New York Architecture Images- Search by style

Neomodern architecture

 Late-modern, Neo-modern, Super-modern Architecture

In spite of the popularity and success of the neo-classical and historicizing architecture, the modernist style has never been abandoned, as many architects continued to be led by its principles. Following the 1960s, these architects were sometimes labelled ‘late-modernists’ and, later, as ‘neo-modernists’ and ‘super-modernists’. However, in time and under new influences, modernism acquired new characteristics and therefore the modernist design began to differ more and more from the pre-1960s’ architecture.

Other labels, such as neo-minimalism, also appeared (Jodidio, 1998), in which the clear and simple lines of early modernism were evoked.

‘High-tech’ is recognized (by some) as having a style of its own. However, its elements can be present in all categories of new architecture. High-tech features are common in neo-modernism and deconstructivism, as for example at the Paris Pompidou Centre by Richard Rogers and Renzo Piano mentioned above. The use of high-tech elements is even more characteristic of the British Norman Foster and the Japanese Fumihiko Maki. Indeed, the conspicuous use of these elements may impart the appearance of an industrial product to a building. The buildings as industrial products become apparent in the aggressive, metallic coated ‘Dead Tech’ buildings of the Japanese Shin Takamatsu or Kazuo Shinohara’s more peaceful ‘zeromachines’ with a pure graphic architecture.

Modernism was characterized by an elimination of decoration and ornamentation. This resulted in the idea of ‘minimalism’ or ‘plainness’ (Zabalbeascoa and Marcos, 2000). This trend was preserved only to some extent in neo-modernism, which combined modernism with post-modernism, i.e. it did not altogether reject decoration and ornamentation although it did reject the historical forms.

Sebestyen, Gyula. 2003. New Architecture and Technology.
 Neo-Modernism... is kind of where are today...

The work that we see from architects like Steven Holl, Reneso Piano or Rem Koolhass... It is kind of a Modernist Reformation. in takes up a lot of the old Modernism tenants but is now "informed" by Post-Modernism, Deconstructionist and other art theories that have occurred in the Post War era...The New Materialism, Post-Structuralism, Phenomenology, Post-Marxist theory , Feminist and Queer theory. It drops a great deal of Modernism's cultural baggage... the Idea that Modernism is universal (International Style), that cities as they were inherited from the 19thC were obsolete and needed to be leveled to start again... that Modernism was to be transformative, that it revolutionize the World Culture and actualize Man.

Neo Modernist's address many of the short comings that Post-Modern theory pointed out... contextualism, sign symbol systems, regional context etc. Like the Post Modernists it is inclusionist, but their works for the most part are without traditional ornament or historical imitation; It utilizes Modern Architecture's abstract formal language to create one of a kind "works".

The work is subjectivist rather the objectivist. Rather tearing down "The City" to start over they create "Interventions" which support the aspects they want reinforce or make visible. They use the whole canon of Modernism... metaphor, surrealism, tectonics anything at their disposal to give (difficult) meaning to their works. they look to not just the biggies for inspirations ie: Wright, Corbu, Gropius, Mies... but also to subtle modernist like Aalto, Scarpa, Kahn, Aspland, Loos, Schindler and Terrangi.. whose work was thought are first though too subjective or willful to their own generation of critics. there is a new emphasis on abstract space, movement, technology, and materiality. Their work tends to be experiential rather than theoretical, poetic rather that literal.