Le Corbusier and Decoration

Themes > Arts > Decorative arts > Generalities > Le Corbusier and Decoration

Le Corbusier referred to what we now call Art Deco as "the final spasm of apredictable death". Why? Do you consider it a fair judgment?
Le Corbusier, as a Modernist architect and designer, had always supported the ideals of simple and honest design, and therefore he did not compromise with decorative arts, or what we now call Art Deco. Decorative arts, for Le Corbusier, should be separated from the tools; he also blamed the deceit in ornamentation, as it disguised the flaws in manufacture, i.e. that it hides faults or poor quality of materials used. This is the main reason why Le Corbusier called decorative arts as 'the final spasm of a predictable death', as he believed that it would not exist in the future. Never the less, Art Deco were widely influential in the United States, and made their presence firmly felt in many fields of design in Britain and else-where.
Le Corbusier was influenced by Adolf Loos, the first designer to reject the need for ornament in interior design, and the debate within the Deutsche Werkbund between Henry Van de Velde and Hermann Muthesius.
Adolf Loos's "Ornament and Crime" written in 1908 gave Le Corbusier new ideas about decorative arts. As pointed out by James Dunnett, from Form and Function : 'His absolute rejection of ornament must owe much to the influence of this "sensational article", and he credits Loos a little grudgingly with the formulation: the more cultivated a people becomes, the more decoration disappears. His primary argument asserting the importance of the distinction between a work of art and an object of use can also be found in Loos'. The Deutsche Werkbund's debate (1914) between Muthesius and Van de Velde started off with Muthesius's ten-point programme that concentrated on the need for refining typical objects. But this was immediately challenged by Van de Velde's protest about the importance of individual artistic inspiration. Le Corbusier's use of the word 'objet-type' as in 'type-needs' and 'type-furniture' clearly owes much to the advocacy by Muthesius, who carried the most of the same connotations.
Le Corbusier, being the most prominent figure of the modernist, was inspired by a new machine aesthetic and stripped away unnecessary ornament from design, interior and other related fields. He was inspired by the ideals of rationalization and standardization. Decorative Art of Today, first published in 1925 as a collection of the series of articles in his magazine L'Esprit Nouveau, inspired and written in protest to the Decorative Arts Exhibition in Paris in 1925. The style now generally associated with that exhibition, known as 'Art Deco', is one of his principal targets. The Exhibition of Decorative Arts aimed to create a market for French Arts and Crafts and to guard off the crowd of foreign products. Le Corbusier saw in it as an opportunity to show that industry was capable of supplying not only the apartment but also the entire city with mass-produced furniture and objects.
In Decorative Arts of Today, Le Corbusier warned about certain dangerous trends he saw emerging in interior, industrial and architectural design. The danger of becoming over-decorated, of becoming part of decorative arts. He argued that these products should embrace notions of rationalization and standardization. The chapter entitled "The Decorative Art of Today" in the book started off the argument with a statement: 'Modern decorative art is not decorated' . Le Corbusier insisted that there is a distinction between a work of art and an object of use and utility. He argued about the paradox of making decorative art out of tools, for example chairs, bottles, baskets and shoes.
In that chapter, Le Corbusier said the decorative arts in the past were rare and costly, but now they are commonplace and cheap. Nowadays, plain objects reversibly became rare and expensive. He explained that the decorated objects of today sell cheaply, because they are badly made and that they hide faults and its poor quality of material under the mask of decoration. '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' ; 'Decorative is disguise' .
Le Corbusier though, agreed to the value of the printed calico with fashionable patterns, but he emphasized that if this surface elaboration extended without discernment over absolutely everything, it would become offensive and shameful. 'This taste for decorating everything around one is a false taste, an abominable little perversion' . Back to the statement of 'modern decorative art is not decorated', He suggested that this group of 'art' is made by 'anonymous industry following its airy and limpid path of economy' rather than artists.
The Modern decorators with serious intentions to provide enjoyment for a sophisticated clientele, Le Corbusier claims, choose materials by considering their strength, lightness, economy and durability. They adapted to new materials, and so the structure of traditional objects had been transformed. Later, the young generation who borned to accept these new light form of products and simple truths; with new materials and forms being eventually introduced into the decorative art industries-New products in a new situation constituted the basis of a new sense of harmony.
Le Corbusier commented that the accelerated evolution in our time, forced decorative art to its decline, and 'observe that the almost hysterical rush in recent years towards quasi-orgiastic decoration is no more than the final spasm of an already foreseeable death' . He said, people started to realize through time that luxuriousness is inappropriate to our needs.
Throughout the chapter "Decorative Art of Today", there are illustrations of items that are devoid of decoration. For example, commercial glassware and crockery, ormo steel furniture, cabin in a ship and armchair with a banded seat and back in the shape of a lyre. This is a further paradox of the theme of the book. Le Corbusier argued that the best designs were the simplest.

The concepts of rationalization and standardization were illustrated in his 1925 Pavillon de L'Esprit Nouveau, this building is known as a 'show flat' for the Contemporary City, characterized by the furniture, storage, systems, and paintings by himself and Fernand Leger. Against the official traditional of interior decoration, this architecture satisfied the essential of function through form and for an interior and an industrial design that responded to the needs of machine-age methods of production. This pavilion challenged the nationalistic and decorative emphasis of the 1925 Exhibition by including mass-production, for example a table made by a hospital-furniture manufacturer, Maples armchairs and bentwood chair. Le Corbusier celebrated the modernists' spiritual bond with notions of standardization, the exploration of new materials, and firm embrace of the contemporary spirit.
Besides architecture, Le Corbusier applied his Purist ideals in his practice of Purist painting, directly informed the designing of at least the earlier Purist buildings, for instance, the Villa La Roche-Jeanneret. The formal links are clear enough, most obviously between the Purist plans and the layout of the earlier Purist paintings. Each functioning part, from light fitting to radiator to ramp, an architectural design placed within an ordered whole.

Le Corbusier gave a fair judgement about decoration and ornament. It is true that massive decoration do not survive the test of time, as they hide flaws and more importantly they are not needed practically. This is proven with movements in the history that were short-lived, for instance, Art Nouveau and the early Bauhaus Expressionist style which emphasis on exaggerated forms and the fantastic. Modernism or any other that design that aimed at functionality superseded these former movements.

Karl Grosz wrote an article 'Ornament' in 1911 from Form and Function, in it he agreed that industry submerged practical items into cheap decoration, and he suggested that "any further development could only be sought for by returning to simplicity" . Also, Maurice Deufrene wrote 'A Survey of Modern Tendencies in Decorative Art' at 1931 from Form and Function : 'Beauty is not attained by means of additions and complicated arrangement, but by balance, volume, form, material and practicability'.
Having validated Le Corbusier's view as a 'fair judgment' on one hand, knowing Art Deco was widely influential on the other. For example, in the United States, the Art Deco motifs, such as the sunbursts, lightning flashes, fountains etc. became widely fashionable, and the style was actively promoted by leading stores throughout the country. I believed this is not a paradox, but simply a reality of human nature; Le Corbusier's view based on logic and aimed at quality, honesty and practicability, but he missed the spiritual emotions that are essential to humans in his argument.
Art Deco is regarded as one of the most exciting period in the history of the decorative arts. Established in France before the First World War in a period of creative ferment, it spread through Europe and had its greatest and most impressive foreign success in the United States, particularly skyscrapers and movie palaces. Art Deco style influenced a wide range of art-making areas, included the furniture, textiles, ironwork and lighting, silver, lacquer and metalware, glass, ceramics, sculpture, paintings, graphics, posters and bookbinding, jewelry and also architecture. The importance of the influence of the style cannot be under-estimated. This fact led us to the reality of the situation and therefore designers now search for equilibrium, so their works maintain a balance of functionality and decoration. People cannot omit decoration entirely. This nature of humanity was summarized by Paul Follot, an experienced decorative arts designer, in a 1928 speech : 'We know that the "necessary" alone is not sufficient for man and that the superfluous is indispensable for him¡K or otherwise let us also suppress music, flowers, perfumes¡K and the smiles of ladies!' Also, Alastair Duncan said in his book Art Deco : 'Even if logic called for the immediate elimination of all ornamentation, mankind was simply not prepared psychologically for such an abrupt dislocation in lifestyle.'