“ModÂern archiÂtecÂture died in St Louis, MisÂsouri on July 15, 1972, at 3:32pm (or thereÂabouts).” This oft-quotÂed proÂnounceÂment by culÂturÂal and archiÂtecÂturÂal theÂoÂrist Charles Jencks refers to the demoÂliÂtion of the WenÂdell O. Pruitt Homes and William Igoe ApartÂments. The fate of that short-lived pubÂlic housÂing comÂplex, betÂter and more infaÂmousÂly known as Pruitt-Igoe, still holds rhetorÂiÂcal valÂue in AmerÂiÂca in arguÂments against the supÂposed social-engiÂneerÂing ambiÂtions made conÂcrete (often litÂerÂalÂly) in large-scale postÂwar modÂernist buildÂings. Though the true stoÂry is more comÂpliÂcatÂed, the fact remains that, whenÂevÂer we pinÂpoint it, modÂern archiÂtecÂture was wideÂly regardÂed as “dead.” What would come after it?
Why, postÂmodÂernism, of course. Jencks did more than his part to define modÂernism’s anyÂthing-goes sucÂcesÂsor moveÂment with The LanÂguage of Post-ModÂern ArchiÂtecÂture, in which he tells the tale of Pruitt-Igoe, which was then relÂaÂtiveÂly recent hisÂtoÂry.
The first ediÂtion came out in 1977, earÂly days indeed in the life of postÂmodÂernism, which in a video from HisÂtoric EngÂland archiÂtecÂturÂal hisÂtoÂriÂan Elain HarÂwood calls “the style of the nineÂteen-eightÂies.” Its riots of delibÂerÂateÂly inconÂgruÂous shape and colÂor, as well as its heaped-up unsubÂtle culÂturÂal and hisÂtorÂiÂcal refÂerÂences, suitÂed that unbriÂdled decade as perÂfectÂly as did the eleÂgantÂly garÂish furÂniÂture of the MemÂphis group.
In recent years, howÂevÂer, the buildÂings left behind by postÂmodÂernism have got more than a few of us askÂing quesÂtions — quesÂtions like, “Are they intenÂtionÂalÂly weird and tacky, or just designed with no taste?” That’s how YoutuÂber BetÂty Chen puts it in the ARTicÂuÂlaÂtions video just above, before launchÂing into an invesÂtiÂgaÂtion of postÂmodÂern archiÂtecÂture’s oriÂgin, purÂpose, and place in the built enviÂronÂment today. In her telling, the style was born in the earÂly nineÂteen-sixÂties, when archiÂtect Robert VenÂturi designed a rule-breakÂing house for his mothÂer in PhiladelÂphia, decidÂing “to disÂtort the pure order of the modÂernist box by reinÂtroÂducÂing disÂproÂporÂtionÂal arrangeÂments of clasÂsiÂcal eleÂments such as four-pane winÂdows, archÂes, the pedÂiÂment, and the decÂoÂraÂtive dado.”
An imporÂtant theÂoÂrist of postÂmodÂernism as well as a pracÂtiÂtionÂer (usuÂalÂly workÂing in both roles with his wife and colÂlabÂoÂraÂtor Denise Scott Brown), VenÂturi conÂvertÂed arch-modÂernist LudÂwig Mies van der Rohe’s decÂlaÂraÂtion that “less is more” into what would become, in effect, postÂmodÂernism’s brief manÂiÂfesto: “Less is a bore.” VenÂturi described himÂself as choosÂing “messy vitalÂiÂty over obviÂous uniÂty,” and the same could be said of a range of his colÂleagues in the eightÂies and nineties: Frank Gehry, Michael Graves, and Charles Moore in AmerÂiÂca; Also Rossi, RicarÂdo Bofill, and Bernard TschuÂmi in Europe; Minoru TakeyaÂma, KenÂgo Kuma, and AraÂta IsozaÂki in Japan.
PostÂmodÂern archiÂtecÂture flowÂered espeÂcialÂly in Britain: “The irrevÂerÂence came from AmerÂiÂca, the clasÂsiÂcism from Europe,” says HarÂwood. “What British archiÂtects did was weave those two eleÂments togethÂer.” As one of those archiÂtects, Sir TerÂry FarÂrell, tells HisÂtoric EngÂland, “the preÂcedÂing era had been earnest and anonyÂmous”; after interÂnaÂtionÂal modÂernism, the time had come to re-introÂduce perÂsonÂalÂiÂty, and in a flamÂboyÂant manÂner. His colÂleague Piers Gough rememÂbers feelÂing, in the mid-sixÂties, a cerÂtain envy for pop art — “they were doing colÂor, they were doing popÂuÂlar imagery, they had pretÂtiÂer girlÂfriends” — that inspired them to “ranÂsack popÂuÂlar imagery in archiÂtecÂture.” This project posed cerÂtain pracÂtiÂcal difÂfiÂculÂties of its own: “You can design a buildÂing to look like a soup can, but the probÂlem realÂly comes when you put the winÂdows in it.”
RenÂoÂvaÂtions to many an aging postÂmodÂern buildÂing have proven difÂfiÂcult to jusÂtiÂfy, givÂen that “irrevÂerÂence and exagÂgerÂaÂtion are out,” as Brock KeelÂing writes in a recent Bloomberg piece. “SigÂnifÂiÂcant postÂmodÂern buildÂings like the Abrams House in PittsÂburgh and the MuseÂum of ConÂtemÂpoÂrary Art in San Diego have already been demolÂished,” and othÂers are endanÂgered: “Fans of the James R. ThompÂson CenÂter — HelÂmut Jahn’s 1985 civic buildÂing, notÂed for its sliced-off dome facade and 17-stoÂry atriÂum with blue-and-salmon trim — fear it will deboned in prepaÂraÂtion for Google’s new ChicaÂgo headÂquarÂters.” The true archiÂtecÂturÂal postÂmodÂernism enthuÂsiÂast also appreÂciÂates much humÂbler works, such as JefÂfrey Daniels’ Los AngeÂles KenÂtucky Fried ChickÂen franÂchise that uninÂtenÂtionÂalÂly evokes of both a chickÂen and a chickÂen buckÂet. Long may it stand.
RelatÂed conÂtent:
Why Do PeoÂple Hate ModÂern ArchiÂtecÂture?: A Video Essay
Why PeoÂple Hate BruÂtalÂist BuildÂings on AmerÂiÂcan ColÂlege CamÂpusÂes
Based in Seoul, ColÂin Marshall writes and broadÂcasts on cities, lanÂguage, and culÂture. His projects include the SubÂstack newsletÂter Books on Cities, the book The StateÂless City: a Walk through 21st-CenÂtuÂry Los AngeÂles and the video series The City in CinÂeÂma. FolÂlow him on TwitÂter at @colinmarshall or on FaceÂbook.
Leave a Reply