Is Ornament Necessary in Architecture? - Special Academic Support

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

A famous and talented architect Adolf Loos considered simplifying various architectural objects his primary purpose. In his well-known essay Ornament and Crime, he suggested achieving a four-hour working day and easier shifts by removing ornament, and though many architects agreed with him, this idea has never been brought to life. It is hard to disagree that technology has come far enough to make it possible to simplify objects like furniture, buildings, and shoes and prove that ornament is an unnecessary part. Undoubtedly, making architectural objects simpler would allow people to create them easier and faster, which is a significant benefit. However, there are those architects who consider ornament extremely vital hence worth paying attention to, and its magical beauty is not the only reason.

To begin with, the core purposes of ornament are to highlight those parts of a building that require special attention or hide those elements that do not look presentable. For example, disguising obvious construction details that may disturb the harmony of space and, on the contrary, amplifying specific features of a building are not possible without ornament. Therefore, it becomes evident that being beautiful and unique is not the main characteristic and purpose of ornament. It can also define the border of a designed object or shape and help a person find out how to use a space if the buildings specific features are not manifested clearly. Finally, even if architects stop using ornament and are able to simplify objects and work faster, it is not guaranteed that more severe problems will not appear. These issues are not hidden and unpresentable elements or special details that do not draw peoples attention the problems that are unlikely to be solved without ornament.

To draw a conclusion, one may say that the love for ornament because of its beauty and originality is essential but not the only basis for Looss idea not becoming an architectural reality. Ornament is a vital part of the architecture, and reducing working hours is not enough reason to remove it. The factors discussed above should answer the question of why Looss idea of 1908 has not been brought to life yet, and what issues need to be solved before ornament may be removed.

Click Here To Order Now!