Учебно-методическое пособие для студентов специальности «Дизайн»

22
meetings in different German cities and formed regional Werkbund associa-
tions throughout Germany. Its declared aim was 'to ennoble industrial labour 
through the co-operation of art, industry and handicraft, by means of educa-
tion, propaganda and united action on relevant questions'.
The single individual with the greatest responsibility for the Werkbund 
idea was a civil servant in the Prussian Ministry of Trade, Hermann Muthe-
sius. Muthesius had trained as an architect, and in 1896 he was appointed ar-
chitectural attache at the German Embassy in London. In creating the Werk-
bund, Muthesius had two associates. One was the Belgian architect Henri van 
de Velde, who had settled in Germany in 1899, and who in 1906 had become 
the head of the Weimar School of Applied Arts – the predecessor of the Bau-
haus. He rejected the notion of ‘art for art’s sake’, and believed in the neces-
sity of reconciliation with the machine. 
The other partner was a former Protestant pastor and now prominent lib-
eral politician called Friedrich Naumann. Had always been an enthusiast for 
the visual arts, and, more specifically, an advocate of the need to find new 
forms to suit the modern age. At this period he was obsessed with the idea of 
bringing about a revival of German culture and of making it something, which 
benefited rather than suffered from the machine. 
Though the Werkbund survived the First World War and lived on 
throughout the whole of the turbulent Weimar years, to collapse only when the 
Nazis came to power, it was too large ever to be really united or homogene-
ous. Its ranks were split by frequent rows. 
One of the most virulent of these occurred in July 1914, on the eve of the 
Werkbund's Cologne exhibition. Muthesius wanted designers to concentrate on 
the development of standard or typical forms. Muthesius was opposed on the 
one hand by up-and-coming architects like Walter Gropius and Bruno Taut, 
who saw in his propositions an attempt to give the status quo the force of law; 
and on the other hand by van de Velde and others, who still valuedHigendstil 
individualism. Many of Muthesius's opponents were even hostile to the idea 
that Germany should try to export on a large scale. For them this meant a dilu-
tion of German folk identity, while at the same time pandering to debased for-
eign tastes. It also meant the sacrifice of quality in ravour of cheapness. Muthe-
sius was forced to back down in order to keep the Werkbund together. 
This debate within the Werkbund on the eve of the war showed how far 
some members at least had moved from the English Arts and Crafts ideals, 
which had originally inspired its foundation. In fact, Muthesius had never ac-
cepted English Arts and Crafts philosophy uncritically. His aim was to see 
what could be learned from Britain for Germany’s benefit. It was a period of 
ever-increasing rivalry between the two countries. Educated German opinion 

23
swung between admiration of England and dislike motivated by envy. Ger-
many had achieved unity only in the nineteenth century. Industrialization had 
taken place much later than it did in England. 
The most seminal Werkbund designs were most of all to the increasing use 
of electricity in the home. Richard Schulz’s pendent light-fitting is a modifica-
tion of designs already evolved for gas, but the cleanness offline is something 
new A series of table-lamps by one of the less-known Werkbund designers, 
Karl Richard Henker of Charlottenburg shows a logic in approaching this par-
ticular problem which is rare even today. 
The most frequently cited domestic designs of the period are those of Peter 
Behrens. Behrens, a painter turned architect, is often called 'the first industrial 
designer'. That honour belongs more justly to Christopher Dresser. Behrens 
was something different – the first house-designer, responsible for the visual 
impact made by a large industrial corporation. 
Behrens was in some ways rather a conventional designer – much of his 
domestic architecture is a bland version of Neoclassical style; his overbearing 
German Embassy in St Petersburg was a favourite building of Adolf Hitler, 
and provided Speer with a model for the colossal structures planned to cele-
brate the achievements of the Third Reich. On a far smaller scale, some of 
Behrens's designs for household objects would set the teeth of design histori-
ans on edge were they not by him. 
Most important of all, in terms of the future, are designs where Behrens 
was content to allow a machine to make its own statement, even in a domestic 
environment. There is nothing disguised or apologetic about the table-fan he 
designed around 1908 and no attempt is made to force it to conform to its pre-
sumed surroundings. Yet even here the architect's instinct for form and bal-
ance is in evidence. Behrens may have taken some hints here from traditional 
designs for scientific instruments, perhaps prompted by the fact that the angle 
of the fan itself needed to be easily and conveniently adjustable – the kind of 
problem which makers of telescopes had been solving for several centuries. 

жүктеу/скачать 0,79 Mb.

Достарыңызбен бөлісу: