Anthropomorphism in architecture is a phenomenon in which a building, which is obviously non-human, is designed to have humanlike characteristics or to look like a human being. The building above is anthropomorphic because the two windows towards the upper right corner resemble eyes and the design between them resembles a nose. Anthropomorphism is a postmodernist phenomenon in architecture because of its playful nature. As a design, it does not do anything functional for the building. What it does do is grab the viewer's attention, which is something that postmodernists aim to accomplish with their artwork.
Another phenomenon that occurs often in postmodern architecture is double-coding. Double-coding refers to the use of irony in architecture; typically architecture with this characteristic gives us more than one meaning. For example, from the outside, the building above has very contrasting looks. The material surrounding most of the building gives it a very industrial look. It almost looks as if it could be a shed that would contain piles of boxes within it. However, on the inside there is another whole house which appears very suburban as well as a modern living room set up outside of the house. The roofing and walls of the building are visible from the inside as well, although they are serving more of an aesthetic and decorative purpose rather than the functional purpose they would normally serve. Again, it is very characteristic of postmodernist art to be aesthetic rather than functional. The irony within this piece of architecture lies within the contrast between the industrial-looking exterior and the modern-looking interior.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLike most students in the class, the architectural explanations provided by Jencks greatly illuminated my previously disjointed understanding of post-modernism. Specifically, I was also drawn to the architectural style of anthropomorphism and double coding.
ReplyDeleteThe particularly striking features of post-modern architecture primarily revolve around the idea that “because we can, we do.” Human capability now surpasses function, thus we make art to play, to live, to inspire, rather than to own and practically function.
Similarly, I found the style of anthropomorphism particularly amusing. Man creates faces, and human qualities in the thing that he builds, again, this occurs simply because he can. Whereas previously, functionality and art and enlightenment were the prevalent themes, art has taken on a more playful nature, mirroring the capabilities of the 21st century man or woman.
The use of irony and art in architecture particularly pique my interest. While I have very little experience studying post-modern architecture, Jenck’s explanations allowed me to recognize a phenomena I thought myself unfamiliar with.
In the United States, specifically the Southern United States, I recognize little post-modern architecture. However, once outside the United States the modernistic style featuring double coding becomes prevalent. For instance, in Denmark, newer glass buildings with odd shapes lend a playful nuance to the otherwise classic architecture found in the capital of Copenhagen.
Even large subterranean water reservoirs hold contemporary art exhibits. Functionality, practicality, and beauty are replaced by the inherent need to create, and play, and live beyond the boundaries of sensibility. Buildings created by post-modern architects reflect themes of the literary greats, including irony, multiple- meanings (multi-valence), and anamnesis. There is no medium, where post-modern philosophy cannot be applied.
The move towards playfulness and creation reflects the evolution of society and civilization. Whereas previously man lived to survive, man now lives to thrive mentally, physically, and artistically.
https://www.google.com/search?q=architecture+in+denmark+postmodern&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjvtb7kgdLdAhUR2lMKHQH2BlkQsAR6BAgEEAE&biw=1600&bih=810#imgrc=kvcH12_B1b8uXM:
In the past, I never acknowledged architecture simply because I didn't believe I was "interested" in it. However, in retrospect, I do recall being fascinated with anthropomorphism as a child. Though I did not know that designers and architects created these pieces on purpose, I found it humorous that there were faces in "everyday" objects and buildings. Nevertheless, now, as a student, I question the artists' intent.
ReplyDeleteWhy would anthropomorphism exist in architecture? Does this validate Joy's theory that aspects of post-modernism are satirical? I personally enjoy Christelle's point that man does not solely exist to survive anymore. It's amazing to acknowledge that we have created art and now have the freedom to express ourselves in any way we'd like. Thus, do artists have passion and emotion behind their anthropomorphic tactics, or do they also find it humorous? I understand that post-modernism is "playful," yet I feel like the term should encompass much more. I.e. if something is anthropomorphic, it should also have double-coding, etc. However, art (like most things in life) does not have a definition and can be anything (which is why I think understanding post-modernism is so difficult).
--
On a separate note, I would like to acknowledge that I have worked for a real estate agent in New York the last few months. Although I would merely post Instagrams in the past that looked "aesthetically pleasing," I now take time to dissect the spaces. For example, I have attached a link below of a building I found particularly interesting. Although it is located in Brooklyn, it is inspired by Scandinavian architecture, which makes the building "stand out" in the neighborhood. I personally would characterize this as an example of disharmonious harmony. Nevertheless, I find it amusing that I now think the property is intriguing due to the knowledge I've gained (although I once did not care about it at all).
http://www.145carrollgardens.com