Historically since the end of the renaissance, the fields of art and design experienced a separation.
This separation was in place for many centuries and it was not until the early 20th century that increasing parallels between the two began to emerge. Following World War I, many architects & designers along with some of the artists and writers of the day were turning away from the traditional philosophies and forms of old.
At the beginning of the 1900’s the Art Nouveau style and its associated philosophies were experiencing vast popularity and a significant level of adoption throughout the world. Within the world of art, the various styles can be placed along a continuum with complete order on one side and complete chaos on the other side. Reflecting on history, we can see that society’s preference has swung back and forth between these two vastly different extremes.
In comes the De Stijl movement.
 |
| https://www.behance.net/gallery/4556031/DE-STIJL-cafe |
In 1917 a review journal called De Stijl (Dutch for the style) was founded by a man named Theo van Doesburg. The title of this journal has come to represent the various artistic endeavours of a handful of associated individuals, the most widely recognised being Gerrit Rietveld and Piet Mondrian.
The DaDa notions of dispersing with the pretentious elitist design aesthetics of the pre war era provided an initial source of inspiration for the De Stijl movement. In terms of form, the De Stijl movement most definitely drew inspiration from some of Frank Lloyd Wright’s early works which were published in 1910 throughout Europe.
As a result of the title of the journal, the movement is often referred to as De Stijl, however the title of Neo-Plasticism as adopted by Mondrian is an alternative name and in my opinion makes more sense. When dissected Neo means new whilst Plasticism refers to the form that the art takes, compare this to the title of De Stijl which is simply Dutch for “the style” and it easy to see which name is more fitting.
Coming back to the continuum of art styles, Neo-Plasticism is firmly rooted quite close to the side of complete order. This is due to a variety of reasons, the most compelling of which being the fact that the primary goal of the individuals behind the movement was to distill art to a level of perfection and scientific precision. This equated to an unparalleled level of functionalism that shunned the intricate decorations of Art Nouveau and the Arts & Crafts movements that were commonly found throughout the western world at the time. Due to the logical approach and the functionalist philosophies of the style preventing any ornamentation or surface decoration, emphasis was placed on two key elements, those of construction and function. Through being mindful of construction and function, the key proponents of the movement were able to create designs that appropriately catered for every aspect of modern life at the time. These designs had both geometry and colour at their core and as their signature.
 |
| http://char.txa.cornell.edu/art/decart/destijl/decstijl.htm |
The universal language of the De Stijl was posited on the fundamental principle of geometry, specifically the straight line, the square and the rectangle. These geometrical principles were then expertly coupled, enhanced and built upon with asymmetry, the use of primary colours as feature points and the relationship between both positive and negative elements being brought out through a careful arrangement of non-objective forms and lines.
Although very few architectural or design examples (such as Gerrit Rietveld’s Schroeder House or Rietveld’s Red-Blue Chair) exist of the style, Neo-Plasticism and its key principles have experienced a relatively influential effect on both modern architecture and design throughout the 20th century. Due the staggering impact composition and balance play in design, elements of the style continue to provide modern inspiration even in the modern age of today. It is evident then that the most important thing about Neo-Plasticism is not the designs, but the ideas behind the movement that are influential.
An exception to this is Schröder House designed by Gerrit Rietveld and constructed in 1924 in Utrecht, Netherlands. This house is widely lauded as being the most complete realisation of the De Sijl aesthetic, featuring not only an exterior designed in the movement’s style, but a complete interior decoration in the Neo-Plasticism style by Rietveld too. This house now operates as a museum and has been listed as a monument since the 70’s as well as a UNESCO World heritage Site since 2000.
In summary, the major identifying features & ideas of De Stijl are as follows;
- The distillation of art to a level of scientific precision & perfection e.g. an extremely logical approach.
- Easily recognisable utilisation of squares, rectangles and primary colours.
- A rejection of decorative excess favouring instead function and a careful arrangement of positive and negative elements.
Sample colour palettes of the movement;
 |
| http://scm.ulster.ac.uk/~B00472293/des106/dhunt_desjournal.html |
 |
| http://www.pinterest.com/waltergebele/form%2Bfarbe/ |
 |
| http://marksutherland1.wordpress.com/2011/10/13/20th-century-art-movements/ |
0 comments:
Post a Comment