Modernist Tastemaker? Fascist Snob? Corporate Artist?
January 29, 2019 10:15 AM Subscribe
“His “Modern Architecture: International Exhibition” in 1932 successfully sold the profession to America by reducing and reframing the architecture of the day into an aesthetic that would come to be known as the International Style. And in his curating, he conveniently omitted architectural modernism’s more populist programs and ideology (the building of affordable housing, schools, recreation centers, and the like). In fact, Johnson, who could afford to fund his own projects and work on commissions for free (a significant advantage over his competitors), had little care for social concerns unless they somehow benefited him: “Social responsibility was boring,” Lamster notes,” and for Philip Johnson, to be boring was an unforgivable crime.” The Boys’ Club:
On the myths and enigmas of Philip Johnson’s life and of a supposedly egalitarian architectural culture. (The Nation)
Kate Wagner previously. Always a delight to read her stuff.
posted by The Ardship of Cambry at 11:17 AM on January 29, 2019
posted by The Ardship of Cambry at 11:17 AM on January 29, 2019
Johnson’s political activities included his leaving MoMA to join Louisiana populist strongman Huey Long’s political campaign in an effort to eventually undermine it - now that sounds like an interesting story.
posted by doctornemo at 11:49 AM on January 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by doctornemo at 11:49 AM on January 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
We had Mark Lamster in our gallery for a reading last week, a more informal pre-game to his appearance at the Boston Public Library. It's a great read, and highly recommended.
posted by grimley at 1:36 PM on January 29, 2019
posted by grimley at 1:36 PM on January 29, 2019
I shared this with some historians, and one pointed me to a 2016 Vanity Fair piece, "Famed Architect Philip Johnson’s Hidden Nazi Past."
posted by doctornemo at 1:41 PM on January 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by doctornemo at 1:41 PM on January 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
As a not American, I always wondered about the influence of Philip Johnson when I was in the US doing my PhD. One professor directly told me I could forget about publishing my thesis as long as Johnson lived. Weird -- why would he care about a lowly dissertation? I still don't really know, either he did care and policed all discourse, or people were "working towards the Führer". (Which is this case is hardly godwinning). I would have liked to interview him, but was strongly advised against it.
Because of this, I developed my own theories about him and his work, which may be edging towards conspiracy; I feel he almost single-handedly pushed American architecture away from what I see as something unique and beautiful, like FLW, and the whole Case Study Houses program, and perhaps the Chicago School (I just don't know enough about it), and towards a utterly useless, banal and also ugly architecture, right at the point where the US had the most influence on international architecture and everyone aspired to lecture at American universities or better still, build in American cities. And also, yes, he took out the very essences of European modern architecture, its foundation in social justice and the reality of modern construction after WWI, and turned the whole thing into a style.
posted by mumimor at 3:37 PM on January 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
Because of this, I developed my own theories about him and his work, which may be edging towards conspiracy; I feel he almost single-handedly pushed American architecture away from what I see as something unique and beautiful, like FLW, and the whole Case Study Houses program, and perhaps the Chicago School (I just don't know enough about it), and towards a utterly useless, banal and also ugly architecture, right at the point where the US had the most influence on international architecture and everyone aspired to lecture at American universities or better still, build in American cities. And also, yes, he took out the very essences of European modern architecture, its foundation in social justice and the reality of modern construction after WWI, and turned the whole thing into a style.
posted by mumimor at 3:37 PM on January 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
PhilJo is a complicated nut to crack, that’s for sure. I’m not sure he more vile, egomaniacal, or misogynistic than many of his peers, but he certainly wasn’t a great human. However, he left a handful of legitimately great projects in his wake (my personal favorite being Pennzoil Place in Houston), and I’ve always appreciated his less than reverent approach to architectural dogma. Looking at interviews, it appears that while he was not nice, he may have been fun.
I would also argue that he didn’t take the social program out of modernism- it had already been stripped out and left a hollow shell long before crossing the Atlantic.
posted by q*ben at 8:09 PM on January 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
I would also argue that he didn’t take the social program out of modernism- it had already been stripped out and left a hollow shell long before crossing the Atlantic.
posted by q*ben at 8:09 PM on January 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
I would also argue that he didn’t take the social program out of modernism- it had already been stripped out and left a hollow shell long before crossing the Atlantic.
Really? Before the Nazis, millions of square feet of modern architecture in Northern Europe was social housing, absolutely the majority of modern buildings. Lot's of architects who were socialists fled to the Sovjet Union, and were allowed to work (though Stalin like all the other totalitarians preferred garish neoclassical), Mussolini and Franco both didn't mind modern architecture, and specially Mussolini did modernist social development projects.
If there is anything Philip Johnson truly is responsible for, it is the emptying of architectural movements like modernism and what became "deconstructivism" after his show. I'm curious about how he had the power to do that, so I'll probably buy the book.
There's a classic anecdote about a drunken row between Johnson and Mies, in the Johnson Glass House, which had Mies leaving in the middle of the night. I've always wondered where he went. Anyway, it was probably more about tectonics than about social issues, but the point is they weren't that friendly, Mies tolerated Johnson because he needed him. And Johnson used Mies because he could.
posted by mumimor at 1:11 AM on January 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
Really? Before the Nazis, millions of square feet of modern architecture in Northern Europe was social housing, absolutely the majority of modern buildings. Lot's of architects who were socialists fled to the Sovjet Union, and were allowed to work (though Stalin like all the other totalitarians preferred garish neoclassical), Mussolini and Franco both didn't mind modern architecture, and specially Mussolini did modernist social development projects.
If there is anything Philip Johnson truly is responsible for, it is the emptying of architectural movements like modernism and what became "deconstructivism" after his show. I'm curious about how he had the power to do that, so I'll probably buy the book.
There's a classic anecdote about a drunken row between Johnson and Mies, in the Johnson Glass House, which had Mies leaving in the middle of the night. I've always wondered where he went. Anyway, it was probably more about tectonics than about social issues, but the point is they weren't that friendly, Mies tolerated Johnson because he needed him. And Johnson used Mies because he could.
posted by mumimor at 1:11 AM on January 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
My comment was a little misleading. I’m not saying that a commitment to social housing died in Europe prior to the international style exhibition - though I would argue that the association of modernism with social housing is more of a historical coincidence than a correlation.
But claiming that PJ singlehandedly stripped the social aspect out of modernism in the US is ascribing a power to the man that he did not have. There simply wasn’t a tradition of social housing in the US that the movement could grab ahold of. FLW and American modernists had utopian and social aspects to their work that were very different from those coming from Europe.
Modernism existed simultaneously as a style and movement at its origin. When “International” modernism was imported, only the stylistic aspects really took root. This is consistent with most forms of cultural appropriation- most often the physical appearance is appropriated without the underlying ethos.
posted by q*ben at 9:54 AM on January 30, 2019
But claiming that PJ singlehandedly stripped the social aspect out of modernism in the US is ascribing a power to the man that he did not have. There simply wasn’t a tradition of social housing in the US that the movement could grab ahold of. FLW and American modernists had utopian and social aspects to their work that were very different from those coming from Europe.
Modernism existed simultaneously as a style and movement at its origin. When “International” modernism was imported, only the stylistic aspects really took root. This is consistent with most forms of cultural appropriation- most often the physical appearance is appropriated without the underlying ethos.
posted by q*ben at 9:54 AM on January 30, 2019
« Older invisibility woven into the digital fabric of our... | The Wondrous Bread of the Pueblo Nations Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
*(coming soon! Artpal season 2, the architecture season!)
posted by the phlegmatic king at 10:36 AM on January 29, 2019 [3 favorites]