[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.They sought to relate their work to the present industrial order and scientific progress byusing the materials of the one iron, concrete, glass and emulating the logical preci-sion of the other.108Moholy-Nagy began to play a noteworthy role in the American reception ofBauhaus architecture toward the end of the period under discussion.He began to re-ceive the attention of critics and authors affiliated with the English publications thathad already devoted considerable space to Gropius.109 Moholy-Nagy s association withhis friend, who was already known in America, certainly translated into a considerablemarketing asset.With his well-received 1935 book The New Vision, Moholy-Nagyreinforced his own growing renown in the United States.Previously Moholy-Nagy hadbeen viewed more narrowly as a photographer;110 this book, which described the ideaand pedagogic concept of the Bauhaus, earned him a broader reception and helpedmake possible his emigration to the United States a few years later.The New Bauhausrepresented Moholy-Nagy s attempt to create a continuity with the Dessau years,111but the financial and organizational difficulties involved, and his illness and earlydeath, prevented his successor institution from taking root. 143 THE FACULTYMarcel Breuer Few other members of the Bauhaus were the subject of attention inthe architecture-dominated Bauhaus reception prior to 1935 1936.The Hungarian Marcel Breuer was one of these exceptions.Breuer matriculated as astudent in Weimar in 1920 and immediately received notice for his innovative tableand chair designs.Among these were designs used in the Experimental House for theWeimar Bauhaus exhibition of 1923.At the same time, he developed his own conceptsof graphics and architecture.Named a Jungmeister at the Dessau Bauhaus in 1925, heassumed responsibility for the furniture workshop, where he made the famous tubularsteel chair he called the Wassily chair. He pursued his interest in architecture as anautodidact.After Gropius s resignation, he, too, left the Bauhaus in 1928 for Berlin,where he worked in Gropius s office.From London, he finally emigrated to the UnitedStates in 1937, where he became a professor at Harvard University.Only a few American critics and authors took notice of Breuer between 1919 and1936, and most of them knew him through their direct contact with the DessauBauhaus.He was first accorded due respect at the end of the twenties, initially on thebasis of his reputation as an interior designer.Herman George Scheffauer reported in1927 on one of Breuer s designs for a nickel-plated steel tubular chair, which Schef-fauer considered a paradigmatic example of the Bauhaus production guided by func-tion and purpose.112 In certain exceptional cases, Breuer s talent as an architectattracted the notice of those who saw in his work the beginnings of a brilliant career.In1929, Horner and Fischer wrote about the tubular steel furniture designed by MarcelBreuer of Dessau without noting his connection to the Bauhaus.113 Hitchcock intro-duced him in the same year as an interior architect and emphasized his Bauhaus con-nection: The chief activity of the Bauhaus at this time [ca.1922 1923] was in107 Harris, The Arts at Black Mountain College, 163.108 Louis Lozowick, Modern Art, 672.109 P.Morton Shand is one of the authors who mentioned Moholy-Nagy in relation to Gropius: [Moholy-Nagy] has been the close friend of perhaps the greatest of all modern architects,Walter Gropius, since 1923. New Eyes for Old, 12.110 Moholy-Nagy, How Photography Revolutionizes Vision ; Shand, New Eyes for Old. Shand,who considered Moholy-Nagy a leading architectural photographer, was more fair to him thanothers by adding to that description that he was not only a photographer. Also see Photogra-phy in a Flash ; Light Architecture ; Herbert A.Read, A New Humanism. 111 The Avery Index of 1973 (9:773ff.) listed 24 articles by or about Moholy-Nagy, of which 21 hadappeared in English or American journals.None of them, however, is dated before 1936.Eightappeared within the period 1936 1939, 12 in 1939 50, and one after 1950.112 Herman George Scheffauer, The Bauhaus Program, 12 May 1927.113 Horner and Fischer, Modern Architecture in Germany, 41. 144 THE IMAGE OF THE BAUHAUS AS RECEIVED IN AMERICAconnection with the organization of the contemporary interior.In this, Gropius and hisassociates, of whom Breuer was the most important, had a considerable success. 114Breuer s status as designer was echoed in Hitchcock s next book, coauthored withPhilip Johnson, The International Style.115 Coinciding with a shift of attention toward hisarchitectural work, including the Doldertal Apartments in Zurich (1935 1936), theinterest in Breuer increased just prior to his emigration to America in 1937, when he wasthe subject of a number of reports in Architectural Record116 and published his own three-page article in the London magazine Architectural Review.In his article, he pointed outfrom his point of view the decisive impulses behind the new architecture.Although hedescribed Gropius s concept of the unity of art and technology as close to his own convic-tions, he made only this implicit reference to the Bauhaus.117 Breuer used the term NewArchitecture, as did Gropius in the title of his book published in that same year, butwhereas Gropius added the words and the Bauhaus to his book s title, Breuer avoidedany mention of the school.The absence of the Bauhaus in Breuer s description of hisposition is painfully obvious and seems to imply a distanced relationship to the school atthis time.This interpretation is supported by an anecdote related by the architect Har-well Hamilton Harris about his first meeting with Breuer at a CIAM conference in 1943in New York: Breuer was there.He got up and said, At one time the Bauhaus served avery useful purpose, but that time has passed.The Bauhaus is dead, and I think weshould let CIAM die. He was interested in design in its very general form. 118Breuer s refusal to position himself in a living, present-tense relationship to theBauhaus may be understandable, considering the strong identification of the Bauhauswith its founder.This explanation is made more plausible by the events around theNew York Bauhaus exhibition of 1938 at the Museum of Modern Art: Breuer was leftwith only a secondary role.He may have found it necessary to declare the Bauhaus partof the past in order to move out of Gropius s shadow.Ludwig Hilberseimer The architect, urban planner, and theoretician Ludwig Hilber-seimer was brought to the Dessau Bauhaus by Hannes Meyerin 1929 to head the Department of Architecture.He remained at the Bauhaus underLudwig Mies van der Rohe and offered his practically oriented architecture course untilthe school closed in 1933.119 His theories on the planning of housing, city, and regionwere intended to bring order to the uncontrolled growth of the modern metropolis [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl odbijak.htw.pl
.They sought to relate their work to the present industrial order and scientific progress byusing the materials of the one iron, concrete, glass and emulating the logical preci-sion of the other.108Moholy-Nagy began to play a noteworthy role in the American reception ofBauhaus architecture toward the end of the period under discussion.He began to re-ceive the attention of critics and authors affiliated with the English publications thathad already devoted considerable space to Gropius.109 Moholy-Nagy s association withhis friend, who was already known in America, certainly translated into a considerablemarketing asset.With his well-received 1935 book The New Vision, Moholy-Nagyreinforced his own growing renown in the United States.Previously Moholy-Nagy hadbeen viewed more narrowly as a photographer;110 this book, which described the ideaand pedagogic concept of the Bauhaus, earned him a broader reception and helpedmake possible his emigration to the United States a few years later.The New Bauhausrepresented Moholy-Nagy s attempt to create a continuity with the Dessau years,111but the financial and organizational difficulties involved, and his illness and earlydeath, prevented his successor institution from taking root. 143 THE FACULTYMarcel Breuer Few other members of the Bauhaus were the subject of attention inthe architecture-dominated Bauhaus reception prior to 1935 1936.The Hungarian Marcel Breuer was one of these exceptions.Breuer matriculated as astudent in Weimar in 1920 and immediately received notice for his innovative tableand chair designs.Among these were designs used in the Experimental House for theWeimar Bauhaus exhibition of 1923.At the same time, he developed his own conceptsof graphics and architecture.Named a Jungmeister at the Dessau Bauhaus in 1925, heassumed responsibility for the furniture workshop, where he made the famous tubularsteel chair he called the Wassily chair. He pursued his interest in architecture as anautodidact.After Gropius s resignation, he, too, left the Bauhaus in 1928 for Berlin,where he worked in Gropius s office.From London, he finally emigrated to the UnitedStates in 1937, where he became a professor at Harvard University.Only a few American critics and authors took notice of Breuer between 1919 and1936, and most of them knew him through their direct contact with the DessauBauhaus.He was first accorded due respect at the end of the twenties, initially on thebasis of his reputation as an interior designer.Herman George Scheffauer reported in1927 on one of Breuer s designs for a nickel-plated steel tubular chair, which Schef-fauer considered a paradigmatic example of the Bauhaus production guided by func-tion and purpose.112 In certain exceptional cases, Breuer s talent as an architectattracted the notice of those who saw in his work the beginnings of a brilliant career.In1929, Horner and Fischer wrote about the tubular steel furniture designed by MarcelBreuer of Dessau without noting his connection to the Bauhaus.113 Hitchcock intro-duced him in the same year as an interior architect and emphasized his Bauhaus con-nection: The chief activity of the Bauhaus at this time [ca.1922 1923] was in107 Harris, The Arts at Black Mountain College, 163.108 Louis Lozowick, Modern Art, 672.109 P.Morton Shand is one of the authors who mentioned Moholy-Nagy in relation to Gropius: [Moholy-Nagy] has been the close friend of perhaps the greatest of all modern architects,Walter Gropius, since 1923. New Eyes for Old, 12.110 Moholy-Nagy, How Photography Revolutionizes Vision ; Shand, New Eyes for Old. Shand,who considered Moholy-Nagy a leading architectural photographer, was more fair to him thanothers by adding to that description that he was not only a photographer. Also see Photogra-phy in a Flash ; Light Architecture ; Herbert A.Read, A New Humanism. 111 The Avery Index of 1973 (9:773ff.) listed 24 articles by or about Moholy-Nagy, of which 21 hadappeared in English or American journals.None of them, however, is dated before 1936.Eightappeared within the period 1936 1939, 12 in 1939 50, and one after 1950.112 Herman George Scheffauer, The Bauhaus Program, 12 May 1927.113 Horner and Fischer, Modern Architecture in Germany, 41. 144 THE IMAGE OF THE BAUHAUS AS RECEIVED IN AMERICAconnection with the organization of the contemporary interior.In this, Gropius and hisassociates, of whom Breuer was the most important, had a considerable success. 114Breuer s status as designer was echoed in Hitchcock s next book, coauthored withPhilip Johnson, The International Style.115 Coinciding with a shift of attention toward hisarchitectural work, including the Doldertal Apartments in Zurich (1935 1936), theinterest in Breuer increased just prior to his emigration to America in 1937, when he wasthe subject of a number of reports in Architectural Record116 and published his own three-page article in the London magazine Architectural Review.In his article, he pointed outfrom his point of view the decisive impulses behind the new architecture.Although hedescribed Gropius s concept of the unity of art and technology as close to his own convic-tions, he made only this implicit reference to the Bauhaus.117 Breuer used the term NewArchitecture, as did Gropius in the title of his book published in that same year, butwhereas Gropius added the words and the Bauhaus to his book s title, Breuer avoidedany mention of the school.The absence of the Bauhaus in Breuer s description of hisposition is painfully obvious and seems to imply a distanced relationship to the school atthis time.This interpretation is supported by an anecdote related by the architect Har-well Hamilton Harris about his first meeting with Breuer at a CIAM conference in 1943in New York: Breuer was there.He got up and said, At one time the Bauhaus served avery useful purpose, but that time has passed.The Bauhaus is dead, and I think weshould let CIAM die. He was interested in design in its very general form. 118Breuer s refusal to position himself in a living, present-tense relationship to theBauhaus may be understandable, considering the strong identification of the Bauhauswith its founder.This explanation is made more plausible by the events around theNew York Bauhaus exhibition of 1938 at the Museum of Modern Art: Breuer was leftwith only a secondary role.He may have found it necessary to declare the Bauhaus partof the past in order to move out of Gropius s shadow.Ludwig Hilberseimer The architect, urban planner, and theoretician Ludwig Hilber-seimer was brought to the Dessau Bauhaus by Hannes Meyerin 1929 to head the Department of Architecture.He remained at the Bauhaus underLudwig Mies van der Rohe and offered his practically oriented architecture course untilthe school closed in 1933.119 His theories on the planning of housing, city, and regionwere intended to bring order to the uncontrolled growth of the modern metropolis [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]