Emergence of Modernism

"In art, architecture, and design it became increasingly evident that the traditions that had served past ages were no longer relevant to this modern world."(Pile, 323) Some of those traditions which architects were doing away with included the revivialism found in the Eclectic Movement. After the eclectic movement ran its course, it was a relief to find a new frontier of design through Modernism. The four people who were the forerunners of this movement included Frank Lloyd Wright, Mies van der Rohe, Le Corbusier, and Walter Gropius. All these designers stirved for originality through geometric forms straying away from the excessive decoration of previous styles such as the Victorian Era.(104) In particular, Frank Lloyd Wright is credited for the earliest successes of this movement through creating the Prarie-style house form. In this style, the long horizontal line creates emphasis accented by short verticals while the interior plan was very open. FLW had many commonalites among his designs including of square skylights, hanging light fixtures, and stained-glass windows of geometric form, commonalites which would surface later in European art and design a few years later. (Pile, 325) In fact, Wright himself expressed that he was the only inventor of modernism insisting others were just imitators.(Pile, 326) Also, Wright's was the first in the modernist movement to have a house plan which was so open and centered around the chimney, and yet the Farnsworth House by Mis van der Rohe was completely open and situated around a central island. The book even makes other allusions to the fact that this imitation may be true when it compares FLW's Gale House to Robert van't Hoff's Dutch huis ter Heide in Utrecht. So my question: Was Frank Lloyd Wright the only inventor of modernism and the other European designers just imitators? Or did the other prominent designers such as Mies and Le Corbusier have original ideas despite their knowledge of FLW's designs published in De Stijl?(Pile, 327)

Photo taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_lloyd_wright

The Emergence of Modernism

“Modernism is the name given to the new forms that appeared in all of the arts- in painting, sculpture, architecture, music, and literature. Four men are regarded as pioneers in the modernism in design. They defined new directions with such clarity and force that they can be thought of as the originators of the ‘modern movement.’ (Pile 323)”

In the emergence of modernism, four men really stand out as the “instigators” of the movement: Walter Gropius, Ludwig van der Rohe, Le Corbusier, and Frank Lloyd Wright. These men paved the way for architects and artists by manipulating forms and lines into ideas that had never before been possible. Thanks to newfound technology (such as reinforced concrete) and yet another wave of displeasure with gaudy decoration, simplicity and abstraction became all the rage. But throughout this movement, another movement has really begun to take off- one that Pile neglects to really mention in his account of the emergence of modernism. For the first time in the history of design, notable designers are also women.

One such designer would be the indisputable genius of Eileen Gray, who is noticeably absent in Pile’s account of modernism. She gets her start doing lacquer screens and furniture as an apprentice, and quickly moves to furniture and rug design. One particularly famous piece would be her cigarette table (seen above), which is still commonly featured in design magazines. Her long and successful career culminated with her house, E.1027- which inspired Modernist pioneer Le Corbusier so much that he not only bought a neighboring lot, he fixated and eventually occupied E.1027! He even attempted to add his own touch to the house- eight massive murals done in Gray’s “style.” Naturally, Gray was horrified.

This is not to rant on Pile for not including women designers in his analysis of the Modernist movement, or even to chastise Le Corbusier for degrading Eileen Gray’s already acclaimed design. Rather, it is to pose a question. In a profession so markedly dominated by women (the profession of interior designer, not architect), how many will actually be remembered or celebrated? Will future movements be marked solely by achievements in architecture as well, or will interiors and their designers also be able to create and define future movements without being incorporated into architecture? Furthermore, where will women be in the scheme of all of this?

Eclecticism

Towards the end of the nineteenth century the idea of looking to the past for inspiration became known as eclecticism. During this time people were ready for an alternative to modernism. Imitating any historical period style became the new viewpoint of design. This was the first time that people were looking to completely recreate past styles. Other eras often used historical precedents to create a style, however they always had an original twist. This new idea actually led to the need for a new profession known as interior design. A designer with the knowledge to recreate any period style as convincingly as possible was now needed. An inteior designer had to be skilled enough to revive any style needed to match the outside of buildings such as; French Renaissance, Gothic, Georgian Colonial, and anything else that was thought of as "traditional style."Architects were also being taught design through historial precedents. Style was now chosen by whatever seemed most appropriate for a particular project. It's evident that without the rise of eclectism the interior design profession would not have been demanded by the late nineteenth century. Where do you feel the interior design profession would be without the rise of eclecticism?

Art Nouveau & Vienna Secession: United States

While Art Nouveau in the United States didn’t have the most lasting impression on its generation, its impact on the future of design can’t be denied. It is often times considered to be a regeneration of Victorian Style influenced by an awareness of the standards of quality and craftsmanship established in the Arts and Crafts Movement. While the décor in interiors remained rather stuffy, a change in subject matter set it apart from the interiors that came before it. Lighter, iridescent colors came into play and a focus was put on nature and natural forms. Sinuous forms taking on plant-like characteristics became visible in exteriors and interiors alike, marking a dramatic change and replacing the historic decorative elements that had come before. Iron and cast iron became large players in the execution of these designs. It was easily molded and manipulated into these very curvilinear and almost obscurely abstract designs.

The two most prominent players in this era of design were Louis Comfort Tiffany (1848-1933) and Louis H. Sullivan (1856-1924), both of which were known primarily for their definitive styles in Art Nouveau. Tiffany became increasingly interested in the decorative arts and founded the ‘Louis C. Tiffany & Associated Artists’ Design Firm in New York City. His early style tended to follow in the footsteps of the Victorian Era with highly decorative elements taking over his interiors. Tiffany was best known for his concentration in stained glass. He was commissioned to produce windows for many American churches, including H. H. Richardson’s Trinity Church in Boston. These works featured traditional imagery of religious subjects as well as landscape, floral and semi-abstract themes that were very similar to French Art Nouveau. While Tiffany grew to be most well known for his ‘Tiffany Lamp’, he also produced many vases, bowls and other decorative objects, combining his famous glass work with metal work resembling natural forms such as floral or vine-like pieces as well as peacock feathers and insect wings.

Louis H. Sullivan was the other key designer in this movement. Often considered the ‘Pioneer of Modernism’, Sullivan is noted for his ideology that “form is to follow function”. He was America’s first modernist architect and was noted for his use of rich ornament combined with strong functionality. Sullivan was a noted designer in terms of both spatial organization and ornament. His Chicago Auditorium Building (1886-1890) marked a major step in the development of iron structural framing, but the interiors of his buildings were the height of his designs. In this particular building, we find an auditorium topped with great arches incorporating the use of electric lighting, covered in gilded relief similar to what we’d find in the Victorian Era combined with great functionality and genius in his design of a moveable ceiling to promote better acoustics.

Many critics have considered this the “style that failed” and had only begun to appreciate it after World War II when various exhibitions and publications brought it to the masses. It is now considered to be a strong step towards modernism, but many disagree, claiming it didn’t let go of the frivolous and tasteless over decorating of the Victorian Era. Do you feel that this was merely an extension of the often over-done interiors of the Victorian Era or that it was, indeed, yet another step leading us toward modern design? Was Art Nouveau in the United States able to successfully transition from the Victorian Era and the Arts and Crafts Movement into modern design without entirely abandoning either of these schools of thought?

Art Nouveau & Vienna Secession: Europe

The Art Nouveau and the Vienna Secession in Europe originated in Britain during the late nineteenth century. As a style led by France and Belgium, the Art Nouveau expanded the possibilities of materials and was most commonly characterized by whiplash curves and abstract natural forms. This style developed due to the economic expansion of growing cities, the social rejection of historical precedents, and the experimentation of new materials. For example, in The Horta House, Victor Horta explored the possibilities of iron in the staircase as well as whiplash décor on the walls. As a rich display of slender columns, curvilinear lines, and sharp curves, the Horta House exemplified a new style in Europe that would continue to push technological advances. Small amounts of iron, for instance, supported a large amount of weight. This strength allowed the designer to have more flexibility with the space thus allowing Horta to experiment with curving lines based on natural forms.

Soon after the Horta House was created, Otto Wagner and many others led the Vienna Secession in 1898. They led this style by including even more abstracted natural forms in design. While the early characteristics of Art Nouveau included slender proportions, long curvy décor, and more functional designs, the Art Nouveau became more of a style for the aesthete, a person who had a refined sensitivity to nature and more of a disregard for historical precedents. And although architects such as Otto Wagner called for designs based on purpose, this style continued until World War I. Consequently, the art of pushing ideas from the past including reinterpretations of inspiration(the art of Japan, nature, and geometry)relatively ended in the 1920‘s. However, the flowing Art Nouveau patterns and carefully detailed fantastic forms continued to prosper throughout Europe.

At the height of the Art Nouveau style, Spain gave Europe an interesting interpretation on the style. For example, Antoni Gaudi used untraditional decorative design and fantastical forms in order to push the limits of the Art Nouveau style. In the same way, current designers often push ideas from the past in order to create designs with a new purpose. After all, social, economic, political, and technological circumstances dictate the direction of design and as one might say, ‘history repeats itself’. However, even though society was changing at the turn of the 20th century, was it a good idea to include such precarious metal work in Art Nouveau designs? After all, as a style of unpredictable turning angles someone could run into something, misjudge angles, get hurt; Was it worth the risks to create an interesting design over what some may call un-functional design?

Bibliography: http://www.barcelonaexperience.com/images/spot%20light/bigPics/pedrera/b.gaudiPedreraD769.jpg
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/math5.pattern/Janson.p749.gif
Pile. A History of Interior Design.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Secession
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Nouveau

Art Nouveau & Vienna Secession: United States

Art Nouveau in America was a time when iridescent colors, floral motifs, naturalistic forms, bold accessories and ornamentation dominated; as well as elaborate wall and window decoration. However, unlike styles before, Art Nouveau was slightly simpler but still highly decorated. The introduction of the Art Nouveau style in the United States is credited to two well known designers; Louis Tiffany, and Louis Sullivan. These designers took a long leap away from norms of classicism and were inspired by both the Arts and Crafts movement, and the decorative arts. Tiffany founded his own glass company and became internationally known for his intricate stained glass patterns, often showing relation to nature and the four seasons. He also popularized lamp design by adding metal bases to lamp frames, and glass shades. However, Tiffany's designs could no longer hold the majority of the public's interest.
Louis Sullivan is often referred to as "The Pioneer of Modernism,"because he was the most successful when it came to stepping away from the roots of antiquity. He worked a lot with public spaces such as hotel lobbies, stairways, stores, and auditoriums. Sullivan was a master of acoustical application; a prime example would be his Auditorium Building in Chicago. He also spent a great deal of his time studying skyscraper design, and focusing on how to add decorative aspects to verticality. The Schlesinger & Mayer Department Store in Chicago was one of Sullivan's most clever designs because his use of a grid pattern on the outside facade. Horizontal lines divided floors and vertical lines colonized windows. This itself was a brave approach to modern design. Like many others, Sullivan's work became less admired. He experienced disagreement with clients while working on St. Paul's Methodist Church because of finances. In his late career he designed small banks and employed great American architect Frank Lloyd Wright. His book, "A System of Architectural Ornament," is still used today by modern architects.
It's been argued that even though Art Nouveau was a down play from previous styles, it was still too excessive and overly decorated. Art Nouveau has been accused of poor taste and unnecessary decor. In your opinion, how important is architectural ornamentation and how does it affect you. Are you drawn to ornamental decor or are you not so interested, explain why. Also, was an Art Nouveau movement in the United States necessary?

Source: Pile, John. "A History of Interior Design" 2nd edition. 2005

http://www.kestan.com/travel/nyc/images/2264%20met%20stained%20glass%20(+).jpg

Aesthetic Movement: Britain: Arts and Crafts

The Arts and Crafts movement was partly founded based on the ideas of John Ruskin, a writer. He believed that with the technology that we had gained, we were losing the most important parts of design. Design wasn’t as personal as it had once been, everything was produced in bulk, and was losing quality as well. Ruskin’s ideas were based on Gothic Revival ideas because Gothic Revival emphasized craftsmanship. However, where Ruskin’s ideas differ is where Gothic Revival is bringing back that original Gothic style, the Arts and Crafts movement brought on a new style and was completely original. The Arts and Crafts movement was very small, mainly because of how expensive it was. While the ideas were great, people simply didn’t want to buy hand crafted products anymore when they could buy the same thing of lesser quality for significantly less. A huge part of the Arts and Crafts movement was shifting away from the Victorian era of design. Most of those associated with the Arts and Crafts movement hated the bulk and clutter of the Victorian era. They disliked how heavy it was and how it lacked functionality, so they created something handcrafted and simple to break away from that. Arts and Crafts designers were regarded as craftsman, because the introduction of machines left people to learn the machines and not crafts, which turned these designers into the craftsman as well. Since the Arts and Crafts design focused more on functionality than formalities it led to designs such as the Red House designed by Philip Webb. The Red House was designed based on the functionality of it. Everything was placed a certain way for a specific purpose, not just to make something look good. Webb was a designer that took his ideas from that of William Morris. Morris was a huge influence in the Arts and Crafts movement. He took his ideas from Ruskin and brought them to a new level with his designs. Even though these designers thought they were technically taking a step back in time by using hand crafted things, they were taking a huge step forward in regards to design. The designs of the Arts and Crafts movement really pushed into modern designs because they were focused on the function and quality, which was completely different than the gaudiness and clutter of the Victorian era. What do you believe caused such a rapid shift from the Victorian era to the Arts and Crafts movement? And do you believe that the shift to the Arts and Crafts movement affected the future of design?

Aesthetic Movement: Britain: Arts & Crafts

To put it in it's simplest possible definition, the Arts & Crafts movement was started by artisans who believed that machines were taking the human element out of too many things. John Ruskin, one of the founding visionaries of the movement, believed that art was connected to the human soul, and a machine could not express what the human soul created. Pioneers of the movement shunned mass production and began to focus on individuality and hand crafted goods that everyone could enjoy. But this led to a problem that was a major hurdle for the movement, hand crafted items were too labor intensive to be made affordable for everyone and in enough quantities for the masses. Even though the focus of this movement was using simple, natural materials, there was no escaping the fact that machine made items were more affordable and could be made in quantities that made products available for the masses.

This brings me to my main question on this topic. Do we see any parallels between what was happening in the Arts and Crafts movement and what is happening today with our ever advancing technology. Take for instance AutoCad and Computer 3D Design. Today, we can create complete construction documents, beautiful 3D renderings, and 3D models of our architectural designs. AutoCad and other programs save us time and money, they increase the accuracy of our drawings and they allow us to churn out much more information than we could by hand. But, buy relying on the computer, have we taken out the human element of our designs? Have our graphic communications become too clean, too sterile, possibly too good? Sure, we can create a 3D "walk through" of a space on the computer, but does that cold computer model show the soul of a design better than a carefully hand rendered set of drawings? Does the fact that our hand put those lines on the paper convey our message better than any plotter could? Does a mouse allow our vision to be expressed more accurately, or does it impede our ability to truly put our heart and soul into our designs. If the founding members of the Arts & Crafts movement were around today to see our technological advancements, would the start pointing and clicking, or would they be saddened that yet another set of machines have taken the human soul out of design?

Aesthetic Movement: US: Craftsman Movement

The Aesthetic Movement quickly spread to the United States from England through the followers of William Morris and others. As a response to the excessive ornamentation of the Victorian Era and the analogous of mass production during the Industrial Revolution, the Craftsman Movement strived to redefine the taste of design in America. It continued the ideas of vernacular design from the Gothic Revival while removing heavy decoration and replacing it with organic, clean, simple, lines and forms. The Bungalow style became the popular design of residential homes, characterized by “ a one-story house…with porches, overhanging eaves, walls of shingle or stucco, and minimal ornamental detail,“(A History of Interior Design). Examples of the style were seen in the architecture of Charles Summer Greene, Henry Mather Greene, and Bernard R. Maybeck.
Guilds were formed to advocate the idea that real artist beauty was being lost in the machine produced goods and the uniqueness of hand made goods was being forgotten. Using these goods in homes was first introduced by Gustav Stickley, with Mission style furniture characterized by “ simple furniture, generally of massive form and made in solid oak, assembled with craftsmanly wooden joints, iron hardware, leather cushions, and other details. Ornamentation was minimal or non-existent,” (A History of Interior Design). After popularity of Stickley’s designs grew, soon factories were producing Craftsmen furniture as well as other goods. References were made to the past in the form of historically imitations that were being produced. While exotic influences came from Japan as artifacts were collected and displayed in homes.
While tasted had mature since the Victorian style, the Craftsman Movement soon became “art for art’s sake”. Interiors and exteriors were covered in “jarring colors and patterns;” according to R.W. Edis in Healthy Furniture and Decoration, that might cause “nervous irritability”. The artistic overflow of the style then paved the way for the next movement Art Nouveau. However the Aesthetic Movement had an enormous impact on design for years to come and is the inspiration for most modern design. How do you feel the Craftsman Movement in the United States has impacted design today?

Aesthetic Movement: US Craftsmen Movement

The Aesthetic Movement was a change from heavy, and very ornate style to simple with little to no ornamentation. The designers of this period appreciated hand craftsmanship and design for a purpose. It was hard for them to give in to machines making everything even though it was faster and less expensive. I know that anyone would prefer something hand crafted and carefully thought out but it was so expensive and time consuming. William Morris wanted to develop household objects that were thoroughly artistic but inexpensive at the same time. It seems like it would be hard to make something that was well designed and inexpensive by hand for "households" of that time. Would you want to pay more for something that was hand made or pay less for something that would look very similar but have flaws at the same time?That would be difficult to decide because I would obviously want the hand crafted well designed one but if that was not in my budget, I would not really have a choice.

Even Charles Eastlake published a book Hints on Household with household tips in it that manufactures tried to replicate furniture from that he suggested in his book. They referred all of the furniture to him which made him mad because the furniture did not turn out the way he had intended it to. He did say that good taste should not be expensive but was that possible during that time? Could the common person afford good taste?Do you think that he was being reasonable....