way that they were used in the Renaissance, for both design and presentation. Many of these extremely
large models have been preserved, and numerous examples were painted and included elaborate,
detailed interiors. Models may have been more understandable for laypersons, while sketches
remained a language of the artistic and architectural professions – a sort of private dialogue (Millon,
1999 ). Although the Renaissance architect Filarete recommended in his treatise, that architects should
sketch in the presence of their clients, the practice may have been limited (Filarete, 1965 ).
Gianlorenzo Bernini, as an interesting example, was a professional who successfully integrated sculp-
ture and architecture, since not all baroque architects received training in secondary skills such as sculp-
ture or painting. During this period, apprenticeships were a common method for architects to gain
experience with some of these shops, specializing in architecture rather than various visual arts. Paper
was continually more plentiful, evidenced by Johann Gutenberg’s printed bible in 1456. The baroque
historian Henry Millon explains that visual imagery was required to express certain emotions or con-
ceptual intentions: ‘Bernini’s father before him had held that in drawing up a plan a good architect must
always try to provide it with real meaning (significato vero), or an allusion to something exceptional,
whether that something was drawn from reality or from the imagination’ (Millon, 1961 , p. 410 ).
The political climate, attitudes, and construction practices of the time influenced and affected the
design processes and representational techniques of baroque architects. Many of the architects’ draw-
ings that survive were those of large buildings projects. They represent prestigious architects, mem-
bers of a royal court or maintaining the trust of wealthy patrons. Several of them succeeded in
reaching a position of status and prominence. These architects fraternized with politicians and ruling
monarchy and in the case of France and the papal families in Italy, as members of royal courts. With
this accessibility they were able to promote their skills and talents.
Presentation drawings became necessary instruments, persuading with seductive illusion, describ-
ing the intention of an architectural proposal. Drawings were a way to obtain a client’s approval
and funding. They furthered the architect’s image as a magician, able to conjure up the majesty and
splendor so important to their clients’ purposes. They provoked dialogue, allowing the architect and
client to speak a visual language. For example, the sketch by Carlo Fontana suggests two alternatives
to engage the client in decision-making. The educated aristocracy could have formulated opinions
on the future building, or at the very least desired knowledge of the proposed building’s concepts
and intentions.
Construction drawings, although probably not similar to those used today, were plentiful enough
to accommodate large-scale projects, with their extensive interior ornamentation, individual articu-
lation of traditional elements, and numerous details. Baroque building allowed for inventiveness – it
required elaborate spatial organizations in plan, calculations of complex geometries, and the inte-
gration of sculpture with building components. Sketches were necessary to conceive of and work
out these designs. Substantially more complex architectural solutions, such as Christopher Wren’s
extended three-part dome for St. Paul’s Cathedral, dictated exploration through both drawings and
sketches (Hersey, 2000 ). As demonstrated by Ange-Jacques Gabriel, coordination of a large staff of
draughtsmen required extensive visual communication. Baroque architects continued to utilize
models to both comprehend an intended solution and communicate form to others. These three-
dimensional constructions were often highly detailed, even describing interior surface ornamenta-
tion as in the case of Wren.
A majority of the architects from this period acquired their skills and training as apprentices under
the direction of established architects. With this experience, they were educated in established
methods of representing buildings; plan, section, elevation, and perspective. A number of these archi-
tects obtained additional experience in the spectacle of theater design, where a sketch would suffice
for construction of a set or translated into a costume’s pattern. They viewed the sketch as less
precious or definitive, allowing alterations and corrections to become a part of their process. Not all
having emerged from a workshop tradition, they were yet able to develop the skills necessary for a
design dialogue.H5719-Ch02.qxd 7/15/05 3:20 PM Page 48