Modernist philosophy continues to thrive due to its criticism - I believe. It seems to be an idea that came at a point in architectural history where someone thought architecture needed to be analyzed and recorded. From that point forward, one finds the term modernism used quite often It has become a point of comparison. In Maki's introduction, it seems that the idea of the "present" is a means to describe Modernism. Modernism expresses the human part of architecture; people view architecture through their "present" human condition; therefore it is ever changing with each new birth into society.
54 St. Emmanuel Street 1945
In the forties the building on the left of the photo was a drycleaner. How did people see and or understand the building at that time? At the turn-of-the-century, it was a retail building.
54 St. Emmanuel Street 2011
Today, with a facade modification, the building will be remodeled for business use. The renovation kept the key architectural features of the facade while adding more windows into the design.
These photos represent the history of a building/architecture. The critiques of the past may have discerned the original building by its ornamentation and materials. Today, we may critique this building by its usability and its relation with the urban fabric.
Do you think that having a reference point like Modernism is a good thing? When you say the work "Modern" -- does it mean the same thing to everyone, or well, at least to the a certain body of people, like your peers. Why do you think a reference point is important? What happens when someone uses a word like Modernism and has a different take? Is that good or bad?
ReplyDelete