My hometown Houston is a modernist city. By that I don’t mean its shiny new suburbs and exurbs but the older public buildings that are all lines, angles and occasionally, futuristic domes. Unfortunately, local politicians and the builders who line their pockets, can’t wait to tear something down that is more than three or four decades old. There is always a fight going on between them and residents who want to preserve historic mid-century buildings and neighborhoods. Now that the Astros, Houston’s baseball team, have moved to the Minute Maid Park in downtown, the latest controversy is about what to do with the abandoned and forlorn Astrodome, the nation’s first modernist indoor sports stadium. Most Houstonians don’t want it pulled down and would like to see it preserved as a sports and architectural legacy. But there are others who would like it torn down to make room for yet another "modernist" parking lot for the Reliant Stadium next door where the Houston Texans play football.
Instead of a book or a single newspaper/ magazine article, this post highlights an entire issue of a journal. Rather than focus on older classical edifices, the latest edition of Preservation, a magazine published by the The National Trust for Historic Preservation, turns a contemplative eye on America’s modernist architectural icons. The special issue devoted to the importance and difficulties of preserving modernist architecture, was brought to my attention by the magazine’s senior editor, Sudip Bose.
What defines modernist architecture? Bose explains.
Trying to define modernism can be a frustrating exercise. As a style, it is less coherent, its boundaries looser, than, say, classicism. Many critics would argue that modernism is not even a singular style, that it incorporates a great variety of aesthetics and sensibilities. And just who were the modernists? Frank Lloyd Wright vehemently opposed being grouped with them, but modernist architecture would not have been the same without him.
Modernism roughly spans the time between World War I and the early 1970s. What we generally think of as the modernist ethic evolved first in Europe, among such architects as Le Corbusier, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, and Walter Gropius, the latter two of the German Bauhaus school. The European modernists imbued their work with an inherent morality and social consciousness and were often associated with left-wing politics. Intrigued by the emerging technologies of the day, they embraced concrete, glass, and steel in their revolutionary creations. They eschewed ornament, rejecting what they saw as the frivolous strokes of Victorian and art nouveau styles. Their work was both spare (think of Mies’ famous dictum "Less is more") and lyrical. Perhaps above all, they believed in function dictating form, though many architects, such as Le Corbusier, would eventually distance themselves from that tenet.
In his thoughtful essay, The Modernist Manifesto, architecture critic Paul Goldberger of the New Yorker, presents his views on the crucial need to save modernist buildings.









