“Saint Jerome – The Desert … The Study”, written by Alison Smithson, is an analysis of the allegories derived from the depictions of Saint Jerome during the Renaissance. The Saint is situated in three different environments, according to the chronological situation of the painting. In the early Renaissance he is seen living in the desert, later on in a study and during the late Renaissance period, he lives in the grotto. Each one of these situations come with an allegory, which reveals interesting architectural manifestations. First, in the desert, the Saint is totally exposed to nature. He is in the “wildness”, unable to defend himself against the natural phenomena, but at the same time “pure”, “naked” and in full appreciation of nature. On the other hand, in the study, St. Jerome benefits from the conveniences the city provides, he is protected and can dedicate his time on studying. Finally, in the grotto, the Saint has found a place where he can combine both the previous: He is still in nature, but inside a protected enclave were he can study. By studying the two extremes and the consequent combination, we can compare to our present living environments. All of the assignment texts deal with the relationship between the human built environment and nature, in terms of questioning why they sometimes end up being so separate and distinct. Concepts as: enclaves, scale, atmosphere, interaction, sustainability, opacity, morphology, blending and vertical growth are explored, in comparison to how each of these are interpreted in nature. Nature has always been successfully incorporating all of the above concepts in its life forms and therefore is, as it should be, a continuous source of knowledge and inspiration for architecture, as well as the very basis of it. As society tends to be more and more dependent and driven by economy, architects should be skeptical about this situation’s impact on the fundamental notions that instruct architectural creation. The primitive purpose of architecture has evolved along with society, but the basis is still solid. Alterations in mentality should invigorate rather than shake these foundations.

By reading, listening and discussing these interconnected topics, and after personal thinking, I was left with a question, which could potentially be subject of further research: I understand that architecture can create new buildings that consider the values delivered from the discussion, but what about the existing ones? Are there ways of re-thinking these complex relationships between humans and their surroundings and incorporating these values in the existing city, as a whole, or in parts of it? What can be done to improve our everyday experience as citizens, considering what we analyzed? Could there be other types of intervention, apart from constructions?Is there a way of revitalizing a city from within?