Considering Hybridisation of Form and Function in Overarching Movement and Designed Objects

In this paper, a critical examination of architectural and design over the last century was conducted in the aim of recognising the dichotomies of modernist and postmodernist design approaches, and in understanding their intrinsic differences, to find the characteristics of form and functions which may produce ideal outcomes in the development of contemporary architectural and lifestyle goods. A review of literature traces the debate of "˜form vs. function' that views craftsmanship and production technology differently. A critical inquiry is launched to understand the social and historical significance that have influenced the growth of aesthetic ideologies in post-war Europe. With reference to the classical rationalistic assumptions of architect Louis Sullivan and historian Joseph Rykwert, this research attempts to analyse the impact of "˜form vs. function' through a series of case studies presenting the ideals of modern aesthetic appeals. To prove the endurance of both ideologies, examples of architectural approaches and machine-wrought home furnishing were studied. The endurance and legitimacy of modernism was demonstrated, from the principle that "form follows function" where architectural style is concerned, but that has "swallowed function" in the context of mass produced goods for lifestyle use. This evidence led to a discussion of the possibility of hybrid of form, function and cultural sensibilities. In the conclusion, an argument is framed for contemporary design to be shaped on a larger organic vision, in order to develop more fluid aesthetics for today's cultural spaces and objects. Although modernism and postmodernism approach craftsmanship and production differently, this paper argues for a hybridisation of the twin pillars of form (ornamentation) and function (utility or usefulness) as the ideal outcome of contemporary architecture and design practice; that neither technological rationalism, spatial dynamics, historical significance nor social function should predominate in legitimising today's cultural forms, but that all play complementary roles