The idea of ornaments has been deeply intertwined with architectural designs; this was made with the main goal of making the designs more complex and offering the architectural model a design that is aesthetic in its details and not just on its general outlook.
In his paper “Ornament and Crime” Adolf Loos attempts at countering the importance that has been socially, historically and architecturally offered to ornaments. Loos primarily argues that modern human societies have successfully lost their interest in the whole process of ornamentation; we have become more complacent With the idea of using simple designs that do not have any extra useless beautification. To prove his idea he states that humans now prefer wearing simple outfits instead of the complex attires that we were more apron ed towards in past centuries; he adds, that the time has come in which we choose to buy simply designed cigarette packs and not the ones with detailed enhancements even if they were for the same price.
From Loos’ point of view this demonstrates the success of a modernized society. From his perspective, as a society progresses it shall always lose interest in what is inefficient and has no practical use. Showcasing that this lack of ornamentation in modern architecture -which shows a deficiency in design- is actually the ultimate mastery of the simplistic design.
Moreover, Loos elaborates that economically ornamentation is a primary loss of capital. Whether this lost capital is in the form of time, health or even raw materials. Especially that these ornaments are no longer related to a specific culture which it tries to represent; it is rather the result of a collective nostalgia that does not offer anything to the modern individualist society.
Loos also has a major addition to the economic deficiency of ornamentation and beautification. He theories that a design is supposed to be perceived as tolerable as long it is still usable. Relating to this he states that because of meaningless ornamentation, consumers are more likely to grow tired of their furniture as it is styled with details that may be changed with the regular waves of fashion.
On the other hand, other designers that attempt at showing ornaments in a more positive light state that the regular intolerance of consumers towards their beautified furniture is what drives the economy and the renewed production process. Elaborating that the constant loss of desire in the current ornaments and the striving after new ones forces the creator of ornaments to constantly reinvent his designs, ultimately offering the existence of a whole industry and an abundance of skilled work jobs. To which Loos responds that fires offer jobs to fire fighters, but you do not see people starting fires to increase the wealth of the nation.
Lastly, Loos states that he understands that ornamentation for some people and workers, is a religion as it offers them a purpose of life, and a deep expression of creativity. But we always have to remember that the modern man does not need flashy ornaments, outfits and designed looks to express himself. These are ways of expression that were used by the man when he was following the herd; as of now man needs a complex mind to express himself and not a shallow expression of designs.
SALMA ABUBAKR
1001645662
コメント