Art through history develops upon the ideas of people. The
ideas that influence art of the period can depend on anything, from society’s present
view on history to its view on current events. Art of the time expresses what
we want to say, what we think is important, and how we interpret our world. Several
contrasting opinions can exist at the same time, and those who express their
opinions often lead reform and the directions of art. In the 19th
century, modern architecture was shaped by three especially important reformers:
John Ruskin, Gottfried Semper, and Viollet-le-Duc.
With the oncoming of the industrial age and the huge urban
transformation, there was little place for classicism or other past forms of
architecture. Factories left architects confused as this was a new type of
architecture and they weren't sure yet what it was supposed to look like.
Meanwhile, John Ruskin was troubled by the emerging replacement of craftsmen
ship by the machine. He believed that the beauty of architecture came from the
skill of the builder, as the craftsman shaped the emotion of the space. He also
believed that restoration of buildings was a bad thing, as this process
destroys the original character of the architecture and wastes the strength and
craftsmanship of the details toiled by the builder. Ruskin is famous for his “7
Lamps of Architecture,” the seven values, such as truth in materials and memory,
that which are most important to architecture.
Ruskin would later inspire architects and art reformers such as Frank
Lloyd Wright and William Morris. His upholding of the craftsman ideal can be
seen in the fine details of William Morris’s residence, the Red House, designed
by Philip Webb.
 |
| image source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Red_House,_Bexleyheath.JPG |
On this thought of the hallowing of
the craftsmen, Viollette-le-Duc contrasted with Ruskin. Le-Duc believed that
the architect was higher than the builder. While Le-Duc agreed with Ruskin on
the importance of truth in materials, he was more concerned with understanding
style and the intelligence of the designer. He believed in rationalism and that
architecture could be seen as a science. He created theories for architects and
those who wanted to study to become architects, and created a method for
designing “good” architecture. Le-Duc’s ideals can be seen in the work of Frank
Gehry. Gehry related to Le-Duc in that elements of a design do not need to be
uniform (as seen in the windows of his project below, the Lou Ruvo Center). He
also likened with Le-Duc in the embracing of modern materials. De-Luc believed
that if the Roman architects of the past had had modern materials such as
steel, they would have used them.
 |
| image source: http://www.highsnobiety.com/2010/06/17/lou-ruvo-center-for-brain-health-by-frank-gehry/ |
Another modern reformer, Gottfried Semper, was also
concerned like Viollet-le-Duc with the style of architecture. Semper admired
the forms and ornamentation of renaissance architecture. He too believed that architecture
could be logistically broken down. For Semper, the formulaic pieces of style
came from a multiplication of forms around the world. His goal was to create a
taxonomy of forms that could be plugged into an equation. In his theoretical
equation, the result of a building came from the function of interacting components
such as materials, techniques, and regional and cultural influences. Semper’s ideals can be seen in his School and
Opera House. His love for Renaissance architecture shows through the design,
but the resulting building carries influences by such components as time,
place, availability of materials, building techniques, function, and culture.
 |
| image source: http://www.europeancastlestours.com/tours/berlin-gallery.htm |
Works Cited
Hvattum, M. (2006). Gottfried semper and the problem of historicism.
Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians, 65(1),
136-139.
Pevsner, N. Ruskin and Viollet-le-Duc: Englishness and Frenchness in
the appreciation of gothic
architecture. (pp. 6-43). London:
Thames and Hudson.
Summerson, J. (1904). Viollet-le-duc and the rationl point
of view. Heavenly Mansions, 135-144.
