From: jmc@huron.eel.ufl.edu (Jim Callahan)
Subject: Re: On meaning and Ornament (
Organization: University of Florida
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 09:21:15 GMT

In article <8eyKgHq00WBNQ3kpxe@andrew.cmu.edu>, Paul M Mcelwee <pm3w+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
|> 
|>    Like damn near anything else in today's society, architecture has
|> largely come under the control of the forces of global capitalism. 
|> "Modern" in architecture came to be associated with industry and hence
|> efficiency ("economy" and "purity" were two design qualities that Le
|> Corbusier recognized as being important in the next century).  To make a
|> long story short, architecture reflects the values of the contemporary
|> age:  Capitalism.
|>    
|> -- It would seem then that there is much less money to be made by
|> carving ornate Corinthian capitals then in creating 5000 s.f. of flex
|> office space...
|> 
|> .. so in this sense I would have to agree that these financial and
|> technological barriers make ornamentation difficult, but there are
|> other, more profound reasons for the destruction of
|> ornamentation--although these are also the results of capitalism. 
|> Modern media has cased an intense saturation and confusion of symbolic
|> images that has made the establishment of a universal symbology almost
|> impossible.  These and other ideas are all addressed in great depth in
|> James Wines' "De-Architecture"; a book I would highly recommend to
|> anyone involved in arts and architecture. 
|>     In any case, I agree that in spite of (or maybye in acccordance
|> with?) modern media, a universal basis of symbols must be found.  

I would agree that Capitalism in the dominate attitude in society today, but I see no reason why we should be forced to choose between dead "styles" of the past and purely utilitarian "capaitalistic" designs.  I do not believe that the experiences and movements of the past which aimed to rally all theories of design around a homogenious ideal are relavant today.  We now live in a world which is finally beginning to realize that the diversity of individuals and cultures are strengths, not symptoms of listle


ssness.

I think our society, meaning world community, is capable of enjoying and appreciating architecture without the masking adornment of sybolic languages. The creation of form should be a honest expression and distillation of the body of ideas within the many contraints of a project.  Economic forces are a important contraint but NOT a motivating idea.  

The relevance of "universally shared" symbols are decreased by thier popularity.  How could such a body of motifs serve as true creative expression when its users pick and choose among generic forms which have evolved independent of a specific situation or intellect.


|> Noble
|> and somewhat successful attempts have been made by Venturi and the
|> PostModern school, yet more often than not, these buildings come off as
|> being irrelevant historical mock-ups applied to an abstract building
|> form.  I fear that post-modernism ignores the potential of new materials
|> and ideas.  It also leads to a stagnation of architectura forms and
|> creative expression (the creation of "cliche architecture".
|> 

Couldn't agree more.


|> ..Solution?  I personally believe that the ideas of Ruskin, Morris,
|> Wright, Gaudi, and Bruce Goff are particulary important in establishing
|> a modern symbology.  -That is, that natural forms should become the
|> basis for ornament.  

I think there is a great deal we can learn from nature but I am wary about this idea of ornament.  An examination of natural forms, especially in plants, reveals that nature is very thrifty with material and rarely (except in the case of reproduction -- flowers, etc..) wastes resources or energy with unnecessary adornment.  If the structural and spatial defining elements of a building are formed creatively and honestly, there is no longer a need to apply symbols and additional materials in an effort to put


 a "face" on (no longer) stark surfaces.


|> Today, however, there is a new twist that somewhat
|> intensifies these ideas--the environmental crisis.  as we approach the
|> age of dwindling and stagnating natural resources, architecture should
|> be at the frontlines of the battle to save the environment.
|>     While I would admit, the world can't be saved by architecture, I
|> believe that the environment is a problem that can't be ignored.  The
|> best we can (and I believe MUST) do, is try to create architecture with
|> layers of meaning that communicate the need to save our planet and
|> intelligently coexist with nature.

You are right on target about the sad state of our ecology today.  I think architects can do alot of good if they control their uses of material.  The forests of Central America are being devastated, at least in part, because of our additction to exotic woods.  Construction itself plays a very big role in destroying the enviroment with site run-off and discarded leftover debris. I'm not sure that architects can mould public opinion about ecology but we sure can do alot to curb our own abuses.


|> 
|>     I would welcome any other ideas on symbols and modern culture.  I
|> would also recommend that anyone interested in the ideas of organic
|> architecture should refer to the readings mentioned as well as an
|> organization called the "Friends of Kebyar":  an organization started by
|> Bruce Goff, dedicated to the ideas of Organic ideas in modern
|> architecture.  I'll send out the address to anyone interested....
|> 
|> Enjoy!
|> 
|> PAUL  
|> 

I personally would like to hear more discussion about "organic" architecture and other non-mainstream theoretical ideas like those of  Lebius Woods.  I'm sure this thread about ornament and "style" will (and should) continue for awhile, but it would be nice to hear some other ideas brought into the discussion as well. 

I hope I haven't stepped on any toes with this post. Next time I'll throw out the idea and take the pounding...

					     Enjoyed!

					  	-Jim


-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Jim Callahan                             Email: jmc@sioux.eel.ufl.edu |
| Student/Developer                        Phone: (904) 377 - 9023      |
| University of Florida                                                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.architecture