Lakhasly

The rise of a modernist architecturerooted in the machine age and inscientific management has preoccupied numerous architectural historians andsocial scientists.I then explore in subsequent chapters the extent to which the explana-tory variables put forward in the literature help sort out the origins and spreadof modernism in different countries.Available explanations of architectural modernism make different assump-tions about the role of architecture in society, and result in different arguments(see table 3.1).Finally, an-other group of social scientists assumes that architecture is primarily to beseen as a profession that rests on a claim to some body of abstract knowledge.Modernism in architecture is supposed to be based on the worldview and tech-niques that stem from an engineering model, one that includes scientific man-agement as a key component.For many historians, architecture is primarily shaped by mate-rial and intellectual conditions, and thus modernism in architecture needs tobe seen as an outgrowth of machine-based industrialization, of the new forms,materials, techniques, and ideas of the industrial age.

The rise of a modernist architecturerooted in the machine age and inscientific management has preoccupied numerous architectural historians andsocial scientists. The vast literature on modernism, however, contains surpris-ingly few detailed analyses of the different causes that may have producedsuch a distinct and influential architectural movement. What made some archi-tects approach architecture in a method-driven, standardized, and plannedfashion? In this chapter I outline the major explanations that have been pro-posed. I then explore in subsequent chapters the extent to which the explana-tory variables put forward in the literature help sort out the origins and spreadof modernism in different countries.Available explanations of architectural modernism make different assump-tions about the role of architecture in society, and result in different arguments(see table 3.1). For many historians, architecture is primarily shaped by mate-rial and intellectual conditions, and thus modernism in architecture needs tobe seen as an outgrowth of machine-based industrialization, of the new forms,materials, techniques, and ideas of the industrial age. Other architectural his-torians, by contrast, assume that architecture responds to social and politicalconditions, so that modernism was the result of a concern for social reform inthe wake of the dislocation caused by industrialization. Social scientists—especially sociologists—have proposed a third way of looking at architecture,one emphasizing the tastes and preferences of those who pay for it or use it.Their argument is that such an innovation as modernism emerged only whenarchitects enjoyed a measure of autonomy from the immediate pressures ofthe mass consumption market. In a related argument, other social scientistsand some architectural historians have highlighted the patronage of industrialfirms and the state as direct causes of architectural modernism. Finally, an-other group of social scientists assumes that architecture is primarily to beseen as a profession that rests on a claim to some body of abstract knowledge.Modernism in architecture is supposed to be based on the worldview and tech-niques that stem from an engineering model, one that includes scientific man-agement as a key component. Accordingly, modernism emerged to the extent