- Key People:
- Louis Sullivan
- Horatio Greenough
Ornament
-
What is an ornament in architecture?
In architecture, an ornament is an element added to a structural form for embellishment. There are three categories of architectural ornamentation:
* Mimetic: Imitative ornaments with symbolic significance
* Applied: Extrinsic elements intended to add beauty
* Organic: Elements inherent in the buildingās function or materialsApplied ornament was common in Western architecture until the 19th century, when architects began to design ornamentation independently of architectural form.
4 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
Why do architects use ornaments on buildings?
Architects use ornaments on buildings for expression, communicating quality and meaning through form. Ornamentation, an embellishment in various styles, distinguishes buildings, furniture, and household items.
There are three categories of architectural ornament:
* Mimetic: Imitative with symbolic significance
* Applied: Adds beauty extrinsically
* Organic: Inherent in the buildingās function or materialsThe use of mimetic ornament is a common reaction to technological change, reproducing familiar shapes and qualities from past usage. Applied ornament lacks symbolic meaning, serving to visually articulate the building. Organic ornament derives directly from the building's nature and materials.
3 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
What are some common types of architectural ornaments?
Architectural ornaments are elements added to structural forms for embellishment. Three categories exist:
* Mimetic: Imitative forms possess symbolic significance, common in ancient cultures. Examples include domes and details imitating bundled papyrus shafts.
* Applied: Adds beauty but is extrinsic to the structure. Classical Greece saw mimetic ornament evolve into applied ornament, like the Doric frieze. Renaissance and Baroque architecture heavily feature applied ornament.
* Organic: Inherent in a building's function or materials. Medieval churches used ornament to symbolize heaven.5 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How have architectural ornaments changed throughout history?
Architectural ornaments have evolved through history, transitioning through distinct categories. Initially, mimetic ornaments imitated familiar shapes and held symbolic significance, as seen in ancient Egypt and Greece. Over time, these evolved into applied ornaments, which served a purely decorative purpose without structural reference. The Victorian era saw a separation of ornament and form, leading to a reaction against excessive, meaningless decoration.
By the early 20th century, architects sought organic ornament, inherent in a building's materials and function. The International Style rejected applied ornament, emphasizing the inherent qualities of materials. Post-Modernism later reintroduced modest ornamentation, including classical motifs.
3 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How do cultural differences affect the style of architectural ornaments?
Cultural differences significantly shape architectural ornamentation through distinct styles that reflect a culture's outlook, traditions, and innovations. Ornamentation, as applied embellishment, distinguishes buildings, furniture, and household items, often carrying symbolic meaning.
Mimetic ornament, common in Asian civilizations and throughout antiquity, reproduces familiar shapes and qualities from past usage, reflecting a culture's reaction to technological change and a desire for continuity. Religious beliefs also play a role, with certain forms and shapes preserved and reproduced for their symbolic value.
However, cultural influences can evolve, leading to the adaptation of foreign architectural styles to local climates and needs, blending modern designs with indigenous forms.
5 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
What are some reasons that modern buildings often have less ornamentation than older ones?
Modern buildings often feature less ornamentation than older ones due to several factors. The evolution of architectural techniques and materials plays a significant role. The development of iron and steel and reinforced concrete in the 19th and 20th centuries allowed for stronger, taller structures with less material.
Economic considerations also drive the trend toward less ornamentation. Major building expenses include land, materials, and labor. High labor costs encourage simplification in construction, and the replacement of craftsmanship with standardization.
Additionally, modern architectural thought has shifted away from applied ornament. By the mid-20th century, an organic concept of architectural ornament emerged, emphasizing that ornament should derive directly from the nature of the building and its materials.
3 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
Ornament, in architecture, any element added to an otherwise merely structural form, usually for purposes of decoration or embellishment. Three basic and fairly distinct categories of ornament in architecture may be recognized: mimetic, or imitative, ornament, the forms of which have certain definite meanings or symbolic significance; applied ornament, intended to add beauty to a structure but extrinsic to it; and organic ornament, inherent in the buildingās function or materials.
Mimetic ornament is by far the most common type of architectural ornament in primitive cultures, in Eastern civilizations, and generally throughout antiquity. It grows out of what seems to be a universal human reaction to technological change: the tendency to use new materials and techniques to reproduce shapes and qualities familiar from past usage, regardless of appropriateness. For example, most common building types in antiquity, such as tombs, pyramids, temples, and towers, began as imitations of primeval house and shrine forms. An obvious example is the dome, which developed as a permanent wooden or stone reproduction of a revered form originally built of pliable materials. In the mature stages of early civilizations, building types tended to evolve past primitive prototypes; their ornament, however, usually remained based on such models. Decorative motifs derived from earlier structural and symbolic forms are innumerable and universal. In developed Indian and Chinese architecture, domical and other originally structural forms occur often and lavishly as ornament. In ancient Egypt, architectural details continued throughout history to preserve faithfully the appearance of bundled papyrus shafts and similar early building forms. In Mesopotamia, brick walls long imitated the effect of primitive mud-and-reed construction. In the carved stone details of Greco-Roman orders (capitals, entablatures, moldings), the precedent of archaic construction in wood was always clearly discernible.
Architectural ornament in classical Greece exemplified the common tendency for mimetic ornament to turn into applied ornament, which lacks either symbolic meaning or reference to the structure on which it is placed. By the 5th century bc in Greece, the details of the orders had largely lost whatever conscious symbolic or structural significance they may have had; they became simply decorative elements extrinsic to the structure. The Doric frieze is a good case: its origin as an imitation of the effect of alternating beam ends and shuttered openings in archaic wood construction remained evident, but it came to be treated as a decorative sheath without reference to the actual structural forms behind. In losing their mimetic character, the details of the Greek orders acquired a new function, however; they served to articulate the building visually, organizing it into a series of coordinated visual units that could be comprehended as an integrated whole, rather than a collection of isolated units. This is the concept of applied decoration which was passed on through the Greco-Roman period. The triumphal arch of Rome, with its system of decorative columns and entablature articulating what is essentially one massive shape, is a particularly good illustration. Most of the great architecture of the Renaissance and Baroque periods depends on applied ornament; to a large extent, the difference between these styles is the difference in decoration.
Judicious and intelligent use of applied ornament remained characteristic of most Western architecture until the 19th century. During the Victorian period, architectural ornament and architectural forms proper tended to part company, to be designed quite independently of each other. Since it became obvious that ornament so conceived served no good purpose at all, a reaction was inevitable; it began to appear in force by the 1870s.
As early as the 1870s H.H. Richardson adopted the Romanesque style less for its historical associations than for the opportunities it afforded him to express the nature and texture of stone. In mature examples of his architecture from the mid-1880s, ornament in the older, applied sense has virtually disappeared, and buildings depend for their aesthetic effect mainly on the inherent qualities of their materials. The generation following Richardson saw a further development of this principle everywhere.
By the early 20th century a preoccupation with the proper function of architectural ornament was characteristic of all advanced architectural thinkers; by the mid-20th century what may be called an organic concept of architectural ornament had been formulated. In the United States Louis Sullivan was the chief contributor to the new architectural expression. Sullivanās urban architecture was largely based on an emphasis of the dynamic lines and patterns that were produced by modern steel-frame construction, but he retained interspersed bands and patches of naturalistic ornament on parts of his buildingsā facades, applied with studied discipline. With the general reaction against Victorian principles after World War I, however, leading designers rejected even this kind of applied ornament and relied for ornamental effect on the inherent qualities of building materials alone. The International Style, in which Walter Gropius and Le Corbusier were the chief figures, dominated advanced design during the late 1920s and 1930s. During the period of dominance of the austere International Style, which lasted into the 1960s, architectural ornament of almost any kind was absent from the facades of major buildings. It was not until the 1970s, with the advent of the Post-Modernist architectural movement, that the unadorned functionalism of the International Style was moderated to permit a modest use of ornament, including classical motifs.

" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">