Architecture: A Very Short Introduction

By the end of the 18th century, then, there were rival versions of classicism in circulation, based on various understandings of Greek and Roman architecture, ranging from the fundamentalist simplicity of austere Doric temples, to the highly ornamental work of the Adam brothers. There was also a growing antiquarian interest in medieval architecture that developed into the very serious-minded architecture of the Gothic Revival of the mid-19th century (Figure 5) and various forays into exotic spectacle, such as the Brighton Pavilion (Figure 3). This eclecticism has flourished ever since, more visibly at some times than at others, marking the fact that the tastes of the classes that have money to spend on building were no longer unified. If the Renaissance marked the passing of power from the feudal to the mercantile classes, the coming of eclecticism marked the arrival of the great industrial fortunes. The people who made their money from the East India Company, from sugar plantations in the West Indies, or from industrial production in England, did not feel bound by the aristocratic canons of taste, and they experimented in idiosyncratic ways. There has been no consensus since, despite a concerted attempt to promote an internationally unified style for modern architecture through the CIAM (Congrès internationaux d’architecture moderne) guided by the Swiss architect Le Corbusier in the mid-20th century starting in 1928. He enthused about the poetic qualities of machines, ships, and grain silos, which were held up as models for the new architecture. While the architecture of the Modern Movement (also known as the International Style) dominated the architectural journals, it was rarely adopted by (for example) builders of housing aimed at a popular market, where versions of vernacular architecture, mock-Tudor, and notional Regency styles predominated. CIAM’s consensus was maintained by excluding voices with alternative views about what modern architecture should be like, and it broke down altogether in 1959, since when contemporary architecture has been very varied (Figures 18, 19, 24, 25).

The terminology used to label the architecture of the last few decades has tended to shift its meaning as new buildings have appeared that seem to need new labels. The term ‘postmodern’ was used to describe some of Le Corbusier’s late buildings, such as the pilgrimage chapel at Ronchamp, which has pronounced sculptural qualities and had clearly moved on from the ‘machine aesthetic’ that he had previously been promoting. The term however did not catch on with a wide architectural public until later, when Charles Jencks published The Language of Postmodern Architecture (1977). He associated postmodernism with a concern for the meaning of buildings. However a less exact usage of the word is in circulation, as a name for the fashion for making use of noticeably historical forms in modern buildings, especially when they were used in ways that undermined their original effect, for example by being made of lightweight materials, being enlarged to gigantic size, or being brightly coloured. Commercial buildings of this type dating from the 1980s are to be seen in many cities around the world (Figure 1). There have been other rallying cries and manifestos in the architecture-world since then, but they have not as yet been given names that have made a lasting impression on a wide public. Frank Gehry’s art museum in Bilbao might conceivably be presented as an example of Deconstructivism (Figure 24), but an explanation of what that term means certainly lies beyond the scope of a very short introduction to architecture.