About Modernism and Rejection of Ornament

The rejection of decoration has been represented as a significant debatable problem in the contemporary architectural movement. Indeed, the conventional decoration was viewed as a superfluous feature, and the need for simplicity resulted in a change in the way architecture was performed and thought to be in historical times. As a result, the ornament has been dismissed in today's culture, which is fueled by the emergence of modernism. Without a question, this aspect has radically altered ornamentation ideals and therefore followed a new path. For this reason, the emergence of modernity provided a move towards diversity in art, and hence contemporary architecture is witnessing new forms of ornamentation. This signals a distinct shift in attitudes which is supported and encouraged by modern scholars. What is central to the changes is the use of images to decorate facades. The chronological structure of ornament history follows rejection, reinvention, and reintroduction.

In the late 19th century and early 20th century, a vast transformation occurred in the economy. There is no doubt that the technological advancement along with the orientation of social ideals created changes in the organic architectural processes and this was defining to an ornamental aspect. The rural nature of American social life significantly shifted, and expansion of railroads made movement and traveling to accessible. Undisputedly, the effect on the urban growth was massive, and this created the need to change the urban architecture and thus elimination of the old ways. The development of the architectural industry filtered in almost every aspect of life causing a rejection of the old art. Modernism changed the quality of life and invention of new machines simplified life. However, the illusions of uncertainty pervaded the atmosphere, and this proved to devastate ornamentation as a nationwide movement progressed in many spheres of life.

Ornament and Crime

The essay, Ornament, and Crime written by Adolf Loos in 1908 explores how civilization has impacted on the ornament, and the way ornament in the current world is depicted to be a crime. Loos weaves through Modernist Movement and illustrates how the past ornament was a reflection of a troubled humanity. The author writes of civilization and mentions that "Men had gone far enough for ornament no longer to arouse feelings of pleasure in them” and if there is no ornament people will have to work for four hours and not eight as it was the case. There is no doubt that Loos was never wrong about the future of human civilization, architecture, and art. Indeed, rejection of ornamentation has been an integral part of modern civilization.

In his writing, he alludes that in 1908, modernism had fully blossomed and in his logical argument, he uses the development of embryo and stages of human development to delve into the analysis of the origin of art and ornament. Loss states that the first ornament is the view of the profane and comments that reproduction was not eroticism but rather a representation of life. In his argument of ornament as a crime, he uses a bathroom graffiti and the drawings of young children. He states that "One can measure the culture of a country by the degree to which its lavatory walls are daubed.” In this second part of the essay, the author is haunted by perverse thinking. In bringing cohesion to ornament and crime, the evolution of culture according to him was “synonymous with the removal of ornament from utilitarian objects” (Loos 1908). Loos blames stagnant attitude and the slow speed of Cultural Revolution. In his argument, productivity would increase if there is an end to frills and filigree. Perhaps, what is more, striking about the article is the argument that workers could benefit when they work fewer hours.

A reader is able to notice that Loos criticizes ornament in art and mentions that with the evolution of culture, elimination of ornament becomes paramount. He links the optimistic sense of the linear as well as the upward progress of culture through applying evolution to the cultural context. This essay depicts to be important in articulating the degree of moral views that are inheritable from arts and craft movement. The essay of "passion for smooth and precious surfaces" implores Loos’ philosophy and illustrates the way ornament can have the impact of making objects to go out of their style. In view of this, items become obsolete, and thus he correctly understood that it was certainly a crime for one to waste the effort required in adding ornamentation to these objects. Underlining to this concept is the idea that modernism makes ornamentation to go out of style and lead to rejection.

Through this, Loos brings to light a sense of what he terms to be immorality of ornament. According to him, this is a degenerate and suppressing it is essential in regulating the modern society. In his postulation, he uses examples of intense surface decorations of objects and "Papuan" tattoo. Here, Loos elucidates that the "Papuan" did not evolve to the civilized and moral circumstances of modernism and thus it is considered to be a criminal or a degenerate. Evidently, he says that ornamentation should be appropriate to the type of the material used. He concludes by stating that "No ornament can any longer be made today by anyone who lives on our cultural level ... Freedom from ornament is a sign of spiritual strength." Cultural progress suffers through stragglers who slow down the progress of humanity and development of nations. The ornament is produced by criminals, and at the same time, it creates crime through causing damages to the health of people, impedes cultural development and the economy of nations.

What is even more astonishing is knowing that ornament inflicts damages to workers and thus depicting to be a crime. From the essay, it is easy for one to conclude that ornament is no longer a natural outcome of people’s civilization but rather, presents to be a degeneration and a backwardness in progression. Individuals who provide labor on the ornament is not adequately rewarded as it supposed to be the case in the modern times. Notably, there are criminally low prices, extremely poor working conditions of turned trades and in wood carving along with working for long hours. Loos states that permanent workers have to work for twenty hours in order to form a salary that is made by a modern worker in eight hours. Therefore, lack of ornament would translate to shorter working hours and also higher wages. The ornament is merely a wasted labor and health, and in the modern times, it is a wasted material adding up to wasted capital.

Ornament and Abstraction

Markus in his book Ornament and Abstraction indicates that the significance of ornament in the development of abstract art has for a long time been underestimated. The author showcases a remarkable area of masterpieces, and he explores the impact of ornamentation on abstract art. The works of four key artists namely, Mondrian, Kandinsky, Stella, and Matisse help to highlight the role of ornament in art history. Markus gives an in-depth study of the major theme of the 20th century of the history of art and provides an innovative pictorial conception of Philipp Otto Runge. He alludes that the paintings of Philipp Otto Runge denoted to be a genuine form of ornament and a historical value that has long been lost. A move towards abstraction resulted in geometric structural lines and thus opening a doorway to non-figurative art. A major impact originated from the modern artists portraying their preoccupation with the ornamentation embedded in cultural history. According to Markus’ book, it is clear that he refers to new media, minimalism, renaissance and digital technology as crucial factors that have affected ornament on abstract art.

Undisputedly, ornament entails the idea of decoration and a driver to the absence of figurative art which is underlining to the concept of abstraction. Brüderlin denotes that ornament is a repressed element of modernity that is restored to its rightful place in the history of art. Classical arabesque is part of an abstract floral pattern. The illusionist depth and western art rejection that Brüderlin demonstrates provides a discovery to the underlining principle of ornament which is discovering its position in the modern works of art. According to Markus, the principle of destruction is identified to be a standard feature that unites abstraction and ornament.

Changes in the modern times bears an explicitly destructive element of anti-figurative. An attempt to make paintings superfluous through the creation of monochrome painting and the end of real socialization depicts to be a decay of figurativeness. If people are to term abstract ornament as a destruction in the modern world, attempt to bring back, the pieces would be a fundamental factor in restoring meaning to the fragmented chaos in art. However, the direction depicts that the figurative image is not likely to be restored in the current world. Preferably, there are structures and patterns that are spreading out like ripples on the surface of the water and hence causing a deep destruction and violent history. This idea significantly ruins a global heritage of a true cultural aesthetic value. Abstraction haunts historical art and withdraws figuration along with suggesting an elusive presence that is destroying the meaning of ornamental art. Abstraction has denoted merely a failure of figuration and the filtering iconography is visually demanding. The reality is that modernity has significantly revolutionized the world and caused a rejection of fundamental art spectrum.

Ornament and decoration

Loos in his thing alludes that ornament has no meaning or place in the contemporary society and culture. He goes further to elucidate that modernism actually hinders the progress of the society. Particularly, he suggested superfluous ornament to be an epidemic and thus contributes to obsolescence of objects. Loss advocated for simplicity mentioning that objects that are simple never go out of style. The predominance of coloring, inlaying, carving, and segmentation as well as surface-altering techniques of wood in the modern world precisely indicates that decoration plays a major role in defining the style. This has established an aesthetic root of wood art in the creation of functional, geometric and natural properties. New techniques of decoration have been introduced by second-generation artists and thus shaping the course of wood art. The basic premise is the invention of more stylish sculptural wood underscoring symbolically honored objects and thus unfolding a wave of aesthetics decorative representation.

The changes that have occurred in decoration account for the quick devaluation of product labor and work suffers because nobody wants to pay its true value. The decorated items can only be sold in the cheapest form. Modernism as made ornament to be a sign of artistic expression of the earlier generations. Nonetheless, the lack of ornament has pushed the other arts to unimagined heights and made artistic to be more refined and subtle. In the modern world, there is the use of various colors and concentration has been driven to the invention of new things.

Ripolin Law and Coat of Whitewash

Ripolin is a paint that is commercial ready-mixed which is formulated for applications including marine and architecture. It, therefore, became sufficient during the ripolin period and these works were argued against ornamentation and hence promoted white enamel. In the 20th century, the white color formed the basis of architecture, and currently, decoration does not embrace white as a major color. White was a symbol of clarity, functionality, and rationality and thus it is interesting how times have changed. The architectural practice has created canopies of blanched vinyl inflatables and much white fabric, and thus the white color is not utilized to be a purge of functionality. Despite this, it can still be argued that white allows people to focus on new sets of parameters and the monochromatic takes the familiarity to be extraordinary.

Conclusion

The modern movement in architecture coupled with the industrial design that began a few decades ago were critical responses to the social and technological changes. They resulted in rejection into an ornament as they created modernism. A new world characterized by modern cities and machines forced artists to rethink the idea of ornamentation. The revolutionized ideas in the current world are perceived to portray new forms of architecture and hence bringing an influence to the world of art. A rejection of the historical precedents was a hallmark in exploring simplicity. New fashions in art style have been defining moments of modernism. Various works had appeared in the western cultures and hence proving to strike a tonic chord of revolution. Adolf Loos coined the concept of ornament decoration denoting that this was a wasted labor, capital, and material. According to him, rejection of ornament means that people will be able to work less hours and earn more wages. This is why he argued that avoiding ornamentation designated to be a sign of spiritual strength. This forms one of the founding essays of the modern movement in ornamentation. Aesthetic, new designs and mass production were embraced and denoted to be influential to modern architects. However, in Markus argument, he alludes that modernity has lost the figurative image of art. According to him, anti-figurative abstraction is a destructive factor.



References

Brüderlin, M. (2002). Ornament and abstraction. [New Haven, Conn.]: Yale University Press. 2-11.

Loos, A. (1908). Ornament and Crime. New York. Ariadne Press. 19-25.