Учебно-методическое пособие для студентов специальности «Дизайн»

37
encouraged a growing fusion of cultural influences. In particular, a blurring of 
Eastern and Western aesthetics and technology represented an entirely new 
cultural fusion. 
The elaborate households of the prewar years were gone, replaced by in-
formality and adaptability. Gone, too, was the conventional approach to fur-
nishings as expensive and permanent status objects. New materials and tech-
nologies, many of which had been developed during wartime, helped to free 
design from tradition, allowing for increasingly abstract and sculptural aes-
thetics as well as lower prices for mass-produced objects. 
The most marked changes occurred in America, Italy, Scandinavia, and 
Japan. A growing number of American firms such as the Herman Miller Fur-
niture Company and Knoll International began to build a reputation for manu-
facturing and marketing well-designed, high-quality, inexpensive furniture 
made from new materials like fiberglass and plastics for the consumer market 
in the postwar years. In an effort to revive their depressed postwar economy, 
Italian designers made a self-conscious effort to establish themselves as lead-
ers in the lucrative international marketplace for domestic design. While ini-
tially they looked to traditional forms or materials for inspiration, they also 
soon embraced new materials and technologies to produce radically innovative 
designs that expressed the optimistic spirit of high-style modernism. Scandi-
navian designers preferred to combine the traditional beauty of natural materi-
als with advanced technology, giving their designs a warm and domestic yet 
modern quality. Japanese designers, obviously aware of contemporaneous de-
velopments in Western architecture and design, strove to create a balance be-
tween traditional Asian and international modern aesthetics, while still evok-
ing national values with their distinctly Asian sensibility.
At the same time, in reaction to the perceived impersonality of mass pro-
duction, an alternative group of artist-designers who were interested in keep-
ing alive the time-honored practices of hand-working traditional materials 
emerged during the 1960s. Their one-of-a-kind objects, made with tour-de-
force virtuosity, helped elevate design to the status of art.
By the mid-1970s, a radically transformed “modern design” expressed it-
self through a variety of idioms. There was a style for virtually every taste, 
from the bold forms and colors of Op Art – inspired supergraphics to the re-
finement of Studio Movement handcraftsmanship to the pared-down industrial 
aesthetics of High Tech. 
The last quarter of the twentieth century saw a surge of unbridled consum-
erism manifested in a number of diverse, often contradictory, design currents. 
Some architects and designers chose to conform to the previously established 

38
intellectual strictures of modernism, seeking expression through form rather 
than applied ornament. Others, inspired by texts that denounced the cool arid-
ity of modernism – including Robert Venturi’s “Learning from Las Vegas” 
(1972), “Collage City” (1973) by Colin Rowe and Fred Koetter, and Rem 
Koolhaas’ “Delirious New York” (1978) – developed a postmodernism that 
celebrated the vernacular and reinterpreted motifs of the past. Still others used 
the design of objects as a means to make countercultural social or political 
statements. Many of the leaders of the Studio Craft Movement consciously 
abandoned the creation of useful objects in favor of nonfunctional art. Toward 
the end of the 1980s, designers, recognizing the inherent beauty of materials 
developed for science, began to employ them in a wide range of consumer 
products. In the century’s last decade, the environment became a major con-
cern for designers offering “green”, socially responsible solutions to design 
problems. 

жүктеу/скачать 0,79 Mb.

Достарыңызбен бөлісу: