How did Modernist architecture reject historical styles and ornament?

Modernist architecture rejected historical styles and ornament by prioritizing Functionalism—the doctrine that a building's form should be determined by its practical use, materials, and structure rather than by preconceived aesthetic conventions or historical references.12

This shift was driven by several key factors:

• Technological Advancement: Architects utilized new building technologies, such as steel frames and curtain walls, to create structures that emphasized logic and industrial efficiency over traditional masonry or decorative facades.32
• Rejection of Ornament: Influential figures like Adolf Loos argued in his 1908 essay, Ornament and Crime, that excessive embellishment was a waste of labor and materials in an industrial age. He viewed the elimination of ornament as a sign of spiritual strength and modern progress.45
• The "Machine" Aesthetic: Architects like Le Corbusier championed the idea that buildings should be "machines for living," drawing inspiration from industrial forms like ships, airplanes, and turbines rather than classical motifs.12
• Institutional Influence: The Bauhaus school played a pivotal role in codifying these ideals, promoting mass manufacture and a "severe but elegant geometric style" that favored economy of form and functional clarity.26

Ultimately, this movement sought to create a nonhistorical, homogeneous environment suited to the needs of "modern man" in an industrial society.2