ORGANIC: A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CONCEPTANNIKA WAENERBERGANNIKA WAENERBERG is Professor of Art History in theDepartment of Arts and Culture Studies at the University ofJvyAskyl5, Finland. Her research and publications include thesubject of the organic and organicism in art and architecture.In defining "the organic,"' most of us have in mindsomething biologically living or forms taken fromNature. It is, however, not enough to reduce theconcept of "organic" to life or to vivacity, even less soto Nature or naturalness, even though these ideasprovide important attributes of the organic. Formswith no geometry, symmetry, or regularity seem, atleast for most beholders nowadays, to be the organicform per se. In spite of this, characterizations such as"biomorph," "zoomorph," or "vegetal" are sometimesunderstood as differentiations within the concept; atother times such designations have been judged assomething in opposition to the very idea of theorganic. 2 How is it possible to define the concept"organic" without losing oneself in self-evident orsuperficial cliches?Especially when examined throughout the period ofModernism from the end of the nineteenth to thebeginning of the twentieth century, the breadth ofmeaning within the organic concept is unexpectedlywide. In the year 1908 Karl Scheffler commented onthe term organic, maintaining that while everybodyagreed on its principles, a contradiction immediatelyarose when those principles were exemplified.3 Thiscontradiction and complication can be illustrated bythe examples of two German architects: PeterBehrens's (1868-1940) Art Hall in Oldenburg from1905 and Bruno Taut's (1880-1938) ground plan fora house from 1920-1921. Both of these exampleswere in their times spoken of as organic, eventhough the two visual forms differ from each otherremarkably. The organic in those two examples ismanifested on the one hand in symmetricalgeometric and on the other in asymmetrical non-regular shapes.

FOUR WAYS OF UNDERSTANDINGTHE ORGANIC ANALOGY AND

THE ORGANIC METAPHORThe large variety of different visual features of theorganic makes it hard to form a defining concept.Focusing on the discrepancies of the organicvariants around 1900, this article will argue that there

are four criteria as to the definition of the visual formas organic: the motif of Nature, the structural form,the parallels in structure, and the artist and his or herwork being itself Nature. The first two of these can bedefined as concrete, the latter two as abstractanalogies, when "analogy" is used in the sense of"similarity" or "correspondence." Mimetic or realisticmotifs of Nature are not always accepted in thecategory of the organic. More often these have beendefined as organic in cases where new motifs wereintroduced in art, design, and architecture- e.g.,new plant motifs or bones, crystals, and microscopicviews. Secondly, if structures are formed withidentifiable motifs taken directly from Nature-forinstance, shell-shapes, tubes, and microscopicstructures-they enter the organic category moreeasily. These can be called structural forms. Treeswith their branches, vascular plants, and grass wereused by the architects Victor Horta (1861-1947) andAntoni Gaudi (1852-1926) in this way; mimeticfeatures revealing or clarifying, but not veiling thebearing function of the firm and elastic vegetalstructure. As early as 1844, Karl B6tticher(1806-1889) had referred to this solution of Nature inhis work on the tectonics of the Hellenes.

The third possibility, exemplified by Behrens'sground plan, can be called parallel structure.Parallel structures have no mimetic relationship tonatural objects, but the similarity is based on a formprinciple such as module, proportion, integration,or function. A module construction can be realizedwith any form as module, because the analogy isbased on the idea of the relation of the parts toeach other or to their environment. How the outerform of a building or an artwork otherwise looks isin this case a secondary feature. This may haveconsequences for the reading of structural forms,because their nature appears twofold. They can atthe same time be interpreted as Nature motifs aswell as parallel structures, i.e., as a concretesimilarity as well as an abstract analogy.The above three criteria of organic analogy alwaysinvolve some visual appearance, either in mimeticforms, non-mimetic structures, or both. The fourthcriterion is to be understood in a conceptual wayonly, without visual references: according to BrunoTaut, the organic nature of the work of art hasnever had another purpose but that of the artistand his work being itself nature.' Many of the

41

organic art views and theories of thetwentieth century, for instance those ofHerbert Read (1893-1968) and BrunoZevi (1918-1975), follow the principles ofthe abstract organic analogy.5 Ironically,however, the examples of Taut himselfseem to contradict the abstract nature ofhis statement in a very illustrious way.Until now we have been referring to theorganic analogy only. However, manywriters take up the organic metaphor, andmany times seem to treat analogy andmetaphor as equivalent. In attempting todefine a difference, it is obvious that thepossibilities of the organic analogy refer toa similarity that is reciprocal, be it visual ornot. The reciprocity, however, does notimply the idea or tradition of imitating amodel-but rather can be seen as astatement for analysis and categorization

ANTONI GAUDI, SAGRADA FAMILIA, BARCELONA. VICTOR HORTA, IRON COLUMNS, MAISON TASSEL.BRUSSELS, 1893.

42

of the different visual materials. Theorganic metaphor, again, comprises theidea of motivation or a model to befollowed, but the relation of the forms is inthis case not reciprocal. Thus, in short,using the metaphor of "the organism = amachine" is not equivalent to the metaphorof "the machine = an organism."For a better understanding of thedifferences in the visual appearance ofthe organic, and in order to understandthe complex nature of the concept, wehave to look into the historical phases ofits development. In addition, keep in mindthat connotations of the organic fromdifferent times do not prevail separatelyfrom each other, but rather intertwine andproduce a multifaceted and oftencontradictory cohesion of the concept.

ANTONI GAUDI, SAGRADA FAMILIA, BARCELONA. ANTONI GAUDI, SAGRADA FAMILIA, BARCELONA.PHOTOGRAPHS BY ANNIKA WAENERBERG.

43

HISTORICAL PHASES OF THEORGANIC CONCEPT

The philosophy of antiquity, art theory of theRenaissance, Romantic aesthetics, architecture ofthe nineteenth century, Jugendstil or art nouveau,modern sculpture, architecture of the twentieth andtwenty-first centuries and (only recently) RussianModernism, 6 all represent different versions inthe history of the organic concept. This hasconsequences for its reading: the organic thinkingin, for instance, Gottfried Semper's (1803-1879)theory of architecture when reviewed from theperspective of antiquity and Renaissance results ina quite different picture than when considered fromthe perspective of the evolution ideas of theRomantic era or of Charles Darwin's Origin ofSpecies (1859).7 Furthermore, the organic view inthe disciplines of philosophy, aesthetics, literature,art, architecture, and design assume differentpositions according to social, ideological, andcultural background.

It seems almost as if the history of the organicconcept consists of only individual cases. Yet theinterrelations of these cases are manifold and it is verydifficult to overlook one position when consideringanother: this is also why, for instance, the NationalSocialistic ideology- exploiting the organic idea forits own use-affects the reception of the organic as aresult of different intentions. One result of that situationhas been meager discussion in the field of arthistorical research.Further, until now another factor that has been moreor less neglected in the analysis of the organic is thatin the history of concepts of the organic, the mainaspect arises from several lines of tradition: from thetradition of visual forms of art, from the tradition ofcommentaries on art theory, from aesthetics and artphilosophy and natural sciences, and fromphilosophy of Nature and Nature observation. Theseareas of study are, of course, related to one another.Nature observation and the idea of Nature affect theaesthetic traditions and, at the same time, impulsesof the natural sciences have a direct influence on artthrough popularization. While these constellationsmight differ from each other, nonetheless they show"family resemblance" in the concept of the organic.The ways of looking into this concept have to bediscerned according to the historical context for theinvestigation. However, the older models of theconcept do not disappear: they continue to thrive,

along with the new models; they are immersed intoone another or are activated in new constellations.Three main historical phases can be differentiated.From antiquity to the first half of the eighteenthcentury, the body was defined as the main referenceof the organic. From the second half of the eighteenthcentury onwards the main reference was life itself,which from the second half of the nineteenth centuryturned into the idea of evolution. These criteriabecome more obvious if we try to define the oppositeof each: the opposite of body is in this case non-order or chaos, the opposite of life or living would bedead in the sense of mechanic; and the contrary ofevolution would be the old or the traditional. Let uslook more closely into these main ideas.

THE PRINCIPLE OF THE BODY

The central idea of the organic whole referring to abody lies in the idea of a conjunction of parts ormembers into one whole. As a rhetoric metaphor inPlato's dialogues this concept was brought into thecontext of the Aristotelian 6rganon, originallymeaning "tool," "member," or "organ as a means toan end." Thus, the order of the parts and the relationof the parts to the whole produce a formal as well asa functional analogy. This was particularly evident inthe Renaissance, enriched as it was by the modelsof Nature. Next, Carlo Lodoli's (1690-1761) conceptof "organico" demanded that every architecturalform had to follow its function.8 This dictum was laterto be made famous as a slogan of Louis Sullivan(1856-1924), and further developed by Frank LloydWright (1867-1956).The bodily function view of the organic was carriedon by architects and engineers from Ernst Kapp'sGrundlinien einer Philosophie der Technik (1877) toHenry van de Velde's (1863-1957) view regardingengineers and bridge-builders as the creators of thenew style: "The exact knowledge of the essentialorganic components constitutes the principalincontrovertible merit of the creator."

9

The thinking of Descartes promoted the application ofthe metaphors of the machine and the automaton tothe organic body. In France the idea of organization,derived from organisme, gained more importance atthe end of the eighteenth century; however,organization was still interpreted as mechanical andas such was transferred into a social function. For a

44

I

designer in the middle of the nineteenth century, abridge, a house, a piece of furniture, or a tool wasbecoming a mechanically organized organism,giving rise to the idea of omitting ornamentaltogether; "organic" meaning solely purposefulnessand economy of design.'0 By this interpretation,".,organic ornament" must appear as a paradox. Butas we know, van de Velde was able to integrateornament into the analogy of function-oriented art.Jugendstil or art nouveau, which showed anabundance of biomorphic ornament, was laterdefined as "biological romanticism," although this didnot necessarily imply a biological analogy for allwriters." At the beginning of the twentieth century theidea of the organism as a machine appears morestrongly again in painting and sculpture, but above allin Le Corbusier's ideas and practice.

THE PRINCIPLE OF LIFEEven though Kant defined an organized product ofNature in contrast to the mechanistic view, hisdefinition did not yet refer to life itself. A relevantchange in thinking, however, was promoted by theidea that plants were living beings, and until 1800the organic being of "vegetal" Nature had beenaccepted. When the mechanistic explanation ofthe organism was overpowered by the organicone, life could be defined as a result of a specialvital force, as relationships or as movement. In1835, three aspects of the organic as concerningartwork were derived from the old metaphor:' 2 theartwork should follow only one single principle inthe development of the product; should do thataccording to the causal law; and should imply therelationship between the parts and the whole. Thefourth aspect- living- belonged to the newversion of the organic metaphor.Two important organic metaphors were establishedduring the Romantic period: first, that original artand artistic genius were derived from vegetableNature, art being an independently creative,organized, and organizing "second nature" movedby intrinsic force instead of by outward mechanism;and secondly, that visual form was above allmorphological in its character.For instance, Schelling stated directly thatarchitecture preferred the plant organism as amodel.' 3 This model was realized above all incolumns and other ornaments. Derived from the

complete vegetable forms of the nineteenthcentury-where the morphological form wasvisible from root to top-there was an impulsetoward the invisible metaphor, presented inEug6ne Grasset's (1841-1917) ornament modelsfrom 1905. That is, the model did not have to bevisible in its entirety; missing parts could be filledin by imagination. In Punkt und Linie zur F15che(1926), Wassily Kandinsky (1866-1944) convertedthis morphological idea into total abstraction byallocating the visible morphological form to the lawof Nature and defining painting by following therules of subordination ascribed as being "of innernature." Thus, the seemingly abstract idea of theorganic in Kandinsky's-and even in Taut's-programs have two roots: the Romantic idea of thegenius's organic nature (the highest form of Naturebeing pure "vegetation") and the morphologicalmetaphor's being abstract (or rather, "invisible").Different applications of natural forms are bound tothis practice, from form structures of the architects ofthe so-called "power allegory" or "Krafteallegorie," toKandinsky's paralleling microscopic tissues asa starting point for a composition, to Behrens'sparallel structure.The distinction between organic and inorganic wascomplicated, however, by discoveries in the field oforganic chemistry, implying that some Romanticistswere strongly committed to the idea that their era wasa time of chemistry. This assumption is also reflectedin the fact that Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) thoughtthe growth of crystals and organisms primarily to be asimilar process. Also, Frank Lloyd Wright was stillstrongly under Spencer's influence when reflecting onthe ambiguity of the organic.

THE PRINCIPLE OF EVOLUTIONThe Romantic idea of organic development impliednot the concept of evolution, i.e., the possibility ofreal change or a new species, but rather the idea ofdevelopment according to a primal type evolvingthrough variations and new combinations of thesame elements. After the Romantic period, this ideais reflected in, above all, the development andhistory. of style-an idea that recently has beenfollowed up in the "genealogy of avant-garde.""The legitimation of the Neo-Renaissance as a styleand the use of iron as a construction material werepossible despite the analogies of Nature as

45

revealed by Semper's theories. The hollow ironcolumn was legitimated by the idea that Nature wasdeveloping all its organic structures according to atube-shaped model, a cover being necessary ornot according to the structure's nature.

The question as to whether and when during suchan evolution something "new" is produced in anartwork depends on the enquirer's point of view. Inthe light of a genius's creativity, every work of artcan be interpreted as a mutation of the same oldelements or as creation of something totally andprincipally new. The Darwinian idea of evolutionfocused on ideal form as being not a primary typebut rather the result of evolutionary development:this changed the focus from the past to the future.In art this was reflected in a transfer of interest fromthe individual to the general development of art. Amutation or the happening of the unexpected alsoallowed new rules or laws to be generated.

The possibility of something totally new andunexpected's being born, when launchedaccording to the laws of Nature out of a "normal"situation, furthermore contributed to the valuationof the new and the eagerness to give up traditions,the old. Art was becoming a prophecy instead of amirror of the historical situation. Being up-to-datemeant being ahead of one's time, and the "true"prophets-Paul C6zanne, Vincent van Gogh,Edvard-would be discerned as such among therest. In architecture this kind of evolutionary"mutation" was realized through iron and concrete,causing change both in the proportion of massesand in the relation of push-and-pull.According to Justus Liebig (1803-1873), theinorganic powers produced only straight lines andplanes; the organic only curved lines and planes;morphological observations were attached duringthe second half of the nineteenth century toconnotations of natural, feminine, and decorativeas curved and rational and of masculine asstraight. Styles utilizing curved or straight lineswere established around 1900, followed later by adivision into "Organik" and "Architektonik," whilepsychological, moral, or ideological interpretationswere reflected in the motivation of the personal orthe national style.'5

The development of organic chemistry enlarged thesphere of the organic by spawning the concept of"inorganic." Around 1900, at the moment when

biology, the theory of evolution, and monism wereobliterating both the differences between organicand inorganic and also those between plant, animal,and human being, crystalline forms were more ofteninterpreted as organic. The crystalline formsappeared at the point of interception of organic andinorganic, whereas the lower forms of life (amoebas,etc.) were positioned at the beginning of the chain ofevolution and held new sources of motives in morethan one sense. The associated background ideas,from mechanistic-functional to psycho-physical,present a complicated variety of aspects, from Rouxand Haeckel to Henri Bergson's. L'Evolution cr6atrice(1907) and Hans Driesch's Philosophie desOrganischen (1909).

PERSPECTIVES OF THE ORGANIC TODAY

At the beginning of the twentieth century theorganic metaphor was seen as referring tosomething outside the elements of the work of art-a reason why Modernism wanted to get rid of it.'

6

And yet it is proven that the connotations of theorganic still prevail. For instance, even today theItalian term organico carries strong connotations ofthe bodily aspect, in the sense of imitation and incontrast to abstraction. Not only the historicaldevelopment but also the interdisciplinary structureof the concept (oscillating between natural science,philosophy, aesthetics, and practices of art)contribute to its character.Scrutiny of the organic concept can help inunderstanding our own time and its growingfascination for the organic; for instance, in bio-mimetics concentrating on biological processes.Kristian K5chy's profound work Perspektiven desOrganischen. Biophilosophie zwischen Natur- undWissenschaftsphilosophie (2003) shows thisinvestigation in the field of bio-philosophy. K6chychooses vantage points in philosophy and inphilosophical discussions on natural sciences fromwhich to consider three aspects of the organic:mesoscopic (referring to the organism), microscopic(referring to the members of the organism), andmacroscopic (referring to the organism and theenvironment). For each level Kbchy brings a differentdefinition of its organic aspects: for organism-wholeness, individuality, fitness for purpose, andcentrality; for members of the organism-interaction, hierarchy, process, and spontaneity;

46

and for organism and the environment- evolution,reproduction, and freedom.What remains to be seen is whether and how theupdated definitions of the organic, acute in manyways in the present society, will have an effect onart'and architecture. As Murray Krieger states,organicism reveals itself at the end always as anillusion.17 For art research, though, more importantis what kind of organic connotations are at stakeand how these illusions contribute to or producevisual forms and visual culture. Consoling shouldbe the thought that, the organic idea being anillusion, the artist in principle cannot have a wrongidea of the organic. What kinds of moral andethical implications are connected with theconcept of course form another question. El

NOTES1. This article is a continuation of my following writings on the

organic aspects in art and art theory: Annika Waenerberg"'Sentimentalitdt der Krifteallegorie.' Die Anwendung derNaturmotive im Ornament des M0nchner Jugendstils und ihrnaturwissenschaftlicher und naturphilosophisch bedingterHintergrund im 19. Jahrhundert," in Taidehistoriallisiatutkimuksia-Konsthistoriska studier 6, ed. PekkaKorvenmaa (Helsinki: The Society for Art History in Finland,1982), 127-83; Annika Waenerberg, 'Morfologinenkasviromantiikka-er5tn ornamentti-idean alku ja loppu /Morphologische Pflanzenromantik-Anfang und Ende einerOrnamentidee," in Kaipuu maisemaan. Saksalaistaromantiikkaa / Alles drangt zur Landschaft. DeutscheRomantik 1800-1840 (Tampere: Tampereen taidemuseo,1991), 204-47; Annika Waenerberg, Urpflanze undOrnament. Pflanzenmorphologische Anregungen in derKunsttheorie und Kunst von Goethe bis zum Jugendstil(Helsinki: The Finnish Society of Sciences and Letters, 1992);Annika Waenerberg, "Goethe und Kandinsky oder visuelleMotive und abstrakte Kunst zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts,"in Icon to Cartoon: A Tribute to Sixten Ringbom, ed. MariaTerttu Knapas and Asa Ringbom (Helsinki: The Society for ArtHistory in Finland, 1995), 339-51; Annika Waenerberg, "DasOrganische in Kunst und Gestaltung-Eine kurzeGeschichte des Begriffs," in Spielarten des Organischen inArchitektur, Design und Kunst, eds. Annette Geiger, StefanieHennecke, and Christin Kempf (Berlin: Reimer, 2004), 21-35.

2. For instance, see Philip Steadman, The Evolution of Designs:Biological Analogy in Architecture and Applied Arts(Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 21.

3. Karl Scheffler, "Walter F0rst und Karl Scheffler, Dialog (lberdeutsches Kunstgewerbe," Kunst und KOnstler Vol. VI(1908): 518.

4. Bruno Taut, "Der Roland von Brandenburg," DasKunstgewerbeblatt Vol. XXVII (6 M5rz 1916): 111.

5. Wilhelm Hortmann, Wenn die Kunst stirbt. Zum Prinzip desOrganischen in der Kunst- und Gesellschaftstheorie vonHerbert Read (Duisburg: Braun, 1976); Bruno Zevi, Zevi suZevi. Architettura come profezia (Venezia: Marsilio, 1993).

6. Recently, for instance: Anne Eusterschulte, "Organismusversus Mechanismus. Zur Rolle mechanomorpher Modellein Naturkonzeptionen der frOhen Neuzeit," in Leonardo daVinci. Natur im Obergang. Beitrige zur Wissenschaft, Kunstund Technik, ed. Frank Fehrenbach (M0nchen: W. Fink,2002), 97-133; Charles I. Armstrong, Romantic Organicism:From Idealistic Origins to Ambivalent Afterlife (New York:Palgrave Macmillan, 2003); Caroline van Eck, Organicism inNineteenth-Century Architecture. An Inquiry into ItsTheoretical and Philosophical Background (Amsterdam:Architectura and Natura Press, 1994); JOrgen Fitschen, Dieorganische Form 1930-1960. Bildhauerkunst-Hans Arp,Henry Moore und die Erneuerung der modernen Plastiknach dem zweiten Weltkrieg (Bremen: Gerhard-Marcks-Haus, 2003); Natalia Baschmakova,Olga Kushlina, andIgor Lostsilov (eds.), Shkola organicheskogo iskusstva vrusskom modernizme. Sbornik statei (Helsinki: Institute forRussian and East European Studies,1999); Isabel Wonsche,"Das Kunstkonzept der Organischen Kultur in der Kunst derrussischen Avantgarde" (Ph.D. diss., Universit.tHeidelberg, 1997).

7. Van Eck, 228-35; Valentin Hammerschmidt, "Organischoder biologisch. Anmerkungen zu zwei Entwurfsparadigmenin der Architekturtheorie des 19. Jahrhunderts," in Bau +Kunst. Festshrift zum 65. Geburststag von Professor JOrgenPaul, eds. Gilbert Lupfer, Konstanze Rudert, and P. Sigel,(Dresden: Hellerau-Verlag, 2000), 76-85.

8. In Lodoli's own case concerning only furniture see: "Organica,architettura," in Luigi Grassi and Mario Pepe, Dizionario dellaCritica dArte (Torino: UTET, 1978).

9. Henry van de Velde, Kunstgewerbliche Laienpredigten(Leipzig: H. Seemann, 1902), 172.

10. Karl Schnaase, Kunstblatt, Vol. 25, (1844): 247; as quotedby Klaus D6hmer, In welchem Style sollen wir bauen?Architekturheorie zwischen Klassizismus und Jugendstil,(MOnchen: Prestel, 1976), 53-4.

11. Robert Schmutzler, Art Nouveau-Jugendstil (Stuttgart:Hatje, 1977), 183-8; cf. on the contrary: Steadman, 21.

12. Ludewig Steckling, Die Kalologie oder die Lehre vomSchdnen aus Einem Principe vollstindig entwickelt(Leipzig: G. J. G6schen, 1835), 94.

13. Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Philosophie der Kunst(1859; reprint, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft,1976),227.

14. See for instance Carl Moellinger, Deutsch-romanischeArchitektur in ihrer organischen Entwicklung bis zumAusgang des XII. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig: E. A. Seeman,1891); also the fascinating recent study by Astrit Schmidt-Burkhardt, Stammbiume der Kunst. Zur Genealogie derAvantgarde (Berhin: Akademie Verlag, 2005).

15. Christina Threuter, "'Organisches Bauen' versus 'nationalerStil'. Hans Scharoun und das Scheitern seiner T8tigkeit inder DDR," in Grammatik sozialistischer Architekturen.Lesarten historischer Stidtebauforschung zur DDR, eds.Holger Barth, Ingrid Apolinarski and Harald Bodenschatz(Berlin: Reimer, 2001), 286.

16. Leo Adler, "Ober das Organische und das Malerische in derBaukunst," Wasmuths Monatshefte fOr Baukunst Vol.1924/25 (1925): 484-94.

17. Murray Krieger, A Reopening of Closure: OrganicismAgainst Itself, the Welek Library Lectures at the Universityof California, Irvine (New York: Columbia University Press,1989), 5.

47

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: Organic: A Brief History of the ConceptSOURCE: Structurist no47/48 2007/2008

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and itis reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article inviolation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher:http://www.usask.ca/structurist/