Summary On Adolf Loos: Ornament and Crime

The 1908 essay Ornament and Crime by Adolf Loos is a collection of contradictory,
hysterical, ill-conceived rants that were fomented by a sullen elitist. Loos implores the
reader to cast off the wicked ways of the old and take up the fight for a new modern and
more civilized era-an era that pictures the human race at its zenith with no
ornamentation whatsoever. Although he was there to ride the wave of the Modernist
Movement his essay decrying the ornament of the past can best be described as a
reflection of a troubled man. Instead of putting forth new ideas he directs the reader to
look with derision on other ones. Ornament and Crime has no continuity and is, in large
part, simply opinions with little, no or bizarre base in facts.

Loose writes of a civilization where, "Men had gone far enough for ornament no longer
to arouse feelings of pleasure in them," of a place where "if there were no ornament at
all man would only have to work four hours instead of eight," and of a place where
people say, "'Thank God,'" when there's a fire, "'now there will be work for people to do
again.'" Loos could not have been more wrong about the future of art, architecture and
human civilization. Ornamentation is not needless expression and is indeed an integral
part of modern civilization that cannot be eliminated.

The human embryo goes through the whole history of animal evolution in its mother's
womb, and a newborn child has the sensory impressions of a puppy. His childhood
takes him through the stages of human progress; at the age of two he is a Papuan
savage, at four he has caught up with the Teutonic tribesmen. At six he is level with
Socrates, and at eight with Voltaire. For at this age he learns to distinguish violet, the
colour that the eighteenth century first discovered - before that violets were blue and
tyrion was red. Physicists can already point to colours they have named, but that only
later generations will be able to distinguish.

At age two 'human' is like a Papuan, a dark-skinned person from what is now Papua
New Guinea, an evolutionary link just above a dog. Just able to walk on two legs and
form rudimentary words but apparently unable to achieve full human status. Although
racism was and still is all too common, science had fully blossomed by 1908 and such
concepts as the theory of evolution had already been around for over 50 years.
At age four, Loos writes, people are like the barbarians from the north that ancient Rome
fought nearly two millennia ago-heathen savages.
 Then, quite unexpectedly there is a great leap in learning; a six-year-old is able to
philosophize on the level of Socrates. Loos then takes one of many fantastic swerves
from logic and declares that at the 'age of Voltaire' a child is finally able to distinguish
subtleties in the color wheel.

After Loos interprets the amoral human embryo and the tattooed man, he launches into
the origins of art and ornament. "All art is erotic." Loos states. The "first artistic act" was
performed to rid oneself of surplus energy. He compares the horizontal dash with a
reclining woman and the vertical dash with a man penetrating her, concluding that the
first ornament to be born was the cross, which was erotic in origin. Though ancient
cross symbols have been seen as phallic symbols the fact that he sees only eroticism in
the simple lines is bizarre in a truly Freudian way. Loos also neglects to elaborate on the
other, probably older symbol, the circle. This reflects on his view of the profane, which is
his main point, apparently, in the first section of the essay. He seems incapable of
thinking that images of reproduction were not eroticism but 'merely' represented life. His
next argument for ornament as a crime is by using bathroom graffiti and the drawings of
young children as examples of art. Back in Vienna, Loos was confronted with a
floundering empire that dwelled on old architectural styles that promoted flourishes and
grand façades. He responded by designing the Café Museum in 1899. Café Museum
was stark for the time but by no means free of ornament-the ornament had just become
more streamlined. Loos blames the stagnant attitudes, the "ornament disease" on the
state, which was the centuries old Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Had he said, "How can so much wealth and effort go into a theatre when people are
starving?" That is an argument for ornament being a crime. Women giving birth to
children on the street and not being cared for at the expense of some filigree, that could
be argued to be criminal. The people with plenty spend their time shirking their duty to
their fellow human beings; that could be considered criminal.

Of the question Is Ornament a Crime? I will retort by asking my own questions. I must
answer 'no' to these questions and simply say that ornamentation is the flower of
humankind, a necessary expression for all civilizations that cannot and will not be
eliminated while there is still a creative spark in us. There are a multitude of images that
could be displayed as examples of ornament that could be viewed as good or bad.
Humanity has created a myriad of expressions since self-realization happened. The
expression itself is not the point, it could be any expression at any point in the history of
mankind.