 S
SShould construction be  decorated or rather should decoration be constructed? Post begins with the question posed in the brief--building a response DIRECTLY in relation to the principle themes of the week. This was a central  issue during the design ‘reform’ of the 19thcentury. Designers began to  think about the beauty and utility of an object, and how these factors  should be taken into account. Owen Jones  argued in his writing of ‘The  Grammar of Ornament’(1856) that “Construction should be decorated.  Decoration should never be purposely constructed”, Jones was looking at  the function of a design before the form and how the decoration of the  design should not take away from the function but rather add to and  strengthen the idea of its function.Here the student refers to one of the primary theoretical figures discussed in lecture and in the week's reading, illustrating an understanding of Jones's philsophical approach to design reform and the role of ornament in relation to structure. A.W.N Pugin had the same idea in  his head when he created his principles of design. His principles  circled around the idea that design should respect the characteristics  of materials, not imitate them. These principles provided a standard for  many 19th century designs. Student also discusses Pugin and his role in the foundation of the principles of the design reform movement--again illustrating a clear understanding of these ideals and thier historical relevance. Why were Jones and Pugin creating these  standards for design? Partly because of the industrialisation of their  country. The Industrial Revolution saw the invention of mass-production,  this gave the middle class the opportunity to obtain goods easily. And  ‘one of a kind’ hand made, goods began to diminish. Here historical context--describe in detail in lecture--is used to provide critical background for the development of design reform. 
The 18th century  wallpaper pictured above does not adhere to A.W.N Pugin’s true  principles of design but rather to his false principle. The design shows  depth and a soft style of decoration. Here the selected image for the post is directly discussed and critially analysed in relation to the principle tenets of the design reforem movement--with reference again to key figures--Pugin + Jones. Whereas one of Owen Jones’s or  Pugins’s designs would have showed a stronger, stylised pattern of  nature rather than the soft bush scene seen here. Because it is a wall  the decoration should also be strong to support the idea of a solid  wall. I agree with Owen Jones argument , because if an object is  designed with this aesthetic it has a stronger sense of its function. Student presents his own opinion on the question of appropriate design 'principles' but in relation to the readings and key themes of the week--used to substantiate his position--and illustrating a sophisticated understanding of these ideas/ideals.  Observers of the design will either be able to understand it better or  their idea of what is will be reinforced by its decoration rather than  misconceived.
 
No comments:
Post a Comment