Modern design: a historical choice in favor of globalization

Introduction

Modern design discourse – a system of thinking within design – assumes a certain set of characteristics that are inherent in design as a cultural phenomenon by default. Design is defined as a phenomenon with the following characteristics: projectivity (orientation to the future), technology, innovation, internationality. The default design is aimed at mass production, at maximum user coverage, ideally, for the whole world.

This understanding of design is characteristic of the modern design episteme, which was formed during the period of modernism.

The term modern design episteme (or modernist design episteme) is convenient when studying design, since it means a system of logical connections within design, design thinking. This system, or modern design episteme, was formed during the transition from the paradigm of modernism to the paradigm of modernism, and exists almost unchanged in modern design.

Of course, the phenomenon of design is much broader than the modern design episteme, and the roots of this phenomenon can certainly be seen long before the modern period. However, it is precisely in the modern era that design appears as a profession, as a social practice reflected by relevant professionals. During the transition from Art Nouveau to modernism, a system of thinking within design develops, design begins to be understood as a projective activity aimed at mass production. The design has a certain set of characteristics due to the international style: geometricism, laconism, functionality. Until now, it is these qualities that are evaluated by most modern designers as a blessing.

In this sense, the history of design can be divided into two uneven parts: implicit and explicit. The implicit part of the history of design is the history of the world of things before the appearance of design, the history of the pre–design object world, which can be called protodesign. The explicit history of design is the time since the 1950s, since the birth of design as a social practice.

It is in modernism that the existing design episteme has established itself, in which minimalism, geometricism, laconism are preferred. At the same time, an international design project was launched. In this study, it is the modernist design episteme that is considered, since modern design is completely dependent on it. Modern designers think in a system of values that was developed during the transition from Art Nouveau to modernism and was established in the first design schools – Bauhaus and VKHUTEMAS.

However, the phenomenon of design is not limited to the understanding that the paradigm of modernism has formed.

The first design style, a style whose existence coincides with the beginning of the explicit history of design, is the Art Nouveau style. Design originated as a social practice in the modern project.

The ideology of modernity was the aestheticization of reality. The first design firm of W. Morris did not focus on mass production, but on the contrary, worked on the creation of exclusive elite things. The goal of the first design firm was to spiritualize the human environment in the likeness of the mood that prevailed in the Middle Ages.

Therefore, the understanding of design as a cultural phenomenon should include those possibilities and meanings that are outside the modernist design episteme. In this regard, it is important to explicate the moment when the historical choice was made in favor of modernism and functionalism and to understand how much this choice was due to the immanent qualities of the design phenomenon.

The object of this research is design as a cultural phenomenon and its historical formation.

The subject of the study is the modernist design episteme, which began its formation in the paradigm of modernity. In the paradigm of modernity, a historical choice was made, which determined the entire further direction of the formation and genesis of design, which brought design from the ideology of modernity into the paradigm of an international style serving the interests of globalization.

The purpose of this study is to show that in the modernist project, the development of design as a cultural phenomenon was not rigidly determined by the vector of functionalism, and could have followed a different path. Achieving this goal will help to comprehend the design phenomenon more comprehensively.

Theoretical foundations of the study

As a theoretical basis for the research, it was decided to use texts that had not previously been involved in understanding the phenomenon of design, although they represent interesting material for historical understanding of the development of design. The fact is that the theoretical basis of the formation of design is well known and researched, but it represents the position of unambiguous supporters of functionalism. These are the works of G. Semper, V. Benjamin ^[1], the famous article by A. Loos "Ornament and Crime" ^[2], which became the manifesto of nascent functionalism, the works of figures of the Bauhaus and VKHUTEMAS schools, treatises by K. Malevich ^[3] and V. Kandinsky ^[4]. All the theoretical foundations of design are still limited to the modernist design episteme, within which the movement towards globalization, set by functionalism and international design, is recognized as an unambiguous good. Of course, understanding the phenomenon of design is impossible without the foundation laid by these works. Until now, they form the basis of designers' thinking and the logic of building connections in design, that is, the basis of the design episteme.

In modern research related to design, a departure from the modernist design episteme is gradually beginning to manifest itself. Today, the position of transition in design from the modernist episteme (and postmodern) to metamodernism is beginning to manifest itself. These are, for example, the works of G. N. Lola ^[5], P. E. Redkin ^[6], R. Eshelman ^[7], S. van Tuinen ^[8], etc.

However, in the period of the origin of design as a social practice, there was a non-modern point of view, which still remains without attention, and its bearers were legislators of public aesthetic taste, people who understand the formation of the subject environment. In this study, we rely on the opinion of O. Wilde ^[9], expressed in lectures just devoted to the American subject environment, corresponding in time to the origin of functionalism. In addition, the study is based on the diaries of M. K. Tenisheva ^[10], who was at the origins of the Art Nouveau style in our country, financed projects related to Art Nouveau in Russia, and also promoted the Russian style at International industrial Exhibitions. Until now, when talking about the emerging design, these sources have not been involved, although this is a critical contemporary view of the transformations of the subject-spatial environment that have formed the modern design episteme.

Results and discussion:

It is important that the first design firm appeared among the pre-Raphaelites, an artistic association formed under the influence of the fascination with the Middle Ages. That is, initially, design appears as a phenomenon of enriching the objective world, increasing its decorativeness, and even enhancing transcendence: in the ideology of W. Morris there was a refusal to divide things into aesthetically valuable and ordinary, the possibility of aesthetic enrichment was assumed for the entire environment. The pre-Raphaelites contributed to the revival of decorative art ^{[11, p. 47]}.

Under the influence of D. Ruskin's lectures, the first designers tried to overcome the "ugliness" of the fruits of the industrial revolution by strengthening the aesthetic component of the environment. The innovation of the Art Nouveau style was not so much in moving forward, towards progress, as going back to the romantic Middle Ages, to manual artisan inspired work. D. Ruskin pointed out the connections between art and the subject environment and morality: "With mathematical precision, which knows neither deviations nor exceptions, the art of a nation is always an indicator of its moral level" ^{[12, p. 118]}. The spirituality of medieval art and architecture was proclaimed by him as an ideal. The first designers tried to make the subject-spatial environment that way, spiritualized.

The Art Nouveau style, on the one hand, was a response to the desire for the new, modern throughout Europe ^{[13, p. 155]}. But on the other hand, the new has not yet been felt as a denial of the entire previous culture and the denial of nature in favor of technology. On the contrary, modern is the first style that played with previous styles, ancient and folk cultures, as well as with natural forms. Moreover, modern is the first style that admired the very original side of nature – swamp plants, snakes, insects, human bones, seeing beauty in forms that were previously used only to express negative meanings. That is, there has been a renewal of the aesthetic sphere, in which one can see the beginnings of a future complete denial of beauty in modernism.

The Art Nouveau style, with all its stylistic unity, in each country "perceived the stylistic features of the local culture" ^{[13, p. 156]}.

Similarly, Art Nouveau in Russia was associated with a strong interest in national roots and applied crafts. Russian Russian Princess M. K. Tenisheva writes that she sought to bring as much Russian flavor as possible to the magazine "World of Art", wanting "to give the magazine a more national character, to leave constant and immoderate censors in front of Western art and to encourage her own, Russian, in particular, applied art" ^{[10, p. 147]}. Now there is little talk about the fact that the magazine "World of Art" was funded by M. K. Tenisheva, and she tried to introduce into the minds of readers the ideology of the revival of cultural identity. It is well known that the "World of Art" has become the mouthpiece of modernity in our country.

In her Talashkino estate, M. K. Tenisheva was actively engaged in the development of handicrafts and crafts. Russian Russian Princess writes a lot in her diary that she saw a huge creative potential of Russian culture, Russian crafts. Moreover, in the use of Russian motifs, M. K. Tenisheva saw not a departure into the past, but the potential for creating a new, new subject environment, new forms. "My task was, if possible, to give more samples, to throw new forms at the market, to pour in a fresh, new stream" ^{[10, p. 187]}. M. K. Tenisheva emphasizes the initiative and creative vein of her employees, and, on the contrary, criticizes the Abramtsevsky circle for the endless repetition of the same forms and lack of imagination. "It seemed to me that I had to say my word, give something new, and in a simple material accessible to the average pocket, achieve elegance in execution, convenience for use and originality, harmony in form and design, using for decorative purposes such simple things as canvases, embroidery, stones and metals..." ^{[10, P. 187]}.

Within the framework of the Art Nouveau style, the idea that the new organically grows out of the cultural soil was stable, that the designer draws inspiration from his national environment and history, creatively interpreting, creating new things on the foundation of culture. Thus, M. K. Tenisheva notes the influence of the Russian style on French fashion: "Both of my Paris exhibitions had a strong impact on the fashions and accessories of the women's toilet. A year later, I noticed the obvious influence of our embroidery, our Russian dresses, sundresses, shirts, hats, zipuns on ladies' toilets, even the name "blouse ruess" appeared, etc." ^{[10, p. 187]}.

If the further genesis of design had followed the path planned by the pre-Raphaelites and modern artists, then today, perhaps, hyperreality would have been fundamentally different. But it was in the last third of the XIX century that design as a social practice made its historical choice in favor of American functionalism, which then successfully developed in Europe.

One of the foundations of modern design discourse is the idea that the origin of modern design is associated with the appearance of the stylistics of functionalism in America at the end of the XIX century. The emergence of functionalism is associated with the Chicago School of Architecture. A common place in the history of design is the idea of a radical revolution that occurred in America in the 1870s and 1880s, when representatives of the Chicago School of Architecture began to abandon decor, ornament in favor of simple surfaces. Following the American architects, the Europeans picked up the aesthetics of purism, which, first of all, was formulated in the article by A. Loos "Ornament and Crime" ^[2].

The transition from ornamentation to simplicity in the history of design is regarded as progress by default. Moreover, it was in the aesthetics of functionalism that the first design schools – Bauhaus and VKHUTEMAS - began to develop further.

However, until now, when considering design as a cultural phenomenon, the interesting fact has not been noted that it was in those years when functionalism was actively emerging in America that Oscar Wilde visited this country. The writer formulated his impressions of America in a series of lectures, which are now known as articles "On home decoration" and "The value of art in home life." Today it is worth paying special attention to these small texts, as they give us information about the witness of those events when the design was born, which accurately reflected the processes taking place. In addition, these are articles devoted specifically to the design of the period in question. As you know, Oscar Wilde paid great attention to the subject environment and sometimes acted as a fashion designer himself.

Oscar Wilde traveled a lot in America, visited about fifty cities, and made conclusions that are especially interesting now, in retrospective understanding of the history of design.

Oscar Wilde says that he came to the conclusion that the same disadvantage is observed everywhere in the material environment of Americans "workers are not given noble samples" ^{[9, p. 233]}. That is, the English aesthete considers the absence of a cultural foundation in American design as a characteristic feature of the emerging subject-spatial environment. "I never imagined, before visiting some of your provincial cities, that so many ugly things were being produced" ^{[9, p. 233]} and then the writer lists bad wallpaper, terrible carpets, oppressive-looking sofas, ugly machine-made furniture. That is, the objective world, which is considered progressive in design discourse, is a direct witness, and a witness who understands beauty and art, unequivocally recognizes as ugly and not even functional.

Wilde criticizes American objects precisely for the transition to machine production, more precisely, for the soullessness and lack of intelligence of machine production: "the imprint of any art is not that the created thing is made accurately and accurately – a machine can do it – but that it is created by the thought and heart of the worker" ^{[9, p. 233]}.

The writer also notes the lack of a cultural foundation, the "abundance" of American workers. "Noble, beautiful drawings are never the fruit of idle fantasy and aimless dreams. They are a consequence of the development of the habit of long and loving observations" ^{[9, p. 233]}.

Today, by default, an equal sign is placed between functionalism and rationalism. But the rationalism of the XVII century did not lead to a decrease in decorativeness, although it contributed to convenience and beauty. The same Wilde notes: "from the point of view of convenience, warmth and comfort, the costume of the XVII century is infinitely higher than all the varieties that followed it, and I do not think that the previous forms of clothing surpassed it" ^{[9, p. 265]}. And American things, according to the writer, just lack rationality.

"You have too many white walls. We need more colors" ^{[9, p. 236]} – Wilde tells Americans. That is, unlike modernists, who will appear in a few decades, and modern people, Oscar Wilde does not equate minimalism and beauty, between smooth white surfaces and rational organization of the environment.

Oscar Wilde's remarks about the color scheme of American homes are interesting. "The disadvantage that I observe in most of your rooms is that they obviously lack a certain colorful scheme. Everything must be sustained in one tone or another, and you do not have it" ^{[9, p. 237]}. Wilde spoke about the lack of connection between objects in American homes. That is, the environment, which, as it seems to many now, is the foundation of modern design, in fact, was a chaos caused by an elementary lack of artistic taste. Moreover, it is the lack of taste and the love of economy, and not a better taste, that became the foundation of American functionalism.

Of course, American functionalism has deeper origins associated with Protestantism, which initially put material gain more important than beauty, and economy more important than cultural reminiscences and decor.

Oscar Wilde reproaches Americans for the absolute absence of wooden carvings on houses ^{[9, p. 238]}. From the point of view of the Protestant consciousness, this is an excess. From the point of view of a person of European culture today, wooden carving is part of the cultural heritage.

M. K. Tenisheva, as a person who inspired modernism in Russia, also demonstrates the rejection of functionalism in architecture, she writes that now Russian churches "have to be looked for among the outrageous, ugly seven-storey houses of the "new style", or rather, German tastelessness and ugliness, which are mashing them, outrageous in their architecture. The German corruption of Russian minds has not spared our architecture, having infiltrated it with the same arrogance as everything else" ^{[10, p. 240]}. That is, she is a direct witness to the emergence of the Bauhaus style in Europe, and a witness with a good education and a level of culture negatively perceives the emerging functionalism.

Oscar Wilde is practically a contemporary of the origin of design in England. He did not like the American approach to the subject environment, as not beautiful enough and too mundane. The subject environment cannot develop without references to the spiritual, without cultural content and transcendental meanings. "We need something spiritual mixed into life. There is nothing so base that art could not sanctify" ^{[9, p. 241]}.

But the nascent functionalism has become precisely the denial of the spiritual in things and in architecture. Practically, functionalism became an expansion of the ideology of American Protestantism into Europe. That's why it was picked up, first of all, by German designers, the founders of the Bauhaus school. Functionalism met the demands of mass production and the emerging consumer society.

Functionalism is a stylistic approach that in the twentieth century will become a tool for global corporations to create a unified consumer environment around the world. Hence, the revolutionary charge of the nascent design. Global corporations are interested in the destruction of nation-states, and capitalism operates through the hands of revolution.

It is natural that functionalism was established in Russia after the October Revolution. The Art Nouveau style was suitable for the Russian Empire, and in the young Soviet Republic the first design educational institution VKHUTEMAS appeared, which was already modernist in its ideology.

At the same time, Art Nouveau was a turning point in aesthetics. Beauty was for the first time separated from higher meanings, from the transcendent. The aestheticism of modernity is already the aestheticism of a person who is not interested in the transcendent. "A fundamental anthropological revolution is taking place in modernity. For the first time, a person appears who is completely identical to himself, not created by any transcendent instance and has no fundamental task. The most important anthropological identity of modernity appears: man is equal to man" ^{[14, p. 83]}.

It is no coincidence that the time of Art Nouveau is a universal fascination with frames and structures: the Eiffel Tower is being built, a little earlier the Crystal Palace marks the beginning of an explicit design history, and even in women's clothing, the basis of the dress is a crinoline frame. The objective world becomes transparent, viewable, devoid of mystery and references to the divine. The secrecy and opacity of technology will begin to be discussed in philosophy a little later, in the middle of the nineteenth century, the world of technology and the subject world are felt to be viewed, understandable.

So, K. Kassung in the article "The apparatus is not a delivery" ^{[15, pp. 164-172]} gives an illustrative example illustrating the technical and design thinking of the mid-nineteenth century. At the World's Fair in London in 1851, with which, by the way, the explicit history of design begins, George Merryweather's device "The Predictor of Storms" was presented and received universal approval. The design of this device fully corresponds to the aesthetic ideas of the middle of the XIX century: 1). according to its design, it is immediately clear how it works; 2). the shape of the device is decorated with decorative details referring to the English rule over India. The same features characterize the Crystal Palace, where the exhibition was held, which entered the history of design. Collapsible structures, that is, the transparency of the assembly, and at the same time decoration with a meaning that is also transparent (elements referring to India).

That is, in the middle of the nineteenth century, the understanding of the objective world, and, consequently, design were characterized by decorativeness, but also by constructive transparency, clarity, and the removal of transcendence. Therefore, in any case, the aestheticism of modernity was also the beginning of a horizontally oriented paradigm in design.

Art Nouveau was the first period of the explicit history of design, and contained two fundamental principles, potentially contradictory: decorativeness and functionality. The development of design could have followed the path of decorativeness, but the functional approach won.

Thus, at the end of the XIX century, a historical design choice was made: a departure from the aestheticization of modernity towards the declared functionality of modernism.

Conclusions

The phenomenon of design has a dialectical nature. One of this design phenomenon has been studied quite well, and is still the basis of design thinking. Design is a projective phenomenon, that is, directed to the future. The origin of the design phenomenon is associated with the transition from Art Nouveau to modernism and with the establishment of the ideology of functionalism and international design. This aspect of design reflects the demand of globalization: it is design in the modern world that is a tool for creating a unified, equally understood and perceived consumer environment around the world. This ideology was laid down in the paradigm of modernism, in which the phenomenon of design took the forms in which it mainly exists today. In the design episteme, laconism, geometricism, purity, minimalism are recognized by default for the benefit. Today, this style is most pronounced in the Internet environment, where the main style has been the so-called "flat design" for more than twelve years. The style of international design and functionalism eventually turns out to be averaging, leveling individuality, since it was born under the slogans of social equality. The declared social equality turns into the same design for anywhere in the world, without taking into account individuality, which corresponds to the goals of creating a homogeneous consumer environment.

However, little attention has been paid to the other side of the design before. More precisely, it was implied, but never explicated as important. This side of the design phenomenon is associated with the emergence of design and Art Nouveau style. That is, at its inception, design was formed not as an equalization tool, but as a tool for highlighting, emphasizing national characteristics, preserving cultural identity. During the period of the origin of design as a social practice in society, there was a demand for the aestheticization of reality in contrast to the rigid capitalist environment developing due to the intensification of the industrial revolution. Design as a tool of aestheticization inevitably became a tool for increasing the semantic fullness of objects, returning to transcendent meanings, therefore, modern design absorbed national peculiarities and styles of bygone eras. The design of the Art Nouveau era focused on individuality, individual manner, style, individual cultural soil.

Thus, at the early stage of the formation of design as a social practice, the phenomenon of design was revealed on the other hand, as an instrument of individualization and the formation of cultural identity. However, at the same time, a historical choice was made: the design followed the path of functionalism that originated in America. Functionalism became a style of globalization, as it was ideally suited for equalizing the consumer environment. Therefore, today, a hundred years later, the subject-spatial and visual-information environment is actively developing towards "flat design".

However, a full-fledged cultural understanding of the design phenomenon shows its dialectical nature. On the one hand, design is an instrument of globalization and leveling of individuality, and on the other hand, it has the potential to become an instrument of aestheticization and spiritualization of human existence.