唐文锦A History of Modern Design.doc

A History of Modern DesignWhen James McNeil Whistler audaciously transformed the London dining room of shipping magnate Frederick Leyland into a gilded swirl of japonisme known as the Peacock Room, it produced a battle between artist and patron that became, at least in Whistlers view, a test of artistic freedom. Relations were further strained when Leyland refused to pay the fee demanded by Whistler and famously decided to give the artist only half the requested sum. Less remarked, though, was the denomination of Leylands payment: he wrote the final check in pounds, usually only presented to tradesmen, rather than guineas, the form of payment favored by artists and professionals. Leylands response has been interpreted variously. No doubt, the millionaire ship owner was infuriated by the artist, with whom he already had complex and troubled personal and business connections. Although the payment in pounds represented a small but significant financial loss for Whistler, as the denomination carried a lower monetary value than guineas, the question of status loomed large too. G.W. Smalley, an American journalist from the New York Daily Tribune, took up Whistlers invitation to see the Peacock Room on two different occasions. After his second visit, and hearing of Leylands cursory payment, Smalley defended Whistler by refuting its implications in print. Smalley noted the great difference between upholsters tricks and the sincerity of an artist of genius. Nobody, not even the most untrained eye, could mistake the talent demonstrated here for the work of a mere craftsman.1 For Whistler, Smalley, and many contemporaries, the implication that fine art might be confused with craft or design was deeply offensive. Over the past two centuries, designs relation to the fine arts has remained ambiguous. Modern design can encompass not only the decorative arts but also mass-produced consumer goods, film, television, and the burgeoning field of digital media. As Whistlers experience with the Peacock Room suggests, the field was especially muddied during the nineteenth century, a seminal period for design studies. While the parameters of nineteenth-century fine art have long been established, there are few touchstones for design studies during this period. Because emerging strategies of industrial production and mass consumption shaped so much of the periods visual culture, this equivocal relationship forms an especially compelling problem both to specialists in nineteenth-century art and to design historians. In grappling with these issues, David Raizmans A History of Modern Design has quickly assumed landmark status within the field of design studies, particularly for those interested in this relatively new fields nineteenth-century origins. An introductory survey intended for a general audience, the books format echoes familiar art historical texts, for instance H.H. Arnasons A History of Modern Art or Nineteenth-Century European Art by Petra Ten-Doesschate Chu. Like these authors, Raizman focuses the narrative on key works and projects while weaving together a series of complex arguments within a roughly chronological framework. Tracing developments in design from the mid-eighteenth through early twenty-first centuries, Raizmans serious and extended examination of nineteenth-century design is as refreshing as it is unusual, and it is that discussion, in Parts I and II, that is the subject of this review. The paucity of extended writing on nineteenth-century design remains a troubling omission in design scholarship, as the period has profoundly shaped design as the field that we recognize today. Moreover, the nineteenth century also marks the development of artists and architects, as well as designers, whose engagement with industrial processes is crucial to their formal approaches. From John Flaxmans original work for Wedgwood to Henry van de Veldes groundbreaking approaches to design for mass production, Raizman focuses his text on the individuals who help to interpret and elucidate the design process as well as on the larger social and economic forces that made such developments possible. In doing so, the boundaries that separate design and fine art in the nineteenth century begin to seem porous and provocative. Raizman traces the development of modern design to innovations in production and patterns of consumption that emerged in the eighteenth century; brief analyses of the prolific state-owned Gobelins tapestry works, the Svres porcelain factory, and Chippendales transformation of furnishings into fashionable commodities establish his contextual approach. A model for the interdisciplinary methodologies that typically mark design studies, the text moves easily between specific facets of design practice, shifting in a single chapter from typography and fashion to a discussion of early forms of factory organization. In these first two sections of the book, Raizman describes the complex development of industrialization in the nineteenth century and its impact on visual culture, identifying such well-known examples as Morriss Art and Crafts reforms and the advent of the Art Nouveau. However, he also elucidates points that may be less familiar to art historians, for instance the nineteenth-century roots of Fordism2 or the graphic implications of the advent of the Linotype machine at the end of the century. Some in the design community will decry what art historians should consider one of the books chief strengthsits straightforward equation of developments in fine art with those in design. Raizmans discussion of developments in high fashion, or haute couture, in Paris in the second half of the nineteenth century, for example, is illustrated by J.D. Ingres famous portrait of Mme. Moitessier (1851), whose colorful, richly textured gown resembles a veritable rose garden. Raizman also considers designs role in artists marketing ploys, mentioning Whistlers famous decoration of his London studio and Frederic Leightons construction of the Arab Hall, a blue-tiled fantasy built in his home between 1876 and 1880. While the last two decades have seen a general movement to scientize the field of design, A History of Modern Design reminds us of the disciplines close proximity to the visual arts; indeed, many painters, sculptors, and architects maintained dual careers as designers. Raizman, however, remains keenly aware of designs crucial distinctions from the fine arts as well. He dwells, for instance, on the industrial processes that prodded typographic developments, exploring the lineage of the bold fat faces used to create the jarring Victorian posters whose urgings and admonitions still shriek across the centuries. For those unfamiliar with the field, A History of Modern Design presents a cogent argument for studying design as both a production-based discipline and as an intellectually-driven profession, as Raizman consistently examines design within the context of complex social change. His discussion of the Aesthetic movement, for example, highlights the significance of women and includes key figures like Maria Longworth Nichols, who founded Cincinnatis Rookwood Pottery. Specialists will also recognize the texts assimilation of numerous significant arguments in design published in the last twenty years. For example, Adrian Fortys groundbreaking case for eliminating the designer from nineteenth-century design history, and his pointed discussion of the social and cultural forces that have shaped visual culture, shade Raizmans analysis of the mechanization of fabric printing, and the multiplicity of choice that industrial manufacturing presented to consumers in the pages of early mail-order catalogs like the one published by Montgomery Ward.3 Similarly, Philip Meggs still-definitive survey of graphic design history has influenced much of Raizmans discussion of developments on the printed page, including his synopses on wood type and the importance of linotype.4 Whether positively or by means of rejection, most treatments of nineteenth-century design are still influenced by Nikolas Pevsners seminal Pioneers of Modern Design: From William Morris to Walter Gropius and Sources of Modern Architecture and Design, which guided a whole generation of scholarship. With the advancing force of a great steam engine chugging slowly out of Pevsners beloved St. Pancras Station, the latter book carefully built an argument for the increasing functionalism of nineteenth-century design. His case begins with the Crystal Palace, which is introduced as a mid-nineteenth century touchstone, if one wishes to discover what belongs wholly to the nineteenth century and what points forward into the twentieth.5 Raizman, by contrast, treats the Crystal Palace as a cursory subject, discussing it mainly as a backdrop to the spectacular theatrics of industrial prowess housed within it; he focuses instead on the numerous calls for design reform that prompted the1851 Exhibition of Art and Industry in the first place. Raizmans account of the nineteenth century focuses less on the evolution of functionalism than the proliferation of forms that dominated late eighteenth and nineteenth-century design, describing work by the Herter Brothers and Robert Adam as well as that of Sullivan and Riemerschmid. Perhaps Pevsners legacy shaped Raizmans decision not to dwell on architectural developments. Where Pevsner saw design as a kind of unwieldy outgrowth of architecture, Raizman eschews extended analyses of the built environment. However doctrinaire the approach of Pevsner and others, the lack of reference to buildings, with their tremendous influence on design aesthetics as well as their ability to embody the collective dreams of entire societies, leaves holes in this narrative. The extended description of William Morris early design enterprises, for instance, limits Philip Webbs contribution to the design of the Morris adjustable chair; the text hardly mentions Webbs architectural affiliations and quickly skims over the Red House, Webbs great contribution to the Arts and Crafts movement and later developments in middle-class housing. Upon the first publication of a book of sweeping scope and authoritative purpose come the inevitable arguments about inclusion. Those scanning for a whos who of modern design might question, for instance, Raizmans brief mention of the Thonet brothers, as well as his decision not to cite their famous Chair No. 14, a ubiquitous symbol of industrial change that haunts Tissot and Lautrec paintings alike. While Raizman includes a remarkable array of information in a single volume, his tendency to skim key works and focus on themes of social and technological change could well frustrate those looking for an encyclopedic approach to design history. Other birthing pains for a new text include a number of spelling errors and factual discrepancies that surely will be addressed in later editions. For example, one of Wrights Highland Park homes is located in Mamaroneck, New York rather than the suburbs of Chicago. For some such errors might diminish the books arguments, however its chief strength, synthesizing a wide body of knowledge into an easily comprehended text, should not be overlooked. Nevertheless, Raizman directly confronts one of the greatest problems to wrack nineteenth-century designers from Ruskin to the German Werkbund at the turn of the century: just how integral is the machine to designers, or for that matter, design studies? In academe, the fields of engineering, economics, and management have rapidly colonized the discipline, and there have been few efforts in the humanities to assert a cogent argument for the contributions of humanist study in this field. As Raizmans text implies, the methods of analysis employed by historians as well as anthropologists, cultural geographers, social psychologists, and literary critics hold enormous relevance for the field, nudging art historical inquiry in design studies beyond a mere chronicle of changing styles. Raizmans position is that the machine is crucial to design development in the nineteenth century, but he also includes some of the debate surrounding the rich nineteenth-century handicraft tradition. His discussion encompasses, for instance, the Shakers, and encapsulates their attitudes toward craftsmanship as well as their roots in a radical form of Christianity. He also includes Whistlers Peacock Room, although it is less a machine-inspired design than an example of artistic handiwork. This point was ignored by the vindictive Frederick Leyland, resulting in Whistlers final payment in pounds. But pounds or guineas, A History of Modern Design establishes nineteenth-century design firmly within broader histories of the period.1. G.W. Smalley, quoted in Linda Merrill, The Peacock Room: A Cultural Biography, (Washington DC: Freer Gallery, 1998) 268.2. The system of mass production and consumption that was pioneered in the first decades of the twentieth century by Henry Ford. Characterized by standardization of parts, and the innovation of continuous assembly-line manufacture, Fords Model T plant in Highland Park, Michigan shaded much political and economic theory in the twentieth century, especially immediately before and after the Second World War.3. Adrian Forty, Objects of Desire: Design and Society Since 1750, (New York: Pantheon, 1986).4. Philip Meggs, A History of Graphic Design, (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1983). 5. Nikolaus Pevsner, The Sources of Modern Architecture and Design, New York: Thames and Hudson, 1968., 10.现代设计的历史当杰姆斯麦克尼尔惠斯勒大胆地改变了伦敦餐厅的航运巨头弗雷德里克利兰为镀金的漩涡的日本风被称为孔雀屋，它产生了战斗之间的艺术家和赞助人成为，至少在惠斯勒看来，测试的自由。关系进一步紧张，当利兰拒绝支付的费用要求的惠斯勒和著名的决定给艺术家只有一半的请求。不说，虽然，是面额的利兰的付款：他写了最后检查磅，通常只提交给商人，而不是金币，付款的形式由艺术家和专业人士的青睐。利兰的反应被解释不同。毫无疑问，百万富翁的船主被激怒的艺术家，他们已经有复杂和混乱的个人和商业联系。虽然用英镑付款是一个小但意义重大的财务损失的惠斯勒，为单位进行较低的货币价值比坚尼，地位问题也很大。G . W .斯莫利，一个美国记者从纽约每日论坛报，把惠斯勒的邀请，看孔雀室在不同场合。在他再次来访，和听力的利兰的粗略的付款，斯莫利为惠斯勒辩护的驳斥其影响打印。斯莫利指出，“不同的技巧和陶器艺术家的真诚的天才。”没有人，甚至不是“最未受过训练的眼睛，“错误的天赋表现在这里工作的一个“仅仅是工匠。”1惠斯勒，斯莫利，和许多同时代的人，暗示艺术会困惑与工艺或设计深受进攻。在过去的20世纪，设计与美术仍然含糊不清。现代设计，不仅包括装饰艺术也大量消费品，电影，电视，和新兴领域的数字媒体。作为惠斯勒的经验与孔雀室表明，外地特别考虑在第十九个世纪，一个开创性设计研究。而参数的19世纪的艺术早已建立，很少有研究这一时期的试金石。因为新兴战略产业生产和大量消费的形状，如此多的时期的视觉文化，这种模棱两可的关系形成一个特别引人注目的问题专家在19世纪的艺术与设计史。在处理这些问题时，戴维雷兹曼的现代设计史的里程碑地位迅速承担在设计领域的研究，特别是对那些有兴趣在这个相对较新的领域的19世纪的起源。介绍调查的一般观众，这本书的格式回声熟悉艺术历史文本，例如孔祥熙阿纳森是现代艺术史或19世纪欧洲艺术ten-doesschate佩珠。像这些作者，雷兹曼聚焦叙事重点工程和项目，编织起来的一系列复杂的论点，在一个时间的大致框架。跟踪发展设计从18通过第二十一世纪初，雷兹曼严重延长考试的19世纪的设计是清新，这是不寻常的，这是讨论，在第一和第二部分，这是主题的本次审查。缺乏写作于19世纪的设计仍然是一个令人不安的遗漏设计奖学金，作为期深刻地影响了设计的领域，我们今天认识。此外，第十九个世纪的发展，也标志着艺术家和建筑师，以及设计师，其参与工业过程中是至关重要的正式方法。从约翰弗拉克斯曼原来的工作到薇吉伍德费尔德的开创性设计方法进行批量生产，雷兹曼集中文本的个人谁帮助解释和阐明设计过程中以及在较大的社会和经济力量，使这种发展可能。在这样做时，其边界单独设计和美术在第十九世纪开始似乎多孔和挑衅。雷兹曼痕迹的发展，现代设计创新的生产和消费模式，出现在第十八个世纪；浅析国有壁毯挂毯多产的作品，vres瓷器厂，和奇彭代尔的转变成了时尚商品陈设建立上下文的方法。一种新型的跨学科的方法，通常标记设计研究，文本容易移动之间的具体方面的设计实践，转移在一章，从版式和时尚讨论早期形式的工厂组织。在这些第一和第二部分的书，雷兹曼描述复杂的产业化发展，在第十九世纪及其对视觉文化，确定这种众所周知的例子作为他艺术和手工艺改革出现的新艺术。然而，他还阐明，可能不太熟悉的艺术史学家，例如19世纪的根源fordism2或图形的影响，出现了划线机在本世纪的结束。一些在设计界将谴责艺术史学家应该考虑这本书的一个主要strengths-its简单方程发展艺术与设计。雷兹曼讨论发展的时尚，或高级时装，在巴黎在下半场的第十九个世纪，例如，说明了他和著名的肖像moitessier女士（1851），其多姿多彩，丰富质感的礼服，类似于一个真正的玫瑰园。雷兹曼还认为设计的作用，艺术家的营销策略，提及惠斯勒的著名装饰他的伦敦工作室和弗里德里克顿的建设的阿拉伯大厅，一个蓝色琉璃瓦幻想建立在他家之间的1876和1880。在过去二十年里所看到的一般运动的“科学化”的设计，现代设计史提醒我们的纪律的邻近的视觉艺术；事实上，许多画家，雕塑家和建筑师，保持双职业设计师。雷兹曼，然而，仍然敏锐地意识到设计的关键区别从美术及。他居住，例如，在工业过程指使排版发展，探索谱系的大胆“胖”用于创建和谐的维多利亚海报的要求，警告仍然尖叫跨越世纪。对于那些不熟悉的领域，现代设计史提出了一个令人信服的论点的研究设计作为一个生产型的学科，作为一个intellectually-driven行业，为雷兹曼一贯审查的设计范围内的复杂的社会变化。他讨论的审美活动，例如，集锦意义妇女和包括重要人物像玛丽亚朗沃斯尼克尔斯，谁创立辛辛那提陶艺。专家也将认识到文本的同化