Ceramics as a vehicle for imagery and meaning
Ornament, or decoration has been the subject of contentious debate throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. It is primarily seen as the embellishment of functional forms and therefore a characteristic of the applied arts, which encompasses everyday objects and architecture.
The modern perception of ornament as mere decoration emerged with the Industrial Revolution. The primary concern for Modernist design was to affirm the beauty of function and necessity, expressed in Louis Sullivan’s theory that “form follows function”. Industry provided the perfect system in modernist utopia, as purposeful utilitarian forms were intended to reflect the clean, minimal designs of the machine aesthetic. The International Style journal, in 1932 stated that one of new architecture’s main constituents was “the avoidance of applied decoration”. In stark contrast, critic Sir Herbert Read equates the very absence of ornament with “the poverty of everyday life” (3).
Having been omitted from avant-garde art movements, decoration saw a revival with the rise of postmodernism, which embraces popular culture and eclectic visual styles