I just attended the annual meeting of the Southeast chapter of the
Society of Architectural Historians (SESAH), held here in Knoxville.
Papers presented included the usual mix of what might expect at such a
conference - some original research on Baroque churches, some reportage
on historic preservation in Tennessee, a paper on Mies, one on Corbu,
etc. Mostly good, solid, interesting, well-presented stuff.
In the very last session there was one paper that caught my attention:
"When the New is Old: The Reawakening of Traditional Design," presented
by Elizabeth Dowling from Georgia Tech. It's a subject that I have
touched on in my own research, so I was curious to hear a 'scholarly'
approach to it.
Dowling began by giving a chronology of the 'new classicism,' touching
on the writings of Venturi (Complexity) and the Prince (A Vision for
Britain), the design work of Duany/PZ (Seaside, the 'ground-breaking'
project in Florida), and the pedagogical innovation of Thomas Gordon
Smith (establishment of a 'classicist' curriculum at Notre Dame).
It was an interesting paper, though devoid of any social or economic
dimension, toeing the familiar line that the classical style (no matter
how shoddily constructed) puts us back in the thousands-of-years-old
tradition of great, civic, timeless building.
I was already on my way out of the room when someone asked the question,
"Well, what do you call this stuff? Is it Modernism, Post-Modernism, New
Urban Classicism, New Classicism, Neo-Classicism?"
I had never thought about that. But one word popped into my head
because, during the lecture, I kept thinking about Iraq and the Bush
Doctrine of pre-emptive war being a kind of politcal/military
counterpart of this retro architectural styling.
"How about Neocon architecture?" I blurted, nearly out the door.
No one in the room seemed to get it, least of all Professor Dowling, who
looked at me and asked, "What do you mean?" I was wondering whether any
of these people read the news, or doing so, make any connections.
I said that if architectural styles/movements have historically
reflected political, social and economic circumstances, couldn't this
newest 'movement' be related to the Project for the New American Century?
Absolute silence. I walked out.
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
Society of Architectural Historians (SESAH), held here in Knoxville.
Papers presented included the usual mix of what might expect at such a
conference - some original research on Baroque churches, some reportage
on historic preservation in Tennessee, a paper on Mies, one on Corbu,
etc. Mostly good, solid, interesting, well-presented stuff.
In the very last session there was one paper that caught my attention:
"When the New is Old: The Reawakening of Traditional Design," presented
by Elizabeth Dowling from Georgia Tech. It's a subject that I have
touched on in my own research, so I was curious to hear a 'scholarly'
approach to it.
Dowling began by giving a chronology of the 'new classicism,' touching
on the writings of Venturi (Complexity) and the Prince (A Vision for
Britain), the design work of Duany/PZ (Seaside, the 'ground-breaking'
project in Florida), and the pedagogical innovation of Thomas Gordon
Smith (establishment of a 'classicist' curriculum at Notre Dame).
It was an interesting paper, though devoid of any social or economic
dimension, toeing the familiar line that the classical style (no matter
how shoddily constructed) puts us back in the thousands-of-years-old
tradition of great, civic, timeless building.
I was already on my way out of the room when someone asked the question,
"Well, what do you call this stuff? Is it Modernism, Post-Modernism, New
Urban Classicism, New Classicism, Neo-Classicism?"
I had never thought about that. But one word popped into my head
because, during the lecture, I kept thinking about Iraq and the Bush
Doctrine of pre-emptive war being a kind of politcal/military
counterpart of this retro architectural styling.
"How about Neocon architecture?" I blurted, nearly out the door.
No one in the room seemed to get it, least of all Professor Dowling, who
looked at me and asked, "What do you mean?" I was wondering whether any
of these people read the news, or doing so, make any connections.
I said that if architectural styles/movements have historically
reflected political, social and economic circumstances, couldn't this
newest 'movement' be related to the Project for the New American Century?
Absolute silence. I walked out.
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html