GRGR(14)=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=5F=D6lsch's=5Farchitecture=5F(long,=5Fprolix?=)

[Mark Wright AIA]

Howdy

--- Jeremy Ludlow <keithmar at jetlink.net> wrote: (fragment)

> So, the New German Architecture (298.21) turned out not to be
> a style as such but a pragmatic if unconvincing blend of the
> pompously triumphal, the (Deutsche Werkbund) revival of handicrafts
> and mysticism, and the pseudo-vernacular 'Heimatstil' of overhanging
> eaves and comfortable domesticism.  Each applied where appropriate.

Lots of good stuff here.

Your view of the 'Heimatstil" seems negative ("Pseudo"something).  Is
it?  And was it so very bad as all that?  The best of this work was by
Tessenow, and is derived form the somewhat earlier Queen Anne Revival
(Shaw) and Arts and Crafts (Voysey) in England and the shingled
Colonial Revival (C.F.McKim) and Shingle Style (S.White,
H.H.Richardson, et al) in New England.  Take a look at Tessenow' work
(I'll find y'all a source somewhere if you like) and you'll see how
powerful it was, and understand how the Nazi's would have been able to
make effective use of it just as Disney can make use of our own
'Heimatstil' in Celebration, Florida.  Is it *all* bad?  Or is it just
an uncomfortable demonstration of how The Powers can get to us through
our dreams, and leash us by the short and curlies?

Mark

PS: I can't think, off hand, of a single beautiful building that has
used the parabolic arch in an undisguised form.  Saarinen's monument in
St. Louis is almos all right, as are some of Maillart's bridges.  But
buildings?  Not a one.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores.  Millions of Products.  All in one place.
Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com