MODERNİZMİN TANIMI, SINIRLARI, ERKEN YİRMİNCİ YÜZYİL MİMARLIĞINDA FARKLI TAVIRLAR

An interpretation of modernism is to return to the lost values of one time, to revitalize them once more, just as Renaissance looked back to Vitruvius or to the Classical Age. Another way is to see modernism not as "rebirth" as in Renaissance, but as "birth", ie. to form the present and future values from scratch. This was the attitude common among the avant-garde movements of early 20th century: Italian Futurism (its other name being Antipassatismo), Suprematism, Neo-Plasticism and Constructivism demanded complete break with the past, the last three turning to total abstraction of objects which was another aspect of 20th century Modernism. Avant-garde attitudes in the first quarter of the century demanded a new environment which would be dominated by industry, machine, abstraction, simplicity and scientific thinking. Nature and rural life were rejected because of their past implications, but urban life, created by the new technology was accepted, just as in A.Sant' Elia's multi-level future city imagined as a gigantic machine. The beginnings of Modern Architecture have been extended back to different periods; in the widest sense, the Modern Period begins with the termination of the Medieval Age and the birth of Humanism. It has been traced back to mid- 18th century, ie. to the Age of Reason, to the beginning of Industrial Revolution, or to William Morris; but the general tendency has been to define Modern Architecture as the architecture that is growing up with this century. Charles Jencks rightly thinks that Modern Architecture is a broad term that embraces diverse developments of 20th century architecture and he differentiates six distinct movements between 1920 and 1970. Within this plurality of expressions, the first and the most distinct movement among others, that comes to one's mind when Modern Architecture is mentioned, is the functional, rational International Style known as Neue Sachtichkeit (New Objectivity) active between the years 1922-32. This movement, which introduced strict formal, social and technical principles based on objective values, aimed at reshaping the human environment with an Utopian attitude. Supported by congresses, exhibitions, publications, and defended by historian-critics such as N.Pevsner, J.M.Richards and S.Giedion, the movement became so influential and, regardless of regional and national differences, changed so much the face of world architecture towards a singleness of style that, it came to be identified with Modern Architecture. Its foremost exponents were Walter Gropius, Mies van der Rohe, Le Corbusier and J.J.P.Oud. Despite its dominance, it is possible to talk about different and subjective approaches, too: Scandinavian Empiricism, Frank Lloyd Wright's Organic Architecture, Dutch and German Expressionists, classical tradition within Purism, Romantic Classicism of Mies, MIAR group in Italy which tried to merge tradition with rationalism, diverse minds even within CIAM and Neo-Classic reactions to Neue Sachtichkeit İn Germany, Italy and Russia. This diversity is best witnessed within avant-garde circles in Germany: the functional-rational wing vs. the emotional Expressionists. This separation of approaches showed itself early before the War in the Deutsche Werkbund, with one group defending objectivity, collective work and Typisierung, while the opposing group believed in Kunstwollen, i.e. creativity, imagination, subjectivity. German architects were torn between these two trends shifting from one to the other; those, like Bruno Taut, Ludwig Hilberseimer, Hans Poelzig and even Eric Mendelsohn, involved in Expressionism, moved to the rational side after the war; while Walter Gropius and Mies van der Rohe, leaders and among the founders of strict principles of Neue Sachlichkeit, for a short while surrendered to the powerful attraction of the expressionist Glass Chain Group. The Bauhaus has also been accepted as the symbol of Modernism, just as the Neue Sachlichkeit has been by those who tend to view modern architecture within a limited frame. But in the foundation principles of the Bauhaus one can find the remnants of the past: the acceptance of William Morris' ideal to revitalize the medieval guild tradition and the unity of arts and crafts. Walter Gropius called architects to unite forces with artists and craftsmen in order to realize the creative cathedral (Zukunftskathedrale) of the future. The word Bauhaus was chosen purposefully, because it came from Bauhütte which meant "masons'lodge" in the Middle Ages. The title page of the Weimar Programme was designed by the expressionistic leanings of the School in its foundation period. Julius Posener called this tendency of the Bauhaus, "Medieval Expressionism". Individual creativity and "building in imagination, unconcerned about technical difficulties" were among the guiding principles of early Bauhaus until 1923. Later, with the emphasis given to the collaboration with industry, objective thinking and teamwork took over. Mies van der Rohe, who defended. anonymous but good architecture, refused to recognize problems of form saying that form was not the aim of his work but only the result. But in his short expressionistic period between 1919-23, Mies designed two glass skyscraper projects with a formalistie attitude. These projects show his affinity with the Glass Chain Group and their spiritual leader Paul Scheerbart. Furthermore, Mies reacted to some of the Neue Sachlichkeit principles by rejecting the "form follows function" slogan and mass production. Le Corbusier had a short visionary period of glass in 1920 when he designed his glass skyscrapers for "The City of Three Million Inhabitants". Glass was a material alien to his conception of concrete architecture. In Le Corbusier's career, there is a clear separation of attitudes; his early purist period with a right-angled geometry was dominated by objective, universal sensations as he called it, and in his later phase, after the Second World War, he turned to individualism and to freedom of forms dominated by secondary, emotional sensations. Here is another instance of the two opposing attitudes: objectiveness and subjectivity. In Ronchamps, he was contradicting his early "five principles" in architecture. While earlier, he called the house a machine, later he defined architecture as "a thing of art to move us" and that "which goes beyond utilitarian needs". MODERNtZMtN TANIMI, SINIRLARI, ERKEN YÎRMÎNCİ YÜZYIL MİMARLIĞI (ODTÜ MFD 1988) 65 Contradictions dominated Le Corbusier's life as an architect. His attacks on Ecole des Beaux-Arts were contradicting his respect for Classicism in certain instances. Le Corbusier was one of the architects reponsible in setting the principles of the Neue Sachlichkeit, yet he was the first to liquidate them. In short, seeing the little-known faces of some of the leading architects of the "New Objectivity" period proves that it is not enough to see developments from a single viewpoint, but a comprehensive survey with all the contrasting and complex aspects will lead to a more complete story.