Sorted by date | |||
page174from Nordic Architects Writes
Kaija and Heikki Siren’s Chapel in the
College of Technology Village, Otaniemi, 1957
young men did not, though, criticize the
programmes of the plans so much as the style, which they considered
anti-social. Aalto was accused of exclusiveness, Pietilä of subjectivity and
Revell of formalism. These accusations combined both aesthetic and social
moralizing in a verbalized pathos which was as powerful as the plastic
expression to which it was objecting. The alternative was considered to be an
anonymous, aesthetically controlled, logical mathematical, and
consumer-oriented architecture utilizing the knowledge provide by
interdisciplinary search and the full potential of technology. Emphatically
technological system architecture was preceded by a return to the sources of
functionalism. At the beginning of the 1960s Aulis Blomstedt and Aarono
Ruusuvuori had a major influence on their students at the School of
Architecture.
Debate
about the architect’s responsibility gradually spread to the global scale and to
the brave new world of futurology. At the level of architecture, Mies van der
Rohe assumed the role of prophet, and on a wider scale the ideas of Archigram
or Buckminster Fuller were eagerly taken up. The result was rather paradoxical:
on the one hand, architecture absolutism (the revolutionary youth of 1968
called this “design fascism”) and on the other, anti-architecture!
|
|||
|
|||
|