Otto Wagner was born in 1841, and was an Austrian architect
and visionary of the Art Nouveau movement.
One of the institutions he studied at was the Academy of Fine Arts,
likely leading to the dichotomy between his initial historicist styles and what
was to come. He was trained in traditional
design; more specifically he was trained in the manner of bringing the many
disparate historical styles together.
However, ultimately he rejected this notion of historic eclecticism in
favor of a more elegant simplicity, allowing programmatic and structural
concerns to dominate his design efforts instead. He did not entirely abandon his roots in
historicism, but his belief that pragmatism was the key to design led him to
forge ahead while drawing analogies to the past. This modern way of thinking resulted in him becoming
a prominent and influential member of Art Nouveau, heralding the era’s theme, “form
follows function.”
 |
Landerbank,
one of Wagner’s earlier works, was completed in 1894. It resembles Renaissance styles as well as a
basis for Wagner’s future Art Nouveau designs.
|
When drawing a conclusion as to who likely had the most
influence on Wagner’s style (between theorists John Ruskin, Gottfried Semper,
and Eugène Viollet-le-Duc), it is most clearly Semper. Wagner himself identified Semper as one of
his prominent influences, and it shows throughout his designs. Semper promoted practical aesthetics and
minimizing excess such as unnecessary ornamentation. Some of the ways in which he preached this
simplistic, but powerful doctrine were through the use of symmetry,
directionality, and proportionality. He
believed that each variable affecting the success of a particular design could
be boiled down to its basics, and then implemented in similar ways to achieve similarly
successful results. Wagner was extremely
attracted to the sciences, and was likely attracted to the pragmatic and
mathematical way Semper approached design.
However, Wagner’s designs also drew upon the tenets of
Viollet-le-Duc’s theories as well, consciously or not. Viollet-le-Duc was not unlike Semper in his
rational approach to architecture. Likewise
opposed to florid ornamentation, Viollet-le-Duc believed each design decision should
have a reason behind it and that it was important to use modern techniques and
materials to express the function and rationale behind each building. His approach differed from Semper’s, in that
he looked to the past for answers. He
did not believe in the denial of past successes, and instead promoted the idea
that one should learn from the past.
Designers should be able to draw analogies to past structures, but
express them in more practical ways through the use of modern inventions,
materials, and techniques.
 |
Wagner’s
Majolika Haus, one his most notable works.
Completed in 1898, it clearly demonstrates the structural and geometric
simplicity inherent in Art Nouveau, as well as ornamental designs displayed on
the façade, which many of his contemporaries disapproved of.
|
At its heart, Art Nouveau was a push against historic, or
archaic, traditions deemed outdated and obsolete by the artists and architects
of the movement. Jugendstil, or “Youth
Style” as it was known in Germany, intended to overturn the frivolous use of
ornamentation and return to the methods of good craftsmanship. Academia
had dominated artistic expression for centuries, and considered painting and
sculpting to be higher forms of art than craftsmanship, which members of the
Art Nouveau movement believed to be detrimental to future development. To modernize design, Art Nouveau enthusiasts
rallied to the credo, “form follows function.” An import facet of the Art Nouveau movement is
that it spread rapidly across Europe at the end of the nineteenth century, and
then was abandoned nearly as quickly in the early twentieth century. What makes this such an interesting
characteristic is that it was not so much a large collection of people moving
as one to create a new style, but rather it was more a concerted effort
produced by a variety of individuals in their own separate way, united only in
their similar thought processes. This is
important because Wagner, though an influential member of the movement,
differed from many of his peers in the way he approached modernity. Interestingly, his departure from more
commonplace Art Nouveau styles was also a departure from the theories of both
Semper and Viollet-le-Duc. Or, perhaps
it would be better termed a “modification.”
A common way in which Wagner would draw his parallels to the past resembles
Ruskin’s teachings; Ruskin believed ornamentation and good craftsmanship were
not mutually exclusive. Wagner would
often modify his designs by decorating his facades in a classical manner.
 |
Wagner’s
Karlsplatz Stadtbahn Station, completed in 1899, the result of winning a
competition for the city design plans of Vienna.
|
In 1883, Wagner won first prize (one of two first prizes
awarded) for a competition for the “general regulation plan of Vienna.” His personal motto throughout the Vienna city
plan design was “Artis sola domina necessitas.”
This motto, derived straight from the influential Gottfried Semper
himself, is Latin for “necessity is the only mistress of art.” In the end, only Wagner’s railway designs
were used in Vienna’s city plans but this success likely strengthened Wagner’s
resolve that modern architecture required the embrace of new sciences,
materials, and design methods.
 |
Wagner’s
Austrian Postal Savings Bank, completed in 1906.
|
By 1894 he was appointed director of the school of
architecture at Vienna’s Academy of Fine Arts, and published his book, “Modern
Architecture,” extolling the virtues of moving forward in design, not drawing only
on the past. His revolutionary ideas,
and position as professor and director, allowed him to spawn several more
visionary minds who continued in his footsteps.
Furthermore, in 1897 Wagner joined the Vienna Secession group. The Secession group was a collaboration of
artists who objected to the pervasive conservatism inherent in academia. Instead of the historicism venerated by
academic institutes such as the Association of Austrian Artists, they insisted
not only upon the necessity in exploring more modern artistic concepts, but in
the complete and total freedom to explore the possibilities that lay outside of
academic tradition. This desire was
encapsulated in their motto, “Der Zeit ihre Kunst. Der Kunst ihre Freiheit"
("To every age its art. To art its freedom.”). Architects in the Secession, such as Wagner, similarly
insisted upon modernity. These architects
often used linear ornamentation on their buildings, believing a purer,
simplistic geometry to be more in line with the quest for function over more
gaudy displays. Wagner’s personal
marriage of unobtrusive ornamentation with form and function, however,
eventually led to a split between Art Nouveau purists and others, like Wagner.
Sources:
Wolf, Justin. “Art
Nouveau.” The Art Story. TheArtStory.org. 6 February, 2013. Web.
“Otto Wagner, The Academy of Fine Arts.” The
Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute.
Clarkart.edu. 6 February,
2013. Web.
“Vision of Modernity.”
Museum Postsparkasse. Ottowagner.com. 6 February, 2013. Web.
Photos from www.greatbuildings.com
No comments:
Post a Comment