revised on 2010.10.16

Conclusion Towards the 21^st century

Thus, the architecture of the 20th century began with the re-discovery of the cube, undergoing the development of the cube, then the dismantling process of the cube into various shapes, the inclination toward complexity that is veering away from the cube, and ended at last in an elusive chaos. The cube is a sign of simplicity, while the form of chaos is the very sign of complexity. There stands reason which begins from nothing and construct in that simplicity-oriented background, while, in the complexity-oriented background, there stands sensibility which synthesize pluralistic senses.

When all is said and done, the one hundred years of the 20th century were characterized as changing greatly, from simplicity-oriented to complexity-oriented. By the way, before the first simplicity-orientation, there was the complexity-orientation of the latter half of the 19th century, and then, beyond the present day’s complexity-orientation, the signs of the next century’s simplicity-orientation are already half visible. There is formed a big wave in a word. As to the question of why the fluctuation like wave especially was formed, I regret to say that I cannot give a definite answer or its reason. I can only suppose that there is a physiological fluctuating phenomenon possessed by life which stabilizes by going back and forth like a pendulum. That can only be said as the ecology of human history.
There is a stage theory of growth in the study of history, which explains one concept continues in a certain period, and another stage will begin when a better concept is found. History is something that will grow steadily in one direction. Today, however, the over-optimistic human development myth is thought to be a nuisance. Though, it is unquestionable that one style is formed during a certain period in architectural history, and that it moves on to the next style at a certain time, ant furthermore we can perceive there something like an evolution of thinking way. That thinking way is a framework of thoughts known as a paradigm, as explained by Thomas Kuhn. Style is something that has precipitated from the framework of thoughts as an artistic form, and the study of style is something like digging up from it the state of those thoughts.
The historical development process, that is the process of growth, decline and reorientation of the paradigm mentioned here, is likely to involve the fluctuating phenomenon similar to the sine curve on a timeline, after all. To explain it three-dimensionally, it will be a spiral motion, while the theory that history progresses moving spirally has been quoted frequently until now. Furthermore, this book has even tried to suggest where each respective architectural style is situated on the sine curve. It is to be questioned about what period in history the crests of the maximum value and the minimum value are formed on the sine curve, and also questioned on what value scale the maximum and minimum values were measured. Even as an historian, once the scale is found, it is cleared up, but until it is found, everything remains at a complete loss.
Well then, in the viewpoint called the style theory of cube used here, The incidents that, the geometric architecture concept was contributed by Boullée in the 1780s prior to the French Revolution, and that Malevich announced Suprematism in the 1910s, when the Russian Revolution occurred, are the crests on one side. The fact that the Zurich architectural historian, Adolf Max Vogt, advocated paying attention to pure geometry has become a motif for this concept.
This is only showing a pole of simplicity concerning form, but of course, before and after that, there is a certain period of time like a tidal wave “Tsunami”, a time that heads toward simplicity, and then there is a time where the simplicity gradually crumbles. It is by no mean certain that an absolute pure form suddenly appeared and then disappeared again. Why here is discussed in relation to these two major revolutions seems because that the public’s general awareness displayed a rise at these times, and the same power that is influencing the social conditions is also influencing the architectural style. Incidentally, we cannot say that social conditions are simply reflected in the architectural style. Instead fact is that the revolution had taken place in advance in the architectural style.
When it looks like architectural forms are simplified, and purely geometrical forms are created, this is the time when reason became the absolute dominator. When all are being sacrificed for just one reason, a bloody, cruel social revolution will take place at that time. The modern society is built on a scientific reason, and therefore it has already experienced major violent revolutions twice, the French and the Russian Revolutions.

Even though we can criticize the inhumanity of the revolutions, we still cannot throw away the era where reason rules, and the era called modern goes under the initiative of reason. Then the excessive rationalism is about to be criticized by Romanticism, and it will be developed into a more smart rationalism.

Then, another type of turning point in the history of architectural form is the turning point from reason-initiative to sensibility-initiative. If we consider the 19th century, it is the period in which the style changed from the simplicity-oriented neoclassicism to the resplendent style of the neo-renaissance in the mid-19th century, while in the 20th century it is the period when the rationalism of the 1970s modernism was being criticized, and the post-modern steps in forwards, trying to restore the delight of architecture. If we look at the social circumstances, each of them corresponds to the time of unrest in large cities in 1848-1849, and to the 1969 May Revolution in Paris and its global aftermath, respectively. The 19th century’s circumstances related to this have been discussed in detail in my previous book, “The Genealogy of the Architectural Dream – The 19th Century Aspect of the German Spirit” Those who are interested, please refer to this book written in Japanese.

As explained in detail until now, I expect it is understood to a certain extent that the first half of the 20th century had progressed under the initiative of reason, while the second half had progressed under the initiative of sensibility. Of course, because the present day is an era in which reason is the foundation of all thoughts, the adjustments of the logic, then even in the era led by sensibility the steady work of reason continues. One can say that the change is similar to that a self-restrained army called reason is controlled by the emotionally rich civilians called sensibility.

And other than that, there are periods in which we can compare the 19th century to the 20th century. Those periods are at the height of romanticism in the 1810s and the 1930s, and the period of Neo-Baroque inclination around the 1870s and 1990s. After doing a simple subtraction, the number extracted is 120-130 years. I suppose that it is about right to consider that number as the cycle period regulating the style transformation of modern ages.

I am prepared to accept any criticism about this number issue, but please look at it as a challenging hypothesis from the above stated point of view. Even if the current age is thought to have lost its orientation and confused, there is actually a strong stream at the bottom of water, which someone must point out some day. Although this cycle period is an event resulted from the history of an architectural style, as architectural style is a phenomenon that is concurrent with social movements, I think that the spiral motion of this cycle period can also be found in the social events, which is something we need to ask to the social historians.

Someone might say that this number could not be acceptable if it is not applied also prior to the 18th century, but my knowledge does not extend far beyond that. Moreover, this phenomenon may be something that belongs only to the modern times, which is trying to make reason a nucleus of thought, like a new religion. Because the period from the early renaissance to the late baroque formed also a cycle of architectural form of simplicity and complexity, and we find there a cycle period of more than 300 years, considerably longer than that of the modern times.

In addition, because the various events all over the world are not something to be understood with only one wave, someone may point out that the physiology peculiar to Christian society has no relation to those of Japan etc. Let me just answer to it that modern times is an era that is trying to put the whole world in order under one reason. Just as we can see from the way the International Style spreads, we find there a process that the reason of the leading Europeans is being accepted gradually worldwide.

By the way, attempts to make the world as one started with the colonial system in the Imperialism era, and at the beginning of the 20th century, internationalism arose and is now taking the form known as the global network. Those were respectively expressed in architectural style.

Now, if you can look at it that way, as an architectural style, the 1990s is an era that represented neo-baroque, and additionally it can be described as a period where architectural form is gaining its complexity. And then, the present day mainly under the initiative of sensibility is an era in which reason is hiding in the shadows, and it is not an era where clear concepts and words can lead the time. After the post-modern, it has become difficult to agree with the clear theories of Le Corbusier and the simple forms of Mies. The present day, if explained in the 19th century’s term, corresponds a phase of passing neo-renaissance, eclecticism and going on to the neo-baroque, which, in 20th century terms, corresponds to the phase passing the post-modern mannerism, typological eclecticism and going to the chaotic form.

If we are to foretell what will come next, something like a neo Art Nouveau will appear around the 2010s to the 2020s, and something like a neo Purism will flourish around 2030s and the 2040s. As mentioned before, the signs of the neo Art Nouveau are thought to have already appeared in glimpses, but it is as yet uncertain what form it will finally mature into, or how it will spread.

There are plenty of topics that should be grappled by present day architectural design, and there is no way of knowing which and how it will progress. Furthermore, since I cannot predict how the innovations in other fields beside architecture and social events will change, I also do not know what shape architecture will take. But If we understand that style is something that has its own ecology, and it changes as a physiological phenomenon, and additionally, if we really ponder upon how the end of the 19th century has turned out, perhaps some degree of wisdom can be gained.

For the time being, it can be only predicted that two topics, information technology and ecology, will influence the first half of the 21st century greatly. If we think on those lines, while computer graphics technology makes free curved surfaces possible, and the naturalism of ecology progresses on the other side, we can catch a few glimpses of the neo Art Nouveau. Even though only at a glance, the late 19th century Art Nouveau may have seemed like an artwork by some talented individual artists, but it actually depended on the cast iron processing technique, which was the high technology of that time. Supposing that there was a background of thought of naturalism, so to speak, organicism, the role to be fulfilled by information technology and ecology present days will let itself be known naturally.

Those who have used rather high quality computer graphic software know that it is easy to create outrageous and unusual objects in the display space, and that it stirs the power of the imagination. That has been created automatically with an artificial intelligence (AI) program, and, if it should be transformed, it could give birth to fantastical sceneries, such as something found in the video works produced by the computer artist Youichiro Kawaguchi. Give virtual reality another ten years, and there is even a possibility that it will bring forth a high level of art, unimaginable right now. I feel that to manifest these forms into real constructions or spaces will be the front line of future architects’ efforts. That will probably become a culture supposedly known as electronic ecology, and it will decorate the scenery of cities.

Then, the flow under the initiative of sensibility will create a path for an increasingly chaotic world, but just as history taught us, that is at the height of maturity, so to speak, heading toward an apocalyptic demise, and it may suddenly just disappear. Together with it, on the other hand, the simplicity-orientated concept is being nurtured naturally, as if to resist this inclination. And, as seen by Behrens, it may change into a neo-classical geometric simplicity at the end of the neo Art Nouveau. The present day can be perceived as an era in which the two styles diverge into a style heading toward maturity, and another style that is growing from now.

Incidentally, the baroque period was understood as a period when distorted shapes were utilized, and in which magnificent and splendid architectural embellishment were developed, but on the other hand the overall shape of the building demanded a simple and strong symmetrical axis. Then, the rococo period displayed a duality where, on one side, embellishment had shown an inclination to become delicate and complex, while, on the other hand, the simple contours of frame borders emerged, and building contours and walls were also becoming simple and plain. Later, the maturing rococo decorations suddenly became unpopular, and changed to the neoclassical, which preferred simplicity. That composition certainly will be the means for thoughts on the duality of the present complexity-orientation and simplicity-orientation.

In this way, the 21st century is predicted to be a third period of the modern times, continuing after the first period of the modern times of the 19th century, and the second period of the modern times of the 20th century. When thinking of the places that generated styles such as ancient temples, medieval churches and early modern palaces, I think of factories as the generating place of modern styles. This is because the modern paradigm is symbolized by reason, and factories are its best embodiment. The reason why the AEG Turbine Factory by Behrens, who had given a temple character to the factory, and the Office and Factory Buildings at the Deutscher Werkbund Exhibition in Cologne by Gropius, who succeeded Behrens's belief, are important in history is because the architectural style of modern times were born there. By the way, the factory architecture symbolizing the 19th century is the heavy industry factories that represented the secondary industry, and the factory architecture symbolizing the 20th century is the sky-scraping office buildings, as the factories of the tertiary industry.

Proceeding in this manner, it is predicted that, even in the 21st century, new types of factory constructions will generate styles. However, what is to be the 21st century factory is as yet unknown. Probably, since the information industry will become the fourth industry, will it be practically, for example, a factory building of completely air conditioned clean room type? And then, what form will the game of simplicity and complexity take? There are plenty of imaginations that come to mind, but let’s leave the answer to the 21^st century architects.

＊

> BACK