The Consideration of History and Tradition in Forming

The Consideration of History and Tradition in Forming
the Modern Ideal in Fin-de-Siécle Vienna
Bryan Kulba
Art History 311
Fall 2009
Introduction
Understanding the term modern begins with understanding that it spans many aspects
of culture, including art, design, literature, and even thought itself. To each of these, the
modern potentially means something different. In most interpretations of modern, the
consideration of the current time and cultural context is common. Kolocotroni, Goldman
and Taxidou describe the goal of the modern movement as to “liquidate the boundaries
between art and life.1” This could be also explained as practitioners of the modern seek
to bring the relevance of contemporary life to art. This element of time and context leads
to the very problem in understanding the term modern. This problem is well illustrated in
the sphere of design. Architectural historian Paul T. Frankl said that “modern is only a
relative term.2” In this, he means that as time passes, the meaning of modern changes.
What is modern in one context is not in another. Modern cannot therefore be defined as
a particular style but more as a context in which a style manifests itself. The definition
that I would establish for the term Modern in reference to design would be: the decisions
determining form, function and ornamentation in design are made with the consideration
of their context, which is that of being used by people of the time in which those
decisions are made. In Fin-de-Siécle Vienna, there are two themes in design which both
consider the context of time but in different ways. First, Viennese design suffered from
historicism and eclecticism which failed to consider the present context in its execution.
Designers with modern ideas reacted against this. The second was the idea that
modern had to be considered in the context of tradition and the solution to modern
1
Kolocotroni, Goldman and Taxidou, Modernism: an Anthology of Sources and Documents, xviii.
2
Oechslin, Otto Wagner, Adolf Loos and the Road to Modern Architecture, 13.
2
design problems was not a complete upheaval, rather were rooted in the evolution and
renewal of traditional design solutions. In this essay, I will show how the consideration of
history and tradition were foundational to the modern perspective of Viennese designers
at the end of the nineteenth century.
Fin-de-Siécle Vienna
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, Vienna became the capital of what was
called the Austrian Empire. The empire included much of central Europe and contained
over ten distinct nationalities within its boundaries. It was ruled by the conservative
Habsburg monarchy which had absolutist tendencies including control of the press, and
oppression of farmers and students. Also, the wide array of nationalities in the empire
struggling for independence contributed to the tension between people and the state. In
1848, revolution in France prompted several attempts at revolution in the Austrian
Empire, however they failed to bring about the change which was hoped for and the
Habsburgs remained in power. The absolutism remained until 1867 when the Austrian
Empire was replaced by the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
In 1857, Emperor Franz Josef I declared that the old walls of Vienna would be
demolished and replaced with a boulevard with new buildings that would include a new
Parliament, opera house, museums, libraries and archives which would be known as
the Ringstrasse (Figures 1, 2). Like Hausmannʼs plan for Paris in the 1850ʻs, the old
was to be replaced with the new to turn Vienna into a modern city. The Ringstrasse
buildings were to express the power and grandeur of the empire and used the
3
architectural vocabulary of historic forms and ornamentation, or historicism to achieve
this.
The development of the character of Vienna through the Ringstrasse as well as the
conservative state opinions on art through the Austrian Artistsʼ Society and their
exhibition space, the Künstlerhaus, prompted reaction from many people including
artists, architects and designers. The reaction manifested in the creation of the Vienna
Secession in 1897 by the progressive artists and designers of the time. Itʼs motto was
“to every age its art and to art its freedom” which is in essence a very modern
statement.
One of the primary members of the Secession was Otto Wagner (1841-1918), an
architect. In his early career, Wagner was involved in the design of buildings using
historicism like his contemporaries, however in the 1890ʼs, Wagner had come around to
the idea that architecture needs to serve the modern needs of a modern population. In
1894, Wagner became the Academy of Fine Artsʼ professor of architecture. To express
his notions of modernity and to guide his students, he wrote his book called Modern
Architecture. In it, he condemned the historicism of contemporary architecture and
proposed that “modern art must offer us modern forms that are created by us and that
represent our abilities and actions.3 ”
3
Wagner, Modern Architecture, 75.
4
Adolf Loos (1870-1933) also provided a critique of the conditions of Viennaʼs
architecture and design. Loos was an architect as well as a writer of polemics where,
like Wagner, he attacked Viennaʼs historicism and its failure to meet the needs of the
modern but also attacked it on the level of context and continuance of tradition. Loos
saw the art and design of the Secession in the same light as the prevailing historicism of
Vienna. In his essay Ornament and Crime, Loos condemns the use of ornamentation as
decontextualized and unnecessary in modern time. Keeping with this, Loos argued that
architecture and design should observe the practical and functional forms of tradition
while abandoning that which no longer suits the needs of the modern.
Avoidance of Historicism
During the Ringstrasse era, the primary issue that the avant garde had was the
prevalent use of historical forms, or historicism in the architecture. Historicism, when
referring to architecture, means the borrowing of architectural forms and motifs of the
past to be used in contemporary buildings. This use of old forms was the prevailing
approach for architecture during the nineteenth century in Europe4. The building of the
Ringstrasse was a statement by Vienna. It was to declare and to define Viennaʼs identity
as a modern city and its place in Europe.
Historicism is often used to evoke the connotations of those forms in the context of their
time and to draw connections between that time and the present. Architecture has long
been used as a method for a group to make statements about their power, ideology or
4
Gutschow, “Restructuring Architectureʼs Theory: Historicism in Karl Botticherʼs Theory of Techtonics.”
5
identity. We see this in the triumphal arches of Rome, or the gothic cathedrals of the
middle ages and the statements that these monuments intended to make.
When viewed by the modern designer, historicism raised an issue that could not be
reconciled: using historical styles is counter to the modern idea that the design should
consider the needs of the present in its execution. Wagner speaks of a certain harmony
that art (or design) must carry 5. He uses analogies of ʻpictures of past stylesʼ such as:
“A Greek temple painted with bright colors, a grove adorned with colorful
statues, a handsome, short-aproned Greek with brown skin, a sacred olive tree
harmonious with color...”
He then continues by suggesting that by substituting any of the above details with
another which is out of that time becomes obvious and dissonant. By using this
reversal, he makes his point clear that historicism is clearly inappropriate in any time.
What complicates this dissonance was the fact that when using historic forms or styles
to make statements, different statements may often require styles from different times to
make their point. This leads to an eclecticism in design. Supporters of eclecticism felt
the use of historic styles could be adapted to meet the demands of modernity 6, however
this seems counter to the modern philosophy of Wagner and other avant garde.
5
Wagner, Modern Architecture, 75-76.
6
Oxford Art Online, “eclecticism.”
6
Nietzsche described three ways history affects man; one of which is the antiquarian way
of collecting bits and pieces of history whether relevant or irrelevant but establishing a
false value. Makela notes “...such a bricolage cannot provide an ʻauthentic identity,ʻ
since it simply shuffles and reshuffles the past without ever being informed by a
consciousness of the present.7 ” Wagner believed that modernity meant to produce art
that represented the time it was produced and the modern could be the only point of
reference. By copying and mixing historical styles to make a statement about modernity,
designers were not creating statements that were truly relevant to the time.
Historicism was not only a vehicle for statement, but a deferral of style. Wagner
criticized Ringstrasse era architects as producing buildings in certain archetypes that
fulfilled the expectations of the public and tastemakers8. For example, gothic for city
halls, Greek for museums and Renaissance for apartments (Figures 1-3). Wagner
compared this thoughtless approach to dissecting a corpse instead of listening to the
pulse of the living. He implored ʻyoung architects to shun the copy and the path of
plagiarism and to seek salvation in creative work9 ʼ. By copying the styles of the past,
architects diminished their identity as creatives and hindered the evolution of
architecture.
Adolf Loos was also critical of the eclecticism of the Ringstrasse and critiqued it on the
grounds of that it allowed everything; it was a “pastiche” which led to fragmentation
7
Makela, “Modernity and the Historical Perspectivism of Nietzsche and Loos,” 138.
8
Wagner, Modern Architecture, 152.
9
Wagner, Modern Architecture, 55.
7
between form and content that prevented a unity that was required of modern life10.
With Loos, architecture and design required the context of modern life to be meaningful
to the public. Beyond the Ringstrasse, Loos directed this same criticism to the art and
design of the Secession which was was also out of the context of modern Viennese life.
The artists and designers of the Secession had broken from the Künstlerhaus to move
away from the historicism. Their reaction was to create completely new motifs and
ornaments which ignored themes prevalent in Vienna. We can see in the designs of
Secession member Josef Hoffmanʼs work use of squares and circles which are devoid
of historical context (Figure 4). While eclecticism was drawing its inspiration for form
and ornament from history, the Secession was creating new ornament which, in Loosʼ
eyes was ahistorical and also failed to address the context of modern life. Ornament
and Crime was Loosʼ critique of the Secessionʼs style but also laid the groundwork
towards what became one of the modern ideals, the move towards the lack of
ornament. His argument lies in the idea that culture is moving in a specific direction
away from ornament. His polemic is not necessarily about ornament itself, but the use
of things which no longer have a place in modern life but are still used, stripped of their
historical context. Loos puts the modern judgement of design in the continuity and
evolution of tradition.
Evolution of Tradition
As we see, in Wagner and Loosʼ arguments against eclecticism and even the
Secession, the primary factor in determining modernity appears to be whether or not a
10
Makela, “Modernity and the Historical Perspectivism of Nietzsche and Loos,” 138.
8
building, or ornament speaks to the needs of the current time. It is simple to elaborate
on this to mean that historical forms cannot satisfy modern function. The manifestos,
arguments and polemics of the time tend to play on the polarization of history and the
modern ideal11 . This likely has more to do with the bitterness the avant garde had
towards the state following the failed revolution in the mid-nineteenth century as well as
the lack of meaning represented by the eclecticism of that time. The avant garde were
searching for their own identity by their rejection of history and breaking free from the
establishment in the form of the Secession. Despite this, the reality of modern design
theory as we see in the writings of Wagner and Loos is not an outright, and conscious
ignorance of the past, but a critical look at the past and elaborating on the forms passed
down to us.
In most definitions, modern is concerned with the appropriateness of an object or form
in the present time. Since the present is always on the move, the modern designer must
continuously assess the appropriateness of that object. With this in mind, the modern
does not have to be the complete reform of an object but the gradual refining of form to
suit the functional needs of the time. This opens the door to allowing designers to take
that critical look into the past and see how things evolve and how they can forward this
evolution.
For Wagner, this meant watching how each style emerged from an earlier one and as
building materials and technology changed, evolving and updating old forms to respond
11
Makela, “Modernity and the Historical Perspectivism of Nietzsche and Loos.” 140.
9
to new needs12 . For Loos, this meant revering tradition and understanding that many
times, designs and solutions never changed radically. Loos used many examples to
illustrate this, but his point is made best in the description of the saddle-maker who
could always make the same saddle as long as the relationship between man and horse
stayed the same13. Putting this idea into practice, Loos would often use what was called
thebes Stool in his interior designs which was based on a stool from Egypt dating to
1300 B.C. displayed in the British Museum (Figure 5)14 . In a very Loosian way, he
illustrated that some forms may have already reached a level of refinement in aesthetics
and function that would only be ruined by further elaboration.
The modern Viennese designers were explicit in their belief that design must regard the
past but at the end of the nineteenth century, there is a clear break from the Ringstrasse
era in design and architecture. With their regard for tradition and its evolution as part of
the key to the modern in Vienna where or rather when did the designers of Vienna
continue traditionʼs legacy from if not from the Ringstrasse? Wagner, Loos and Hoffman
all looked to the Biedermeier style which was the predominant style in Vienna in the first
half of the nineteenth century. The Biedermeier style appealed to these designers in a
number of ways. First, Biedermeier was a style which had its roots in Austrian culture. It
expressed Austrian values15 whereas the historic forms that eclecticism drew upon had
little historical weight in Vienna. As with so many other European countries experiencing
12
Wagner, Modern Architecture, 80.
13
Gravagnuolo, Adolf Loos, 14.
14
Sarnitz, Loos, 13.
15
Sarmany-Parsons. “Vienna Biedermeier,” 256.
10
their arts and crafts movements, this native historic style resonated with Viennese
designers. Second, modern Viennese designers hailed it as a “classic example of
harmony between form and function16 .” The designs of Biedermeier were about utility,
and craftsmanship which sparked inspiration especially in Loos, as evident in his interior
for Café Museum (Figure 6) and the work of Hoffman and the Wiener Werkstatte.
With Hoffman, we see him admire the Biedermeier period as the last period that “offer
(ed) a valid expression of art17 .” His design of the Purkersdorf Chair (Figure 7) draws on
the Biedermeier tradition of bentwood as well as using the manufacturers J & J Kohn
which were associated with the original production of furniture of this style in the first
half of the nineteenth century 18. Like Hoffman, Loos was inspired by the Biedermeier
style and was known to wander through the old streets of Vienna, marvelling at the old
houses in their simplicity and problem solving19. Rossi suggests that these houses were
proof to Loos that the moralization of modernity and its will to improve life or even to
dictate how to live was false. Like thebes stool, the Biedermeier style already had the
solutions that the modern time needed. In Loosʼ design for the Cafe Museum, he felt he
had designed a Biedermeier style cafe, accessing the design solutions used from that
time, but then keeping to his philosophy, adapting it to address the needs of the
modern. An example of adaptation was the use of decorative metal piping to obscure
the wiring for the electric lights (Figure 8). On the whole, however, the Biedermeier
16
Sarmany-Parsons. “Vienna Biedermeier,” 255.
17
Naylor. “Secession in Vienna,” 305.
18
Naylor. “Secession in Vienna,” 303.
19
Gravagnuolo, Adolf Loos, 12.
11
approach to designing the Cafe Museum was sound because the role and function of
the cafe had not changed in the modern time20.
While the historical and eclectic styles were meeting the state and publicʼs expectations,
it was felt that they failed to address need or the modern ideal of function. The criticisms
that Wagner aims at the historicism of the day often refers to the sacrifice of function at
the expense of satisfying the historic form. Wagner sums this with “Artʼs only mistress is
necessity.21 ” Modern needs call for modern solutions. Through the nineteenth century,
building techniques had changed and improved, but were disguised behind the facade
of the historical forms. Industrialization began to change things. The introduction of
technology like electricity in Vienna, or the need for new buildings like rail stations,
telegraph offices required new approaches and new forms. Wagner was an early
adopter of aluminum22 and Loos also had considered the impact of new technology as
we see in his integration of electrical lights in the Cafe Museum. Historicism fell flat in
trying to address new design problems or technology while the modern designers
embraced them.
Conclusion
The differentiation between historicism and tradition seems somewhat paradoxical.
Where Ringstrasse era architects used historicism for certain statements, Loos likewise
20
Gronberg, Vienna: City of Modernity, 1890–1914, 74.
21
Oechslin, Otto Wagner, Adolf Loos and the Road to Modern Architecture, 28.
22
Sparke, An Introduction to Design and Culture, 38.
12
of tradition by modern designers versus eclecticism is posed as a “critical appropriation
of historical forms through interpretation.23 ” versus “simple imitations.” I believe this is
an issue that Wagner or Loos would pose not as eclecticism against the modern ideal
as we see both of them critique the architecture and design of their own
contemporaries. The idea of critical appropriation and interpretation versus simple
imitation requires a subjective decision by the observer on what is valued in design, be
it aesthetic statements or functional artifacts. However, within the ideas of modernity as
a measure, it is possible to separate historicism from tradition. Historicism is a
conscious construction that leverages the past to create meaning in the present. By
picking and choosing motifs from history and then superimposing it on the needs of the
public or the modern technology, the designer can make whatever statement they want.
In the end though, this is just a message the designer is sending and not a meaning.
Wagner saw this as stifling the creativity in design. Tradition on the other hand is based
on the progression of culture and time which creates the language and understanding of
the modern. Wagner described the relationship as the ʻnew requires the foil of the old24ʼ
while Loos explained it as (in architecture) a mason who has learned latin25 . Modern
design needs to be set within a tradition to give it continuity, and to give it meaning. For
these Viennese designers, the contexts of historicism and tradition were pivotal to
understanding design issues occurring in the present and these contexts informed the
design solutions of the modern.
23
Makela, “Modernity and the Historical Perspectivism of Nietzsche and Loos.” 141.
24
Oechslin, Otto Wagner, Adolf Loos and the Road to Modern Architecture, 14.
25
Sarnitz, Loos, 9.
13
Figures
Figure 1: Rathaus (City Hall) constructed in Gothic style (1872-1883). Architect: Friedrich von Schmidt.
Photographer: Christopher Long, source: Artstor.
14
Figure 2: Vienna: Parliament building constructed in Neoclassical style (1872-1883). Architect: Theophil
von Hansen. Photographer: unknown, source: Artstor.
Figure 3: Stadiongasse Apartment constructed in Renaissance style (1882-1883). Architect: Otto Wagner.
Photographer: Headjoin, source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/
File:Otto_Wagner,_1882-1883,_A1010_Wien,_Stadiongasse_6-8,_p1.jpg.
15
Figure 4: Sitzmachine c. 1905. Bent beechwood and sycamore panels, 43 1/2 x 28 1/4 x 32" (110.5 x 71.8
x 81.3 cm). Manufactured by J. & J. Kohn, Vienna. Designer: Josef Hoffmann. Photograph: Sailko,
source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ngv_design,_josef_hoffmann,_adjustable-back_chair_
%28stitzmachine%29_1905_circa_02.JPG.
16
Figure 6: Café Museum, Vienna, interior by Adolf Loos. Biedermeier-style chairs also designed by Loos.
Photographer notes chairs pictured are reproductions in aluminum. Photograph: Thomas Geoghegan,
source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/potlatch/25670628/
Figure 7: Dining chair for Purkersdorf Sanitorium (1904). Originally manufactured by J. & J. Kohn.
Designed by Josef Hoffmann. Photographer: unknown, source: http://kunst.gymszbad.de/produkt-design/
menue/objekte-stuehle.htm
17
Figure 8: Detail of integration of wiring for lights, Café Museum. Photo: Ben Busch, source: http://
www.flickr.com/photos/benbusch/2927060299/
18
Bibliography
Adlmann, Jan Ernst, Sarah Campbell Blaffer Gallery, and Cooper-Hewitt
Museum. 1978. Vienna moderne, 1898-1918 : An early encounter between
taste and utility : An exhibition. Houston, Tex: Sarah Campbell Blaffer Gallery.
Compagnon, Antoine. 1994. The five paradoxes of modernity. New York:
Columbia University Press.
Crouch, Christopher. 1999. Modernism in art, design and architecture. New York:
St. Martin's Press.
Drucker, Johanna, et al. "Modernism." In Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, edited by Michael
Kelly. Oxford Art Online, http://
www.oxfordartonline.com.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/subscriber/article/opr/
t234/e0358 (accessed September 29, 2009).
Geretsegger, Heinz, Max Peintner, and Walter Pichler. 1970. Otto Wagner,
1841-1918; the expanding city, the beginning of modern architecture. New
York: Praeger.
Gravagnuolo, Benedetto, C. H. Evans, and Adolf Loos. 1982. Adolf Loos, theory
and works. Idea books architectural series. New York: Rizzoli.
Gronberg, Tag. 2007. Vienna : City of modernity, 1890-1914. Oxford ; Berlin; New
York: Lang.
Gutschow, Kai K., "Restructuring Architectureʼs History: Historicism in Karl
Bötticherʼs Theory of Tectonics" (2000). School of Architecture. Paper 36.
http://repository.cmu.edu/architecture/36
Janik, Allan, and Stephen Edelston Toulmin. 1973. Wittgenstein's Vienna. New
York: Simon and Schuster.
Jensen, Robert. 1994. Marketing modernism in fin-de-siècle Europe. Princeton,
N.J: Princeton University Press.
Kolocotroni, Vassiliki, Jane Goldman, Olga Taxidou, and Uaaug. 1998.
Modernism : An anthology of sources and documents. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Maciuika, John V. 2000. Adolf Loos and the aphoristic style: Rhetorical practice in
early twentieth-century design criticism. Design Issues 16, (2): 75-86.
Makela, Taisto H. “Modernity and the Historical Perspectivism of Nietzsche and
Loos.” Journal of Architectural Education, Vol. 44, No. 3 (May, 1991), pp.
138-143.
Naylor, Gillian. “Secession in Vienna.” In Art nouveau : 1890-1914. Edited by
Paul Greenhalgh 298-310. London; Washington, D.C: Victoria and Albert
Museum; National Gallery of Art. 2000.
19
Oechslin, Werner. 2002. Otto Wagner, Adolf Loos and the road to modern
architecture. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford Art Online. "eclecticism." In The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Art Terms.
Oxford Art Online, http://
www.oxfordartonline.com.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/subscriber/article/
opr/t4/e631 (accessed October 25, 2009).
Raizman, David Seth. 2004. History of modern design. Upper Saddle River, NJ;
London: Prentice Hall; Laurence King Pub.
Sarnitz, August. 2003. Adolf Loos 1870-1933 architect, cultural critic, dandy.
London: Taschen.
Sarmany-Parsons, Ilona. 1988. “Biedermeier. Vienna.” The Burlington Magazine
130, (1020): 255-6.
Sheaffer, M. P. A. 1997. Otto Wagner and the new face of vienna. Wien:
Compress.
Skrypzak, Joann, Barbara Copeland Buenger, and Elvehjem Museum of Art.
2003. Design, vienna, 1890s to 1930s. Madison, WI: Elvehjem Museum of
Art, University of Wisconsin--Madison.
Sparke, Penny. 2004. An introduction to design and culture : 1900 to the present.
2nd ed. London; New York: Routledge.
Wagner, Otto. 1988. Modern architecture : A guidebook for his students to this
field of art. Texts & documents. Santa Monica, Calif: Getty Center for the
History of Art and the Humanities.
Wikipedia contributors, "Hapsburg Monarchy," Wikipedia, The Free
Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hapsburg_empire (accessed
October 25, 2009).
Wikipedia contributors, "Ringstrasse," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringstrasse (accessed October 25, 2009).
20