It is not often that words written or spoken long ago can still resonate today. However, like the ripples of a pebble thrown in a pond minutes ago, the world still feels the impact of Austrian architect, Adolf Loos.
Loos was a man of intense opinions and a reflecting portfolio. The blunt forms of his buildings were in tune with the tones of his writings and opinions on architecture. He saw architecture as a movement and progression that was beyond any one man’s ability to change. Furthermore, he waged war against those who tried, insisting that a change to tradition is only permissible if it constituted an improvement.
He was European in every sense of the word, living throughout the continent at various points his life. However, Vienna …show more content…
To say it short—it should play no role. Analogizing the use of ornamentation to the use of tattoos, he states that any man “who tattoos himself is either a criminal or a degenerate.” To him, it is a primitive and uncultured practice that must be rid of. To him, an ideal culture is free from these embryonic art forms. To quote him, “The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornamentation from utilitarian objects.” (The only line italicized.) Ornament represents a waste of resources, materials, time, and the efforts of the working man. “Ornament does not heighten my joy in life or the joy in life of any cultivated …show more content…
To Loos, an architect was not an artist, nor a craftsman, but rather a rough collage of “An abundance of works of reference.” Insisting on emulating past styles to the point where they lose their potency, the efforts always resulted in “an abomination.”
At points, his pride begins to show—implying the “modern architect” is himself. He critiques others as reducing the practice to “a graphic art” with no care for the craft of building and construction—another echo of his educational background. He arranges all of the arts on a spectrum ranging from the graphic arts to sculpture to architecture. “The best draftsman can be a poor architect, the best architect a poor draftsman.” Citing the Pitti Palace in Florence, Loos states that even the greatest monuments in architecture would fail in the competitions of his time because they would not stand well as a graphic design. “… a true building makes no impression as a picture, reduced to two dimensions. It is my greatest pride that the interiors I have created are completely lacking in effect when photographed; that the people who live in them do not recognize their own apartments from the
Loos was a man of intense opinions and a reflecting portfolio. The blunt forms of his buildings were in tune with the tones of his writings and opinions on architecture. He saw architecture as a movement and progression that was beyond any one man’s ability to change. Furthermore, he waged war against those who tried, insisting that a change to tradition is only permissible if it constituted an improvement.
He was European in every sense of the word, living throughout the continent at various points his life. However, Vienna …show more content…
To say it short—it should play no role. Analogizing the use of ornamentation to the use of tattoos, he states that any man “who tattoos himself is either a criminal or a degenerate.” To him, it is a primitive and uncultured practice that must be rid of. To him, an ideal culture is free from these embryonic art forms. To quote him, “The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornamentation from utilitarian objects.” (The only line italicized.) Ornament represents a waste of resources, materials, time, and the efforts of the working man. “Ornament does not heighten my joy in life or the joy in life of any cultivated …show more content…
To Loos, an architect was not an artist, nor a craftsman, but rather a rough collage of “An abundance of works of reference.” Insisting on emulating past styles to the point where they lose their potency, the efforts always resulted in “an abomination.”
At points, his pride begins to show—implying the “modern architect” is himself. He critiques others as reducing the practice to “a graphic art” with no care for the craft of building and construction—another echo of his educational background. He arranges all of the arts on a spectrum ranging from the graphic arts to sculpture to architecture. “The best draftsman can be a poor architect, the best architect a poor draftsman.” Citing the Pitti Palace in Florence, Loos states that even the greatest monuments in architecture would fail in the competitions of his time because they would not stand well as a graphic design. “… a true building makes no impression as a picture, reduced to two dimensions. It is my greatest pride that the interiors I have created are completely lacking in effect when photographed; that the people who live in them do not recognize their own apartments from the