International Modernism (B)

Following WWII every country in its own way focused on marrying economy and efficiency, joining good design with practicality, or as Raizman summarized it, they all ‘dealt with the humanization of science’ 267. Along the way each of them explored the relationships between inspiration from the organic and experimentation with new technologies. In Scandinavia the lava-lamp curves of Anne Jacobsen’s Egg chair and the straight-from-nature radial forms of Poul Henningson’s lamps are an expression of the organic, while Gertrude Vasegaard’s porcelain tea service explored the more utilitarian side of new materials.
In England the war meant a severe depletion of resources, so their designs erred more on the side of the industrial- as is seen in George Carwardine’s Anglepoise lamp. But there was still room for whimsical creativity in the textile design of Marianne Mahler’s Bird and Bowl pattern.
Italy was highly concerned with establishing a name for itself- being such a little country competing in a global export market. They took a route harkening back to the director/artist system of the royal manufactories by employing a consultant designer to create a unified design approach. From there they could mass produce to their heart’s content. The curvaceous Lady armchair by Marco Zanuso references natural forms, simultaneously experimenting with the new materials of foam rubber while Italian light design (much like the simplistic English lighting) took the minimalist/industrial form of Achille and Pier Giacomo Castiglioni’s Tubino desk lamp.
Germany pioneered the automobile field, using streamlined curves for its bodywork in the BMW while still maintaining straightforward rectilinear lines for much of its design such as Max Bill’s granite statues.
Japan had to work a little harder than everyone else to get back in the world’s favor, ‘With government support a number of Japanese manufacturers began a conscious pragmatic effort to enter the export market for the more sophisticated products of good design. (Raizman 286)’ They did so with the nature-derived curves of Sori Yanagi’s butterfly stool but more popularly with the orthogonal boxes of Nikon cameras and Sony radios.
Has America developed any tendencies in our own wartime world, whether they be in design or in lifestyle? Where do you see tension between organic design (not sustainable design, but specifically nature-inspired design) and industrial design in our contemporary world? List examples of products from the same time period that express themselves in these two different ways.

Industrial Design and Art Deco

It was primarily during the interwar period of history that the position of “industrial designer” saw great development and in turn, industry saw great development from this wide-spreading position. The industrial designer was first solely concerned with creating products that were efficient and functional. The industrial designer wished to create a product that could quickly and easily be created with the machine, was affordable to the general public, and served all of the user’s basic needs. Thus, they created products that were simple, cheap, and functional. Henry Ford and his production of the Model T automobile is a great example of this take on industrial design. Ford produced over 15 million Model T’s over a ten year period with the same “black lacquer finish and carriage-based body form” (Raizman 210). Due to the invention of the assembly line within the Ford Motor Company factory, Model T’s could be produced easily, quickly, and because there was a lack of competition to such speed in the manufacturing process, cheaply. However, Ford was not seeking to create unique automobiles that appealed to his individual customers, instead he was simply creating a single product for mass-production. Thus, his costumers were at a loss for individualized products as were all consumers during this period of industrial design. Consumers could easily obtain functional, inexpensive products, but they were not unique in any way.

It was during this time that industrial designers moved away from the blandness of mass-producing function and function only and began “styling” products to increase consumer appeal, while still retaining a design that was highly functional and efficient. Increasing consumer appeal was very important at this time due to the severe economic downfall of the Great Depression. Styled products were those that had a modern design approach and were “streamlined.” Many products had a unified body which housed all necessary components in one unit and was without interruptions from “ugly seams,” and had rounded edges that helped to achieve the streamlined design approach (Sparke, 99). Raymond Loewy’s Coca-Cola Fountain Dispenser was a styled design that had both a unified body and an attractive streamlined design through the implementation of curves on the product’s edges. Loewy, like many industrial designers, was successful in creating a branded product for the Coca-Cola Company and elevated the company’s sale’s success and familiarity among consumers through his design. Thus, industrial designers had now become branding agents for varying companies and were just as in tune with creating functional products as they were with creating appealing products consistent with the particular company’s theme.

Consider a specific company from today and determine whether or not an industrial designer had created a specific brand through their designs that speaks for the company altogether. This was the effect of the first industrial designers, is it still a relevant concept for today’s industrial designers?

Art Deco and Industrial Design B

The message portrayed in the 1939 New York World’s Fair was one of efficiency, improvement and an overall optimism for the future quality of life. The vision of the Exposition was “Building the World of Tomorrow,” and featured developments in transportation and comfort of living. In the Futurama exhibit, “traffic flow in the modern metropolis was managed by multi lane highways and banked exit ramps, as well as by a radio-controlled system that monitored speed and distance between vehicles”(Raizman 221). This exhibit stressed the importance of highways as well as helped stimulate the purchase of new cars. In addition to improvements in transportation, the fair took advantage of the efficiency and logic of modern technology to “erase differences contradictions, conflicts and irritants” (Raizman 222). Overall, the products of the exhibition provided the economy with “tangible ‘proof’ of improvement and sufficient cause for optimism” – a key aspect in recovering from the Great Depression. The exhibition allowed people to see that the economy was running again, and things were in fact returning to normal.
Today, the economy is in rough shape once again. Jobs are being lost, companies are becoming bankrupt, and the average American is scared of spending whatever money they might have. We live in fear of the return of the Great Depression. The recent radical drop in the economy causes industry leaders to critique the current performance of our products. These revisions will yet again lead to improvements in daily life and means of survival. Parallel to the improvements in transportation of the late 1930’s, motor companies are developing new means of transportation and fuel use. We are researching more cost-efficient and eco-friendly ways of transportation, to ignite the new era of industrial technology. Just as the exposition of 1939 revolved around making life more enjoyable and leisurely than years past, researchers are finding new ways of giving back to society.
It is obvious that our current economic standing reflects the situation of the 1930’s. Can the arrival of 2009 jump start the reformation of the economy the way the World’s Fair of 1939 did? Or will we have to go through much worse conditions before serious restructuring can occur? What will it take for our society to pull together in a patriotic movement to dig ourselves out of this rut and return to the prosperous nation we have always been?

Art Deco and Industrial Design A

After the war, the United States’ history of modern design could not be discussed without mentioning the importance of advertising. That time after the war was considered a “culture of consumption.” (Raizman 223) Everyone was excited about the new technological advances and how the mass production of products was helping their economy; but word of the mouth wasn’t enough. There’s where the world of advertisements came into play. Tools that were used to help “spread the word” were things such as photography, layout and typography on things such as posters to visually communicate their products efficiently and effectively. These advertisements were to build and strengthen the companies and their key products. The advertisements themselves were depicted in terms of the product being used in a more upscale setting, like a nice Model T car being driven to go watch a polo match or a golf tournament. They were to show the products being used in everyday leisurely activities and how they could be used while living the “good life.” Such advertisements could be seen in mass-circulated magazines such as The Ladies Home Journal.

Advertisers believed that the purpose of such advertisements was to sell the company’s products and that reference to the individual artists or to the works of art focused attention upon the ad as an “object” rather than as a promotion product (Raizman 225). Here, we saw a switch from photography used as a form of advertisement device to a form of journalism; capturing the use of the product as everyday people used it on a regular basis. Art directors turned to photographic reproduction for it “objective” truth and its visual impact.

Did all these new advertisement ploys seem to create a new visual culture in the US? If so, can this still be seen in today’s society? Do you think that the advertisers originally used the portrayal of the “good life” to show how they wanted their products to be used? Do you think that advertisements today tend to show products used in a more everyday sense or used in a more upscale, exclusive manner?

Modernism

After World War I the design community did seem to have the same connection with everyday people as they had before. “Manufactures considered design, as during the nineteenth century, as endless variations on traditional decorative patterns applied to furniture, lighting fixtures, silverware, ceramics, wallpaper, and fabrics” (pile 94). With the change in design taste in 1925 at the world’s fair the style Art Deco was introduced. The style was both praised and criticized by its viewers at the fair. The United States didn’t have the same take on the style as Europe did, in that instead of incorporating the new modern style in homes the US designed skyscrapers with it’s ideals. Including the interior furniture. With the new Zoning law in New York City’s the need for skyscraper technology advancements was at it’s high (pile 100). Because of the expense of the modern design everyday Americans weren’t able to afford it thus leaving the style to be seen in large expensive skyscrapers and hotels in the cities.

It wasn’t until the Great Depression would the new modern designs become more affordable for everyday people, only because they would be forced to. During this time it was so important that designers find an alternative way to make design more affordable because in national crisis such as the depression design is not seen as a necessity but more as a luxury. The automobile is a prime example of the changed made to make the product more affordable. Originally the building of a car was very labor intensive using “composite bodies of sheet metal on wooden frames,” then moving towards innovations of  “all steel bodies stamped in huge presses” (Pile 104). With the Great Depression Industrial Design was introduced and with it industrial designers. These designers were the ones that could make a product affordable for the consumers as well as keeping the product equally attractive.

How does this situation relate to today? Are we going to have to become industrial designers ourselves? Is our current economy today equally as bad? What about green design that seems to becoming more popular today, how will it have to change?

Modernism

Modernism II

The Bauhaus was a school of design located in Weimar, Germany which began in 1919. The German word “bauen” means “to build”. The school supported artistic freedom and individuality. It showed little interest in design standards and industrial movements in technology. Their main objective was a concern for the equality and collaboration between the artist and the craftsman. They were attempting to overcome any opposition between the fine and applied arts and to achieve a spiritual association with the creative process. It was all about “the craft” . The school believed that there was no such thing as “professional art”. They believed that “An artist is nothing more than an exalted artist.” According to their philosophy, the buildings of the future were to be a combination of architecture, sculpture, and painting. All three would be used to create a singular form. (Raizman 181) Professors, or “masters” taught all first year students under a common set of classes called the “Vorkurs” These classes taught students to draw connections between artistic activity and the discovery of unconscious reality. After this, students split up into areas of expertise. An example of the student’s work is the Sommerfield House in Berlin. Though it no longer exists, the house was an example of the early Bauhaus emphasis upon the integration between construction and ornamentation.
The school struggled for adequate resources because they were suffering criticism from both the government and other designers associated with the Constructivism movement. This movement was very different from that of the Bauhaus. They were structured around the practice of mechanized industrial production. The school responded to this negativity by shifting the focus of their mission and curriculum. This “shift of focus” turned into a complete 180 degree change in philosophy. This turn of events came about when Constructivist Laszlo Moholy-Nagy was appointed as the new director of the Vorkurs program. No as you remember, I mentioned the constructivists earlier on. The constructivists were the designers with a completely different philosophy who had been criticizing the Bauhaus. So as you can imagine the impact he played on the school. Naturally, when taking over the Vorkurs classes he brought in his industrial focus. He also brought in his strong commitment to mechanized mass production. He also reduced the importance of craft specialization and traditional workshop training. The spiritual association with the creative process was no longer considered important. The new philosophy was focused on an appreciation of the aesthetic potential of new industrial materials. Moholy-Nagy stated, “Constructivism is not confined to the picture frame and the pedestal. IT expands into industrial design, into house, objects, forms. It is the socialism of vision - the common property of all men (Raizman 184) .” He believed that this new theory would broaden the professional horizons for the students. And he believed that this philosophy compensated for the sacrifice of individuality. A structural example of the new curriculum is the student built Haus-Am Horn. It consisted of a large living room surrounded by smaller rectangular rooms, each intended for a specific domestic function. It was constructed of prefabricated material and was intended to be the prototype of future, cheap, quick, public housing.
Even after all of these changes, even after the original philosophy completely changed to that of the critics, the government was still not pleased and the philosophy of the Bauhaus was again repainted with new faculty and curriculum again and again. Reading this blog, what opinion have you formed regarding the philosophy of the original Bauhaus vs. the revised? Do you feel Moholy-Nagy’s ideas were beneficial, even called for. Do you believe that the Bauhaus started of with the right idea but was then corrupted?

Modernism, part 1, A

 

            Variable elements stemming from the aftermath of World War I, such as economical, social, and political conditions, helped shape and develop the concept and practice of modernism, which was a reaction to the tension of the aforementioned war. This style encompassed industrialism by using new methods (cubism, futurism, dynamism) and materials (glass and metal) and the designer’s role that was more thoroughly coming into understanding. Even though it is thought to have emerged by French artists and designers, the beginnings of Art Moderne can be traced to years before the war, when French organizers wanted to have and international exhibition of modern decorative arts, planned in 1915 but eventually taking place in 1925 (The Paris Exposition of 1925).

            A veteran of World War I, Walter Gropius, became director of Bauhaus, an influential advocate of ambivalence towards mass production and industrialization. (Raizman, pg. 140) A new theme of Art and Technology was launched from this institution. Mass media and the printing industry flourished during this time. New typefaces were developed, such as the one being used to type this post, Times New Roman. World War I was very influential in the time as well by the use of the government enlisting help from artists and illustrators to produce mass media of posters and billboards. Thus, trying to recruit soldiers, create a sense of national solidarity, and so forth. Another service of this mass media was for advertisement, which was being more commonly seen.

Contrasting recent previous styles, Modernism focused more on a machine-made environment (Raizman, pg 158) as a source of inspiration instead of the world of nature. Thus, creating new forms and techniques that would strive to liberate emotion and action by being dynamic. How was the reaction of current events evident in Modernism? And with that without those events, do you think design would have ever evolved into the industrialist ways it did? How has this style influence future designs and designs of our time?

Modernism, part 1, B

Following the demise of Art Nouveau and the years right before World War I, a new style called Modernism slowly developed. Although French designers were not ready to give up the reputation for individuality and originality they had acquired through the years they were able to find new sources of inspiration. By looking to influences from contemporary paintings and sculptures, original adaptations of late eighteenth-century Neo-classical furniture design and fashion, as well as sensational entertainments in Paris such as the Ballets Russes, these designers were able to create a more bolder style than ever seen before. According to art historian Nancy Troy, “designers during this time seem to have consciously pursued a less ‘coordinated’ esthetic in which variety of color, texture, and shape mirror the disjointed character and hectic pace associated with the experience of modern urban life” (Raizman 146).
Along with finding new inspirations and influences Modernism is also credited for challenging designers in using new materials and techniques, such as interior furnishings and working with glass and metal (Raizman 147). An example of this can be seen in Armand Albert Rateau’s chaise lounge made of patinated bronze. This piece of furniture exemplifies characteristics that differ from the meandering curves of Art Nouveau.
With the examination of glass design on the rise designers were very interested in experimenting with a variety of techniques to permit individual and original expression in the medium (Raizman 148). A few of these techniques include “verre soufflé” of “bubble glass”, the idea of etching with acid to achieve contrast and textured effects, and an enameling technique called “pate de verre”. Early French glassmakers drew their inspiration from Emile Galle by examining the imperfections and techniques previously used. An important early twentieth century glassmaker is Rene Lalique who was originally trained as a jeweler and is recognized as creating some of the most celebrated examples of Art Nouveau jewelry design. He later gave up his precious gems and began experimenting with glass, transforming the ordinary and inexpensive material into a highly original work. Lalique’s glass designs are now recognized and admired for their purity and brilliance (Raizman 149).
With experimentation playing a huge role in Modernism design, how do you think this style has impacted our current designs? Do you think that evidence of this style is still visible today? If so, where?