What Can Be Learned from the Past: Interior Design as a Continuation of Ideas - Term Paper Example

What can be learned from the past Interior Design as a continuation of ideas Social spaces within homes are essential to the development and maintenance of the social fabric of its residents. It is the point of harmonization, interaction and communion. This concept has been consistently supported and pursued by modernist architects and designers as it was recognized that social spaces have an interactive intimate relationship with the occupants. To improve this dialectic relationship, designers must consciously or unconsciously develop forms and designs to reflect the needs of the modern man – shelter, social interaction space and a continuing fascination with the machine age. This aspect of space is explored to discover how human fascination with the machine changed the spaces created and how these altered spaces changed the way in which its users interact. This study demonstrates that modernism was a movement of material, form and interior design in pursuit of the ideals of industrialization. The intimate relationship of spaces with their occupants forms the background philosophy of modern design. Thus, a kitchen or a living room is not merely a square space but is instead an area where families have some of their most intimate moments. The evolution of the machine age developed new social, economic, and aesthetic values which modernist designers have integrated in their works intending to better serve the working class. While some designers have met this objective, others have failed. This is not because of ideological differences but because of the lack of execution, commitment and translation of design to form. By understanding some of the historical conceptions of modernity and looking at some of the designs that have been developed within this context, it is possible to gain a greater appreciation for how interior design functions to both support and define concepts of contemporary living. Modernity is the concept of legitimizing emotions with space. As a movement, its primary influence was evident during the early to mid-1900s as the excitement of industrialization and new materials inspired new design in association with new philosophies regarding society and man’s place within it. Its philosophy involves the identification of social spaces within the home as spaces of community interaction. It represents the individual with specific reference to the greater society.1 Scholars define modernity as the relationship between a dwelling and architecture or as “a condition of living imposed upon individuals by the socioeconomic process of modernization.”2 In this context, modernity is not merely a conceptual framework based on the individual but reflects the condition of the society as a whole. While this is one aspect of modernity, modernism can be understood through a range of dimensions. If one is speaking with Marshall Berman, modernity is described as “a mode of vital experience—experience of space and time, of the self and others, of life’s possibilities and perils—that is shared by men and women all over the world today. I will call this body of experience ‘modernity’.”3 It encompasses the social changes that are constantly taking shape, the way in which these changes are experienced and the reflection of these experiences in various circles. It is a world of definition and ambiguity, static definitions and constant change. In describing the modern human, Berman says “they are moved at once by a will to change – to transform both themselves and their world – and by a terror of disorientation and disintegration, of life falling apart.”4 In the study of interior design, the history of modernity could be perceived as the “dialectical relationship ... which modernism consciously or unconsciously, directly or indirectly, positively or negatively reflects the effects of capitalist development.”5 Modernism therefore has historical, sociological, philosophical, and cultural contexts that are interwoven into the fabric of society, including the spaces in which we live. The general public was brought into the world of the modern primarily through the ways in which modern interior design factored in the comforts and purposes of spatial use. New furniture designs helped to translate its philosophies into the home and the psyche thanks to the efforts of several key early designers. This began early in the movement through designs such as that of Charles Rennie Mackintosh with his famous chair design of 1897. Figure 1 - Mackintosh chair Source: Right 3/4 view; (CT65348). [Image]. Victoria and Albert Museum, (2006). Created at the beginning of the Art Nouveau period, in which a blend between the machine and the man-made was actively sought. The chair was made to be a featured seat at a fancy Victorian Argyle Street tea room, traditionally a rather crowded environment. Most of the chairs made during the Victorian period pulled from a number of different influences, but primarily shared a wide seat (to accommodate the large skirts worn by the women) and a tendency to build with the comfort of the user in mind.6 At only 50 cm wide, this chair represents a drastic movement away from the popular styles of the earlier period. The strong emphasis on the vertical would have diverted attention upwards and thereby extended the idea of available space among visitors. This feeling of space would also have been emphasized by the several areas of open space inherent in the chair – note the open vertical space between the two slats of the back, the open space between the slats and the side support poles and the hollowed out space in the center of the oval backing. The gently tapering vertical poles also help to create the optical illusion of a solid piece of furniture melting into the ample space above it. At the same time, the unique oval shape on this chair as well as the uplifting nature of the vertical poles and the light, floating effect of the front leg supports as compared to the solid, grounded feeling of the back leg supports begins to intrigue and invite further consideration. All of these are important elements in the success of the design. Instead of merely copying styles of the past, artists were encouraging each other to consider what had been made in the past and then change it to fit in with what the future should be. “The chair is alive with understated sources. Its extreme height and linearity have a sense of the Gothic; the delicate curves and the use of the oval echo the eighteenth century; the way in which the vertical elements of the back cut through the oval form are reminiscent of Japanese compositional ploys; the plainness of the slats and struts shows respect for the vernacular, sifted through the filter of the Arts and Crafts movement.”7 Despite these recognizable aspects, the chair also presents significant shifts from what had been done before. For example, the back remains a little too high for the contemporary sitter while the width is significantly narrower. The oval shape is flattened more than the styles typical in the balloon back chairs of the earlier decades and canted on its side rather than the elongated forms to which the Victorians were accustomed. It is out of proportion with the Golden Section and the way in which the oval is positioned presents numerous concerns regarding the way in which it interacts with other elements of the design. “Thus, the chair is a denial of convention and a subversion of normative value. It is a subjective work that tests the artistic potential of domestic furnishings and makes references to nature and the human body.”8 This drastic change in direction and focus was intended to convey a sense of the ultra-modern as a means of helping the woman who commissioned the piece establish a specific upscale reputation for her establishment. Charlotte Perriand, working several decades later, used these same techniques of challenging the traditional shape and form as a means of more appropriately addressing the changes that were taking place in the way people lived their lives in this new modern age. She was among the first women who worked in this field, introducing a new, fresh energy to the field of architecture and interior design. According to Teicher,9 she was considered the modern spirit of 20th century design. Her work was among the most influential in the furniture equipment category and she produced landmark designs which formed the icons of modernism. She believed in the utopian concept that furniture should be inexpensive and accessible, as well as reflect the functions of daily life.10 Figure 2 - Villa La Roche in 1928 Figure 3 - Villa La Roche Furnishing Source:www.diplomatie.gouv.fr Perriand was renowned for her iconic modern furniture and interior designs. Her copious works from early years to later reflected the machine age as it continued to grow and change. Perriand’s interiors were often created to reflect her lifestyle and the environment she observed. Some of her specific work included the interior space of her own apartment in Paris, particularly Bar Sous le Toit. She was also known for creating innovative furniture designs that mirrored the needs rather than the aesthetic ideals of the time. The tubular chrome swivel chair with padded cover seat and back was considered to be one of the most revolutionary of her designs.11 Comprised of a round seat swiveling on a base of four tubular chrome legs set in a perfect square, the chair offers a solid semi-circular back-rest/arm-rest supported by three narrower chrome tubes. It was designed largely with the needs of the user in mind, allowing form to follow function while still managing to convey a sense of aesthetic consideration. Figure 4 - Tubular Chrome Swivel Chair Source: http://s7d3.scene7.com/is/image/DWR/f_8232?$detail$ But perhaps the most famous among her collection was her work in collaboration with Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret in the Equipment d’une Habitation exhibition in 1929. Among the collection, the Chais longue, Fauteuil and Grand Comfort were most renowned for their design, context and function. These designs were intended to provide the greatest possible function and comfort while occupying a minimum of space and materials given the environment in which they were intended to be used yet still communicate style and beauty as form, function and space became harmonized. Like Le Corbusier and Jeanneret, Perriand was keen on experimenting with new material and concepts in her evolutionary approach to interior design. These were amplified in her works such as the free form table made in 1938 from recycled timber from Pavilion des Temps Nouveaux.12 From this designer, one gains an appreciation for ‘new’ movements such as green design and sustainable development. Figure 5 - Free-form Table Source: http://www.henrymausantiques.com/data/storage/attachments/11965364752391.jpg As Painter13 reflected, modernism was the amalgamation of domestication of art practiced in the home. While for some this was a social transformation, others considered it to be a cultural one. Take for example the works of Perriand and her famous free form table. The free form table is comprised of a rhombus table seemingly ‘connected’ with another square one. The design supported the premise of future needs as or when one required a longer table. While the square table was nothing unusual, the rhombus addition to the design added presumptions of a larger communal dining or gathering. It also denoted the simplicity of needs of the modern man whose concern was based on function rather than superficial design. In her later years, Perriand traveled widely, derived inspiration from her aesthetic experience during her travels and incorporated these in her work. For example, her choice of using wood, space and indigenous materials to vernacular approaches to design all reflected her sustained interests in architecture and furniture design by incorporating the idea of space into specific space to develop signature assets. Like Corbusier, she also appreciated the elements of sky, landscape and light in her designs to reflect the environment she inhabited,14 again pointing the way for contemporary designs that attempt to re-introduce the elements of nature into the postmodern experience. Modernism has been a movement of ideology rather than a purely cultural or political shift. While critics may consider a movement as having the characteristics of political, social, ideas, and cultural change, modernism lacked in that sense in much the same way that postmodernism is thought of in the contemporary period. Nevertheless, modernism was a revolution that changed the characteristic landscape of architecture and interior design. It transcended and transformed the concepts adopted by classic architects and designers. Even though modernists would refuse to acknowledge their borrowing some ideas of form and design from the Art Deco movement, their works undeniably reflected some of the features of Art Noveau as seen through the designs of Mackintosh. This leads to the conclusion that modernism was a by-product ideology of the social, artistic and design movement during the early 20th century eras. Modernism’s relationship with architecture and interior space was hinged on the profusion of domestic application of art and design. These were clearly denoted in the new approach to designing simple interior furnishing items like tables, chairs, and dividers etc. The designs by Perriand reflected the ideals that furniture for the 20th century society should be cheap and accessible to the common man. They were clearly driven by their assumption that they could change the social arena by changing the space where people most interact – the home. These innovations have already suggested some of the ways in which the past can affect the future of interior design. References Benton, Tim. (2007). The Villas of Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret 1920-1930. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser. Berman, Marshall. (1982). All That is Solid Melts Into Air: The Experience of Modernity. New York: Penguin Books, 1982. Ellis, C. (2006). “Perriand at the Pompidou.” The Architectural Review. Volume: 219. Issue: 1308: 80 Greenhalgh, Paul. (2000). “Alternative Histories.” Art Nouveau: 1890-1914. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc: 52-3. Heynen, H. (1999). Architecture and Modernity: A Critique. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts/ London, England. Massey, D. (2000). "Space-time and the politics of location" Architecturally Speaking: Practices of Art, Architecture, and the Everyday. Alan Read ed. Routledge: London. Painter, C. (2002). Contemporary Art and the Home. Berg: New York. Swinglehurst, Edmund. (2001). Charles Rennie Mackintosh. San Diego: Thunder Bay Press. Teicher, H. (1999). “Collective Affinity.” Artforum International. Volume: 37. Issue Summer 10: 126+. Read More