ARCH 121
Introduction to Architecture

Adolf Loos was a notable Austrian and Czechoslovak architect, as well as a respected European theorist. He had a significant impact on modern architecture and was known for his criticism of the Art Nouveau movement. Loos' ideas and writings played a crucial role in the establishment of the Vienna Secession movement and postmodernism. Despite facing personal challenges, including hearing impairment and multiple failed marriages, Loos pursued his passion for architecture. Influenced by the Chicago School of Architecture, particularly by architect Louis Sullivan, Loos emphasized the importance of functionality and simplicity in design. His renowned manifesto, Ornament and Crime, advocated for clean and unadorned surfaces, contrasting the extravagant decorations of the time. Loos also developed the "Raumplan" method of arranging interior spaces, showcased in his design of Villa Müller in Prague. Adolf Loos passed away at the age of 62 in 1933.n his pursuit of education, Loos attended various Gymnasium schools and explored different programs. Although he faced setbacks and changed his field of study multiple times, his diverse background equipped him with a wide range of skills. For instance, he gained an understanding of masonry and craftsman work, which greatly influenced his architectural work. Loos' experience and expertise in the field earned him recognition and respect from scholars in the architectural community.n the late 1800s, architect Adolf Loos traveled to the United States to study outside architecture. He worked various jobs to support himself and explored American architecture in New York and Chicago. Loos was particularly inspired by architect Louis Sullivan and his concept of form follows function. Despite leaving America in 1896, Loos later submitted a building design for the Chicago Tribune Tower Competition in 1922, which showcased his architectural ideas. He eventually returned to Vienna, where he became a prominent figure and rejected the ornate style of the Vienna Secession. Instead, he advocated for a new, plain, and utilitarian approach to architecture. Loos's early commissions in Vienna mainly involved designing interiors for shops and cafés.Loos was an Austrian architect who criticized the Vienna Secession and used provocative catchphrases in his essays. He argued that the evolution of culture is associated with the elimination of ornament from everyday objects, making it a crime to force craftsmen to waste their time on ornamentation. Loos's stripped-down buildings influenced the minimal massing of modern architecture and were finished with rich and expensive materials. He was also interested in the decorative arts, collecting sterling silver and high-quality leather goods. He designed the interior of the Kníže of Vienna and had a brief collaboration with Frederick John Kiesler in 1920. His glassware, produced by Lobmeyer, is still in production today.Loos designed big projects such as the "Looshaus" for the Viennese tailor Goldman and Salatsch, which was criticized by contemporaries. He also designed several housing projects for the City of Vienna and was awarded Czechoslovakian citizenship after World War I. Loos had an admiration for classical architecture and his entry to the 1922 Chicago Tribune competition was a massive doric column. He taught at the Sorbonne and was contracted to build a house for Tristan Tzara in Paris. His main place of residence remained in Vienna.The essay was written at a time when Art Nouveau, often referred to as Secession in Austria, was demonstrating a new direction for modern art, something that Loos had denounced even at its height in 1900. The essay played a significant role in defining the philosophy of modernism in architecture and in articulating some moralizing beliefs that were carried over from the Arts and Crafts movement and would be essential to the Bauhaus design studio.Loos asserted, "The evolution of culture marches with the elimination of ornament from useful objects," connecting the modern trend of applying evolution to cultural contexts with the idealistic notion of cultures progressing linearly and upward. Loos's work was inspired by the rules he came across while designing a plain building next to a palace. In the end, he added window flower boxes as a concession to specifications.When he is eight years old, he becomes aware of violet, the colour which the eighteenth century had discovered, because before that the violet was blue and the purple snail red. If, however, the modern man slaughters and devours somebody, he is a criminal or a degenerate. The Papuan tattoos his skin, his boat, his oar, in short, everything that is within his reach. The modern man who tattoos himself is a criminal or a degenerate. Those who are tattooed but are not imprisoned are latent criminals or degenerate aristocrats. The urge to ornament one`s face, and everything in one`s reach, is the origin of fine art. The first ornament that came into being, the cross, had an erotic origin. The first work of art, the first artistic action of the first artist daubing on the wall, was in order to rid himself of his natural excesses. The man who created it felt the same urge as Beethoven, he experienced the same joy that Beethoven felt when he created the Ninth Symphony. But the man of our time who daubs the walls with erotic symbols to satisfy an inner urge is a criminal or a degenerate. It is obvious that his urge overcomes man: such symptoms of degeneration most forcefully express themselves in public conveniences. With children it is a natural phenomenon: their first artistic expression is to scrawl on the walls erotic symbols. But what is natural to the Papuan and the child is a symptom of degeneration in the modern man. I have made the following observation and have announced it to the world: The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from objects of daily use. What cast the gloom was the thought that ornament could no longer be produced. Those objects without ornament, which mankind had created In earlier centuries, had been carelessly discarded and destroyed. We possess no carpenter`s benches of the Carolingian period: instead any rubbish which had even the smallest ornament was collected, cleaned and displayed in ostentatious palaces that were built for them, people walked about sadly amongst the display cabinets. What makes our period as important is that it is incapable of producing new ornament. Behold, the time is at hand, fulfilment awaits us. ” But there are still hobgoblins who will not allow it to happen. Humanity is still to groan under the slavery of ornament. Man had progressed enough for ornament to no longer produce erotic sensations in him, unlike the Papuans, a tattooed face did not increase the aesthetic value, but reduced it. Man had progressed far enough to find pleasure in purchasing a plain cigarette case, even if it cost the same as one that was ornamented. And I said: “Behold, Goethe`s death chamber is more magnificent than all the pomp of the Renaissance, and a plain piece of furniture is more beautiful than all the inlaid and carved museum pieces. Goethe`s language is more beautiful than all the ornaments of the shepherds of the Pegnitz. ” This was heard by the hobgoblins with displeasure. The state, whose duty it is to impede people in their cultural development, took over the question of development and re-adoption of ornament and made it its own. Soon one was to see a buffet introduced into the Viennese Museum of Applied Arts, which was called “the prosper°us fish shoal,” them was even a cupboard, which was given the trade name “the cursed princess” or something similar, which referred to the ornament with which this unfortunate piece of furniture was covered. The state forces every cultivated twenty-year-old man to wear outdated footwear for three years (after all, every state proceeds on the assumption that a poorly. 26.12.2023