Postmodernism: Nostalgia for the Old Good Days or Design Tool for the New Life?

Hardly any art trend in contemporary architecture caused so much debate, and comprehensive lengthy discussions as it did a style of Postmodernism. Over the past 50 years there have appeared various reflections of its ideas in almost all countries where any slightly significant construction has taken place. Precisely through this architectural experimentation the society started to extensively consider this phenomenon of modern consciousness. It is very unusual of a style direction or a trend in architecture, when at first there emerge some buildings and only after that came the perception and numerous discussions of the method or its penetration into other forms of arts.

Postmodernism has become one of the main poles of the wide range of modern Western architecture movements since the early 70’s. This rather arbitrary definition combines creative concepts and trends that oppose the basic postulates of the “Modern movement”, also known as “Modernism” in terms of the architectural establishment and development. The main achievement of this style that was clear to the average viewer was the restoring of buildings’ imagery. The theatrical and acting principles, the complex associative multi-side concepts came back to the everyday life; the color and ornament were restored; certain historical elements of design got a new scale.

Such scholars and critics as E. Curtius, J. Yedike, S. Stevens, and others, view “Postmodernism” as parallel to “Mannerism”; and it does not only refer to the world view scale but also the purely formal and stylistic features. In several of his articles the renowned architectural scholar, Academician A. Ikonnikov juxtaposes Mannerism and Postmodernism in art. He emphasizes that “Mannerism bases its forms on the rethinking, imitation and distortion of the classical forms of the previous period; whereas Postmodernism imitates and inverts the forms of Modernism….

Mannerism aims at affecting, amazing the viewer by a solely individual effect, as well as Postmodernism does. One can find here a collision of the seemingly disparate scales, unexpected spatial tricks, elements of illusiveness as well as refinement combined with brutality; and so many others”. In his book “The Language of Post-Modern Architecture” Charles Jencks gives the following definition of this movement: “Postmodernism is the populist pluralistic art of direct communicability”. As a general philosophical and ideological phenomenon this trend gradually got a great many credible definitions and justifications. Jean Baudrillard defined its cultural paradigm as the major one for the art of modern times: “Citation, simulation, reappropriation. These are not just the terms of contemporary art, but they are its essence”.

At the very beginning architectural Postmodernism found its reflection in relatively small shapes of shops, restaurants and private house; later on there appeared the first public spaces and facilities. And the large office buildings started emerging when it could be considered a widely spread architectural trend. Not all scholars were ready to right away accept the existence of Postmodern architecture as a separate movement. Extremely authoritative K. Frampton did not use this term at all as he considered the followers of the movement as populists (R. Venturi and D. Scott Brown, C. Moore and R. Stern), rationalists (A. Rossi and G. Grassi, V. Gregotti and Ticino, O. M. Ungers and J. P. Kleihues), post-avantgardists (M. Graves, H. Hollein, P. Portoghesi, R. Bofill, J. Stirling) and critical regionalists (M. Botta, T. Ando). All of these architects displayed to a certain extent their devotion to the principles of Postmodern architecture; but the fact that it has become a significant worldwide phenomenon over the last few decades is no longer doubted.

The possibility of historical references was to a large extent triggered by the customers of such projects. Besides the assumed originality and the greater figurative contextuality of the new spaces, the customers’ directions played the major role in the creation of the iconic Postmodern projects. For instance, one of the first high-profile sites of Postmodern architecture – the Piazza d’Italia in New Orleans (1977) by Charles Moore contained nostalgic ideas that were compiled in the grotesque composition as well as certain symbols like the huge map of Italy that was used in the finishing decking area of the piazza that was created to host various festivals of the local Italian community. The desire to reflect the recognizable images of the lost historical homeland justified the use of eclectic elements in order to create the artistic association. This approach to interaction with the customer along with the bright expressiveness of the final image positioned Postmodernism as new, modern and highly sought after at first within the American architecture and then all around the world.

In high-rise architecture the iconic Postmodern objects were the American skyscrapers by Philip Johnson who before this movement appeared had been considered one of the closest associates of the acclaimed master and chief Modern apologist Mies van der Rohe. Although the AT&T building in New York (1978) was a very robust and rationalist administrative skyscraper, it had a tank top roof that copied the shape of Chippendale furniture. The building received much attention and for a long time it was the focus of heated discussions among professionals and ordinary people. The architect spent the next two decades on consistently developing the forms of the architectural Postmodern language that were new to him. Thus, it is not at all surprising that Comerica Bank Tower (Nations Bank) in Dallas, Texas, USA (1987) and the Museum of Television and Radio in New York (1992) are known for the prominent hierarchical structure, textural contrasts and overall monumentality along with the diverse historical associations and generally expressive imagery. The Crystal Cathedral skyscraper in California already shows Johnson’s gradual withdrawal from the formal Postmodern principles in favor of the visually lighter high-tech architecture. But his projects of the late 1970’s and early 1990’s contain all the essential characteristics of this movement: references to history, irony, originality and bright imagery, concept ambiguity, partial contextualism.

Full content of this issue you can read here

The full version of the article can be read in our printed issue, also you can subscribe to the web-version of the magazine

MARIANNA MAYEVSKAYA