A Critical review on Perception of Ornamentation in Architecture - Shamil Hameed

Srinivas School of

Architecture

Graduate School

B. Arch Architectural Writing And Journalism 2021-2022

Term 7 Research Paper

A Critical Review on Perception of Ornamentation in Architecture

Shamil | 4SN18AT061

January 2022

Authorship Declaration Form

INSTITUTION

PROGRAM SUBJECT

SUBMISSION

TITLE

NUMBER OF WORDS

STUDENTS NAME

Srinivas Institute of Architecture

Bachelor of Architecture

Architectural Writing and Journalism

Analytical Report

A Critical Review on Perception of Ornamentation in Architecture

2520

Shamil

Declaration

“I certify that the contents of this document are entirely my own work and that any quotation or paraphrase from the published or unpublished work of others is duly acknowledged.”

SIGNATURE :

DATE : 17/01/2022

ABSTRACT

For many centuries, people have been trying to question the purpose of ornamentation in architecture. Mainly branching between the two dilemma that is being admired or despised entirely. It has always been a critical and problematic topic even in today’s architecture. The true meaning of ornamentation is lost between the eras and is largely being misunderstood by the general mass even in the field of architecture. It was a language through which history was passed down on, to narrate a story, to honor, to glorify a space. The reemergence of ornamentation in modern architecture and how ornamented buildings in this era is used as a medium of public attention, expression and a marketing strategy is straight up ignorance.. Ornamentation is a feature which Architects must use to have a connection with the public As Adolf Loos reveals in his book ‘Ornamentation and crime’ that “Ornament is the language through which architecture communicates with a broader public - each remove puts another degree of separation between the profession and the public”.This paper deals with ornamentation and how the perception of ornamentation have changed through different times.

1. Introduction

Ornamentation in architecture can be traced back to 40000 years. It represents decoration for the purpose of enhancing aesthetic appeal of buildings or any object in context. From wall paintings and engravings to sculptures and models, ornamentation can be seen in various styles. Jacques Herzog, said that they do not need to explain the necessity of ornament anymore, or apologize for a decorative detail in their works, since ornament becomes one with the form of their building (Chevrier & Herzog, 2006). This merely shows the design potential of ornamentation in the current era. This study is to investigate the reemergence of ornamentation in the modern architecture and to evaluate, redefine the various new aspects of ornamentation in practice.

Three basic and fairly distinct categories of Ornamentation may be recognized Depending on the placement of the ornamentation it is characterized as Surface ornaments- carving and painting on the walls, Edge Ornaments- example Antefix, Junction Ornaments- example- Cornice and Frieze Architectural ornamentation has 3 main distinct categories which are mimetic ornament (refer fig 1), applied ornament (refer fig 2) and organic ornament. Styles of ornamentation can be studied in reference to the specific culture which developed unique forms of decoration, or modified ornament from other cultures. In recent times architectural ornamentation is an instrument of image-driven culture for the public. It has come down to medium of public attention, expression and a marketing strategy to attract the public. The true meaning of it is lost through time and the concept of ornamentation is largely misunderstood by people. [britannica.com]

2.Ornament in Architecture

A question arises whether it is important to include ornamentation in architecture, can it prove to be beneficial or is simply a means of extravagance? Isn’t a simple and a noble design sufficient enough? Why do we ask for more? The answer to this would be, ornamentation are simply used for aesthetic purpose. Ornamentation has proven to enhance the beauty and regality of any structure. No analysis, however sympathetic or persistent, can exhaust a truly great work of art. Because the qualities that make it great are not only mentally, but psychical, and therefore signify the highest expression and embodiment of individuality and their feeling. An ornamented building requires an Architect to high emotional tension as it requires of him to design the building as a single unit without it turning out to be a building with a lot of elements but without any unity or harmony in them. An example of this could be The Antilla in Mumbai [fig 3] by Chicago-based architects Perkins and Will. The facade of the building has a lot of elements without any visual harmony with them. An example of the opposite could be Reggio Emilia [fig 4] by Ar. Santiago Calatrava with elements that are in harmony. This can be seen as the language that is used to perceive and narrate architecture as a spatial art from the formal-physical elements which are mostly rather found on easily understood level of communication, where it belongs to the highest level of artistic communication language,

Source - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Santa_Croce_in_Fossabanda,_Pisa,_capitello.JPG

Fig 1Mimetic ornamentation.jpg

Fig 2 Applied ornamentation.jpg

Source - http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com

3. History of Ornamentation

In the past, ornamentation was seen as something of a luxury, the more something was ornamented the more the value of the product. But over time, with the help of industrial revolution and modern technology, ornamentation became faster and cheaper. This led to masses of buildings and structures with profuse ornamentation. These were used to attract people and the general public. As ornamentation became cheap, the taste of the mass moved on. Ornamentation became common and wasn’t considered unique anymore. This in turn led to the rise of minimalism in architecture. The value of simple minimalistic design grew rapidly with the idea of ornamentation dying out. This is, effectively, the birth of Modernism as described by Pevsner and others, the stripped aesthetic of the Bauhaus [fig 5] or the Arts and Crafts [fig 6] where the effort now goes not into ornamentation but into making the building or the product so that it appears simple. Ornamentation was a bridge of communication between architects and the public. The less the ornamentation the further you move away from the connection and bond between them.

4. History Vs Modern Ornamentation

The historical concept of ornamentation evolved with the history of style, each of which produced its own ornaments and their style with a clear definition and set of rules for its design, production, and application,For example [fig 7]. It was revealed sometimes in the form of mere expression and sometimes as show of power. In contrast, modern ornamentation [fig 8] varies from each individual with new aspects and it expands exponentially with the digital realm. It is not very defined and is not bound by a set of rules and instructions. It can be added to the exterior as well as the interior of a structure. The scale of the ornament can vary from the materials used to a much smaller detail ranging from a graphical image to a three dimensional sculptural model. Modern ornamentation is not defined by any specific style but it is productive and dynamic by the means of modern technology and advancements in design and materials. Using technology as a tool, ornament in contemporary and modern architecture hence allowing the current generation to experiment with form and structure of a building.

Fig 3 Antilla.jpg

Source - https://www.makaan.com

Fig 4 Reggio Emilia.jpg

Source - http://www.architecturaldigest.com

Fig 5 bauhaus.jpg

Source - http://www.architecturaldigest.com

Fig 6 The Barn, Arts and crafts movement.jpg Source - http://farm4.static.flickr.com

Leon Battista Alberti has has considered architecture completely as a “beautiful art” and a “body” In his analysis of the Renaissance period, he has explained ornament as an element separately attached on surface of buildings. He has explained that, “ornament can be defined as an auxiliary light and that it also defines beauty. Beauty is an internal characteristic. Ornament is rather a characteristic attached or applied later externally. Moreover, ornament is an intermediary

agent between pure nature (material) and the architect’s creative composition and it carries the visual to perfection with its final touch”.

5. Ignorance of Modern Architects

Ornamentation signals to and verifies a continuous evolution and change depending on the given data about personal, societal, industrial and technological issues. While ornamenting something, people are usually split into two extremes that is one, where they don’t ornament at all and two where they end up going extravagant with excessive elements which don’t work with harmony. Architects tend to not follow a certain style of architecture and ignore the context and style developed or evolved in the area around them and instead focus on ornamentation from another time period or geographical location. They are driven by the image of the building and appealing the general public. As long as the end product generates capital and profitable. Structures with well-designed and ornamented facade are left untreated or with minimal interior are coming up all over the world. Ornamentation of any structure should have a purpose either structurally, functionally or aesthetically.

The enforcement of the robe of ornament over architecture is meaningless and that the decorative value of futurist architecture is dependent only on the original use and organisation of materials which are rough, bare and in glamorous colours. Henry Van de Velde had compiled his own theory by separating ornament from its historical codes. He had chosen as reference and as the basis of his foundation, more abstract concepts like harmony, balance, colour, and so on. He puts forward the concept of “abstract ornament” and claims that these new concepts help the shaping of both the architects’ buildings and the style of ornaments

6. Ornamentation for the Elite

There is a big misconception by the general masses that ornamentation in buildings are some unequitable feature only reserved for the rich or elites. The idea of ornamentation for the rich is because of the high cost of achieving these details in the earlier times. Since the modern revolution, the rate for these features have reduced drastically with mass factory made design and precast techniques. But still the concept of ornamented buildings are slowly gaining attention with more and more people respecting the art form of ornamentation

Fig 7 Roman Ornamentation.jpg Source - https://commons.wikimedia.org

Fig 8 Mashrabiya, Modern ornamentation.jpg Source - http://tallbuildings.ru

In terms of production, until the Industrial Revolution, an artisan worked as a result of expression of the moral and physical duties that the client had offered him which later got tuned by the figural-meaningless repetition of the visual façade by industrial mass production. Which led to a widespread of overused, repetitive ornamental features which slowly led to the downfall of the use of ornamentation in buildings. But the idea of it being for the elite is still stuck on and is presumed to be reserved only for the elite.

7. Ornamentation is a Crime ?

Adolf Loos wrote an article “Ornament and Crime”, which can be considered as his most radical publication in content and style about ornament and architecture. Loos was influenced by the following words which read: “if we were to put aside ornament for a while and concentrate only on constructing buildings meticulously stylized and have dignified attraction, the attitude would only be beneficial”. The 1908 essay Ornament and Crime by Adolf Loos is a collection of contradictory, hysterical, ill-conceived rants that were fomented by him against why ornamenting a building was a crime. He felt that the national economy should not result in the waste of human labour, money and material.” He points out that productivity can increase and would allow greater compensation for more productivity. Although some of the buildings he designed had some redeeming points to them his obsession with a ‘purity of design resulted in his structures with no aesthetic would be one way to describe the later Loos ‘style. His low point probably came when he designed the Rufer House in 1922 for Josef and Marie Rufer [fig 9]. It is considered to be the first example of the new style of Raumplan. He felt that To make an object that is already useful, graceful and a delight to the senses enhances the value of that object turn into something that can only be seen in the mind.

Of the question Is Ornament a Crime? There are a multitude of images that could be displayed as examples of ornament that could be viewed as good or bad. Humanity has created itself a way of expression at any point in the history of mankind. The fact that humans should not be inhibited to be snipped off of creativity and expression is woeful. [Ornamentation and crime, Adolf Loos]

8. Re-emergence of Ornamentation

With the growing minimalist designs, a pattern of reemergence can be noticed. Contemporary architects are increasingly engaging with ornamentation. With the help of modern digital technology, there are infinite new possibility and innovative ideas and materials which is leading to a slow re-emergence of ornamentation. The Architects are slowly incorporating ornamentation and breaking the prejudice of ornamentation. The idea of a well ornamented building is updated and improved among the masses and the misunderstanding of an ornamented building being something elite is redefined. Architects are starting to implement ornamentation and have been widely used in cafes, hotels and public spaces. We have in us romanticism, and feel a craving to express it. Ornament in contemporary architecture has a new concept and perspective, according to literature from the recent decade. An in-depth study of ornament combines its re-emergence with the social, cultural, and economic status quo, making it much more than an exquisite architectural element.

The link between ornament and capitalism is revealed by the requirement for commercial success and a profitable image of the building. The ornamental façades emerge as a result of compromise and commercialization between the client and the architect. Today, the client’s budget and mutual agreements with the architect set the boundaries for constructing remarkable and amazing façades. Ornament is like an advertisement board, graffiti, or a tattoo, contributes to the city’s contemporaneity and cultural diversity, not primarily as a functional feature but as an intense medium of impression, expression, and representation for the architects.

Fig 9 Rufer House.jpg

9. Ornament for Aesthetics

The field of architecture is dominated by images in the age of visual communication. With the widespread use of photography, advertising, and publishing technologies in the twentieth century, mass media grew globally by changing items into pictures. The accumulation of spectacles, which mediates people’s social relationships, represents contemporary culture. Spectacle, in this meaning, refers to something which is only valued for its aesthetical value but not for its emotional and physical value. As a result, in an imagedriven culture, visuality, surface, and surface effects are emphasised with the goal of consumption rather than contemplation. In contemporary architecture, ornament contributes to image-making, financial success, and marketing strategy in the same way that it becomes a designer’s tool for achieving astonishment. The designer is rarely presented with an opportunity to represent his ideologies in a design since he is confined with a lot of restraints like client and budget. This in turn turns ornament into a feature which is widely neglected upon while designing and is least thought about. This causes a lot of issues like random elements being thrown into the design, loss of harmony and unity, the oneness of the whole structure is lost in this process.

10. Conclusion

Ornamentation is mentally a luxury, not a necessity. If we should refrain entirely from the use of ornament for a period of years, we might concentrate more upon the production of buildings well performance and formed. But on the other hand we could inquire to what extent a decorative application of ornament would enhance the beauty of our structures and what new charm it would do to them. It is impossible to separate ornamentation from architecture and buildings entirely hence we have to use it judicially and competently. With modern technology and equipments, the possibilities of ornamentation and its features are endless. The misunderstanding and misconception between the architects and the general masses have to be cleared out in order for true ornamentation to be handed down for generation. Every building or structure has its own kind or style of ornamentation, even if it’s a small detail in the it is ornamentation and one cannot remove it from a building. Everyone has their own opinions on ornamentation and it truly depends on the individual and it differs from person to person.

References-

1.https://jag.journalagent.com/itujfa/pdfs/ITUJFA73745-THEORY_ARTICLES-BALIK.pdf

2. Loos, A. 1930 Ornament and Crime (1908)

3. Ornamentation in Architecture, the Times Magazine [1892]

4. Re-thinking the Concept of “Ornament ” in Architectural Design , Hakan SAĞLAM

5.http://theoria.art-zoo.com