¶óÆæÆ®¦¢Ä«Æä¦¢ºí·Î±×¦¢´õº¸±â
¾ÆÄ«µ¥¹Ì Ȩ ¸í»çƯ°­ ´ëÇבּ¸½Ç޹æ Á¶°æ½Ç¹« µ¿¿µ»ó°­ÀÇ Çѱ¹ÀÇ ÀüÅëÁ¤¿ø ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®
ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®

Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹°ÇÃà½Ã°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹µµ·ÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀܵðÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ý¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ

Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ / v.13, no.3, 2004³â, pp.11-16
¾Æµ¹ÇÁ ·Î½ºÀÇ Àå½Ä¹èÁ¦¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸
( A Study on the Adolf Loos's renunciation of ornament )
À¯¿¬¼÷; ½ÅÈï´ëÇÐ;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
Adolf Loos studied at the Dresden Institute of Technology. He lived in America from 1893 to 1896. On his return to Vienna, hi worked for a year with the architect, Carl Mayreder. From 1897, he wrote extensively on design and architectural matters. In 1908, his famous article "Ornament and Crime"(Ornament und Verbrechen) was published, in which he linked the use of excessive decoration to a debasement of society. For Adolf Loos, it was a question not of renunciation of every ornament, but of the liberation from superfluous ornament. Where ornament was pastes on only, without connection with the subject or the building, and where ornament was not honest with the hand put on, the ornament is supposed to be removed. Onto the place of the ornament the joy of the material and the shaping should step. That the opinion of Adolf Loss is not correctly understood Is due on the one hand to the concentration on the 'ornament and crime' too very much. On the other hand his extreme Position is supposed to be understood more as thinking-impulse, more as provocation.ovocation.
 
Ű¿öµå
Àå½Ä;ºÐ¸®ÆÄ;¾Æµ¹ÇÁ ·Î½º;
 
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ³í¹®Áý / v.13, no.3, 2004³â, pp.11-16
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1229-7992
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200411922352781)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î
³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø
¸ñ·Ïº¸±â
ȸ»ç¼Ò°³ ±¤°í¾È³» ÀÌ¿ë¾à°ü °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸Ãë±Þ¹æÄ§ Ã¥ÀÓÀÇ ÇѰè¿Í ¹ýÀû°íÁö À̸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò ¹«´Ü¼öÁý °ÅºÎ °í°´¼¾ÅÍ
   

ÇÏÀ§¹è³ÊÀ̵¿