1950s Architecture

By the 1950s, architecture was following International Style. This style relied on glass, concrete, and steel to create buildings with high efficiency.  It was very simple and yet also became a symbol of modern wealth and technology.

Van der Rohe was a major leader in International Style. His motto was “less is more” and he designed some simple looking, yet magnificent structures. One of his most famous works is the Seagram Building, shown below. I personally think it is a pretty cool building because of all the black steel and glass. It looks simple but it still catches your eye.

Wright was another famous architect in the 1950s that designed some very creative structures. An example the book uses is the Guggenheim Museum. When I first saw the picture of it, I was impressed. The curved walls and continuous spiral ramp is so original; I don’t think I’ve seen anything like it. The book says that “The Guggenheim remains the definitive example of the modern architectural imagination.”

A third influential man we discussed was Buckminster Fuller. He is mostly known for his massive domes, composed of very strong triangular structures. This fits with International Style in that it uses minimum resources for maximum strength. It also could be very cheaply produced.

Overall, I really enjoy the aspects of International Style of architecture. It is very pleasing to the eye and yet is still cheap and cost effective. Also, architecture seems like it is useful to me. Instead of paintings that really have no relevance to our lives, architecture actually has significance.



Abstract Expressionism

By now, most of you probably know that I am not a huge fan of abstract art. When I saw the section in the book on Abstract Expressionism (pg. 84 -85) it just reminded me how weird this type of art is. It says that this art movement took inspiration on the “nonsensical performances of Dada”. Synonyms of nonsensical include absurd, stupid, and ridiculous. That is pretty much how I feel about Abstract Expressionism.

Abstract Expressionism parallels with physicists’ views of the universe – very random, vague, and disorganized. Most of these paintings are not representational. However, William Kooning’s Woman and Bicycle shows a large woman standing by what is apparently a bicycle. This painting took more than a year and a half to finish, which I thought was incredible. It would seem like in that amount of time, a good artist could create something that was actually worth looking at.

      The Woman and the Bicycle

I feel like it takes very little talent to create these types of works. For example, on page 87, there is a picture of Jackson Pollock “at work”. He is shown standing on a large canvas flinging paint around like a little kid. Maybe this is harder than it looks, but I just don’t see what makes these paintings so special. Overall, I guess I don’t see the value in this art because almost anyone could do it. I would rather place value on a very realistic painting that a talented artist put lots of effort into.

What do you think?

Pollock painting