Viewing page 12 of 20

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

that Dr. Gropius had developed the hits and suggestions in this essay on this subject. It is a critical study for this moment. At one time I thought that maybe architects has limited the scope of their training too narrowly in relating it to building, especially when I saw them venturing into other fields of design such as furniture, decoration, poetry and so forth, but I see now that I was not right. The designer for industry must be placed alongside the architect, with a training equivalent in character, if directed towards another end, and with a status and authority equivalent too. Dr. Gropius must help to define this training and to explore its methods, once more repeating the experiments of the Bauhaus, with architecture as a mistress art certainly, but with a new architectonic arising out of a collective understanding of design in the industry. 


Please note that the language and terminology used in this collection reflects the context and culture of the time of its creation, and may include culturally sensitive information. As an historical document, its contents may be at odds with contemporary views and terminology. The information within this collection does not reflect the views of the Smithsonian Institution, but is available in its original form to facilitate research. For questions or comments regarding sensitive content, access, and use related to this collection, please contact