27 Oct, 2020
“Concepts of Modernity” in Architecture and Modernity, A Critique by Hilde Heynen defines modernity in three different ways and uses opposing historical views to discuss the pros and cons. His argues modernity is inevitable and moves society in a positive direction, but advices that it should be monitored.
The chapter starts with Heynen describing modernity using three definitions: (1) present and current, opposite of the past; (2) new with an emphasis on distinguishing itself from different periods; and (3) momentary and temporary. He differentiates from the present and past, stating, “Modernity is what gives the present the specific quality that makes it different from the past and points the way toward the future. Modernity is also described as being a break with tradition, and as typifying everything that rejects the inheritance of the past.” (page 8)
Heynen discusses how modernity has changed throughout history. Western culture see time as a progression and advancement of the past, while other see time as fluid, even quoting seventeenth-century Querelle des Anciens et des Modernes who argues that modern artists can never be better than their predecessors. He contradicts this argument with Octavio Paz’s view from the Enlightenment about critical reasoning, that everything is temporary and should be improving.
Heynen describes the difference between modernization, modernity, and modernism. Modernization has to do with social developments like cultural technology, industry, urbanization, and population growth. Modernity are personal experiences within modernization like art and social movements. Modernism is the desire for people to fix the present. Connecting all of these, he defines modernity as relationship between “socioeconomic processes, and a subjective one that is connected with personal experiences, artistic activities, or theoretical reflections.” (page 10)
He then compares several opposing views on modernity. First, he discusses the difference between programmatic and transitory concepts. Programmatic views believe that modernity is a progression and advancement of the past. They strive to be new and distinguishing. A transitory view believes that modernity is temporary, and the motivation has to do with an opposition to the past.
He also compares pastoral and counter pastoral view. Pastoral views deny contradictions and tensions; they see modernity as a struggle that unites people towards a common goal. Counter pastoral views see modernity full of flaws, and that we cannot regain our original composition.
Heynen also discusses postmodernism: something that comes after modernity. He sees it as adding new level to the present rather than replacing it. With this, modernity is always in the past, and we are always trying to improve upon society.
Finally, Heynen argues that modernity is inevitable. In addition, while it has brought good to society, it should always be in question. He states, “A critical attitude has therefore become more necessary than ever, although it must be admitted that it is not immediately clear what this criticism should be based on or what form it should take.”
I appreciated how Heynens presented many views on modernity with quotes from philosophers and historians, rather than just telling us his without comparison. While his views weren’t as radical as many of the people he cited, he still made it clear that he viewed modernity as a positive that should be monitored.
Many of the views that he said were contradictory, I think can be viewed together. With the case of programmatic and transitory concepts, I see modernity as a progression of the past, even if it is temporary and in opposition. I believe that people will always be looking to improve upon the current conditions.
For example, Apple comes out with a new iPhone every few years with technological advancements better than the last. People are never satisfied with their current phone, even if it’s working perfectly well to fit their needs; they need the three cameras and the waterproof technology.