Summaries
Leaving Traces by Hilde Heynen
With Modernism Hilde argues that the idea of the Home began to shift. People slowly did not want to live in a place of refuge, but rather a place that gently guided them to leave. With globalization on the rise people were becoming more connected than ever, and this included traveling. Shifting from “private life to fully indulge in collective life” (Heynen 123). This shift was also tied to the continued economic shift to capitalism, which created a class system in which the newly forming middle class could enjoy some of the benefits that other working and low-income class could not. This shift led to less ornamentation and led to utilitarian style housing. Interior spaces were becoming neutral and transparent. These shifts were led by “masculinist logic” which broken the connection between home and its occupants. It is argued that this perspective did not have a true grasp of the value of cultural connection to home.
Ornament and Crime by Adolf Loos
Adolf Loos shares his skewed world view on the value of ornament and its correlation to a criminal class. He begins by asserting a hierarchy of humans based on mindsets. This is a dangerous assertion as homogenizing groups of people leads to power imbalances of ingroups and outgroups. He also claims that people who cling to ornamentation are kin to “tribesmen.” He believes that society has evolved passed ornamentation and that it is holding back cultural development to cling to historical cultural ways of ornamentation. He believes that clinging to this past slows down production and is a waste of time. His view of culture centering around economic ties is tied to a global view of people as labor and production. He implements systems of policing culture by inscribing deviants as criminals. His troubled world view was shared by many, and we see that many of these beliefs have played out in Western ideologies and spread through globalization.
Critical Response
Adolf Loos’s views have led to systemic issue in which Black, Brown, LGTBQ+, and other minorities have become targets of a society in which their culture and bodies are policed. People who are viewed as other can be punished under the guise of fear. When you assert a culture as dominating over another you begin to normalize atrocious acts such as genocide, colonization, and othering. Cultural clashes that assert western culture above others have led to an acceptance of erasure while additionally creating a mindset that the ends do justify the means. His ideologies were a reflection of the time, and it is important to be able to critique how his views aligned with other dominant powers. How did this control of culture manifest in physical space and did the architecture (modern) that was produced during this time assist in carry out destabilization.
Application
Brasilia is a great example of how the influence on modern architecture was used a tool to destabilize and change a countries economic, political, and social structures. Brasilia came to be the capital of Brazil in 1960s in response to pressure of rapid modernization and centralizing power.
Take Away
- Examine modernist movements influence from global west.
- how do ignorant viewpoints benefit dominant hegemonic forces
- examine how people challenge the western influence as there are blatant forms of racial and sexist views that were being pushed.
- Lack of understanding of a space can have bad design outcomes.
Really good point about utilitarian function vs. cultural connection to the home. I agree that culture and sentiment is virtually erased when it comes to this idea of designing a home you want to leave. Do you think this idea of “purifying the home” is just paving the way for white-washed gentrification?
I completely agree with you on Loos’s views. I was really appalled with how he wrote and found it difficult to look past that and just focus on the ideas he was presenting themselves. It’s true indeed that his views are a reflection of the time, and I just hope, if anything, his writing allows people to talk about it and grow both mentally and morally.
I completely agree with your opinion on Ornamentation and Crime. The entire time he was acting like the people as he called them “at the bottom” were below him and they were unhealthy and those are the ones who believe in ornamentation. He clearly thought he was the smartest man or even just person in general in the room and did not care how he made other people feel. The only time he pretended to care was when he decided the people “at the bottom” were allowed to design with ornamentation since it’s their only thing in life that makes them happy and thus he is just too good of a person not to allow them that one happiness. He is truly a horrible person, who wanted to be idolized for this insane view he had.