Adolf Loos
1870-1933
“The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament
from utilitarian objects.”
The chronological context
of Loo’s architecture
Chronological context in Architecture
- Modernism to Postmodernism 1890s
1900s
1910s
First generation
modernists
1920s
1930s
1940s
1950s
Second generation
modernists
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
Third generation
modernists
The pioneers of modernism.
They each treated form, space,
structure, materials and ornament in
novel ways.
These were the architects of ‘high
modernism’- the universal
International Style- as well as the
fashionable Art Deco period.
These were the architects of
Postmodernism.
They reacted against the orthodoxy of
high modernism.
Peter Behrens -
Berlin
Walter Gropius
Frank Gehry
Auguste Perret -
Paris
Le Corbusier
Philip Johnson
C. R. Mackintosh -
Glasgow
Mies van der Rohe
Charles Moore
Otto Wagner -
Vienna
Gerrit Reitveld
I. M. Pei
Adolf Loos -
Vienna
William Van Allen
Michael Greaves
Louis Sullivan -
Chicago
Napier Art Deco architects
Louis Kahn
Frank Lloyd Wright - Chicago and mid-western states of USA
Robert Venturi
The context of his architecture
Geographical context:

Loos was an Austrian architect and social critic. He lived and worked in Vienna and
Prague. His significant buildings are located mostly in Vienna, Austria.
Vienna

Two major works are also located in Paris, France and in Prague, Czech Rep.
Context continued…
Historical context:





Adolf Loos was an important pioneer of the modern movement, his major buildings
were all constructed in the years between 1910 to 1930. He was almost an exact
contemporary of the Scottish pioneering architect and designer Charles Rennie
Mackintosh. His fellow Viennese architect Otto Wagner was a friend and supporter.
Loos traveled through America for three years from 1893. He admired the simplicity
and pure geometries of American agricultural buildings and the buildings of Louis
Sullivan. He also admired the English Arts and Crafts tradition.
Loos harshly criticised the decorative works of the Vienna Secession (the Art Nouveau
movement in Vienna) and what he considered the cultural backwardness of his native
Austria for its adherence to past styles of architecture (particularly the lavish Baroque
style with its superfluous ornament) which he believed had no relation to modern life.
Loos wrote numerous critical essays during his lifetime, the most notable of which,
Ornament and Crime, was published in 1908.
Loos was one of the most significant prophets of modernism. His buildings are stark,
abstract and rational in appearance and his ‘raumplan’ concept revolutionised the
spatial design of buildings. His buildings and ideas had a significant influence on the
emerging International Style architects in Europe and America.
Social context:


Context continued…
Loos was a radical thinker and an outspoken critic of Austrian society. His austere buildings,
particularly the Goldman and Salatsch Building on the Michaelerplatz, caused scandals at the
time they were built.
Loos admired the relatively efficient, economical and unstuffy atmosphere of American life,
unhindered by tradition and class division. In his publications Loos wanted to awaken his fellow
Austrians and shake them out of their cultural backwardness. Upon his return to Austria from
America in 1898 he started a magazine entitled The Other. A journal for the introduction of
Western Culture into Austria.



Loos criticised the artists of his day who continued to revive or invent ‘applied art’. He believed
that superfluous ornament was decadent and wasteful of time, money, materials and human
labour. “The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from utilitarian
objects” he wrote in his famous essay Ornament and Crime (1908).
Loos sought to design practical buildings for his clients. He designed buildings without a preconceived notion of their form. “Don’t think of the roof, but of the rain and snow” he wrote. By
this he meant the designer should analyse the practical needs of the client and design the
building from the inside outwards, so as to satisfy the man of the house rather than the man on
the street. The architect must be as much a psychologist as a designer to determine these
requirements.
Loos was not so much opposed to ornament itself, but rather to an unhealthy and uncultured
concern for form or ornament for its own sake- to superfluous, applied ornament, to what
‘cultured’ Austrians termed ‘fine art’. What he really sought was truthful design, pure architecture
that served and expressed function, nothing more, nothing less. He admired old fashioned
objects that were sensible and workable because “truth, be it hundreds of years old, has more to
do with us than the lie which walks beside us” said Loos (a swipe at work by the Secessionists).
Significant Loos buildings
The Steiner House, Vienna, 1910
The Michaelerplatz Building, Vienna, 1910
The Müller House, Prague, 1930
Loos’ views on ornament
Excerpts from his essay Ornament and Crime (1908)
“The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from utilitarian
objects.”
“Every age had its style…by style, people meant ornament. Then I said: …See, therein lies the
greatness of our age, that it is incapable of producing a new ornament. We have outgrown
ornament; we have fought our way through to freedom from ornament… soon the streets of
our city will glisten like white walls.”
“…the ornament disease is recognised by the state [Austria] and funded by state funds.”
“I don’t accept the objection that ornament heightens a cultivated person’s joy in life, I don’t
accept the objection contained in the words “But if the ornament is beautiful!” Ornament does
not heighten my joy in life or the joy in life of any cultivated person… The show dishes of past
centuries, which display all kinds of ornaments to make the peacocks, pheasants and lobsters
look more tasty, have exactly the opposite effect on me. Am horrified when I go through a
cookery exhibition and think that I am meant to eat these stuffed carcasses. I eat roast beef.”
“Omission of ornament results in a reduction in the manufacturing time and an increase in
wages. The Chinese carver works for sixteen hours, the American worker for eight. If I pay as
much for a smooth cigarette case as for an ornamented one, the difference in working time
belongs to the worker. And if there were no ornament at all… man would only have to work
four hours instead of eight, because half the work done today is devoted to ornament.
Ornament is wasted labour power and hence wasted health.”
Stylistic features -exteriors

Reinforced concrete construction
with a smooth WHITE plaster
finish.

Clean lines and crisp edges.

Unmoulded, simple window
openings.

Flat roofs and severe, cubic,
austere, geometric forms.

No historical or applied
ornamental effects.


No indoor-outdoor flow. Interior
and exterior space is strictly
separated. The only function of
the windows is to admit light.
Windows of different sizes are
usually arranged in an
asymmetrical manner and
partially suggest the raumplan
arrangement of space within.
Stylistic features -interiors
Click here to view a webpage illustrating stylistic features of Loos’ interiors.

Partially or wholly mirrored ceilings or
wall surfaces that visually extend space.

Oriental rugs on the floors.

Wooden paneling on the walls.

Marble veneer on walls or floors.

Wooden parquet floors.


Severe, geometric, austere architectural
forms softened with comfortable furnishings,
often varied in style.
In-built fixtures and furnishings
(eg. bookcases, seating, shelves, heaters).
Stylistic features -interiors





No indoor-outdoor flow of
space. Windows only exist to
admit light into the internal
spaces.
Internal spaces tend to flow
vertically with rooms of
different shapes, sizes, heights
and levels as dictated by
functional and socially
hierarchical requirements (Loos’
famous Raumplan concept)
Straight or right-angled steps or
stairwells of varied height that
connect the internal spaces,
sometimes bordered with
stepped terraces.
Matching grid patterns in the
walls, floors, and/or ceilings
“The building should be dumb
on the outside and reveal its
wealth only on the inside."
Context, style and iconography in Loos’ houses.
Click here to view a webpage that enables you to answer the following questions.
(The language used is challenging, but the concepts outlined in this article are excellent.)
State, in your own words, THREE points made about Loos’ architecture.
Paragraph 2: Here the author states that Loos’ buildings “…one moment are near to those of
other icons of modern architecture and the next moment far from them”. State
ONE stylistic aspect of Loos’ buildings that are similar to the works of mainstream
modernists and ONE stylistic aspect of Loos’ buildings that distanced him from
mainstream modernists.
Explain what the author means when he states that mainstream modernists wanted
to create interior spaces that were ‘centrifugal’, whereas Loos’ architecture was
‘centripetal’.
Paragraph 3: What sort of individuals commissioned early modernist buildings?
Paragraph 4: List THREE social functions of Loos’ houses.
Paragraph 6: Why is the Müller house significant?
Paragraph 7: Quote THREE phrases, each no more than ten words in length, that illustrate
Loos’ Raumplan concept.
Paragraph 8: Identify FOUR architectural elements of the Müller House living space that
serve to distinguish it from the more intimate, less public, function of the adjoining
dining space.
Paragraph 1:
Context and stylistic features
- the Müller House Click here to view the official website of this house and to find answers to the
following questions about this building’s context and style:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Who commissioned this house and how was his profession related to the
material construction of the house?
State TWO personal associations Loos himself had with this house.
Identify FOUR different materials used in the construction of the house.
State TWO spaces that flow, via stairs, from the living room.
Give ONE other specific example of Loos’ raumplan concept in this house.
Loos was the son of a stonemason. Give two pieces of evidence of this
influence/legacy in Loos’ Müller house.
Identify THREE functional objects that express utilitarian efficiency.
Describe the main colours used on the walls, floors and ceilings of this
house. What modern effect do these create?
List FOUR specific examples of in-built furniture.
Give THREE examples of lavish or opulent materials used in the house.
Why does Loos use these?