Page 134 - AIT0718_E-Paper

WOHNEN • LIVING THEORIE • THEORY

Foto: Lerato Linden, BAU International

Am 17. und 18. Mai wurde im Auditorium des Deutschen Architekturzentrums (DAZ) in Berlin ...

W hich came first? The chicken or the egg? Architecture or interior design? –
This was one of the most frequently discussed issues in the auditorium of
the Deutsches Architektur Zentrum (DAZ) in Berlin on 17th and 18th May. The pri-
vate BAU International University of Applied Sciences in Berlin had invited to this
venue for a two-day conference on the theory and history of interior design. The
hostess was Prof. Dr Carola Ebert, who holds the chair of interior design in the
department of history and theory of architecture and design at BAU International.
That the object in the focus is mostly ignored was already suggested in the confer-
ence title formulated by Ebert: “Interior – inferior – in theory?” was the key ques-
tion. This clearly described the fundamental problem that the phenomena of inte-
riors are hardly paid attention to in contemporary architectural theory. One could Design: Sharmila Sandrasegar, BAU International
splendidly discuss the various causes of this marginalization. It is not least partly
the fault of the interior designers themselves. The representatives of the profession
like to present themselves as shying away from theory, as pragmatists working intu-
itively rather than analytically – which not last is also reflected in the teaching.
Unlike in architectural education, for instance, the disciplines of theory and history ... viel über die Frage „Interior inferior in theory?“ diskutiert.
are playing no more than niche roles at most faculties of interior design. Specific
chairs hardly exist; the professorship of Dr Carola Ebert is more of an exception
than a rule. That this does not necessarily have to nor should continue was would often have wished at least the opposite arrangement especially since, in
expressed by the question mark at the end of the conference title. Ultimately, the the course of the two days, the discussions appeared to repeat themselves and
formulation of theory and the knowledge about the discipline’s history are indis- primarily focused on the question of how interior design can best be differenti-
pensable for “strengthening the profile of the profession – not least for the comple- ated from architecture.
menting of or the differentiating from other disciplines”, Ebert stated in an inter-
view with the BDIA prior to the event. Cave painting as the birth of interior design

Theory and history strengthen the profile of the profession That this differentiation is desired and currently of central significance for the
self-image of the discipline was made more than clear by the introductory lectures
“Particularly for the training”, Ebert continued, “the historic development and of the first conference day. The above quoted question of the sequence of the chick-
the theoretical conditions have special significance” (see AIT 4/2018, p. 165). In en and the egg or of architecture and interior design started here. Several speakers
line with this, the Berlin conference was above all intended as an exchange referred to the example of prehistoric cave paintings which were summarily
between the researches and the teachers but also addressed practicing interior explained as proof of the primal creative drive to interior design. According to
designers and their professional organizations. For the exchange, Ebert had in- this, the origin of interior design had indeed been prior to the development of
vited more than 30 speakers from over a dozen countries. That, as is often the case, architecture and was summarily presented as having been independent of the
there were not only Europeans and Anglo-Americans but participants from all latter since a cave is not architecture in the strict sense. This thesis might be
the five continents is a definite merit. Thus the contributions from Iran, Saudi- useful for the first steps on the way to interior design’s own theory and historiog-
Arabia, Indonesia, New Zealand, Brazil and South Africa probably made the raphy. In the long run, however, architecture and interior design should not be
most fascinating and sustained impression. To give just two examples: the role of aimed at differentiation but at complementing narratives since, in the end, both
women in interior design in Saudi Arabia or the significance of female interior disciplines can just as little be separated as can the chicken and the egg. The
designers in the renovation and conversion of historic buildings in Iran. These lec- prerequisite for this is that both disciplines meet at eye-level. With the Berlin
tures showed the variety of approaches to the theory and the history of interior conference, an important foundation stone was laid for this on the part of interior
design beyond one’s own nose. A shortcoming of the event was unfortunately that design. What remains is the hope that, at future such events, there will be fewer
the organizers limited the country-specific lectures to no more than ten minutes empty seats and that more representatives from teaching and research in Germany
while 15 minutes were allowed for the subsequent discussions. As a listener, one will take part in the discussion.

134 • AIT 7/8.2018