Artist

Mihails (Mikhail) Eizenšteins (1867—1921)

 Co-Worker

 

 Year 

1867—1921 in Riga, Latvia

 Location/Map

 Style

Eisenstein took inspiration from Paris 1900 World Exhibition, and this interest is reflected in his style.  Lazdiņa House in Elizabeth Street 33 facade  is the first Eisenstein design making use of a particularly rich sculptural elements. In 1903  projects he began the construction of the house in Albert Street 8 (owner A. Pole). In the same year started facade in Iljaševa / von Hanovskas rental house and shop 10a Elizabeth Street, as well as rent and store house of Elizabeth Street, 10b, whose owner was a high-ranking Russian government official. In the following two years Eisenstein designed the three buildings at Alberta: Alberta Street 6 Albert Street 13 (both – 1904) and Albert Street 4 (1905). In 1905 designed Mitusova S. School Street Riflemen 4a, as well as P.Šteinberga House .

Eisenstein façades have a rich, powerful sculptural use of the plastic compositions, the direct result of Historicism buildings typical facade decor with emphasis on the principles of geometrical one. Decor widely used characteristic motifs of Art Nouveau style, as well as those who inherit from Historicism and heraldry (for example, griffin, lions, dragons, etc.), thereby producing an impressive look. Plastically, the rich ornament motives creates strong light typify contrasts, the contrast principle is also dominant in the treatment of same theme, focusing on naturalistic or stylized powerful solution. Facades also used typical Art Nouveau decoration of glazed brick and plastered surfaces , in some cases, focusing on the unusual window shape solution (as in Elizabeth Street 10a.

Eisenstein building decor consists of anthropomorphic nature of the theme expressive decor, or – conversely – the static solution, as well as the ability to create emotionally impacting decorations, combining  zoomorphic motive and fantastic elements, balancing between the beautiful and terrible.

Eisenstein facade decor theme was inspired by the work of O. Wagner School, as well from the decorative ideas taken from Historicism of Vienna and Paris II Empire style buildings.  The somewhat eclectic style of citations (mannerism grotesque ornament, ancient Greek, ancient Oriental civilization, etc. themes), as well as contemporary sources (Rene Lalika jewelery, Otto Morning architectural fantasies, etc.). he also revitalized the use of castle aesthetic, with a taste of neogothic revival (J. Lazdiņa House Elizabeth Street 33, A.Ļebedinska tenements Alberta Street 6 and 13), complementing the decor of the then modern accents.

 Pictures

Elizabetes iela 10b 1903

DSCF7760DSCF7761DSCF7763DSCF7764DSCF7765DSCF7766DSCF7767DSCF7768DSCF7769DSCF7770DSCF7771DSCF7772DSCF7773DSCF7477DSCF7478DSCF7480DSCF7481DSCF7482DSCF7483DSCF7484DSCF7485DSCF7486DSCF7488DSCF7489DSCF7490DSCF7491DSCF7492DSCF7493DSCF7494DSCF7495DSCF7496DSCF7497

Strēlnieku iela 4a 1905

DSCF7527DSCF7528DSCF7529DSCF7530DSCF7531DSCF7532DSCF7533DSCF7534DSCF7535DSCF7527DSCF7528DSCF7529DSCF7530DSCF7531DSCF7532DSCF7533DSCF7534DSCF7535DSCF7845DSCF7846DSCF7847DSCF7848DSCF7849

Elizabetes iela 33 1901

DSCF7499DSCF7500DSCF7501DSCF7502DSCF7503DSCF7504DSCF7505DSCF7506DSCF7507DSCF7509DSCF7510DSCF7511DSCF7512DSCF7513DSCF7780DSCF7781DSCF7782DSCF7783DSCF7785DSCF7786DSCF7778DSCF7779

Elizabetes iela 10a 1903

DSCF7774DSCF7775DSCF7776DSCF7777

Alberta iela 8 1903

DSCF7812DSCF7813DSCF7815DSCF7816DSCF7817DSCF7819DSCF7820DSCF7821

Alberta iela 6 1903

DSCF7806

Alberta iela 4 1904

DSCF7799DSCF7800DSCF7802DSCF7803DSCF7804DSCF7805DSCF7807DSCF7808DSCF7809DSCF7810

Alberta iela 2 1906

DSCF7796DSCF7797

Alberta iela 13 1904

DSCF7537DSCF7538DSCF7541DSCF7542DSCF7543DSCF7545DSCF7547DSCF7548DSCF7827DSCF7828DSCF7829DSCF7830DSCF7831DSCF7832DSCF7833DSCF7834DSCF7835DSCF7836DSCF7837DSCF7838DSCF7839DSCF7841DSCF7842DSCF7843DSCF7844DSCF7850

 References

 picture503 Eizensteins_Alberta_4_zimejums

 Artist

Löffler Béla (Budapest. 1880 – ?) and Löffler Samu Sándor (Budapest, 1877 – ?)

 Co-Worker

Spiegel Frigyes

 Year 

Löffler Béla (Budapest. 1880 – ?) and Löffler Samu Sándor (Budapest, 1877 – ?)

 Location/Map

 Style

Of these two brothers, Bela was the most experienced. He graduated at Felső Építőipariskolát. Between 1897 and 1899 he worked jointly with Spiegel Frigyes and with Bela Lajta. He traveled throughout Europe with his brother Sandor, and he kept in touch with different architectural traditions. Returned in Hungary in 1906, he worked with the brother and with Spiegel , also in furniture design. After the First war he planned several apartements houses. In 1923, he designed the synagogue in Antwerp and then won the 1925 application to the Nationa Theatre in Jerusalem.

The Löffler apartment house lacks the Gödöll -inspired decorative elements. Dark colored austere construction, with essentialand geometrical lines, closer to the theoretical directions of an architect such as the AustrianAdolf Loos. Details, such as flower pot, well visible in the facade, are designed with geometric lines in a sort of checker board, following so much the Austrian secession taste, that
really it seems a typical production of the Wiener Werkstaetter, close to the ones designed by Josef Hofmann. On the Loffler building’s facade are often present human figures. Here the
sculpture style is, if possible, even more essential and absolutely in disregard respect to every
proportions directives: the spectator can feel immediately this lacks of proportions just looking
at the oversize heads of the figures. Animals are also present in those scenes, members of fantastic species, mythological animals, which seems
to directly come out of artist’s own dreams or incubuses. The spectator himself can feel the
inquietude of these human figure’s sights, at the same time, inexpressive and sinister as in a
work by Alfred Kubin. The Löffler’s symbolism is so obscure, and even difficult to translate into
meaningful images that constitutes a sort of intricate hermetism , similar to several works by
the German painter Franz von Stuck.

 Pictures

Budapest VI.. Aradi utca 57. Piatschek-ház. MÉ 1908/10

DSCF1170DSCF1171DSCF1172DSCF1570DSCF1571DSCF1572DSCF1573DSCF1574DSCF1575

Budapest VII., Síp utca 17. Lakóház MÉ 1908/10. Műlakatos-munka: Migray József

100_3125DSCF0021DSCF0022DSCF0023DSCF0024DSCF1225DSCF1227

 

Budapest VI., Székely Bertalan utca 2/B. és 2/C. Lakóházak 1909-1910

DSCF1160DSCF1161DSCF1162DSCF1163DSCF1164DSCF1167DSCF1168DSCF1169

Budapest VII., Izabella utca 34. Lakóház 1910

DSCF1218DSCF1211DSCF1213DSCF1212DSCF1214DSCF1217DSCF1215DSCF1219

Budapest II., Szilágyi Erzsébet fasor 1 Lakóház. Műlakatos-munka: Migray József. MÉ 1910/8.

DSCF1228DSCF1229DSCF1230

Budapest VI., Ö utca 49 Magyar Vegyikészítményű Papírgyár 1910 körül

Sandor and Béla LöfflerDSCF1566DSCF1567DSCF1568DSCF1569

Budapest VIII., Népszínház utca 37 Lakóház. MÉ 1911/9

Sandor and Béla LöfflerSandor and Béla LöfflerSandor and Béla LöfflerSandor and Béla LöfflerSandor and Béla LöfflerSandor and Béla LöfflerSandor and Béla LöfflerSandor and Béla Löffler

Budapest VII., Kertész utca 29 Lakóház 1911 körül

DSCF1220DSCF1221DSCF1222DSCF1223DSCF1224

Budapest VII., Kazinczy utca 29-31 Ortodox izraelita hitközség temploma, iskoJája és lakóháza. Pályázat 1910. díjazva és kivitel 1912-1913.

DSCF1204DSCF1205DSCF1206

Budapest VII., Rákóczi út 74. Rosenberg Márk lakó- és üzletháza 1914.

Sandor and Béla LöfflerSandor and Béla Löffler

Budapest VII., Dob utca 35. Ortodox izraelita hitközség temploma, iskoJája és lakóháza. Pályázat 1910. díjazva és kivitel 1912-1913.

DSCF1207DSCF1208DSCF1209DSCF1210

 References

 

 Artist

Eižens Laube

 Co-Worker

 Year 

22 May, 1880, Riga – 21 July 1967, Portland, Oregon, USA

 Location/Map

 Style

In the beginning of 20th century, when Riga architecture school flourished and gained foothold, already the third generation of professional Latvian architects after J. F. Blaumanis and K. Pēkšēns started their creative work. This generation was fronted by Eižens Laube. Architecture styles and artistic trends one after another were swiftly substituted by new ones. At the beginning of the century eclectism was substituted by Art Nouveau, 20ies saw the development of functionalism and 30ies also a parallel development of neo-eclectism. E. Laube was always in the very centre of these stylistic twists and turns. He contributed immensely to the progress of event both as architect – practitioner, architect – theoretician and also teacher. In Riga alone more than 200 buildings have been built, reconstructed and renovated according to his designs, among them about 80 multi-storey stonework construction projects. Eižens Laube was born in Riga on the 25th of May, 1880. His father Kārlis Teodors Laube (1862-1920) was a master pottery craftsman and trader. He had arrived in Riga from the north of Vidzeme region where his ancestors had been farmers and craftsmen for many generations. Already as a boy Eižens Laube got acquainted with construction work and projects – his mother’s stepfather was in construction business. Thus Eižens’ interest in architecture arose and in 1899, after graduating from Realschule named after Peter I, he enrolled in Riga Polytechnical Institute, architecture department. In his student days he stood out among others with his brilliant artistic talent and outstanding work capability, and reached professional maturity quite early. In 1900 alongside with his studies Eižens started working in K.Pēkšēns’ construction design firm, where a study colleague of his, Aleksandrs Vanags, was also employed. In 1904 Laube went to Finland together with Vanags. There he admired buildings designed by L. Sonck, E. Saarinen, A. Lindgren, H. Gesellius and established personal contact with the Finnish architects G. Lindberg and K. Wasastjerna. Later Laube travelled even more to improve his professional skills – in 1909 he visited Sweden, Denmark and Germany and in 1910 – Germany and France. In 1906 he graduated from the Riga Polytechnical Institute with the diploma of engineer architect. He worked for K. Pēkšēns for one more year and then in 1907 opened his own architectural design firm that soon became one of the largest in Riga. At the same time he was invited to teach at this own Alma Mater, and E. Laube became associate professor at RPI at the age of 27. He lectured on theoretical subjects as well as conducted classes in drawing and architecture design. At a time when teachers at the institute were all local Germans and education in architecture had slipped into a certain stagnation, the young Latvian associate professor brought a multitude of fresh and new things into academic work. E. Laube worked as a teacher also elsewhere. From 1907 to 1908 he taught technical drawing and construction forms at the technical department of Public courses, established by him, J. Rozentāls and A. Vanags at the Riga Latvian Society. Starting from the year 1909 E. Laube together with architects W. Bockslaff and K. Felsko was the official counsellor in art matters of Riga City Council building authority. He was also invited to be in the jury of several big contests, for instance, in 1910 he was the judge of projects for Ozoliņš’ tenement building at 88 Brīvības Street in Riga and in 1912 participated in the jury of the international project contest for Tallinn town hall. E. Laube also participated in several contests with his own projects, and did that with remarkable success – before 1912 nine of his works were prize-winners of various project contests. During World War I he closed down his firm and together with the Riga Polytechnical Institute evacuated to Moscow in 1915. In 1917 E. Laube returned to Riga and continued working in the field of architecture education. In University of Latvia he was in charge of one of the architecture design workshops, workshop „A”, and during certain periods of time was also the dean of the faculty and even the rector of the University. In 1920 E. Laube became a professor and in 1930 – Honorary doctor of architecture. From 1924 to 1936 he was the chairman of Commission of architectonic matters at National building committee, in 1937 he was elected corresponding member of Royal Institute of British Architects. In 1940 E. Laube was awarded the Fatherland Award, he is also the bearer of Three-Star Order, the Cross of Recognition and the Swedish Royal Order of Vasa. In 1944, just like many other Latvian intellectuals, he emigrated. At first he lived in Berlin, then in 1950 moved to the USA, worked in an architecture design office in Olympia, Washington, and since 1955 lived in Portland, Oregon, where he spent the rest of his life. During the course of his very fruitful life E. Laube has published a great number of articles on different issues concerning the art of building, from the much-quoted essay „On the style of building” („Zalktis” – 1908. – issue No 4. – pages 145 through 148) to the impressive volume of the book „Writings on architecture” (Lincoln, Nebraska, 1960 – 205 pages). He has immensely contributed to the theory of architecture with his „Logic of colour and shape” (Riga, 1921. – 74 pages) and in his final years in Portland E. Laube wrote a manuscript of nearly 700 pages in typescript – „Manifestation of Architecture” which can now be found at the Architecture museum of Riga. However, the most significant part of the master’s heritage is his buildings. A vast majority of them were created before World War I – during a time when Riga was experiencing a building boom. The first works by Laube saw daylight in the firm of K. Pēkšēns. There is at least half a dozen of them and all are fine monuments of architecture.

Source: http://www.jugendstils.riga.lv/new/eng/JugendstilsRiga/Laube/

 Pictures

Brīvības iela 62

DSCF7447DSCF7449DSCF7450DSCF7451DSCF7697DSCF7699DSCF7700

 

Alberta iela 11

DSCF7823DSCF7824DSCF7825

Brīvības iela 47

DSCF7694DSCF7695DSCF7455DSCF7456

Brīvības iela 37

DSCF8071DSCF8073DSCF8074

Lāčplēša iela 51

DSCF7361DSCF7363DSCF7365DSCF7366DSCF7367DSCF7368DSCF7369DSCF7370DSCF7569

Brīvības iela 59 (with Oskar Bars)

DSCF7696

Ģertrūdes iela 23

DSCF7402DSCF7403DSCF7404

Aleksandra Čaka iela 26 (with Konstantīns Pēkšēn)

DSCF7354DSCF7355DSCF7356DSCF7357DSCF7358DSCF7359DSCF7360

Alberta iela 12 (with Konstantīns Pēkšēn)

DSCF7536

 References

 

 Artist

Béla Lajta (nèe Leitersdorfer)

 Co-Worker

Bela Löffler, Szendrői Dezso, Tálos Gyula, Lajos Kozma

 Year 

Pest, 23 Jan 1873 – Vienna, 12 Oct 1920

 Location/Map

 Style

He visited Italy, Germany and England. France Spain and Russia.
In Germany he keep in touch with Alfred Messel in Germany  and Eberhard Ihne. In years 1898-1899 he was in London where he staid in close contact with Richard Norman Shaw, and with Baillie Scott, and subsequently in Austria with  Josef Hoffmann, and personal Adolf Loos. After his return in Hungary, he studied the national art and the style Transylvania and Upper Hungary folk art. 
During 1902 and 1903, he worked in contact with Ödön Lechner. Other than pure Architecture design, he worked also as interior designer
His style was heavily influenced by the ideas about national art of Odon Lechner and, as a matter of fact, Lajta himself had the goal to preserve folk architecture style, together with ancient
motives. Lajta art was also influenced by the English villa’s architecture, by Finnish national
romantic and Austrian modern architecture.

 Pictures

Budapest X., Kozma utcai izraelita temető Schmidt Sándor sírboltja

100_2942100_2943100_2944100_2945_cover100_2945100_2946100_2947100_2948100_2954

 

Budapest XIV., Mexikói út 60. Vakok Intézete 1905—1908

100_3890DSCF3959DSCF3960DSCF3961DSCF3962DSCF3963DSCF3964DSCF3965DSCF3966DSCF3967DSCF3968100_3882100_3885100_3886100_3884100_3887100_3888100_3889100_3891100_3892100_3893100_3894100_3896100_3897100_3899100_3881100_3879100_3880

Budapest XIV., Izsó utca Malonyay Dezső villája 1905-1907.

100_3876100_3877100_3878

Budapest XIV., Amerikai út 57. Budapesti Chevra Kadisa Gyógyíthatatlan Betegek Intézete

100_3903100_3904100_3905100_3906100_3907100_3908100_3909100_3910100_3911

Budapest VI., Paulay Ede utca 35. Parisiana mulató 1908-1909. Épületszobrász -munkák Maróti Géza

DSCF1867DSCF3168DSCF5085DSCF5086

Budapest VIII, Vas utca 11. Székesfővárosi Kereskedelmi Iskola 1909-1912

100_4337100_4338100_4343100_4345100_4350100_4352DSCF1192DSCF1193DSCF1194DSCF1195DSCF1196DSCF1197DSCF1198DSCF1199DSCF1200DSCF1201DSCF1202DSCF1203

Budapesí V.. Martinelli tér 5. Lajta Henrik és Rezső üzletháza. Földszintjén a Rózsavölgyi Zeneműbolt berendezése Kozma Lajos tervei szerint készült. 1911—1912.

100_3924DSCF3659DSCF3660DSCF5064DSCF0790

Budapest VII., Rákóczi út 18. Erzsébetvárosi Bank háza 1911 —1913.

100_4356100_4357100_4358

Budapest VIII., Népszínház utca 19. Harsányi-ház 1911—1912

DSCF0728DSCF0729DSCF0730DSCF0734DSCF0735

Budapest V. Szent István tér 14. Hecht Jónás nagykereskedés portálja 1906—1907

100_3737100_3738100_3739-1100_4333100_4334100_4335

 References


Művészet magazine, volume 12, pp 285 – 294

285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294

Der Architekt, Volume 1911, pp-34-37

page_5_33 page_5_34 page_5_35 page_5_36 page_5_37 page_5_38 page_5_39 page_5_40

Una delle più controverse vexata quaestion nella storia dell’Arte fin dè siècle, è costituita dal rapporto tra il cosiddetto estetismo, vera e proprio fondamento teorico ed estetico, e gli sviluppi dell’estetica della linea Art Nouveau. In più: se si considera la Secessione austriaca in particolare, costituisce un punto cardine della definizione dell’estetica secessione l’influenza delle produzioni di Kunstgewerbe della scuola di Glasgow, e di Rennie Mackintosh in particolare, e delle raffinate illustrazioni in bianco e nero di un Aubrey Beardsley o di un Selwyn Image su produzioni che spaziano dalla Kunstgewerbe Schule di Vienna fino all’estetica Wiener Werkstaette. Tuttavia, a mio avviso, rimane da indagare quanto, anche da un punto di vista teorico, un ulteriore contributo d’oltre Manica sarebbe stato destinato ad esercitare un definitivo e determinante influsso sui fondamenti teorici della Secessione Viennese. In particolare, rilevo come due dei maggiori teorici dell’Art Nouveau austriaca, Hermann Bahr e Ludwig Hevesi, conservino questo particolare legame teoretico con i fondamenti dell’Estetismo inglese.

Leggo e traduco Ludwig Hevesi, il quale, nella fondamentale raccolta di articoli e saggi brevi intitolata “Acht Jahre Secession” scrive:

La Vereinigung Bildender Kuenstler Oesterreich è principalmente una Kampfgesellschaft (una Società Guerriera) che conserva come proprio campo di battaglia l’Arte stessa. E tale battaglia non si connoterà di sterile polemica, ma, al contrario, sarà come suo proprio una finalità artistica. Quella di risvegliare gli occhi delle masse e far sì che essi si aprano e contemplino e comprendano gli sviluppi dell’arte giovane.

Le masse diseducate alla fruizione ed al riconoscimento del gusto, alla appercezione del bello. La Secessione non costituisce, dunque, un elemento di polemica o rottura con la tradizione del passato, con una estetica ritenuta vetusta e superata. La Secessione ha come proprio un fine meramente estetico, proponendosi come veicolo di una sensibilità sconosciuta, come una sorta di sileno pronto ad elettrizzare, talvolta scandalizzando, i dormienti ed assuefatti occhi dei più, per consentir infine loro non solamente di apprezzare la nuova arte, ma soprattutto di liberare la naturale umana tendenza al godimento del bello.

DSCF7095_pt

Ancora Hermann Bahr, in “Secession”:

Se si considerano le secessioni di Parigi e Monaco, risulta evidente come quelle siano in deiretta contrapposizione alla Vecchia Arte in nome dell’Arte Giovane e Nuova. In questo senso si potrebbe dire che essa promuove uno scontro fra modernità contro la tradizione, o più modestamente: giocare una lotta per una nuova tecnologia, o innovazioni ancor non accettate: un tentativo, la moda di oggi contro la legge eterna. Ma pur sempre una controversia nelle arti. Entrambi gli avversari volevano servire la medesima cosa, la bellezza mediante l’unico mezzo con cui la potevano comunicare. Artisti  contro altri artisti. E ‘stata una battaglia delle scuole, le dottrine, di temperamento. Tutto questo non ci appartiene. Noi non argomentare contro la tradizione, dato che non ne abbiamo nessuna. Non è tra l’arte antica e nuova, non intendiamo discutere su come cambiare l’arte.  Al contrario, la Secessione si interesserà dell’arte stessa. L a nostra associazione dirime ogni dubbio, "rinuncia alla battaglia contro il vecchio, ed essa stessa rinuncia a chiamarsi moderna. Ill punto vero sarà il seguente: "contro i meri produttori, noi vogliamo essere artisti! Questa è tutta la controversia: o Business o l’arte, è la questione della nostra secessione.

La secessione dunque si propone portatrice di un nuovo modo di concepire l’arte, ancor più ed ancor prima di un nuovo modo di fare arte. E per i secessionisti, lo scontro esiziale è tra l’artista al solo servizio della Bellezza, ed il commerciante, al soldo di mecenati più o meno interessati, schiavo delle imposture del gusto borghese. Non è l’arte ad essere vecchia, al limite lo è l’artista, caduto nell’oblio della bellezza, non più in grado di lasciarsi avviluppare dall’estatico abbraccio della bellezza, potere eccitante e taumaturgico. Eco del campione dell’estetismo, Pater Walter, il cui pensiero è posseduto e veicolato dalle parole dell’Epicureo Mario:

Tutto questo è servito, come ha capito in seguito, in una sola volta a rafforzare e purificare una vena certa di carattere in lui. Sviluppare l’ideale, pre-esistente , di una bellezza religiosa, che MArio accumunerà in futuro con lo splendore meraviglioso del tempio di Esculapio, come si rese conto su di lui quella mattina della sua prima visita – Si è sviluppata in questo un ideale legame con un vivace senso del valore della salute mentale e corporea. E questo riconoscimento della bellezza, una estetica che mediante il bello veicolato dai sensi dona  salute al corpo, una sorta di influsso moralmente salutare, liberando le tendenze meno desiderabili o pericolose di alcune fasi del pensiero.

VER SACRUM – Organ der Vereinigung Bildender Kunstler Osterreichs – 1898

DSCF7443DSCF7444DSCF7445DSCF7446DSCF7447DSCF7448DSCF7449DSCF7450DSCF7451DSCF7452DSCF7453DSCF7454DSCF7455DSCF7456DSCF7457DSCF7458DSCF7459DSCF7460DSCF7461DSCF7462DSCF7463DSCF7464DSCF7465DSCF7466DSCF7467DSCF7468DSCF7470DSCF7471DSCF7472DSCF7473DSCF7474DSCF7475DSCF7476DSCF7477DSCF7478DSCF7479DSCF7480DSCF7481DSCF7482DSCF7483DSCF7484DSCF7485DSCF7486DSCF7487DSCF7488DSCF7489DSCF7490DSCF7491DSCF7492DSCF7493DSCF7494DSCF7495DSCF7496DSCF7497DSCF7498DSCF7499DSCF7500DSCF7501DSCF7502DSCF7503DSCF7504DSCF7505DSCF7506DSCF7508DSCF7509DSCF7511DSCF7512DSCF7513DSCF7514DSCF7515DSCF7516DSCF7517DSCF7518DSCF7519DSCF7520DSCF7521DSCF7522DSCF7523DSCF7524DSCF7525DSCF7526DSCF7527DSCF7528DSCF7529DSCF7530DSCF7531DSCF7532DSCF7533DSCF7534DSCF7535DSCF7536DSCF7537DSCF7538DSCF7539DSCF7540DSCF7541DSCF7542DSCF7543DSCF7544DSCF7545DSCF7546DSCF7547DSCF7548DSCF7549DSCF7550DSCF7551DSCF7552DSCF7553DSCF7554DSCF7555DSCF7556DSCF7557DSCF7558DSCF7559DSCF7560DSCF7561DSCF7562DSCF7563DSCF7564DSCF7565DSCF7566DSCF7567DSCF7568DSCF7569DSCF7570DSCF7571DSCF7572DSCF7573DSCF7574DSCF7575DSCF7576DSCF7577DSCF7578DSCF7579DSCF7580DSCF7581DSCF7582DSCF7583DSCF7584DSCF7585DSCF7586DSCF7587DSCF7588DSCF7589DSCF7590DSCF7591DSCF7592DSCF7593DSCF7594DSCF7595DSCF7596DSCF7597DSCF7598DSCF7599DSCF7600DSCF7601DSCF7602DSCF7603DSCF7604DSCF7605DSCF7606DSCF7607DSCF7608DSCF7609DSCF7610DSCF7611DSCF7612DSCF7613DSCF7614DSCF7615DSCF7616DSCF7617DSCF7618DSCF7619DSCF7620DSCF7622DSCF7623DSCF7624DSCF7625DSCF7626DSCF7627DSCF7628DSCF7629DSCF7630DSCF7631DSCF7632DSCF7633DSCF7634DSCF7635DSCF7636DSCF7637DSCF7638DSCF7639DSCF7640DSCF7641DSCF7642DSCF7643DSCF7644DSCF7645DSCF7646DSCF7647DSCF7648DSCF7649DSCF7650DSCF7651DSCF7652DSCF7653DSCF7654DSCF7655DSCF7656DSCF7657DSCF7658DSCF7659DSCF7660DSCF7661DSCF7662DSCF7663DSCF7664DSCF7665DSCF7666DSCF7667DSCF7668DSCF7669DSCF7670DSCF7671DSCF7672DSCF7673DSCF7674DSCF7675DSCF7676DSCF7677DSCF7678DSCF7679DSCF7680DSCF7681DSCF7682DSCF7683DSCF7684DSCF7685DSCF7686DSCF7687DSCF7688DSCF7689DSCF7690DSCF7691DSCF7692DSCF7693DSCF7694DSCF7695DSCF7696DSCF7697DSCF7698DSCF7699DSCF7700DSCF7701DSCF7702DSCF7703DSCF7704DSCF7705DSCF7706DSCF7707DSCF7708DSCF7709DSCF7710DSCF7711DSCF7712DSCF7713DSCF7714DSCF7715DSCF7716DSCF7717DSCF7718DSCF7719DSCF7720DSCF7721DSCF7722DSCF7723DSCF7724DSCF7725DSCF7726DSCF7727DSCF7728DSCF7729DSCF7730DSCF7731DSCF7732DSCF7733DSCF7734DSCF7735DSCF7736DSCF7737DSCF7738DSCF7739DSCF7740DSCF7741DSCF7742DSCF7743DSCF7744DSCF7745DSCF7746DSCF7747DSCF7748DSCF7749DSCF7750DSCF7751DSCF7752DSCF7753DSCF7754DSCF7755DSCF7756DSCF7757DSCF7758DSCF7759DSCF7760DSCF7761DSCF7762DSCF7763DSCF7764DSCF7765DSCF7766DSCF7767DSCF7768DSCF7769DSCF7770DSCF7771DSCF7772DSCF7773DSCF7774DSCF7775DSCF7776DSCF7777DSCF7778DSCF7779DSCF7780DSCF7781DSCF7782DSCF7783DSCF7784DSCF7785DSCF7786DSCF7787DSCF7788DSCF7789DSCF7790DSCF7791DSCF7792DSCF7793DSCF7794DSCF7795DSCF7796DSCF7797DSCF7798DSCF7799DSCF7800DSCF7801DSCF7802DSCF7803DSCF7804DSCF7805DSCF7806DSCF7807DSCF7808DSCF7809DSCF7810DSCF7811DSCF7812DSCF7813DSCF7814DSCF7815DSCF7816DSCF7817DSCF7818DSCF7819DSCF7820DSCF7821DSCF7822DSCF7823DSCF7824DSCF7825DSCF7826DSCF7827DSCF7828DSCF7829DSCF7830DSCF7831DSCF7832DSCF7833DSCF7834DSCF7835DSCF7836DSCF7837DSCF7838DSCF7839DSCF7840DSCF7841DSCF7842DSCF7843DSCF7845

 Artist

Joseph Maria Olbrich (* 22.12.1867 – † 08.08.1908)

 Co-Worker

Gustav Klimt (Beethoven frieze)

 Year 

1897-1898

 Location/Map

 Style

The motto of the Secession, "Der Zeit ihre Kunst. Der Kunst ihre Freihei" constitutes a sort programmatic goal for the building itself.
Olbrich’s design was for a wing with a central entrance, surrounded by side rooms and a hall adjoining exhibition hall. The representative entry part combines the exterior walls of solid cubes as a structured entity, the center of a golden dome surrounded by four pylons. The pure white plaster facades have been geometrically arranged and adorned with a decoration in an entirely new, stylized shapes. Vegetable and geometric ornaments, such as the laurel trees growing up along the edges were cut directly in the plastering and completely flat on hold. The decoration also came to symbolic significance. Main motive was the laurel tree, the crown of the broken, of gilded leaves and berries, and the existing dome "Ver Sacrum" symbolizes the dawn of the new art . The smooth, white facades meant not a step to sobriety, but were an expression of purity and grandeur, "Walls … white and shiny, holy and chaste "(Olbrich). Forms, which give the effect of a "reliance on an archaic geometry" (Achleitner), the construction of a sacral taste. With the reduction to the basic form refers to the origin that is associated with a claim to renewal. The hall for exhibitions, however, was conceived to create an environment at the same time simple and functional, flexible, and covered by tent-like roofs of uniform glass skylight. It was designed for exhibitions of contemporary art and became a pioneering prototype. The so utterly new and strange-looking entrance, constructed of three interlocking cubes with a central, domed hall, however, followed a tradition, (approach inherited from his teacher Hasenauer Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna), which Olbrich in 1891 used his design for the Museum of Decorative Arts Opava had.

 Pictures

 DSCF6774DSCF0329DSCF6775DSCF6770DSCF6769DSCF6764DSCF6763DSCF6771DSCF6768DSCF6767DSCF6766DSCF6765

klimt_sml

 References


Article on Der Architekt (Volume 5, 1899)

page_5_5 page_5_6 page_5_7 page_5_8 page_7_1

Zala György frieze on his own villa

 Artist

Zala György

 Co-Worker

Architect: Lajos Jambor (Frommer)
Architect: Odon Lechner
Interior Architect: Ede Toroczkai Wigand

 Year 

1900 – 1901

 Location/Map

 Style

Designed in typical Art Nouveau style, Zala’s villa presents on the façade  Zala’s own relief, The Celebration Of Venus.

 Pictures

 DSCF1090DSCF1091DSCF1092DSCF1093DSCF1094DSCF1095DSCF1096DSCF3878DSCF3879DSCF3880DSCF3881DSCF3882DSCF3883DSCF3884DSCF3885DSCF3886DSCF3889

 References

The turn of the century – the era when the art of György Zala was awakened and reached maturity – is one of the most exciting periods in Hungarian social and cultural history, and one that is uniquely rich in works of art.
His development, his personality as an artist and his immense capacity for work have made him along with contemporaries such as Alajos Strobl and János Fadrusz one of the definitive figures of the time and a chronicler of the period on account of his prolific output.
He lived for his work. His life was long and he continued to work throughout his life. Even during the confusing, tormented, crisisridden times following the First World War, he received noteworthy commissions.

http://www.zalagyorgy.info/lang3/index.html

http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zala_Gy%C3%B6rgy

 

The Studio, Volume 26– dr. Enrico Thovez, “The first international exhibition of modern decorative Art”

studiointernatio26londuoft_0051 studiointernatio26londuoft_0052 studiointernatio26londuoft_0053 studiointernatio26londuoft_0054 studiointernatio26londuoft_0055 studiointernatio26londuoft_0056 studiointernatio26londuoft_0057

The Studio, Volume 27 – Turin 1902: the Austrian Section

studiointernatio27londuoft_0148 studiointernatio27londuoft_0149 studiointernatio27londuoft_0150 studiointernatio27londuoft_0151 studiointernatio27londuoft_0152

The Studio, Volume 27 – Turin 1902: the German Section

studiointernatio27londuoft_0208 studiointernatio27londuoft_0209 studiointernatio27londuoft_0210 studiointernatio27londuoft_0211 studiointernatio27londuoft_0212 studiointernatio27londuoft_0213 studiointernatio27londuoft_0214 studiointernatio27londuoft_0215 studiointernatio27londuoft_0216

The Studio, Volume 27 – Turin 1902: the Italian Section

studiointernatio27londuoft_0289 studiointernatio27londuoft_0290 studiointernatio27londuoft_0291 studiointernatio27londuoft_0292 studiointernatio27londuoft_0293 studiointernatio27londuoft_0294 studiointernatio27londuoft_0295 studiointernatio27londuoft_0296 studiointernatio27londuoft_0297 studiointernatio27londuoft_0298

The Studio, Volume 26 – Turin 1902: the Scottish Section

studiointernatio26londuoft_0097 studiointernatio26londuoft_0098 studiointernatio26londuoft_0099 studiointernatio26londuoft_0100 studiointernatio26londuoft_0101 studiointernatio26londuoft_0102 studiointernatio26londuoft_0103 studiointernatio26londuoft_0104 studiointernatio26londuoft_0105 studiointernatio26londuoft_0106 studiointernatio26londuoft_0107 studiointernatio26londuoft_0108 studiointernatio26londuoft_0109 studiointernatio26londuoft_0110

The Studio, Volume 26 – Turin 1902: the Dutch and English Sections

studiointernatio26londuoft_0213 studiointernatio26londuoft_0214 studiointernatio26londuoft_0215 studiointernatio26londuoft_0216 studiointernatio26londuoft_0217 studiointernatio26londuoft_0218 studiointernatio26londuoft_0219 studiointernatio26londuoft_0220
studiointernatio26londuoft_0263 studiointernatio26londuoft_0264 studiointernatio26londuoft_0265 studiointernatio26londuoft_0266 studiointernatio26londuoft_0267 studiointernatio26londuoft_0268 studiointernatio26londuoft_0269 studiointernatio26londuoft_0270 studiointernatio26londuoft_0271

Polls

Ferdnand Khnopff vs Otto Eckmann

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013

Basel 2013