Atavism of skin markings : surface patterns in architecture

Abstract

The recurrence of the traditional practice of patterns on surfaces of the human body and architecture is explored here. In histories and theories of architecture bodily markings have been used to describe the metaphors of ornamentation in architecture. Architectural patterns are a potent device for architectural articulation and announcement expressing the character of a building. Yet Adolf Loos’ essay ‘Ornament and Crime’ and the nineteenth-century criminal anthropology sought to get rid of decoration for a culture of modernity. This research highlights the influence and fallacy of those unornamented theories on the meanings of behavioural decorum in post-modern and contemporary modes and agendas of surface patterning. Decoration and decorum as social coding, albeit more neutral, less ritualized, less conspicuous, is still seen as apropos.Die terugkeer na die tradisionele praktyk van oppervlakpatrone op die menslike liggaam en argitektuur word hier ondersoek. In argitektoniese geskiedenisse en teorieë is liggaamlike merke gebruik om metafore van versiering in argitektuur te beskryf. Argitektoniese patrone is 'n kragtige apparaat vir argitektoniese artikulasie en aankondiging vir die uitdrukking van karakter van 'n gebou. Maar Adolf Loos se opstel Ornament and Crime en die negentiende-eeuse kriminele antropologie, het eerder probeer om ontslae te raak van versiering vir 'n kultuur van moderniteit. Hierdie navorsing dui op die invloed en die dwaling van daardie teorieë relatief tot die betekenis van gedragsfatsoenlikheid in post-moderne en kontemporêre modes en agendas van oppervlakpatrone. Die versiering en die dekorum as sosiale kodering, hoewel meer neutraal, minder geritualiseerd, minder opvallend , word nog steeds gesien as apropos.