DSDN171 Blog Assignment 4 (Week 4)

Adolf Loos argued in 1908 that, “The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from objects of daily use.” After careful consideration, I do believe that Loos is correct, to an extent. Most everyday objects today have little ornamentation – minimalist design, which is now popular, means there is no need to intrinsically decorate every object. Modern housewares such as plates and cups are simply and practically designed (ref. 1). This is just one example of what is now acceptable by today’s standards, compared to a plate years ago which was expected to have some sort of intricate design – a show of the craftsman’s talent. “Decorated plates are expensive, while white crockery, which is pleasing to the modern individual, is cheap.” However, I do believe that this is a result of industrialization– minimalist design is a cost-effective way of mass-producing. As Loos said, “ornament (…) commits a crime itself by damaging national economy”. Objects without much ornamentation are cheaper to produce, and it is not essential to ornament, therefore society has reduced its efforts to do so, resulting in progression. Therefore, I agree with Loos that culture has evolved as minimalist design has become more and more popular, but I do not agree with the context in which he puts it – “the man of our time who daubs the walls with erotic symbols to satisfy an inner urge is a criminal or degenerate”. It is not a crime to decorate; it has merely become something surplus to requirement.

Ref. 1
http://www.idealhomemagazine.co.uk/news/foo_article_146608.html