At least six times a day, I cross a white pedestrian
footbridge near the boat. As a frequent user of the structure, I only evaluated
the bridge in a utilitarian light, as a tool facilitating travel from one side
of Oosterdok to the other. Aesthetically
speaking, there are more interesting bridges in a city known for its inventiveness
in design, and, thus far, I have encountered bridges that revolve nearly
360-degrees and one particular structure outside MuziekGebouw that resembles a
dinosaur’s ribcage. To some readers, the subject of this review may pale in
comparison, but my intent is not to find the most technologically advanced or
structurally complex bridge. Instead, by casting an aesthetic eye to a
structure with no particular significance, this review highlights the
architectural marvels that even the most common footbridge in Amsterdam can
possess.
The artful use
of lines in the Oosterdok bridge gives the structure a contrasting sense of fluidity
and rigidity. The bridge itself consists
of two matching structures connected by a center platform. Typically, bridges connect
linearly in order to minimize travel distance, but the Oosterdok bridge
connects at an apex so that an aerial view would show a slight dip where the
two halves meet. The slight bend defies the traditional conception of a
straight, utilitarian bridge and also challenges the idea that a bridge’s arch
must be perpendicular to the plane of the water. Parallel to the water’s plane,
the curve gives the impression of a bridge that flows with the water. As a whole, every slope and curve mimics the
fluidity of the waterscape. Two arches rise to a low apex before gently sloping
downward, and a gradual incline brings the bridge to its peak elevation. These
smooth and subtle changes in elevation complement the bridge’s watery
surroundings.
By
contrast, straight and rigid aspects of the design attempt to distance the bridge
from its watery setting. Thick metal beams create towering triangles that ultimately
form the bridge’s skeleton. A shape historically associated with strength and
stability, the triangles themselves have a commanding quality, and the thickness
of the trusses intensifies the image of the bridge as a strong, unwavering structure
rising above the surrounding waterscape. The metal triangles support the
bridge’s arches and raise them above from the water, and, at the same time, the narrowing
triangles create the illusion that the trusses are reaching up and away from
the water. The upward-facing tips of the triangles draw the viewer’s gaze away
from the water, and the sharp angles give the structure an edginess that
contrasts with the smoothness and lightness of water.
Despite the
fact that certain structural qualities emphasize the rigidity of the bridge,
the general tendency of the design tends toward visual fluidity. While the
metal triangles extend away from the water, the curves of the arches ultimately
trap the triangles and prevent the tips from reaching further into the sky. The
bridge’s arches metaphorically “round out the edges” of the structure and
mitigate the sharpness of the trusses. During the evening, a row of lights also
light up underneath the top arch, and casts shadows on the trusses. From afar,
the light emanating from the bridge softens the structure’s angles, and the
trusses themselves look less rigid when the light dances across the beams. When
viewing the bridge at night, one notices that the light and shadows create an “alternating
effect” in which every other beam appears to glow. By walking on a dock that
parallels the bridge, one observes that the “alternating effect” actually creates
an illusion that the rigid beams are in flux and shifting in some way, almost
like the way the water ripples under moonlight.
While there
might be more fascinating bridges in the city, the constant struggle between
the fluidity and rigidity of the Oosterdok bridge creates an engaging visual
experience for any viewer.
No comments:
Post a Comment