Modern Arch Since 1900 Ch3

The search for new forms and the problem of ornament

Art Nouveau obviously contrasts from the Chicago School. The aim or Art Nouveau was not to decorate buildings of commerce. It was concerned with homes, municipal buildings, religious places, etc. To use modern building material and technique was a bit more subversive since there were traditions to making these structures.

Nature is emphasized in Art Nouveau but the emphasis could be misleading. The essence of Art Nouveau, in most cases, was to rebel against the past and not to glorify nature. Trying to grab content from the spindly decoration would be like saying Mohawks glorify upright hair. The nature motif seemed prolific because it stood out.

Although Art Nouveau was in one way rebellious, it was also rooted in the past. Unlike Art Nouveau, The Chicago Style had little tradition and so buildings stood on their own and often their language described the building itself. On the other hand, in stark contrast, the architect Gaudi enfused metaphysical metaphors similarly to gothic cathedrals. The Chicago School symbolized the frame with the frame. Gaudi used the frame to symbolize motifs such as material being used to describe the spiritual in allegory like how cathedral ceilings are made to symbolize heaven.

But not all Art Nouveau was as allegorical as Gaudi. In many ways it a distilled version of using past traditions that have lost their meaning. Architects that rebelled against Art Nouveau rid decorative elements in design. Yet this two was not the same as the Chicago School. It was more a reaction to the Art Nouveau than making the structure aware of it's structure.