CONCLUSION

from Henry van de Velde and Adolf Loos: Reflection on Architecture and Fashion at the Turn of the Century

The Looshaus

Henry van de Velde and Adolf Loos were two relevant architects who developed fashion ideas related to their respective architectural principles.

In the case of Henry van de Velde, although theoretically, his ideas on fashion and architecture align, in practice, his designs do not coincide with what he defends in both architecture and fashion.

His first fashion ideals were a consequence of his artistic objective of creating a total work of art by designing every detail of his domestic environment in Bloemenwerf, an ideal that he acquired from the Arts and crafts movement. He designed the dresses that his wife Maria would wear in the house, creating them to be in harmony with the building. As well, thanks to the influence of Maria, he created the dresses according to the Dress Reform manner and became associated with the movement. The dresses designed for this occasion were successful as they presented essential elements of the Reform, and they were in synchrony with Bloemenwerf style, accomplishing his architectural view.

In the following years, van de Velde developed his ideas on architecture in a series of writings where he condemned Art Nouveau and moved away from the characteristic architectural principles that he had applied in his house in Brussels. However, in his later participation in the Krefeld exhibition, this separation from the Art Nouveau is not visible. Most of the dresses he designed resembled the cut and shape of the ones he had designed for Bloemenwerf, which led to their relationship with the style.

Furthermore, not all the dresses he designed for the exhibition were according to the principles he defended in his lectures on fashion. Although he was associated with the Dress Reform because of the influence of his wife, he remarked how his interest in female clothing was focused on reaching beauty through logical design and did not consider women’s health as the Reform did, demonstrating that he was not concerned about the movement itself but on reforming female fashion as a part of his programme for reforming all the applied arts which he believed would lead to a better society. Indeed, this is mainly seen in the Dress for the Street that he designed for the Krefeld Exhibition.

In contrast to van de Velde, Loos shows consistency in his ideas on fashion and architecture. Although he did not realise any practical work on fashion, these ideas are well represented in his buildings, including the case study examined, the Looshaus.

Loos wrote numerous essays throughout his life. He described his views on architecture and fashion and showed his interest in clothing not only by writing about the topic but also using it as a metaphor in multiple of his writings. His most famous essay was Ornament and Crime, in which he rejected ornament in architecture and objects of daily use as it delayed cultural development. He applied his ideas of ornament in architecture to clothes, defending a change in both genders’ clothes but emphasising the need to reform female clothing for their independence. Loos claimed that the ornament in women’s clothes was a weapon to emphasise their sensuality and seduce men to gain social and economic status; therefore, to reach intellectual and financial freedom, they needed to remove all ornament from their dresses. It is possible to see the relationship between the need to remove ornament in architecture and clothes, as in both cases is a synonym for development.

Moreover, he also applied to fashion his view of architecture not belonging to the category of art because it meets a need. He saw clothing as the objects that meet the human need for shelter and as the tool for a person to portray an adequate image of themselves while demonstrating their common sense; therefore, it could not be considered art. This idea of displaying an image is related to his concept of buildings needing a simple exterior and an interior that showed the richness and commodity, which has been translated into fashion as how a person would wear formal clothes in the street and intimate garments in the house.

When comparing both, it is evident that Henry van de Velde shows less consistency between his ideas on fashion and architecture than Loos, primarily visible when he puts his ideas into practice. Furthermore, although Loos was not involved in the Dress Reform or any other feminist movement or ideal, his thoughts on fashion and the utility of dress reform for women are more in synchrony with feminist theories, declaring intellectual and economic independence would depend on women changing their clothes, that van de Velde’s views, who defended women would need an artist, a male figure, to achieve freedom from the fashion tyranny.

Finally, when comparing the architectural case studies, both architects successfully created buildings that were in synchrony with their architecture. Bloemenwerf and the Looshaus clearly show the relationship between their respective architectural and fashion ideas. Although there are discrepancies in Bloemenwerf, the dresses designed for it are in harmony with the design of the house and follow the principles he defended in his ideas on fashion. And the principles that Loos defended in fashion, the removal of ornamentation, prioritising function, and the creation of an external image, are present in the Looshaus in architectural form.

Total word count: 9576 words

List Of Figures

Relevant dates

Original image

House structure made of fabric

Quinn, Bradley. The Fashion of Architecture, 1st ed. (Oxford: Berg, 2003)

Henry van de Velde