Perception of Aesthetic Design Approach: Safavid Architecture
Bahram Shahedi
Senior Lecturer
College of Architecture, Islamic Azad University (IAU) Isfahan Branch, Iran
PhD Candidate
Faculty of Built Environment, Department of Architecture, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
bshahedi@yahoo.com
Nila Keumala
Associate Professor, Research Fellow
Faculty of Built Environment, Department of Architecture, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
nilasanusi@gmail.com
Naziaty Mohd Yaacob
Senior Lecturer
Faculty of Built Environment, Department of Architecture, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
naziaty@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
This study has concerned the aesthetic design approach of architectural precedents through the historical facts
of Safavid architecture. The aim of the study is to explore and examine Safavid architectural buildings as the
case study strategy through the user perception by collecting multiple data from perception questionnaire
instrument. The method included concurrent approach to qualitative and quantitative data, which was obtained
within the users of Safavid architecture. Data analysis procedure conducted through descriptive statistical
analysis and by sorting thematic information for Initial categories, which has been defined by the theoretical
foundation. The researchers found that participants’ perception fall into two distinct groups. The first: structural
honesty, expressions, identity, design feature, interaction as design values in the sense of aesthetic and the
second: design principle, design concept, characteristic, minimalism, and style as an attribute. Such findings
revealed how Safavid architectural concepts aesthetically were integrated into the diversity aspects of its
architectural precedents. In conclusion, a holistic theoretical explanation's framework based on research
findings is presented with focusing on the significant of architectural precedents. A supportive line of theory
provides further investigation for testing the framework in the similar context.
Keywords: Aesthetic, Architectural Precedents, Safavid architecture, Design values, Attribute
INTRODUCTION
Approaching design aesthetically in architecture has found a great strength and purity through architectural
precedents of the early times (Alexander, 1987). Architectural precedents are testing and placing the
architecture aesthetically in cultural and environmental contexts in order to discover their reflection on the
social and cultural aspect of the particular period in the technology of time (Elwee, 1996). Architectural
precedent of Iranian architecture in the historical city of Isfahan has been recognized as the best-known
instance, in which some of the rich monumental architectural precedents of Safavid dynasty have demonstrated
how an aesthetically contribution to the heritage of the nation’s cultural identity (Eimen, 2004).
However, the concepts of design in Iranian architecture are so preoccupied with its aesthetic design values with
a doubtful question of west or tradition (Eimen, 2004). Iranian contemporary architecture is demonstrating how
the influences of foreign architectural elements are incompatible with its own architectural precedents, Figure
1. Lack of the signature with historical architecture and heritage has led to disregarding the ancient
architecture, which definitely demonstrate a better perceivable sense of aesthetic principles (Naderi, 1996).
Figure 1: Lack of connection with cultural heritage background composed
the language of Iranian architecture with international style
A review of scholarship has indicated the importance of Iranian architecture, Eimen (2004), summed up with
views in a way that Iranian architecture has had a long-lasting history of the country civilization and they have
been extensively patronized in an era of Achaemenid dynasty (522 – 486 B.C). As noted in pope’s book
“Persian Architecture” (Pope, 1976), the glorious period of Safavid architecture under Isfahani style has
opened a new perspective in aesthetic design elements, qualities and criteria in the design process of
architectural that European, who traveled in Iran referred to it as “half the world.”
The general feature of this research is implicating toward the constitution of a secure architecture in which the
human characteristics in relation to originality with its environment has been depicted aesthetically.
Contribution to the experimental progression of man-made architecture by application of architectural
precedent of Safavid aesthetic design approach is uncovering significant concepts for the process of design and
practice.
Given the significance of the general feature and application of architectural precedents, this research intends to
explore the aesthetic design approach of Safavid architecture, examining the Safavid architectural buildings
through participants’ perception of Safavid architectural user to elicit and re-define the potential applicable
concepts of the aesthetic design approach to the contemporary Iranian architecture. The research develops the
questions based on inquiry as how do the users of Safavid architecture perceive the aesthetic design approach
of Safavid architecture in relation to contemporary Iranian architecture and how does the aesthetic design
approach of Safavid architecture as a precedent contributes to the contemporary Iranian architecture?
1
LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
The expansion of aesthetic design approach in architectural vocabularies has taken place within the last
century. This approach constitutes a diversity of logical movements in aesthetic reality in the domain of
architectural movements. Such movements are considered as, Modernism, Postmodernism, Neoclassicism, etc.
(Krieger, 2004), (Flores, 2004). Aesthetic design approach can be classified as a theoretical approach toward
the enhancement of aesthetic design values to develop aesthetic design reality. Numbers of values and attribute
were involved in the reality of aesthetic design approach (Flores, 2004). Development of architecture in society
has been affected by the aesthetic design and expression on individual architects and designers’ personal
expression (Flores, 2004).
The architectural precedents accumulate many aspects of aesthetic design and approach that are different from
one region to another. The concept of spirit of time was introduced when David Hume the first time spoke it1 :
“the spirit of the age affects all the arts.” According to Pugin,2 architectural style should be an honest result and
expression of its time and that it should reflect the current climate, customs, and religion of a country (Brolin,
2000). The aesthetic design in the context of time, was understood as a “system of thought in which the past
understood as a series of periods, each distinct from each other and the present” (Tilman, 2005).
More considerable design values in the sense of aesthetic within architectural precedents can be found in
structural, functional, and material honesty. As an example, the aesthetic design can be traced back to the
ancient history of architectural precedents in a different period and style. Caro Lodoli who is known as the
father of functionalism and the supporter for the honest use of materials linked his works to the aesthetic of
material and functional honesty. The aesthetic design approach in the sense of design honestly is reinforced by
Christopher Alexander (Alexander, 1979)whom asserted that, in order to discover the true functional aspects
and its consequent form of design, the designer must act as a scientist toward the process of design. The
historical roots of structure honesty are not only obvious in architectural precedents, but it is a design value
which can be found in architectural movement of modernism and among many individual architects. The
aesthetic design honesty is blended with the function and material honesty (Nesbitt, 1996 ).
Simplicity and minimalism are considered as dominant aesthetic design approach among contemporary
architects and has its roots back to the time of John Ruskin3 and William Morris4 (Brolin, 2000). The feature of
simplicity and minimalism in the sense of aesthetic design approach is involved with the characteristics of
“introversion, simple geometry, smooth surfaces, and absence of visible details and truthful of a materials.”
Additionally, the abstraction of its attributes has been characterized as “honesty, austerity, clarity, calmness,
free of clutter, purity of view, harmony between elements, mass and void perceived as massiveness.” The
notion of simple forms gives the freedom to the users and offers them recognizable defining spaces as well as
products, which contribute to the harmony and restfulness, Silvestrin as cited in Holm (2006).
Regionalism, approach aesthetically in the direction to express the traditional idea in the line of contemporary
architecture with Modernist roots(Gelernter & Dubrucq, 2004). Social interactions have an aesthetic impact
and link to the ethical user of space. The strong sense of motivation exists among architects to create the public
goods for a population of users (Symes, Eley, & Seidel, 1995). The aesthetic design of architectural precedents
has a considerable history and can be re-interpreted with the important elements of traditional aesthetic to be
re-used and be inspired by already existing aesthetical elements, functions and styles. The inspiration of
traditional architecture is a considerable concept and proposes professional reproduction ideas through
contemporary architecture (Holm, 2006, p. 256). Concerning the replication of aesthetic design approach in
David Hume (7 May 1711 – 25 August 1776) was a Scottish philosopher and historian.
Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin (1 March 1812 – 14 September 1852) was an English architect.
3
John Ruskin (8 February 1819 – 20 January 1900) was the leading English art critic of the Victorian era.
4
William Morris (24 March 1834 – 3 October 1896) was an English textile designer, artist, writer.
1
2
2
contemporary architecture, there are three main strategies as critical traditionalist or regionalist, revivalists, and
contextual which are involved in the process of aesthetic design approach from historical architectural
precedents. The foundation of critical regionalist is based on interpreting traditional architectural character of a
specific site through abstract utilization of modern vocabulary in contemporary designs. In the second strategy,
revivalists have a tendency towards traditional aesthetic design which derives from traditional styles in factual
forms. Regarding the last strategy, Contextual, the usage of architectural precedent is restricted to a particular
situation of a project. it is the contextual gesture of environmental demands through integration with
contemporary architecture (Holm, 2006, p. 257). The importance of an aesthetic design process from the
architectural precedents to contemporary architecture demonstrated an obvious connection between general and
particular design values. These values are particular variables, which emerge as the resulted of society
reflection on the distinctive design of practitioners in different epochs (Birkeland, 2002, pp. 114-117).
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Concepts of the aesthetic design approach and emotional evidence of theoretical foundation will pave the way
for defining appropriate concepts to explore. These concepts are not considered as the rules but as a supportive
device, suggesting guidance to the research and are identifying some pre-defined categories in the account of
theoretical foundation in advance for further investigation from user perception in the aesthetic design
approach of Safavid architecture an its application to the contemporary architecture, Table 1.
The underlying structures of the conceptual framework for this research is to define the key elements and their
relationship which consist of the aesthetic design of Safavid architecture as relate to architectural precedents,
and contemporary Iranian architecture as related to contemporary architecture, Figure 2. These concepts have
specific relationships and interdependencies to guide the research inquiry in accordance with some key
concepts which have been obtained inductively through the theoretical foundation.
3
MATHODOLOGY AND METHOD
The exploratory and explanatory nature of setting and the line of how-question has linked the research to the
case studies strategy design (Tellis, 1997). This strategy made it possible to obtain the users’ perception,
beliefs, their points-of-views, relationships, and focused to learn the meaning that participants brought up about
the situation under investigation (Creswell, 2009, pp. 8,175). The cases, which provided rich and diverse
evidence in this research, were as follows, Khaju Bridge, Madrassa Chahar Bagh and Hotel Abbasi, Figure 3.
Cases within the study server a specific purpose (Yin, 2003, p. 47) and have preserved their originality for the
same rationale of its function in a new trend to meet contemporary phenomena and aesthetically interact with
users.
Khaju Bridge
Madrassa Chahar Bagh
Hotel Abbasi
Figure 3: Case Study Sampling
Participants were chosen among users of Safavid architecture who were working, visiting, and accommodating
the Safavid architectural buildings. A purposeful random sampling from (N=150) participants were adapted to
add more credibility due to the large samples as one could handle (Laframboise & Shea, 2009).
A mix method approach to data collection was utilized to compile qualitative and quantitative data through
single instrument from participants of the three cases. The survey looked at the brief questionnaires with a total
of 10 key targets based on theoretical foundation using 5-Point rating agreement Likert scale from strongly
agree to disagree. Although the questionnaire may not be among the most predominant methods in qualitative
nature of any research, they have their uses, especially as the means of collecting information. This approach
has explored the consistency of results from qualitative and quantitative technique by the means of
triangulation between qualitative and quantitative results and allows the researchers to be more confident of the
study’s conclusions (Jick, 1979).
The data was analyzed exploratory, using descriptive analysis calculation for each response category in two
separate modes, quantitative and qualitative. The qualitative keywords in relation to Safavid architecture in the
sense of aesthetic design approach were investigated as the quantitative categorical concepts. In the qualitative
part, the basic knowledge of architectural user was obtained through participants’ information as a useful
primary feedback for sorting information and identifying perception, feeling and issues of their concern
(Herman, 2009). The investigation of key concepts related to qualitative and quantitative was evaluated across
the rating of explanations of participants and was presented as an integrated discussion (Dooley, 2002 ).
DESCRIPTION OF ANALYSIS
Descriptive analysis concentrates on participants of user and non-users’ perception of Safavid architecture in a
quantity's manner. It starts with the description analysis followed by the mean and the group analysis of the
items to explore participants’ reality of what they perceived regarding the aesthetics design approach to the
Safavid architecture. It starts by the description analysis followed by the mean analysis of the items. Table 2,
4
with regard ‘strongly agree’, the result of data analysis indicates the highest frequency for the design principle
(62.8%, n= 94) followed by ‘design concept’ (53.3%, n= 80), regionalism and identity (52.8%, n= 79),
structural honesty (46.7%, n= 70), expressions (45.6%, n= 68), character (45%, n= 68), design feature(36.7%,
n= 55) style (29.4%, n= 44), interaction (20%, n= 30), and minimalism(12.2%, n= 18).
The data also indicates that (48.9%, n=73) of the participants agree with style as the highest frequency.
Subsequently, the rating is followed by interaction (44.4%, n= 67), structural honesty and expressions (42.2%,
n= 63), design feature (41.7%, n=62), character (40.6% n= 61), regionalism’ (38.9%, n= 58), minimalism’
(35%, n= 52), design concept and design principle (33.9%, n= 50,) as lowest frequency.
In addition, Table 2 shows design Principle, regionalism, structure honesty, and design concept, were
addressed by the participants with the highest frequency in ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ zone.
Additionally, mean analysis of items in the Table 3 shows that ‘design principle (mean= 4.58, std= 0.61)
received the highest in the attribute items and regionalism between the values received the highest mean score
(mean= 4.43, std= 0.67) followed by the design concept (mean= 4.38, std= 0.77), structural honesty (mean=
4.34, std= 0.71), expressions (mean= 4.30, std= 0.78), Characteristic (mean= 4.30, std= 0.72), design feature
(mean= 4.11, std= 0.77), style (mean= 4.04, std= 0.72), interaction (mean= 3.81, std= 0.79), and design
minimalism, (mean= 3.51, std= 0.82) as the lowest mean score .
5
The result of mean analysis supports the result of descriptive analysis where overlay design principle,
regionalism, design concept, and structure honesty, received the highest score of perception in the strongly and
very strongly zone.
Mean analysis of groups: In order to integrate users’ opinions into relatively the same meaning, the items
were classified into two groups, i.e., attribute, and values, with internal consistency (α) above 0.7 as
recommended by (Nunnally, 1978). From Table 4, 5 items were classified under the term of ‘attribute’, and
another half was grouped as ‘values’ group.
Table 5 shows the mean score for ‘values’ (mean= 4.20, std= 0.51) and ‘attribute’ (mean= 4.16, std= 0.51)
groups. As the Table illustrates, mean score for ‘values’ are slightly bigger than ‘attribute’. It states that
participants perceive almost these two groups in the same level of perception. However, the overlay from
descriptive and mean analysis concludes that; design principle and regionalism-identity were perceived highly
and strongly by the participants. In addition, ‘design concept and structure honesty’ were received the next
highest perception by the participants as important items of attribute and values in architecture.
QUANTITATIVE DESCRIPTIVE RESULTS
The divergent participants’ perception in the above performance in this study was synthesized to produce new
relationships in the results and findings of research’s inquiry. This procedure resulted in a single unique
combination of users of Safavid architecture. The quantitative results augmented to qualitative part of
questionnaires to position the discussion along the research investigation (Morgan, Lin, Chou, & Wu, 2006).
6
Descriptive analysis indicates that, there is a positive feeling about the level of respondents to the statements.
The most perception of dimensions identified by the mixed results from participants was the designed
elements, principle, regionalism, identity, design concept, and structure honesty. Although other dimensions
were not highlighted, they will be concerned in much the same way. The results also indicate that there are
positive feelings about the dimension of design elements and principle of order in the Safavid architecture. The
high weighted mean of 4.58 with standard deviation 0.61 was highly concerned by 62.8 percent of participants.
A dimension of design concept was identical in both participants and stands in the third place with weighted
mean of 4.38. The next rank of the participants’ perception was identified by a mixed feeling of structural
honesty, which is bonded to the humanistic, purity and true purpose of structure, function and material
property. The results showed that respondents were more inclined to support this statement with 46.7 percent
in the zone of strongly agreeing, and 42.2 percent in the zone of agree whereas 9. 4 percent of participants were
only moderate about the statement. Despite the clear concern that arises in responds to the question only1.7
percent of participants cited no positives respond to the given statement. The obtained results from participants
by giving their mixed feelings about knowledge of humanism function and a material likely shows a new
meaning to architectural representation of the Safavid architecture. Further, an indication on architectural
proportion, space, attention to detail, construction materials, and use of colors, which depict a harmonious and
articulate structure of the city as a foundation to human society was highlighted.
QUALITATIVE RESULTS
The following themes are defined as the keyword's concepts in the sense of aesthetic design approach, emerged
from the variables’ measurement framework base on theoretical foundation to be investigated in qualitative
manner and to be evaluated with conjunction to quantitative results. Numbers and percentages have not been to
avoid from any impression that the results can be projected to a population (Ernst, 2005).
1. Sense of order in arrangement of architectural elements:
Participants delivered a variety of responses to the statements in a different context of their inquiries. However,
it was discovered that some of the participants were not knowledgeable enough to give reasonable responds to
the line of inquiry. With regards to visual design elements, some of the participants could recognize buildings
or part of buildings from its outline, and that happen in the case of Madrassa Chahar Bagh and Khaju Bridge
with the strong definition of architectural edge, which is defined as a boundary line of space. Some participants
refer to colorful architecture and convey the message as being a tool for reinforcing an idea and depict attitude
of building components in relation to be a cultural belief, moral and ethical consideration.
2. Humanistic approach to design and tradition of society:
Participants referred to Safavid architecture as characterized by two principals which were called ‘Bron gara
(In toward Out) and Daron gara’ (Out toward in) as a main characteristic of Safavid architecture. In addition,
they emphasized on Caravansary Abbasi, Maddreseh Charbag and Medaneh Naghshe Jahan as an example of
Bron gara and Chehel Sotton palace, and Khaju Bridge as a case of Daron gara architecture. The expression of
some participant indicated that the aesthetic signature designs of the Safavid architecture are references to cool
colorful architecture that reflects purity of traditional language of architecture. Some participants believes that
Safavid architectural characteristic speaks of a symbolic architecture as a way of describing a humanistic
approach to design that expresses the traditions and rituals of the custom society.
3. Relations between people and building, building and surrounding:
Participants appreciate activities in public spaces, both in aesthetic aspects, spaciousness and the difference in
size and scale as urban square, open court yards and bridges. In a case of caravansary, Abbasi and Khaju
Bridge were important to some participant in making their judgments of a spacious social gathering place and a
public location. Some judged the overall appearance of the square as being so proportional in different
7
directions (length, width and height). The interaction within the context of the city between manmade
architecture and nature in a case of Khaju Bridge was important to respondents considering their awareness of
events and activities in public spaces along the bridge and Zayandeh rood river. Other experienced that the
space along the both sides of bridge as a cross of the Zayandeh Rood River allowed people to enjoy a sense of
harmony with water as a natural nature.
4. Created regional and national cultural identity:
Participants believed that Safavid architecture is strongly depicting the cultural, social and national identity of
society. The notion of a court yard was important to participants in making their judgments of defining the
place identity with culture and architectural means. Participants who used Safavid buildings daily as
participants and visitors comment that Safavid attempts to restore local and regional characteristics of its
architecture as a lesson for future generation.
5. Simplicity of forms, geometry and surface:
Some respondents who judged the physical characteristics of buildings explained that, rhythm repetitions are
per dominant's features of the Safavid architecture on building’s façade. Some saw them to be a simple
geometric relation defined on the surface as well as the interior to explore the idea of wholeness through simple
forms and producing a new idea, aesthetic and constriction techniques of its related time. Others believed that
simplicity of Safavid architectural feature lies in the properties of forms, space, materials, scale, geometry color
and proportion, which made a clear bridge between art and architecture.
6. Generate quality visual expression:
Participants who are using Safavid architecture as a place of work, recreation and visitors of their daily life
identified some key points to refer as their taste to tradition and cultural quality expression. Through the
question and conversation with participants, it was found that aesthetics design values of Safavid architecture
have a profound root in expressing its tradition, folk, custom and the ritual of progression of its related time in
its buildings. The actual experience of observing and using the space also was deemed important.
7. Humanistic, purity and true purpose of structure, function and material property:
Majorities of participants were aware of the principal in Safavid architectural shape of a building to be
primarily based upon its intended function or purpose. The similarity between buildings with different
functional aspect and similar material purity were important to some participant as a sign of beauty from the
character point of view to the entire heightens design in Safavid architecture.
8. Potential as to measure up to contemporary architecture:
Respondents who comment on the external and internal Safavid architecture were shown more frequency
compared with some participants who justify the lack of information and awareness towards aesthetic design
approach of Safavid architecture. Participant showed the different ways of understanding toward historical
buildings. In the case of Safavid architecture, they saw each building as a specific building which is purely
functional to participants’ demands.
9. Design style of its related time as contrast to contemporary architecture:
The majority of respondents believed, there exist some similarities between building's forms space as a typical
set of pattern, which is used by a number of different buildings being introduced as identical buildings. A few
respondents were doubtful about how the Safavid architecture can act as a model of performance for architects
who provide a solution to the problem of designing buildings. Those respondents, who judge the physical and
spatial characteristic of the Safavid architecture Madrasa Chahar and Caravansary Abbasi, gave their
explanation as a pattern that looks quite similar, organized, using the same set of image and language.
8
10. Contribute to all aspects of design concepts and processes as a paradigm to contemporary
architecture:
Majority of a participant believed that, pattern of the Safavid architecture as a model would influence the
representation of architecture by introducing new perceptions of similar events to look at reality in a new way.
One participant given an example of a building, which is under construction on Chahar Bagh axis as a sample
of defining its character and language based on the Safavid architectural features. Some participants refer to the
Safavid architecture as a source of rich treasure for providing solution background to the issues in
contemporary Iranian architectural problems.
INTEGRATED DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
The perception of user is found to be more perceivable and expressive by their awareness of architectural
elements and arrangements of building components. Visual elements such as color, texture on building façade
is found to be the first attraction to the user perception. Additionally, cultural belief, moral, and ethical
consideration also was concerned with the agreement of user perception. However, some participants did not
give any reasons in supporting their agreement. The lack of awareness is found to the account of neutral
responses from participants or either not a great perceived. Nevertheless, researchers decided that, scored all
responds to the items and used as supporting evidence as indicated by descriptive analysis in a quantitative
manner to provide feedback for qualitative part.
It was found that, perception of users who used Safavid buildings as a daily work, were associated with the
place of their work, because practically and aesthetically the characteristic of the workplaces had a direct
impact on well-being and performance of user (Yavetz & Yaakov, 2005), especially in the case of Madrasa
Chahar Bagh, Caravansary Abbasi. There were indications of a great positive respond among user awareness of
visual and conceptual elements as a general pattern in their perception(Richter, 2008). The collective results
from qualitative and quantitative were conclusive evidence as it was predicted that the most positive aspect of
assessment of the order in arrangement of architectural elements of the Safavid architecture comes from the
visual elements through the sensory factors of participants which is concerned with the aesthetic design order
of architectural elements.
It was important to participants’ judgments that the integration of these architectural elements concerns
aesthetically into the meaning criteria by proposing some kind of policy. The results of these items are
consistent with the qualitative evidence as it was found some of the participants could recognize visual
elements of buildings or parts of buildings from its outline. For example, this could be seen in the case of
Madrassa Chahar Bagh and Khaju Bridge with the strong definition of architectural edge, which was defined as
a boundary line of space.
Identity and regionalism approach was found as the chief point among the rest of questions from participants
and responded by 70 percent of the participants in a great detail. This perception found to have enthusiasm
since it was considered to be relatively understandable. More than half of respondents to the questionnaire
believed that the regionalism and national identity in Safavid architecture had taken adequate steps towards the
history of Iranian art and architecture and has made a great contribution to the world of Islamic architecture.
This result was reflective on the awareness, knowledge and familiarity with the meaning of the word “identity”.
The weight of quantitative was supported by the results of qualitative comments, and improved the statement
of identifying in the sense of aesthetic as a creation of regional and national culture. For instance, the notion of
the courtyard was found important to participants in making their judgments of defining the place identity with
culture and architectural means, which contributed to development of regional character.
The integrated perception of mixed evidence about the knowledge of regionalism and identity found in many of
the responses, in which the feeling of pride in their home town and public image was evident, because, image
ability was possibly the most important factor in identity of place to the sense of participants (Lynch, 1960).
9
Hearing architecture was found as a unique aesthetic design feature of Safavid architecture in the case of Khaju
Bridge. Examples were given to the reflection sound of water passing through vaults similar to reflection of
sound underneath of the blue mosque dome (Masjed-e-Amam), and Ali Qapu palace with a high harmonically
sound reflection that appears pleasant to the ears. This perception showed a considerable loyalty to the
treatment of the sound in the sense of aesthetic design in Safavid architecture.
With regards to the contemporary architecture, majority of participants understood the impact of successful
projects to integrate with the concept of architectural precedents in a new trend. This finding revealed the
significance of architectural precedents as a prototype in designing concepts. It is considerable to note that the
resulting treatment may come up with an attractive architectural work that has helped the public to recognize
their architectural features for many years to come. Apparently, this finding indicates that the distinct
architectural style of the Safavid architecture was easily perceivable, identifiable and adaptable to the various
structural elements throughout the projects. Aesthetic approach of Safavid architecture is found to be as
valuable as the expressions of humanistic approach to design and tradition toward society.
The integrated mixed perceptional evidence seemingly demonstrates two indications. The first is that, mainly
participants believe to their perceptions from their point of view, improved visualization that the contribution
of aesthetic design approach of Safavid architecture will improve all aspects of design notion and the process
as a paradigm to contemporary Iranian architecture, and the second thoughts, conveying the message of issues
in contemporary Iranian architecture. This perceptional consistency among users’ comments show the
contribution of Safavid architecture to the development of concepts in contemporary architecture.
These findings unfold the knowledge gaps within the body of Iranian architecture. With this assumption in
mind, which has emerged inductively through findings, the researchers hypothesize based on participants’
perception that the ‘use of ideas out of ancient historical buildings could result in a more satisfying architecture
than those recent ones without any meaningful background’. This finding is only a development towards the
significance as signify probably is true. “A research finding may be true without being important and do not
necessarily means that it is highly significant."
The feelings about knowledge of humanism function and a material likely was perceived by participants as a
new meaning to architectural representation of the Safavid architecture. Moreover, an indication of
architectural proportion, space, attention to details, construction materials and the use of colors highlighted a
harmonious structure within the city of Isfahan. These findings suggest a strong probability that participants’
use of their information is based on the two existing facts of Safavid aesthetic approach toward design, which
includes, aesthetic design values and attribute. These perceptions among values and attribute would seem to
reveal the literal replication on the nature of aesthetic design approach of Safavid architectural buildings that is
perceived throughout the users' mind. This indication has a positive act to the solution of real social needs in
architecture as a sign of concern about issues in contemporary Iranian architecture.
CONCLUSION
Constitution of the overall discussions above is assembled based on the sense of the reflection and users’
perception to obtain the information and derives important features within the field of design theory and history
area. This information makes a useful contribution to the constitution of a holistic visual commentary of the
theoretical framework in which it rises from the architectural precedents of historical evidence of Safavid
architecture, Figure 4. The frame suggests two beneficial groups and illustrates not only the significance of
what has happened in the past but why and how the aesthetic approach of architectural precedents unfolds the
design values and attribute to the contemporary architectural phenomenon. Design attribute in the aesthetical
framework benefits from discovery of elements, presenting new criteria which have remained unnoticeable in
architectural precedents and are leading gradually to lose architectural feature creativity. The attribute
10
application of architectural precedents as a robust vehicle in the framework increases the development of
architectural solutions that possibly has resulted from a paradigm to add quality improvements in the sense of
aesthetic design approach in the contemporary architecture. Similarly, Design values in the structure of frame
benefits originates to be seen in terms of an incensement in the confidence of the societies, authorities,
professions and practitioner who receive more obligations toward society expectation producing humanistic
architecture.
The visual commentary theoretical framework functions as analytical tools and should gradually move to
deeper levels to the substantive theory in the further investigation (Schwandt, 2007, pp. 292-293) .Such theory
should function as the social instrument specifying more comprehensiveness or scope in its explanation of the
social aesthetic phenomena in the line of architecture.
Reference
Alexander, C. (1979). The Timeless Way of Building. New York Oxford University Press.
Alexander, C. (1987). A New Theory of Urban Design. new Yourk , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Birkeland, J. (2002). Design for sustainability: a sourcebook of integrated eco-logical solutions. London:
Earthscan.
Brolin, B. C. (2000). Architectural Ornament: Banishment and Return New York: WW Norton & Co.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (Second
ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Dooley, L. M. (2002 ). Case Study Research and Theory Building. Advances in Developing Human Resources
Vol. 4, (No. 3 ), 335-354.
Eimen, A. (2004). Negotiating cultural identity at Tehran’s Al-Ghadir Mosque. Paper presented at the
International Conference on Architecture and Identity.
Elwee, M. M. (1996). The Aestheti of Architecture. Retrieved 24 April, 2008, from
www.theuniversityconcourse.com
Ernst, J. A. (2005). A Formative Evaluation of the Prairie Science Class. journal of interpretation research,
volume 10 (number 1), 9-30.
11
Flores, C. A. H. (2004). Symbolism. In R. S. Sennott (Ed.), Encyclopedia of 20th-Century Architecture (Vol. 1,
pp. 205). London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
Gelernter, M., & Dubrucq, V. (2004). Historicism. In R. S. Sennott (Ed.), Encyclopedia of 20th-Century
Architecture (Vol. 2). London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
Herman, R. E. (2009). Demographic Report. Retrieved Oct,16, 2009, from
www.hermangroup.com/employerofchoice/eocrept.pdf
Holm, I. (2006). Ideas and Beliefs in Architecture and Industrial design. The Oslo School of Architecture and
Design, Oslo.
Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action. Administrative
Science Quarterly,, Vol. 24, (No. 4, Qualitative Methodology), pp. 602-661 601.
Krieger, P. (2004). Contextualism. In R. S. Sennott (Ed.), Encyclopedia of 20th-Century Architecture (Vol. 2).
London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
Laframboise, K. L., & Shea, K. (2009). Developing Understanding of Research-based Pedagogy with
Preservice Teachers: An Instrumental Case Study. The Qualitative Report Vol.14(Number 1), 105128.
Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Morgan, M., Lin, H.-n., Chou, J., & Wu, H. (2006). An Interpretation Specialization Continuum of
Environmental Volunteerism In Taiwan. Journal of Interpretation Research, volume 11(number 2).
Naderi, K. A. (1996). Iranian Architecture Today, A Bridge Between East and West. Abaadi (Quarterly), No.
21, Pages: 18-23.
Nesbitt, K. ( 1996 ). Theorizing a new agenda for architecture: an anthology of architectural theory 19651995pp. 606). Available from
http://books.google.com.my/books?id=kXa5xjnHB5QC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hal.: New York: McGraw-Hal.
Quantitative report:.
Pope, U. A. (1976). Persian Architecture.: Soroush Press,National Iranian Radio & Television, Tehran, Iran.
Richter, P. G. (2008). Architektur psychologle - Eine Einfuhrung.lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.
Schwandt, T. (2007). Dictionary of Qualitative Inquiry (Third Edition ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage
Publications.
Symes, M., Eley, J., & Seidel, A. D. (1995). Architects and their practices: a changing profession: Butterworth
Architecture.
Tellis, W. (1997). Introduction to Case Study. The Qualitative Report Volume 3 Number2 July 1997.
Tilman, J. T. (2005). Historicism. In R. S. Sennott (Ed.), Encyclopedia of 20th-Century Architecture (Vol. 1,
pp. 896). London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
Yavetz, R. V., & Yaakov, S. (2005). Instrumentality, Aesthetic, and Symbolism of office Design.
Environmental and Behavior, 37(4), 533-551.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Third ed. Vol. 5). London: Sage Publications,
Inc.
12