After studying the various
movements which contributed to the emergence of modern architecture, there is
one key idea that I see commonly running through each of them. Each one began from an almost rebellious
attitude toward continuing architectural styles from the past. Supporters of the movements seemed to see it
as their duty to not only create a new and better architectural style for the
modern world, but also to steer society in the direction of change.
Example of ornate achitecture from the past. |
The
rebellious nature which I am referencing can first be found in the values of
the Arts and Crafts movement. Up until
the time when this style began to take shape in the 1880s, architecture was
valued on the level of prestige and grandeur that could be attained through the
use of ornate details and costly materials.
As industrialization became more and more a part of everyday life, architects
began integrating steel structure with these details and costly materials. Supporters of the Arts and Crafts movement rebelled
against this trend, refusing to allow industrialization to determine a muddled,
crossbreed architectural style. They believed
the new direction of architecture should cast off the stipulations of past
styles, and exist independently of the latest societal mania for
industrialization. While their
intentions were good, however, what they believed at the time to be a fad in
the end grew into the new norm. Industrial
materials and methods were here to stay, and the rebellious attitude exhibited
by the Arts and Crafts movement found its way into other new styles.
The Red House, an example of Arts and Crafts architecture. |
Beginning
with the Art Nouveau style and progressing into many other styles to follow, the
new building technology brought about by industrialization became the
centerpiece of attention. Some believed
that with this new technology should arise a corresponding new architectural
style. For example, De Stijl was based
on the idea similar to that of Arts and Crafts that the modern world should
have its own new style not to be held back by the demands of past styles. With industrialization, society was moving
forward into a new age of sophistication.
Movements like De Stijl were aimed at rebelling against the outdated
conception of sophistication in ornate details and compelling society to see
elegance in simplicity, a new style for a new, changed world. This idea continued throughout the remainder
of the modern movements which we studied, sometimes more strongly than
others. At times the idea of rebellion was
so strong it frightened people, as with the Bauhaus school or with Russian
Constructivism, and some projects became almost obnoxious with the amount of
crudeness and simplicity targeted at changing our perception of good
architecture. However it was addressed,
though, the key idea remained constant through all divisions of the modern
movements—architectural styles of the past were unfitting for the new world, as
were outdated societal values, and a new style was needed to bring about
necessary change.
Rietveld Schroder House, an example of De Stijl architecture. |
Works Cited:
http://www.exploring-castles.com/characteristics_of_gothic_architecture.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Red_House,_Bexleyheath.JPG
http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-fish/galleries/72157628182847177/#photo_2640649956
No comments:
Post a Comment