Technology as the Foundation for Development
When French gardener Joseph Monier invented and patented a material for his planters in 1867, which later came to be known as reinforced concrete, no one anticipated the revolutionary impact this event would have on the construction industry, leading to an entirely new vision of architecture termed modernism. This movement swept across the globe, resulting in the construction of numerous reinforced concrete buildings. Today, the question arises of preserving these structures as architectural landmarks.
The invention of monolithic reinforced concrete, combining concrete with metal (rebar and framework), offered several advantages: the technical ability to create large glass areas, spanning great distances, increased building heights, and flexible interior layouts. Skyscrapers emerged, alongside the development of metal structures like the iconic Brooklyn Bridge in New York City, the first large-span suspension bridge supported by steel cables and massive foundations anchored in bedrock 25 meters below the riverbed.
Clearly, the emergence of entirely new types of structures became possible only through advancements in technology. However, another aspect of this interrelation piques our interest.
Technological breakthroughs themselves do not necessarily signify an instant revolution in consciousness. Typically, it takes the groundbreaking discoveries of one or more authors to change established public opinion. What advancements in construction would Monier’s invention have led to if not for avant-garde architects like the French Charles-Édouard Jeanneret-Gris, known as Le Corbusier, the American Frank Lloyd Wright, the Russian Ivan Leonidov, and many others who revolutionized the concept of building and completely altered approaches to design and even the philosophy of this field?
We believe that all revolutionary transformations of consciousness mostly occur almost simultaneously and have a cumulative effect. What do we mean by this? The development of social relations, science, and production is a gradual process that takes a certain amount of time (although these processes used to be longer, nowadays everything happens much faster). The contradiction between technological progress and people’s way of life, the majority of whom are conservative and firmly hold onto traditions, becomes evident at some point. Throughout human history, there have always been individuals willing to change the existing order of things, generating innovative ideas.
By the beginning of the 20th century, the mismatch between technologies and the familiar way of life had become evident in all spheres. We will not dwell on this because, as architects, we are only interested in how architecture changed so radically at the beginning of the last century.
Indeed, how can one drive cars, trains, use telephones and electricity, and yet live either in ancient castles and palaces or in homes lacking basic amenities? And how do such technological achievements reconcile with the classical details and decorations of buildings? Perhaps the pursuit of freedom (a crucial aspect of creativity) leads to the emergence of a creative vanguard—individuals who keenly feel the disparities of their era. Their path is always unpredictable; it can lead to success or the rejection of innovative ideas by society as a whole.
However, it’s important to note that individuals with the “will to power,” as described by Nietzsche, always, albeit in the minority, emerge at the right place and time.
What is primary here? Did the latest technologies that emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries lead to the emergence of avant-garde architecture, or did architects with their projects shape the demand for new technologies? Both are true.
Why do we constantly revisit this period of history? It’s evident that it defined the subsequent development of architecture and continues to influence it to this day.
Currently, when technological breakthroughs are no longer a gradual progression but a rapid sprint, architecture (referring to its finest examples) no longer trails behind technology but rather dictates its emergence. Therefore, the discourse on whether technology is the basis for architectural development or if the most talented architects create demand for these technologies remains open, and we will revisit this topic again.
