Maybe F.L.Wright had a notion of what was to come when the Bauhaus
immigrated to America in the early 20th. century
The Bauhaus immigration may have been the reason for the phobia
that Wright seemed to have developed towards the European architects. Wright
never wanted to meet them and even went as far as to refer to Walter Gropius
as Herr Gropius. Wright had the opportunity of meeting Gropius one day while making
a surprise visit to a site in Racine, Wis. Wright's red Lincoln Zephyr pulled up to
the site. One of Wrights' apprentices, Edgar Tafel was driving. The two arrived
just in time to see a group of men coming out of the building. Walter Gropius
was among that group of gentlemen. He had been giving a lecture
at the University of Wisconsin and wanted to see some of Wright's work.
Gropius came over to the car as Wright lowered the car window just a bit.
Mr. Gropius looked into the car window and said, "Mr. Wright, it's a pleasure to
meet you, and I have always admired your work". He did not try to shake his
hand or smile, but slightly turned his head and said, "Herr Gropius, you're a
guest of the University here and I just want to tell you that they're as snobbish
here as they are at Harvard, only they don't have New England accent." After
that was said Wright turned to Edgar and commented, "Well, we have to get on back!"
Wright sat back in his seat as the red Zephyr quickly drove away. Wright must
have realized his suspicions were accurate and that he had just seen the face of
the German who had replaced him as the future of American architecture.
1
At the time of the Bauhaus Immigration to America:
A new movement of forms and progression was beginning in
American architecture. These forms expressed the
period and progressions in culture, ideas,
and technology. The formal elements made up the faces
of our buildings, which translated into the American world as formal
identities. These formal identities expressed
the functions of the many types of architecture that had emerged
in the growth of American culture and country.
One could walk down the street in the urban fabric, and through these
formal identities one knew the functions of the urban
forms.
In Europe at the same time:
European architects have been inventing forms and types of architecture
which expressed their cultural positions since the beginning of time.
One particular example are the
industrial and workers housing forms of the Bauhaus period. These forms are
translations of the ideas of socialism and fascism, which became
intriguing to some American architects.
When the immigration of the European architects were associated with
these ideals of the European Bauhaus:
To certain circles of American architecture schools and practitioners,
a certian mysticism surrounded the forms of the European Bauhaus.
What they failed to realize was that these ideals and forms were
arbitrary at the least
and devastating to American formal identities in architecture.
These transplanted minimalist anti-bourgeoisie
architecturual thoughts began to gradually effect all forms of architecture
in America. These thoughts
only related to the formal identity of the American tenant,
worker, and public housing efforts. So, to apply these European
ideals to American architecture, which was represented in a different formal
ideal, was something that should not have happened. American
architects should have seen the problem in allowing this European influence
to effect American thoughts in architecture.
Just imagine what could have transpired if Gropius and his entourage of
architects would have spent as much energy on American worker housing
types as they did on the worker housing types in Europe.
The gradual minimalization of American formal identities
in architecture:
Walter Gropius and the Bauhaus style became the future of American architecture.
This minimalist style began to reveal itself on all forms
of architecture. The sheer flat facade of the anti-bourgeois architecture
was removed from its original context, and slowly began to become the
architecture of the bourgeois in the urban landscape. These architects
spoke of form and function, but did these new buildings really have a form
that followed function? The forms that had emerged from our American
culture never had the chance for progression and transformation. As a result,
architecture ceased as being truly made, and lost its position in the
mainstream population. It became something that the people did not
understand anymore. When architecture had a formal identity, it was
beautiful, understood, and revered by the mainstream population. In the early
20th century, architecture was presented and discussed in many publications,
mainstream newspapers, and magazines. Architecture was conveyed to the population and
they understood its importance in our society. The minimalist
style of the Europeans with its flat sheer facade slowly reduced the
understanding that people had for architecture, and as a result these published
resources slowly depleted. Without true form or formal identities the
majority of the people stop caring and architecture ceases to be revered.
I feel that the style that the Europeans brought with them diverted the future of
American architecture in the wrong direction. I think Wright knew what the outcome
was going to be, and this was why he developed such strong phobias towards
European architects.
1 . Wolfe, Tom - From Bauhaus to Our House
Washington Square Press
New York 1981