Does Ornamentation have to be justified?
- Janus Wayne Lim
- Feb 24, 2021
- 4 min read
The readings for this week continue on the discussion of the ornament, its function and importance or the lack thereof; whether the use of ornamentation needs to be justified, especially in the context of buildings today, where the rise of parametric design has made ornamentation once again ‘popular’ after its inherent absence in modern buildings in the second half of the twentieth century. We look at this topic through the writings and works of key figures such as Adolf Loos, Le Corbusier, Mies Van der Rohe among other things.
In the article “Toward Resilient Architecture” by Nikos, he explains that “Ornament may be what humans use as a kind of ‘glue’ to help weave our spaces together”. He discusses succinctly that the modernist movement stems from somewhat peculiar choices by a few influential individuals; one of whom is Adolf Loos.
In Adolf Loos’s writing, he codified a fateful series of four tenets namely Geometrical fundamentalism, Tectonic determinism, Typological prejudice and Modernist exceptionalism. In his writing “Ornament and Crime”, Loof explains that “The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from utilitarian objects.” He believed that ornamentation is a crime because it forces people to work much more needlessly. In ancient times, people were doing it perhaps due to the lack of technological advancements bringing highlight and importance to handmade ornamentation, but to Loos, they serve no inherent function and utility.
In a similar response, but in a much less malevolent way, Le Corbusier laments in his piece “The Decorative Arts Today” that “We are told that decoration is necessary to our existence” but we need to “separate the satisfaction of disinterested emotion from that of utilitarian need.” Le Corbusier’s 5 points of architecture reflects an architectural approach that rejects ornamentation for the sake of decoration and instead focuses on pure forms. He believed that the dwelling of man can be standardized to meet their needs in their lives which are also standardized.
During the same time period, Mies Van Der Rohe, whose famous words “Less is more” also propagated ideas of modernist simplicity. His world famous architectural piece, the Barcelona Pavilion, rests on a plinth of travertine and had a simple floor plan. It gave an aura of tranquility through its use of materials and lack of ornamentation, an effect Mies wanted to achieve. Dubbed as the building that changed America, Mies also built the “Seagram Building”, a building that epitomized elegance and the principles of Modernism. The building became a monumental continuity of bronze and dark glass climbing up 515 feet to the top of the tower, juxtaposing the large granite surface of the plaza below. However, when examined critically, it can be argued that the very style that Mies avoided, the use of ornamentation for its sake, still ‘slipped through the cracks’. Exposed I-beams that supported the building's facade were of little use, if anything it was a piece of ‘decoration’ aiding in the effect of highlighting the building’s elegance.
I then purport to ask: Do we need to justify the use of ornamentation on buildings? And if so, what is the role of the ornament? The questions put forth do not have straightforward answers. The digital age has changed the face of architecture, making it much easier to once again adorn building facades with parametric designs, and has made it easier as well to fabricate building materials. Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum Bilbao showcases a daring and innovative use of the facade, the randomness of the curves designed to catch the light. The National Museum of African American History and Culture by David Adjaye features an intricately detailed, bronze-colored façade that is steeped in references to the struggles and achievements of African Americans. Each tier of the façade consists of approximately 1,200 ornate cast aluminum panels, which were custom designed and fabricated.
To this end, the facade has been a prominent feature in today’s architecture. The use of ornamentation for these buildings, have their intended purpose laid out by the architect. Ornamentation has become the buildings’ highlight, and without it, these world renowned projects would not be the same.
I believe that in today’s architecture, the role of the ornament has to carry heavy justification. The Arab World Institute by Jean Nouvel, incorporates a facade with an adaptive shading system whilst looking contextually beautiful. It can be said that ornamentation in this case does have a function, and thus is justified. But in the same manner, ornamentation for its sake, that is “it’s just aesthetic and nothing else”, can also be justified. The light facades by UN Studio on the Galleria Department store, can be seen critically as just beautiful light installations on the wall, but they in fact aid in business branding and have helped the store recoup revenue. Ornamentation goes beyond the visual and has an effect on people that can also be psychological, and with greater understanding of the latter, we can then maybe understand ‘function’ as a word that has its facets. Form does follow function, but function can also have its forms.
Readings:
Pictures:
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/397794579570534466/
Comments