NOTE TO USERS
This reproduction is the best 'copy available
UMr
ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN CULTURATION mm: GUTEELIED SEMPER AND On0WAGNER
C. Brent Epp
Graduate Program in Art History
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Werof Arts
Faculty of Graduate Studies The UiÜversity of Western Ontario London, Ontario Augusf 1999
O C.Brent Epp 1999 Natlonal tibrary Bibliothèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services senrices bibliographiques 395 wetrigmt smm 395. nie wciui~gtoc~ OttawaON KIAW OitawaûN KIAONQ Canada Canada
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distntbute or seIl reproduire, prêter, distncbuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts £tom it Ni la thèse ai des extraits substantiels may be printed or othenvise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Through an -on ofGotdEed Semper's Art History Museum (Kimsthistorisches Museum) in Vi- and andous ofOtto Wagner's works, this thesis explores the emer&ence of architectural modemkm in Vie- Rather than identifjring a ~eKa&ed "moderm'sm," 1examine the materiai and discursive practices of Semper and Wagner as stnitegïes almed at negotiating the intensts of cuitmal producers with those holding other politid interests in Autria and Vienna The transition nom bistoncism to modem-sm, and all the difficulties in understandùg tbis p*odwith these terms. can more propedy be understood in reiatîon to the la~gershifts Ïn power ttist occuned as Vienna grew as an uhncentre- Semper d Wagaer each 6edthe* interests as cultural producers in the balance ofpower at Minent moment* ThW works can be seen to reproduce this balance of power in and tbrough cuitrirally stmctioned, inban architectural fom
ICeywords
Architecture, Urban Studies, Saciology of- Gottfried Semper, Otto Wagner, Vienna r wish to thank my supeirvlsupeirvlsor,Bridget Elüott, for her generous patience .ad advice. Table of Contents
page
Abstmct and Keywords Acknowledgements Table of Contents List of Plates List of Appendices
Introduction Part 1 Gottfried Semper: Siting Cultural Legitïmacy 1. Austnan Art Hïstory and Semper's Theory 2. The Art History Museum Part II 3. Otto Wagner: Confionting Urban Society Conclusion: Thinlang with Histones of Practice Bibiiography Plates Appendices Vita View fiom Karlslorche ofthe Glacis. A1tand St Stephan's cathedral,
Plans of Vienna, 1857 and 1887. Royal Znsti*tute of British Architects, Transadiom. S.S. 4 (1888).
Rïngstrasse, showing the ParIiament, Rathaus, University, and (Hof)burg Theater, c- 1888.
Gottfkied Semper and Car1 von Hasenauer, bird'seye perspective of the Naîurai and Art Hïstory Muse- aud expanded Hofburg (together formuig the Ka&erfonan), 1869.
Hemgasse, near the Hofburg with the Palais Lichtenstein, c. 19 1 1.
GoWed Semper, penpective of the Zwinger courtyard with the Art Gallery and Hoftheater, 11842.
Christian Gottlob Hammer, north side of the Dresden HoAheater (18354, GottiEed Semper, architect), waterc010w, c. 1845.
Gottfried Semper and Car1 von Hasemuer, view of the Art History Museum, Viema, 1869-91. From ZeischijZfur Bildeiicie Km,1892.
GoeedSemper and Car1 von Hasenauer, Art Aitstory Museum, 1896-9 1. Entran~e~Vili011.
Gottfried Semper and Cdvon Hasenauer, Arî History Mm, 1896-9 1. Right corner pvilion
Official annomcement of the Ringstrasse plan, 1860.
Theophii Hansen, design for the Hofinuseen, cornpetition project, 1867.
Heinrich Ferstel, design for the HofÎnuseen, competition project, 1867.
Moritz Ldhr, design for the Hofinuseen, competition project, second stage, 1867.
Cari von Hasenauet, design for the Hofinuseen, cornpetition pmj- 1867. Gottfki Semper, preIimmary plan for the HoAheaterf hesden, with wtltlection to Zwhger, 1835-
Goeed Semper, pIiminary perspective ofthe HoAheater, Dresd~resdea, 1835-
Gotmed Semper, plan of the Zwinger courtyard with the Art Gailery located as an extension of the east wing 1841.
Rudoif von Alt, Kaïserforum,witercolour, LâfZ
Girard and Rehlander, coloured drawlng of the Kaiserforum for the Worfd Exhiiition of 1873-
T. MayerhoEer, KUllSfhistoriscbes Museum, Lithograph, c. 1900.
ûtto Wagner* Miethaus. Schottenring 23,1880.
Otto Wagner, Miethaus, Rathausstrasse 3,188 1-
ûtto Wagner* Miethaus, Stadiongasse 6 & 8, 1883.
Otto Wagner, Miethaus, Stadiongasse 6 & 8, vestibule, 1883.
Otto Wagner, Miethaus, Stadiongasse 6 & 8, ground plan of& br7 1883,
Otto Wagner, Fespfutz vor dmBwgthore, drawing for the festival celebrating the emperor's dver wedding anniversaryt 1879. otto Wagoer, entry Baldachin for Princess Stephanie ofBelgiimi. 188 1.
Otto Wagner, Ho~villionon the Wienîabïe of the Stadtbhnear Schiznbrunn, l896fW-
Otto Wagner, nrSt Vina Wagner, Hütteldorf, 1888.
ûtto Wagner, detail of Majolikahaus, Linke Wienzeile 40, haidesign, 1898,
Otto Wagner, Vienna, an example of big city regdation divided into districts by ring and radial roads, I91 1. Otto Wagnert site plan ofthe projected tweaty-sec~nd-ct of Vie~1118,1911.
Otto Wagner, T,ew of the Lufkntnm (open air centre) of the fhre twenty-second district of Vienaa, 1911.
Otto Wagner, PostsperLasse (Postal Sa* Bank), Vienna, 1904-06. Main entrante-
Otto Wagner, Lupus Sanatorium, Stiftung 19 10-13. Main entrancece
Otto Wagner, mawing for the Monument to Kultur in fiont of the proposed Kaiser FmJosef Stadt Museum, 1909.
Otto Wagner, perspective view of Kaiser Fnmz-Joseph Stadt Museum, main building with reception pavjlion, 1903.
Otto Wagner, -*ve view of the Karlskirche and Kaiser Fm-Joseph Stadt Museum on the Karlsplaîz, 1903.
Otto Wagner, perspective viewof the Ferdinandsbrücke, first competition design, 1905.
ûtto Wagner, perspective view of the Ferdiriandsisrücke, bridge pier with column and Stadtbahn station gailery, 1896.
Detail of plate 44. List of Appendku
Appendix 1: Iconography ofthe Art History Museum Viemm
Appendix 2: Permissions and Copyright Act, -on 29. 180
Copyright Act, Section 29: Fair Dealinp. 181
Permission for repmductiom KunsthbtonSChes Museum, Wien 182
Permission for reproduction: Institut fin Geschichte und Theorie der Architektur, Semper Archiv, EM-Zurich, 183 Introduction
One of the diffrculties of studying modemism as an historical phenornemm is that for ail the emphasis it places on progres, the new, and breaks wïth the pas?, it remains difficult to descrii when exactly it began As such it is dso di811cdt to talk about some practices as fiaing entirely into the category of modemïsrn, when it is a category wnstantly king redefïned by competlng discourses that give it various shapes- The phenomewn of the emergence of modemism in Vienna is the porrticdar subject of Car1 Schorske's book Fin-deSide Vienncr, whkh has becorne a landmark for subsequent literature on the perïod in Vie- incladùig minemllieAs AUen Janik notes, Schorske's book provided a working paradgm around which other works have crystallized (4). in other words, imtead of providing a series of narratives of loosely cormecteci even& as did other earlier works on Vienne, Schorske's book helped explain the problem of why Viemese modemkm appeareà ui the shape that it did The thesis diat organkes Fin-deSiècte VYiemneeds to be demihere in some detail. Schorske sees a «>mmon shiA towards an ahistorical culture stemming fiom a crisis in nuieteenth-centmy Iiberal cultureeThe crisis can be seen as the result of a series ofevents. h 1848 politicai upheaval spread across Europe, but in Austria, revolutionary activities were short-lived Despite a few temporary victories liberalism was u~tGnate1y defeated by imperid forces. By 1860, a co13Stitutid regime was put in place, however, not on the strength of A-~~ll iiism,but instead more or less by deniutf at the han& of extemal politicai forces. in the 1860s and 1WOs, while the liberas shared their power with the aristocracy, their &ai bewas relatively small, beuig made up pharily of middleclass Germaas and German Jews of the inban centres. Theu growth increased, however, and by the 1880% Liberal hegemony was king challengeci by various emerging groups: amoag them, anti-Semitic ChrisbsbanSocials and PanGennans, socialists and Slavic natioaalists. The strongest political organization among these groups, at lest in Vienna., was the Christian Social party, up until 1907 a strictly municipal party- Its platform coosisted of strongiy Catholic clericaiism and municipal socialism. Its popdarity was greatest among the petite bourgeoisie who had elected both the par& and elected h mayorai candidate Karl Lueger in 1895. Due to resistance on a number of fionts, Lueger was not ratifIed as mayor until two years later in 1897. The Christian Socials represented "al1 that was anathema to classical Ii'beraiism" (6). We the breakdown of the hird stronghold in public office was nrst felt in the municipal goverriment, by 1900 the likrals were largely defated on the parliamentary Eont by a number of emergïng demmas movements: -stian, d-Semitic, sociaIïst, and natiosali* (5-6)- The political events ofthe last haE ofthe nineteentb centary made themseIves Mt on a culairal Ievel. Schorske identifies two groups of values that were the ideritance of this threatened ii'beral culture- The fïrst is a mord and scientik cultrire wfrich Schorske roughly equates with "garden varÏety Victm-&smn (6). Its ts'butes were the deof law, socidorder, mind over body7 socid pgress tbn,ugb science, education and hard work Despite the fàct thet tbese dues&ied the iegal, educatiod and econornic systems in Austn-a, they were not what gave the "Austri= ujpxdddle class* its uniquely aesthetic cuiture- Associated with the educated bourgeoisie, this aesthetic . - cultare meant a mqttWyto the Me of art on a clas level, and a &vSty to psychic states on an individual 1eveI (6-7). Wbat Schorske descri'bes is a cultural backgmumi that will h5IÏtat-ethe "b& he is about to identify- He Wfites, '%y 1900, the usuai moralistic eutMe of the European bourgeoisie was in Adoveriaid and undermineci by an amoral GejùhLFRu/haS7(7). This aui be explained by a condition that wes unique to Austria: that the bourgeoisie "did not succeed in either destroying or fbliy frising with the aristocracs and because of its weakness, it remained dependant upon and deeply loyal to the emperoi' (7). This caused an assimilationist thrust on the part of the bourgeoisie toward the arist~.which in Schorske's eyes was strengthened by the assùnilationist thnist of the signiscant and prosperous Jewish element in vienaal Kowever. direct social sssimilation for the bourgeoisie was rare, and the route thus taken was via culturetureIust as there was a social gap between the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy there was also a gap between their respective cultural traditions. The traditional culture of both bourgeois and Jew is considerd by Schorske to be Iegalistic and puritanid, Wethe traditional culture of the aristocracy in Austria, unWre tbat ofthe German north, was a "profoundly Catholic . . . sensuws and plastic culture" where nature was seen as a joy and divine grace, instead of something to be ordered By divine law (7). ThÏs primarily aesthetic' and, in
lschorske uses the tenns "bourgeoisie" and Whe li'berals'' rather interchaageably. The role of the Jewish contribution to Viennese cuiture is certainly great, and is dius of prime importance in any theorization of the emergence of speciflcally Viennese mOdeRllSm, Janik has noted the importance ofstudies of Vienna's Jews to the chdlenging and shaping of paradigms in this area. In pacti~ular,he cites Steven Beiler7sVienna md the Jmsas addresshg some of Schorske's oversights. See Janik 4. particular, Baroque culture hacl its grratest achievemem~in the applied and perfomiing arts. This then kamethe ideai to which the A-an bourgeoisie aspired (7). For the bourgeoisie, two avenues toward assimilafion exîstal, accordmg to Schorske. The fiist. which is the focus of my resean:h, is the urben nconstniction of VienThis form of assimilation was prirnarily mirnetic: the liberal ruîers "trieci to design their way ùito a history, a pedigree, with grandiose bddi.ngs inspired by a Gothïc, Reessance7 or Baroque past tbt was not their own" (8). According to Sch&ey the second avenue was more important than the bi1iIdiag spree- It wes the patronage of the perfiorming arts which had a forenmner in the Vieana folk theatre- What this patronage meant was that "mthe 1890s heroes ofthe upper-middle class wa m, longer politid leaders, but actors, artists, and cnticsn (8). The nnal phase of this process of cultural change sees the "templeof art" that had flln&ond as a surrogate fom of asmùlation mutate into an escape, a refuge fiom an "in-ingly threatening political reality" (8). This, says Schorske, was not oniy a fom of withdrawai for the artists themselves but for a whoIe class of Viennese. Thus the bourgeoisie tumed toward the sort of akstoncal cultural forms tbat Schorske sees as a chatacteristic fmof modemism- Schorske predicates his argument of an ahistoncal on the very modmua rhetoric that espouseci a decided break with the histoncist tradition- At the same they however, he explains that the transition fiom historicism to modemism qmmed a number of years and thaf in some ways histoncism couid be comprtile with modemism. In a later essay, Schorske descnbes this compati'bility as an bistorical-modem synthesis: an attempt to combine historical architectural forms with the modern demands ofurbaniEation ("PublicScene"). It had been criticized in two very different ways by two represeatatives of the "fkt genemtiony7of architectural crïticism: CamiUo Si*, who favoured the histoncist primacy of ^art," and Otto Wagner, who favoured the modernist primacy of Wty"(the two critics and hanplmers that Schorske examùed in his chapter on urban modembn in Fin-de-Siècle Vienna). The Cntics of the nrst generation worked within the parameters of the historid-modern synthesis: Sitte by inserting the historidy artistic square into the modem urban wfiole; Wagner by considering the raban wble as an artistic monument- For the second genemtion, only the rejection of the entire historid-modem synthesis muid serve the goal of 'auth" and c%onestyesty"This is the generation ofdie Jimgen (the young ows) and it was divideci into two camps: the aesfhetes and the ethicists. Following Schorske's fin-de-siècle thesis of the tum away from political Me, boboth of these groups were more concerned wïth the psyche than with society (Tublic Scenen 16 1). They were comprised of the Secessionist architects and Werkstatte designers in the aesthete camp, and ofthe architect Adolf Loos and literary critic Karl Kraus in the ethi& camp- By the theof this yoimger generabon, incIodùig the "encapsulPtiag" escapist mhitecnnat of the Secessionists and the polemics agaiast oniamentation in the rÏgomusiy ccpracticaln architechue of Loos, any cornedon with ninet- historicism had been
The notion of a perïoà of architectural Cnticism that worked within the parameters of compatibility (the '%ntgenerationn) is considered by Schorslce as merely a stage in his historical tmjectory-I beiieve that the dpmïcs ofthis mod am more complex thSchomke dows, an4 by examinhg t closer, 1hope to teconsider the paradigmheusestod~kitWhatneedst0beemphaSizedaboutthisparadigm:kthat anîïthetical movernents One of my centrai arguments is that the opposition between histoncism and modernism is a Wse one. That is to Say, that the tams in which the opposition is made are fomded in a discourse of art that posits pro- without any reference to the grounds on which an entire field ofartistic production is possible. This argument is by no means original; the notion of architectural modernism supaseding elements, or, at the very Ieast, a process of inUoducing ornament that is CLappr~priateto the age," has, for some tirne, been derreevaluation? By exploring this Yâlse" opposition, 1 intend to show the ways in which Viennese histoncism and modernism were closely -ed with a deeply contesteci cultural plitics that afEected the very image and spatial oragnization of the ci* The second point oPSchorske's that I want to take up is the way he fonnuiates cultural change as a reaction to a given poiiticai situation. This reaction can only be desmias psychological. Why would an amoral GefiihlskuItur be beüer than a le@ and puritanid one? Schorske ody provides mersin psychological tenns, and in particda., in Fre- ones He coasistently phrases the %volt" of die Jungen in ternis of a symbolic pat~icide.~Furthemore, alî change is placed squarely in the han& ofa single class. Rather thau seeking a model for change in a sort of linear progression that
2The Secessionists' motto, which is written above the entrante to their exhiiition house, is 'To the age its art, To art its fkedom," Two classic statements ofmodemkt architecturai histoxy are given by Pevsner and Giedion For a revision see, for example, Frampton. 3~chorskealso examines Fdsown relationship to his -y" with respect to his belated appointment to the faculty at the University of Viema, Fni-de-Siècle 18 1-207. stretches all the way back to the Coimterdodon,1 am willùig to forego causal explanations. Iastesd, 1am interest& in the way in which powerwas redistfliuted in social political and cul- fields In this formative phase of modefillkn, discourses thet supported shifts in power emcrged over a -od of thne. This is someihulg that Schorske clearly recognizes7notùig thet the transition fiom nbeteenfh-century historicism to twentieth-centmy modemkm was a protracted one, spaaning an entire gweratiot~, Criticisms of both Schotskeysbistorical methodology and his rdtingWure of liberalismyyparadip bave appeared sincc the publication of Fin-ce-Siècle Viema in 1980.1 have already rnentioned some of my challenges to Schorske's model-However, 1 wili confinue to refer to his paradigm because, firrf the pmblems it rawS continue to be central to debates on Viennese cuiture and politics, and, second, because architectural disçussions in prticuiar have made hardly any inroeds &O this terrain John Ebyer's political bistory of the transition from Li- to Christian Social power (Politiixi Radicafim)challenges Schorske's vague psycbologicai notion of IibGralism's collapse by demonstrating how much the path to "mas po~ticsY'was paved by the liberalsaown "illiberali-" especially in terms of their efforts to mnnitain a Limited fhncbise(Jan& 9). Janik concludes that the CCfailureof Ii'befism'' thesis canwt sufticiently accomt for the culturai production of those moâefaists who were aïtical of m-ty (e-g. Loos, Kraus). Rather than advancing his "critical modemid' pInadigm as a repIacement for Schorske's, Janik argues that the two need to be considend togeth (22-3). This conclusion demonstrates the wed to resolve Schorske's essentially causal model, &ch daims that a brdyahistorical culture resulted hmsocial and political developments, and Janik's cornter-proposai tbat cultural production had a docidedly active dein those developrnents as a reaction to, and aïtique of, modernity- Mary Gluck has cogently argued the need to thuiL beyond these opposing views in order to work outside the Vienna 1900 paradigm (correctly RcognUed, 1tbk, as a single paradi-gm that incorporates both aesthetic modernism and cultural crïticism-in other words, the two "paradigms" tbat Janik suggests, despite their "incompati'bility," ndto beea considered togethefi). She idemines this division as one between intellectd historians (e.g Schorske) %ho have tended to be liberal in orieneon [and] for whom the collective domain of popular culture appeared both incoherent and unintegratable within the aesthetic perspective," and histonm ofpopular culture, who "have tended to be critics
4~anilcindeed fkiters when it cornes to descniing the reiatiomhip beîween the two
"Cparadigms,77for he notes the condition given by Kuhn tbt pinadigms- are "incommensurable and incompatible," 22. of h'beral individU81ism [aad] for whom high art remained the expression of elite attitudes thar served to legitunete die social ode? (221-22). As it is my aim to mink beyond these oppositions, as Gluck recommends, 1 SM dari@ some of my rnethodoIo~C8Lassumpoions and terminoIogy- 1 have chosen to use some of Pierre Bourdieu's te-, such as field and capital, and to work with his theory because 1feel it accomts for the cornplex social pocesses involved in cultural production The perceiveci shift fkom histoncism to modemism can be better descn'beci in Bourdieu's terms as a stniggte for culhiral Iegitimscy that took uito accotmt changes in power in the social field Boindieu7stheory explaias processes of sociahation in temis of both struchms ofpower and agmts, of ccobjectivestnicturrs and sPbjective constructio~~~''(Procticul Remon 12)- Since 1am trying to stmdy the mcular * - relatiomhip between arctritecture as cu2~a~production attd çonaluati'on, 1 have chosen the tenn culturation to desçn'be its role in that process. Myinterest in social process stems fiom the need (much aegiected in *es on Viennese architecture) to coconsider architecture in relation to irrbanization To bater examine social processes with respect to urbanization, 1 have turned to the field of geogrsphy. Like Bourdieu, David Harvey is also a relational thinlcer (or, as Harvey prefen, dialectical). While his earkwork concentrated on revishg Miux's economic theory to account for the e&cts ofspace on capitalism and vice versa, Harvey's more recent work (Jutzcee)explores how a range of social processes an uivolvad in the constroction ofgeogtaohic space, which both produces and is produced by difference. Harvey's theqis very useful buseit shows how Bourdieu's relational smicnues ofpower can be reprociuced in spsce?
I now wish to tum to the historical and poIitical developnents that led to the reorganization ofviema, the object of rny study- The reorpanization twk place on both a material level, shaped by the demaads placed on it by &toncal forces, and concomitandy on a symbolic level, which idedogidy buttressexi the forces that were instrumentai in reshaping the city and fich ccnanualized"the new organizatioa Since my hope in this adysis is to unwver some of the politid desinvolved for the various social groups that Iived in Vienne, it is worthwbile to fht identify some
5~ourdieuhimselfdiscusses this to a limited extent in Ozdiine of a Ineory ofPracfice. However he is more interested in how temporality is operative in power relations. <)n the relationship between Harvey's and Bourdieu's thinbing, see Gregory 40610. of these as Schorske has done (Finde3Siècle 5). On the O\lfpOsts ofthe AuStf~cHungarian Empire there ernerged a number of donaIiisms, includuig Serbian. Bosnian, Himgaaan and Czech, Vienna, from the mid-nineteenth century m.&became increasingiy a cosmopoLitan centre, attracthgworkers ofaU LlZdionalities in the empire. As noted, the Jewish element in Viemm grew dong with the rniddle-~lasses.At the same time the prosperity ofthe Jewish middIe classes sometimes became an object ofcontempt for the Catholic andior German Viennese- The Christian Sociais' base in the @te bourgeoisie, or Klehbtrigeerr~m,has has nnoted Aati-Semïtism also appeared in the form of pan-Gennani~~~~,which ahstined anti-Slavic ~11.ents.Those who felt that they stood to gain £km a unification with Pnissia, or at 1- hman Am-ad of* Sa.c element, were ofken the Protestant bourgeoisie. The wodring classes ais0 began to organize themselves in the city in the latter part of the nineteenth century. HistoricaUy7Viema had been for a long time a Ren'd'adt7a city of imperid residence, before it became the modem cosmopoLitan metroplis. However, in the micldie ages it had been a B*gerstadt7 a citllens' city reflecting the artisan classes that composed it This medieval chrPacter of the city stilI exists in the very centre of the old city, the Alfsfad,*ch surrounds St Stephan's Cathedral, orïgindly a Romanesque structure with later Gothic additions. The city was fortifïed aad became the seat of Habsburg residence. With the nnaI expulsion ofthe Tmkish threat in 1683, it became deto build oatside the city walls- Thus began Vierma's suburbs (OIsen 58). The glacis, which accounted for a considerable stretch of land sunounding the city's ds,had been made parkiike under the djrection of Joseph II in the 1770s and 1780s Cpl. 11. In 1770 he had grass planted on the glacis; in 1781, he had its footpeihs paved and 2,650 trees planted (Rotenberg 80). The eighteenth centwy saw Vienna flourish economically, dthough more Born the production ofluxiiry goods then hmlongdistance trade or export. Its population increased nom 60,000in 1683 to 180,000 in 1770. The greater part of the increase7*Oh observes, "occuned in the subint>s, whicb by 1779 contained 3,832 houes, three hesthe number to be found in the AItstadt" (64). What this meant was that the city itseiff the Altstadt, remaineci a relatively homogeneous centre for the nobility, while the subiirbs became hcreasingiy hetemgeneous es they grew. They included aristocratie villas7 new msnufBCfUnIIg deve10pments with a new class of rutisans, and older agriculturally-based villages which were qpïcidy becoming engulfed by the niburbaa developments (Olsen 15 1)- This gened character of the city pisteci Mtil 1857, when the city walls were razed Even afteMfarâ, much ofthe eadier social gwgraphy continued to dominate. in genefal one sees a marked &LUie in social prestige as one moves fiom the inner city to the iimer suburbs to the outer subiirbs. However, it was between 1750 and 1850 that the social distance between iniier city and inner suburb was greatest This was reflected in the rem ofthe respective areas (Oisen 151)- Before the d-on of the city wails and the building ofthe Rùigstmse on the giacis, the park that had ban Joseph II's initiatnre became an important put of Viennese Me. Joseph was the popuîar Ehbsburg who brought the Enlightenment to the monarchy. Esdecision to bdda pubIic padc open to ali Viennese was uniiJual for traditionaüy monarchs built parks to ceiebrate Barqeabsolmism. The liberal spirit tbat howwer ironically motivateci tk wnstnicfion of the glacis parlr, was sam pUedThe defeat of Napoleoq and the Congres of Viema saw the begïmÜng of the Mettemich era, a long period of strictiy poIiced consmdsm The Viennese knaw this period as the Vomdn fiterally, Tefore hrlarch," meaning before the revolutionary activities of March 1848). However, despite such the glacis pedr provided an undplace of social intercourse (Rotenberg 86). It was ofien the site of middle ciass oiitùigs, and for maay of the working ciass, it was the ody public @-space open to them The wave of politid tumioil ~CTOSSEurope reached Viema ui 184% and the city wds that once semed to proteci the hmal residence ended up being used agsiaSt it. Those who pruticipated in the +sing used the walls as foxtifications and dmve the imperid fdyhm the city for a number of moaths. It was only wÎth the aid of provincial and Hmgarian amies, led by Windischgr&tzand Jeila6ÏC, tbat the short-lived democracy was defeated and the Hebsburgs ren~nedto the city. The subsequent parliament was appointed with remtionary ministers and a conservative tide swept over Vie- However, economic deveIopmemt progressed contindy in the hends of the growing Bürge~lum,who demanded political recognition Finally, in 186 1, a new constitution, the Febnisry Patenf was achieveâ, establishing a bicameral legislature that govemed the whole empire. The Iower chamber was made up of four categories of eLectors but it did not hclude dl citizensitizensThe aria system, as Jdsn notes, "played a preponderant role in Austnan political Iife before the introduction of ~~ [male] sufnage,," which did not occur untiI 1905 (104). The Patent serveci to continue the old feudal diets while fostering Austro-Ge~llmbureaucratie centralization (JaSzi 104-5). On the munici@ levei, meanwhile, "htra.Biirgerr" wnflict had dïvided politicai recognition into a üueecuria system that gowmed the city of Vienna since it came under its own administration in 1849. The electorate was comprisad of rsicpeying" citizens, but whet this meant in effect was that ody property owning classes were given the vote, since the taxes ofthe popertyIess amSans were cfeditedto their ladlords, tbe weiied Hawhmen, who were a powerful force in Viemese politics and shared the nrst curïa - ** with the industriai bourgeoisie. The sysr~mMer dsmmmwi agsinstaPrOPertY ornes, who were in firt a large number~f~sansaed ShOpEreepers, because it excludeci those who paid less than ten florins in taxes. It also recognized eddollsil criteria, which gave the Viemiese ldligemz considerable repsmtatÏon in the second cda(Boyer, PolificalRadicaIim 15-16). This perhimarked the rise of what Schorske calls the era of hiasceadaacy. However, ït was a asituation fâr Mm unithg the Bürge-, privileged its dominant fiactions of Besitr and InteZIigenz, and, as Boyer cIearly demoIiStfBtes, aJlowed the KleinoUrgertum to mage, &r prolongad exciusion, as a political force at the end of the cenm Itwssthehigheraoflibaalismdbo~isgrowthtbatsawtbegrratest reorpüzation of the city, which was centred around the buMing of the Ringstrasse, the wide boulevard built on the site ofthe giacis- Alnady in the first haif of the nineteenth centiiry the ber city had homecongested- Buildings withh the walîs hed nUed up 85% of its space (Olsen 61). This meant that new residem to the city bnd to be accommodated by a more intensive utilization ofexisting space. Gardens were built over, stories added to buildings, and older smicturrs replaceci with newer taüer ones (Olsen 65). Mdtipledweihg flats were built fkom the late eighteenth century onwards. Despite these initiatives, Vienna's population supersedad the supp1y of housing and a shortage of domestic dwelhgs continueci from bcfore the midc~ntu~yuntil the 1920s (Olsen 69). There were thus a number of reasons for the destniction of the city waiis and the building over the glacis which began in 1857. Fearing the spectre of 1848, the emperor supported the destruction of the Wsas an act ofsecurity, Wite the tact that the military argued that the glacis should be kept to serve its original purposesses6Secondiy, the openkg up ofthe glacis would provide duabIe land for the development of housïng However, the flats that werp built on and around the Ring were primarily middle aud upper-middle class flats and -fore did Little to alleviate the housing shortage. Finally, and most sipnindyfor the symboiic reorgatüdon ofthe city, the Ringstnisse provided space for Unmal offices, museums and monuments. What Vie- lacked in 1857," argues Olsen, '%vas not room for essential and useful fhctiom, but room for pomp and spectacle of its corn the time-wasting riaials of its leisure classes" (69). The Ringstrasse o5cidy opened in 1865. The wide boulevard formed a horseshoe aroimd the old city connecthg at both ends with the Danube Canal that ran dong the northcastem edge of the old city Ipl. 21. WhiIe most of the public monuments
%ere were those that argued for the cuIISffUÇtionof a replacement wall that might better serve the securiîy ofthe court, Olsen 69- were consüwîed in the 1880~~the most active building wod, incluludg Dats and shops, was the pend from 1868 to 1873. Forty percent of dwehgspace pcoduced by the pmject was bdtduring those fke years (Olsen 76). Public building did occur immedktely after the destniction of the dsThe Hofbing the imperial court, situated opposite the Canal on the south-easteni part of the Ring, became an orgsnirationd point for the buildings that emerged arodh The nobfify considered the land surrou11dingthe Hofburg as the most desirable for the constniction of IUXLlfious townhouses- The ûpera House (S-per) was one of the fiFst public buildings to be erected and it was situated not fm from the Hofburg at the point where the KHnitnerseasse meets the expansion zone- It was briilt by August Sitard von Sicardsburg and Eduard van der NüD (with whom Ono Wagner studied), and was completed in 1869- This building containeci an eclectic mix of architectural motifs, containing elements of 'Ydan and Spanïsh-French Gothic, Florentine and French Renaissancei) (PoweU 48). The charge of eclecticism leveiIed Pt architecture, however, usualiy meant that the bddings, built each in a single histoncal style, together formed an eclectic grouping- The Votivkirche (votive church) was built between 1856 and 1879 by the architect Heinrich von Ferstei and is located on the western part of the Ring and set back fkom the boulevard Bdtin French Gothic styIe, it was ina- after an attempt was made on the lives of the emperor and his brother in 1853. The newest symbolic addition to the city was the group of three buildings to the south of the Votivkirche. Together they symbolized the ii'beral addition to the constitutional monarchy. The University, the Rathaus (city hall) and the Parïiament were each built in a separate style surrounding a central square, the Rathaus Park [pl. 31. Thou& initialiy they were desigueci to fface each other aromd ttiree sides of the square, with the fourth being dong the Ring itself, it was eventually decided to have each building face the boulevard Schorske argues that such a decision reinforces the pfhaq of the Street in the orgmïzation of the city. The sjmce ofthe Ringstrasse, he argues, &Bers fkom that ofthe Baroque era, where buildings are mapnined by vistas; here the buildings '%float unorganized" (Schonke, Fin-de-Siècle 36; Olsen 73). Rather than the visual stasis comdedby vistas aIong the boulevards of Hausmann's Paris, it was the movement of traffic on the boulevard that defined the charScter of the RUigsorasse. The Rathaus was bdtbetween 1872 and 1883 by the mhitect Friedrich Schmidt in the Gothic style. 11 was bdton the wntested site of a military parade ground That the military lost the stniggle to presene the site reflects the changes in the political organization of the new constitutional monarchy (Schmke, 16). On either side ofthe Rathaus were the University and the Parliament, To the right, the University was built in an Italiau Retialssance style by Heinrich Ferstel in yavs of 1873-84- On the other side, begun in the same year, Theophil Haasen built tbe Greek Classical Parüament building It was cwaplead in 1883. This trio of buildings, according to Schorske, is an expression of hi asçendancy representingthe Liberal iddsofRecht and Ki,iaw and culture. Tbey stand in symboiïc oppositionto the presence of the Hofburg (FbzdeSiècZe 36; "Museumn 16). Theu respective bricalstyles were based on each buildings' ktion The civic burgher ideal of the mïdâieages is represented in the Gothic style of the RathawtlSAtheaianikmocfacy ispllidtd to inthe GreekCiassïd style ofthe Parliament building And in the University, humanistic learning is represented in the Italian Renaissance style of its building Two later additions to the Ring wae the Musetuns ofArt end Natuml History (KW-und Natmhïstorische Museen) Cpl. 41- Although plans for the museums ezûsted shortly after the opeaing of the Ring in 1865, their comtndon did mt occur until later (1 871-91). As in the case of the three buildings around the Rathaus Park, the location of the museums, buiit by Gottfried Semper and Cari HIasenauer, is signincant The Art Histosy Museum faces the Natumi History Museum on the Maria Teresa Platz, a square tbat contains a monument to the eighteenth-centiiryernpness- The square and two Museums are located acros the Ring fiom the Hofburg. Although the original plans, submitted by Hasemuer and Semper, included triumphal arches that wcre to span the Ringstrasse and physically connect each of the Museums to the Hofburg cornplex, as I wili âiscuss in the next chapter, the arches were aever built NevertheIess, the symboIIc connection is still evident Such imperial proximity suggests an attempt to mate Ausman culturetureSchorske wrïtes: "Though the art and oaniral history museums should be court museums still, [following a rejection of plam to combine wurt and state museums in a single cornplex] the imperid presence should m811ifkst itseif in the ww capital space beyond the Burgtor not thn,ugh ambut through art" ("Museum" 15). However, accoaccording to Schorske, the enéctiveness of the imperidpresence was duninished by the presence of the street Its horizontal flow, he adds, and the fact tbat the buildings fis& their own qum,suggests an equal tie to the h'beral monuments on the Ring ("Museum" 1
'1 wiil discuss this argument in cbapter two. The Burgtheater, or then known as the Hofbmgthearer (the court theatre) is the other major building on the Ringstmse that shoaki be mentioned at this point [pL 31. It was bdtby Semper and Hasenauer an the site ofthe Riagtheater wbïch had been destroyed in a disastrous f%e that had küled hundreds ~fpqle-~Both it and the Art History Museum became sites ofpiblicly co-oned paintings by Gustav Klimt, Another major fature of the Ringsttasse, though not a building, is the Stadtpark Significatltly, its design echoed that of the fornia giacis. That is, it foilowed the model of an English Garden, rather tban the caretllly regulated Baroque French style. Like the former glacis it was a site of social intercourse and poMded park-space to both the propertyless working classes and bourgeoisie alike- Public refomiers had argued that its dwrderfmess was a tfueat to the mEue of Society, sriggesting that it only brod crime and prostitution (Rotaberg 125-3 1). As mentioned, the gmtest kveI of @vate building activity oocurred in the yerus prïor to 1873, which was a sigdicant year for Vienna because of two major events First, was the Internationai Expositon held nt the Rater, a park-space east of the Altstadt- Wihdays of its opening the stock market crashedc This slowed building, but the ecunomy soon zec0ver;ed That maay of the Jewish middie and upper-middie classes escaped mscathed fiiefied an mergent antiSemitism. Private building of this jxxiod may be considemi equally eclectic in terms of chosen historical styles. But wh- public monuments utilued style to symbolidly reinforce their fimction, private building saw much more whimsical stylistic choices. The upper classes and nobiIity had been building paiaces near the Hofburg since the eighteenth century Cpl. 51, and this influenced the model of building for the bourgeoisie and haute bourgeoisie. Through a stratifTed mtal arrangement, the MietpaImtyor 'kntal palace," accommodateda mge of tenants in the social order. The main floors of these apartments, however, were the most Iavishly decorated on both the interior and f&. Building in Vienna during this piedarranged itself more or less into different sectors. Considered socidy infkrïor was the area along the Danube Canal; Methe streets near the Hofburg notably the Herrengtmeywere preferred as sites for noble palaces. Liooiry trade concentrated itseif along the Graben and Stephansplatz and dong the Kgmtnerstmse and R~tenturmstrasse~The suburbs were morp heterogeneous than the city, containing a mix of workiog and midde classes, as weiï as the aristocratie villas built in the outer suburbs (Olsen 151)- In the AItstd, OIsen observes,
8~or~~~SOIIS of space, 1mwt, udortmiattely, leave it out of my discussion of Semprr's contriiution to Viemese architecture. [t]he high mbiiïtyprefewd the Schwarzenbageaplatz, the Opermingattmc&d thennaacialaadofficiaianst~cracy,while~distnctnaucheRatbauswas fkvoned by industrhiiisg and financiers. The medïcai profession cii~steredaroimd the Votivkûche because of tbe bospitals thDt lay behuid ic lawyers and reW merctianrs were foimd near the Stock Exchange Pod in the Textile Qutnter, *ch iay next to the Danube Cd(155; see dolso Lichtenberger 53-81) As mentioned, the shortage of housing for the woriang classes conthued ngbt through the period ofhighest buildingactMtyactMtyThe prospects were simpïy not good enough for buildm to be gusraateed a worthwhile retum on their imrestment As such the livingconditions amoag the wodcÏng ciasses were wme in Vienna than they were in Paris or London This meant severe overcrowdiag, especially in the eyes of reformers. It was not uncornmon for a wohgchs tenant renting a two-mm flat to subkt one of the rmm. lncome was clearly valued over the more bourgeois ideal of prkacy (Olsen 178-79)- Despite these problems7Vienna still amaaed workefs from the outlying provinces.
Havinggiven a brief oidline of the materid and symbolic reor-on of the city, and a general overview ofthe politicai situation diniag the second haifof the nineteenth century, 1 am now able to procæd with a pair of case studies that will reveai how the struggie for cultural authonty was imbricated in the dmhtionof Vienoa. The fïrst deals with Gonfned Semper's role in the building ofthe museum wmplex. Here 1 consider how the archîtecturai and art historid fields innuencd the pro cesse^ of culturation and how this in tum reproduced power relations in aad through various iirt#ui spaces. Dmwing on the theoretical concepts developed in this section, the second shdy examines Oao Wagner's respome to a shifk in the field of power. This shift was marked by the new streagths the municipal govenunent held in the 1890s, over which the Social Democrats and Christian Socials struggie& The power @ed by the newly qresented social ciasses was won pertly at the emofthe cultural field In this chapter 1 examine how Otto Wagner responded to these changes. GoMncd Semper: Siting Cultural Legitimacy
One of the problems of undertaking an analysis t&at attempts to engage a perd nich as a generation at the îum-of-theceaturyand a geo-cal situation such as a city Lies in choosing one's maîerial objects of stuc&- Such choices can ail too easily become a Limiting affait, tmpped in a logic of the example that "tupifies" or "reflects" the larger historid and geographical situation Instead of selecting objects that are tpical or reflective, 1 have chosen artefects that seem to offêr certain insights into the histoncai and geojpphid structures of the period In th-s chapter I will examine Vienna's KUllSfhistorkches Museum (Ait History Museum) because, beyond its specficity as a building and art collection, it can be dysedin relation to discourses of Geman and Adartart history- This latter relatlonship sheds light cm how the museum legitimated the cuituraI production it serve& Th-s process is ïnscriibed in the entire field of cultural production by marking and delimiting the musem's authority- As such the muse= bears on other instances of culawl production and is therefore a site of considerable interestetest The mwum complex opposite the Ho- made up ofthe Art History and Naturai History Museums (1 869-9 l), was one of the last monumental projects to be boilt on the Ringstrasse. Aabsburg collections were as old as the dynasty and had grown at a fairly steady rate since the Renaissance. As early as the 1830s discussion began over the need for the museums and in the 1860s it intensined as the Ringstrasse provided a pretext for building. Further contnIbuting to these developments was the fact that art histoncal research had begun to be fostered mder imperid auspices @Migrave,Semper 114; Haupt 19). Semper was first dedto the project to resolve a stslled cornpetition that will be descn'bed later- The commission for the museum gave Semper an opportunïty to demonstrate the representational theory of architecture which he had been deveIoping for nearfy forty years Unlike other building cotnmitîees which Semper had worked for in the past, this one hPd agreed almost entirely with bis proposeci iconography for the exterior decoration, wfüch he developed closely arodhis theory- Thus, apart from reading his styIistic treatment of the buiidings as an implementation of his theory of pa&cal aesfhetics, the exterior of the Art History Museum cm dso be read as a represen&atronof Semper's historicad theory of style- For this reason 1wül consider Semper's theory and its relation to deveIoprnents in art biston'& research in Austria Semper's renom as an architectinal theorist rested upon the pubIIC8tion ofhis largest wrk Der Stil(186063), *ch appearedjust as ait history in the German-spealong wmtrks wss developiag &O ârï Independe* discipline. The CO- O€ Semper's theoretical production (which intersec&with a number of other disciplines) folfows a trajectory towards the sort of ardonomipltion thaî the discipline of art history similarly experiencd That is, as art history increasïngiy sought to establish its own boundanes ami aidonomy. Semper endeavoured to formnlafe the theoretical basis that wouid authork that ardonomy. Semper's efforts, however, wodd be directed toward an ail-encompassing thwry of the plastic arts (that would include the pictod arts)- Consistent with the tmn described by Fodttowarâs historical depth and the recovery of ongins wbich chanicterized much thhichg in the human sciemes in the nineteenth ce-, Semper sought to establish the original "motives" that produced the laws of historical changes in style, adgoverneci al1 the technical and plastic arts. At the same he2architectural discome similarly concerned itselfwith historicism and the pmblem of style (ohphrased as a question of ongins), aad Gefman-language art history, through more ngorous research methods and models of expIanation, sought to becorne a proper science (in the Germen sense of Wissemc?m#)- If1 demiSemper's theoretical work as following patterns in art history to establish discipbuy authority, 1 do so to show how it afEcteâ a field of architectural and artistic production. Bodeubas shown how a position of auîhoriîy is imbricated in the relations of power within the test of its field and how that field Ïn turn is reiated to a larger field of power. Bourdieu's mode1 is usefbl because it aUows seemiagly isolated debates in architectural discourse to be seen as parts ofthe same coatest over the structure of power that characterizes that field (FM29-73}. Furthemiore, the way in which art and architectural theory works to sustain or transforrn the structure of power within its field can be shown to have pdcular relationships with the economk and poiitical fields. A& art history became a -shed field of stady' largely because it received state sponsorShip. The state's interests stemm& nom the mngsense of nationalistic rk&y with Prussia. Austria's strugpies with Prussïa over unithg the independent Gcmian States meant tbat cultural history becarne a crucial ground of contest. in addition to this, poMhl mes intemal to the Wbwgempire would make themselves felt as Austro-Gerrnan domhance was contested by strengthening nationalisms. Margarrt Oh(CCAl~is Rie@") and Suzanne Marchand ("Professionalin'ng'') have shown how mn-AUSfLj8IL scholars (as pmfessionaîs) muid bolster theù own political capàal în exchange for service to an osteasMy international empire. Thus, for example, Alois Riegi's recuperstion ofthe late Roman perïod hmthe annals of art history could counter Russian Heiiewphilism, and could therefore serve a politics of Gr~~stemeich(Greater Austria) by com~gthe iotemationatism of the late Roman Empire with that ofthe late Habsburg Empire (Oh,ccAI~is Riegl"). At the same time, particular German claims to a comection with s medïdGemren cultucal mity were dis- Riegl's dissertation of the late 1880s (now Iost) on the Chmh of St Jacob at Regensburg argueQ aguaSt the claims ofPrussian schoh, that stylistic traces showed Muences of CeItic culture (then thought to have a commun origin with Genaan culture), and demonstraed instead a Camlingiian influelice, which could tbea be traced back to the late Roman perïod (Oh,Fom 20)- Serving simIlar ends, a Viemese professor ofpaiaeography, Engebert MiibIbou:her, upon the injimcaon of Pnissian authorities to promote the use of FraAtw scrîpt, which was thought to be of medieval German origin, argued that it in fâct derived nom Caroluigian script The &val of Latin type after the middle ages was thus considered an attempt to restore clarity to that same script that had becorne Qastically distorted Smce the Roman perïod (Oh,Fonns 18). Within the AUSfrian acadernic commZU2ityt therefore, there was rmm for those outnde the dominant positions in the political field to increasetheir political capital by performing mandarin semices to the state and its politics of Growerreich.As Marchand wrïtes ofthe Czech art historian M;sur DvoWc and the Austcïan Jewish music historian Guido Adler, TheIr cirriously paraUe1 acts of assimilation in the 1880s, in fe are good demonsüatïons of the qdities Viennese cultme required of its mandarins" ("Rofessionaliziag"25). This displacement of political power into the cultural sector can account for rdonacypolitics in other art bistoncal xholarship. A co11eague ofDvW and FmWickhoE Josef Strzygowsky, produced eonsistendy anWhnitic research around the ttm ofthe w,arguing against the clahof bis coileagues that a wntinuity existed among Roman, Carolingian, and Gennanic art (Oh, C'Natiod-sq'' Marchand, "Rhetoric")- The connedon between Austrian art history and the political interests of GroflOsterreeich, however, has its foun~onsin the period ofpost-revolutioniiry consenmtism. A policy of miionai &cation sought to restore an historiaal conception of law and state agaïmt the notion of Na~echtthat had been dowed to flourish under the Habsburg's enlightened monarch, Joseph IL In 1854, the minister of ducation, Count Leo Thun, founded the InrtitutfIit bsferreichirche Geschichisfrschung (Instituîe for Austrian Historical Resean:h). Its objective7above aU, was to provide sodhistoriai research for hies,archives and museums. The hsfifid ptected itselfhm incursions nom phiiosophy, paticular1y Hegeh Universalgeschr'chte@&ucIiand, "Prof-onahhg7 29; Schorske, "Mrrseumn 13). It9 nrSt ert advisor was RudoIfvon EiteIberger, who would later becorne the director ofthe Museum for Art and Industry7 and would be wnsalted on the buil* ofthe Art Esfary Museum, One dits fomost members was the historian Theodor von Sicket who Mdbecome Semper's son-in-Iaw, It took some time, however, beforp the cuitud maduimte system could becorne effective,ssince this reqirired that the field attain a Comrizlciag degree ofreIative autonomy. Tbet was not compIeteIy achïeved before the ofbdding cornpetition for the Museums prutly explaias the pmblems Urvolved with the pro* Despite their common intaest in Gro$J6sterreich culturai mon,it was the imperial authorïties rather than the academics and artïsts who held the most power (Schorske "Museumn 13; MaIIgrave, Shper 3 MdO). As the completion of the Art History Museum approacheû, the 8C8demic situation in Vienna undment signifïcant changes. In 18û4, both the Iizstiiha and the University moved to the Ringstrasse; the latter became housed in a single building designed in a Renaissance style by Heinrich Ferstel. The fact that the University had played a role in the revolution had Led the emperor to favour a plan proposed by Thun to keep it dispersed, foUowing the Engüsh wilege model, ïnstead of granting a singie site to the whole UniversityefSitYHowever, in 1870, with the help of the Liberal mayor, Kajetan Felder, the University building committee won the concession to constmct a single building to house aIi the University7süepertments on the newly plmed RathouPpIafi (Schorske, %useumn 16-17). Another important development occmed in 1885, when Franz Wickhoff founded the K~~l~thi~~orisccheIhptitut out of the Instituîfsir 6sterreichische Geschicht@rsctnnrgg This move gave art historians administrative autonomy deretaining intellechmi ties to their parent instituîe, which in tum ailowed the positivistic and fomialist scholmhip begun by Eitekger, Sickel and Moritz Thausing to be pursued in a new sening- Wickhoff and Rie@ were attentive to fommliism, but both, and especially Rie& attempted to incmduce theoreticai models of histoncal change (Uarchanci, .. Trofessionalin'ng'' 30-3 1). Wickhoff's adminlstnitive move to fonn the K~historischeslltsfiluf was one of îhe important steps toward autonomizttion of the art historical field in Viema Theory pvided another; for it at once delimited the art historical field and established the authority for its auton~rny.~For instance*the notion of KtatstwoI'enis central to Riegi's theory- By posituig that each age has its own artistic will, Riegl was able fornidte a system ofperiodizatiion that subverted what he saw as value-baseci systems. In this way, the late Roman perïod, for example, could be Mewed in cultural-historiai continuity with the Hellenic perïobBy the time RÏegl was Wfiting his dissertation, Gottfried Semper had aiready published the majority of bis theoretireticalwok Although Rie@ took issue with it (eve~ifhe only nomiaally attaciced "Semperiaus2+and not Semper himself), their theorïes have many similaritie~.~ What is important in this conte- is that both Rie@and Semper developed theories that worked to canre out an autommous art historiai field Semper's development went through a number of stages, which can help to illuminate some ofthe stakes involved in the formation of that field Interest in Semper's theory was ody revived in the 1970s af€ertwo derences on the subject of his work3 mgrave attributes the relative lack of interest in this architect and theorist, who gained such a wide reputation in the nineteenth centurry not only in Gemiairy but in the rest of Europe and Amerka, to a few passages by Riegi. These were quite inexplicably sekd upon by lata interpreters of Semper, perhaps the most notable and detrimental being Lionello Venturi, who used Riegl's rema.to condemn Semper as a crude materialist in 1936 (Semper 381). Riegl had made a simiiar assessrnent in 1901 in a shoe passage in his Spdtr~mischeKultstind~rsfrie~ However, as Uallgrave notes. eight years earlïer in Stilfiagen Rie@had deveioped his notion of Kllllstwoflen taking sevdcues nom Semper's theoryryIt was in this 1893 text that Riegi had made the distinction between Semper and ce&u umamed "~ernperians"-~In the Semperians he detected a cde
'The University's move to the Ringsûasse is a paraile1 development in autono~*onto the formation of the Ktorrhisto~chesImtitut The University's move signals the autonomization of the academic field fkom the political field (in Boindieu's sense, which is not to be confused with the field ofpower, see Pmcticui Rmon 33-34), and the Imtitut's move signals autonom-Aion fkom the academic field The scanda1 Klimt raïsexi among the University authorities and the support he @ed fiom WicLhonaad other art historiaas closer to the tum of the century demonstrates how much the ertistic field came to compte with the açademic fieid Schozske provides a detailed narrative of the scarsdal and Klimt's reacîion in Fin-delriècle, 208-78. %II Riegl's relatiomhip to Semper, see Olin, Forms 39-66, Ivemen 2 1-30, and Mitilgrave, S~enip372-8 1. 3~heprOceediLlgs of the second, held in Zurich, 1974, are pubfished in Vogt et ai. 4~xactlywho was meant by "Semperians7'is not certain, Zvenen suggests thaf for one, it was Otto Wagner, who who repeated a pphras Semper usad: "NeceSSity is art's ody materialism, but in Semper he recognized a theory of style that acwunted fm -ai, purpose and technique:as well as aitistic creativity. The differieaces between and Semper lay pWarily in their interpntsfion of this creativity- For Rie& it belon@ to the spirit of a people in an historical Zkitgast and was the most decisive featine of an artform; for Semper, it came* in his later theory, to belong to the individual and as such was oniy one ofnumerous "coefficients" in an artfi(Smpw 374-78).
That Semper's position was misinterpreted even in his own &y can largely be amibuted to the fm thM he defended it on number of hts-Semper's theory is quite hi@y nuanced and therefore so was his Cnticism ofother Moreover, the defence ofhis position took place as his own theory evdvd Semper hed bis aüversarïes7 but they were certainly not ail idealists as Venhiri claims? Recent work has been done to recova the context in which many of Semper's arguments were fkst made- Margaret Ohbas provided new iasi&cts to the Rie@-Semperdebate (Falllls)-Mgtave7 who bas done much to resiore the historical conte* of Semper's work, hss read bis th- with an empbesis on Semper%notion ofBekfeidung(dressing) and the theatncai element of architecture (Sqr;Four Elments)).Hemnann has shrdied the infiuences on and the publication history ofDerSM HekQuitzsch's 1%2 dissertation Die &het&chen Amchauungen GotrfiiedSernpers me Aesîhetk Views of Gottfried Seniper) is a Marxist readiag of Semper's aesthetics &ch restores some of the political import of Semper's wrïtings. These are just a few of the revisionary accounfs of Semper's work, and while each bas redressed his position on mateziaiïsm, his critics stiU disagree about other aspects of his work, includiag the reasons why Semper nwer wrote the proposed third volume to Dm S'It wïli be necessary to talre these views into consideration in order to situate Semper's changing position in relation to shiffs within the architectural and art historical fields.
master," 25. Mailgrave argues that 1893 was too won for Rie@to have known Wagner' and that by "Semperians" he must of meant certain art histmonansmch as Juiius Lessing, and the archaeologists Alexander Conze and Reinhard Kekuié, Semper 376-8. 5~venSemper's somYIIaas and Menned, who Iooked after his litemy estate following his death, fall into the category of misinterprete~.Hans said in 1880 that Semper was oniy a step away fiom Darwin's theory, after Semper himselfhad rigorously defended his position agaiost the accusation of following Darwinism. Otto Wagner made this coupling in 1896, and Venturi mte, We is the advesary ofail idealism and tends ta natiiral science of the Darwinim type," qtd in Sap,38 1. Born near Hambiirg in 1803, the son ofan affluent wwf menufkturer, Semper studied architecture under Fr- Christian Gau in Park hmf 827 to 1830- After witnessing the -siug in Paris in 1830, he tcavelled to Italy* Sicily, and Greece on an architecturai tour. Here he observed the architectad remains ofclassicaL mtiguity and gathered iaf~~onthat he would put into a pamphlet pubIisbed in 1834: Prelimhmy Rernarh on Polychrome Architecture and Sculpture in Antiquity (Mallgrave, Fout EZements 2; Sémtper 11-62}. With this essay Semper entered hto the Iively debate in archaeo10gical and architectural chcles over the possibility thet the ancieuts had painted their sculpture and architecture.
More than a contniution to the polychrome debate, the PreIimimty Remarh are the bepiimings of what wouid become Semper's BeHeidiorg theory- Usuig rather weak ethologid evidence, Semper suggests that the fht religious wncepg were scratched in relief ont0 the walls of dweLlings. In order dramatize the efféct of light, peuit was addeci, and fiom tbere paintuig and sculpture (at fi&, just relief) developed intertwined (Prelimhmy Remmks 5 1-2). Furthemore, the physid decoratioas such as flowers, branches, çacrinciai implements, or weapons which were aîtached to the walls of a sanctuary were graddy replaceci by artistic representations mtedreliefs of the dec0ration.s)and thereby incorporatesi into the monument itself(Prelimihay Remmis 62-3). This notion that symbolism was the basis of stylistic elements is something Semper wodd develop Merin othcr Wnîings-
Just months after the pubLidon of the PrelimiMry Rem~~ksSemper was appointed to a professorship at the Dresden Academy on Gau's recommendation (Mallgrave, Semper 63-64). The Academy was an exampie of the Iriralizahoon of the culnual field in Saxony where since 1830 new hilberai elements in hesden and Leipzig contested the strengths ofthe Saxon Ladsrande (Hermann 3). Upon arrïving in Dresden, Semper began workiag on desi- for an expanded cultural formn centred aromd the Zwinger, a Baroque gallery by -8s Daniel P6ppeImam Cpl. q. Semper's designs included a new theatre, an orangery and later an additiod pictrire gaUery. The orangery wouid have been cormectecl with the Zwinger, and the combined forum wouid have been situated next to both the existing Hotrche and the guardhoose designed by Schinkel. Dram on his own initiative, Semper's plans for the forum were rejected by the Diet who rewto fund the pro~ect.However, his plans for the Ho@euter (Court The),the one monumeat fot which the Diet requestcd desi- were accepted (Hernnann 4-7; Mallgrave, hper96-98}. The theatre served the court in two ways: it signailed royal patronage ofa public building end it stnick an accord with the Dresden Biager~tlmgwho inaeasiagly became the patn,ns oftheaee producfions. The kt thaî i German court theatre was co-oned under a ~~LISti~onalagreement, however tenuous, between coiat and popuiace7made it a "sensitive platform for cultural baiance and conseusus" (Wyss 67). The stnictine that Semper built (hm1838 to 1842) was mique in its own respect 'The Dresden Hoftheater broke with the tradition of coneeaüng the auditorium behind a single fiscade, and was comidered by Semper in-the-round [pL 77. Visual weight wms @en to both the fâcade markuig the cani-age mps (one of which was the entrance for the Saxon lan- second ramp is on the opposite side of the th- hidden hmview) and the hemi-cyIllidncal projection of the auditorium- This latter feature heIped to emphasize the thaitrr's bzïrgerlich patrons Who largefy med the auditorium?
The quest for a sensitive balance of power was shatted in both the politid and the cultural fields denthe uprising nnally came in Mruch 1849. These fields were not necessarily even gro~dsfor stroggle. Semper's Eiidand Mlow-Dresdener, Richsrd Wagner, who had been the resident conductor at the Dresde11Tharter since 1842, joined the insurgents7ifonly by afiFiliation. His actions seem to have been motivateci by the idea of participating in a cultural war agaimst the dilenantishLandstande who had fded to support his artistic vision7 Rior to this moment Semper had already made his politicai stand known. h his Prelimhay Rerrtmh, he he argued argued art and plitics were insepsrable (47). Both Semper and Wagner7as cuiturai producers, found their interests in cornpetition with the Lmuktimte and Diet, while the Saxon king seemed relatively favourable to the cdtidsectorr However, the two Dresdeners directeci their culaual interests into the poiïticai field diffaeaty. Sempex aligned his stniggles with those of the Btirge~t~nt.He had been a member of a locai mllitia and became the architect of a number of barncades that went up in the streets ofDresden (Mallgrave, Semper 169-70)- Wagner, on the other hanci, distanced himselffiom the republicaus, and in his edehe would wish for "a young mommh" to support his work
6~yssnotes the theaîre's resemb1ance to a circus, including its "big top," which has its precedent in the CoIosseum and the Theatre of Màrcellus IRome. In ligbt of the way in which the Roman Republïc was cited a model sincc the French Revolution, the 'cegalïtarian~co~otations of the circus7could serve it as a mode1 for civic architecture, 65. 7~eeArt ami Revolutron and The Art- Work of the Futuree When the iasurgents were put dom in May 1849, Semper was forced to flee Saxony andman edethet iastedfor mer twmty y-. Semper moved to London, where he was evdyawarded a teaching position in the Department of Practical Art at the new South Kensington Mwmn directed by Hemy Cole (Mdlgran, Semper 208-17). In 1851, he published Ine FOUTElemenfs of Architecture, *ch was fomd nom notes for lectures he had given as a pmfcssor in Dresden
In The FmEZementrs ofArchitechue, Semper theorizes the original elements that gave rise to the fïrst stnicturescturesBut rather than thinlàag ofthese as material elements thst would then becorne a set ofbailcihg blocks for d fiuther architectuie* he considers these efements to be motives. In other words they becorne social needs ammd Hmich architecture would be or- The first elmient is the hemth (102). It is, for Semper, the mord element, and around it the first social pupsorgani&-fiornthe fkp1ace of the hunters of the "nrst human settiements," to the "nrst rude religious concepts. . .put into the custams of a cult" (102). Developing a theme that Wqper had presented in Art ond Revolution, Semper suggests that the height of architecture's sociakeligious motive is the Greek temple. Atheni= democracy is ailuded to as the mode1 social condition under which art might bloom and %cage the deiîy" hidden away in the place architeam ofthe despot-priests (Semper is oullining an historical mode1 in which the Egyptians among others precede the Greeks). In this way, Semper does not hide the po1itical implications to his time: "He [the uncaged deÏty] senied no one, was a pmpose unto himseIf, a representative ofhis own perfection and of Greek hummity- ûuly a fke people sustained by a national feeiing could nndersîand and create such works" (123)- Quitzsch sees this as the moment in *ch Semper has made his most complete synthesis of politics and art (35).
The other îhree elements are gtoupexi around the fint îhe roof; the encIosrae, and the mound. In the notion of the enclosme. the element that Semper spe~dsthe most time discussiag, he continues to develop the idea of BeWeidtmg a~ddraws on his PreIiiniluny RemmRr. The enclosure is the original means of separatiag space. The wail falis under this category, but Semper does not cornider it as a solid, load-beating saircture- Mead, he points to the use of woven carpets that, according to him, historidly preceded solid Ws,by behg hmgsimply to demaraste spçc. The miportame of this is tbt, nrsf Semper considers architecture not as primarily stnictrnal but as both spofial and social. Second, the use of woven carpets suggstP for Semper tbat this element is primoeity ornamental and symbolic (FmElementrs 103-1 10). Semper's resïdence inLondon in 1851 affided him an opportunity, thaf @en hisincreasedtfieorttidinterestinthetec~~andiadustrialarts,arwitmssedbythe importance he gave to tedes in the Four Elements, he eagerly embraced The Great Exhiiitim at Joseph Paxton's Cryÿtal Palace gave for Semper the chance to wort on a few srna11 jobs designing some exh'bits- But more importantly, it prompted him to write about the state of industrial art Science, Indutry, undArt (1852) (subtitîed: P ropsds for the ~~~~~~ment of a NotowI Tme ih An at the Closing of the London Indzrstrral Exhibition), as Qubch notes, considers artistic pmdudon in a dmnmticalty mirent poIitical-econom-ccIimate fiom that of Saxony in the pr;evl*ousdecade- Quitzsch examines Semper's sidjustment to a capitaüst mode of poduc-tion in iight of his e8fïier rwolutionary dernocratic stand in Drrsden, and conc1udes that Semper, despite baving serious reservations about what capitaiism doCs to azt, nonetheless resigns himseIfto if or at least untü a new world-historical idea would replace it (Semper, Science 138; Quitzsch 24-5). Quitzsch's wnclusÏon that Semper became compIacent under b~dich conditions aiid gave up his ederrev01utionary politics can be Cnticized as reductive. But he anives at this conclusion by painting out ~O~~OLISin Semper's thoogh. These contradictiom, as I shall descrihe, are characteristic of Semper's attexnpt to resolve an economic and a culturai field thec was each more autommousthsn what Semper had experienced eariier. It is on the bisof this, rather than a softening of bis polXticaI views, that Semper refomuiated his theory- The waiaradictions Quitzsch identifies in this new theoretical outiook are important because they signal a covert strategy of power that is fünciamentaly connected with an autonomous cultud field
Apart fiorn a favourabie review of certain features of the exhibition, Semper sees industnal art in a state of disintegratio~This he aîtri'butes to capitalist speculation, an4 in particular, to two specific fatum of it First, the means of production iacrease at a rate which exceeds aay atternpt to make them artistic. Second, the dstgendy does not have the means to acquire new technoiogies. This lads Semper to ide- wiùat can be descnias the negatïve pole of an autommous cultural field. He wurites tbat both artists and manuf'acairers of industd art under the influence of specuiation are at the same time dependent onfarhion. In nict, the artkt is a doubly dependent "slave to his employer and to the latest hbion that provides the employer with a marlcet for his waresn (Skience 139)- Thw the atitonomy ofartktkcreativity is given its negative, fmhion, which is heteronomous with the economic field. Semper continues by descniiga proposal for the nationai development oftaste- Having identifieci speculation as the cause of this stieing situgtion, Semper dws not caü for the overthrow ofthe capitaiïst mode of prahstïon, as Quitzsch laments. On the contrary, Semper feels that ody under the influence of specdan'on will the conundrum of faShion dissolve itseifand make way for O new art: "Thisprocess of dbinfegrating exiscing art types m~tbe complered by id.,by spedatiorr, dbyapplidscience before sornething goodond new can resz12t" (Science 144). Semper continues to cal1 for the deve1opment of a "national tastetaste"@tis unciear whether this is a part of or after the process ofdisuitegration) In Questions of tastes Semper pids the onus on the "public" over and above the state: Temust wodr to raise people's tastes or mtkr, the people themsehres must work for it It is better tbey play the fwl fbr a whiie than have their taste dictated by others" (160). h having the people work for t themseLves, ruste is sïtuaited in an autonomous domain and is thus the opposite of fahion. The state does play a part in the oftastes however, by providing instituti~ns~Semper names four caîegories for public instruction: mUections, lectures, w&hops, and emdatioa and prias. The heaith, which, of the four elements, was the architectural fmture that signalleci the ided social coaditiom aUowiag art to bloom, is now given precisely the terms collections and studios (160).
Quitach identifies two contradictions here. The fht, which is particuls to Science, 1ndzrsb-y. md Art, is in the role of capitalia speculation: it is both detnmental to art and the grounds for its renewal. The second is between the vie- expnssed in this essay and those in The Four Efemenfs, conceming the relationship between art and society Earlier, Semper had argueci that art and politics or art and society were inseprable and concludeci that only under favoiirable social-politid conditions couid art bloom. Now, under less tban favourabe social-political co~ons(or, out of the disintegdon of art by such conditions), art can prrticipate in the improvement of national taste (Quitzsch 38). What has, in kt,changed in Semper's Wntiag is the cultural field he is examining In The FmEZemenfs, based on his expience in Dresden, Semper had written about a cultural field that had WeBUtOmmy in relation to the politicai field The posaion Semper defended withia the cultural field, the hearth, the social element that also figured in terms of Atbenian democraçy, is closely comected to the correspondhg dominated position in the political field, îhat of the btagerkh democrats. The culturai field did not have an autonornous or-g principle (although those with the most cultural capitaE-e-g. Semper and Wagner-d indeed struggle for calturai autawmy) and this position within the cuitUrai field was PIS0 Qmiruited by politicai detenninations (though the events of 1849 show tbat the domiiillrim in both fields was not absoiute).
+-Sam -.
Following Bourdieu's dims,"+I refers to a dominant mion; =-* a dominatecl position- Given the cultural field's law degree of autoriomy from the poIWaf field, two organiu'ng prïncïpres cornpete with one another: (a) is for Landstande coritrol of the arttutal field ttirough the maintenance of the fiefd'srelatively little automnny; (b) is fw cultwal autonomy, and its intmests oould easily be aligned with the those of tne büqpdich democrats.
In Science, Indtlsoy, d Art, Semper is fesponding to a cultural field tbat is relatively autonomous fbnthe political field The stmggle in such a field, according to Bourdieu, is baween the autonomous O- priaciple and the hettmnom<~~~ oqphingprincipIe. The dominant position under the autonomous principie of orgmization is the one âe!scrii. by Semper as 'haîional taste". Heteronomy descnk production &r the mixing of the cultural field with the economic field, and to this position Semper amiifosho- which he notes is insepsrabIe from speculation. Note: accorâing to Bourdieu, the dominant position in an autonomous cultural field (that of cultural autcmuny) corresponds with the dominated in the fargerfield of paufer; whereas the dominateci position in the cufturai field (that of cultural heteronomy) comporids with the dominant position in the field of power,
In Distinction, Bourdieu ieu show that diffêrentiation withui a culturai field is marked by taste. To sqprt autowmous cultural production, taste must be made pure, that is, divorceci of all that is ordinsry or average. Ekre taste*then, is autheutic and Semper has opposed it to the arbitranliess offashion In this way, Semper has invoked a paradigrn common to Gaman inteliectuals: Tuhure" and its attendant taste (Bildmg 'cultivation') is opposed to 'Civitizatiori" which is characterized as Sripemcial, showulg only the outward features of society. This featine of the Ge- cultural mandannate, cmbe accounted foi by the relative independence of the Gefman academic commuuify nom the court- The notion of culture as something to be achieved (rather tban pre-given) situates it in the realm of education. It is opposed to the French educational system, *ch achieved a greater inteeon with court, and pmduced the notion of taste as inherited in the mondain (Distmction 68-74; see dso, Ringer 83-90). The German pamdïgrn itselfto a politics ofmitiodsm, especially in the pendsmimdùig unincation (as witnessed, for exampie, in the polemics of Richard Wagner, who vehementLy attacked the cc~~iO~''ofFrench niShion). Howwer, Semper does not polemicize a national taste. In f8ct, he spealrs quite fàvourably ofFrench iadustnal art, despite French '%cklenessm(the stereotype prwails) (149). Pure taste, however, necessitates a separation fiom taste thtis dependent on other factors (in this case, economics), and thas, in the field, necessitates a band of positions that are sepamte fbrn the rest The logic of the field meam that those who have pure taste motbe "the public," or "everyonenenAn imbalance of power alm.stnrhnes the field, therefore, whether it is in fàvour ofclass or min an ce-* T'uswhcn 7he public" is invoked, even to be cultïmkd, a covert pofitics of exclusion is éeployd This is a fuitme of the field and the way in which it is structureci, and does mt necessarily mean a conscious ploy. h the next chapcer, 1wiil argue that Oao Wagner uses the designations miiture" and "thepublic" in dupiicitous ways that demonstrate just such a poliacs. For Semper, this feature of the cultural field appears as a pob1ernatic ofspeculation, which is why he ascriito it a detrimental relation to taste mrd a (mystical?) ability to rejuvenate taste-
Semper's thaoiy wodd take one more hm, and it would corne during the writing ofDer Sril (its fiill title: Sîyle in the Technical and Tectonic Am or Practicol Aesthetics A Hand2iookfor Technicians, Arti;sfs, md P-om of Art). In 1852, Semper's fbt proposais for the work werp acn>ally for what he then envisioned as an eleven-volume series of comparative building tbeory, which wouid dysevarious building types. At some point in the mid 1850s Semper begaa to sbifl fiom his historïcal, quasi-evoluiiomuy thùiking evi&nt in the Prelininary Remarks and The fou^ Eiments, to a sort of symbolic hemeneutics of style. What Semper anived at was the Iawfiilness [Gesetzlichket] of symbolic form, which refemd not to the laws of historical development proceediag hmorigùial types, but rather the laws of a stmctud symbolics, in which essentid motives may transfonn in periods of height and decay acwrding to other variables.
Although it is difncult to detemine the precise moments when Semper refonnulated his theory, since his work hmthis perïod exists in multiple drafts, for the sake of simplicity 1will examine the shift and its relation to his earlier work at two parîicular moments.
1) In an 1859 prospectus for Der Stil, Semper uses his four-part division to organïze the first two volumes ofwhat was then plaumi as a tbree-volume work (Prospectus 174-80).
8~oughSemper does not potemicize arouad this, taste fa tüm is uader the provenance ofthe national-state- Zn the years to corne Semper would drop the donal as a féature of taste, in fkvour of w?iat he would =fer to as the "cosmopolitan future of architecture,," On ArchitectzuaI Styles 28 1. This wouid corne at a moment when îhe path to German mification was foUowing Bismarck's lead See passage at the end of Architecr~ruZSeles 283-84; Quitzsch sees the move to cosmopolitaaism as finther wmplicity with the capitalist mode of production, 40. Ratherthan followiag the motives pacisely, he organizes the division mund the materials and technid processcs that are mder the influence ofîhe motives: textiles (Wall), ceTZiIilics (hd), carpe* (roof), and masorvy (mouad). The third volume was to wver the social~nItmaland persoaal influences on design as weU as Semper's remarks on contempomy ar~hitecttue~What is important about this moment is that the hearth (the socid-politicai) is no longer the central tenn and the gtxmator of style. Instead it beloags to one oftwo groups offrnors, or "coefficientsn-Semper provides the folIowing formula-
Wziere U denotes the artfom, and C the fiindon whïch enacts the set of vanable coefficients in the parentheses. The coefficients are of an indeterminate number, but Semper groups them into two classifidom: I'ntri%zsic,which includes the purpose, materid and technique,and exîriwic, wwhich inclides the social and cultural fa- (e-g. chate, topography¶national education, politicai and social iustiMîous) and individuai factors (Le. the realm of artistic ~reativity)-~
2) Semper never wote the intended thud volume of Der Sril, whïch accomts, in large for the repeated misintetpretation of Semper as a rnateriaiÏst This is because he never wrote the history of how &al and CUIhrtal aictors influence design It is aow a matter of debate as to why Semper did not complete it 1fhd Hermiami's opinion tbat this change resulted fiom Semper's decision ?O expanci the nrSt volume in order to include his Bekleidung theory (vimialy doubling the length ofthe 500 pages he had written for the rest of the first two volmes and radirscting Semper's theoretical interests) (1 12-7) quite piausible. Pebps rnost importantly, this new material fonns the second major shift in his thinlcing, which some critics consider a theoreticai one. It is, in fact, not so much a new direction as the incIusion of revised material, since he had fht considezed aspects of it in 1834, and bad a large basis for it in his discusgon of the wd motive in Be FmElemenfs. As in his discussion of carpet wall hangïngs, bis excm hmthe section on textiles in Der SIil considers the symbolic nature oforaament In a footnote, an extended passage relates Semper's new belid in the masking of reaüty (material) as the fimdamentd aspect of
%is fomuia appears in the introduction to "rtimry of Formal Beauty" ("Theone des Fonnell-SchOnen," c. 1856/59), an mpubIished rnafluscrimparts ofwhich fodtheir way into the prolegomenon to Der SM, uAttni%~es,''241-2. The denial of realïty, ofthe material, is necessq if form is to emerge as a meanin@ symboI, as an 8tlfotmmous -on ofmm Let us make forgotten the means that need be used for the desired -c aect and not poc1aïm tbem loudfy, thus missing our part miserably- (Sryle 25257)
Semper's main point in this section is '30 draw attention to the principle of exterior adontntent and (aessing of the shuctural doldingthat becornes necesuy with impruvïsed festive structures, and that always and everywhere conveys by itseifthe nature ofthe thkg'' (Style 257). Tbe aim ofthe artist is to mate =a mewringful symboI* and this is though of peUsely in tems of how it is conveyed in the dressîng. With respect to the decision not to wmplete the thüd volume, Hcrrmann argues that this theory suppIanted the nnal section not ody in ~uantity,but dso in substance. Sempeis extrhsic caedlicients, the socki-cultud fktm7becorne a part ofthe Bekleidug theory (Style 114-5). That is, Semper locaîes his structural symboIism in the masking of feality-
That Semper appean to ody account for socialcutural fwtors in his Bekleidung theory, however, does not mean he abandoned personaî or individuai influences. These individual innuences appear in a late lezture given in Zurich in 1869 (On Architecturai Styles) as one tenn in a dialecticC1*In what he cidis the human ideal in a& that is, in Ir'berai (autonomous) art, Semper sees a "synthesis of two seemingiy ~on~ctoryforces: namely, smviag toward individuality and merging into the coUectiven (281). In 1850 had Semper employed the metapiior of the architectural releese of divinity Mdin a cage- In the Zurich lecture, he uses the metaphor once again, but instead of the democratic orgmktion of the Greeks into a nation-stae supplying the impetus for this, he now amibues this to the "haman idealn Here he speaks of the cosmopolitan future of architecture, and hîs stystSc mode1 is no longer the Greek temple, 'Wch had achieved a perfect fonn but had not yet reached its highest goal," but instead is the arc- style of Imperia1Rome (28 1). By this Semper means specincaily the Roman arch and the dome. The negative force of the state wilective is represented by Alexander, who adopted the Wca, which Semper traces through the declme of the Roman Empire to the styfistically infior Gotbic cathedral, serving Semper's polemic agaïust the supporters of a national German Gothic architecture- Constantine, on the other hm4 represents for Semper the path of Romarchitecture towsrd the human-ideal synthesis:
'%e lecture was delivered at the Zurich Rattiaris on Manch 4, 1869. Semper was a professor at the Zurich Polytechnilonn fkom 1855 to 1869. the Byzantine dome is the model wbich is men its highest expression byMichelange10 at St Peter's-
Semprystheory in 1869, the year when he was nrst codtedwer the proposed museum complex in Vienna, represents a piirticular response to the cultural field At this time he f8rmaIated a culturai ideai and defencEed it against the heteronowous forces of the state, &ch he felt was threatening aie autonomy of the cultural ideaL Semper's image of MichelangeIo clearly demonstrates this:
For MichelangeIo, wwho cared fittle for the pope, the cIerw, or the empire, this task @miidhgSt Peter7sdome in the serviice of papal sovefeigntyl was only a means to an end He wanted to create with the daw an emancipated, ideai work of aif but his immediate successors buagied his design when they piaced a baroque basilica in fiont of it (On Architectwaf SIyles 282)
Semper's ideal woks to demerCate an autonomo~sspws *thin the culturai field, which is set against the more general field ofdcproduction thM he had proposed to analyse in Der Siil. In the 1869 Zurich lecture, style is defined as "di the preconditions anci circumstances of an art object's becoming [Verden]"(269). This is precisely wbat he proposed to examine under the formula ofcoefficients, adwhat took on a somewbat structurai fomi when it was subsumed under the BekZeidung tbeory- Gdstyle, demonstrating the "human ideal",requires particdar preconditions and circumstances; foremost among these deals with "the purpose of the tasK' ("Attri'buîes of Formal Beauty" 240). Semper's idealism is influenced by Hegelian teleology, and seems to owe much to AdoIfZeising (Hem30011; Mdlgrave, Fow Elements 35; Sempm 271,273, 276). Borrowing âom Zeising, Semper established a system of authorities that govern Formal Beauty, of which the fimdamental one is the authority of the fitness of content (or, the unit of pinpose) which govems those of proportionaliity, symmetry, and direction- Evidently these traces of Geman i8ealism have surpDised Mailgrave and others, given that Semper's defence of a Practical Aesthetic was pecisely agakt the incursions of philosophy into the architestmil fielci
It is important to stress that Semper defends his position on a number of fionts. In fa@ in drafts for a discussion ofcontemporary architecture, Semper names three positions that he is particularly critical of: a) the rnafe~iallists~"under the influence of the natural sciences ami related theories," b)the historicists, %derthe innuence ofart history and arçhaedogiical [and mtiquWian) research," c) the schemotists, ''under the inauence of specuiative phïiosophy and ae~tbetics."~Tii the nnal category, Semper criticizes those aestheticiaus wâo ignore the practical aspects ofart, fosm "dead categories* and"amass a schematic-pnitanid system of art founded in pure capricen (Style 194). Semper uses the terni schematism to refer to what he saw as a fom of redUCfnlUCfnlsm-He has in minci LN1Duraud's system of moduiar design which wiis king taught at the Polytechnique ui Friill~e,and foUowed in Munich by Friedrich Weinbrenner (Henmam 153-5). Semper argues that using this meihod is like tqhg to appiy mathernatics to @lems of physics. Wbat he oppses most directly is the way ui which the teaching of modula.d&p prpoduc arc- &ch does not recpüe aay great skilI and even Iess arthic ingenuity- This in trirn tbreatens to sw;unp the restricted market of the type of architecture Semper proposes. * Hedso inctudes Gotbïc architecture in this categqon account ofthe fact thet it foilows hown schematism (Swe 194; uAttri'butesn257-8). However, the grea&st weight of his attack on the Gothic style Ïs on the bIisis ofbsupposed 8SSOCiBfion with "Cithoiic and qpto-cathoiic propaganda" ("Critical" 228). Semper's anti-Catholiciism is quite pervasive in his writirtg-I3 The mion of Gothic and schemritikm under the heading of specuiative aesthetics rnakes for some straage bodfeilows.
Yet, Semper allows some room for an aesthetc philosophy, despite his critique of architecture influenad by certain branches of it His on aesktic philosophy encompasses his theory of authorities and the human ideal. In the Prolegomenon to Der SIil Semper's critique of specuiative aesthetics is foUowed by an arMendum which advances an aesthetics htis clearIy ianuenced by Schopenhauer. The authorities tbat govern configuration (symmetry, pop~rtiodty~direction) foliow a "general law of configuration" (called the "authority of fitness of content" in '"I'heory of Formal Beau@') which affects art (Le. the artist who is the cause of art) in a mpmrer very much like the way in which Schopenhauer%Will affects the phenornemi world In this way Semper is able to unite Zeising's phciples, which aie fomded on Hegekt ideaIïsm, with Schopenhsuerian scepticism Theanalogy ktween the gened law of configuration
''Sec the Prolegomenon to Der S.,SZyle 189-90; 'TnfIIuence'' 19 1-4; 'cCnticaln254-8. 12hterestingLY,Semper cites SchuiLel and his school es foilowing the influence of schematism, Schinkel is ohconsidered as an influence on Semper. ("Criticai" 257) I3~orSemper's anti-Catboiicism and Ïts relation to events in hi.Me, see MaIIgrave Semper 143-9,274-5,306; for its dation to Semper's views on the Gothic, see Herrmarin 124-38. (GestuZtun&rgesetz) in in and art aappats most clearly in what spculative 8esthetics casthe fonnal elements of kauty" (Slyle 197).
The space Semper malces for himseifwithh the field ofdeticsis precisely the . - space he defends againsî îhe makmkîs who he ch&Ocafe an architecture that masfers oniy structural tasks- In this way Semper defends the architecnital profession against that of engineering Matcriai "mwt wver be the oniy decisive fc;iictor for the embodzment of the ides" ("Cntid' 255)- This notion is consomnt with Semper's Bekleidmg t6eory thst propos4 the maiking of materiai reality. HoweverYSemper's extendecl discussion of the influence of materid on style, that is, the matenal ofthe "dressing", demo~l~frafe~the defence of hïs position agabtst style that does wt consider materid fators: mmely, the whims offashion that adapt material to any given style.
This Iast criticism is the one Semper directs agahst the Historicisb, whom he conceives of as Classicd or Romantic (Gothie).
Both find it more wnvenient to reproduce existiag works mchanged or, et least, to fashion whatever the given task requires in an arbitrary and unnaanal mamet. . . .The Historiatls [-storicists] are in a sease the -me opposite of those architects who a;ttn'buîe to the material too decisive an influence on the rise of architectural foms. - .. ("Cnticaim 255)
Yet, historicism is nevertheless evident in Semper's own th- @en thai he lwks to historical forms in order to detemine the laws of formal beauty. MaMgrave woaders, with cause, why Semper refussd to incorporate contemporary materials and to work toward new fiappropriate to them (Semper 307-8). Semper's nnal remarlrs of the 1869 lecture show thet he has, at least, wnsidered the possïbilïty of their futine incorporation, but is convinced ofthe relev811ce of historicai forms.
People reproach us arcbitects for a Iack of iaventiveness-too barshIyysince nowhere has a aew idea of universal historical importance, pursued wiiforce and conscio~ss,becorne evident Weare convinceci that wherever such an idea would reaUy talre the lead, one or the other of our young ~~IIeagueswill pve himself capable of endowing it with a siiitable architectural dress- Until that tirne wmes, however, we must be reconcile outselves to make do as bestwe canwiththe01dx4(284)
Thus, the position Semper defends within the cuinnal field is not just one amang a number of otheis, but is closely intercomected with three positions that vied for authority within the field Semper's positionhg among them, a process of m~gulation, served to demamate a space fiom which he could argue for dturaiauthonty-
On each fiont, Semper sought the eEéctive legitimation of hÏs theory's autonomy by setting up au opposition. The opposed position is situated as heteronomous with other fields. Historicism is heteronomous witb the ecoaomic field when it folIows the dictates of fashion/speculati011;materiaiism is heterommous with the ecunomic field when it follows the dictates of speculation in an architectural economy of means; and specdative
L4~tzschargues that the contentment to wait for a new worlbhistoricai idea is in direct opposition to Semper's view in 1834, whece oaly a change in social-political conditions wïil aüow art to impmve. This is, according to Qrntzsch, a demoIIStfBaon of how mach Semper had abandoneci his revolutiorwy i&als under different (i-e.bourgeois) conditions 44-5. aesthetics is heteronomous with the economïcand the intdectual fields, as in îhe case of Durand's schedciSm, which is CRtickifm following economïc lKCeSSity and floodhg the madret of architects, d in the case of Gothic architecture wbicb is criticized for foflowing empty inteLIctual categorïes (Le. categones tbat do aot apply to the autonomous field of art). Tlmt each ofthese opposed positions is comtered by another position opposed by Semper*demoasfrates the intertwined and relatlond character of the strug@e for 1egitimar.y.
1have attempted to show that Semper's development of his theory was aIso au extended effort to esîabiisb bis position (expressed in his thwry and in his wce) as the legitimate, autonomous position withia the architectpral field (which varied as Semper eneountered it, fiom nation to nation, end Elnn historical moment to historkal moment)- The stakes involveci in autonomy, as Bomdieu demoI1ShCLLfeS, are not only the forces of power that characterize the archikdmd field, but aIso the relation of those forces to the field ofpower, which he danias
the space of relations offorce between Mirent bdsof capital or, more precisely, betwee~agents wbo possess a sdficient amount of one of the dBèrent kinds of capital to be in a position to dominate the correspondïng field, whose smigples mtmwheneverthe relative value of different kinds of capital is questioned (for exampIe, the exchange rate between cultural capital and economic capital); that is, especiaily when the established eqdi'bnum in the field of instances specifically charged with the reproduction of the field of power is threatened. .. . (Practicd Razson 34)
Bourdieu has shown how "the comtrdon of the state proceeds apace with the construction of the field ofpower," by explainhg that the state is nothing 0ththan the accumulation and concentration ofdifferent Iands of capital, which enables it to exercise power over the different fields, the capital paiticuiar to hm, and the exchange rate between clBiirerit kinds of capital (Pr~cticulReason 4042). The concentration and regdation of capital by the staîe produces a bureaucratie field, wherein agents who possess a suBcient amount of a type of capital authorize Iegitimacy within that field (e-g. the culturai field) and struggie in @cuk for power over the state, which iS also the power to reproduce the very capital they possess (42). Since culture coI1Sfjtutes national identity, the state has an interest in imifving the cultural market (45-46). Wïtba field, those agents who hold enough ofthe type of capital paaicdar to it to establish legitimacy for thst field do so by accoding to the unifiai cultural det,tbet is, by acceduig to the miversaï (PracticaI Rem5&60,8&91). Thus the otniggle for power in the caltural field is the stniggle over the definition of the universal, which represents the interests of the dominent positions (holding a high degrex ofcapital) în the field ofpwerwerh 0th words, the stniggle fm positions oflegitimrih'm is the stniggle for autonomy (ie. the dennition of aidowmy), which sigdsthe universal, since it opposes itseifto the arbitrarMess ofheterommyY In the architectural field, as 1have attenipted to show, Semper stniggled for Iegitmiacy in mirentways sccordmg to the @cuIStr stmctlire of the field at the moment and accordhg to that of the larger field of power In The FmElements 4 Architecture, he responsponded to the afchitectud field as it related to the field ofpower in Saxony. The principle of Iegitimacy and universality was the social (the hearth), and Semper's struggie to effect this pinciple was met with the resistance of dominant forces in the field ofpower,dose intetests were not in "the social" as Semper de- it In Science. Irtaurtry, cdArt, Semper reformulated îhe principle of legitimecy in his theory by situsting univerdity in taste. Here the contradictions betweea c'unîversality" and the interests the universal serves becorne apparent; that is, the contradictions between "the public" and the interests of those who hold dcient cultural capital to possess "taste"- We shouid recaU he was writiag in England at this point where within the field ofpower (imWre S8~0ny)~taste involves a greater value kingplaced on cultural capitai dative to other species of capital, incliiding economic capital. However, in England the dominant positions in the field of power held a relatively large amount of economic capital (Methe dominant positions in Saxoay had a greater interest in hereditary forms of capital), wfüch can hetp accoimt for Semper's contradictory rdationshp to specuiation. In 1869, when Semper had ahady written the fkst two voiumes of Der SM, and gave his lecture, On Architechaol Slyle, the principle oflegitimacy in Semper's theory was bound up in idealism aiad couched in hmankt tenas. His appeaI to humanism and what he Ousthe cosmopolitan fiaioe of architecture expreses the universai, agaùi, in the interests of placing a greater value on culnual capital. Similarly, his defence of autonomy had to siibnmie opposing positions hetemnomous with the economic field The difference between Semper's position in 1869 and the one he formeriy kld in 1852 is that the universal is expnssed in tams of a hdsm(whereas taste was de- as natronal) that is directly opposed to foms ofcolledvity that Semper dcemed iilegitimate; namely, ratho1ic-infIuencednationaiïsm- l5 When dedupon hmViema, the hamrnism ami "cosm~poli~sm"espoused by Semper would be conducive to the potitical &xests ofan "intemational nariodsm," wbïch served the dominant forces in definingthe cdture of GtoJO~feneich~As 1 showed earlier, wben Semper arrived, the field of Art History in A& was in a process ofautonomization. It was tbenfore ahin a pocess of redefhing the legitimate (and Iegitlmizing) principles of Art History in a way that served the interests of those wào held aa inwuigly vaIdcultural -mL Art histond ~cholarshiprmder the Iisti-ttrttfûrdstmreichische Gerchch~orscJclnmgwas more cIosely tied to the dynastic progtam of estabIishing an histmicai couceptïon of law and state, &ch meant tbaî cultural capital in the fonn of art history was to serve those who held jitridical capital; namely the dynasty and its ministers- The he- nobility was replaced with a culturai nobility as the cultural field became increasingiy autonomous. Thus Art History in Austria incrieasingly mtedcultural intdonalism Ui fkvout of the cultural capital that was held by agents of different donalities within the Empire, particularly Hmgarh and Czech (although the struggie with bctïons that held Austro-German interests is a result of a similm stniggle within the field of power). Intematiomkm as a prïnciple ofcuituraI Iegitimacy at the same tiw served the dynasty, which, since 186 1, shared political power in a bicameral legislatuce, and, since 1867, in a Duai Mona~chywith Huogary. The dynasty would benefit from mternatiodsm since, intedy, it was dyeateried by the fbgmenting forces of nationalisms within the Empire, and, extedy, by the forces of Genmm mificatiou. The 'îmiversal" represented as cultural intematiodism thus had its profits for those who acceded to it
lS~ernper's remadcs at the end of îhe 1- lectuievml his îhstration with Pnissian authorities (he names Bismarck) who oversaw the jury Semper sat on to decide the design of the Protestant chinch of St Peter in Berlin, On Rrclrirectwd Slyles 283-4. Despite Semper's ptests, a Gothic design by E. Küapeabeie bad ken entertained, but was later dropped, and the cornpetition did not succeed in producing a result. Mallgrave notes thet Semper, however, did look with satkfkdon on Russia's victory in the Franco-hian war, Semper 323. It has been necessary to show the development of Semper's theory as a series of attempts to establish an aidonomous position within the an:hitectural field, and to show this in relation to the autouomization of the field of Art History in AustrÏa, in order to demonstrate their cornmon imbrication in a contest over cultural legitimacy in Vien The building of the museum complex in Vienna was a crucial site in this contest FurthemoreYthe iconography of the Art History Museum, for which Semper was respomible, oxtly becornes comprehensible with an u0derstandi.gof the details of Semper's theoretical -on As MaIlgrave qui-ps, one vhdyrequires a program just to read it (Semper 321). This densely packed iconography will make sense not ody in relation to other theoretical positions, but also to the stniggle for cuihnal legitimacy within the field and to the stniggle over the state regdation of that field The Art History Museum Cpls. 4 and 8L which si& oppsite the NadEIistory Museum on the Maria Teresa Platz, was built to house not only the Habsburg collection of painting and sculpture, but also its coUections of amoucy, mas7coins, and other industrial arts, which had their origins in the court's cabinets of curiosities. In keeping with his theory of style and with the objects housed in the museum, Semper made three vertical divisions in the exterior iconography. On the grormd story motifs were drawn fiom the technical arts: such as, vases, ornements, weapons, tools and instmmeuts. This level represents the material or "intend" factors of style (material, technique7purpose). The main story illustrates the socio-cultural or "exterital" factors (social, political, and individual influences on art)¶which are represented by figures fiom different historical epochs and are meant to show the civilipng power ofart The roofstatuary provides the syntheskg and pendtirnate moment in Semper's style theory: the ideal or the artïstic vision of genius. Here, he paireci what he saw as penodties representing the classicai and romantic tendencies of each period This tripartite vertical division was complemented by a horizontal division into historical periods. Each of the four facades was given an epoch important to the development of art The rear facade represents antique the south-west facade (the side finthest from the Hofburg) Byzantine, Romanesque, and Gothic; the main fdeon the Mitria Teresa Platz fatures Renaissance art; and the norheast kadeon the Ringstrasse fwing the Hofburg represents modem art (Mdigrave, Semper 329-30; Lhotsky 165-7). By allocatiag the longest facades to the representations of antique aad Renaissance art, Semper was able to give pater attention to the periods he felt were more imposant Moreover, the empbasis on the Renaissance, showcased on the main fàcadeyis reinforced by the Renaissance vocabulary with which Semper executed the building- The length of the museum is cwered by two rom of arched windows, which are intemrpted only by the pavilion projections at each end and the central entraace pavilion. Un each projection two pin of co~utnnson each ievel fhme niches reserved for scuipturai works, while piiasters fnune the windows on the middle sections. Semper's favoined use of nxstication is evident on the puud story- The museum's third story is really only signalleci by the square clerestosy windows above the second row ofarched windowsI as the balustrade conceais the skyiïghtstsIt is in the entrauce pavilion, howeverf that Semper concentrates the stylistic and symbolic features most important to his thwry- The dome, which, in bis Zurich le!cture of 1869, was ponounced the greatest creative achievement in architecture, stands high above the rest of the muse- and is smunded by four tabernacles. Crowning the dome is the figure of Pallas Athene [pl. 91. This is the very deity Semper had twice refdto as achieving her Eeedom through art. Phidias, Semper wrote, had recognized that the temple was too confining for his Zeus, so he brought Pallas Athene out into the courtyard of the Acropolis (On Architectural Styles 281). Here, Athene looks out over the courtyard oftbis public forum-' The sculpture on the main story, which represents social and cultmal influences on art, is, in the -ce pavilion, more indicative of Semper's ide&*sm as compared to the more historical figures on the end pavilions. In the niches below the tabaaecles are two pairs of figures: Ems and Psyche, representing the spiritualization of the senses throua art, and Faust and Helena, representing the marcïage of classical culture and formal beaiby with the romantic school of thought (Lhotsky 158). Semper's prediIection for synthesis is characteristic of the artistic ideal he envisioned (this is also evident in the "classical" and "romantic" pairings ofartists nom each period represented on the balustrade). As 1attempted to show in the develojnnent of Semper's theury, the production of an ided as cultural legitimacy is bound up with the production of cultural capital. The -te, reorganïzed through a shift in the field of power to include the interests of the culhiral nobaity (Le. those who hold a high degree of cultural ~apitai)~began to accumulate cultural captai and to ïnvest it in institutions such as the Art HZstory
thene ne was also important to Wagner and the Secessionists, and, as Schorske notes, to the liberals who, lacking any historical heroes of their own, placed a statue of her in fiont of Hansen's pariiament building Fri-de-Siècle 43. Museum. (The degree ofthis pwtïcuiar hvestment is evidenced by the large amount of culturat capital recpmed to read the museumysiconognqby-) Thus, the production of the ideal, or the "uaiverSaIYnfunctions in a performative discourse to define what the staie is, or what its miverse is. At the same time, however, is met with both cornpethg and reinforcing bands of interest in other fields that work towards the denmtion of the -te in sdarprocesses (Bourdieu, PraclcaZ Remon 56-57). 1have suggested that Semper's theory was highly conducive to the Austnan state's politics ~fGro~sterreeich.This becornes quite explicit in the rest of iconography Semper devised for the museum [see appendix]. While the Eros andPsyche, and Faust and Hel- paHs reptesent a certain type of sociakdtud suenceon art, the niches in the end pa.00~are reserved for representatives of important art patronage. On the net pavilion are Charlemagne and RudolfI Ipl IO].* 1have already mentioned the importance of Carolingian art to RIegi and his coileagues in theK attempts to trace medieval German art and architecture back to Roman ongins, rather than Nordic origins as man and north Gennan art historians haci. The representation of Charlemagne would have had pticulary strong politicai resonances as Austria waged its wars with Prussia, Although the batde at Koniggriitz, which occurred when the mwumcornplex was in the Srst stages of the design cornpetition, signalleci milaary defeixt, it may have fortifieci FmJoseph's resolve to compte with Berlin cuinually (Mallgrave, Semper 3 141.3Charlemagne was the pofiticai figure who unifid the German States under the Holy Roman Empire, and the comection to the Habsburg dynasty is reinforaxi by the figure of RudoIfL As fouuder of the Habsbiirg ayaarty, Rudolf was the 6s-tin a long heof Habsburg Holy Roman Emperors until its formai dissolution into the Austrian Empire procIaimed by Francis II in 1806. Rudolf was by no meaas a great art patron His representation here is IMy meant to signal the importance ofa more generai Habsburg art patronage. On the left pavilion, two other Habsburgs are represented: CbarIes V and Charles VI. It was through Habsburg dominion in the Spanish NetherIands, under Charles V (aiid more significantly, in tterms of art collechg, Archduke Leopold Wilhelm), that the Art History Museum eventually
2~hehistoncal progression of right to left fo11ows the clockwise progession amund the musewn Semper is evidently considerhg the Renaissance as a derbroad historiaai pend 3~emperwaged his own compaition with Berlia, as evidenced by the bittemess he felt aAer sitting on a jury there. See note 15, cbaptcr 1. inherited what, to many, is the most sigdicant part of its coilection: the large number of FlemishandDutch paintzngs. The rear side of the muse- *ch is devoted to aimÏart, is entirely consonant with Semper's theoretid privileging of Roman art as a progression fiom Greek art The six figures deuoting Ùiauential art patronage on the rear facade represent, the eariy Classical, high Clsssicd, HeUenic, and Roman penods. On the right piifion are Minyas and Polycrates; on the centre pavilion are Pisistnuus and Pericles. Wberess earlier, in his Oresden Art Gallery, Semper ended this devetopment with the representative of Akmian demoaacy, Pericles. he now continues, on the left p.on,to include Nemander the Great and AugustusugustusIn the Zwïch lecture, Alexander is Wseâ for conceiving "the idea of an Asian-Mcan-Ewopean universai momhy" and for mempting with his architect Dinocrates, to give it monmentai expression (On ArchitecruuZSryIs 281). Semper continues, that AUgUShL9 assumed this legacy in developing the ccAlexandrian-R~manstyle'' of hperial Rome (281-2). As I menti@ earlier, Semper saw the denigration of this style as a result of the Western adoptÏon of the basilics-fom for its sacerdotal chah(later becoming the Gothic cathedral) MeConstantine fostered the dome-form in the East (On Architecftrral Styles 282). Semper thus had a very prticular notion of artistic inheritance that centrecl on the style of Imperia1 Rome. This is reflected in the choices for the symbolic representations of the Byzantine, Romanesque, and Gothic perïods on the Lastenstrasse f'acade. For example, the cities chosen to be personified in the arch spandrel reliefs are Byzantium, Rwenna, Aachen, Goslar, Ragw, and Cologne. Semper atternpts to give the Bylantine and Carolingian pendequal consideration These examples illustrate the ways in which dhual legitunacy and the cultural capital it produced wuld serve the interests of the Austrian state. Ironically, however, Semper was not immediately chosen to execute the museum. In fact, he was not even cornecteci with the design competition wben it was fht issued. The bistory of the cornpetition, *ch aroused heated debate and ernbittered many, reveals not only something about the characterof the wntest over cultural legitimacy, but also something about the definition of the state and its power to reproduce relations withlli the field through institutions such as the Art History Museum. It must be kept in mind that, dong with his advisors, Franz Joseph effdvely had the nnel decision with respect to the shape of the museums. As court museums, they were intended as gestures of imperial patronage. Furthemore, they were constcucted on the land opposite the Hofbrng, which becarne a key factor in the deba-teover how exectly they were to relate to the court itseK However, Franz Joseph and his cabinet were far fiom king the soie determïning force in the construction of tk mwumcomptex, as the increasingly autonomous field stniggied to make its opuUons wimt in the decision-making processprocess Schorske has show hm,by the heofthe cornpetition amouncement, the cuitaral field had won sigaiscant ground m the aaiiirs ofthe state- When the land ofthe rampaas and glacis were officially decided to be razed for co~lst~cb*on,folowing the rescript of 1857, ali ofit wss underthe control ofthe müaary. An 1860 ldetIpl. 111 announcing the development of the Ringstmse shows a plan for a pair of military buildings on the site of the pffent museun cornplex (%Weumn 15). Ti1 the yuae year, the miiitary sdfiered losses My,and the fht bicamerd legislature was constïtuted in 186 1 with the Februaxy Patent This ushered in a paiod of bunaucratization and Austro-Geman centraI~~ou.Oae of the effects of this was the reclamation, in 1864, of the land opposite the Aofburg fiom the military, despite L &stance- The City Expansion Commimmission,which was created whm the Ringseasse dwelopment was announced and consisted ofmembers with niixed politicaï allegiances, now pressed the emperor for the construction of musecmis instead of miliîary buildings C"nhJSeum7' 13-14). Franz Joseph conceded, and in 1865 the füst program for the wmpetition was drafted (Mallgrave, Semper 3 14). Prior to the cornpetition, the professional community haâ issued calls for an independent, comprehensive museum. The architect Ludwig Forster drafted a plan for single block of museums for both court and state; and RudoIfvon Eitelberger proposeci a single, comprehensive, noadynestic museum. None ofthese proposais appealed to the court, however (Schorske, "Museumn 15). When the competition program was drafted, it stipulated tbat two rnusems be sited across nom the Hotburg. The competition was limited to Theophi Hiamen, Heimich Ferstei, Moritz Lohr, and Car1 Haseaauer. Haosen and Ferstel were obvious choices. Under Count Leo Thun, Ferstel had bdt the fht Ringstrasse buiiding the Votivkirche. He had also been involved in the Academic Legion in 1848 and would be chosen to buiId the new University a few years later- Hansen, who built a total of five public buildine on the Ringstrasse, was at the the in the mi& of designhg the pdiament, although in the foUowing year his work was interrupfed by the Austro-Prussian War. After the ensuiag interd political crisis, Haasen complcted the parliament according to the needs of the reorgmkd legislature (Schorske, Finde-Siéccle 40-1). In the competition, then, were two architects who would bdd two-thirds of the Rathausp1atz, or what Schorske refers to as the Birrgerforum. Moritz Lohr was a civil servant who did not hvemuch of an arcbitecnnal reptation, although he had prepered a number of shdies for the museums- Hiwxmuer, on the other hanci, had eamd recognition in other competitious, although he bad wt won any major commisio~.Fm the begïmhg, then, Haasen and Ferstel were favoured in the professleSSlonalco~ll~tl~ty, which wwld won becorne polarized over this choie (MaUgrave 3 14). Feeling that the prognun was too restrictive, both Haas+n and Ferstel chose not to adhere to the stipulation of two separate buildings [pls. 12 and 131. The jury rejected . their plans on these groUtl %e Ragmatic Sanction was enamd by Francis II to ensure the conhnuance of Wsburg dermder his daughter Maria Teresa, since he had no male hiers. The contest The cultrwl hion su- by the museum complcx was, then, merely "symbolic-"The Ring, concludes Schorske, uabsorbs [dcting] claims to poLltical primacy into the circufar flow of pluraIistïc compmise" ("Museumy' 20; addition made in minking 121). In otkr woràs, the Rindmodernity blunted the liberals' atternpted cultural fusion, and 5 blunted imperid efforts to extend its patrimony. Thus¶tbe Ring/modemity stands in the way of coltrwI fusion on two fbnts It seems9 however, tbî much word play so as to maintai.the historicism/fix-modernidflux opposition; that isy so that Schorske may maintain the progression of Whe sword, the sceptre, and the ring,'' imperative that Schorske does not explab, just as he does not explain the generating power of the Ruigstnisse's "magnetism," 1 briefly wish to reconsider this imperative to the dissolution of spatial fkity and the theory of the mure of culturai fusion on which it is dependent This reconsideration wiU also be developed Merin the foilowing chapter. So fm, I have showa, usïng Bourdieu's theory, how the f~lureofcuiîurai fiision thesis can be rethought in tenus of shifts in relations of power and capital accumulation which involve the production of positions ofautmomy withul the field of cultural production Semper defended the cultural legitunacy of such a position in tenns of the monumental and the forum. The production of a cuituraUy autonomous position in architecture caa be translated into a question of spatial autoaomy. This means the production ofa physical place distinct from its sumundings; in this case, a forum tbat is differentiated fiom the mrounding rabaa space. In the cultural field, this means an dsiically autommous position discontinuous with the "space" occupied by others in the field Sitte made Muse of the idea of place as spatial differentiation in his advocacy of pi- set off ftom the rest of urban development, in effect ma- an argument that defends the autonomy of place against the heteronomy of urban flux and ephemdty-To cite one other Viennese empIe among the many nineteenth.calls for iirban refonn, Rudolf Eltelberger and Heinrich Ferstel pubfished a pamphlet in the 1860s calleci "HowShould Vie- Build?" It fesponded to the new flood oftenement bdding activity in the Ring district, *ch the over the symbolism illusirates the extent to *ch it was a compn,mise. The libQals mgued that the empress should hold only the scr0I.l in her hand. The royal cornmittee responsibie for the monument compmised by baving the sceptre rest on the scroli. mersymbolic elements at the base of the monument reinforce this: they include both miiitary and cuitml heroes, "Museum"l9-20- authors saw as a rather messy fom of dankation tbat resulted fiom dettered specdaîiom They argueà instesd for detatcbed dweWgs with sepmûe gardeas based on the English mode1 (Schorske, FmaeSèccle 48; Olsen lûû). Although deticand perhaps edogical justifications may have beeu cited, their poposais would medy have brought a more exclusive foun ofhousing to a market that was already disadvantapus to the underclasses, The production of place or spatial autowmy under the name of cultural legitimacy, therefore, involves a politics of space that ùicludes ail the relations of power invoIved in the production of CMautonomy. When legitirnacy is watested in the architectinal field and the stakes are the state regdation of the C'univexs&"then that conte$ which is always overthe limiteddispersaI of the profits of the miversal acwrding to a "principle of vision and division" (Bourdieu, Practcal Remon 57-6û), can be seen to %ke place" in particdariy geographical dimensions. One of the ways in which those moments of stniggle eau be andysed is according to the different imaginaries of a ecular place- 1wouid Wre to compare the culturai sites on which Semper worked in Drwdea and Vienna by examining some drstwings made by the arcbitect and others. A common device employed in architecniral presentation drawings is the inclusion ofone or more figures to indicate scale and sometimes the notion of "iivable" FeeThese figures, 1 think, also reveal to a ptextent how, and by dom, the architect imegiws that space to be used, When Semper began to wo* on plans for the nrst Dresden Hoftbeater in 1835, he had ody begun to wnsider the formation ofa larger fmthat would wmect with the Zwinger. Over the years his ideas for a cultural fonnn evolved as be aegotiated with the Kuig, the Saxon Diet and museum officials. When construction on the theatre began, it was aligned with the west wiag ofthe Zwiager in accordance with Semper's plans for a comecting orangery Ipl. 1q. Together the omgery and theatre wodd have faced the Catholic Aofkirche, the guatdhouse designeci by Schinkel and King Friedrich August II's palace looking across a square and garda extendhg fiom the Zwinger courtyard (Midigrave, Semper 97-99). Over the, the Zwinger officials mvedthe need for a new gaIlery that wouid house the collections in the then deteriorating Stallgebtiuùe. Semper then began to design the new art gaüery as an extension ofthe east whg ofthe Zwinger, partialiy on the site of the guardbouse, which he pro@ to move to the trank of the Elbe [pl 181. In tbis plan, the courtyard of the Zwinger is exteaded to the theatm in an enclosed forum, the axis of which aligns with the repositioned guardhouse. The extension of the forum (now demmated on the west by a aam>w storage building rather than an orangay) beyond the new art galiery into the space opposite the theatre is marked off oniy by a bal- and three hesiaeding collumlls. Thus, the palace and much of the Hofkirche is hidden fiom view inside the fom(MaIlgrave, Semper 107-1 1). Semper mede a number of altematives to this design as he Iubbieâ the Diet for support However, thîs plan was the one he prefdand for it he made the elaborate perspective drawing ofthe fo- 100- slightly off&, hmbehind the balustrade Ipl. q. Semper won the approval of the king but the two chambers of the Dîet continueci to debate the me& of the plan Resistsace formed anwmd a number of issues7includïng, in addition to cost, the -on ofhsafi (the connection to the theatre) and even the possibIe formation of a wind tunnel @ect (Mdgrave, Semper 110-1 1). Howmr,one point of resistence adds a remarkab1e twist to the storystoryThe Iand between the church and the river was occupied by a pupofapproximite1y forîy bouses, called the ItaIïau Vinage. It was formed in the eighteenth century by immigrant craftsmen who were employed in the comtmdon of the palace and other royal building projeaS. In the 1820s the CO- concemed over its ghettdiile appearaace, had bebegun le@ proceedings to expropriate the land to make better use of it mgrave, Sbnp967). The mure of the wurt and the Diet to agiee on a suitable plan conthutxi into the phase of Semper's involvement wÏth the Zwinger designs. The Diet did agree, however, to expropriate some land to build Semper's Hoftheater, *ch, in a cumpromise, was moved closer to the Zwinger tban first pl- (Uaugrave, Semper 9û-99). NOW,fàced with the plans for Semper's exptlnded fonrm, it had to resolve the questionof expropriating the rest of the vülage and rdocating the guardhouse. Apjmredy the associated costs were more than the Diet was wiifing to aUow (MaIlgrave, Semper 110). The vision Se- jxesents in his Qawing is one of a spatially enclosed cultural forum, separate fiom the royal palace yet stül under its purview. Totally eclipsed fiom both the perspective drawing and grouad plans is the IUan Villageywhose Unwrely inte- were defended by the Diet wmprised mostiy of the Saxon kmdstande. The spatial autonomy of the forum is imagined as the cultural aidonomy ofthe set of institutions sited there- This is signaled by the victory columas in the foreground of the drawing whicb represent the classical motif ofthe triumph of art over barbarity* The forum as a site autommous fiom the palace and the church did not depend on the severance of syniboIic relations, since ît stilï reqoired the court's pbroaage. Iaaead.ît depended on a selfantaiaed space to effectively enable it as a site of culturation Semper has translateci this mnddlyin the perspective drawing The viewer immediately identifies the pair of figures in the foregrouad and has their gaze directe4 through a ciramatic use of Iinear persplive. to the farthest end of the forum and the tiny barogue dome ofthe Zwinger- A scopic order regdates the spacc ofthe fo~aOur culnned, coatempIative viewers who stand before the impessRre scene are ecboed by a simüar pair who overlook the scene nom the batcony ofthe theatm- The activiîy ofthe group between the nght column end the theatre is siniated within the field of vision de- by these overlapping gazes, whüe that which goa on ohdethe fo- to the far passes mticed- Although these plans mver gaineci the sapport neededto carry them through, Semper was asked to build the new gaiiery as an extension between the two wings on the noahside ofthe Zwinger (thus encIosiag the ZwiDger courtyard)- The theatre more was situated opposite the Hofkirche, the pairtce and the guardhouse in a relativeIy open urban space. It is this site and social space thet the artist Gottiob Hammer represented in the 1845 waterçolour ofthe Hofthegfer [pl. 71. Altéough 1was unable to discover for whom it was made and iaow it was used, this image nevertheles was intendeci to convey a vey aemtpi- of the same site. It is clear fkom the scaîe of the figures that the artkt wished to reprPsent the symbolic sigdicance ofthe theatre through the image of the socid relations that took place on the site before it This is especiaUy apparent when compared with Semper's prebhary perspective drawing of the dieatre [pl. 171. Semper's shaiply rrcsding two-point pmpectcte exaggerates the monumentality of the bddiag, whereas Hammer's redition of the theatre is exceedingly awkward in its scale and low degree of Wve.Hammer may have imagined the theatre as the "platforni for conse~lsusand balancey'baween court and populace, as Wyss argues it was, and represented the theatre as a symbolic social mediator that extended to all the socid groups depicfed in the pinhg h any case, the monument is not conceived as having a singuiady cuiturai relationship with the people who occujy its space. There is no one who reflects on it as an archikctud form. nor is there any indication that ail of the people shown might actuaily attend the theatre- Ifthe theatre is imagined as a cultural institution that operates in a rapprochement with the CO- then it does this here above and beyond the space and social relations represented. In Hammer's ixnagbtion the theaire is a "public" institution; that k, its cultural universe is the "public," however limited we may recognize this to be (are any of the residents ofthe Italian Viliage pictured?). He wnveys this by qresentiag the monument on a public square, in which the whole social field, apparentlyymoves in and out across the fiame. Whüe Semper represents bis Zwingerfonnn as an autowmws site reseived for cultural contemplation, Hammer reptesents the Hoftheater on a "public" site in which its cultural bene& extend to a "publicn sphere-HoweverY Semper's own perspective drawing of the Hoftheater Ipl. 171 similady portrays a large number ofpeople going about their business seemingiy obLivious to the the-= except fm two standing figures near the bottom nght corner. These are two officid loobg men One, evidently a soldiers discusses the building as the other gestms toward h Ts Ït meiely an architect's conceit in a presentation drawing to hclude the image ofsomeone contemplating his or her own don?Or is it an indication that the architect fecognizes the stakes involved in cultural legimacy, by a~ouncinghis or her work as a site of culturai consideraton? I think the second proposition more WreIy. What tbis gesture reveals is the principle of vision and division that differentiiates the social miverse of the monument hmthe universe ofcuIturaL capital. That is, as a space of cuitmation it openites unevenly. The différences between Hammer's image and Semper's perspective drawing of the forum reved tbat place is a conStNction that is detetmined not so much by a built environment, but rather by a network of social processes (Harvey, Jmtice)).The ïmapinaries of this site diverge on the character of the miverse to wtùch Ït belongs- This is dong the iines that sepruate its daims to the "universal"(its ''public" chmacter) and the limited economy of cultural capital. Thus, the notion of spatial auiowmy or is dependent on the Merent imaginaries ofthat place This is not to argue that a se= of place (cultural, public, etc.) is entireIy relative. As David Harvey writes, The process of place formation is a process of carving out "permanences" nom the flow of processe~creating spsces. But the CCpermanences''aomatter how solid they may -are not etemal: they are always subject to time as uperpehial perishing? They are contingent on the processes that -tes sustain. and dissolve îhem (Jitice 261) Harvey includes among these processes imagkdon (beIIek, values, de~ires)~ Mtutions, discourses, and material practices. 1would add that the ways in which different types ofcapital are accumulated, exchanged, and reproduced can be considered in reIation to these passes. AU of the processes involved in the creation of the Dresden Hoftheater (for exampIe, those that determined the political field, Semper's mchitectuFcil theory and practice, the emgbuilt environment) served the creation of its place and the differences it produced as a site of culturation These ciifferences 1 have descni in Bourdieu's temis, as foilowiag a principle of vision and division, which serves to reproduce a universe of culturation and the uneven distnLbuti*onof its capital and power. Semper's imsginary of a grand Kais-forzun in Vienna was Uivolved in a different universe of culturation, since it fonned a part ofa dinerent set of relations between the state and the CuitUrai field This monumental space was modelled on the forums of hmal Rome, as Semper's bistorlcal tbeory now posited a development fht hm despot palace architecture to the Greek temple, which dtedin Phidias's placement of Athene in the courtyard of the AcropoiislisThis move sigoalecl the tum toward cïty planning and chic suchitecture, which culminateci in the forums of Rome (On Architectural Siyles 281). Semper's thinLing on the forum, therefore, began to take into account urban space- His bird's-eye view of the proposed Kaiserforcan situates it within a rather indistinct and relatively undifferentïaîed urban setting, no doubt helping Schorske to imagine it as a kedenclave amid ubnflux and flow bL 41. Semper blfseemed not to retreat hmthe architectural and mban planning demands ofa metropoh, however- His objection to the developments in Parîs did not fius on Haussmaim's creation ofwide boulevards ami long vistas, which served, among othec things, to meet a high volume of traffic- Instead, he critiqued the artincial styles tbat cloaked its monuments (On Architecnaol Styles 26667). Viema's transformation into a burgeoning metropolis was afso Uistnimental to the way in which the state began to imagine itseK The empire's bureaucratie centralkation, which wntinued steadily sùice the I860s, contributeci to the city's growth, which was also aided by migration hmBohemïa, Moravia and other parts ofthe empire to meet the needs of Vienna's uid~~tion(L,ichtenberger 4243). Bureaucra~on began under the hereditary nobüj. and the systern of Alexander Bach according to strongly Austro-Gennau pinciples as traditional domains of state power wexe alter& by the loss to Italy and the AusgIeich with Hmgary (Je100-05). As the heredîtary nobility was replaced with a culturai nobibty, the bufeaucraîïc field witnessed a StNggie to redefine the &teteThe shift in the field of art hiStory is representative of a larger pattern to culturally defke the state accordhg to "intemational" principles (despite resistences). Thus the wsmopolitau image ofthe city could serve the w1l~01idationofthe state in tems of both the reorganized bureamtic field and the traditional political boundaries of the empire- (An examuiaton ofthe way in which, for example, non-Austriian nafionals and immigrant Viennese labourers imegined Vienaa would reveal cornpethg claims to what the city meanti) This notion of the City fomd its way into the imaginaries of the muscimi site. An 1872 waterwlour by Rudoif von Alt IpI. 191, that hcludes a view of the rear of the Natuml History Museum and the adjacent picîures a flow of eatnc tbat circulates around and through the museum complex This is an image ofthe forum that clearly does not adhere to Schorske's view of its Eircity. For the 1873 World Exhibition in Vienne. the artists Girard and Rehlander produced a coloured perspective drawing denved fkom the von Alt watercolour, which also dramatidy exagerates the deof the forum Ipl. 201. The triumphal arch that spms the RUigstrasse towem over the suffo-g people, which becorne an imdifferentiated crowd The extended reach of the fombeyond the picnire's That the state mi@ want to show to the empire and the ddan image ofthe fonim, then under construction, as a rnonumenta.1inban space is evidenced by the Girard and Rehlander drawing What this image conveys about the fonmi as a site of culturation is that it extends syxnbolidy to the public domain of the city and the empire. Very different nom it is a Iithograph of the Aa Efistory Miisermn Ipl 211 made mund 1900 showing a much Iess populated Maria Teresa Platz as a dïsth~tIybwgmlich spsce in which the state~culturai institution serves as an exterision of "domestic" space. The highiy manrmanrcuredFremch garden of the square signals the respectability adorder of the space tbrough which the bzirgerlich mother and her maid stroli- Only the uncertain pause ofthe man by the lightpost and ^business-me''activity ofthe men at the edge of the fiame lend any suggestion of a "public" rPalm beyod, which is here operative in opposition to "domesticity." The ways in which the museum complex as an inban -ce hctioned in the processes ofuneven culturation is revealed by the Merent imaginaries of that site. These imaginaries may alternately represent the space as a 6xed and regulated cCperrnaneucenor as open to the circulation of an mdifferentiated urban population Again, the division of how this site is imagined is dong the Liaes of the separation of its claims to the "universai" and the limited universe of the benefactors of culturation, That the site produced d.erences in a process of culturation can be furttser demonstrated by some observations on how the Art History Museum was used. Although an entire museological study couid be dertaken, 1wish merely to point out some statistics about the museum's use. Upon the ceremonious opening of the Art Hïsbry Museum on, October 17,189 1, the empmr Franz Joseph was granted an exclusive showing of its displayed wllections, guided by Hasenauer and museum curators The visit began at eleven in the moming and went well into the aftemoon, two and a half hours beyond schedule. For the next two days, the museum entertained visits fiom selected individuais (Haupt 39-42). On October, 22 the museum was opened to the public. According to its hours of Visitation, it am making the assumption (which I have been unab1e to verify) tbat the Girard and Rehlander drawing is qroduced in Mailgrave, S~emperh its entkty. was open five days a week for four or five hours each day (a suth day was soon added to the schedule wuhich remanied in effiuntil1907). Thiirsday was desïgnafedNobekag and was resewed for those who held entranus car& distrï'buted in Iimited number by the court treanny &cece Simday was its busiest day, kiagthe or@ &y on which most workers were able to attend Btrance was also free on Sundays, when it was open hm nine mtii one. Although on weekdays the entrarice p*cewas ody one crown, the hierarchized price structure (practïced by many museums today) helped facilitate the class differentiatim ofvisitors accordhg to the &y ofthe week Of the more thsn 200,000 visitors wfio went to the museum in the first two and a half month, over half visited it on Smdays. During this thetefore. an avqof 13.000 people entered the musePm in the scant four hours it was open each Suaday (Hàupt 53). Thus the pwctice of the muSeimi Merentiafed its public jud as the architectural site of museum complex did This differentiation should be seen as a response to a new urban public- In tinn that new public played an instrumental role in shaping the way the rnuseum's inbaa space was both imegined and used AU of these developments were predicated upon uneven pocesses of culturation and shifts in the definifinitionofthe state- 1 have noted the new importance the image of the city held in relation to these developments. During the 1890s. urbaai2ation dramatidy affecced the political field just as municipal politics were u?stnimentai in ternis of duectuig urban growth This shifi in state power, of course, also aEected. the cultural field, and in the ne* cbapter 1wïii examine how Otto Wagner responded to urt>anization derthese conditions. Otto Wagner: Confronthg Urban Society I have attempted to show thus far how the pcesses of culturation, that deveIoped almg with the autonomization ofthe cdtdfield and the emergence of a cdtural nobility, have to be comidered as tokingpIace. The siting ofcdtural legitbacy must also be considered reflexively: the space of culturation produces differences ondthat space is proddthrough processes ofdiffereatiation((tba t, the muge of processes that Harvey atmbues to the carving out of 'pemianences")).Thus the museum wmplex deployed its cultural program through iirtwin space and it used different imaginaries ofthe hanto construct that space- The processes ofcdturati*oncomected with the Art History Museum produced and depended on a "universaLn under which it effected diffefenfiation The image of the city, through a metonymic chah of forum-city-empire, worked to consolidate a national groJ6sterreeichisch culture. Yet by the 1890s, uhn&ion began to drarnatidy affect the sociai, cuitiual, and poMcai fields in both Austria and Germany. Brdyspeakhg, the city facilitated shifts in capital accumulation and its attendant power in di of these fields. As a perceived phenornenon, the city chaiienged the traditional notions of community that were produced by riniverSajn culture (or more proprly, community became a site of discursive investigation)). These traditions of co~~llllimitywere bas& on Land or Nation, in the case of Germany, or Empire, in Austria (Tbat the empire codd be be projected through the image of the city and in ~UIU threatened by if serves to demonstrate the reflexive production of place.) The paralle1with Gennany is noteworthy, as Fritz Rïnger hss descrî'bed the effects ofthese developments on the German academic community-the cultural nobiiity or mandarins-in ways that bear remarkable similarities with the situation in Au- of this perid These similatities existed despite deepseated cultural cornpetition between the two corntries. l A number of German sociologists reacted to the city, often fearing that tbe dishtegration of traditional notions of community would prove alie~thg.Yet the more "This serves to demonstrate thaî red differences are not în the pdcularïties of national or cultural charactei but in those of the histones of structures and dispositions- Bourdieu, Practical Reason 3- abstract nature of mban social relations did not peclude the possï'bifity of communiiy formations that would finiction in sidarly oahodox ways (Ringer 162-80). In fàct, for the mandarins, the dilemma tht begau to be posed in this period was between a retrenchment oftraditional dhnal vaiues and the adaptation of those vaIues to the material and social changes of which urbanüation was a part Ringet has categonzed these two camps as orthodox and modemist Thic is a crucial distinction because it thwsthe supposed progressivism ofthe modemist position into question (Ringer deh'berately avoids the categories of consedve and progressive) (12843)~He notes also that a very limitai nmber ofGemaen academics actually took up the cause of the Mawsts. What this demonstrates is thatthe culturai capital ofthe mandanas bed to be safeguarded, and that the positions oithodox anci modemist addressed this by representing two pales in a whole speanun of strategies. The @culau, modernist architectural discourse Otto Wagner employed negotiated cultural legitimacy, and its vaiues and profits7against this larger shift in power. It did this by directly engaghg with irrbanism, which was seen as both the locus of cornpethg daims to cultural legitimacy and the site of potential renewai-in 0th words the stabg out of an altemate clabas an adaptation to some ofthe interests of the cornpetition This struggle for power was played out in the political field as weli, as the relationship between the cultural fieId and the state was affected by these cbanges. Looking back through the fikof îwentieth century high modernist, tationalist architecture, histoisans have descn'bed Wagner as a "pioneef of the modem archltectrrral movement His own career supposedly tmk the path of a moddsm that defineci itself by slowly stripping away its excessive elements untü it was left with purely rational and fundonal forms. This is the -gtu Car1 Schonke adopts in Fin-deSiécZe Viemra. However, he explains Wagner's choices by situating bis work within a context of a crisis in bourgeois culture as monumentai public buildings were threatened by CC~politin" ami the breakdown of likral culture. Schorske suggests that Wagner reacted to this situation by proposing a &*st program of efficient public works and rational, hctionalist residential and commercial buildings (24-1 15). Only recently bas any serious reconsiderationof Wagmr's debts to nineteenth-centuryarchitectural theory taken place. Wbat has been revealed is the need 2~talso demonstrates how closely related Ringer's and Bourdieu's fiamewodrs are. Orthodoxy, for Bourdieu, ody emerges as position when the doxa cornes into question, Outhe 159-7 1. to take into account the prîî~uiarmÏxture of reaiism and ideaiism that were present both in Wagner's thoughî and wodc aud in late nineteentbsmtmy architectud discourse? However9 a rec~nsïde~onof Wagner's architectural and theoretical debts nceds to be situated in the contes of the social demands placed on the architect, Wagner did not simply have a hermetic notion of Mdem Arc- to *ch he applied select& architecturai discoutses available to him, Rather' the formation of his architectural pro- was the nsult of impIementing those art and architectural discourses that heiped him negotiate the social reorganization faLiag place in the city ofVienna SchorskP has claimed that the histoncai ref-ts chosen for the public buiidings on the Ringstrasse reflected a past that dÏd not belong tu the 1i'beraIs who instituted them and that this was the bask for the Mdemist 3reak'' with tradition, and Wagner dîd, in fact, make these claims himse1f Espoject, however, (at least his discursive project, which partially mabifested itseifas his personal artistïc task) was not so much to produce an ahistorical architechue that disavowed any linkage with Li'beral Kullur in favour of rationaEst dty,as to retrench the values represented ôy his cuitural capital, &ch, in the political field, &en aligned with those of the Btirgertm or GrqBb~gertum. Wagner's most sougbt-after clienî, it seems, was hysthe imperid state; but as the power of the Liberal-monarchicai coalition waned, so too did Wagner's prospects for imperid wmmissioas4 The rnunicipiiîy of Viema ernerged as a polity within the Aiistro-Hm- empire with relatively strong political boundarïes and prerogatives (ten outer districts were incorporateci as subarbs in 1890-92, adding ovet 50,000 to a popdation of about 800,000 in the city and inner districts), and, concomitantly, two political forces with decidedly urban agendas fought on the municipai level for the political representation that was king wrested fkorn the Liberals. The success of the Christien Social paty agaiost their primary opponenf the Social Democrats, forced Wagner to adapt his architectural vision to the primarily kleinbl?rgerlih ideals of the new municipal governent In many fe~pectsthis adaptation shoald mt have been too cWicult, His many pronoutlcememts that urban planning and the design of UtiLities shouid be conducted under the guidance of the artist made him a suitable candidate for overseeing the numerous public works projects that the Christian SociaIs initiated. AU the ratiod-st 3~ number of arguments in this regard appear in MiIIgrave, ed RReflectrioons; see especiaily Mallgrave's introduction, Sarnitz, Neumeyer, Beny, and Oechslin; see also Miilgrave, Md'Architecture. Wagner's relationship with Habsburg patronage' see Kassal-Mihila and fimcioIIItlist rhetonc that pemieated Wagner's brand of modemism (especidy his manifi, Modm Architecture, 1896), might havp served the Chtistian Socials and their program of "municipal sociallsm". However, Wagner's rationalism and utility were always laboriously tempered by ^Art,"or Kdna; that is, in the terms of his day, Wagner sought a balance between reaiism and ideabm Wagner's insisteme on aesthetic concems prubably Iost hùn a aumber ofmunicipal commissions, just as his iasistence on fiinctionality and modem materiah, and his rdusal to imitate historical styles probably lost him a number of imperid c0mmimmissions-(Jhe end ofhis imperial jmtromge also seems to coincide with his mernbership in the Viema Secession, Kasse1-Mikula 35). These observations are, of course, temg the story hmWagner's point of view. But what did the uneasy footing of Wagner's modernism mean in the contest over cultural iepitimacy during this politicai reorprhîion? While the Christian Socials stnipgled to institute their corporatist program, which sought to eafianchise the Klembiirgrnmt and tojustiSr this move by employùrg patriarchal-clerical discourses bat drew on traditional Catholic values and referred to Vienna as the Vaterstradr, Wagner sought to reprrseat another set of traditionai values, albeit in ostensibly modem ways, by malcing claims to cultural legitunacy in the name of Kultw, a a"miversal"culture. The miverse of Kuitzu- was ohmperceïved by the Christian Socials and theh electorate as that of Gm#b*gertium. Far nom opposing culture altogether, as Wagner may have somebmes ciauned, the Christian Socials sought to institute a different fom of culturation However, what tky imagined-municipal services and a school system tbat served a combination of clerical and kïembürgerkh interests-largely codicted with the interests in autoaomy held by the culturai nobility. Otto Wmrwas born in 1841 in the village ofpeming, which, fifty years later, would become incorporateci as a suburb of Vie- His father, a master artisan, died denWagner was just five, arsd he was raidby his mother who came fkom a wealthier family of the Beamten class. Wagner attended a Gymnasium and a boarding scbml, but was unùiterested in becorning a lawyer as his mther had hopxi After studying civil engineering at the Vienna Polytechnic hstïtut, he went to Berlin to study architecture at the Kdnigliche Bauakademïe (Gerretsegger and Peiotner 9). Wagner was able to estabiish himself as an architeet while making a living as a property specuiator. In this way, he was one of a class ofwealthy Housherten in Vien By building tenement structures which dso served as investments, Wagner established his architecturai practice whiie dga signincant retme Aithough at least th@ such structures were buiit, they are nowunbiown to us because' accordiag to Geretsegger and Peintner, Wagner wished to cover up his early, immature endeavours (9). The few of Wagner's eady residential stnichins which are hown reveai how he conformed with existing practices in spartment building. Like the public monuments ofthe Ringstrasse, private building ofthis -od rnay also be oomidered edectic in trrms ofcombining various historical styles. But whereas pubIic monuments related style to the building's fimaon (for examp1e7 the Ttalian Renaissance style of the Uaiversity evoked classical humania; the Gothic City Hall, the medieval burgher ideal; and the Greek Classical ParLiament, Athenian democracy)~private buüding sa.much more whlmsical choices in style. In the preface to the first volume of ERnge Skizzen, Projette, und ausgefiihrfe Bauwerke (Some Sketches, Rojects, and Executed Buildings, 1889), in which a number of his early apartments are reproduced, Wagner registers his concem over the appropriate style in which to build, but is not yet ready to denouace all uses of historid styles: The experiments with various styles hunied through by most of the architectural world in the last twenty years whicti, mom or less -catured, have consumed the building styles of millenniawith the haste of our way of Mehave passed me by leaving Iittie trace, and thus 1nnally reached the conclusion that a certain fke Renaissance that has been absorbed by ôurgenius loci is, talMg the greatest possible account of materials and CO-on, for present and future architecture the only correct course: for, siace the beginnings ofculturaL development, the style of building bas always been the expression of the disposition and the ab* of the people ofall ages (SkPches l8)? Here, Wagner clcarly wishes to distance &self fiom the superficial use of styie that he saw in both public monuments and private architectureyyet his choice of% certaÏn £k Renaissance" does not have the polemical tone of his pronouncements on style just seven years later in Moderne h~hitektw~However, rather than simply reading this passage as an expression ofa formative stage in Wagner's architectural theory, it is instructive to consider the SOCI*~~demands pladon tenement building in nineteenth-century Vieana Depending on his or her wealth, a bourgeois tenant could rent fiom either a Miethaus or a MietpIa~f~The Mierpalast, a rental peiace* became the building ofchoice for the GruJbzïrgmtum. It was modelled after the palaces that had been built near the Hofburg by the upper classes and nobilÏty since the eighteenth century [pl. 51. Palatiai in 5~0urvolumes were cornpldad and pubiished separately in the years l889/9O. 1897, 1906, an4 posthumously, in 1922. tenns the main aparnnentsythe Miefpohst ddalso be rented out to various meaibers of society- The owner usualiy Inred on the nrst floor, the Nobelstock, adaadted the rest of the building to tenants wbose social prestige declined as one ascended the building Unlike in Paris, where such arrangements were udycoded by a UILiform fhâetin Vienoa, the extaïor of the MiefpaIarf was stratifiecl to reflect the social hierarchy wïtbin, The Mietham, followed the same principle, but the gn,dfloor and the so-cailed Hochpoterre were usually resemed for businesses and were also differentiated on the facade. The socid basis for this buiIdurg scheme Lies in tbe pindustrial @ai conneetion of home and wo& which stiiI served repnsmtational and fiinctionai ne& in the em ofthe Ruipûasse (Schorske, Fkde-Siècie -2; Olsen 80-100). "A ceriain fke Renaissance," which Wagner prescnbes, seems weIf suited to the representabooal needs ofthe hietanchical tenement çtnicRire- In the Miethincrer bdtat Schottenring 23 (1 879 Ipl. 221, Rathausstrasse 3 (1880-1) [pl. 231, and Stadiongasse 6 & 8 (1 882) [pl. 241, Wagner employed a stratif5ed rusticati~ntypid of Italian Renaissance paiazzi. The main corridor at Stadiongasse 6 & 8 is divided by marble colmnas and a coffered ceiling IpL 251 and le&, to the left and ri@, to the two apartments on the Nobelstock, each with five large interconnected rooms in addition to the usual kitchen and utility rooms Cpl. 261. These wouid be considered quite exclusive aparbnents*given their size, and although the facade does not emp- this to the extent that the facades of MiefpuI&ste near the Hofburg dici, Wagner does treat the windows of the Nobelsfock with greater decoration than the other floors. inchhgthe sculpted pumi between the windows above the entrance Cpl. 241. During this peiod of apartment couon,Wagner worlced on a couple of important projects that earned him the soughtafter recognition from the emperor. h 1879, Hans Mdcart, the leading Viemese ad-c artist, was commissioned to devise a procession to celebrate the emperor's silver wedding anniversary- Uakart employed Wagner to work on the decoratioas. Festpltz vor dem Bwgthore Cpl. 27'l is a drawing Wagner produced to repment the festival site on the Ring in fiont of the Mana Teresa PIatz and the then incomplete KUIlSfhiston'sches Museum opposite the Hofburg- The second project Wagner was asked to work on was the reception of Princes Stephauïe to celebrate her arrivai to marry Crown nince RudoWin 1881. For this reception, Wagner designed a baldachin of the most baroque style CpI. 281. Wagner would later have one other project tbat would bring hirn nearer the emperor- As a part of the SCadtbahn projects, Wagwr designed an Imperid pavilion near the Habsbiirg summer Wace, Schanb~ntlHis structure was intendeci to fimction as the emperor's personai Stadhbn station [pl. 291. Franz Joseph, however, wodd ody use it twice (Kassel-Mikula 30). Throughout the rest of the 1880s up to 189 1, Wwerconstmcted a number of otber resideatial buildingsgsHis nrst Villa Wm,a aerresiW, was built &y in a classical style for his famrly in the outiyÏng distnkt of Hiîtteldorf Ipl. 301 and his own Palais Wagner was constructeci on Rennweg, near the Schwarzenbergerplatzon the Ringstrasse- By 1894, Wagner's reputation was well ewugh estabüshed to esni him a professorid position at the Acaâemy ofFine Arts in Vîenna This honom was foiiowed by his appointment as kaiserliciclr dktjniglcher Oberbamat (Imperid and Royal Chief Architect), a title Wagner then appmded to nearly all his presentation Qawings. The title really had more to do with his association with the Academy-the Kaismliche imd konigliche Akadentie der OiIdencien KhsteAwithany sort of personai association with the emperorr.6 The year 1894 ais0 saw another important appointment: Wagner was made &stic advisor to both the Viennese Transport Commission, wbïch regdateci the Shdtbabn, and to the Commission for the Reguiation of the Danube Canal- This appointment, which would charge Wagner with the design ofnumerous Stadtbahn stations and two dams on the Danube Cam& came on the eve of the CtuististianSociais' rise to power in the municipality of Vie~a In 1896, the nrst edition of Modem Architecture appeami In ik Wagner laid down bis pedagogical principles as a professor: With coostant creative work every man cornes to hold a wealth of views that take mot in him and, Iike theses, Muence his future actions! Ifhis deeds are accompanïed by success, then it may be assumed that others too share these Mews and tbat they hold dida& values. Thisis also tnre for me. Cded to practice the teaching profession at the premier scb;ool of art of the Empire, 1fiel the duty to set domsuch theses, to prove and defend them, and by so dohg to Merthe cause of education. (59) The timing of Modm Architecture's publication is important, for it Iinked together Wagner's roIe as professor of architecture with his role as artistic advisor to municipal improvernent prognuns and adQessed these roles to the frihne of Vienna's urban design. Public politics soon complicated Wagner's plans, however- In order that he 6~lthoughGeretsegger and Peintner refer to Robert Musiî's satincal narne for AM% K... which is Caenved hmthe mitials k k (hiseriichand Ronigkh) tbat were cCappIiedto every thing and pef~~n,~aad suggest the contradictions and inefficiency of the state admhistrati~Meyfail to note Wagner's own repeated use ofthe initiais. Instead, they paint an image of him as waging a personal war aga& "this land, dose people found it so difficult to anive at ciear-cut kisions,'' 19-20, mïght initiate public-works projects in Vieana, Wagner foimd it useful to present his views in a way that wdd be taken up by municipaf abmubation,W. It is hportanî to note that the nse ofthe Christian Socials to power in 1895 initiated a renewal of public building in Vienna for the kttune sùice the bwlding of the major monuments on the Ringstrasse (c.1865-85). What typ of public building and which social gcoups it should serve was constantly at issue in civic poliii-cs after 1895. In Modern Architecture, Wagner describes the need for the "state's protection of architecture* claùning that ~c]ertainjythe state meives the geaest advantages nom the cultivation of art In ItaIy we see tday a country in which the artistic achievements of past generations sure& form its most important Ilfinerve adFrance WEewise owes its wealth in no smd part to art" (63).He goes on to explain how the state shouid protect art It shouid allocate more fimàs for monumental it shodd end the purchase and use of old apartment houses for public offices and hsteàd initiate architectural commissions for new works-, snd it shodd employ artisticallytrained architects and wt just engjneem 'AU public buildings of the Empire shouid be canied out ody by true architects" (64). Paradoxicaily, Wagwrtherefore defended the artïstic field's relationship with the state in order to ensure its autonomy- Wagner aïs0 went to some length to defend amstic autonomy fiom the incursions of the economic market. Much ofModern Architecture was directeci toward the problern that new materials posed for the architect- Whüe üon had grdyaltered the posslbilties of architectural form and had reduced production costs, a sûi~tly utifïtarian use of the material left w room for ertistic expression Wagner did not hold the view, only just emerguig elsewhere on the Contineat, that pure fiinctionaiism and the efficient use of materials should be the sole concenu ofthe arcbitect. Aesthetic wncerns mu& be addressed and this was the role of the artistidy trained architect7 Wagner feared that utility-dnven architecture wouid reduce the need for architects, who would be replaced by engineers. The problern, said Wagner, is in the educatiod system, where, as a recendy appointai professor, he recoguized the power of the educational field to gant specific capital. Before explaihg how "art" and "style" needod to be recuperated hm the indolent "public," Wagner directly attacked the state and the technicd institute for graduating inartisticaiiy trained engineerr and granting them the title "achitect" The 7~hec~~tionalist'' reading of Wagner, so prpredominant in modemist histories of architecture, has no lack of support in Modern Architecture. For example, "Something impracticai «inaot be 82. However, tàe imprtant point is that Wagner sought a mediation between utilÏty and designations oonfened by the state- such as 'state-examiaed architect,' 'graduaîe architect,' 'civil architect,' etc., ohwnstitute as a great misuse of the title as when t is usurped by people who have not the shadow of a claixn to it" (65)- His defience of his educational @tien ais0 staked out bis hterests in the Iimited market of state empioyed architects. In terms of the htmepublic-worb programs tbat he asked the state io initiate, Wagner dùi not wish to see a market flooded with architects (especidy with les qualified one) who mi-ght steal comnit*ssionsfiom hun for alI the wr~wrongreasons- nie cuitural mandarin, who, up uiitil this thne, enjoyed a fàïrly cornfortable relationship with the -te now fomd his benefits contesteci. The architecturaf field saw a @culady mgincursion fromthe ecowmic market, as the hetero~ousforces of specuIative builhg activity had a greater impact on architecture tban the other cdtural fields- The stniggIe to maintain the structure of the architectural field sigaalled competing daims to cultural legitimacy- However, this stniggie for power as also waged aga& other fiactions ofthe social field who heid their powet as IndiMIndiMciuais,such as wealthy entrepreneurs, or co11ectively, such as industriaf workers (Ringer 12-3). For Wagner, the two socially iâatihble positions which were most threatened by the politicai changes in Vieana of the 1890s were that of the Haushem and of the academic. The Hbusherren made up a class in Austria tâat had its mots in the eighteenth century. Mer the Wed revolution attempts in 1848, the Hmkrren emerged with renewed politid strengths, which made them an objezt of resentrnent for the artisan classes and the iower Bwgem. The Gemeindeorrdmmg of 1848-49, which estabLished Viema's municipal &inchise, excluded those who paid less than ten florins in taxes (this was later reduced to five florins)- Since taxes of tenants were credited to theu landlords, this left the majority of popertyless artisans, wt to mention ÏndUStnaI workers, disenfranchised In addition to this, the Haushmen mostly voted in the First Curia of the three-Curïa electoral system (Boyer, Polit ical RadcaZism l3-6)! However, the Hc~;ushemenwere not aiways considered money-gnibbiug opportunists by the arthl classes. As Boyer explains, they also poseseci a "qumi-officidn public status, anci, more importantly, they owned a piece of the Tiennese Heimaf' (PoIiticuI RadicaZism 393). This latter quality was perhaps wbat was most appeahg to the CMan Socials. In order to establish a viable political program, the Christian SociaJs had to include the 8h1869, when Wagner was eaming a living primady as a propeity specuiator, Lichtenberger notes that of the 828.120 residents of Viema and the swrounding villages, 4,306 were proprietors of aparbnent buildings wbo owned their own dwelling this made up approximately one quarter of the upper class, 4445. Hmhe~enonce they had dcienilymiteci the kleinbürgerkh and amSan classes. The gestures on the part of the Socials toward the Hmrherren were not accepted by ail of them, but the rights for the working classes demanded by the Socid Democrats -. made a coalition with the Christian Socials M attractive offer for Nmhmen groaps (Political Radicc12im 385-90)- Wagner's position as a Hùushis implicated in this dynamic, but by 1895, he had a greater interest, ecommicaUy and socialIy, in his position as a professor in the Academy. This dernomrates how his symbolic capital (boa educatiod and cultural) reûmed grrater ben6titan the mostiy ecommic capital ac-ed as a property speculator- Rmger descrîIbes the ~c~yGermsn [and Austnan} production of cdtmsil Iegitimacy that 1mentioned Iast chapter, as he explaim how the CUIhual mandarins established socïafly recognizable values for the Gennan bingber, *ch were basxion the concepts of Bildung (cultivation) and Kzrlfta- As a pedagogid ptincipal, Bildung meant much more than cceducation"or "instnictio~~"It implied a Tonning ofthe souln that only partly relied on dyticabilities- "It is epitomized in the ne~h~st's relationship to bis classical sources- He does not oniy corne to know them- Rather the moral and aestheîic examples containeci in the classical sources affect hi.deeply and totally" (87). KuItzu-, up until the eighteenth cenniry was closely &&ad with the concept of BiZdung, and meant somethùlg like c'personal culhue." It then came to characterize, in German acachüa, al1 civilized achievements in society. Ringer notes tbat in France, thk second step was not taken; civilisc~tionstood for "the totality of man's social and inteUectual creations and arraugemenfs" (88). As 1noted earlier, Bourdieu cbaracttenpd this as a difference between German &tes and the French modzin. This led to the adoption ofthe antithesis of civilisation - Kdtw by German intekctuds, which Mtiaüy was used to distùiguish "superficial" French social patterns fbm more "refiaed" Ge- ones. Again, one did not have to share anti-French sentiments to employ the discomes that supported the Iegitimacy of Ku2.u~~This opposition came to serve the particuiar shifts in pwer of the 1890s: With time, the term civlllzation was quite aahvally expandeci to cover ail the results of 'outward' progres in economics, technology, and social organiation, while Kultto. always continuxi to stand for the condition and achievements of cultivated men. 'Civilizaton' evoked the tangible amenities of eardily existence; 'culture' suggested spiritual concems. (Ringer 90) This trope of Zivi2isution-Kuhr is one that couid be redeployed in a number of ways to represent a range of political positions fÎom ortbdoxy to cCpr~~vi~m,"adt is precisely its multiple and vaqing redepIoyment that works to obscure the political stakes involved in its usagellSageReading this tmpe in Wagner's archItecniral practice and wrïtings should shed some light on the political stakes involveci in the situation he confbnted. For ail the modemist rheton'c and pgressivism implied in MOdm Architecture there rem& an undertying poMcai orthodoxy, meant to conserve the hegemony of a social group and its value system. Both the Bnfifheses ofZivilsation-KuItur and realiSm-ideaüsm arp simuitaneously used in Modern Architecture, through a sort of muhial afignment of discourses. As noted above, the reahsm-idealism mtitbesis-with fiinctionai utïlity on the one hand ead a moralistic aesfheticism on the other-posed the greatest prob1em for Wagner, who made it his personai task to achieve a Lmd of synthesis ofthe two, as the openhglines ofthe book siiggest: The arcktecî with his bapW combination of ideaikm and dsmhas been praised as the aowning glory of modem man Unfitelyhe done feels the tnidi ofthese words, while his contempomies stand offto the si&, Me interested. 1too, at the risk ofbeing accused a delusion of grandeur, must joui in the song of praise. (61) Even in his often (mis-)citai slogan, "Necessity is art's only master" (borrowed from Gottfried Semper) this cccombination"is intended: Need, purpose, comtmction, aud ideaiism are therefore the pimitive genns of atistic Me. United in a single i&a they produce a kïnd of 'necessity' in the ongin and existence of every work of art and is the meaning of the words 'mm DOMINA NECESSITAS.' (Modem Architecltae 9 1) That idealism ddbe linked with necessity suggestr a certain Hegeiian notion of necessity, quite different fiom the reading of the same term by modemkt art historiam. Yet, for al1 Wagner's "happy combination" of temis, he would, by 1914, wish to distance bseKfkom idealism In the fourth edition of Modern Architectwe, Wagner would change "ideaiïsmn in the passage above to "a sense of beauîy" (13 ln). Currents in German architectural theory had, by that tirne, abandoned the last vestiges of idealism, and Wagner's dep10yment of tems depended on an alignment with "modem" causes in architecturai theoryry g~hebook was published four times during Wagner's Me in 1896,1898,1902, and 1914; all changes to each edition are in hbiigrave's translation. For a full discussion of the reception of Moderne Architektw, its title change to Die BauAurrsf lmrerer Zeir for the fointh edition, andthe conte* of Gennan kMichAeit, see Neumeyer, and Mgrave, Trom Reaiism to Suchlichket't," How Wagner Mdup idea'sm with modemi@ is evident in his discussion of style. Each age has its own style* as a redt of "new methods of consûuctïon, new materials, and new human tasks and viewpoints-" What bas happened in the nineteenth centuiy, according to Wagner, is that '?he events outpaced every developnent of art" (ModeniArchitectwe 74). This has ieft the unwelcome solution to the famous historicist problem (the probiem of what style to build in): the "saperficiai" use ofstyldtis, a use of style that dœs not correspond to 6cmoûemnneeds. In a reference to Viema's Oreek Classicai ParLiament building and itysGothic Votivkùche and Ra* Wagner des7 we wouldn't ride up to the parliament %me-legged in an antique triumpbal chariot" nor would we "approach a chutch or city haR wearkg a slit doublet?' (ModemArchitecture 78). But Wagner mes that where style is not up to date7fsfhon is. 'Woderis men" is able to recogaize the srnailest of errors in fâshion, so why is there such a discord between fashion and style? Wagner answe~~tbat it is easier to uaderstand -on, "a precursor to style," while style requires "a rigid and rehed taste whose critique requires concentration and understanding* (Modem Architecture 76-7). Hem Wagner bas invoked what Ringer bas refmed to as the mandarin-burgher ideal of Bildtmg, îhat partïcular tem for cultural capital of the d'tes. The concept of Bildmg is employed by Wagner in a highly charged way that clearly differentiates the cuihiral values of the puphe represenfs fbm the more indennite CLmasses".The use ofterms like ''the public" and Whe masses" had particuiarly poIemicd meanings in the discourses employed in the poIitical context of Vienna in the 1890s and abafterAs the poti'tid fianchise grew and the bai^^'^ ofpower shif€ed,those who belonged to exclusive social groups that previously held power expressed fears of social change by associating those social groups thet previousIy did uot enjoy the rights of enhanchisement with terms like "the masses." This becarne a vqeffective political tool for çonsolidating tée notion that organized labour movements representd a threat to social order. The Christian Socials, wbo were primady supporteci by the newly enfianchised artisan classes and Klenbiïrgertrm, could use such discourses agakt their labour movement rivals (organized labour and universai male sufnage were precisely the terms over which the Social Democnits stru@ed)- At the same the, the GmJb~ertum and the Beamten classes could use similar discourses to express a retrenchment of values directed against the newiy enhmchised Klembiagerttan. The social and cultural hegemony of the upper strata of the Biirgmtum wuld be natrwIized by the use of the term Bi[dung, *ch implied an inherent receptiveness to ("unived") mords and KuZtur, while %e public9*and "the masses" even ifrepresented in pubIic politics, did not have that receptiveness and were therefore excluded hmthe social groups definecl by KuItur- However, these same terms wuld be usad in a way that invoked an inclusiveness when it was pliticaily desirable (albeit diipficitous) to do so. What this strategy madrs, with respect to the processes of culturation 1demi eadier, is the Merence betMea the 3mivd*and the profits to the universal desi@ by principle of visiun and dÏvision, Wagner used te- such as %e public" and "demOcmcy+) in ways that suggest his multivocal position. On the one band, %e public" and "the massest, were used to negativeiy define Kdfia and Bildvng with phrases like the "indolence and peculï8f views of the masses," and the "eenedarkness of public iudifference"'(Modern Architecture 61)- On the other, he wwted the Christian Social government that held jmwer in Viaina after 1895 and proclaimed to serve the entire populace. Wagner did this even as he enacted a retrenchment of values based on Kulho and Bildung, tems *ch he used comistently and applied to a range of his production A ctrtain slippage of terms is recognizable in Modern Archirecfwe that reveals the poblematic relationship of these two tactics. AU modem donsmust correspond to the new materials and demands of the pesent ifthey are to suit modern man; they must illustrate our own better, democratic, sekonfident, ideal nature and take into account man's colossal technid and scientinc acbievements, as weii as his thomughiy p&d tendency-that is sureIy se~kvident!~~(my emphasisy 78) Later, Wagner writes: Democracy has supplied art with a large number of new mks, yet it must be saÏd that what art has gained, on one han& through the power of the new impulses and the possibilities created by modem construction, it sureIy has forfeited, on the other hand, with a Ioss of sovereign will, energy, persod desire for fie,and intïmacy- Our colossal stnictures (exhibition bddZngsy raiiway stations, parliaments) are an cloquent testimony to this fact when they are compared to castles and palaces." (1 14) Democracy, it seems, serves only one side ofthe reaIism-idealism coin, At tirne, it suits Wagner to proclaim its beneficence and, at others, it stifies the "sovereign will" ofthe '% is signiticant to note that in the fourth edition, Wagner replaces "ideal" with ''trenchant" 13h "1 will remind the reader of the Limiteci notion of democracy in use in Austria at the tirne ofthe nrst publication of Modem Architecture. Universai male sufFrage was not achieved until1905. artkt who struggles to maiotain an idealism mthe colossai ditarian stnictures of the day. In other words, it served to project a univerd image, md the range of interests it represented threatened artistic autonomy. It shodd come as no surprise that Wagner mentions those very types of~tnrctineswhich he buift and desipd 1t was ptecisely rakystations and exhibition buildings that Wagner bdt or, especially, proposed to bddin Viema that were not well fece~edby municipal co~tîees,that pedqs merited the m-tion, ccdelusionof grandeur-" Yet Wagner did not suanit his desigus to a dormChristian Social City CounciI, which was meceptive to bis more grandiose schemes- As John Boyer notes, the Christian Sociais stnigpled with their own self image- Just as Wagner's mandarin values were caught between a ceaain modernism or progressivism and a cenain political orthodoxy, so too were the Sociais tmpped between an imaginaiS'b*ger past of traditional clencal duesand modem urban needs (Culture ond Political Crisis 10)- While Wagner sough to imbue public-works pmjects, such as the mimicipal milway stations or the proposed Kaiser Franz-Joseph StraQ Museum, with a sense of the monumentai, which couid serve the representatiod neeûs of Kultut (however "dernocraticelly" this tem is taken), the representatid ne& of the Christian Socials were best met by fimctionalist architecture. Not srnprisingly, the few attempts made by the Liberais to sponsor large representationd building pmjects were met wiiheated debate-l2 Wagner may have felt he could have convinced some City Cound members of the merit ofhis desigas, but jxobably doubted that he couid achieve wholehearted support for the greatm works he wished to bdhAIthough his 1907 design for the FramJoseph Stadtmuseum wss approved by mayor Karl Lueger, it did not nxeive the same support fimm Lueger's colleagues and the cornpetition dragged on for a total of 13 years before Wyking awarded to aaother architect Additions to the third edition of Modm Archilectwe (1902) suggest that Wagner wished to see the state intecvene in support of monumental projects. He calls for the donof a Bureau of Art (Uini*sûy of - - Art) and with respect to a Corncil of Art created by c'[o]ur state admmstmtion," Wagner notes that "at present its work is still rather iilusory because it lacks the most important 12~oyersuggests that the bis'huge representaîiond building projects on the Ringstrasse may have been a lesson for those Christian Socials that argued that inban management and public seNices better served representationai needs, CuIture ond PolitimI Crisis, 1O. wnditions for Wé-power and money." Wagner Merlaments, Thus its (LCtivity bas been confhed up to mwto announcemen@" (64). These rem& on capital and M-ngrevd how Wagner identifid and grappled with the coatradi*ctoryforces of the cultiwl field; that is, the foioes ofautommhtion and those directed toward heteronomy with the economic field Wagwr repeatedly points out that %nt capitalistsn are only denimental to the aesthetic concem of architecture, putting profît ahead ofgood taste and styie (a typid gestwe in defence of WC autonomy). He,Wagner's allegiances are not with the with whom he seems to once have idded, but instead axe with the hctions of classes that wdd be identifiedwith Kuf~ad Biidznrg- In pracüce Wagner came to tEeat the kadeof his apgaments mifiody. Each Ievel was @en the same detic considastion, as seen in the two apartment buildings at LinLe Wide38 & 40 (189899) Ipl. 3 11. Wagin writes that it no longer makes any sense to distinguish flmrs on the exterior since the rentd value between floors hns been levelled by the elagtor (ModemArchitecture IW), and the decorative treatment of the elevator and stairs at LinLe Wienzeile 40 Iiterally signais this IevelIing Ipl321. Impiicitly, Wagaer endorses aot a social stratification that is spatiaIized vertically withm each apattment building, but one that is spiitialized horizontaïly înto districts aud ghettos- This is a covert feature ofhis wntiag that was directed particuiarly to tuban planning, as 1wiU show. The exclusivity ofthe WiemeiIe apartxnents is not only registered on an economic de*but aCso on social and cultural ones. For, the decidedly Art Noweau decoration that Wagner ernpIoys here semed a limitai clientele, one thet was bolstered by the creation ofthe Vie- Secession in the previous year of 1897.l3 InterestingIy, Wagner's economicptescri*ptiom in Modent Architecture fot iuban maintenance coincide in large part wiithe economic policy of Christian Social "municipal sociaiism." Howevert as usaWagner feels that the City Council has committed itseiffinânciaüy to se* the needs of* and not those of ar~In the 1902 edition, Wagner adds this comment on city representatives' and their enforcement agencies' iduence on the citysc;ipe: AU public CO~O~wmes under their control and it may be conceded that with the exception of everything artistic they have exercised this control weîi md very conscientiously. Since hese agencies are composed only of engineers and not of atïsts and, moreover, Iittle or no fbnds are ali& for artistic I3 ~agnexwouid join the Secession two years later. commissionsor for tbuigs that simply wodd coat~iuteto the mat appeanince of the city, it happeas that umadibe errors are committed agaht art (1 14) In his essay Die GroFstodt, pubbshed in 1911, Wagner proposeci a plan for mgufating the continuai growth of Viema to meet the needs of a population that he beught wodd double eveiy t?&y to fifty years (h 1911, Vienna bad approhtely 2 million residents) IpL 331. Wagner agued tbat a municipality couM buy up undeve10ped ladon its odyïng districts, let it out in order to provide an interim return on the invested capital, and, once that city expanded to those districts, it wuid briag in a prom dhckdback to the munÎciplity, arising out of subsequent deveIopment Vycontrohg Iand WC-, leasehold priceg etc, the rnnaicipoiity would be able to direct CMCdevelopments into specifk channels, reserve the necessary public land for V~OUSce districts, check Iand speculation .. . and use its profits to prm*desplendid instituîiom and civic amenities* (Geretsegger aad Peintner 39). This type of contrd over the regdation of rirban design was deemed to be a great dmntage by Wagner- The for the XXlInd district of Viema bis. 34 and 351 reflects the &ormity and apparent ratio11ii1ity that Wagner sou@& The pictute of Wagner as the ratïonalist who wished to epply uniformity to all of urban design is the one taken up by Schorske. It informs his problernatic geography I descrii in the previools chapter* Accordhg to the paradigm of historicidfkity- modemism/flux, Schorske argues that Wagner exalted the modem flux and flow of wban tdEcaad therefore pianued rectilinear streets to facilitate this. However, in his prescriptions for urban design, Wagner acaially &ocated sqwres to serve as centres to each of the districts that would radiate out hmthe centre of the greet ci% Furthemore, in order to easrrre that these squares would be as spatially unique as possible and to provide a locus for monuments and culturai centres, Wagner dedfor a uniforni height of al1 oîher building around the district's centre. The -en geography also characterizes his acceptance of the fdy@cal demaads of locating idustry on the outer edges of each districi, according7he says, to other factors such as the laadscape (Great City 493). AU of this is belied however, by hïs gestures toward the public and the "universal." As in the case ofhis cornments in Modern Architecture, Wagner laments in Die GroJstudt tbat the "general nuiss" is "@te ignorant on artistic matters" (490). The problem is: how can "Art? intmene in the process of decline a811icti.glarge cities? for, it is only Art that can genuinely do this Wmçeems to be bekably prescient on the larger deve1opments 1have descri'bed: Tùe masses bave been for ages accustomed to lave ali matien of art to the niling ciasses, and they ovdook the fact that the aidonomous comrnunïty having now corne into power, it devolves upon it to provide the necessa. artistic initiative" (491). W- proposes that the masses (in politid power) graut "truc" arththe right to exercise their talaits in tuban design so that aii benefit But the processes ofdiffemtiation hidden in Weer's cdtaraI program have their efféct in urban space. In respnse to an unsightiy amount ofrubbish, and "sbbby Street appearmcesn in Vie- Wagner writes in a 1902 addition to Modm Archi.ectwe, 7tis thetefore high iime that the city administration uuder the ledership of di~tin~shedaxtists actÏveIy intervenes to provide fimds and pass a Iaw of expropriation, so that everything visibfe to the eye can be suceessfrily appved not dyby the engineer but alsa by the artid' (1 15). In Die GtoJstadt, Wagner says that expropriated land wwld eventdly retiim to private ownership, but cldythis socid reform and inban planning means the uprooüng of one class ofpeople to make room for the settlement of another.. TM sort of differentiation, here reveaied as an extreme force of symbolic violence was conceaïeci by a "universai" urban planning. Wagner insisted that no pafi of handesign be left untouched by "An" The municipal mcialism imptemented by the Christian Socials similarly enacted this sort of dupIicity. Aithough the new pubiic-works programs generated incorne and findly gave Vienna the appearance of economic progress, the Christian Socials pMariIy sewed their own electorate, despite their claims to be advancing the "public" good (Boyer, Culture md Political Crisis 12-3). Their project was one of "proprieîary corporatism": ifyou paid taxes, you owned the City. Both Kad Lueger and Otto Wagna referred to Viema as UItSete Vaferstadi!cour Father city) (Bayer, Culnae OndPolitieul Crisis 8; Wagner, Modern Architecture 115). As Boyer notes, the Chrisa'au Socids were not so much anti-capitaIist, as popularly believed, but were more preciseIy "state capitdkt," in terms ofthe business-like management of public ownership (Boyer Cube mtd Political Crisis 7). It is useW to consider Harvey's notion ofthe state in terms ofa body serving the interests ofthe capitalsi accumulation of ecowmic capital that redirects overaccumuiation into the Mt environment Harvey notes that it has a number of options in this regard, and one ofthem is the production of cultural works (WrbonizPlion 1-3 1). The Christian Socials, representing an economic underclass by pooling resources, redirected state accumulation away nom large demonumental architecture into idhstruchiral muni-cipal works. Wagner seems to support the basic structure of the Christian Social management of municipal finances, he ody wishes, from his perspective, that it would rrduect its fimding more properly into monumental building In addition to the StadMmstations, and the two dams on the Daaube Canal, Wagner was only able to procure three other major commissions nom the city or provincial Wwer Austna) govemmem the PostaI SaViOgs Bsnk Oflice Ipls. 36 and 371, in the Sîubenviertel of the SOUfh-east district of the Rlng the Chmh Am Steinhof [pl. 381, on the grounds of a mental hospitai in a western suburb of Vienna; ada Lupus Sanatorium Cpi. 391 in the same district It is signincaat thaî these &ree buildings (especially the Sanatorium) represent Wagner's less +ose designs; and it is equaüy signincant that the Postal Savïngs Bank Mcemore than any other wodr eacaed Wagner a place in the anuais of art history- The Postal Sa- Bank was a state-supported effoIt, by the Christian Socials, to combine the hcialresouces oflower btngerlich depsitors, as a means of combating big-baaliag (Schorslre 90)-l4 The Bank acbieved its grea&st appearaace of fuuctionalîty through the use of marbIe sheatbing and non-fimctional bolt heads which served to symbolically repwent fimctïonalitytYThe Chinch Am Stehhof used the same sheathing technique-However, Wagner employed Secessionist dststo decomte both buildings. Oüunar Schimkowitz supplied wmth-bearing angels for the acroteria of the Postal Savings Bank Cpl. 371 and other sculptural elements for the Church, for *ch Kolo Moser also designed stained-giass windows. Despite efforts directed toward fÙnctioaaiity and the economic use of materials, the Chiach was criticized for being too ostentatious. Wagnef s choice of material-marble and brom-symbolically replaced excessive deCoration, and perbps digneci him more wïth the excesses of bistoricism tban he would have Iiked to admit. The ways in which Ono Wagner and the Christh Socials each negotiated sets of values belonging to partïcular social groups within the broader social dtyof the city reflects concerns registered on a larger scale. At the same the, as I mentioned, a nmber of Gennan sociologists were dealuig with m-ty and iîs accompmying social relations by categorinng of these types of social relations. In Ferdinand Tdnnies's work, the dichotomy of socioiogicaI categories, Gemenr~chajZand Geseflschgtt(commimity and society), suggests the wncem over what were seen as the aliemitiag effects of society and their detrimental impact on tniditiod forms ofcommiaiity. Co~l~~lunity,then, came to stand for what was at stake in the modemization of economics and social relations, 14T3ig-banking" was as- with tbe power of Jewish bankers. For a discussion of the complexities ofanti-Semitiism in Viemese public poiitïcs, see Boyer, Culture md Political Cnsis, and PolritiwI RadiC4/ismypassim, However, the luiking of comm11Iliiîy with tradi-tion and the past did not precIude the possibiIity of its uestmce withlli mockuÜtyty15As we have seen, modernity was something that had to be reckoned It couid brhg with it ali sorts ofpossibilities for more tban one political agenda Yet it was also 8ccornpanied by a shif? in the balance of power. Both Otto Wagner and the Christian Socials, for wbm he sometimes worked, perceived a threat in "society" and guarded against it with hetonc that claimed the "masses" were the cause ofperceived cbhtegdon ofthe social firbric- At the same tirne, however, they were forced to iaclude a rhetonc ofthe "public" in order to express the "universai" interests ascri'bed to their programs of culturatioa That both employed similat tactics demomtmtes tbat they protectedthegpower~thednminnted fhdons in society aI ways thet wtdd sometimes be However, the Ciuistïan Socials represented a newiy acq* poIiticaL power for their electorate, that was won @y at the expense of the pwer of the cultural WbÏlity- Otto Wagner's notion of the masses therefore sometimes included the Christian Socials, as suggested by his frustration with state allocationof "pibIicn fiinding. By way of conclusion, 1would Iike to wnsiâër how Wagner pic- çociety in his presentation drawlngs, ami the way these meal the notions of ciiffiedation ernbedded in his ïmqïmry projections of the ci% Wagner noted, that the arcbitect shouid give great wnsideration to perspsctive, and tbat all the formal elements should be properly read nom a single vantage point The mhitect bas the ability to "force the viewer to consider the wotk in just such a way" (MimArchitecture, 86-87). This implied that viewer identifidon meaat success for the architect- Wagner's presentaton drawings oRen included representatons of figures, which rweal whaî sort of commuaity he had in mind when he spoke of identification In a namber of drawiags, Wagner incIuded people (udymen) contemplating his creatioe In the drawing for the monument to Kulrur (1909) Ipl- 401, which was intendeci to sit in fiont of the Kaiser Franz-Joseph Stadt Museum, a single spectator stands with his back turaed to us wntemplating the enigmatic statue, Mea second one stands on the balwny looking out at us Kulho, here symboljzeci in very orientaiist imagery, is the object of contemplation Just as Semper presented his cul- fonm in lS~~~felt that socialism was a nabiral outgrowth of GeseIIschafsand was the best soiution for its pr&Iems. 16~iebersohnshows that a position shared by most Gennan sociologists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, despite their mering poIiticai aiiegïances, was that modem capitalist society was a resuit of fiate- Dresden in a way thst used two sets of figines to suture the viewer into theu gaze, Wagner here employs a smiilar strategy to claim culhwl legitùiiacy. Howevef, Wagner's relation to the viewer is much less certain than Semper's. On the one hanQ almg wilh the central figure, we consider "CUIture," while on the other, we conthnt the questionhg gaze of the man on the balcmy, who seems to ask ifwe too are on the side of culture. It is not diffi:cult to imagine Wwerasking this question of the Christian Socials. With the gaze ofthe second fi-, Wagner acknowledges the uastabIe grouud on which his claim to cultural legitïmaq is made His petition to the viewer for support suggests that Wagner &es the need to broaden the imivexse of culture in order to adapt its Ilmiteci values to a social base newly holdingpower. Yet. the ujunction made by the figure on the balcony neverthekss ùnplies a lImited cultural sphere (his position is iiterally on the side of cultprpde stands behind the balustrade on the balcony of the museimi). The character of thk univefse is demonstrated in the central figure's undivided contemplation of the enigmatïc monument The ecommy of cultural capital is suggested to requirr an investment4kmper at one point dedit work, and Wagner referred to it as concentration and understanding Of course7 al1 of Wagner's projects equally required an ecollomic investment Money and power, Wagner had written, were the most important conditions for üfem Pictured behind the monument is Wagner's later, somewhat simplifieci design ofthe Kaiser Franz-Joseph Stadt Museum, as it was t'enproposed to be calîed (îater named the Historisches Museum der Stadt Wien). The museum was the subject oflengthy debate in the City Council and it aroused the scrutiny of the press. For an earlier cornpetition design of 1903, Wagner's plans included an ebrate monpadion (later replacecl with the monument to KuZtw), and the deCoration of the exterior in gilded bronze detailing, and detailing gilded in gold for the interior IpL 411. A critic responded in the Neue Freie Presse, It does not look like a musecmi, ceaainly not a Vienna city-museum. No trace of gravity and digniîy- . . . Golden balustrades, golden baiconies, golden windows, eveqwhere an oriental excess of an otherwîse vaiued metal. It blazes, it glimmers, it brags, as if Vienna had becorne a city of billionaires overnight (qtd in Haiko 77) Dwing the long period when he designed and redesïgned his phfor the museum, Wagner was fully aware of the fethat to get the City Councii on board, he needed to convince it to make the economic investment At the same time he felt compeUed to maintain his artistic integrïîy, whïch effectively meant the autonomy and limitedness of the cultural miverse- Wagner's decision to replace the reception paonwith a monument dedicated to Culture, and the way in which he pictured this in the bwing demomtmtes, I thmL, a very overt retrem:hment ofthe bolmdsnes to the cultural miverseydespite his recognition of the need to appeal to "money and power." The criticism of the excessive Costliness of Wagner's 1903 design is imiaed set k tenns ofthe appropnpnatenessof such an economic investment to the "pubIic7'image ofthe city of Vienna This demo~,once again, that bdameutal feature ofthe uuevai processes of cdturatio~~'the separationbetween the "UaiversaI" domain ofculture and the Iimited miverse its profits. However, Wagner was not only seen as servhg a cultural eite. His image in modernist art histories is, after ail, thet ofthe progressive "pioncer? Wagner also wn6onted a set of ûditional cuIttlral valuesuesAs set forth in the cornpetition announcement, the Kaiser Fnuiz-Joseph Stadt Museum was intended to sit on the KarIspIaîz next to the famous beroque KariskirChe by Fischer von Erlach. For the Catholic Viennese, the Karisplatz was a very important site in the urben imaginary, and one ofthe most sigaincant issues in the debate over the new museurn was its reIatiomhïp to the baroque churcht Wagner himself was adamant that the architect must EaLe special are in setting out this relati~nship~He argued th* by maùitaining a low, domheïght, his museum created a skyline that empbasized the grandeur of the Karlskirche's dome Cpi. 421. In addition to this he reasoned that the improvised style of his Qme did not create a reckless mockery of the baroque dome of the church, as he clsimeci other propals did HoweveryWagner's desigas were viewed by meas an &ont to the sanctity ofthe KzuIspIatz That his plans appeared to infiinge on a speciflcaUy Catholic Viennese heritage, fkilad criticisms that drew on some of the polernics of Vierma's municipd politics. For exampie, Margaret Ohhas discovered a letter addressed to Franz Wickhoe then director of the Kzntsthistorisches Zll~fir~l,in *ch the unknown author asks Wickhoff to help prevent Wagner's museum fiom king built AAer assuring Wickhoff that, were a hypotheticai 'David Cohn" attacked in fiont of his window by "a pair of punks" he would certainly call out for help, even ifhe C'wouldn'texady" place himselfat the victim's senice, the author mites, 7 wili tell y04 and prove it, that presently in Vienna amistic punks, a pair of brutal architests, want to attack and mmder not an innocent Jew, but the great Chwh of St Charles by Kerl Fischer von Erlach!" l7 The extendexi stniggle over tbe Karispiatz and the wnstmdion ofthe Kaiser Fm-Joseph Stadt Museum was a wntwt over the shape of this itrbanpluce as a site of 170h,"Nationalism" 46142. Evidence mggests that Wickhoff did not sympatbize with the leaer's author, see Ob, ?Uois Riegi" 11617. culturation The character and boumlaries ofthe cdturai miverse it worked to reproduce was the prhuy source ofdebate. Very different cultural Pnivezses wexe projected in the competing daims to cultural legitimacy- These cleims were also efforts to came out of rnban space a plimcular "permanence" in order enable it as a site ofculturatim Since Wagner's architectural works extendeci to Vienna's ïnhsimcture~and since he tbeorized thaî Art should leave no par&ofthe city Imtouched, he was fito conftont the image of the whole city whiie he staked his daim to cultural le@timacyYOne of his most sought afk pmjects was the developmenî ofthe quays almg the Danube Canal, which effectively would have completed the Ringstrasse dwelopment In a 1905 drawiog for the Ferdinandbriïcke Ipt 431. the comtrmtion itseff serves as a source for cdturaf mntempiatio~~Here, two figures stand Iookiag at the buttressing of the iron, arched fiame, demonstrating W-er' specinc claun to the legitimacy of the matmial's statu in his architectud the~ry!~Those in confempIation are always ofthe leisure classes, or those fraçtions of Society tkî generally were not among the Christian Socials' electorate- The surpPising number of people Wagner pictures in contemplation shows the extent of his claims to cultural Iegitimacy. Rather tban suggcsting a larger miverse that beaefits hmculturation, it is more an overstated effort to afnrm the legitjmacy of his cultural program. ril this image the figure at the top ofthe stairs directs motber gaze toward the viewer that seems to ask the same question posed by the figure in the drawing of the monument to Kuffia- In both drawlngs, this gaze opens onto a realm outside the cultural universe. The uncertahty of the viewer's relationship to this gaze (are we invited into the cultural universe? is it an open invitation?) is, I thi.a part of Wagner's own ambivalence towsrd the political and social bodies that held the power to innuence architecanal production in Vien Wagoer did attempt to picture the larger social field beyond the limiteci cdturai universe. Another view of the Ferdinandsbrircke showïng the lower quay IpL 441 (drawn in 18% for an earlier design whïch included a Stadtbghn reveals how the working classes intenict with Wagner's irrbom architecture. They appear here to go about their usual work dong the quay, seemingiy obiivious to their architectud smundings Both desigus for the bridge include 'tictory" columns remuliscent of the ones Semper pl81~~1edfor his Dresden forum (Tn the eatîier design they are fke-standing columns I8~eumeyerconsiders one of the figures as Wagner himseIfcontemplating the Stone abutment His eyes on the stone rather than the km suggests tbat, despite the engineering demands placed on bim, the stone remains the source of arCistic fsination, 133- dedicated, as the inscription says, to an achial architectmal victary-%wheieas in the 1905 design they appear as stmctud pien, *ch are nevertheIess wu-fiiactional, see Neumeyer 133.) However, for Wwer, ,the victory of Art in these cases implies a culturation that is above its bene* are susgested to extemâ to the masses. who are "&te ignorant on artistic mattersttersnIn other words, Wsgner posits a "universaln relatio*-p to culture This is demonstrated by the inscription in the border, whae Wagner has Iiaked together the symbolic chab of tand-Stmf-StSlo Tbat Wagner couid imagine the same site in temu of both a limited cuihiral universe, as in the later drawïng and a larger social field, reveals the diffiationinvolved in the processes of culturation. With respectto the pmductïcmofplaces this differentiation is marked in tems of the hnaghqof the spece as a fhd, autonomous site of contemplation, and the imesinary of the space as a setting to the larger social field That Wagner hïmseif considered the same site in these two ways, reveals how he negotiated the production of place in an urban environment outside ofa specincaiiy sited cdhual institutio~~ Remarkably, the earlier Qawing for the Ferdiaandsbrücke aiso includes a gaze direeted at the viewer. The centrai figure at the edge of the qyay appears to pause hm his activity in order to look at us [pl. 4q. To his left, in the background, a woman carrying a pdalso sends a gaze in our dkectï~~Whnt is the gesture Wagner makes here? Does he, as in the other bwings, wish to impIicate the viewer in a reIationship (however undecided) with the cultural Miverse? The universe represented hem, howewer, appears to be the "umversarl," the larger social field It seems that Wagner wishes to put into question the vieweZs reiationship to the chain of Land1Staat-Stad. This may have been the question he wished to put to the govenunentai bodies who viewed his proposais, effectively zsking them to atnrm a "UniversaIl"cuiture by approving ofhis design (In 1896, the date of this drawhg, Wagner had been recentiy appointai by mimicipal authorities to the commissions overseeing Vie~llia's transportation and the reguiation of the canal.) However, if, in the other drawings representing the cultural miverse, the gaze directed at the viewer opens onto a realm outside that universe, what is the ouîside to the c?.miversal" social field represented here? Where is the viewer located7 Wagner's apparent desire to make an appeal to the "univemal" benefits of his cultural prognun has resulted in an mconscious conûontation with the cultural universe's ccother-"The prideged position in this dmwing is not ot ofthe viewer, but that ofthe man between the column and the edge of the picture who observes the workers hmabove unnoticed. This cocoionîation with the cultural universe's uothef throws the hidden principIe of vision and division, the differentiation of the culairal universe nom the CZinived,"into je~pardy- Asamodernist,inRinger'ssenseofthetam, Wagnersoughttoadapta tradztioaal set of vaïues to the shif?s in powerdtingnOm the mrrterimrrterial and socid - - changes ofubanhtioa The Cbnstien Socials, as the bDdy that held power in municipal politics in KmaRer 1895, the -&on ofone aspect ofthese changes. It was the body with which Wagner most directly negotiated his adapt@ionof values. This adaptation can been seen more precisely as a -on of enhqghg the Iimited miverse, and extending the bene&, of a staîe-unified culture. Just as Ringer observes that thap &sted an entire spectmm ofpositions between modem& and orthodox, Wagner took on a number of positions in bis attempted adaptation, often employing a tbetoric of the Ccp&Ii~nin duplicitous ways An e-on ofthe cultiwl universe's profits wodd aiways prove difficult, end this is a result of the contradïctory forces that characterize the cultural field Wagner7sefforts to deguard the profits ofthe cultural universe was a part of his attempt to maintain cdtural aaomrny, wwhh was thrpatened by the hetemnomous forces he associated with the iaban ^masses." These contraclictory forces are at the root of Wagner's ambivalence with respect to his adaptation of values. 1believe this ambivalemce is recogmzpble in the drawing of the monument to KuItw and in the 1905 drawing of the Ferdinandsbnicke. The question of the culturai mive~~e'sextension (into the vïewer's space) is as uncertain as the gazs directed toward the viewer. As sites of culturation they depend on a seIfentaineci space. The unCerf8inty of those gazes is precisely the way in which they seme as both an invitation into and a guarded watch over that spaw. (In Semper's drawing ofthe Zwingerfonun, on the other hancl, we are in the privilegad position tbat watches over others.) In the 18% drawing of the Ferdinandsbrücke, Wwer's atternpt to picture the ccuniversalnrealm of culturation, to picture the benefits of the cultutal universe as extended to the ccmasses,nallowed for the uncanny co&mtation with the cultural universe's repressed "other." This space is not &uarded by a priviieged position in the cultural universe, but is guarded by the other. It is, of course, the same site pictured in the 1905 drawing. The two drawings together demonstrate the tenuousness of Wagner's attempts to maintain culturai autonomy and the limited universe of its benefits, and the tenuoumess of bis attempts to produce particdar sites of culturation in an urbsn space that was instrumentai to the shiRr in the field of power that îhreatened that autonomy. Conclusion: TbMdng with Hlptorks of Practice My initial objective was to examine the lasting impact histoncism had on Viemese modemïsm, By anaiysing discourses of history and various examples of historicist architecture 1 had hoped to show how they reappeared in new configurations in modernist architectpre in Vienna The efforts of historiaas Iike Mallgrave have showthe supposed break between historicism and mo6ernism to not have happenecl so completely. mitedernoastfating that discourses of both rdsmand idealism were present in the theory and practice of Semper and Wagner, these rwisionist architectural histories seemed to Mt the3 expianations ofwhy aplirentiy hcompaabe discourses were used simdtaneously to these discourses alore-My intention was to show how the multiple and varying deployment of &st and ideaIist discourses in architecture was Mplicated in the exercise of power. To do this 1wished to look beyond the codhes of architectural discourse in order to reconsïder the poIitical wntext that Schorske examineci when he psited, as it seems to me at least, a probiernatic separation of histoncism and modernïsm, My interest in these deve1opments was to undnderstand why one discoune or the other had been suppressed in a given situation. For example, how wdd Rie@ make the daim, in 1901, that Semper was a crude materialist, and Wagner the daim, just five years earlier, that despite poiating the way to architectural realism, Semper could not get beyond his idealism? Whether or not he was influenced by çomeone else's interpretation, Wagner evidently misread Semper by selectively isolating certain of Semper's concepts. In MdmArchitecture Wagner argued that Semper had more knowledge than ab* (62)' that he deviated fiom bis own dictum that art's only master is necessity (91), and that, "like DarWm,'' Semper, rack4the courage to complete his theones fbm above and below" (93). Through this slanted vision of Semper, Wagner projected the image of himself as advancing architectural realism, which, in tuni, obscured the discourses of idealism evident in his own projeçt- Historïans such as Maiigrave, J. Duncan Berry, and Werner Oechslin have attempted to accoimt for the simultaneous use of reaIist and ideaiist discourses, by examining both realist and ideaikt ''influences'' on Wagner- However, these efforts have merely replaced the notion of modemism "breaking" hmhistoricism with an c'evolutioaary" mode1 ofchange. In this way, however, we are show how Wagner's seemingiy paradoxical cail for "a certain fke Renaissance absorbeci by our genius loci" that takes "the greatest possible account ofmaterials and construction," may be seen as an homage to Semper's rustication and lithic constructional metbods employed in the Vienna museums. Wemay al- undentsnd this homage' made in 1890, in relation to the Renaissance style apartments Wagner bsd been building at the time (Beny 247). To take another example, the wteadi-bearing mg& that Semper used on the entrance pavilion of the Art =story Museum to represmt the "idealisr topos of the victory of art may be seen to be borrowed by Wagner for the amteria of his Postai Savhgs Bank Ofnce (Mallgrave, Senrper 369). This f- of Wagner's building has been typicaliy overlooked in the modernist histories that have canonizied the Postal Savings Bank Furthemore, Wgcave, HiÜko, anâ ûecbslin have ail viewed Semper's BeHeichmg theory as a direct infIuence on Wqpfssheathing technique- What had once been viewed as evïdence of Wagner's emphasis on consimctional methods, the boIt heads on the Postal SamBa* *ch visibly indicate the sheathmg technique, have been show to have been hctionai ody in seciinng the marble while the mortar hardened (MaIlgrave, Mdmn Architecture 37). Rirndy s-g to reprrsent fhctioI181ity, therefore, they dernome the emphasis on representation, rather than matefial or construction, that Semper had given to his notion of BekZeidmg. Each of these exampks adds sigoincantiy to out understanding of the complexïty of architechual discourses during this pendHowever, by situating these wntradictory impulses in an evolutionary mode1 (&ny; Oechslin) or in a CCcontradict~ryhisbricai backdrop" (Malgrave, Otto Wagner 3), these histories attempt to account for contradictions by situating them in the realm of context Memaintahhg the origiraality nnd comistency of the architect's theory and practke-l In other words these histories attempt to account for contradictions by &eCtiveIy displacing them. The historian's wagner, Wgrave &tes, "the problem lies les wiîh the seeming conhradictions posed by this @cular architect and more with the historicai backdrop," Otto Wagner 3. Beny rejects a claim that a %de gdf' existed between Wagner's early theory and practice, and argues iastead that his dywork "rendered his mature &icaiïty intelligible," 244. At the same time, Berry wrïtes, The emergeace of a seK-collsciously 'modem' entepise amwg Central European architects of the late nineteenth century appears to exhibit many ofthe concepaial dilemmas tbat contemporary historim face in examining these efforts. 243. h positing "the evolutionary way to modem architecture," Oechslin Wntes of the historically cwscious Wagnerywhose "architecture gradually detached itselfhthe Sernpeiian iiaeepe:" ''Even though he appeared as a champion of 'modem architecture' and had to defend himselfagakt the resultîng criticism, he was sîiil integrated into the cornplex culturai situation tbat exkted before World War 1and was marked with all its con~ctions,''367,365. Even Quitzsch, who has no trouble in locating costtadictions in Semper's theozy, ultimately claims that these ere the resuit of the contradictions of a capitalist epoch, 105. efforts to maintain coLlSistency in an mhitecf's WO* may be true to the architect's seif-image- but I want to emphasize the ùnportance of an architectys projected consistency as a strategy to pvi& a coherent Iogic to c~n~ctoryimpulses; that is, to locaîe contradZctïon not simply in the cealm ofcoatext but also in the architect's material ami theoretical pmcîice- The problem ofau hisîoncal pject that attempts to chart the passage fiom historicism to modemism, then, is in the rrcovery ofthese contradictory impulses. Schorske's pojecf in many ways, seems well suiteci to this As a "selfdexive modem," Schorske attempts to write a history of the encornter between nineteenth- historicist culture adtwentietkentury ahistorid culture, of whih he is a product Mï~kIRoth bas cogently argued that Fm-de-Siècle Vienna is a deeply reflexïve book that PRforms "the conficontation ofmodemity and histoq" (739)- Through the use of modemist fomi-a series of independent vignettes that operate together, as Schorske says, iike a song cycle-mther than a linear, realist nanative, Schorske is able to provide more than histoncal contexnialization to his intdeetuai history- Since each essay points to a different result in the co~ntationbetween modernity and history, he is able to perfom the tension of this con-fkontatiomRoth argues, "Schorske does not choose between politics and culture, or between society and the psyche,= the cuntradictary impulses Schonke identifies in an emergent rnodemïsrn (741). ISsteaâ, the book's reflexivity, that it "maires no attempt to stand outside its subject) situates the reader within this cdOIlf8tion (741). I am convind tbaî a refiexïve history is rrquind to -ver the contradictions evident in architectural discourses of this perïd However, Schorske's reflexive history cCperf~rmsnthe conEradictory impdses at the wntexftu~crllewei; it does not perform them, as I insist is necessary, sitmted at the level of discursive and material practices. Schonke considers Wagner as an architect who advances nothiag other than realiq fiin~tio~st architecture, and the only c'tension"performed is in placing Wagner's work in the conlm of Sitte's (and vice versa)* 2~oth,in fact, defends the one-sided hages Schorske pain& of his djects, emphasinng tbat Schorske, a modem in an ahistorical intellectuai ciïmate {Le-, herica in the two decades after Wodd War II), attempts to perfiorm the mdemist Srryof dehistoricimtioa"On this point, Schorske's work is remarl 3Hàrvey9stheory accoimts for the same, buî since 1have foiiowed Bourdieu in this regard, 1 wiU Mt myselfto his theory of practice. See H;arvey7schapter The Dialdm of Discuurse* in Jrrstce, 77-95; and Bourdieu, OrdIine and Ptacticai Rea~~n12740. tniiy heterodox positions, and the eadaptati~nist"position of the modernist, *ch 1have used to deScni Wagner, lies somewhcre between these two poles. Reading Bourdieu's theory into the cuiturai prodi~ctionof architecture and rirban design, 1have argued that under perïods offaiteniate hmgbmies ofsites ofcdturaa'm are produced. In order to defend a limited cultural economy, those that benefit nom it must project the image that its bene- an univd. Thus to posit the "imiversality" of its cultural benefits, a site of culturation must be denned as uncontained and open to the circulation ofthe entire social field (however ilmited this circuiation may actually be). The extent to which a site is imegiaed as seif-contained and %ed" or uncontaineci and "open" dcpends on tbe extent to which that site is imagiaed as a spaœ specific to the cuitPraI field, or as a space belonging to the "public" (as the image of universality)).Of course, the imagiuuuy of an dauspilce as open and mcontained may itseifbecomefved, through, for exemple, constant repmduction (i-e.the fixecl notion of a place as "public"). This amounts to wfiat Bourdieu descrii. as a popuiist inversioa: The cult of popilar CUIture . . . is a fom of essentialism, in the same way as the class meism which reduces popular practices to -f which it is offen nothing more than the mere hwersion, ada falsely radical one at tbat: indeed, it offm aii the benefits of apparent subversion, of 'ctadicalchie," while at the same tune leaving everythhg as it is, some with th& actually cultureci culture, capable of sustaimag its own questioning, the others with their decisively and fictitious1y rehabilitated culture- (Practid Rem137) 1have attempted to expand on Bourdieu's theory to show that the mIhrrd production of architecture and dandesign, under the claim to culturaI legitimacy, seives to create the alternate imaginaries of urban space as fked and seLf-taed, d Buid and uncontainecl- These alteniate hagbries may be used in multiple ways to sustain or challenge the limited aud domimu& domain in the field of power. Both -es may even be used in a single strategy, as witnessed by Wagner's efforts. ffarvey aIso describes the pmduction of- in temis of relative fityand fluidity. According to the passage 1cited earlier, place formation, or qatid fuuty, is the result of carving out "permanencesn fiom spatio-temporal processes, including those cornprised of discourses, imaginaries, institutions, and matenal practices. Harvey argues that place formation is a fiiadamental and pmuioxical fatune of capitalism. Necessarily directed toward growth, capitalisn seeks to eliminate ali spatial barriers, but in order to check overaccumul&on it must provide a spatial fix by redirecting ovenrccurnulated capital into the built environment. '"Difference' and 'otherness,"' he writes, "'are produced in space through the simple logic ofuneven capital investment, a proliferating geographical division oflabor7an increasing segmentation of reproductive activities and the rise of sptïaiiy orBered (ohsegregaîed) social distinctzom- . ." (Jktice 295)- However, upermanencesn(in addition to materid pictices, these include imthtiom, beliefk, and discourses) are never absolute, no mamatter how nxcd and permanent a piece may seem-this is, in fact, one of the coadltÏons of political agency- Harvey notes that a tradition of urbgn reform, however. has been troubled by tbinlong within the boundanes of spatial fity. In the nineteenth cenhiry Olmstesd, Geddes, Howar& Bumham, Sine, Wagner, Unwin, all reduced the problem of intncate social processes to a matter ofnmfmg the right spabial fom. And in this they set the domeiant ("utopie") twentietbxntury tone for either a mechanistic approach to &an form, as in the case of Le Corbusier, or the more organic approach ofFrank Lloyd Wnght The âifEculty with so-called "high modernid and the city was not its ''totakiqf' vision, but h -stent habit of pivileging things and @al fonns over social processes. It presumed that social engineering couid be accomplished through the engineering of physical foan. (41 Sl9) Harvey's point is that the toîaiizhg vision of modemism is not at fault, because Utopianism is not necesdy a hinhceto jwt socsocial actior~"A UtDpianism of process," he argues, "lmks very difièrent fiom a Utopianism of spatial fonn." From Bourdieu's perspective, the probIem with Wagner is not in having a totaiizing or chiversai"vision, but in tbet vision's promoting a Iimited and privileged universe of profit. (Compare Boutdieu's ethical program of c%v~rklngto universalip the waditions of access to universaiity.,") 1have argueci that the uneven cultumiion that differentiates the limitecl miverse of cdturai benefits fiorn the claims to its "UniversaIity" is produceci both in and through space. When Harvey daims that the problem of Wagner and an entire tradition of rirbaa "reform" is in @viIeging spatial fomis over sociai process, 1 would add that this is a feanire oftreating spatial form in ternis of cultumi legitimacy, that is, the subjeting of spotal fonn io the relatt-omofpower in the dhnafljild- While Karvey's work wvers a broad mge of social processes in addressing capitaIism7srole in the production ofuneven geography, a project he refm to as historical-geographical matenlalism, my interest is to show the role that particularly mhrai thinlong has in the uneven development of urban geography- A propexiy reflexive history, one that accocmts for discursive and matenal praaices as strategies, is the sort of materialkt history raquind to remver the ways in waich the cultural field bas been implicaîed in the development ofurt#ta geographyYConsidering reflexïve history as a means ofC%hkingwith history," rather than about history, as Schorske has recently writîen, "implîes the employment of the materids of the pst and the dguratiom in fich we oq@ze and comprehend tbmi to orient ourselves in the living prescat" (ThRiAing 3). In recovering the various strategis of historical, architectural practices, a properly reflexive history wül also be usefiil in rroiuikùig the ~lstioashipbetween cultural production nad iirban spatial form, by drawlng attention to the ways in which the cultitral field is able to repraduce power relations by materially and discursrvely embedding them in urban form ZOO Jahre Kutrsthistorisches ihseinn: I)as Arntsfhistorische Mkeunt ah Dehlund Gesamtkunstwerk- Spec. issue of Jahrbuch der ktatsthi~rorischenSarmnImgen in Wien 88 (1995). Beiler, Steven, Viemta adthe Jews. 2867-1938: A CuItzaal Hisfory- Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1989. Berry, I. Duncan, "Fm Histoncism to Architecturai Realism: On Some of Wiper's Source+" MaIlgrave, Otto Wagner 243-78. Bourdieu, Pierre Disthction: A &ci' Cmiipie of the Jigenaenf of Taste- Tmrans Richard Nice. Cambridge MA: Harvard UP,1984 Traas. of Lu Disfmction: Critique sociale dujugement. Paris: Minuit, 1979. - The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Arî andLiterutute. Ed Randal Johnson Traos. Richard Nice et aL European Perrpectives Senes- New York Columbia UP,1993. -. Outline of a Ineory of Practtice. Trans. Richard Nice. Cambridge: bbdgeUP, 1977. Tram of Equisse d'une théorie de la practîque, prédécé de trob études d'ethnologie Kobye. %vitzerian& hz,1972. -. Pracficul Remon: On the Theory ofAcfion. Tm.Gîsele Sapiro, et al. Stanfiord CkStanford UP,1998. Trans. ofibisonPratiques. Park: SeuiI, 1994 Boyer, John W. Culture mul Political CTisir in Viemur. Christian Sociallm in Power, 28974918. Chicago: Chicago UP,1995. -. Political RodicaZism in Late 1-al Vienna- Chicago: Chicago UP, 198 1. Frampton, Kenneth. Modern Archifectwe: A Critical History- Mord: Mord UP, 1980. Geretseggex, Heinz and Max Peintnec. Ono Wagner, 1841-1918: fie Exprmriing C@, 7Re Beginning of Modmn Architecture. Tm.Gerald Onn New York: Praeger, 1970. T'nuis. of Oito Wagner, 1841-1918 :mbegrenzte Gros=stadt: Begiim der modemen ArchiteKhrr. Wburg Residemz, 1964. Giedion, Si@ed Spce, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a Nov Tradition. Cambridge MA: Harvard UP,1941. Gluck, Mary. "Beyond Vienna 1900: Rethinlùng Cubin Centrai Europe." Aust&n Hisfory Yembook 28 (1997): 217-22. Gregory, Derek Geographicai Ima.onsItSCambridge Mk-Blackwea 1994. EhïkoaPeter. TheFranz JosepMtnrfanuse~ltt~:The Attempt to Irnplement a Theory of Modem Architecture-" TranseM81lgntve. Wgmve, Otto Wagner 53-83. - n>e Urbrmhtion of Capital- BaIBaIore: Johns Hopkins UP,2985. Mord- Blackwell, 1985, Hermann, Woif&ang- Gortfiiedsénpr: In Semch of Architecm Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1984- Jan&, man. "Viema 1900 Revisited: Paradigms and Problerns." Ausîrian History Pearbook 28 (1997): 1-27. Jbi, Oscar. The Dzksolutiion of the Hàbsbwg Monmchy. 1929. Chicago: Pheonix-U Chicago Pa 1961. Kassel-ma, Renata -O Wagner's Umccessfiil Pdel-Aktiot~.~'TramratlS Mallgrave. Mailgrave, Oîto Wagner 21-5 1. Lhotsky, Alphons. Die Bàugeschichre ddm Mween dderneuen Bwg Vien- Ferdinand Berger, Horn, 1941. Lichtenberger, Elisabeth, Vienna: Bndge Between Cultures. Tram. Dietlinde Mühlgasser and Craig Reissa. World Cities series. London: Belbaven Press; New York Halsted-John Wiley and SOIE, 1993. Liebersohn, Harry. Fate d Utopia in Getnum Sociology, 1870-1923. Cambridge MA: MITa 1988, Mallgrave, Herry Francis. GoWed Sbqm: Architeet of the Nineteenth Cenfwy. New Haven: Yale UP,1996. -. Iniroduction. The Four Elemenfsof Architecture and Other Wntings. By Semper. 1-44. -. 'Rom Realism to Sachlichkit The Polemics of Architecturai Mdernity in the 1890s-" Mgrave, Ofto Wagner 281-321. -. Introduction ModmArchitecture. By Otto Wagner. 1-5 I. - IntductÏo~.Otto Wagner: Reflections on the Ramtenf of ikhdm@. By Mdlgrave, ed 1-13, -, ed. Otto Wagner: Refections on the Raiment of Modernity. Issues and Debates series 3. Santa Monica CA: Geny Center for the History of Art and Humaniîies, 1993, Marçhand, Suzanne- "Professio~gtheSemses: Art and Misic HIstory in Viemut, 1890-1920-77Amtrim History Pearbook 2 1 (1985): 23-57- -. 'The Rhetoric of- and the DeChe of CIassïcai HumaniSm: the Case of Josef Strzygowski." HrStory and Tlieory 33 (1994): 106-30. Neumeyer, Fritz '%on and Stone: The Architecture ofthe Gro-rlr." Trans. Maiigrave. Mdlgrave, Otto Wagner 1 15-23. Oechslin, Werner. The Evolutionary Way to Modem Architecture: The PM-gmof Siilhülse und Kem." Tm.MaIIgrave. Mangrave, Otto Wagner 363-410- Oh, Margaret ccAloisRiegl: The Late Roman Empire in the Late Hihburg Empire-" nie Habsbwg Legacy: NationuI Id- in Hiktorid Perspective. AuStnan Studies 5. Eûs. Ritchie Robertson and Edwani Timms. Edinburgh: EdInburgh UP,1994. 107-120. -. Fonns of Repesenfationin Alois Riegl's Ineory of Art. University Park PA: Pennsylvania State UP, l992. -. "Nationalism, the lews,and Art History" Jtllliaism 45 (1996):46 1-83. Olsen, Donald J. ïïte City as a Workof Art: London, Paris. Viemui. New Haven: Yale UP, 1986, Pevsner, Nikolaus. Pioneers of fie Modmn Movement 1936. Rpt as Pioneers of Modem Design: From Williont Morris tu Walter GropiwZISNew York: Museum of Modem Art, 1949. Powell, Nicholas. Tiie Sacted Spring: The Ambt Vimma 18984928. Greenwich CT: New York Graphic Society, 1974. Ringer, Fritz. The Declare of the GemmMe: Ine GemmAmdenic Conmuni& 1890-1933- Cambridge MA: Harvard UP,1969. Roth, Michad S. TdormingHistoiy: Moderaist Conterdrialism in Cari SchorskeYs Fin-de-Siècle Viemra." AllzerrllZerrèanHistoriiwl Review 99 (1994): 72945. Sdtz,August "Rhversus Vémiedichtmg The -gn of the Great City." Tnuis. Mgrave. Mallgrave, Otto Wagner 85-1 12. Schorske, Car1 E, Fhde-SiècIe Vienna: Politics rmd Culture. 1980, New York: Vintage-Random House, 198 1. --uMuseum in Contestod Space: The Sword, the Scepter, and the Riag" IO0 Jahre Runsfhistorisches Milseum: Das kunsthistorische Mwerrm als DenklllQl und Gesamtkrarstwerk- Spec. issue ofJahrbucl,der Kurtsthistorischen Aknmnhgen iït Wlen 88 (1995): 10-20. (Rpt in Inrirkng With HÏsto~105-22.) - ntmkmg with Hist0t-y: Expfo~utiortsin the Paîsage to Modenti~m~Princeto~, N J: Princeton UP,1998, - Wevoit in Vie- (Architectural Development in A-a)." New York Ratiew of Books 33 May 29,1986: 24-29. Rpt as Trom Public Scene to Private Space: Architecture as Cultural Criticsm." Thinking With History l!Wïl. Semper. Gonnied. On Architectwd Styles- Four Elements cmd Other Writfigs 264-84. Tmof aer BamtyIe. 1869. - The Forrr Elenienis of Architecture and Other Wiitmgs. Tm.Hriny Francis Mailgrave and WoIf&ang Herrmanm RES Momgraphs in Anthropobgy and Aesthetics Senes. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1989. -. The Four Elements ofArchitecture. Four EIements and OtkWNinigs 74-129. Traus. of Die Vier EI'te der Badwmt- 185 1. - introduction 'CThe~riedes FonneII&hijnen." (Theory of Formal Beauty.") unpublished msn-pt c. 1856/59. Rpt. as TheAmiutes of Formai Beauty-" Trans. Hertmann Herrmam 2 l9-W --Re-. "Eheorie des FonneIZ1S;ch6nen~"(Tkory of FodBeauîy-") unpiibiished man-pt c. 1856/59. Rpas "A Critical Aizalysis and Pmgnosis of Present-Day Production-" Tnuis. Hemmm Hemnann 24560. -. PrelfmbmyRwks on Po&chroie Architecture mdScuptwe in Antipity- Four Hements and Other Writings 4533. Trans of Vodtiqiige Bemetkungen über benadte Archifektw d PIartik bei dm Alten. 1834- -. Science. 1-, d Art. Fora EIements and Other Writings 13047. Tm.of Wissenschaft.Industrie undKimit. 1852. -. %le rii the Technical adTectonic Arts, or Pructid Aesthetia- Excerpt Four Elements und OfhmWritings 18 1-263. Trans. of Der Stil in den technischen und tekionischen KUtrsfen, ociiwp'aAtische Aesthetik- 2 vols- 186063. -. Zeichnischer Nachlass an der El73 Zurich: Krirsck Kiogvon Martin Frôlch. Geschichte imd Theorie der Architektur an der Eidgea&ssischenHochschuie Zinicb series 14. Basel: Birkhauser, 1974. Staatliche KULlSfSammlwn Dresde11 and -tut flic Denkmalpflege/ArbeitssteUe hesden. GoWied Semper, 1803-1879: Bameïsfer Zwischen Revolution Md Hisrorisrrms. EExtL cat "GottfZd Semper arm lûû. Tmn1979. Munich: Callwey, 1980. Tonnies, Ferdinand Gernehchujt d GeselIsch# Tm.Charles Loomis. New York: American Book Company, 1940. Tm.of Gementschajt und Gesell~chaft~ 1887- Vogt, Max, Ctuistina Reble andMemn Frohlich, eds. Gowed Smper &die Mitte des 19.Juhrhderfrs. Roc. of a symposium held at the Eidgnassischen Technichschen Hochschule, Zurich Basel: BkkMuser, 1976. Wagner, Richard The Art- Work ofthe Future d Other Workx Tram Wüüam Ashton Ellis. Lincoln and Londotl: U Nebraska Ress, 1993. Wagner, Otto. The Dwelopment of a Great CityitynArchitecturai Record 3 f @&y 1912): 485-500- Trans. ofDie Gromcrcik: Eine Snde uber diese von Otto Wagner- Vie- Antun Scbroli, 191 1. - Modem Architecture- Trans, Ebmy Francis M;allgntvee Te& and Documents series. Santa Monica CA: Geny Center for the History of Art and the Humadies71988. Trans, of Miente Architekha- 1896, -. Sketches. frojects, and Exemted Buildmgs- Tnuis Edward Vance Humpherk New Yok Rmmli, 1987. Tram- 0fEinige Slklaert, Pnyëcte, iad msflrte Bmerk- 4 vols- 1889/9û, 1897,1906,1922. -* Einige SkrIm Projehe. iodmgt$Ü&e Batlwerk von Orto Wu-: VoII~fandiger NacMuck der vier OnOnghaIlbdb>evon 1889.1897. 1906. 1922. Ttibingen: Ernst Wasmuth, 1987. Wyss, Beat. "Ragnarok of Illusion: Richard Wagner's 'Mysti-cai Abyss' at Bayreuth_" Tram- Bratton. Ocrober 54 (1990): 57-78. Plates Plate t View Gom Karlskirche of the Glacis, Altstadt. and St Stepban's cathedral, 1850. Lithograph, (Miseen der Stadt Wien) Source: OIsen 61- Plate 2 Plans of Vienna, 1857 and 1887. (Royal mtute of British Architects, Transuctiom, es. 4.) (1888). Above: Plan of the berCity, 1857, prior to the removal of fortifications. Below Plan of the huer City, 1887. Opera House Art History Museum Natural History Museum Hofburg Extension Pdament Rathaus Hofburg Theater University Vo tivkirche St Stephau's Cathedral Hofburg Source: Ob59. Plate 3 Ringstrasse, showhg (Iefi to nght) the Parliament, Rathaus, University, and (HoQburg Theater, cc.1888. The Votivicùche is visible in the background behind the University. (Johanna Fiegl, Photographer-) Source: Schorske, ZEi&iqq L 18- Gottfried Semper and Car1 von knauer, bird'seye perspective of the NaturaI and Art History Museums (foregroumi) and expandeci Hofburg (together formïng the Koiserfotrnn), 1869. (Institut thr Geschichte und Theone der Archltektrn, Semper Archiv, ETH-Zurich) Source: Staatliche KunStsammlunga Dresden 141- Herrengasse, near the Hofburg with the Palais Lichtenstein, c. 19 1 1. (Bildarchiv der 6sterreichischen Natiodbibliothek) Source: Olsen 152. Plate 6 Gotüiied Semper, perspective of the Zwinger courtyard with the Art Gallery left foreground, and the HoAheater right foregroumd, 1842. (btitut fiu Geschichte und TheorÏe der Architektur, Semper Archiv, ETH-ZW~C~,) Source: Semper, Zeiclnristrier Nahlàss 41_ Chridan Gottlob Hammer, 1101thside of the Dresden Hofiheater (1 835-4 1, Go--ed Semper, architect), waîercolorn, c. 1845. (Institut für Geschichte md Theotie der Architektur, Semper Archiv, ETH-Zurich) Source: Staatil-ctie KuoscsammlungenDresden 182. Plate 8 Gottfried Semper and Car1 von Hasemuer, view of the Art History Museum, Viema, 1869-9 1. From Zeirschr#fio. Bildende KZMS~,1892. (Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanitles-) Source: MalIgravc Smpm 326, Plate 9 Goeed Semper and Car1 von Hasemuer, Art History Museum, 1896-9 1. Entrance pavilioa (Institut fiïr Geschichte und Theorie der Architekair, Semper Archiv, ETH-Zurich) Source: Wgnrve, Saper 328, Plate 10 GoSed Semper and Car1 von Hasenauer, Art Hkt~ryMuseum, 189691. Rigbt corner pavilion. in the right niche, Charlemagne; in the left niche, RudolfI, both by J. Mer-Photograph, c. 1885. (Bildarchiv der &terreichische Natiodbibiiothek) Source: Haupt 28. Plate 11 Official announcement of the Ringstrasse plan, 1860. ~storischesMuseum der Stadt Wien) Source: Schordce, 17anRing t 22, Plate 12 Theophil Hansen, design for the Hohueen, cornpetition project, 1867. (Akademie der Bildeaden Kimste, Wien, Kupfdchkabinett) Source: 100 J.eRuri;srhisl~n~~k~sMttseum 143- Plate 13 Heinrich Ferstel design for the Hohuseen, wmpetition project, 1867. (Museen der Stadt Wiea) Source: 100 Jahre kunslhistoriscsch MÛseum 143. Plate 14 Moritz Ldhr, design for the Hobuseen, cornpetition project, second stage, 1867. (KUIlSfhistorisches Museum, Wiee) Source: 100 Jahre ~isio~schesMuseunt 144. Car1 von Hasenauer, design for the Hofinuseen, cornpetition project, 1867. (Kunsthistorisches Museum, WieaJ Source: 100 fiekimsfhi~l~sches hhseaïm 144. Plate 16 Gottnied Semper, preliminary plan for the HoAheater, hesden, with co~ecfion to Zwinger, 1835. (Sikhsische Landesbibliothek, Abteilmg Deutsche Fotothek) Som:Mallgrave, Semper 99. PIate 17 Gottfîied Semper, prelimuiary perspective of the Hoftheater, Dresden, 1835. (Sàchsische LandesbibLiothek. Abteilung Deutsche Fotothek) Source: Mallgrave, Semper 99- Plate 18 Gottnied Semper, plan of the Zwinger courtyard witb the Art Gallery located as an extension ofthe east wing (bottom). Alternative location ofthe Art Gallery to West (above and separate from Zwinger), 1841. (Institut fiu Geschichte und Theorie der Architekturf Semper Arc& ETH-Zurich.) Source: Mangrave, Semper 1 IO. Plate 19 Rudolf von Ait, Kaidonun, watercoIour, 1872. (EWarcbiv der Osterreichische NatÏonalbibIiothek, Wien-) Source: 100 Johre ~~storischesMurPian133- Plate 20 Girard and Rehlander, coloddrawing of the Kaiserforum for the World Exhibition of 1873-The NamHlstory Museum (with Borne) is in the inmediate foregrod fur Denkmaipflege, Dresden-) Source: Maflgrave, Smpr 327- Plate 2 1 T. Mayerhoffer, KULISthistorisches Museum, Lithograph, c. 1900. (KllflSfhistonsches Museum Source: 100 J&e krrnsthrstorisches Mzcseim 8. Plate 22 Otto Wagner, Miethaus, Schottenriag 23,1880. From Otto Wagner, Emige Skiize~Projecte undat(sgefirefirhteBawerke (Vieana,- Author, 1889) 1: pl. 40, Source: Wagner,, Eimge Sfixen NQC~~CR54, Plate 23 Otto Wmer, =ethaus, Rathausstrasse 3, 188 1. From on0 Wagner, Einige Shen, Prqiecte lmd aurgej2ke Bauwerke (Vie-: Author, 1889) 1 :pl. 42. Sourcer Wagner, Ehi~SRTzren Nrnhhck 53- Plate 24 Otto Wagner, Miethaus, Stadiongasse 6 & 8,1883. From Otto Wagner, Einige Skizen, Projecte undatagejiihte Bauwerke (Vienna: Author, 1889) Ir pL 44. Source: Wagner, Emige Skzzen NiMhrck 55, Plate 25 Otto Wagner, Miethaus, Stadiongasse 6 & 8, vestibule, 1883. From Ono Wagner, Einige Shen, Prujecfe undatlpgefUefUhrteBauwerke (Viema: Author, 1889) 1: PL 45- Source: Wagner, Eimge Skïzzen NOciirjj?cck 56. Otto Wagner, Miethaus, Stadiongasse 6 & 8, ground plan of nrSt floor, 1883. From Otto Wagner, Einige SLzzert, P rowe und ausgefuivfe Bawerke (Vienoar Author, 1889) 1: pl. 43. Source: Wagner* EWge SkXPen N&chraick 57. Otto Wagner, Fesfpafzvor dmBurgthore, dra- for the festival celebrating the emperor's silver wedding anniversaty, on the Ringsûasse in fiont of the Burgtor with the incomplete Kimsthi-storisches Museum in the background, 1879. From Otto Wagner, Einige Sken,Projecte Mdausgeftihrze Bwerke (Viemm Author, 1889) Ir pf. 62. mst~risches Museum der Stadt Wien.) Source: Wagnerr EiiurugeSkrSkrrren Nmhcarck 73. Otto Wagner, entry Baldachin for Rincess Stephanie of Belgium, 1881. From Otto Wagner, Ekige Sken, Projecte lmdamgefiihrte Bauwerke (Vienna: Author, 1889) 1: pl 6 1. (Mstorisches Museum der Stadt Wiea) Source: Wagner- Ehge ShenNQcM~cA 72, Plate 29 Otto Wagner, HoQaviIIion on the Wientalline of the Stadtbahn, near SchBnbninn, l896/97. From Otto Wagner, ERiige Skeq ProJecte und amgejiihrte Bauwerke (Viema- Anton SchrolI, 1897) 2: pl. 64. (Historisches Museum der Stadî Wien) Source: Wagner, EMge Sfzzn NacMhcck 137. Plate 30 Otto Wagner, îkt Villa Wagner, Hütteldorf, 1888. From Otto Wagner, Eniige Skken, Ptqecte dawgeftihrte Bu~mnke(Vieaaa: Author, 1889) 1: pl. 36, Source: Wagner, EiBige Ski-rzen Nmkhck 48, Otto Wagner, detait ofMkjolikahaus (apartment house), Linke Wienzeile 40, noal design, 1898. From Algemei~eBauzeitmg (1900): pl. 10. (Getty Center for the Kïst~tyof Art and the Humanities.) Plate 32 Otto Wagner, Majowcahaw, Linke Wienzeüe 40, 1898-99, staïr~aseand lift gates. (Josef Dapra, photographet) Source: Geretsegger and Peintner 126. Plate 33 Otto Wagner, Viemna, an example of big city regulation divided into districts by ring and radial rd.From Otto Wagnerr Die Grofifmît(Vie-- Anton Schroil, 19 1l), 12-13. (Alcademie der bildenden Kiuiste Wien) Source: Gereîsegger and Peiatner 38. Vienna. an Example.of Big City Regulation Divided into Districts by Ring and Radial Roads 1 - Plate 34 Otto Wagner, site plan of the projected twenty-second district of Vienna From ûtto Wagner, Die Gropstudt (Vienna- Anton Schroli, 1911), 11. (Memie der bfidenden Künste Wien) Source: Gereîsegger and Peintner 40, Plate 35 Otto Wagner, Mew of the LuRLentnim (open air centre) of the fibure twenty-second district of Vie- From Otto Wagner, Die Grc@srtndt (Vienna- Anton SchroU, 191 l), 14. (Aicademie der bildenden Künste Wien-) Source: Cieretsegger and Peincner 41. Plate 36 Otto Wagner, Postsparkasse (Postal Savings Bank), Vienna, 190606. Main entrante. From Otto Wagner, EEige Skizze~Prome dausgejDkte Bawerke (Vienna: Anton Schroll, 1922) 4: unpagïnated Source: Wagner, Einr'ge Siken Naciiriiuck 243. Plate 37 Otto Wagner, Postsparkasse (Postal Sahgs Bank), Viema, 1904-06. Acroteria From Ono Wagner, ER'iige Skrizetr, Prujecre zuuiaasg@zrfe Bawerke (Vieooa: Anton SchroîI, 1922) 4: unpaginated Source: Wagner, Einige SRirzen Nochhtck 244. Otto Wagner, Church am Steinhof, main facade. BuÏlt 1905-07 for the Lower AdanState Sanatorium. From Ono Wagner, Emige S&en, Proiecte d ot~~gfu'hrteBauwe~ke (Vie- Anton SchroU~1906) 3: unpaginated Source: Wagner, LigeSk-zzen Naclirouck 173, Plate 39 Otto Wagner, Lupus Sanatorium, Stiftimg, 19 10-1 3. Main entrante. From Ono Wagner, Einige Shen, Prqiecte tmd mgefiihrte Bamverke (Viennar An- Schroli, 1922) 4: unpaginated Source: Wagner, Elilrge SherzzenNüchrihrck 236- Plate 40 Otto Wagner, drawing for the Monument to Kultur in fiont of the proposed Kaiser Franz-Josef Stadt Museum, 1909- From Otto Wagner, Emige Skkzerr, Projecte und ausgefuhrte Bauwerke (Vienna: Anton ScW, 1922) 4: unpaginated Ono Wagner, perspective view of Kaiser Fm-Joseph Stadt Museum, main building with reception padion, 1903. From Otto Wagner, Einige Skizzen, Projecte undazagefùhrte Bmerke (vie- Anton Schro~,1906) 3: pl. 47. (Historisches Museum der Stadt Wien) Source: Wagner, EweSküzen Nachrarck 182- Plate 42 Otto Wagner, perspective view of the Karlskirche and Fm-Joseph Stadt Museum on the Karlsplatz, 1903. From Otto Wagner, Einige Shen, Projecfe und aurgef2irte Bawerk (Vienna: Anton SchroiI, 1906) 3: pl. 32. mst~nsches Museum der Stadt Wien) Source: Wagner, Einige SKizzen Nachrarck 169- Plate 43 Otto Wagner, perspective view ofthe Ferdniandsbrücke, fkst cornpetition design, 1905. From Otto Wagner, Einige SL-en, Pro~ecteimd ausgejiikrfe Buwerke (Viema: Anton SchrolI, 1906) 3: pl. 63. (Hïst~n~hesMuseum der Stadt Wien.) Source: Wagner, Emige S'zzen ffach&uck 193. Plate 44 Otto Wagner, perspective view of the Ferdinandsbrücke, bridge pier with column and Stadtbahn station gaUery, 1896. Project for the development of the qyays dong the Danube Caaal. From Otto Wagner* Einige Shen, Projecte und amgefuhrte B~werke(Viemm Anton SchroU, 1997) 2: PL 55. Source: Wagner, Einl'ge Sizzzen Nachck 130, Plate 45 DetaiI of plate 44. Appeadir 1 Imnography of the Art History Museum, viemal Ikbenbergemtmme Antique Art Ground Story In the central piiris, six figures in the arch spandrels Ïndicating the animation of material through poetry and art, and at the same thethe anthropomorphic world view ofthe ancien& in wntrast to the divine revelation, on which the CbnCbnstÏanityis besed: "Oreade, Dryade, Najade, NereideySyIphide, Boreade* (ail by R Wq)- Ln the metope reliefs: figures involved in activities indicative ofthe invention and tools of art techniques: Dibutades of Corinth @ottery wheel), Rhoecus (casting), Clarchus (hoilow mdwork ad embossing), Glaucus (forging and weldiag), Daedalus of Atbens (wood construction and carpentry), Melos of Chios (marbIe sculpture) (each by K Kundmann). BetwPen the columns sitthg figures: Architecture and Art Industry (both by K Kundmann). Heads on the keystones: AgamedesyHephaestus, Trophonios (ali by R Weyr)- Main Story In the niches of in the three padïons, tiuee groups of statues of ~orl~famous representatives of social, political and art-patronage influences on antique art: right - Minyas and Polycrates (both by 5. Tautenhayn); centre - Pisistratus and Pericles @th by Vincenz Piiz); left - Alexander the Great and Augustus (both by J. Tautenhayn)). In the arch spandrek: reliefs with symbols ofthe great cultural sites ofthe ancients: Orchornenos and Samos, Sicyon, Miletus, Athens, Rhodes, Thebes and Corinth, Alexandria and Rome (dl by R Weyr). Medailions with rnythological representations, in which the tnumph of art and science over Msmis represented: rigbt - Perseus slaying Medusa and BeUerophon slayiag Chimera; centre - Prometheus and Athene (inteUecfuaX art) and Pygmalion and Aphrodite (emotioaal art); left - Theseus slaying the Centaur and Hercules slaying Hydra (all by ni. Fiedi). On the balustrade, pairs of statues of ancient artists: right - Thdorus of Samos (by K Rippei); Bularchus (by Vincenz Püz); Canachus of Sicyon (by K Rippel); Polygnotus of Thasos @y K Rippel); Centre - Phidias and Polyclihis, Pythagoras and Anstotie (as lawgivers in the arts) (ail by VZncem Pilz); Skopas and Praxiteles @y F. Koch); left - Lysippus and Apdes (bath by A Diilil; Athenadonis and Dioseurides (both by J. Donath). "I'his information is repfoddfiom Lhotsky 167-68. Lastenstnsse~useam~) Byzaatine, Romanesque, and Gothic Art Uain Story h the arch spandrek, reiiefk pmonifyiagthe cities ofByzmtium, Ravenaa. Aachen, Goslar, Prague, Cologne (au by R Weyr). On the balustrade, statues ofIsïdor of Miletus @y L Sïmek), St Eligius (by L. Simek), Alcuin (by A Schwenzer), Bemward of Hildesheim (by J. MeDner). Willrelm of Sens (by A Dom), Erwin of Steinbach @y R Zafouk). Mariri Theresia Phtz Renaissance Ground Story In the central paris, six relief figures in the arch spandreis indicative of the revelation of Christianity: three Sibyls - Cumaea, Delphica, Persica - and three Prophets - Ezechiel, Jesaias, David - (each by R Weyr). Metope reliefs: Theophilus (enamel and giass work), Eligius (goldsmith art), Leo of Ostia (mosaic), Bemward of Hildesheim (casting), Giacomo Tagiiacanie (gem cutting), Jan van Eyck (oil painthg) (aIl by K. Kundmann). Between the wIumns sining figures: Sculpture @y X Benk), Painting (by E. Hellmer). Main Story In the niches ofthe three paviliom, three groups of statues: right - Charlemagne (by S. Mer); Rudolf v- Habsburg (by I. Gaffer); centre - Ems and Psyche (spiritualizing the senses through art) @y J. Benk); Faust and Helena (meage of classical culture and formai beauty with the romantic school of thought) (by E Hellmer); left - Charles V @y V. Tilgner), Charles VI (by R Weyr). In the niches of the centrd sections busts of: Lorenzo de' Medici, Leo X (both by V. Tilgner). In the arch spandrets, reliefs with symbols of arî-styles and the great cultural sites of the Renaissance: right - Romanesque art, Gothic art; centre - Augsburg, Nümberg, Rome, Florence, fisa, Venice; left - Renaissance art, modern art (dl by R Weyr). Medaliions of struggles: right - St George and the Dragon, Siegfried and Fafhiq left - Simon and the Lon, David with the head of Goliath (all by Th. Fnedl). On the balustrade, pairs of statues of some artists: Giotto (by R Zafouk), Jan van Eyck (by R Zafouk, Albrecht Diirer @y k Schmidgruber), Michelangelo (by P. Wagner), Rubens (by M hrrkarthofd, Titian (by P. Wagner), Holbein (by U Purkarthofer)).Four Victones (by l- Benk). On the balustrade, statues oc G. R Donner, A Canova, Chr- Rauch, P, Cornelius, J- Fuhnch, M v. Schwind (the first two by F-Ponninger, the fast four by V. Tilgner). (Semper had not made any ofthese partïcuiar decisionq the nnal choices were pmbably made by Hasenauer in association with the officiais of the Museum,) On the crown: Pailas Athene (by J. Benk)* In the tabermacles, four allegorical figures representîng the four attributes essential to artistic mastery: talent, strength of will, passion, and seIf-reStraint (aii by Fr- Gastell). (The implementation corresponds to Semper's second proposal; he bad also considered Hesiod, Homer, Dante and Goethe.) In the spandrels to the cupola windows, six Victones (by IE. Haerdtl). Four wreath-beanng angels stand below the tabernacles. Appcadu 2 PermWsions and Copyright AaSection 29 Co~yriahtAct. Section 29: Fair Dealinas Because this thesis is a nonprofit publication, I have included photocopies of images without oMaining priw qyrisht deaana, fix each individual image. What would othemvise be an infringment of copyright for a commercial publication is, in Canada, pemissible under the Yair dealings" provision in Section 29 of the Copyright Ad, whiai follow~. Fair Dealinq Research or private study 29. Fair dealing for the purpose of research or private study does not infringe copyright. R.S., 1985, c. C42, S. 29; R.S., 1985, c. 10 (4th Supp-), S. 7; 1994, c. 47, s.61; 1997, c. 24, S. 18. Criticisrn or reviaw 29.1 Fair deaiing for the pwpose of aiticism or review does not infringe wpyright if the followiriç are mentioned: (a) the source: and (b) if given i~.the source, the name of the (i) author. in the case of a work, (ii) perfoner, in the case of a perfomefs performance, (iii) maker, in the case of a sound rscording, or (iv) broadcaster, in the case of a communication signal. The full act can be found online at h~:lt~nada.jusüce.gc.ca/FTPEN/LaWS/ ChaplCIC-42.W. Date: Ued, 18 Aug 1999 09:44:07 +O200 From: Ilse Jung herewith Ise grant you permission free of charge to use fallowing images - Th,Meyerhoffer, Kunsthistorisches Museum, 1900 - Moritz Lbk, Entwurf für die Hofmuseen, 1867 - Car1 Hasenauer, Entwurf fU.r die Hofmuseen, 1847 in your aster of Arts Thesis. Yours sincerely, ILse Jung Printed for Cou&en+ Zpp Dear kir. Epp, since your thesis Kill not be pubrished, there is no argument against the reproduction of the Mages, Itmassuming that you will nevertheless indicitate the sources correctly- Would you be End enough to send us a short description of your subject- We are beginninq to think about a way to commemorate Semper's birthday in 2003, and for t-Fus it wotxld be use-- to have an ove~ewof the relevant research worldwide , Bruno Maurer research coordinator Institute gta