Sorted by date | |||
page117from Nordic Architects Writes
1931
Eliel Saarinen
Address
Louis Sullivan explained once to me his
philosophy of architecture. When he finished, he said: ”That is the only right
thing to do.”
I
looked skeptical and said: “Do you think so?”
“Yes”,
he answered, “that is the only right thing to do – for me. You have to consider
what is right for you.”
I
have to say the same thing to you, when I am going to explain my opinions: “That
is the only right thing to do – for me. You have to consider what is the right
thing for you.”
There
is still another point I will mention, so there will not be any mistake. When I
speak about contemporary architecture, I do not mean the French modernist, as
you call it in this country. I will not mention anything in this way or that
way, or my personal opinions of contemporary architects and their work. I will
speak only about principles and I only take into consideration architecture,
which has principles and logic behind the forms.
I
will not criticize. And if I do criticize, I will limit my criticism to a
little story: There was a man walking crookbacked along the street. His friend
met him and said: “What is the trouble with you – lumbago?”
“No,”
he answered, “That is not lumbago. That is modern furniture.”
My topic will be: the historical and
ethical necessity of the contemporary movement in the development of our
culture.
We
all know that when something new comes in our art life, minds are divided into
two main parts. One part is for the new: the progressive minded; another part
is against the new: the conservative minded. Both are necessary. The
progressive part is the motor which gives the speed; the conservative part is
the brake which prevents accidents.
There is a third group in the middle,
doubtful, hesitating and asking: “is this only a fashion for today, or will it
last?”
The
conservatives who are against the new against it partly because they have grown
up with the old forms and they are slow in changing their minds. They are
watching to see how the new will develop. Others are against it because they
are satisfied with the old forms, they are afraid of something new which disturbs
them, and they do not see anything good in it.
And
I have heard remarks like this: “Why all this searching of new forms? We have
architecture already settled. We have the antique and the Gothic. They have
|
|||
|
|||
|