Art Nouveau & Vienna Secession

The Art Nouveau movement and Vienna Secession intersect in the early 20th century . Even though these movements overlapped they were both very different in style and popularity. While items produced in the style of Art Nouveau were organic in shape and detail, items produced during the Vienna Secession were fully geometric in design and pattern. Art Nouveau allowed people to experience and feel design rather than just viewing it.
Emile Galle played a very influencial role in the development of the Art Nouveau movement. Galle looked for inspiration from nature. Also he liked to include symbolism. He wanted the viewers interpretation of the piece to be both from an artistic and psycological stand-point. His glass work set the pace for renewing the world's interest in such artistic pieces. Unlike Art Nouveau the Vienna Secession was lead by a specific group rather than individuals. The Wiener Werkstatte organization was founded in 1903. It's purpose was to bring aesthetic design to Austria. This was achieved through producing everything from furniture to clothing. A common motif seen in these pieces was a series of cuttouts creating a pattern. For example, in Josef Hoffmann's Skyscaper Basket, small squares are cutt out and evenly spaced to add an aesthetic appeal. Without these cuttouts the basket would still serve the same purpose, but it would not be as appealing. Also the use of color was crutial to the final design. In Hoffmann's Gaming Chair a pattern in apparent in the structure of the chair, but is emphasized even more because of the placement of the black squares.
Both Art Nouveau and the Vienna Secession changed the world of aesthetic design and have greatly influenced today's styles. Because of the difference in the two styles which style do you feel was more influencial and still seen today?

The Aesthethic Movement

The Aesthetic movement was a rebellion against the heavy ornamentation and mass production of goods that was introduced after the Industrial Revolution. The first two key players of the Aesthetic Movement were John Ruskin and William Morris. They both beleived that all of the technology and new furnishings of the Victorian had caused a great seperation between the art and the artist. They felt that the true beauty of crafting a piece of furniture or creating an original design had been lost to the machine. The new designs of the Aesthetic movement were very referential to nature and not to the latest fashion of displaying how much wealth someone possessed through the amount of ornamentation and fabric draped on anything that would stand still.
John Rustic was mainly a writer on the theory of arts and crafts, while William Morris was one of the designers who actually implemented these theories. He is most known for his furniture design as well as patterns. In addition to his designs , Morris was greatly involved with rebelling against capitalists whom he believed to have created the unequality between classes due to the mass production of goods.
Furthermore, I belive that at some point "stuff just becomes stuff" unless there is something meaninful about where goods come from or how they were created. I believe that William Morris and John Ruskin had great ideas about reuniting the artist with the art.
I think a perfect comparison to the Aesthetic movement's rebellion against the Victorian Era, is today's rebellion against unsustainable buildings as well as unrenewable products. The Victorian Era brought so much happiness to the people that were finally able to afford things they never dreamed of and became the new "middle class". People came to realize that possessions do not hold as much meaning when they are so easily accessible. Today, we have every demand at such convience that we forget the simple things in life. We have become so advanced that we forget that nature is the only reason we are here in the first place. We have all been so comfrotable with today's convientient technology that we forget about the issues it brings, much like the loss of craftsmenship. I wonder what John Ruskin and William Morris would think off today's world and where they would steer design because of our environmental issues? What do you think?

Victorian Era

The Victorian Era
Quantity VS Quality

The Victorian Era allowed many middle class people to afford many goods previously enjoyed only by the rich. However, the ornate rugs, draperies, and richly decorated objects that were once all handmade and of the highest quality were now being produced in quantity. The craftsmanship suffered and the cost went down but the quality of life for many people went up. Today nearly everything in mass produced because it is efficient and cost effective. Many of the small items that are produced can be made for very little cost but in turn have very little value or use. If you wanted you could have five hundred Frisbees, plastic whistles, or visors with your company logo imprinted on it, no problem. But how many of those would actually be used for more than a day? With it being so easy to produce goods and put them onto the market think how much goes to waste. Do you think we are moving forward with mass production or are we just becoming more efficient at producing junk?

Vacuum

I thought the discussion of the effects of Marketing and the role "Visualizers" played in marketing in class today was interesting. We saw vaccuums cleaners that were advertised in old print and the new Dyson vacuum was mentioned by Estee. I just had to look it up!

http://www.bcrfcure.org/part_promo06_dyson.html

PS:
Hope this is ok Megan.

Industrial Revolution, part I

A step forward or step in the wrong direction?

As we have discussed in class, historians relate the Industrial Revolution to that of the Neolithic Revolution, when humans became an agrarian community versus nomadic (Tate & Smith, 1986, p. 219). There is no doubt that because of the Industrial Revolution we have benefited from its many inventions, advancements and improvements. Without it, our lives as we know it would be non-existent. As a person that belongs to middle class society, I would not have had the opportunities which I enjoy today if it were not for mass production and technology. In addition, very few individuals would know and understand the same comfort and luxuries we expect today. Still, history shows that the ancient Romans (before the fall of Rome) were a very advanced society and had invented many processes and materials to make life easier and more secure. Unfortunately, these methods were lost or forgotten with the fall of the Roman Empire. It took many years before these techniques were revived and improved upon. However, these “improvements” employed different methods than what was originally utilized, and since 1850 we now have 35% more carbon dioxide in our atmosphere (CBS evening news, August 2007). Sooner or later our idea of “comfort” will have to become compromised in the interest of the world’s future. The effects of this change are sure to bring about a new revolution; one that is perhaps more healthy for our environment, but (as some feel) could be detrimental to our way of life.

Considering global warming, do you believe that the Industrial Revolution, specifically the discovery of coal and other fossil fuels, was a necessary step forward or a “misstep” in the advancement of modern man? Do you think we would have found the same quality of life if we had continued to develop the technology we were already using (such as wind and water mills)? Explain your answer.

Hey everyone it is good to be back in school...right? Well I hope to have some stimulating discussions with all of you. Hopefully we will have diverse opinions to share. Just as a warning, my spelling is terrible so if you are confused or if I have made some outrageous error please email me.
(minggal52386@yahoo.com)

Test

Testing 1, 2, 3

Welcome to ID 243

Anne Frank once said "paper is more patient than man." Today, the internet has become our "paper" and blogs, which are outlets for expressing thoughts and opinions, are a modern form of journals. For this class, the blog should be used as a tool to inform, educate, and express ideas centered on modern design, theories, and culture. All thoughts and opinions must be original to writer (blogger) and engage others to discuss the topic at hand. There are no "wrong" answers or responses, rather poorly supported statements. Therefore, it is important to use real examples and document sources to support your argument. Don't forget, these will be graded, so be creative with your discussions/ responses!

Contemporary Desing Part III

As we have talked about in class we are the contemporary era we are living it. Ideas and design are changing in forming into something of the future or something of now. Ideas of the past reflect design of today but with technology and new materials they can recreate old or even restore old building with new architecture. Today materials are easy to recreate to appear old. Buildings are created with new materials once again designing it and using old styles with flashy new materials.

Designers and architects have been researching green design and how by using certain products and materials they can change and the use of energy by the amount that is used and the amount created. Another name for this is green design. Green design has just become popular or even thought about being used in the last 10 -15 years. Green design may not be considered a style but it’s a direction that we are going. If we want to enjoy the earth later in our life or make it a nice place for the future generation we must start to consider green design. This has become its own style it’s unique and interesting. There are so many ways to use green design. Many different materials can be used glass, metal, recycled just to name a few. When these materials are constructed just the right way or in the right form they are extremely effective. Energy is not wasted and some is even stored for later use. A good example of both old and new architecture and green design as well is a building built in New York. The Hearst Magazine Building it was an original finished in 1928 but in 2006 an additional tower was erected. The tower was built and designed as green design. The Hearst building was the first and only building in New York City that is a green design.

This is just the beginning of hopefully many more green designs. From what we have learned green design may even be considered a style because of the use of materials and as contemporary style / design we may have found our new style.
This is a question I have for designs students. Will green design become more of a style or a technique for the future?

Contemporary Design III

Historically, almost every style can characterize a certain period of time. The Victorian Era carried us close to the 1900's with its innovative material use on exteriors, such as the Crystal Palace with iron and glass, and the amazing ability to fit large amounts of ornate and rich furniture into their homes. The Arts and Crafts is another example that characterizes the early 20th century. This style called for a return to handcrafting and simplicity with introducing more natural materials and innovative layouts.

Currently though, design is going in many different directions. There are deconstructivists such as Rem Koolhaas and Peter Eisenman, who love to push the envelope with new material uses and cutting edge technology use. The Prada retail store in New York (to the right) is an example of Koolhaas' innovative use of planes and materials.
On the other end you have a return to the classics, again, but with a twist on the earlier elements of this style. An extreme example is Greenburg's "perfected" and enlarged version of Washington's Mount Vernon. Some say that this structure could easily be mistaken to have come from a much earlier period.

So, my question is, with so many different styles happening at one time, will we ever be known to have come togehter to create the great style of our time?