Imitation is sincerest form of flattery…
In architecture, there is no such thing as an original design. Elements of the new are sourced to the old. Sometimes this credit to the past is given explicitly, such as was the case during the neoclassical movement which patterned itself after the past by recapturing the classic Greek and Roman architecture. However, even as the popularity of neoclassical architecture began in the mid-18th century and peaked by the late 19th century as the popular style, elements of this classical style still exists, even though categorized as a different genre. Indeed, neoclassical architecture has become so conventional that architects popularly label neoclassicism as “traditional architecture.” As a result, the influence of neoclassicism can be seen in modern architecture, and remains anything but extinct.
Though understanding the difficulties in assigning chronological orders of popular architectural movements, the first variants of the modern architecture developed in the early 20th century with the rise of profound technological and engineering developments. Modern architecture sought to reflect the engineering feats of humankind, as exemplified by the Empire State Building and the Sydney Opera House. Among modern architecture’s key characteristics include a simplification of design and a rejection of ornament. Evidently, modern architecture arose from the same ground as neoclassicism did in its rejection of the excess of art in design. Neoclassical architecture similarly increased its influence by rejecting popular architectural movements of its period, namely the Rococo and Baroque architecture. It did so on the grounds that it viewed the excessive design and use of detail to single ornaments of Rococo and Baroque architecture as brazen and representative of a degeneracy of art. The fundamental requisite for neoclassicism was the simplification of form and an elimination of ornaments. From this perspective, modern architecture borrows from neoclassicism in its basic principles and unequivocal rejection of what it views not to be functional.
As the century continued, in North America and Europe, functionalist architecture enjoyed significant popularity, which limited architects to design buildings based on its purpose. Though neoclassical architecture was similarly characterized historically by its flexibility in function, from the Altes Museum in Berlin to the United States Capitol to the Bank of England, there was an essential consistency to its style. The style commanded symmetry, proportion, and classical, whereas critics viewed functionalist architecture as mundane and inconsistent. It remains unsurprising therefore that architects began embracing postmodern architecture as a means of reconciling their view that functionalist style was unpleasant while accepting the need to move forward. Neoclassicism, however, developed in popularity insofar that classic Greek and Roman architecture was viewed as timeless. Structures such as the Stoa in Athens or the Colosseum in Rome remain as imposing today as they when constructed. By contrast, postmodern architecture adopted a more nostalgic view of architecture in an attempt to merge the new with the old. Though it was unlike neoclassical movement which attempted to recreate classic architecture as it was, postmodern architecture did enjoy a comeback in columns, pillars, and elements of symmetry that were hallmarks of classic Greek and Roman architecture.
