by Ng Chen Yin 1001540026
Ornament is defined as a thing used or serving to make something look more attractive but usually having no practical purpose. In architectural context, ornament is a decoration used to embellish parts of a building or object. Large figurative elements such as monumental sculpture and their equivalents in decorative art are excluded from the term.
(Wikipedia: Ornament)
From the article “Ornament and Crime” by Adolf Loos, he saw the effort wasted in designing and creating needless ornament, he saw it as nothing short of a “crime”. He supported his idea by mentioning ornament means wasted labor and therefore wasted health, it also means wasted materials, and both mean wasted capital. In Loos’ article, he also described how ornamentation can have the effect of causing objects to soon go out of style.
Of the question is ornament a crime? I do not think so. I agree with Joseph Rykwert in his text “Ornament is no Crime” - as he sees ornament makes decent in supplying a missing essential for the buildings. While the poets are concerned about historical ornaments, the polytechnicians are concerned about the proportion. To me, ornament is a direct and literal way to express a certain notion of style which most characterized by its surface at a certain period of time. Ornamentation is more or less a form of personal self-expression, a form of self-promotion of an artistic practice. This reflects ornamentation as a communicative language between architecture and the public.
We should consider ornament not in terms of ethic, but in fact it is much more about aesthetic. Some may like ornaments or exaggerated things while some prefers minimalistic and pure forms. We can’t generalized all ornaments as immoral nor crime. To make an object that is already practical and useful to be a charm to the senses by bringing aesthetic values to it actually enhances the value of that object.
For example, by comparing Cheong Fatt Tze mansion with the Parliament Building, it is obvious that the former is fully decorated with different Chinese ornamentation and motifs. While the latter one is built with clean and pure form without any exaggerated decoration. Both architecture shows different attitudes regarding ornamentation. Cheong Fatt Tze mansion is uniquely furnished with ornaments from the Cheong family, adding a traditional touch to its architecture style. Ornaments here plays a role in representing a culture identity. On the other hand, Parliament building is installed with carved ornamental patterns which are made of local concrete. It helps in controlling the amount of sunlight entering the building thus providing a cooler environment. This beehive-shaped ornamentation add a sense of richness to the building’s appearance while acting as a practical screen. Once again, I agree with Joseph who he written in his article says “it was beautiful because it served its purpose most directly.” In this case, ornamentation is never a crime.
To conclude, architecture is constantly evolving, the revolution of ornamentation to the contemporaries will definitely affects the perspectives of architects and designers. However, the quality of work and efforts put into creating a certain ornament or in fact any creation at all, should always be respected. Because the past works are where we learn and inspire to invent a new style of architecture.
References:
https://yengies.wordpress.com/2017/08/01/lecture-3-ornament-crime/
http://theoria.art-zoo.com/ornament-and-crime-adolf-loos-excerpts/
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/english-literature/architectural-ornament-is-a-crime-english-literature-essay.php
Comentarios