Formal-Spatial Approach in Architecture and Painting: a Case Study on the Works by Mehrdad Iravanian and Alireza Taghaboni

Document Type : Research Article


1 Ph.D. Candidate in Architecture, Department of Architecture, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Abhar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Abhar, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Hamedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Hamadan, Iran.

4 Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy of Art, Hamedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Hamadan, Iran.


Problem statement:The architecture-painting relationship is one of the study fields in the theory of art and architecture. Although architecture is a combination of practical concepts, it can be studied in relation to painting focusing on form and space. Meanwhile, in creating an artwork, if an “artist” is assumed as a fixed variable; the question is that how his intellectual structure affects the creation of form and space in two media, and how it connect the two art regimens.
Research objective: This study addresses the works by architects who work in both areas. It is assumed that the architect’s skill from the distance of imagination to depicting mental schemas as a painting leads to the dissemination of his thought, affecting the creation of his architectural work and spatial thinking.
Research method: The present study was performed using a qualitative comparative analysis technique concerning Kerry Walk’s model. The study model was a combination of spatial tendencies and semantic approaches of form and space. In the first section, the paintings by Mehrdad Iravanian and Alireza Taghaboni were analyzed using Wolf Lane’s formalism method. Next, the concepts of their architecture form and space were examined. The achievements were concluded based on theoretical studies and experimental data through a descriptive method. Finally, a comparative analysis was performed to clarify the architecture-painting relationship.
Conclusion: It seems that the artist deals with the objective concepts of the work at the levels of “basic” and “functional” in two completely independent areas, and the subjective concepts at the “value” level, which can be adapted to the intellectual structure of the artist. At the “symbolic” level, by transferring some formal approaches from painting to architecture, the architectural work gets closer to its artistic aspect and acquires an aesthetic aspect.


Adams, L. S. (1996). The Methodologies of Art (A. Masoumi, Trans.). Tehran: Nazar.
Bacon, E. N. (1967). Design of cities (F. Taheri, Trans.). Tehran: Shahidi.
Bani Masoud, A. (2015). Iranian Contemporary Architecture. Tehran: Honar-e Memer-ye Gharn.
Bazrafkan, K. (2016). Who is afraid of [against] formalism? [Against] Formalism: “FARAWAY – SO ClOSE”. Memar, (101), 64-69. 
Blau, E. & Troy, N. (2002). Architecture and Cubism. Cambridge: MIT.
Douglas, Ch., Obrist ,U. H. & Gmurzynska, K. (2012). Zaha Hadid +Suprematis. Stuttgart: Hatje Cantz.
Falamaki, M. M. (2002). Rishe-ha va Gerayesh-ha-ye Nazari-ye Memari [Theoretic Origins and tendencies of Architecture]. Tehran: Faza.
Foroutan, M. (2008). How to understand the Iranian architectural space from Iranian paintings. Unpublished Ph.D thesis. Islamic Azad University, Iran.
Giedion, S. (1995). Space, time and architecture (M. Mozayeni, Trans.). Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi.
Hershberger, R. G. (1970). Architecture and Meaning. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 4 (4), 37-55.
Jalili, M. & Foroutan, M. (2015). The nature of architectural space, its roots and approaches. Haft Hesar Journal of Environmental Studies, 4(13), 51-62.
Jamali, M. (2015). An Introduction to Form and Formalism in Modern Art. Philosophical Investigations, 11(28), 5-33.
Lang, J. (2011). Creating Architectural Theory: The Role of the Behavioral Sciences in Environmental Design (A. Eynifar, Trans.). Tehran: University of Tehran.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of Space. London: University Oxford Press.
Memarian, Gh. H. (2014). Seiri Dar Mabanie Nazari Memari [Take a look on theoretical foundations of architecture]. Tehran: Soroush-e Danesh.
Mirmiran, S. H. (2004). Jariyani noo dar memari-ye moaser-e Iran [A new trend in modern Iranian architecture]. Hamshahri, (3229), 19. 
Ocvrik, O., Stinson, R., Wigg, Ph., Bone, R. & Cayton, D. (2017). Art Fundamentals: Theory and Practice (M. R. Yeganeh Doost, Trans.). Tehran: SAMT.
Norouzitalab, A., Moghbeli, A. & Jodat, Sh. (2014). The Evolutionary Psychoanalysis of Painting and Architecture in the Historical Context of World War I to World War II. Bagh-e Nazar, 11(31). 17-32.
Noghrehkar, S., Muzaffar, F. & Noghrehkar, S. (2010). Modeling; A useful method for interdisciplinary research (Case study: Feasibility study of using the teachings of “Islamic thought” in “architecture education”). Iranian architecture and urban planning, 1(1), 129-138.
Partovi, P. (2013). Phenomenology of Place. Tehran: Farhangestan-e Honar. 
Piravivanak, M. (2016). Introducing a Criteria for Comparative Research Based on Kerry Walk’s Model. Motaleat-e Tatbighi-e Honar, 6(11), 1-10.
Samiei, A., Khodabakhsh, S. & Foroutan, M. (2016). Comparative Study of Representation of Iranian Traditional Spaces in Contemporary Painting and Architecture Works, Case Study: Parviz Kalantari’s Painting Works and Seyyed Hadi Mirmiran’s Architecture Works. Armanshahr, 9(17), 63-78.
Sarmastani, H. & Foroutan, M. (2018). Poetics in Urban Space: A Semiotics Analysis of Bagh-e-Boland in Shiraz City. Hoviat-e shahr, 12 (34), 67-78.
Soja, E. (1990). Postmodern geographies, the reassertion of space in critical social theory. London-new York: Verso.
Norberg-Schulz, C. N. (1979). Genius loci: towards a phenomenology of architecture (M. R. Shirazi, Trans.). Tehran: Rokhdad-e- No.
Taghvai, V. (2010). From what to the definition of architecture. Hoviat-e shahr, 4(7), 75-86.
Wölfflin, H. (1998). Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art. Oxford: Oxford University.
Zarghami, E. & Behrooz, S. M. (2015). “Space” and its Role in Recreating Architectural Theory and Social Science. Interdisciplinary Studies in The Humanities. 7(2), 81-99.