In Search of Method. On the Crisis of Architecture Studies

Abstract

How can modern architecture be evaluated — architecture that in a declarative manner refused the succession, orientation of samples, and any system principle? What aesthetic criteria can be applied to works in which the author’s individual approach dominates entirely? Such installations of modern architecture and art in general gave rise to a common crisis of humanitarian thought and forced people to talk about the end of the history of art. However, as G. Sedlmayr wrote, the question of initial positions and questions of determining goals should precede the question of methods. The relevance of the Sedlmayr’s words is enhanced in the current environment of a rapid change of paradigms. The article substantiates the idea of a direct relationship between the development of architectural form with the value transformations
that social consciousness has experienced since the New time. In addition, the author raises the question about the search for an art criticism method that would correspond to the current situation in architecture, on the one hand, and at the same time can be applied it to the entire history of architecture. In this regard, the author demonstrates the enduring relevance of the art criticism method of Max Dvorzak, designated by the thesis “the history of art as the history of the spirit”. This method, developed by Hans Zedlmayr, is based on the belief of the need for ethical, moral and spiritual assessments of the phenomena and processes that take place in the development of art. Implementation of this method could provide a full-fledged alternative to the overly formalized approach which exists today, as well as arbitrary and haphazard approaches that take place in modern architectural studies.

Keywords:

Tradition, Modernity, modern, postmodern, traditional architecture, modernist architecture, modern architecture, architectural method, self-determination, goal-setting