Arnold Schonberg, Adolf Loos and the Viennese Circle - Essay Example

? Arnold Schonberg, Adolf Loos and the Viennese Circle Architecture is a diverse field that can take many forms and engage all thesenses in a person. The appreciation of an architectural piece can be in many aspects including visual appeal, the natural blending with the environment and the story that it tells. Therefore, it is imperative that architecture is a multi faceted profession that essentially requires input from many fields. The relationship between architecture and music is one of a perfect fit. Architecture strives to create a memorable and striking design of space in a given time. On the other hand, music tells a story through a carefully crafted set of audio. The best creations in architecture and music take painfully long to craft and they tell a compelling story that captivates its audience. It is evident that several analogies can be drawn between architecture and music in terms of their creation and impact to the society (Breivik, 2011). Inevitably, music and architecture tend to borrow from each other. Music can be considered as a metaphorical representation of a structure that can be transformed into visual terms and be an architectural piece. The relationship between architecture and music can be difficult to fathom for an ordinary person. Yet, a careful analysis of the underlying principles of any music piece shows a clear correlation with architecture. Music can be analyzed in three key parts that are rhythm, melody and harmony. These three features can be incorporated into architecture and help to create striking pieces. Breivik (2011) and Alexander (1999) pointed out that musical influence in architecture redefines a design and showcases the subtle artistic features that make an architectural piece to stand out. Therefore, it is important to appreciate the importance of the relationship between architecture and music. The sharing of information between various professionals is an age old tradition that has been in place for several decades. In Vienna, professionals including architects used to meet frequently under the auspices of Viennese circle and this played a great role in shaping the development of architecture. One of the most notable architects during this time in Vienna was Adolf Loos. Loos was a prominent architect in Vienna rising to become the Chief Architect of the city from 1920 to 1923. He was a member of the Viennese Circle. The architectural ideas of Loos were shaped greatly by the ideas that were brought forth by the Viennese circle (Schezel et al, 2009). Loos was greatly influenced by the musical ideas of his colleague Arnold Schonberg who was also part of the Viennese circle. Both Loos and Schonberg had great influence on each other. In fact, the intellectual relationship in terms of architecture and music that transpired between Loos and Schonberg has had a great impact on the society up to the present time. Loos and Schonberg were active in their professions during the era of serialism. Serialism was a revolution in composition as it was during those times. Traditional melodic, harmonic and tonal conventions were replaced entirely. Arnold Schonberg developed the twelve note system that was a new thinking in the line serial development. In the serial theory, it was the structural series of notes that made up the overall composition. The ilk of Schonberg revoked standardized musical devices and instead opted to come with something that was unique. The main emphasis in serial development was order and clarity (John, pp. 87). Schonberg let go of the traditional aspects of music and endeavored to reinvent music in its entirety. Serialism in music was about composers coming up with their own musical language based on their ideas and intellectual inclination. Historical reiterations were not given any consideration. In essence, Serialism in music as embodied in Arnold Schonberg’s work was of disruptive nature in comparison with the conventional music at that time. During the time of Serialism, the cultural environment in Vienna allowed professionals to freely share ideas. Such free flow of information meant that the professionals from various fields borrowed heavily from each other. This was evident due to the fact Adolf Loos architectural ideas were greatly influenced by the work of Arnold Schonberg. Both Loos and Schonberg were great acquaintances and they also followed closely on the philosophical footsteps of Karl Kraus. Loos tried to implement Kraus’ ideas in architecture and design while Schonberg applied them to music. The intellectual and artistic developments during this time were shaped by intellects attempting to think outside the conventional platforms (Benedetto, 1995). Loos translated the revolutionary ideas into architecture by launching a staunch opposition and criticism of ornamentation. For many years, architectural pieces were valued depending the amount and quality of ornamentation that they possessed. Thus, it was common for churches, palaces and other socially significant places to be laden with ornamentation. Loos wrote a stinging critique of ornamentation in his essay “Ornament and Crime”. According to Loos (1998) the plumber should be the model of an architect and not the sculptor. This essentially meant that Loos valued the practical aspect of a given design rather than the aesthetics. Loos was inclined towards the creation of functional and efficient structures devoid of any aesthetic features. He believed that rational and efficient architectural design was inherently beautiful. In this respect, it is evident that the works of Arnold Schonberg and Adolf Loos were based on the same philosophical foundations (ed. Benedetto 1995). The key factor here is that both men disdained the issue of aesthetics. Their works are analogous in the sense that they lay emphasis on the technical aspects of their creation. It is inherent that they both believed that the real beauty of any creation lies in its technical and practical aspects. A technically competent piece would create an efficient aesthetic rather than the imposition of superficial aesthetic feature. Schonberg believed that there could be no form without logic. Hence, the most important aspect of a design is its logic. Schonberg advocated for simplicity in the composition of music. According to him, Schonberg believed that the simplicity could help to transform music back to its grand state. His twelve tone technique was meant to remove the unnecessary ornamentation elements that impacted negatively in the evolution of music (Schezen et al, pp. 152). It is evident the twelve tone technique that the Schonberg developed was the main structure of all his other work. Schonberg believed that structure and technique were more important than how a musical piece sounds. He believed that how a composition sounds is not important. The key issue in composition is the structure and technique of arranging the keys in a given piece. Notably, there is no harmony in any of Schonberg’s works. He steered clear of the traditional interpretation and presentation of music. Adolf Loos’ architectural designs were also very similar to Schonberg’s work in music. One of the similarities between him and Schonberg is that they both valued the functional part of a creation rather than the aesthetics. In this respect, Loos believed that aesthetics and ornaments were not important in the architectural design of a building (ed. Benedetto 1995). In essence, Loos put emphasis in the design of a building that was structurally and practically sound. In most of his designs, the visual appeal of the creation is often not considered. Rather, the main emphasis lay in the efficiency and structure of the design. In retrospect, it is very evident that Loos’ work disregarded the non functional aspects of a design. In fact, Loos believed that the use of ornamentation was unnecessary as it added no real value to an architectural piece. He also believed that ornamentation hid the real features that should be used to evaluate an architectural piece. For instance, he postulated that the use of ornaments was mischievously utilized by deviant architects to hide the flaws of a structure. Thus, he believed that an efficiently designed architectural piece was a beauty in itself and did not require ornamentation to make it look good. Both Schonberg and Loos embarked in works that served as critiques of the society. Loos essay of “Ornament and Crime” went against the grain and offered a stinging criticism of architectural works that embodied ornamentation. He offered his ideas of emphasizing on the structural competency of an architectural design. Loos strongly advocated his ideas in scholarly works hence leading to an intellectual persuasion of the architectural community towards abandoning of the ornamentation mentality (ed. Benedetto 1995). Schonberg also published essays on his musical theories which were against the previous conventional knowledge on music. He attacked the music of the late nineteenth century for not being original. He claimed in his essays that the music of the nineteenth century was merely conforming to the practices of the time. He postulates that it would have been beneficial to the musical fraternity had the music of the nineteenth century challenged the status quo and come up with original work. Both Schonberg and Loos were of the belief that a great creation did not need any coating so as to become beautiful or appealing. Schonberg’ work strived to show the truth by embracing clarity in all his creations. It is important to appreciate the fact that the traditional aspects of music were laden with unnecessary additions that were not of any functional value. The minimalist nature of Schonberg’s work ensured that only the essential notes remained in the composition of any musical composition (Zach and Mikesch, pp. 215). On the other hand, Loos also applied the minimalist design features in his architectural work. In essence, whatever added no functional value to an architectural creation was in reality unnecessary. Therefore, his work was devoid of nonfunctional features and contained only what was necessary for an efficient and practical structure. The advent of Loos’ architecture without ornamentation coincided with Schonberg’s atonal music. Loos’ opposition to ornamentation in architecture went against the norm (ed. Benedetto 1995). The architectural community at that time was following on the traditions of ornamentation that had been passed on from previous generations. The culture of ornamentation in architecture had begun back in the ancient days when the cream of the society wanted to show off their wealth and influence. These traditions were carried on unquestionably to the twentieth century by architects who were not willing to chart new frontiers. Loos’ opposition to ornamentation was a direct challenge to his field and it rattled the other architects who were otherwise comfortable with the status quo. It should be noted that eventually, Loos’ work had great influence in the field of architecture and he managed to convert other leading artists to his point of view. Notable contemporaries such as Frank Lloyd were influenced by Adolf Loos’ work and they began arguing against superfluous elements in his architectural designs. Schonberg’s work was also influential in both the fields of architecture and music. The notable architect Daniel Libeskind used the composition of Schonberg in his design of Jewish Museum in Berlin. Schonberg’s composition titled Moses and Aron was based on Serialism. The composition was created based on serial thinking. Libeskind applied similar serial thoughts in the design of the building. In fact, he used a kind of “serial code” that brought the various elements of the building together in a simple but highly functional manner. Schonberg’s work in music also challenged the long held conventions in the field. His twelve note technique was a great departure from the traditional music composition techniques (Schezen et al 2009). It is clear that he steered off the issues of adding aesthetics to his compositions. Instead, he ensured that his compositions were clear and precise. Such notable differences with the traditional music meant that Schonberg went against the norms as they were in the area of music. The core concept in both music and architecture is that they attempt to create. Creation can be thought of as the action of bringing something into being. Hence, music and architecture are involved in the making of something that did not exist previously. This means that the role of architects and musicians is fundamentally the same: an aspiration to make something original and captivating. Both of these fields call for one’s imagination and fully immersion into the creation of laudable works (Alexander, pp. 59). It should be noted that any musical composition can be rearranged and appreciated in a totally different way. In this sense, music is considered unique depending on how it is composition. The composition of music is dependent on the arrangement of notes. These are the basic building blocks of music and their alteration inherently causes a change in the initial music composition. Similarly, architecture can be appreciated from various angles. Being a spatial object, an architectural design can be evaluated from various sides and the impression it creates may not be the same for all the angles of viewing. Therefore, music and architecture are similar given the fact they can be understood in different ways depending on the circumstances (Zach and Mikesch, pp. 73). It is evident that Adolf Loos and Arnold Schonberg shared a lot in terms of minimalistic thinking in design and composition (ed. Benedetto 1995). The critical issue is that they belonged to different fields. It would have quite normal if both of them were based on the same field and happened to just share ideas as colleagues, However, the fact is that both of them applied the same fundamental principles in totally different fields. Incidentally, they both shared the same philosophical background based on the fact that they were both members of the Viennese Circle. Hence, they were a part of the intellectual philosophy that prevailed during those times among the members of the Viennese Circle. The fact that the same principles fitted well in architecture and music imply that indeed, the two fields share a lot in common. The critical components of music are also vital in architecture. Rhythm, melody and harmony are all important aspects of any musical composition. Schonberg’s works especially the Twelve Note technique opened new frontiers in respect to how music composition is organized (John, 1986). Although the works had the three elements of a musical composition, the non functional elements of music were removed and the composition was stripped to its barest minimum. The importance of simplicity to Schonberg was two-fold, it saved time and it also made the composer to concentrate more on creativity. This meant that a musical composer would not necessarily be worried by the nature of compositions that they made but rather on the structure of the notes. Beauty in creation of music was meant to be observed in the functionality of the composition. In a similar way, Adolf Loos embarked on architecture that valued logic and function rather than the conventional ornamentation (ed. Benedetto 1995). The advantage of architecture without ornamentation as postulated Adolf Loos was that it reduced the non functional aspects of an architectural design. By doing this, significant resources that could have used to purchase and carve the ornamentation were saved. The second benefit of discarding the use of ornamentation was that it resulted in a more functional structure where defects were not hidden. This stemmed from the fact that ornaments could easily distract the eye and one could not notice structural defects in the building. Also, ornaments by their nature cover a structure and hence it is virtually not possible to see the underlying structure. Adolf Loos believed that the true beauty of a design lay in its structural beauty. A structure that was constructed in a competent and sound manner is inherently beautiful and does not need superficial ornaments. In fact, Adolf Loos believed that the elimination of ornaments could help to improve the competency of architects. This is due to the fact that they could not have the chance to hide poor workmanship under the ornaments. Records (Loos and Opel, 2002) show that architects could design the beauty of an architectural piece based on the functional aspects that are essential to the building. The analysis of Adolf Loos and Arnold Schonberg clearly indicates that both of them had similar philosophical background. It is also very evident that Loos was greatly influenced by Schonberg’s work in music. Loos successfully applied the principles that Schonberg had implemented in music. One of the similarities between Loos and Schonberg’s work was their inclination towards the functional aspects of any creation. It was possible to strip both architectural pieces and musical compositions all the non functional components and still make them appealing (ed. Benedetto 1995). Also, both of them went against the norm in their fields. The proposals against ornamentation were against the tenets of architecture during those times. Hence, Loos went against the general grain in his profession and begun a stinging critique of ornamentation. Schonberg also advocated for a radical transformation of music composition. As one of the members of Serialism movement by advocating an overhaul of music composition as it were, Schonberg had to face opposition of the people who were willing to conform to the traditional concept of music. Schonberg developed the twelve note technique that became the foundation of most of his later works. Both of them also wrote literally works that outlined their visions in the respective fields. Adolf Loos’ Ornaments and Crime was an elaborate argumentative issue to provide the basis for his opposition to ornaments in architecture. On the other hand, Schonberg also wrote various essays that offered critique against traditional music composition It is very evident that music and architecture have a special relationship. Both are based on the ability to create compelling compositions and they involve long processes of development for excellence to be achieved. The fact that architecture can borrow from music implies that music has the potential to enrich architecture and influence its development. Comparison between modernism in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Australia The advent of modernism in Australia began in 1910 and was brought through the migrants and expatriates. During these early stages, the concept of modernism in Australia essentially meant everything that was not local. The exotic arts from foreign countries were in vogue and the Australians experimented with various forms of art. In terms of architecture, the Arts and Crafts movement played a significant role in shaping the architectural landscape of Australia (Childs, 2008). In the early 1960s, swimming pools became part of the Australian community. Australian artists experimented with colors, texture and shape to come up with designs to suit the evolving circumstances. The rapid urbanization of Australia meant that more people began to move to the cities. Therefore, the landscape was marked by new activities of interior design, tall buildings and other specialty buildings. The design of bars and milk bars was a significant phase in the evolution of modernism in Australia. It should be noted that these developments led to the conversion of corner pubs into distinctive structures which borrowed from Art Deco features (Levenson, pp12-15). In 1957, the construction of Sydney’s skyline began. This was marked by the construction of high rise buildings that redefined the skyline of the city. One of the most notable architectural designs of this era was the Australia Square. Ultimately, the space age design era made it possible for the construction of structures such as domes and spirals. Notably, Australian architectural transformation was greatly influenced by the American culture. The use of lighting and signage was adopted with time throughout Australia. The concept of using walls of buildings as canvas for branding was also adopted in Australia. On the other hand, the story of modernism in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is based on the balancing of tradition and modernity. According to Levenson (1999), most of the architectural designs in Saudi Arabia were based on traditional Arabic history. The structures were made in simple manner to serve their functions in the hot climate. Conservative architectural designs were used to ensure that the buildings remained cool. This entailed having high ceilings, use of ceramic tiles and the use of small sized windows. However, Saudi Arabia architecture has evolved rapidly in the recent past. Saudi Arabia has managed to blend the historic Arabic designs with modern architecture. The intelligent use of terraces to deflect heat and capture rainwater is a clever blend of traditional and modern architecture (Childs, 2008). The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has also embraced the construction of sky scrapers to grace its skyline. To suit the conditions in the region, the towers are usually rounded instead of being squared in order to deflect strong winds and desert sand storms. Bibliography Alexander, W. 1999. Architecture and music: A study of reciprocal values. New York: John Wiley &Sons. Benedetto, G (ed). 1995. Adolf Loos: Theory and works. University of Michigan, Michigan. Breivik, M. 2011. Musical functionalism: The musical thoughts of Arnold Schoenberg. New York: Pendagron Press. Childs, P. 2008. Modernism. London:Routledge. John, A.S. 1986. Schoenberg and his circle: a Viennese portrait. London: Schimer Books. Levenson, M. 1999. The Cambridge companion to Modernism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Loos, A. and Adolf, O. 1998. Ornament and crime: Selected essays. Carlifornia: Ariadne Press. Loos, A. and Opel, D. 2002. On architecture. California: Ariadne Press. Schezen, R., Frampton, K. and Rosa, J. 2009. Adolf Loos: Architecture 1903-1932. New York: Crown Publishing Group. Zach, M.S. and Mikesch, W.M. 2007. Architecture and music. New York: Pearson Publishers. Read More