Historicism or pastiche?
The professor pulled up an image of an unusual desk for her class of interior design students to study. The desk was long, wide, finished in ebony with simple, yet sculpted legs which developed into claw and ball feet. No mention was given to the manufacturer, the price point, or the period. What was important was to examine this piece and answer a simple sounding question. Is this an example of historicism or pastiche?
The answer to this question, however, is far from simple. One must first define the terms:
Historicism is an artistic style that draws upon historical styles and interprets it in a modern context.
We see historicism every day in all walks of life, from the faux Spanish structures in Southern California, to the palatial Georgian manors, Tudor homes with their vertical plank construction, to the Greek columns on government buildings, banks, and churches.
Pastiche, on the other hand, refers to a disjointed coupling of styles that only superficially go together. If you are as old as I am, think of those corny “Freedom Rock” TV Commercials from the 1980s with the two hokely dressed up “Hippies”.
This sets up an unavoidable grey area where designers must use their own discretion, expertise, and historical grounding to make the correct call when working on a job. While all design has its roots set firmly in the rich soil of the past, there is always room to innovate and to build something new. Besides, new movements do not gestate organically, but are the product of synergy, marketing, and exposure.
Returning to the desk and the issue at hand, I am reminded of something Clarence House founder Robin Roberts once said in defense of luxury. “Luxury is the opposite of vulgarity”. If pastiche is vulgar then historicism would veer to the opposite side of this aesthetic, would it not?
What I may find important in design is subjective to me. It’s ultimately about creating and defining your own space in the world. The table by itself did not resonate with me in the way that it might with others. Most in the class believed that the table was elegant and drew upon historical styles to create something new.
I saw that, but I also saw its potential to wind up as mere entryway window dressing in an upscale McMansion, lost in a whirlwind of disposable pieces without a hint of thought or meaning. This potential is not the fault of the piece, I decided, it’s potential miss-pairing is no failure of architecture, but instead the responsibility falls upon us to define our space and make it ours… to not slavishly follow convention and routine. That, I feel is the very essence of pastiche living; a type of prêt-à-porter world, artificial and wooden, disposable and replaceable.
In the end, the piece is what it is. It is on us to attribute to it meaning.