A Comparison Of Early Modern And High Modern Movements

1074 Words5 Pages
Although often considered a single era of architectural history, the modernist movement which dominated the 20th century could actually be easily classified into the two very distinct sub-movements. Early modernism and high modernism, in fact, have a number of differences which distinguish the two movements, but also share a number of common traits born from a similar intent. One of the most prominent differences between early modernism and high modernism was their relationship to architectural tradition. Early modernism, it seemed, was much more reliant on architectural customs and the styles of previous movements. This dilemma was an understandable one, for when the early modernist movement was developing, the European schools of architecture were under the strain of hundreds or thousands years of successful architectural tradition. Architects were continuing to draw inspiration from Greek, Roman, Egyptian, or Gothic architecture styles. It was as a result of this, then, the transition from historic architectural styles to a modern form was a relatively gradual one. Proof of this can be found by examining some of the earliest works of early modernism. Early modernism began as a means of addressing worsening social conditions brought about by failures in urban and architectural design, as well as utilizing a variety of new materials which allowed designers to explore new territories in building design. One architecture theorist in particular, Eugene Viollet-le-Duc, struggled to conceptually bring these new ideas to the field. It was his belief that while the traditions of architecture at the time should not be eradicated, new construction techniques and materials should inform future design. He was clear to distinguish between the simple revival of imitation of past design styles, and the use of historic architectural motifs while incorporating new ideas and
Open Document