” (Johns, 78). In order to fully understand the context of these quotes, we first need to understand the beginnings of parallel montage historically in cinema, starting with director David Wark Griffith. 

Parallel montage would find its’ beginnings within the pages of the novel, Charles Dickens pioneering the form within literature and inspiring Griffith. Dickens used the form within his novels, alternating back and forth between story lines. Rather than simply doing so to move the story along, the intricate balance between plot points allows comparisons to be drawn. In his novel Oliver Twist, Dickens used the method to jump from Oliver’s story to Charley Bates’, in order to highlight his “self interest” and “personal weakness” (Tambling, 44). In doing so, Dickens juxtaposes Bates’ weak moral character against Oliver’s humility.

The second half of this paper will focus and analyze specific examples of parallel montage in film history, starting with Griffith. However it is important to note that Griffith was not necessarily the first director to utilize the technique, yet he receives credit for synthesizing a more modern style of film direction. Quite possibly the finest example of the beginnings of parallel montage lie within the film The Unchanging Sea:

THE UNCHANGING SEA

Griffith tells the tale of a fisherman and his pregnant wife. We watch as the fisherman heads off to sea, bidding his spouse a fond farewell. His subsequent shipwreck, and his wife’s faithful patience waiting for his return form the emotional core of the film. Griffith strategically cuts between the fisherman and his wife. Echoing Odysseus and Penelope of The Odyssey, we watch as the fisherman’s wife fends off potential suitors, watching the coastline closely for the chance of seeing her husband once more. The emotional impact is heightened as we can see the wifes’ direct reaction to her husbands absence.  Most films prior to Griffith used static shots with minimal cutting. As Eisenstein explained earlier about the strength of montage is eliciting psychological response in viewers, its’ no wonder that audiences of the film (released in 1910), agreed that “it was a movie unlike any made before” (Sklar, 50). 

Griffith’s film A Corner in Wheat highlights another evolution of parallel montage, in order to express dichotomy between thematic ideas:

A CORNER IN WHEAT

This film in particular is representative of the inspiration Griffith received from Dickens. Telling three stories linked by the wheat market, Griffith questions class differences. The narrative jumps between the lower working class farming wheat, the middle class merchants selling it, and the upper class business tycoons. We see the harsh implications of the upper classes’ greedy actions trickling down to those below them. Author Timothy Johns explains:

“...when Dickens and Griffith employ a form of montage - which is to say, sharp editing, back and forth between storylines- they often do so to highlight a polarization of content: a distinction between rich and poor, evil and benevolence, anarchy and order and the like” (Johns, 78). Griffith’s use of montage in A Corner in Wheat is very similar to how Dickens uses it in Oliver Twist, highlighting class differences. Eisenstein makes an interesting claim about how Dickens and Griffith use montage. Forming a “drama of comparisons”, they do not make a direct statement against social injustice (Johns, 78). Rather, Eisenstein levels a criticism at the lack of a true pointed approach. While Dickens and Griffith introduce subjects with heavy themes, they lack true social commentary on them and “as a consequence, historical progress feels blunted” (Johns, 83).

Griffith’s ventures into the feature film helped define him as the father of the modern motion picture, perfecting the parallel montage techniques he practiced with in his shorter works. His controversial film Birth of a Nation used montage to balance an epic scaled story about Southern reconstruction with a smaller, more intimate character driven one. This approach would become common in storytelling, allowing writers and directors to tackle larger issues by grounding them in a human struggle. His second feature, Intolerance, represents his largest leap forward in terms of the parallel montage. The film tells four stories, linked by the theme of intolerance. Griffith jumps around from Ancient Babylon, to the time of Jesus, Renaissance France, and finally to contemporary New York City. Each story is framed around similar issues, in order to express the idea that social injustice may be rooted within human nature itself. 

In conclusion, the mechanics of montage rely on the use of dialectical thinking visually expressed through the collision of ideas (the thesis and antithesis). Looking to modern examples of parallel montage, we can see how the method has expanded and developed (in some interesting experimental ways).

ROCKY IV

The famous use of montage in Rocky IV is an excellent example of the form in modern cinema:

We watch as Rocky and his rival Ivan Drago train for the coming fight. Director Sylvester Stallone juxtaposes the training methods between the competitors. Rocky representing humanity and natural training methods is depicted. Cutting to Ivan, he is framed around technology, and it is implied that he is using some kind of performance enhancing drug. To further the dichotomy between the characters, Rocky is shown surrounded by his close friends and allies. Ivan on the other hand is depicted in a cold laboratory and working with scientists. Jumping between the two characters, parallel montage allows us to compare the differences and motivations between the men, while driving the plot forward at the same time.

INCEPTION

The 2010 film Inception utilizes parallel montage much like Griffith, weaving together several complicated stories existing on different planes of a dream. Beyond thematic linkage between shots, Nolan’s usage of parallel montage drives the plot forward in a very unique way:

Within this scene, we follow a group of characters within two planes of reality. Cutting back and forth between the car and the hotel, we are treated to a physical link between universes. The characters’ physical bodies exist in both planes, and Nolan is able to amplify the sense of danger as both realms are bombarded by attackers. As the car begins to tumble, Nolan cuts back to the hotel and we watch as gravity begins to shift in proportion to the car. To get a sense of just how intricately the film utilizes parallel montage, one YouTube user created a video that sequences the four levels of dreams, simultaneously playing, rather than intercut as they are portrayed in the film:

While this edited video doesn't use parallel montage, you get a sense at the challenging puzzle it must have been to arrange the composition of scenes and shots in the editing room.

TEAM AMERICA: WORLD POLICE

Another modern example of montage that parodies the form appears in the 2004 comedy film Team America: World Police:

Writers and directors Trey Parker and Matt Stone form a pointed satire on the use of the montage in film. The lyrics of the song directly allude to this, jocularly playing with the idea that character development can be rapidly accelerated using montage in film:

 “In anything if you want to go, from just a beginner to a pro / You need a montage...”

Parker and Stone even make a reference to the Rocky films’ use of montage. Eisenstein would likely agree with their satire, as using montage in this manner somewhat undercuts its artistic roots while lessening the depth of character development when it simply acts as a plot device. The final line of the song makes another humorous observation, and continues the satire of the method:

   "Always fade out in a montage,
   If you fade out, it seem like more time
   Has passed in a montage"

THE SOCIAL NETWORK 

Within the 2011 docu-drama The Social Network, parallel montage is efficiently used to move the plot forward while employing Eisenstein’s idea of the collision of images to draw psychological response. Interplaying shots of Mark coding the website and blogging within a montage, we are brought into the mind of a programmer. Fincher conveys his inner monologue through writing and hacking as he develops the website. He cuts to the object of Mark's obsession; the fraternity clubs, using parallel montage to criticize the frivolity of their partying lifestyle against the brilliance of Zuckerberg's programming binge. This example in particular strikes a balance between the plot acceleration Team America satirizes, with Eisenstein’s more idealized view of montage.

CONCLUDING STATEMENT

In conclusion, we looked at the technical mechanics that utilize a dialectical thinking on the screen through parallel montage. Presenting a thesis and antithesis and colliding them with imagery, a new concept arises. As Eisenstein explained it was not their “sum” but their “product”, representing a synthesis of abstract concepts. Charles Dickens and D.W. Griffith were crucial to bringing the method onto the film screen, and developing the form to its modern capacity. Looking to contemporary examples, we can see the potential for experimentation it provides the filmmaker with. Parallel editing brings new possibilities to the screen, capturing the wild speed of reality and compounding it with the omniscience of existing in multiple places at once.

For our video we had the concept of a day in the life of a college student. We attempted to incorporate elements of montage with walking shots of students. I attempted a basic composite of stars over the backdrop of walking on campus, and we utilized a tracking/walking shot as well

The Long Follow and Zoom in Cinema

THE LONG FOLLOW AKA THE TRACKING SHOT

We’re going to start our presentation of the long follow AKA tracking shot by briefly exploring the montage. Today we typically categorize the montage as a filmic trope used to carry an audience rapidly through time. But for Sergei Eisenstein in the early 20^th century it was a way of defining cinema. In his collection of essays, “Film Form,” he unpacks his theory of montage and argues for certain guiding principles that he thinks underpin good film editing. He begins by using the example of the Japanese hieroglyph to draw a parallel:

"The copulation of two hieroglyphs of the simplest series is to be regarded not as their sum, but as their product... from separate hieroglyphs has been fused- the ideogram. By the combination of two ‘depictables’ is achieved the representation of something that is graphically undepictable” (Eisenstein, 30).

He gives examples…

A dog + mouth = to scream

A knife + heart = sorrow…

“But this is-montage,” he proclaims, “yes, it is exactly what we do in the cinema, combining shots that are depictive, single in meaning, neutral in content – into intellectual contexts and series” (Eisenstein, 30).

Eisenstein is suggesting that cinema IS, at its core, montage; an artistic medium predicated upon the juxtaposition or “collision” of images.

So why is this a relevant preface to the long follow?

Well, the very idea of the long follow is somewhat antithetical to that of the montage. Using one, continuous shot the filmmaker can achieve Eisenstein’s “ideogram” without joining together separate, independent images. Complex and novel ideas can be generated without the use of editing, without the use of “collision.” Additionally, the long follow presents the viewer with an experience of time that is much closer to that of their everyday existence. Tracking shots offer narrative information that happens in “real time,” and as result brings a greater level of realism and immediacy to the events transpiring within the frame. What the tracking shot loses in intellectualism (by Eisenstein’s standards) it gains in realism.

Eisenstein quotes the famous German poet Goethe: “In nature we never see anything isolated, but everything in connection with something else which is before it, beside it, under it, and over it” (Goethe, 45).

Ironically, it is the tracking shot, not the montage, that ends up becoming the best tool that cinema has to actually achieve this idea, to recreate the world in a way that authentically reflects humanities experience of space and time. Yes, the mind itself is a kind of editor, constantly editing together seemingly disparate parts to construct a subjective narrative, but the visceral experience of…walking through a kitchen, for example, is much more akin to a tracking shot than a montage sequence.

The mind does not consciously register the equation: sink + stove + smell = kitchen. The mental edits are imperceptible; we experience the kitchen as a cohesive and seamless hole. A good tracking shot should have the same seamless quality. 

So, what is a long follow/tracking shot?

Los Angeles Times writer Jake Coyle describes it this way: " In a medium predicated on storytelling through the juxtaposition of images, the long tracking shot is the cinematic equivalent of a no-hitter in baseball: rare, untouched and very difficult to pull off."

Conceptually it’s pretty simple. The camera follows a character or an object as it moves through space. Typically the camera is mounted on a camera dolly, a wheeled platform that is pushed on rails while in pursuit of the character or object.

(the technology gets simpler as filmmaking evolves but we’ll get to that in a bit).

One of the first films to free cinema from the “static gaze” was CAMBIRIA (1914), a silent movie from the early years of Italian cinema, directed by Giovanni Pastrone and shot in Turin.

By “static gaze” we mean a non-moving tripod shot in which the camera simply plays the witness, never moving through or engaging with the cinema space.

Martin Scorcese (whose film Goodfellas we will examine shortly) makes the claim that Pastrone invented the “epic” movie and was the first to frequently use tracking shots, and thus deserves credit for many of the innovations often attributed to D.W. Grifith and Cecille B. Demille (both legendary filmmakers of the 20th century).

Most discussions of tracking shots usually begin with Orson Welles though. Specifically with his film noir crime thriller TOUCH OF EVIL (1958, shot by Russell Metty, who also shot Kubrick's SPARTACUS).

The film opens with a three-minute, twenty-second tracking shot widely considered by critics as one of the greatest in cinematic history. On the U.S. - Mexican border a man plants a time bomb in a car. A different man and his wife enter the vehicle and make a slow journey through town to the U.S. border. Newlyweds Miguel "Mike" Vargas (Charlton Heston) and Susie (Janet Leigh) pass the car several times on foot. The car crosses the border, then explodes, killing the occupants.

Orson Welles, Touch of Evil (crane shot, 1958) - cinematographer Russell Metty

The shot was achieved by using a camera crane, which typically looks something like this…

This is a more modern version of the crane...

Orson Welles’ was already known for revolutionizing film techniques (most notably with Citizen Kane), so it’s no wonder that he was one of the first directors to unlock the real potential of the moving camera. One of his big cinematic achievements in CITIZEN KANE was to advance the fluidity and realism of cinema though the use of deep focus, in which the foreground, middle ground, and background are all visually available simultaneously. 

CITIZEN KANE (1941) Directed by Orson Welles and shot by Gregg Toland

Welles and other filmmakers have suggested that the tracking shot is the apotheosis, or ultimate expression of deep focus because it allows the audiences to choose what they want to focus on.

FLASH FORWARD to 1975 when cameraman Garret Brown invents the steadicam, or as he had hoped to call it, the “Brown Stabilizer.” Brown had test screenings of what his new invention good do and the word quickly spread through Hollywood, catching the attention of high profile directors.

Brown and Kubrick on the set of THE SHINING

The invention of the steadicam really unlocks the potential of the long follow/tracking shot. After 75 it’s everywhere.

It looks like this…

The benefit of the Steadicam is that it combines the stabilized image of a conventional tripod mount with the fluid motion of a dolly shot and the flexibility of hand-held camera work. While smoothly following the operator's broad movements, the Steadicam's armature absorbs any jerks, bumps, and shakes.

The monitor substitutes for the camera's viewfinder, since the range of motion of the camera relative to the operator makes the camera's own viewfinder practically unusable.

The first film in which the steadicam plays a major role in production is BOUND FOR GLORY (1976), which chronicles the life of folk singer Woody Gutherie (played by David Carradine).

BOUNDS FOR GLORY (1976), directed by Hash Alby 

The film was shot by cinematographer Haskell Wexler (also known for ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST), who ended up winning the Oscar for Best Cinematography that year. He did not thank Brown in his acceptance speech.

Brown is also credited with inventing the Skycam (for football games), Divecam (Olympic diving, and Mobycam (for underwater Olympic swimmers.

GOODFELLAS

Another granddaddy of the long tracking shot is Ray Liotta and Lorraine Bracco’s walk through the Copacabana in Scorcese’s “Goodfellas” (Shot by Michael Ballhaus – also shot Gangs of NY). It’s a good example of a tracking shot that isn’t just a masturbatory maneuver by a director who wants flex his muscles, but a really meaningful decision, a shot that serves the purpose of the narrative and its themes.

 GOODFELLAS (1990) Directed by Martin Scorcese and shot by Michal Ballhuas

Shot analysis: Because we only see the back of Lorraine’s (Liotta’s wife) head, the shot ends up functioning as her POV. It puts the audience in her mind as she is systematically swept off her feet by the temptation of the gangster lifestyle. The shot has a really hypnotic effect, which is not accidental. Scorcese was quoted saying that the shot is “his [liotta’s] seduction of her [Lorraine] and it's also the gangster lifestyle seducing him." The Copacaban turns into a maze that Liotta and Lorraine walk deeper and deeper into, so far that they will ultimately be unable to escape. And because cocaine is so prevalent in the film, the shot, which has a really manic, hyper feel to it, reflects that psychological state as well. It took them eight takes to get it right.

CHILDREN OF MEN

CHILDREN OF MEN (2007). Directed by Alfonso Cuaron and shot by Emanuel Lubezki

The next film we want to explore is CHILDREN OF MEN (2007), directed by Alfonso Cuaron and shot by Emanuel Lubezki (perhaps the most sought after cinematographer in the world right now. He shoots all of Terrence Malick’s films). The film has 16 shots that are longer than 45 seconds. The three most impressive ones run at about 1 1/2 minutes, 4 minutes, and 8 minutes. Like Scorcese, Cuaron chooses these shots not for egotistical reason, but because they serve the purpose of the narrative.

In a recent interview cinematographer Emanuel Lubezki said this about his work in CHILDREN OF MEN: “By not cutting…and by keeping the camera rolling in real time, we thought that you would not feel betrayed by our cuts… we’re not pushing you to see something specific but letting you feel everything at the same time.”

In The Language of New Media, Manovich argues that through digital technology cinema has come full circle to once again become a form of animation. The idea is that because the stage at which a film really comes to fruition is now in post production, the need for the original footage to be of a high quality is greatly reduced. If you look at the dailies of major motion pictures now, much of the footage is total crap. But this is intentional as the filmmakers have a sense of what it will ultimately look like in post with the aid of animation, color correction, and CGI. 

Steven Soderbergh (director of SEX LIES AND VIDEOTAPE, TRAFFIC, ERIN BROCKOVICH, OCEAN’S ELEVEN) has express frustration with this development in film production. “The reason they no longer work that way is because it means making choices, real choices, and sticking to them…that's not what people do now. They want all the options they can get in the editing room, so the skill and craftsmanship that goes into actual production is profoundly less.”

The authentic tracking shot, like in CHILDREN OF MEN, is proof that there are still some filmmakers out there who want to capture scenes that stand alone as artistic achievements, scenes that don’t necessarily need post production to be impressive.

CHILDREN OF MEN Featurette

One final point: Another director who is now known for impressively long tracking shots is Joe Wright (PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, ATONEMENT, HANNA). He’s specifically know for a 5 ½ minute tracking shot in ATONEMENT that follows the main character through a war camp on a beach. He pointed out something very interesting about tracking shots:

In an interview with LA Times, Wright said, "For the actors, they really enjoy [tracking shots] because you're in a situation where there's a fourth wall created…there's no area on the set they have to imagine; it's all in front of them."

The “fourth wall” was originally used to describe the imaginary "wall" at the front of the stage in a traditional three-walled theater, through which the audience sees the action in the world of the play; it’s essentially the imaginary boundary between any fictional work and its audience, which in film is the camera. But in a tracking shot, that invisible was is no longer static, which allows the actors to forget that it’s even there and interact in a 360 degree environment.

New York Times author Steven Johnson had this to say about the Long Zoom: 

"Most eras have distinct “ways of seeing” that end up defining the period in retrospect: the fixed perspective of Renaissance art, the scattered collages of Cubism, the rapid-fire cuts introduced by MTV and the channel-surfing of the 80’s. Our own defining view is what you might call the long zoom: the satellites tracking in on license-plate numbers in the spy movies; the Google maps in which a few clicks take you from a view of an entire region to the roof of your house; the opening shot in “Fight Club” that pulls out from Edward Norton’s synapses all the way to his quivering face as he stares into the muzzle of a revolver... And this is not just a way of seeing but also a way of thinking: moving conceptually from the scale of DNA to the scale of personality all the way up to social movements and politics — and back again."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/magazine/08games.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Comics

This panel from the conclusion of the graphic novel Watchmen depicts many elements described in Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics.

The use of sequential images, specifically in the final two frames, emphasizes the brutality of murder and coldness experienced by the character Dr. Manhattan. The lack of dialogue brings a stark silence to the scene. The lack of any kind of reaction panel from Dr. Manhattan following the murder further emphasizes this. McCloud brings up the concept of closure in his book, being the "phenomenon of observing the parts but perceiving the whole" (McCloud, pg. 63). Even if author Alan Moore does not expressly state it within the panels, readers of Watchmen are able to infer quite a bit from this scene as Dr. Manhattan's loss of humanity reaches fruition as he kills his once-friend.

With the vibrant use of color within the panels, artist Dave Gibbons and colorist John Higgins  are able to express synaesthetics, being the expression of senses visually represented on the page. We can see the repulsive texture of red-haired Rorschach's face, the watery tears dripping down his face as he prepares for his doom. The change in color as Dr. Manhattan liquifies his body displays the splendor of his superpowers. The powdery snowfall gives the reader a sense of the harsh cold environment. And lastly, the pile of blood left in Rorschach's wake emphasizes the savagery of his death.

Sontag - Photography

This weekend while I was at a concert in LA, I couldn't help but be aggravated by fifteen people holding smartphones above their heads and obscuring my view...

Given I am a hypocrite in this matter, as photographing of events is often my favorite method of remembering them. Susan Sontag addresses this very phenomenon in On Photography, "After the event has ended, the picture will still exist, conferring on the event a kind of immortality (and importance) it would never otherwise have enjoyed (Sontag, 11).

Sontag is dead-on in this assertion, as the modern human relies extensively on social media and photography for self-reflection. An event without photographs may fall beneath the cracks when compared to another that is well documented. But in some ways the act of photographing, and being in that state of "non-intervention" that Sontag describes, removes one from the very event they are experiencing. I will unfortunately have to halt my wild dancing at a concert in order to snap the perfect shot. I recall those filming the concert on the phones appearing motionless amidst the chaos of the crowd. Is it better to truly experience an event, or have the proof to validate it subsequently?

The Medium is Massage

For my project I chose to update pg. 63, which centers on human communication in the days of electronic communication. The image I chose is of a project that attempts to bi-dimensionally map links between websites on the internet. The largest aqua-colored bubbles are based around social media and search engines, making up the largest portion of internet traffic. I feel that McLuhan's quote can adequately represent our modern Internet era.

For those of you interested in checking out the project, here is a link:
http://internet-map.net

Architecture

My first attempt with Sketchup turned out a little wonky, attempting to capture postmodern style.

For my second attempt, I looked at the idea of Palladianism. The Greek and Roman temple influence is clear in the use of columns and steps. I chose to incorporate some of the Postmodern ideas here as well, adapting the triangular top of the pillars to give a more unique dimension to the design. This also illustrates the concept of deconstruction, altering the precepts of the Palladianism design. In addition I added some protruding black ornaments to the building, representing the concept of cladding. Lastly by adding an array of colors, the building illustrates polychrony.