See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275973435

Arts & Crafts and the Bauhaus

Research · May 2015

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2754.7048

CITATIONS READS
0 4,096

1 author:

Zacchaeus Tow
Deakin University
11 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Zacchaeus Tow on 09 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Zacchaeus Tow
5 May 2014

Question
How was the relationship between art and craft conceived in the Bauhaus?
How did this affect the Bauhaus ‘ teaching practices? How did it relate to
the Bauhaus conception of architecture’s relationship to the other arts?

The Bauhaus was an art school in Germany that combined fine arts with
craft, and was exceedingly successful for its approach towards design. This
piece of writing will investigate the ideas and concepts surrounding the Bauhaus
and how it recognized the deep-seated relationship between art and craft, which
led to its reform of educational practices. The reconciliation of art and craft will
be carefully analyzed, and how it led to its conception as a holistic entity where
neither one is independent of the other, which would eventually manifest itself in
the form of building. Through this, a strong notion suggesting that ‘architecture
is ultimately the mother of all creative thinking’ re-evaluates the relationship of
architecture among other art forms.

The Bauhaus was established in 1919 by Walter Gropius in Weimar,

Germany. Bearing in mind that this was a time of post industrial revolution as
well as the first world war, many artisans were boycotted for an embrace of the
rationalized and cheaper goods from production line manufacturing. Recovering
from a period of creative drought due to the war, culture by and for the people
had become a desperate need, even more so than any other cultural
movements from before. Also, within a highly nationalistic climate, the search
began for a stylistic language that would complement Germany’s worldwide
industrial reputation. The gap was not just between fine arts and applied arts but
also the application for the industries of mass production. Through the founding
of the German Werkbund, with the inclusion of Walter Gropius, a marriage of art
and industry was resolved as the solution for Germany’s future. The key to
revitalization of the art industry was seen to lie in the revision of educational and
training policies.1 The Bauhaus was seen as the solution that would solve the
problems of these criteria through a drastic change in art education. It started
with a clear goal to reconcile art with craft, which later graduated towards
considerations suited to industrial requirements. For the purposes of this
writing, focus and priority will be given to art and craft though acknowledging
the importance of industrial applications that were realized through the
Bauhaus.

Image 1: The Bauhaus Manifesto by Walter Gropius2

The early philosophies of the Bauhaus are summarized in its Manifesto

and Program (1919) by Gropius. In his short pamphlet, he emphasizes the
isolation of all art forms and the need for revival that can only be brought about
through cooperative effort of all craftsmen to materialize this dream. He implores
for a reunification of all fields of creative study that would give rise to a new
architecture. In the manifesto, Gropius envisions a utopian craft guild that would

                                                                                                               
1  Magdalena  Droste,  Bauhaus  1919-­‐1933  (Berlin:  Bauhaus-­‐Archiv  Museum  fur  Gestaltung,  1993),  10.  
2  Droste,  “Walter  Gropius:  Bauhaus  Manifesto  and  Program  with  opening  woodcut  by  Lyonel  

Feininger,  1919”.  
combine architecture, sculpture, and painting into a single creative expression.
The Bauhaus broke down the hierarchy which had divided the “fine” from the
“applied” arts and differentiated between what can be taught (technique) and
what cannot (creative invention).3 Gropius believed that the fine arts had begun
to decline as long ago as the Renaissance when their traditional links with the
crafts became loosened as the painters and sculptors, seeking enhanced status,
argued that their skills were superior to those of the artisans.4 The self-gratifying
need to make it to the top of the pecking order has creating a chasm between
artists and the artisans, allowing the rift to handicap them, and this was the case
for all fields of creative practice. The Bauhaus aimed to demolish these ‘barriers’
in order to forge a “new guild of craftsman”5 that were free from all preconceived
creative thought and through cooperation would flourish once again. The school
sought to restore the idea of the fundamental unity underlying all branches of
design and to create type-forms that would meet all technical, aesthetic and
commercial demands.6

The utopian ideals of the Bauhaus were not constrained within the realms
of architecture; this is synonymous with the concept of reimagining the material
world to reflect the unity of all the arts. Gropius states that the tool of the spirit
of yesterday was the “academy” which had shut artists off from the world of
industry and handicraft, and many have been misled by the fallacy of art as a
profession mastered by study, but in actual fact, cannot be taught and learned –
emphasizing the necessity of manual dexterity and thorough knowledge through
craft.7 This ambition of synergizing all aspects of creative activity within the
Bauhaus informs the academic structure of the institution that required for a
reformative approach towards all activities surrounding creative education. In

                                                                                                               
3  Herbert  Bayer,  Ise  Gropius  and  Walter  Gropius,  Bauhaus  1919  –  1928  (Boston:  Charles  T.  Branford  

Company,  1959),  1.  

4  Frank  Whitford,  The  Bauhaus:  Masters  &  Students  by  Themselves  (UK:  Conran  Octopus,  1992),  32.  
5  Whitford,  The  Bauhaus:  Masters  &  Students  by  Themselves,  38.  
6  Gillian  Naylor,  The  Bauhaus  (London:  Studio  Vista  Limited,  1968),  7.  
7  Herbert  Bayer,  Ise  Gropius  and  Walter  Gropius,  Bauhaus  1919  –  1928  (NY:  Arno  Press,  1938),  21.  
order to produce a new guild of craftsman, existing practices within creative
education had to be abandoned.

Gropius’ main principle of creative education centered around the

individual’s capacities to grasp life as a whole, a single cosmic entity, and also
to resolve the problems between imaginative design and technical proficiency8,
free from preconceived orders and standards from the past century. In order to
provide for a smooth transition from 19th Century into 20th Century attitudes,
Gropius enlisted the help of Avant Garde artists such as Feininger, Klee,
Kandinsky and Moholy-Nagy; it was their function to create and stimulate the
creative process; and their attitudes to shape, colour, space and form had a
profound influence on the works of the Bauhaus.9

Image 2: Thistle, by Gunta Stolzl10 Image 3: Itten’s Colour Star11

(Itten’s Vorkurs)

The academics selected by Gropius were critical in informing the minds

of student designers. One influential academic was Johannes Itten, who laid the
foundations of first principles of design through the preliminary course, involving
himself with major themes such as studies on nature, composition and colour

                                                                                                               
8  Walter  Gropius,  The  New  Architecture  and  The  Bauhaus  (London:  Faber  and  Faber  Ltd,  1965),  52.  
9  Gillian  Naylor,  The  Bauhaus,  7.  
10  Magdalena  Droste,  Bauhaus,  31.  
11  Johannes  Itten,  The  Elements  of  Colour  (Germany:  Studenausgabe,  1961)  
theory. Itten had a profound influence on the students and he sought to aim his
teaching at the inner being, where students were to find their own rhythm and
develop a well-tuned personality. 12 This contrasted greatly with conventional
teaching practices where most preliminary students were immersed in the
studies and copying of precedent works. Other artists such as Paul Klee and
Wassily Kadinsky also conducted studio courses aligned with the pedagogical
practices of the Bauhaus, each contributing to the goals of the institution.13 The
theoretical learning was complemented with hands-on practices that took place
in workshops. Placing workshops at the center of the curriculum, Gropius
brought students out of the academic studio into a process of making things.14
Each workshop, being led by a master craftsman and fine artist eventually
sought to blur the distinction between fine-arts and applied-arts.

Image 4: The Curriculum15

The Bauhaus curriculum starts with a ‘preliminary stage’ that engages

with elementary instructions of form combined with practical experiments for
beginners. This preliminary stage immersed the students, who came from a
diverse range of social and educational backgrounds, in the study of materials,
                                                                                                               
12  Magdalena  Droste,  Bauhaus  (Italy:  Bauhaus-­‐Archiv,  2002),  31.  
13  Rainer  K.  Wick,  Gabriele  Diana  Grawe,  Teaching  at  the  Bauhaus  (USA:  Distributed  Art  Pub  

Incorporated,  2000),  13.  

14  Barry  Bergdoll,  Leah  Dickerman,  Bauhaus:  Workshops  for  Modernity  (New  York:  The  Museum  of  

Modern  Art,  2009),  14.  

15  Bayer,  Gropius,  Gropius,  Bauhaus  1919  –  1928,  23.  
color theory, and formal relationships in preparation for more specialized
studies. Followed by this were ‘instructions in form and craft’ and finally
‘instructions in architecture’. This was a phase that would ‘scrape away’ all
preconceptions where students learnt all elements of art, before engaging with
the building. For most of the course, students were continuously exposed to
practical and theoretical studies simultaneously, focusing on material
fundamentals and the basic laws of design, shunning away from any particular
stylistic movement. The goal was to rid the new generation architects of
academic estheticism and narrow conventions, and to reconnect them to
modern methods and materials.16 After three years of workshop activities the
student took the journeyman’s examination in his field, and also an examination
in design capabilities before the Bauhaus faculty in order to obtain a diploma
from the Bauhaus; only at this point could the candidate proceed to the study of
buildings.17 This is strongly indicative of how architecture was perceived and its
supremacy over the other arts, which will later be discussed further.

The fundamental difference between the Bauhaus and the other

contemporary art schools lies in its emphasis on the methods of creative
approach.18 While other art schools trained their students through precedent
forms, the Bauhaus encouraged an objective education in design where the
institution as a whole collaborated, each contributing from various aspects of
creative thinking. The Bauhaus exposed its students to a myriad of workshops
ranging from pottery, to carpentry, to metal-works etc. It is the corporate
approach to design and architecture which implies teamwork, standardization
and modular coordination that Gropius was trying to convey at the Bauhaus –
for him, the medieval cathedral epitomized such an approach with architect,
wood carvers, stone carvers, stone carvers and masons all working together to

                                                                                                               
16  Bayer,  Gropius,  Gropius,  Bauhaus  1919  –  1928,  27.  
17  Reginald  Isaacs,  Gropius:  An  Illustrated  Biography  of  the  Creator  of  the  Bauhaus  (USA:  Bulfinch  

Press,  1983),  71    

18  Bayer,  Gropius,  Gropius,  Bauhaus  1919  –  1928,  40.  
achieve a corporate vision19 (image 1). The concept of ‘collaboration’ is further
emphasized with other activities surrounding the Bauhaus – ‘Bauhaus evenings’
was a key aspect of the extra curricular activities that served as a crucial link
between the Bauhaus and the community, through lectures, concerts, festivals
and dance recitals. 20 This exchange between the institution and community
strengthens the designers’ capacity to produce designs that were practical and
functional according to social and cultural dynamics, in contrast to the
‘disconnect’ that many artists and artisans were facing. The bilateral relationship
between institution and community not only informs the designers, but also the
communities’ appreciation and acceptance for ‘Bauhaus art’. In a sense,
Bauhaus practices were current with the times – this does not suggest a
disregard for historical practices and antiquity, but rather, prioritizing the times
in which they lived in.

In contrast with conventional pedagogical practices such as that of the

Beaux Arts tradition in the 19th century, the students at the Bauhaus begin from
fundamentals within all aspects of design. Also, infusing studios with workshop
practices, further affirms one’s understanding of the basics according to each
individual’s learning and interpretation. Frustrated with the emphasis on
perfecting form and the focus on drawing (i.e. analytiques informing building
character in the Beaux Arts) that came with the professionalization of architects,
which began in the Renaissance but reached its height in the 19th century,
architects had begun by the end of that century to look for ways to make their
work more responsive to life around them. Along with artists of the time, those
architects who wanted to create a modern architecture tested ways to escape
rigid attention to a prescribed set of standards and forms.21 This greatly informs
the need of the times, that architects themselves became aware of the rigidity
that came with conventional practices. It became apparent that architecture had
                                                                                                               
19  Gillian  Naylor,  The  Bauhaus,  44.  
20  Bayer,  Gropius,  Gropius,  Bauhaus  1919  –  1928,  84.  
21  Kathleen  James-­‐Chakraborty,  Bauhaus  Culture  (London:  University  of  Minnesota  Press,  2006),  63.  
to break away from those of the old, and become subject to the logical product
of the intellectual, social and technical conditions of the age.22 No longer could
architecture be studied and practiced in isolation; it was imperative of it to adopt
and embrace all peripheral disciplines that informed and shaped the society of
the times.

The Bauhaus forged a new identity for architecture – not an independent

art discipline in itself, but one that draws on multiple disciplines requiring for
both theoretical and practical understanding. Gropius, through the Bauhaus,
elevated architecture to the highest kind of art form, free from restrictions. From
the fact that the Bauhaus did not actually have an architecture department until
1927, we can infer that Gropius saw all art forms ultimately leading to its
realization within that of a building. Image 4 (The Curriculum) characterizes the
institute’s system of priorities, and is representative of how all forms of creative
activity revolve around a central core – building. It is indicative of architecture’s
superiority over the other art forms, and each art form only being a contributing
factor that will produce a building through collaboration. Walter Gropius
declared the unification of art and craft through the “Bauhaus Manifesto and
Program 1919” in his highly emotive declaration of principle where “The ultimate
aim of all creative activity is the building!” 23 Gropius strongly believed that
architecture was supreme among the visual arts because a building ideally
achieves a synthesis of them all: painting and sculpture as well as all the other
crafts.24

                                                                                                               
22  Gropius,  The  New  Architecture  and  The  Bauhaus,  20.  
23  Magdalena  Droste,  Bauhaus  1919  –  1933,  10.  
24  Frank  Whitford,  The  Bauhaus:  Masters  &  Students  by  Themselves  (UK:  Conran  Octopus,  1992),  32.  
 References:
• Bayer, Herbert, Ise Gropius, and Walter Gropius. Bauhaus 1919 – 1928. Boston: Charles
T. Branford Company, 1959.

• Bayer, Herbert, Ise Gropius, and Walter Gropius. Bauhaus 1919 – 1928. New York: Arno
Press, 1938.

• Bergdoll, Barry, and Leah Dickerman. Bauhaus: Workshops for Modernity. New York:
The Museum of Modern Art, 2009.

• Droste, Magdalena. Bauhaus 1919 – 1933. Berlin: Bauhaus-Archiv Museum fur

Gestaltung, 1993.

• Droste, Magdalena. Bauhaus. Italy: Bauhaus-Archiv, 2002.

• Gropius, Walter. The New Architecture and The Bauhaus. London: Faber and Faber Ltd,
1965.

• Isaacs, Reginald. Gropius: An Illustrated Biography of the Creator of the Bauhaus. USA:
Bulfinch Press, 1983.

• Itten, Johannes. The Elements of Colour. Germany: Studenausgabe, 1961.

• James-Chakraborty, Kathleen. Bauhaus Culture. London: University of Minnesota Press,

2006

• K. Wick, Rainer, and Gabriele Diana Grawe. Teaching at the Bauhaus. USA: Distributed
Art Pub Incorporated, 2000.

• Naylor, Gillian. The Bauhaus. London: Studio Vista Limited, 1968.

• Whitford, Frank. The Bauhaus: Masters & Students by Themselves. UK: Conran
Octopus, 1992.

View publication stats