Design and Modernism the history of design following the pul M. chives, and libraries of art and design Dato 2110 roénikj wari 1928 Odeon Praha © uppolinaire @ baumeister @ blebl @ alas @ hausenblas & urban @ honzle kiec @ konrad @ léger @ UsicklJ @ mallarmé @ man ray @ molzahn @ ne~ rvul@ pleausso @ proust @ selfert @ Sima @ Slyrsky @ tele @ toyen @ yantura @ (6 ke) its exposure on pedestals or behind glass cases, has also generally been vie >d for its aesthetic qualities, divorced from any real sense of its original everyday context and function. Such galleries and museums have been powerful conditioning agents in the establishment of cul- tural hierarchies. Perhaps the most celebrated example is the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) in New York. Established in 1929, it was for many decades closely associated with the promotion of a ‘Bauhaus aesthetic’.® Its first specifically design-oriented show was the 1934 “Machine Art’ Exhibition [12], organized by Philip Johnson, with an emphasis on clean, geometric, and classic forms, symbolically and materially attuned to new materials and modern mass-production technology. Later in the decade, shows devoted to the work of Alvar Aalto and the Bauhaus further consolidated MOMA’s position as a propagandist for the modern aesthetic, an association which was later 30 DESIGN AND MODERNISM 11 Qian Jun-tao bolstered by Edgar Kaufmann’s ‘Good Design’ exhibitions of the 1950s. Such an outlook became closely linked to the cultural imprint of the multinational corporation and what may be seen as the globalization of avery particular kind of modernist design culture. This became evident in many exhibitions and museum displays across the world, a theme which will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 6. Although self- evident, it is important to remember that such collections have been formed in the light of particular beliefs as to what was culturally significant at specific historical moments and that the high premium placed on aesthetic content necessarily distinguishes their exhibits from what was generally consumed, used, and experienced by the majority The modernist creed has also been reinforced by the constant pro- duction of avant-garde manifestos, magazines, and books in the early12 Installation view of the Machine Artexhibition, MOMA, New York, 1934 Held between 5 March and 29 April 1934, this exhibition was curated by the arch- modernist Philip Johnson. Adopting a similar standpoint tothat explored by Herbert Read in Britain in his book Artand Industry, published in the same year, Johnson interpreted the functional forms and materials of aircraft propellers, industrial insulators, and ball-bearings in purely aesthetic terms Such emphasis on the clarity of abstract form set MOMA apart from the commercially widespread application of ‘streamlined forms to all kinds of objects. twentieth century, many of which have been specifically oriented towards an international readership. Furthermore, organizations com- mitted to the promotion of modern design, such as the Deutscher Werkbund (DWB), the Swedish Society of Industrial Design (Svenska Sléjdféreningen) or the rather less effective Design and Industries Association (DIA) in Britain, all left a legacy of exhibitions, related catalogues, periodicals, and other publications which have occupied the shelves of major art and design libraries ever since being committed to print. A number of art, architectural, and design educa- tional institutions have also left their mark through similar outputs. Perhaps the most celebrated self-propagandist body in this respect has been the Bauhaus, formed in Weimar, Germany, in 1919 under the directorship of Walter Gropius, moving to Dessau in 1925 and thence to Berlin in 1932, where it was finally closed by the Nazis in the follow- ing year. Fourteen Bawhausbiicher (Bauhaus Books) were published between 1925 and 1930, explaining Bauhaus aims, objectives and prac- tice to an international readership. It also published a journal, Bauhaus, which appeared in fifteen issues at intervals between 1926 and 1931. Furthermore, the Bauhaus Archive was founded in Darmstadt in 1960 (moving to Berlin in 1971), another stimulus for research into the his- tory and ideology of the institution, a process which subsequently con- tinued through the mounting of exhibitions such as Fifty Years Bauhaus which travelled in Europe and North and South America between 1968 and 1971. Similar developments concerning Bauhaus heritage 32 DESIGN AND MODERNISM were taking place in East Germany, with the mounting of a major exhi- bition in 1967 which led to the formation of a Bauhaus archive in Dessau.’ Until comparatively recently the ready availability of such resources for historians has tended to overshadow research into the wider patterns of design manufacture and consumption in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s.* Modernism: moral and political dimensions The moral dimension of modernism originated in the nineteenth- century design reform movement. It reflected a growing belief in early twentieth-century avant-garde design circles that products which both disguised their modes of construction through ornamental embellish- ment and were out of tune with the ‘spirit of the age’ (or Zeitgeist) were exemplars of ‘bad’ design. Adolf Loos, an important theorist of the early twentieth century who had been characterized by Pevsner as a ‘Pioneer’ of modernism, went so far as to claim in his celebrated text Ornament und Verbrechen (Ornament and Crime) of 1908: the modern ornamentalist is either a cultural laggard or a pathological case. He himself is forced to disown his work after three years. His productions are unbearable to cultured persons now, and will become so to others in a little while.’ Writing almost two decades later the architect-designer Le Corbusier, a central figure in the modernist debate, further clarified the moral implications of such an outlook in L’Art décoratif d'aujourd hui (The Decorative Art of Today) of 1925 in which he declared forthrightly: Trash is always abundantly decorated; the luxury object is well-made, neat and clean, pure and healthy, and its bareness reveals the quality of its manufacture. It is to industry that we owe the reversal in this state of aff a cast-iron stove overflowing with decoration costs less than a plain one; amidst the surging leaf patterns flaws in the casting cannot be seen." For Corbusier the adjectives ‘neat’, ‘clean’, and ‘pure’ were linked with healthiness; there was also an implicit charge of deceit in his account of ornamentation as a disguise for flaws in manufacture, a rather more measured view than Loos’s inference that the ornamentalist was not only criminal but somehow mentally unstable. However, bound up in the writings of both is a sense of cultural élitism: Loos’s claim that the ornamental designer's ‘productions are unbearable to cultured persons now, and will become so to others ina little while’, presages Corbusier's assertion, also from The Decorative Art of Today, that ‘the more cultiv- ated a people becomes, the more decoration disappears’. Indeed, in a turn of phrase which many today would find distasteful, Corbusier went on to deplore the fact that ‘decorative objects flood the shelves of the Department Stores; they sell cheaply to shop-girls’. DESIGN AND MODERNISM 33The modernists’ spiritual affinity for abstract forms and new mate- rials was also wedded to a democratic ideal whereby the majority would _be able to enjoy an improved quality of life in a hygienic, healthy, and modern environment. This social utopian commitment was potently expressed in the housing and design programmes implemented by pro- gressive municipalities in Holland and Germany and, with consider- able variation in intensity, realization, and influence, in a wide range of other countries including France, Italy, the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Sweden, Denmark, Britain, the United States, and Japan. At its heart modernism was committed to a social and cultural agenda which was not constrained by national boundaries; indeed, the internationalizing outlook which characterized many of its publica- tions and products received tangible recognition at the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) in New York in 1932 when the art historian Henry Russell Hitchcock and architect Philip Johnson mounted an exhibition entitled ‘Modern Architecture— International Exhibition’. The term ‘International Style’ was adopted both in the accompanying publication and in Russell and Hitchcock's book of the same year The International Style: Architecture since 1922."' With heightened political tensions spreading across Europe in the later 1920s, further exacerbated by the economic consequences of the 1929 Wall Street crash, there was a strong reawakening of nationalism and a growing antipathy to what was often portrayed as the ‘cultural Bolshevism’ of the internationalizing modernist outlook. In the face of international economic crisis there was a widespread reassertion of national values and traditions, together with a rejection of the mod- ernist agenda of abstract forms, new materials, and modern techno- logy; the modernist antipathy to historical references in design, architecture, and the visual arts, found itself under increasing attack from the National Socialist Party under Adolf Hitler in Germany and the dictates of Socialist Realism under Josef Stalin in the USSR. As will be indicated later, the position in Fascist Italy under Mussolini was rather more ambivalent although still a battle of ideologies, whilst in the calmer political climate of Scandinavia and Holland modernism found considerable room for expression and development. In many other countries the modernist aesthetic was most fully represented in the pages of the architectural and design press, exhibitions, related reviews and caricature and was generally oriented more to the tastes of a sophisticated élite than to effecting any significant change in the demands of the mass-market. Modernist design: a working definition The Modern Movement is generally seen to have developed in two main phases: the first originated in the theories and practice of the design reformers of the late nineteenth century, gathering impetus in 34 DESIGN AND MODERNISM If nn UNUNINCNONNCNCMONUUNNUNONIUUNIININN TO the years before the outbreak of war in 1914 and coming to fruition in the early 1920s; the second phase, known as the International Style, can be seen to have run from the later 1920s through to the 1960s. In the 1950s it became a powerful form of expression for the architecture and interiors of multinational corporations, but by the 1960s was associated by many critics, theorists, and practitioners with a sense of social alien- ation and cultural remoteness in a fast-changing, pluralist, and multi- cultural society dominated by the mass media. Such Postmodernist critiques were considerably bolstered by popular associations of mod- ernism with social and economic problems in mass-housing and urban planning, and a style of aesthetic anonymity. Although modernism has perhaps been most visible in terms of its architectural legacy it none the less generated widespread experimen- tation and production in many fields of design including appliances, ceramics, glassware, furniture and fittings, carpets, textiles, typogra- phy, posters, and wallpaper. Its appearance was generally characterized by clean, geometric forms, the use of modern materials such as chromium-plated steel and glass, and plain surfaces articulated by the abstract manipulation of light and shade. The use of colour was often restrained, with an emphasis on white, off-white, grey, and black. When decoration was applied its appearance generally conformed to the abstract aesthetic which had been forged by the artistic avant-garde in the years leading up to the First World War, but had found fuller expression in the work of the Constructivists in Eastern Europe, those associated with De Stijl, and others in the early 1920s. All such charac- teristics of modernism were felt to be unambiguous affirmations of twentieth-century life, symbolically attuned to the possibilities of modern materials and manufacturing processes. However, although this drive to adopt a creative vocabulary imbued with the new ‘func- tionalism’ of the twentieth century looked to the creation of standard- ized forms and types in furniture and equipment, such ‘functionalism’ was often far more symbolic than material. The adage so often associ- ated with modernism, ‘form follows function’ can be seen as the culmi- nation of the acrimonious ‘Standardization Debate’ which took place between Henry van de Velde and Hermann Muthesius at the Deutscher Werkbund congress of 1914, when Muthesius’ commitment to Typisierung (standardization), based on economic as well as aes- thetic grounds, was opposed by those who felt that this restricted the creativity of the individual designer.’ Modern movement design: the First World War and its aftermath The massive disruption engendered by the First World War ensured that German efforts to establish an emphatically twentieth-century aesthetic, typified by the more progressive factions of the Deutscher Werkbund and evident in the work of Pieter Behrens at the AEG, DESIGN AND MODERNISM 35R20) wat Rarf iervfanve 268 #200 «20 xz ame Zeetanne Milestovs Eeetenne Guterdofe ——-‘affeetanne were substantially disrupted. None the less, the war also bolstered German initiatives to break free of foreign cultural influences as well as providing the impetus to establish a system of standards for industry. This was realized in 1917 when the Normenausschuss der Deutschen Industrie (Standards Commission of German Industry) was founded, an important body which continued to play a key role after the war. Nor was design propaganda entirely forgotten: in 1915 the Deutscher Werkbund and the Diirerbund'’ jointly published the Dewfsches Warenbuch (13), a handbook of well-designed German products, together with prices and retail outlets. Originally planned in 1913, its effect was somewhat diminished by the war although it was favourably received by a wide range of organizations and individuals. Progressive design initiatives were taken up elsewhere during the war years, especially in Holland which remained neutral. The most important fulcrum for debate was the De Stijl group, which was founded by Theo van Doesburg in 1917, together with a magazine of the same title. The De Stijl group included fine artists, architects, and designers, with its early outlook conditioned by the work and thought of the painter Piet Mondrian, who had been considerably influenced by the work of the French Cubist painters before the outbreak of war. The Dutch architect and designer H. P. Berlage, whose own manipu- lation of form and space revealed links with the American architect and designer Frank Lloyd Wright, was another formative influence on the movement. The De Stijl designers sought to explore an elemental design vocabulary in their search for a modern, harmonious aesthetic. Equilibrium was to be achieved through the balance of verticals and horizontals and the restriction of the design palette to the primary 36 DESIGN AND MODERNISM ctural pr builtin the colours of red, yellow, and blue as well as black and white. Interior designs by Van Doesburg, including stained glass windows, tiled floors, and mosaics, textiles by Bart van der Leck and Vilmos Huszar and furniture by Gerrit Rietveld, including his famous experimental Red/Blue chair, typified the early agenda of the group. By the early 1920s, the De Stijl aesthetic took on a more international profile as modernism generally began to attract more critical attention: Rietveld’s 1924 design for the Schréder House in Utrecht [14] was the most striking realization of its outlook where abstract, geometric forms, symbolically compatible with modern mass-production tech- nology, were manipulated both with regard to external detailing and internal spaces and furniture. Thi h for universal forms in Holland in many ways paralleled Muthesius’ commitment to standardiz Deutscher Werkbund before the First World War, although with an emphasis on its symbolism rather than its technological practicalities a ation in the debates at the This quest for modern, abstract form, symbolically reflective of the twentieth century (15, 16], was also taking place elsewhere, as in Russia, where Constructivism became an important focus in progres- sive design circles. DESIGN AND MODERNISM 3716 W. H. Gispen/ J. Kamman 15 Gerrit Rietveld Following the October Revolution of 1917 many Russian avant- garde artists and designers committed themselves to propaganda, including theatre and poster design. However, by 1920, rifts occurred amongst the avant-garde, with concern expressed about the way in which utilitarian concern was leading to the stifling of individual artis- tic creativity. Artists such as Wassily Kandinsky (who went on to work at the Bauhaus in Germany) believed in the primacy of the creative expression of the individual in art whereas others, including Alexander Rodchenko, his wife Varvara Stepanova [17], and Vladimir Tatlin, committed themselves to work with a more utilitarian bent, geared to the needs of society, employing forms compatible with the potential of modern mass-production technology (18, 19]. El Li: highly influential Russian with a strong commitment to the establish- ment of an international vocabulary of form. Travelling extensively between Russia and other European countries in the 1920s, he forged links with De Stijl and other progressive groups and published in Berlin a journal Vesch (Object) in which he sought to reconcile art with sitsky was another mass-production. The Bauhaus 1919-1933: Weimar, Dessau, Berlin Perhaps surprisingly, given Walter Gropius’s commitment at the Werkbund Exhibition at Cologne in 1914 to notions of standardi tion, the manipulation of modern materials, and an industrial aes- linked with after the thetic, the early years of the Bauhaus were close’ Expressionism. Such a radical change of outlook immediate war undoubtedly sprang from the subsequent antipathy of many designers (particularly on the left of the political spectrum) to large- 38 DESIGN AND MODERNISM ROTTERDAM’ ‘OnTw Wit GEN -FOTO'S IRAMMAN [DRUK KUN 8 250N-R°DAM scale industry, which was felt to have played an important part in pre- cipitating Germany's involvement in the First World War. In 1919 Gropius was the chairman of the radical Arbeitsrat fiir Kunst (Worker's Council for Art), the programme of which embraced a com- mitment to crafts training and the unification of all the arts, undoubt- edly influencing the spiritual intensity of the Bauhaus Founding Manifesto of 1919. Something of this expressionist spirit may be seen in one of the most important early Bauhaus projects, the wooden Sommerfeld House.'* Designed by Gropius and Hannes Meyer in 1921, it provided an early opportunity for design collaboration on a large scale, embracing the architecture as a framework for all the fields of design contained within it, including elaborate woodcarvings by DESIGN AND MODERNISM 397 Sports clothes by Stepanova and graphics for Dobrolyet by Rodchenko from LEF magazine, Moscow, 1923 LEF (1923-5) was an important outlet for Russian Constructivist debate. Varvara Stepanova, renowned forher Striking textile and clothing designs, and her husband Alexander Rodchenko were leading figures in the movement. Their concerns were to utilize art and design as potent and progressive forces in the construction of anew society, aligning symbolically the abstract forms of their artist vocabularly tothe machine age. Joost Schmidt with reference to folk art traditions in the detailing. But within two years a distinct shift of design outlook was discernible, no doubt engendered by the need to demonstrate the economic relevance of the school to the Thuringian State government which funded it, an authority with which the Bauhaus had an increasingly fraught political and ideological relationship. Once again a design aesthetic which explored forms compatible with the ethos of modern mass-production technology was clearly visible, even if its realisation was achieved by craft modes of construction. This could be seen in Gropius’s own office [20], throughout which the contrast of horizontal and vertical articu- lated both furniture and fittings, particularly in the lighting fitting, which was designed by Gropius himself, echoed solutions by Constructivist designers in Russia and Hungary or De Stijl in Holland. This marked a much more international design orientation [21], itself stimulated by several events which took place in Weimar in the early 1920s: the arrival of Van Doesburg in 1921, the mounting of a Dada/Constructivist conference at which Van Doesburg, El Lissitsky, the Hungarian Constructivist Lazl6 Moholy-Nagy, and his wife Lucia participated, and the appointment to the Bauhaus staff of the Russian painter Wassily Kandinsky and Moholy-Nagy in 1922 and 1923 respec- tively. In 1923 the Bauhaus also mounted an exhibition in order to defend itself against increasing criticism from its funding authority and elsewhere. The centrepiece, a physical manifesto, was the ‘fune- tional’ Haus am Horn, designed by Adolf Meyer and Georg Muche, for which the interior furniture, fittings, and equipment were produced. as prototypes for industry by a number of the Bauhaus workshops. These were especially evident in the kitchen, the design of which was 40 DESIGN AND MODERNISM 18 Textile designs by Popova, from LEF magazine, Moscow, 1923 Liubov Popova, like Stepanova, was an important figure in the regeneration of the Soviet textile industry, both of them working for the Tsindei factory near Moscow in the early 1920s. The strong geometrical leanings of these designs are shared by those seen in 17. SYNE iy A Stee DeaK EK tit influenced by ew weaver Benita Koche-Otte who, er the gen- eral expectations of women at the Bauhaus, was brought in to lend ‘a woman's view’ in the male arena of industrial design.” A new Bauhaus slogan, ‘Art and Technology: a New Unity’ was adopted by Gropius, a firm rejection of the handicraft ethos which he reiterated in a contem- porary speech to the Werkbund conference also held in Weimar in the summer of 1923. Gropius had recognized the importance of establishing links with industry as a vital means of helping to alleviate Bauhaus dependency on the Thuringian State government. To this end a business manager was appointed in 1923 but, particularly during the remaining years at Weimar, his task was fraught with problems, not the least being the incapacity of the various Bauhaus workshops to meet delivery dead- lines. Displays at trade fairs were also poorly handled, with many goods overpriced. As a result the Bauhaus saw many of its potential outlets located at the more exclusive end of the market (22, 23].'° The firm commitment to a fusion between art and technology was even more emphatically expressed in the new buildings, interiors, fur- niture, and fittings at Dessau, where the Bauhaus had been forced to move for political reasons in 1925-6. The commitment to industrial prototypes was more rigorously pursued in the later 1920s, despite the departure from the staff of Gropius and Moholy-Nagy in 1928, soon followed by two other influential teachers (and former Bauhaus gradu- ates), the graphic designer Herbert Bayer and furniture designer Marcel Breuer. A number of lighting designs were put into production by the Leipzig manufacturers Kérting and Mathiesen, wallpapers by Rasch Brothers & Co of Hanover, and textile designs by Polytextil- DESIGN AND MODERNISM 41ae =f may ye a Gesellschaft in Berlin, Pausa in Stuttgart, and the Deutschen Werkstitten in Dresden. In fact, the Weaving Workshop at the Dessau Bauhaus under the direction of Gunta Stétzl was one of the leading centres for training in the field and was the only one that qualified women graduates to work for industry. The removal of the Bauhaus to Berlin in 1932, in the face of implacable opposition from the National Socialist City Council in Dessau, and its final demise in the following year have b documented and have perhaps increased its ideological cachet for late historians. Furthermore, many architects and designers working in Germany fled the increasingly oppressive Nazi regime and moved to Britain, the United States, and elsewhere, thus sharpening debates on, and knowledge of (at least in progressive circles), both the modernist aesthetic and Bauhaus educational practice. n widel The Bauhaus: some issues in interpretation and historical location As indicated earlier, for many years the Bauhaus, formed in Weimar in 1919 under the directorship of Walter Gropius, has subsequently played a dominant role in considerations of the Modern Movement in Germany, Its lifespan almost directly coincided with the culturally fer- tile period of the Weimar Republic, established in 1919 and terminat- ing with the election of the National Socialists under Adolf Hitler in 1933, and many of the wider social, economic, and political tensions engendered during those years mirrored the problems and successes of the institution. In addition to the Bauhaus’s own considerable propa- , there have been many subsequent useful published historical evaluations and collections of documentary material, as well as exhibitions celebrating the work of associated artists, architects and designers.’ As has been argued earlier, this notoriety has tended to obscure the achievements and concerns of other important art institutions in con- temporary Germany, including those at Berlin, Breslau, Dusseldorf, Essen, Stuttgart, and Frankfurt. For example, the latter, formed in 1923 gandist output concerning its own activiti from an amalgamation of the existing School of Handicrafts and Institute of Art and Architecture, was also renowned in the 1920s and increasingly forged links with industry, particularly in printing and Like that of the Bauhaus its curriculum became progressively textile specialized and attracted onto its staff Bauhaus graduates such as Christian Dell, as well as eliciting contributions to its programme from leading designers and architects such as Ferdinand Kramer (also a Bauhaus graduate) and Ernst May (the Frankfurt City Architect). The prominence of the Bauhaus has also tended to overshadow the activities of other culturally significant German organizations that had an important bearing on design production in the same years, most DESIGN AND MODERNISM 4320 Walter Gropius 26 notably the Deutscher Werkbund. Considered by historians to be a significant shaping influence on the roots of the Modern Movement, it has generally received most scrutiny in the period from its foundation in 1907 to the occurrence of the seminal Werkbund Exhibition in Cologne in 1914, the culminating point of Pevsner’s Pioneers of Modern Design. Indeed, as the Canadian historian Joan Campbell argued in the introduction to her authoritative publication, The German Werkbund: The Politics of Reform in the Applied Arts: the impressive achievements of the early Bauhaus are not sufficient reasons to neglect the contributions of the Weimar Werkbund to the cause of modern architecture and design. Moreover, because the Werkbund was one of the few 44 DESIGN AND MODERNISM 21 Ruth Hollés Tapestry, Dessau, 1926 Hollés was a student in the Weaving Workshop at t! Bauhaus from 19: her diploma in 1980. A pupil of the highly influential women's teacher Gunta S esigned many textiles as prototypes for industry. The strongly structured, abstrac forms of this tapestry receiving st symbolically echo such king itwith moderni in other fields. S Sev workin alsc commissions such as the afé in Dessau. national cultural institutions to survive from the Second Reich into the Third, ideals can illuminate both the extraordinary flowering of y designated as “Weimar Culture” and the intel- mination of its the modern spirit common’ lectual-cultural origins of National Socialism."* However, it is also the case that such wider historical emphases on the commitment to modernism of both the Deutscher Werkbund and the Bauhaus have tended to overshadow the wider duction and everyday consumption in contemporary G +h have largely been overlooked in publications on the lities of design pro- rmany, con- siderations whic period. More recently research into the structure and workings of the Bauhaus has addressed the role of women at the institution, the restric tions of which had far wider social and industrial implications in Germany (and elsewhere). Magdalene Droste, in an essay entitled “Women in the Arts and Crafts and in Industrial Design 1890-1933 drew attention to the ways in which Walter Gropius sought to limit the number of female students at the Bauhaus through the introduction, from 1920, of a more rigorous entry policy, ‘particularly for the female sive’.'” Furthermore, in a climate in which x, whose number is exce: there were clear male conceptions that arts and crafts practice (gener ally associated with women) might be seen to threaten the successful realization of the stated goal of the institution—architectural proficiency—he sought to restrict women’s opportunities after com pletion of the foundation course to weaving, pottery, or bookbinding Where women such as Marianne Brandt and Alma Biischer did emerge to a position of some prominence in other fields, metalwork y much flew in the face of the gen- and furniture respectively, this very eral assumption that design for industry was a male preserve DESIGN AND MODERNISM 4522 Herbert Bayer Brochure advertising Bauhaus products, 19% Bayer was in charge of the printing workshop at the Dessau Bauhaus from 192: 1928. The clarity of the design and structured layout of this brocht page was characteristic of progressive typographers of the period. The use of sans-serif letterforms, often accentuated by bold underlining, was favoured by Bayer wi was influenced by ioholy-Nagy, El Lissitsky, and Van Doesburg The wider climate of modern design in Germany in the 1920s Just as the unambiguous prosecution of the modernist cause at the Bauhaus was evidenced by its 1923 exhibition and the move towards the production of industrial prototypes, the DWB re-emerged from a period of ideological confusion in the immediate postwar years. With a marked shift away from a position of economic impotence and affiliation with the idea of the cultural and economic significance of the crafts, it once again became a significant campaigning body for the reconciliation of design excellence with modern industry. This was intimately linked to the halting of the inflationary spiral at the end of 1923 and more invigorating future prospects for German industry. During the mid-1920s the DWB became an important sponsor of erg gesch. AUSFUHRUNG —— Messing, Deckel vernickelt ASCHENSCHALE MIT DECKEL ee VORTEILE — 1 Kein Ausbrennen des Tischtuches, da die Cigarette in den Aschi fallen _muB 2 leichte Reinigung, da Deckel abnehmbar gesch. AUSFUHRUNG a Messing Deckel vernickelt ASCHENSCHALE MIT DECKEL VORTEILE Shee ae 1 Kein Ausbrennen des Tischtuches, in den Aschenbecher fallen muB 2 leichte Reinigung, da Deckel abnehmbar. je Cigarette 46 DESIGN AND MODERNISM 23 Marianne Brandt Teamaker, 1928/30 This crisp, elegant design in brass and ebony was probably made while Brandt was still at \e Dessau Bauhaus, where she took charge of the metal workshop in 1928 before moving to the Berlin studio of Walter Gropius. Whilst reflecting an avant-garde interest in forms and ma which embraced no contemporaneity t! teamaker also exhibits a rather more pet in the curved handle end The prominence of a woman designer ina ‘mascul field outside the weaving workshops was unusual at the Bauha onal style minine” exhibitions promoting modern architecture and design, with an emphasis on many aspects of its wider social relevance. An important travelling exhibition reflecting this new spirit was entitled Form ohne Ornament (Form without Ornament).” First shown in Stuttgart in 1924, it included both craft- and machine-produced goods and embod- ied a broad commitment to the rejection of historical ornamentation and the individualism of postwar E ism. Furthermore it helped to ferment the idea of developing standardized forms compat- ible with modern modes of production. Such a functionalist outlook began to sound the alarm bells in traditional art industries where a pre- mium was placed on traditional craft skills, an alarm which was to articulate itself far more vociferously at the Weissenhof hous’ bition of 1927. But in other ways the 1924 exhibition was rooted in the past since, in the accompanying publication, women were associated ng exhi- with the crafts and ‘primitive’ design whereas men were linked with ‘technical’ design, reinforcing their nineteenth-century stereotype- casting at the centre of cultural and industrial change.”* The DWB magazine Die Form resumed publi 5? and soon became a highly influential mouthpiece for progressive ideas, being read by the avant-garde at home and abroad. None the less, it is important not to underestimate the relative lack of enthusiasm of German industry for the widespread adoption of such ideas in the domestic marketplace. Indeed, opportunities to realize them were comparatively short-lived since, by the late 1920s, German industrial production began to decline with the lessening of foreign investment and the successive economic crises that followed the Wall Street Crash of 1929. As a result, the membership of the DWB dropped markedly, and in the polarized political climate of the times it found itself increasingly unable to defend itself against accusations of ‘cultural bol- shevism’ from the political Right and cultural élitism from the Left. DESIGN AND MODERNISM 47ded prices DAS FRANKFURTER REGISTER 17 WEIMAR BAU- UND WOHNUNGSKUNST G.M.B.H. Ehemalige Vertriebs organisation der Staatl. Bauhochschule Weimar TYPE: M42 TISCHLEUCHTER mit Zeibspiegelreliekior Entwirfe: WILH. WAGENFELD Oberweimar Thiringen TY PE: M30 ZUGPENDEL- LEUCHTER Messing, matt vernielt. Mit Callon- ed. Karton-Unterchirm dus betonders liehldurchlassg. Material und innen i lackiertem Motelieiektor. Rellekior 2 24 em Unteichirm © 48 em Fordern Sie Kataloge iber Leuchten, Metaligerite, Mabel, Bauleile, Keramiken und Webereien von der WEIMAR BAU- U. WOHNUNGSKUNST $- WEIMAR - SCHILLERSTRASSE 14,1 Like the Bauhaus before it, the DWB eventually fell prey to the cul- tural repression of the National Socialists. Municipal patronage also played an important role in the dissemi- nation of modernist design and planning in Germany in the mid- 1920s. This had originated in the general shift away from private to public patronage in the period of spiralling inflation of the early 1920s, and was considerably boosted by the greater economic stability in the mid-1920s brought about by substantial American investment. Progressive concepts such as the Neue Gestaltung (New Design), Neue Bauen (New Architecture) and the Neues Wohnen (New Lifestyle) became rallying calls for the avant-garde, reflecting a desire to embrace the material advantages which could result from the whole-hearted embrace of modern m above all, the true spirit of the twentieth century. In this respect the world-shattering consequences of the First World War had marked a much more emphatic break with the past than had the literal passing of the old century in 1900. Magazines such as Das Neue Frankfurt and Das Neue Berlin, which commenced publication in 1926 and 1929 respec- tively, argued for the recognition of the social as well as aesthetic value of modern architecture and design. A related publication, the Frank- -production technology, new materials and, 48 DESIGN AND MODERNISM _furt Register was also an extremely telling vehicle for the dissemination of the modernist project. Effectively a sales catalogue for the promo- tion of modern design for everyday life, with sections devoted to light- ing [24], furniture, and other facets of interior design, it pursued, from a municipal perspective, similar objectives to the Deutsches Warenbuch published jointly by the Diirerbund and the Deutscher Werkbund in 1915, to which reference has already been made [13]. Ernst May, in charge of Frankfurt’s municipal housing programme, brought a num- ber of modernis Such dwellings aspirations to life in the prov ion of mass-housing. w the development of special building techniques and were equipped with functionalist furniture and fittings tailored to the practicalities of efficient living in small spaces (Existenzminimum). One of the most noteworthy solutions was the Frankfurt kitchen, the planning of which was achieved by a team working under the Vienn architect-designer Grete Schiitte-Lihotsky. The Frankfurt kitchen: a design solution for twentieth-century living The planning of efficient, pleasant kitchens had been a concern of the women’s movement in Germany for some time but, in the post-First World War period, was allied to a rethinking of the role of the house- wife within the home. The growth of interest in the concept of ‘scientific management’ in the home was especi afforded the role of housewife the prospect of acquiring status as well as ‘professional’ connotations through its adoption.”* Considerable impetus was given by the translation into German in 1922 of the American Chris Home of 1915 in which considerable emphasis was placed on the kitchen. She argued for the removal from the kitchen of activities unre- lated to the preparation of food in order that it could be made smaller and thus less wasteful in terms of movements around it. Another widely read text which promoted this new spirit in the domestic arena was Edna Meyer's Der Neue Haushalt. First published in 1926, it had gone into 40 editions by 1932. She collaborated with the Dutch architect-designer J. J. P. Oud on kitchen d Siedlungen exhibition of 1927, a feature which re able critical acclaim. Also important in this field of design was Greta Schiitte-Lihotsky who had been influenced by important pioneer in the analysis of the de s also well aware of Oud’s work, having worked in Rotterdam where some of his most important schemes had evolved. Called in by the Frankfurt City Architect Ernst May, Grete Schiitte-Lihotsky sought to bring about a fruitful collaboration between architects, ally attractive as it ne Frederick’s Scientific Management in the ign at the Weissenhof sived consider- Heinrich Tessenow, an ign of small apartments, and w: housewives, and manufacturers to arrive at the most appropriate means of approaching housework.** Much more systematically con- DESIGN AND MODERNISM 49ceived than the labour-saving kitchen of the Haus am Horn seen at the 1923 Bauhaus exhibition, the size and layout of the Frankfurt kitchen (25, 26] was determined by time-and-motion studies, although the aim was also to produce a pleasant, as well as efficient, environment. To this end psychological considerations were also incorporated into the design, which took careful account of the use of colour as well as the sizes of the window and the opening into the adjoining family room. Costs were kept low by the use of factory prefabrication, and different versions of the kitchen were incorporated into a range of the new hous- ing estates in 1920s Frankfurt and reflected the trends towards an increasing nationally instituted standardization of many household goods and kitchen equipment. cussed extensively at the 1929 Congrés Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne (CIAM) conference in Frankfurt, and many modernist The concept of Existenzminimum (compact living) was dis designers explored ideas of space important facets of their social utopianist aims and were proposed in many European and Scandinavian countries. In Russia, for example, El Li Finland, at the 1930 Minimum Apartment Exhibition in Helsinki Town Hall, Aino Aalto designed a minimum kitchen, which included a rubbish bin on wheels and tables with extendable surfaces at which aving. Such experiments were itsky designed a ‘compartment kitchen’ in Moscow in 1928; in 50 DESIGN AND MODERNISM vocabulary of f in its stark, undecorated exterior an the clarity of internal ‘ommitm ardizatior duction technology Schott & Gen nomic the person preparing meals could work; in the same year a Minimum Flat Exhibition was mounted in Warsaw; and in Britain in 1933-4 Wells Coates produced a galley-kitchen design for his ‘Minimum Flats’ at Lawn Road, London. Die Wohnung: the Weissenhof Siedlungen exhibition, Stuttgart, 1927 Perhaps the most celebrated and unambiguous manifestation of mod- ernism in Germany was the Die Wohnung (The Dwelling) exhibition held in Stuttgart in 1927, reflecting the high status afforded architec- ture in the modernist canon. Organized on behalf of the Deutscher Werkbund by the German architect and des ner Ludwig Mies van der Rohe on the Weissenhof Estate, Stuttgart, it included about sixty DESIGN AND MODERNISM SI27 Hermann Gretsch Model 1382 service, Porzelianfabrik Arzberg, 1931 T an, undercoated forms of this service endorsed the od design’ principles of the German Werkbund, but also revealed the often ambivalent attitud modernism of the National Socialists since it remained in production during the 1930s (and after the Second World War) Gretsch, as a consultant to the Arzberg porcelain factory from 1931 onwards, continued to promote similar formal considerations in his publication Gestaltendes Handwerk (Creative Handicrafts) of 1940. housing designs by sixteen of the leading protagonists of the Modern Movement, including Le Corbusier from France, Mart Stam and J. J. P. Oud from Holland, Victor Bourgeois from Belgium, and Gropius and Mies himself from Germany. The modernist forms seen in the architecture, furniture, and fittings did much to establish the notion of an ‘International Style’ as critics were able to see that the work of architects and designers from a number of countries, including Germany, was stylistically homogeneous. This gave rise to growing hostility in Germany to an aesthetic which disregarded indigenous tra- ditions: the flat roofs of the buildings were seen as incompatible with the German character. The exhibition was also a forum for the display of modern home furnishings and provoked conservative furniture manufacturers to attempt to prevent avant-garde furniture by Marcel Breuer and others being shown. The exhibition did much to centralize criticism of the avant-garde, and modernist designers and architects were increasingly portrayed as embodying harmful moral and political characteristics, often being associated with Bolshevist, Jewish, and other ‘undesirable’ or ‘foreign’ origins. Although modern design was generally suppressed under the Nazis for such reasons as had become apparent at Stuttgart in 1927, the design historian John Heskett has argued that standardization and rational- ization continued to exert an important impact on economic planning, particularly with regard to rearmament and militarization.” Despite the widespread adoption of an emphatically vé/kisch aesthetic under the Nazis guidelines were still produced for neat, functional design in housing, domestic furnishings, and equipment, and the work of many Modern Movement designers who had come to the fore in the 1920s, such as the metalware and glass designer Wilhelm Wagenfeld or the industrial ceramic designer, Hermann Gretsch, continued in produc- tion throughout the 1930s. Gretsch’s porcelain service for Arzberg of 1931 [27] exemplified the clean-formed ‘functional’ aesthetic of the 52 DESIGN AND MODERNISM modernists which continued in production for more than fifty years. The extent to which the Modern Movement could still be seen in Germany as late as 1939 was apparent in the Deutsche Warenkunde, an official state publication of approved designs in current production. Modernism in France: Le Corbusier and the UAM In France Le Corbusier was undoubtedly the most prominent figure in modernist circles, having links with a number of the pioneers before 1914, most notably Peter Behrens, in whose Berlin office he worked in 1g10-11. Corbusier remained at the forefront of modernism until after the Second World War. Active in many creative fields, including archi- tecture and planning, design, and the Fine Arts, he also produced a number of important theoretical texts. Vers une architecture of 1923 in particular was an important vehicle for the dissemination of the mod- ernism across Europe and beyond, drawing attention to the aesthetic significance of modern anonymously designed cars, aeroplanes, or ilos. grain The 1925 Exposition Internationale des Arts Décoratifs et Industriels in Paris has often been viewed by design historians as an important forum for the material embodiment of conflicting design ideologies in the interwar years. Here, the austere, modern aesthetic of Le Corbusier’s celebrated Pavillon de l’Esprit Nouveau [28] clearly indicated the huge ideological gulf which lay between the decorative excesses of the expensive creations of the French ensembliers, which were predominant throughout much of the Exhibition, and the mod- ernists’ spiritual affinity with notions of standardization, the explora- tion of new materials, and firm embrace of the contemporary spirit. 28 Le Corbusier ir of Pavillon de Espirit s Pavilion was tothe major aim of the 5 Paris Exposition, that of prome arts and 1g French decorative liners, the DESIGN AND MODERNISM 53Corbusier's commitment to the poetics of the utilitarian object could be seen in the clean forms of the interior fittings and furniture, most of which was mass-produced. As has already been noted, Le Corbusier's ideas relating to interior design were characterized in his book L’ Art décoratif d’aujourd hui of 1925, first published as a series of articles in his magazine L'Esprit nou- veau. Here he argued that interior design and furniture should, like architecture, embrace notions of rationalization and standardization, concepts brought to life in the furniture, storage systems, and paintings (by himself and Fernand Léger) in his 1925 pavilion. Corbusier's ideas for furniture were developed further at the 1929 Salon d’Automne exhibition, at which Charlotte Perriand collaborated with him and his brother Pierre Jeanneret.” Their output included modular storage sys- tems to define interior spaces, as well as the celebrated Chaise Longue and Fauteuil Grand Confort armchair, which have subsequently become design ‘classics’. The wider climate of design politics in France reflected similar oppositions to those evidenced at the 1925 Exposition, set against the retrospective historic encyclopaedism in design for the mass market. The latter, largely uncollected and under-researched on account of its perceived lack of cultural cachet, was unrepresented by the advocacy of the other main factions: the politically radical modernists, collectively represented by the Union des Artistes Modernes (UAM), which sought ‘balance, logic, and purity’ in its designs, and the more conser- vative Société des Artistes Décorateurs, from whom the founding members of the UAM had seceded in 1930. Under the directorship of René Herbst the UAM included Le Corbusier, Charlotte Perriand, Robert Mallet-Stevens, Eileen Gray, Louis Sognot, Charlotte Alix, and Pierre Chareau. But, despite the social utopianist commitment of such designers, the market for their design work, like that of many modernists, was largely restricted to the affluent tastes of a metro- politan cultural élite. Modernism in Fascist Italy The radical embrace of technological, social, and cultural change by the Futurists so evident in their manifestos of the years immediately following the foundation of the group in 1909 did not, as some art, architectural, and design historians have implied, fadé out with the death of a number of its adherents in the First World War. This in part stemmed from Marinetti’s close political links with Mussolini and Fascism, but also from the increasing marginalization of the move- ment in the architectural and design debates of the later 1920s and 1930s. Despite the efforts of Giacomo Balla, Enrico Prampolini, and Fortunato Depero to promote experimental Futurist interior design, furniture, and decorative objects in exhibitions in Rome and Milan in 54 DESIGN AND MODERNISM adi novation in product rtisin s seen here p driano’s exper! entific mani 1918 and 1919, the most potent ntially metropol- itan movement were to be found in dramatic graphic representations of futuristic ci emphatic rejection of Italy’s cultural heritage was paralleled in the work of the architects-designers of Group 7, which was formed in 1926 and was the first clear expression of the spirit and aesthetics of the Modern Movement in Italy.?’ The leading figures of the group were Luigi Figini, Gino Pollini and Giuseppe Terragni. Known as Rationalists, their work embraced the prevailing modernist aesthetic of clean, abstract forms spiritually attuned to modern life, materials, and technology; committed to a spirit of dynamic cultural change, they hoped that Rationalism would be adopted as ¢4e official Fascist aesthetic. It has been suggested by a number of historians that their failure to achieve such an objective stemmed from their commitment to an internationalist outlook.”* The Rationalists gained only few commissions in the public sector, and their reputation is based in part on the critical attentions afforded yscapes and poster designs. None the less, the Futurists’ private commiss and early 1930s, such as Figini, Pollini, and Luciano Baldessari ja Bar in Milan (1930) or the Parker shop interiors (1934), also in Milan, by Edoardo ions in the late 1920s interior for the C Persico and Marcello Nizzoli. Magazines such as Domus, founded by Gio Ponti in 1928, and Casabella” provided further vehicles for the dis- semination of their work. However, exhibitions provided the most potent means of expression for the avant-garde. The most significant were the Triennali, first held on a two-year cycle in Monza in 1923 under the title ‘International Biennale of the Decorative Arts’ before moving to Milan ten years later as the ‘International Triennale of Decorative and Modern Industrial Art’.*° These progressive Italian designers with opportunities not only to put their chibitions provided DESIGN AND MODERNISM 55ideas into practice in a number of one-off commissions but also to exhibit them alongside other leading foreign designers and architects: at the 1930 Triennale functionalist interiors were exhibited by the Berlin Werkbund, including lamps and fittings from the Dessau Bauhaus, chairs by Mies van der Rohe, and equipment by Siemens and AEG; the 1933 Trienale included photographs of CIAM work by Le Corbusier, Gropius, Mies, and Melnikov; and in 1936 the Finnish designer Aino Aalto was awarded a gold medal, the birchwood furni- ture by her husband Alvar also attracting interest. But the efforts of the Italian Rationalists at the Triennali and other exhibitions to place the modernist agenda within the public domain remained largely unsuc- cessful [29]. However, the Fascist regime's relationship with the modernist aes- thetic was by no means as publicly hostile as that which prevailed in Nazi Germany, for there were a number of instances where Rationalist designers were directly involved with design which promoted the Fascist regime, whether at celebratory political exhibitions or Fascist buildings, their interiors and furnishings. The best known example of the latter is Giuseppe Terragni’s House of Fascism of 1933-6. However, the difficulties of reconciling a modern, internationalizing aesthetic with the propagandist demands for visually accessible symbols of a political regime steeped in notions of a Roma Secunda were rarely overcome in the 1930s. Scandinavian Modern The term ‘Scandinavian Modern’ as a concept has tended to provide ylistic umbrella for progressive designing in Sweden, Finland, 56 DESIGN AND MODERNISM 31 Wilhelm Kage Praktika I, model X, Weekend pattern dinner service for Gustavsberg, 1983 Kage, the Art Director at the Gustavsberg ceramics factory from 1917 to 1947, introduced this dinner service at a time when there were strong, ideological conflicts between functionalist and traditionalist designers in the wake of the austere modernism of the 1930 Stockholm Exhibition. The somewhat stark de: lived up to the practicality of its title, with stackable cups and interchangeable lids. \twas favoured by the critics and shunned by the public Norway, and Denmark. However, whilst there were undoubtedly com- in their aesthetic concerns empathy with natural materials, and respect for the creative imagina- tion of the designer—there were in fact clear political and cultural differences.*! mon featur the value of craftsmanship, The Svenska Slédféreningen (Swedish Society of Industrial Design) did much to promote the modernist cause in Sweden, tem- pered by a historic commitment to preserve the aesthetic and creative qualities of the crafts. Although the Society had been founded as far back as 1845, the demographic changes brought about by widespread migration from the countryside to the cities in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries led to a re-evaluation of its social role. As with the Deutscher Werkbund, with which Gregor Paulsson (later the Society's Director) had developed links before the First World War, the Svenska Slédféreningen sought to raise the quality of life by bring- ing about improved standards of design in everyday life. The Swedish design climate (like the Dutch) was not disrupted by involvement in the First World War and during this period bridge industry continued to be developed. A key manifestation of this alliance of aesthetic awareness, manufacturing proce purpose was the Home Exhibition put on by the Socie! in 1917. Often seen by d of twenty-three fully furnished interiors, the results of a competition for the design of furnishings, fittings, and equipment for one- and two-bedroomed flats. Prizes were awarded right across the design spectrum, from carpets to domestic appliances. As was apparent in Gunnar Asplund’s kitchen-living room, there was something of a compromise between the ethos of crafts production and thesimplicity of form and decoration compatible with industrial production. As with between art and ses, and social in Stockholm ign historians as a seminal show, it consisted DESIGN AND MODERNISM 5732 Alvar Aalto Wilhelm Kage'’s B/ue Lily tableware, also produced in 1917 and geared to the pockets of the working design in everyday life were in fact generally rejected by consumers in favour of traditional heavier, more decorative products {30}. Despite fresh initiatives such as the Svenska Slédféreningen’s col- ass, such efforts to elevate standards of laboration with AB Svenska Mobelfabrikerna, one of the largest furni- ture manufacturers in Sweden, in the production of ‘beautiful’ mass-produced furniture, there was an ambiguous commitment to modernism during the 1920s. Two major strands of Swedish design had emerged by the end of the decade: the first of these, promoted by Svenska Slédféreningen, its director Gregor Paulsson, and Gunnar Asplund, was committed to a ‘functionalist’ aesthetic, blended with the social utopianism of the German modernists; the second embraced an aesthetic rooted in the arts and crafts, an outlook particularly evi- dent in the glass and ceramics industries, the principal exponents of which were the glassmakers Orrefors and the Gustavsberg and Rérstrand porcelain manufactories. The Stockholm 1930 Exhibition was a clear affirmation of faith in the contemporary spirit and attracted a considerable amount of atten- tion abroad. Given shape by the tripartite alliance of Paulsson, Asplund, and the § design with a sense of social purpose and presented an agenda relevant to the dynamics of twentieth-century life. Advertising, one of the most potent forms of expression of the latter, was at its core, together with transport, communications, and the urban environment: housing pro- jects, furnished flats, and interiors were displayed alongside school and hospital exhibits, and the modernist commitment to ideas of standard- the nska Slédféreningen, it sought to ally modern 58 DESIGN AND MODERNISM 33 Alvar Aalto Garden Room displayed at Paris International Exhibition, 1937 st bythe Aalt Savoy’ glass vase s, including the el ae AS ization and mass-production was highly visible. Opposition to the rather stark and austere qualities of the machine aesthetic which gen- erally prevailed at the exhibition was animated and led to considerable debate between those representing funkis [31] (functionalism) and tradis (tradition). Amongst the factions which expressed particular concern were the conservative furniture manufacturers, who set out to suggest that standardi would lead to unemployment in the industry and that innovation might lead to price inflation. Following this there were a number of exhibitions during the 1930s ed designs with a minimum of decoration which s t out a less radical agenda, often in conjunction with the Svenska Mbelfabrikerna, including the display of interiors and furni- ture by Svenskt Tenn at the Galerie Moderne in 1931 and the Modern Home Exhibition of 1933, where the sharply articulated clarity of space in interior spaces was softened by furniture and equipment which blended modernism with more traditional forms. Natural materials played a far more prominent role, and this more humanizing interpre- tation of the modernist ideal, which became known as Swedish Modern, was evident in the work of Bruno Mathsson and the Viennese architect-designer Josef Frank, who settled in Sweden in the early 1930s and became increasingly familiar as a propagandist of this ‘softer’ modernism to a wider international audience through the design press, exhibitions and the export trade. The more publicly acceptable face of modernism through this greater exploration of natural materials was also evident in other rs. In Finland the Arabia Scandinavian countries in the interwar ye factory” established an international reputation for its ceramics and glass products, together with the Karhula glassworks. Individual DESIGN AND MODERNISM 59designers, such as the Finnish architect Alvar Aalto (32, 33], also began to attract international attention. His furnishing of the Paimio Sanatorium, through its custom-designed interiors, fittings, and fitments (embracing everything from lighting fixtures to drinking glasses), has been celebrated as an aesthetic unity. Aalto’s sensitive and elegant use of plywood in furniture, architecture, and interior spaces also drew favourable comment and widespread notice in the displays in a number of international exhibitions, including the V and VI Triennali in Milan of 1933 and 1936, the Paris International Exhibition of 1937, and the New York World’s Fair and San Francisco Golden Gate Exhibitions of 1939. In published accounts, like those dealing with the later work of the husband and wife team of American de- signers Charles and Ray Eames, the distinguished work of Alvar's wife Aino has tended to be overshadowed by that of her partner. Their work was marketed internationally through a number of organizations, most notably Artek, which they established with two partners in 1935. Denmark was also prominent in attracting contemporary interna- tional attention in its own interpretation of the modernist aesthetic, particularly through many products of the Royal Copenhagen Porcelain factory, the anthropometrically considered furniture of Kaare Klint, and the austere forms of the silversmith Kay Bojesen, who had been trained by Georg Jensen, a dominant designer in the field. Bojesen was a key figure in the establishment in 1931 of the Copenhagen exhibition gallery and shop Den Permanente, a collective venture where the ‘best’ of Danish design was put on show—a forerun- ner of other design propagandist agencies set up elsewhere in Europe after the Second World War. Britain and modernism Although modernist design in Britain has received considerable atten- tion from historians, its true significance, as opposed to the wider pat- terns of production and consumption, has perhaps been overvalued. It is clear that from the late 1920s onwards there was an increasing aware- ness of avant-garde developments in continental Europe, as reflected by an increasing number of articles devoted to them in magazines such as The Architectural Review and The Architect and Building News. However, rather as had been the case with the propagandist output of the Bauhaus in Germany, assessment has been influenced in favour of organizations which have left their legacy in archives, exhibition cata~ logues, and magazines. The Design and Industries Association (DIA), a pale reflection of its spiritual antecedent, the more politically and economically powerful Deutscher Werkbund, never impacted upon British manufacturing industry in the same way as its counterpart had in Germany in the mid-1920s. Many design historians have also argued that the British State was committed to promoting a greater 60 DESIGN AND MODERNISM 34 Marion Dorn Hand-knotted wool rug, Wilton Royal Carpet Factory Ltd.. .1937 Marion Dorn was a leading textile and carpet designer in Britain in the interwar years. gaining important commissions for ocean liners and hotels. Many of her designs contain strong and bold geometric patterns but often also, as here, formalized natural motifs. This perhaps reflected the general unwillingness of her clients, albeit with adventurous taste, to accept the uncompromisingly abstract face of unadulterated modernism conscio ness of design in manufacturing industry and the domestic marketplace through the setting up of the Gorell Committee by the Governmental Board of Trade, drawing attention to the report on The Production and Exhibition of Articles of Good Design and Everyday Use ot 1932 as the first of a series of initiatives to promote modern design. The establishment by the Board of Trade of the Council for Art and Industry at the end of 1933 has also been cited. However, it should be remembered that the commissioning and publication of reports and the establishment of a state agency with very limited funding may be interpreted as acts of political defensiveness as much as marked posi- tive intervention. This theme will be returned to in Chapter 6. Historically, modernism in British design has been built around a number of key individuals and exemplars. For example, Wells Coates’s Lawn Road Flats in Hampstead, London, may be seen as an important rallying point. Funded by Molly and Jack Pritchard of the progressive Venesta Plywood and Isokon furniture companies, its early tenants included a number of European modernist emigrés including Walter Gropius, Marcel Breuer, and Lazlé Moholy-Nagy. Breuer and Gropius also designed furniture for Isokon before moving on to the United States. Key exemplars in the public arena included the co-ordinated design policy of London Transport, which was apparent in the commission- ing of posters, fabrics for the seating of its underground trains, sign- systems, litter-bins, and other corporate existence. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has also played a part, not only through the commissioning of leading mod- ernists such as Serge Chermayeff, Wells Coates, and Raymond McGrath to design functional interiors and furniture for the new Broadcasting House in London, erected between 1928 and 1932, but also through the broadcasting of a series of talks and debates on di in daily life in the early 1930s. However, despite the formation of avant-garde groups such as Unit One, founded in 1933 to promote modern art and architecture in Britain, and the pub Read’s Art & Industry of 1934, design which fully endorsed an uncom- promisingly modern aesthetic [34] was never widely accepted in a country where the lure of the past, heritage, and Empire found much more vi manifestations of its ation of propagandist texts such as Herbert ble expression in the widespread mock-Tudor architecture and interiors of the burgeoning suburbs than the sleek modernism of housing for the more wealthy. Eastern European developments Certain aspects of the Russian experiment with modernism between the October revolution of 1917 and the Social Realist repression under Stalin have already been addressed (and will be explored further in DESIGN AND MODERNISM 6135 Adolf Syszko-Bohusz and Andrej Pronaszko ir furniture, Pre Chapter 4). But, as was the case in other European countries, there were also marked tensions in Eastern Europe between those who looked to international developments in design and those who sought to define national identity through association with vernacular, peas- aft traditions. Such tensions came to the fore in Poland in connection with her display at the Paris Exposition des Arts Décoratifs of 1925, where the craft-oriented, applied arts outlook of the Cracow Workshops was seen by progressive factions as irrelevant to the realities of modern twentieth-century life. After the First World War Warsaw had emerged as the centre of the avant-garde, with many of her de- signers having studied elsewhere in Europe, including Austria, Germany, and Russia. Aware of the outlook of De Stijl and Russian Constructivism, progressive artists rallied under the title Blok, also the gazine, in 1924. Although lasting only two years, the group was increasingly riven by debates, similar to those which had taken place a few years earlier in Russia, in which the autonomy of artistic creativity and abstract form as agents of social and cultural change in their own right was posited against a commitment to har- nessing modern forms to the possibilities of mass-production techno- logy. Many of those representing a more functional outlook became members of Praesens, formed in 1926, an internationally oriented group focused around a journal of the same name. As with many of their modernist counterparts elsewhere in Europe, architecture was seen to be at the root of a social and aesthetic revolution. However, as in many other countries, the number of opportunities to implement the modernist agenda was limited by the prevailing economic condi- tions. Despite a number of noteworthy experiments in working-cla ant and c name of their ma 62 DESIGN AND MODERNISM 36 Adolf Syszko-Bohusz and Andrej Pronaszko Hall and cloakroom furniture, Presidential Castle, Wista, 1930 Like 35, this illustration feature Arch However in the magazine Budownikcwo den forms of the table end and e cloak storage area mpromising leir modernity than the oir furniture, perhap: 2 curved w rather less unc bou revealing the stronger design perso more conservative Syszko- Bohusz than his ner Pronaszko ember of Praesens. ality of the co housing, the majority of achievements were confined to houses and apartments for the wealthy (35, 36] and, as the 1930s unfolded, there towards a was a move away from more ‘internationalizing’ tendencie: position in which the modernist spirit was tempered with a greater acknowledgement of vernacular and regional considerations. Like the Bauhaus in Germany, educational establishments in Eastern Europe were also important vehicles for the spread of mod- ernism. For example, in Russia the Constructivist outlook of the Moscow Vkhutemas school of design, founded in 1920, provided an important stimulus for the training of artists in industry, closely allied to the desire for cultural regeneration; in Poland the School of Architecture at Warsaw Polytechnic was a powerful advocate of the new spirit in design. Elsewhere there were other educational institu- tions which were modernizing in their educational philosophy as, for example, the Bratislava School of Applied Arts, founded in Czechoslovakia in 1928 under the directorship of Josef Vydra. Stressing a close relationship between architecture, the applied arts, and indus- e, and raise standards of, to moderniz trial production, its aim v domestic manufacture. However, as in Germany a few yea: oppressive political climate of the late 1930s forced the school to close s earlier, the its doors in 1939. DESIGN AND MODERNISM 63