Journals / A+Arch Design International Journal of Architecture and Design / 2026 / Volume: 6 Issue: 1

Is Ornament Crime? Discussing The Representative Nature of Ornament in Architecture

Süsleme Suç Mu? Mimarlıkta Süslemenin Temsili Doğasını Tartışmak

Gülşah Güleç(GAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8041-2018
Pages
—
Publication Date
2020-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It will constitute a theoretical basis for further discussions on ornament in architecture.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Ornament is a conceptual and cultural discussion.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, the change in its source of representation from nature to culture in the early 20th century leads ornament to be redefined, and even refused in architecture.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It will constitute a theoretical basis for further discussions on ornament in architecture.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Architectural design · architectural theory · ornamental architecture

Abstract

Ornament is a conceptual and cultural discussion. But it is generally reduced to being discussed as a formal and superficial construction. It is one of the main tools of representation. It mainly represents nature. However, the change in its source of representation from nature to culture in the early 20th century leads ornament to be redefined, and even refused in architecture. Modern architects accuse it of being a crime not capable of representing modern culture. Post-modern architects embrace ornament as the main tool of representation in the second half of the century. It is called as the return of ornament in architecture. Today, the reinvention of ornament is rather discussed in the architecture of the 21st century. It is discussed by new concepts such as mediatic, phylogenetic, chaotic, eccentric, hypnotic, photogenic, and parametric due to the developments in the digital technology. As such, ornament now represents digital culture. The aim of this paper is to reveal the fact that conceptual and cultural framework of ornament is significantly changed in architecture. It is critically important to understand this change for architects in the 21st century in which ornament is rediscovered both as a tool of design and representation. The changing representative nature of ornament is therefore discussed in the paper. It will constitute a theoretical basis for further discussions on ornament in architecture.

Özet

Süsleme, kavramsal ve kültürel bir tartışmadır. Ancak mimarlıkta süsleme genellikle biçimsel ve yüzeysel bir inşa ve tartışma olmaya indirgenmiştir. Süsleme, önemli temsil araçlarından biridir. Daha çok doğayı ve doğal oluşumları temsil etmiştir. Ancak erken 20. yüzyılda temsiliyet kaynağının doğadan kültüre doğru değişim göstermiş olması süslemenin yeniden tanımlanmasına, hatta mimarlıkta süslemeye karşı çıkılmasına neden olmuştur. Modern mimarlar, süslemeye modern kültürü temsil etmediği gerekçesiyle karşı çıkmıştır. Buna karşılık, post-modern mimarlar yüzyılın ikinci yarısında süslemeyi başlıca temsiliyet aracı olarak kabul etmiş ve kullanmıştır. Bu, mimarlıkta süslemenin geri dönüşü olarak ele alınmıştır. 21. yüzyılın mimarlığında ise süslemenin yeniden keşfedildiği anlaşılmaktadır. Dijital teknolojinin gelişmesiyle süsleme bugün medyatik, filogenetik, kaotik, eksantrik, hipnotik, fotojenik ve parametrik gibi yeni kavramlarla tanımlanmakta ve tartışılmaktadır. Öyle ki, süsleme artık dijital kültürü temsil etmektedir. Bu makalenin amacı, mimarlıkta süslemenin kavramsal ve kültürel çerçevesinin önemli bir değişim geçirdiğini ortaya koymaktır. Bu değişimi anlamak, süslemenin hem bir tasarım hem de bir temsil aracı olarak yeniden keşfedilmiş olduğu 21. yüzyılda mimarlar için kritik bir önem taşımaktadır. Bu nedenle, makalede süslemenin değişen temsili doğası tartışılmaktadır. Bu tartışma, mimarlık alanında süsleme üzerine yapılacak olan yeni tartışmalar için kuramsal bir altlık oluşturacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Güleç, G. (2020). Is Ornament Crime? Discussing The Representative Nature of Ornament in Architecture. A+Arch Design International Journal of Architecture and Design, Volume: 6 Issue: 1. https://ajindex.com/articles/1170018

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (28)

  1. Loos, A. (1970). Ornament and Crime. Programs and Manifestoes on 20th Century Architecture. Ed. U. Conrads. Cambridge; The MIT Press.
  2. Etymology Online Dictionary (2019). The Etymology of Ornament. Available at: https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=ornament.
  3. Ots, E. (2011). Decoding Theoryspeak: An Illustrated Guide to Architectural Theory. New York; Routledge.
  4. Pell, B. (2010). The Articulate Surface: Ornament and Technology in Contemporary Architecture. Basel; Birkhauser.
  5. Lynn, G. (2004). The Structure of Ornament. Digital Tectonics. Ed. N. Leach, D. Turnbull & C. Williams. West Sussex; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  6. Gleiter, J. H. (2012). What is Ornament? Ornament Today: Digital, Material, Structural. Ed. J. H. Gleiter. Bolzano; Bolzano University Press.
  7. Semper, G. (1989). The Four Elements of Architecture and Other Writings. Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.
  8. Rykwert, J. (1982). Ornament is no Crime. The Necessity of Artifice. Ed. J. Rykwert. New York; Rizzoli Publications.
  9. Levit, R. (2008). Contemporary ornament: The return of the symbolic repressed. Harvard Design Magazine, No. 06, 71-85.
  10. Moussavi, F., Kubo, M. (2015). The Function of Ornament. Barcelona; Actar Publishing.
  11. URL-1. https://ascholarlyskater.com/2017/10/17/a-guide-to-gothic-architecture/, Ascholarlyskater, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  12. URL-2. https://ascholarlyskater.com/2017/11/30/guide-renaissance-architecture/, Ascholarlyskater, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  13. URL-3. https://www.e-architect.co.uk/rome/santa-maria-della-pace, E-architect, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  14. URL-4. https://www.flickr.com/photos/24364447@N05/5222076286, Flickr, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  15. URL-5. https://www.archdaily.com/59412/ad-classics-seagram-building-mies-van-der-rohe, Archdaily, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  16. URL-6. https://www.widewalls.ch/defining-postmodern-architecture/, Widewalls, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  17. Cache, B. (2007). Digital Semper. Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory. Ed. W. W. Braham, J. A. Hale. New York; Routledge.
  18. Picon, A. (2010). Digital Culture in Architecture: An Introduction for the Design Professions. Basel; Birkhauser.
  19. Picon, A. (2013). Ornament: The Politics of Architecture and Subjectivity. Chichester; Wiley Publications.
  20. URL-7. https://www.architonic.com/es/project/frank-o-gehry-fondation-louis-vuitton/5103341, Architonic, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  21. URL-8. https://inhabitat.com/construction-crawls-ahead-on-herzog-de-meurons-elbphilharmonie, Inhabitat, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  22. Balık, D., Allmer, A. (2016). A critical review of ornament in contemporary architectural theory and practice. ITU Journal, No. 1, 157-169.
  23. Balık, D. (2016). Ornament: The politics of architecture and subjectivity. The Journal of Architecture, No. 8, 1336-1339.
  24. URL-9. https://tr.pinterest.com, Pinterest, last accessed on 04 June 2020 [25] URL-10. https://tr.pinterest.com, Pinterest, last accessed on 04 June 2020
  25. Kipnis, J. (2012). The Cunning of Cosmetics: A Personal Reflection on the Architecture of Herzog & De Meuron. Constructing a New Agenda: Architectural Theory 1993-2009. Ed. K. Sykes. New York; Princeton Architectural Press.
  26. Chevrier, J. F., Herzog, J. (2006). Ornament, Structure, Space: A conversation with Jacques Herzog. Barcelona; El Croquis.
  27. Benjamin, A. (2006). Surface effects: Borromini, Semper, Loos. The Journal of Architecture, No. 1, 1- 35.
  28. URL-11. http://architettura.it/inabit/20020215/index.htm, Architettura, last accessed on 04 June 2020