Well, I read this list only as digest and I wouldnt have written
most of my reply if I had seen this before. Anyway:
http://www.gi-ihr.su.se/calamuswww/BAUHAUS
> the arcitechture of buildings. Among some of the design that was
> made at the bauhaus is the steelchair by Marcel Breuer. This you
can
> still find in furniture shops around the world.
A very childrenfriendly intro!!:))
But first I dont know a chair that was really invented by Breuer
and not by Mrs Brand, who also made some nice lampade and teapots.
And then, I would like to know more about the conditions under
which those chairs are/were sold. In germany today, they are sold
as rare and extremely expensive collectors items. Like the
Jacobson chairs, that break so easily, if you really use them.
> The science of form sprung from out from the three basic
elements of
> form, the circle, triangle and square, each of them were told to
> have specific emotional charactaristics and function.
Isnt that extremely obscure? Not to mention the writings of juris
doctor Kandinsky...
>Bauhaus bought
> the the production made by the best students. In that way
students
> could finance their years in school and at the same time
contribute
> to the school-finances.
And the homes of trendy people in Weimar, who got handmade things,
that looked industrial...not to mention Klees...
> emphasize what was important. Black, white and red were the
> dominating colours.
As in the paintings of Malewitsch. I dont want to upset anybody,
especialy not the dear and noble prof in norway, maybe its an
irrelevant personal observation, but I was totaly shocked, many
years ago, when I first saw a big Malewitsch show in one part of a
museum (including his later works, citing scenes from Eisenstein
movies) and then in another part of the museum drawings made by
the inhabitants of german concentration camps, drawings of ss
people with the black nazicross in a white circle on red square.
And I dont like Eisenstein anymore, the poor officers, killed by a
cruel mob. Maybe the dear and noble expert in leadership and
economics can contribute something to the point of willingness to
pay/willingness to like.
> the school. Gestapo occupied bauhaus and demanded that it would
> accept a nazi-oriented course of study and the eviction of some
> teachers, among them Kandinsky.
Kandinsky, the greatest, wood cutter, especialy the stuff he made
around 1916, with a lot of telephon lines etc in his rural
dreamlands. He had a desk like a lawyer..............
Anyway, maybe one can say that the stuggle between nazis and
bauhaus was, cum grano salis, less a struggle on how to build
things, houses, furnitures, but more a symbolic struggle on the
question, who "owns" progress
The mysteries of history............
Heiko
most of my reply if I had seen this before. Anyway:
http://www.gi-ihr.su.se/calamuswww/BAUHAUS
> the arcitechture of buildings. Among some of the design that was
> made at the bauhaus is the steelchair by Marcel Breuer. This you
can
> still find in furniture shops around the world.
A very childrenfriendly intro!!:))
But first I dont know a chair that was really invented by Breuer
and not by Mrs Brand, who also made some nice lampade and teapots.
And then, I would like to know more about the conditions under
which those chairs are/were sold. In germany today, they are sold
as rare and extremely expensive collectors items. Like the
Jacobson chairs, that break so easily, if you really use them.
> The science of form sprung from out from the three basic
elements of
> form, the circle, triangle and square, each of them were told to
> have specific emotional charactaristics and function.
Isnt that extremely obscure? Not to mention the writings of juris
doctor Kandinsky...
>Bauhaus bought
> the the production made by the best students. In that way
students
> could finance their years in school and at the same time
contribute
> to the school-finances.
And the homes of trendy people in Weimar, who got handmade things,
that looked industrial...not to mention Klees...
> emphasize what was important. Black, white and red were the
> dominating colours.
As in the paintings of Malewitsch. I dont want to upset anybody,
especialy not the dear and noble prof in norway, maybe its an
irrelevant personal observation, but I was totaly shocked, many
years ago, when I first saw a big Malewitsch show in one part of a
museum (including his later works, citing scenes from Eisenstein
movies) and then in another part of the museum drawings made by
the inhabitants of german concentration camps, drawings of ss
people with the black nazicross in a white circle on red square.
And I dont like Eisenstein anymore, the poor officers, killed by a
cruel mob. Maybe the dear and noble expert in leadership and
economics can contribute something to the point of willingness to
pay/willingness to like.
> the school. Gestapo occupied bauhaus and demanded that it would
> accept a nazi-oriented course of study and the eviction of some
> teachers, among them Kandinsky.
Kandinsky, the greatest, wood cutter, especialy the stuff he made
around 1916, with a lot of telephon lines etc in his rural
dreamlands. He had a desk like a lawyer..............
Anyway, maybe one can say that the stuggle between nazis and
bauhaus was, cum grano salis, less a struggle on how to build
things, houses, furnitures, but more a symbolic struggle on the
question, who "owns" progress
The mysteries of history............
Heiko