prompt 1 loos argues that the evolution of ornament is synonymous with
Search for question
Question
Prompt #1:
Loos argues that "the evolution of ornament is
synonymous with the removal of ornament from
utilitarian objects" (Loos 1908, 20). Can society evolve by
the discarding of ornamentation? If so, how? If not, why
not? Can you identify contradictions in Loos' writing or
built work that invalidate these statements? Provide
your working definition of ornament for clarity.
Prompt #2:
Consider the role of symbolism and cultural identity
through the words of Loos. Are there any ideas that are
incorrectly valued? Refer to the specific passages in both
"Ornament and Crime" and "Criminal Skins Tattoos and
Modern Architecture in the Work of Adolf Loos." What
cultural perspectives do you see embedded in these
writings? What could be the implications for cultural
identity, if ornamentation is removed?
Prompt #3:
According to Loos, is ornamentation a disease, a crime or
both? Do you agree or disagree with Loos' assessment?
Explain your reasoning. Find particular passages that
support your assessment. What is the role of ornament
in architecture today? Are there certain types of
structures/buildings that benefit/deserve/need it more
than others? 8:53
Assignment Details
ARCH 3214-001: Hist & Thry of Architecture 2
< To Do
Prompt #4:
ا
100
Compare and contrast Loos' position on ornament
through the work of Canales and Herscher "Criminal
Skins Tattoos and Modern Architecture in the Work of
Adolf Loos" and "Ornament and Crime." When asked to
design a building for the Mexican parliament what does
he do and why? How does modern ornament differ from
that embedded cultural ornament? Discussion Framework:
Part 1 (your initial post): Your initial post must meet
the following:
1. Respond to one of the prompt options for the week.
(That is not a free-write or write whatever you
want).
2. Title the post to correspond to the chosen prompt.
3. Compose a response that consists of at least 200
words, of your own writing, which critically examine
the reading(s) and engage the prompt. (Please omit
any unnecessary fluff to reach a particular word
count.)
4. Express your thoughts in clear and careful writing.
Make sure to type, review, and edit before posting.
(Please do not write like you are Snapchatting or
texting a friend.) Use complete sentences and
appropriate terminology. Provide evidence from the
text to support your position. Where relevant, refer
to direct passages using the Chicago Manual of
Style Author Date parenthetical citation. These
quotations are not included in your reflection word
count.
5. Thoughtfully engage with peers' work. Some
responses may include concluding questions to
further discussion. For Part 2 (your engagement post):
1. You then reply to at least one person with a substantive
post, which is around at least 150 words. (No fluff).
2. Your reply must do the following:
1. The engagement response utilizes one technique of
Bailey's guide to participating.
2. Your reply begins by identifying which technique
that you are doing (e.g. #5 Offer an Objection)
3. Express your thoughts in clear and careful writing.
Make sure to type, review, and edit before posting.
(Please do not write like you are Snapchatting or
texting a friend.) Use complete sentences and
appropriate terminology. Provide evidence from the
text to support your position. Where relevant, refer
to direct passages using the Chicago Manual of
Style Author Date parenthetical citation. These
quotations are not included in your reflection word
count.
4. Your response is respectful, charitable, kind, and
displays a concerted effort to avoid defensive or
aggressive reactions.
5. Your reply adheres to all the expectations of the
classroom behavior outlined in the syllabus.