Paulo, Shara2011-07-032022-10-262011-07-032022-10-2620072007https://ir.wgtn.ac.nz/handle/123456789/25098There exists a level of unease in contemporary architectural discourse with regards to the notions of ornament. The modern movement attempted to remove the superficial and immoral from architecture by removing all that was considered ornament, as ornament was understood as being false and immoral. Scholars have since discussed what parts of architecture are and are not ornamental by intellectualizing what ornament and decoration might be in a representative and symbolic context rather than understanding its physical nature. In contrast to this, post modernists attempted to physically capture the work of their scholars in highly symbolic and often kitsch buildings. What is significant is that no clear definition exists for contemporary decoration today. This study has investigated how decoration has developed from the position of a contemporary context. Particular focus has been placed on architectural figures of the late 19th and early 20th century, comparing their position with contemporary theorists. What the study finds is that decoration is in itself very difficult to define. It also discovers that a presence exists in architecture, from the modern movement onwards, which leads to the decorative capacity observable in architecture today. By identifying the origins of contemporary decoration, it is evident that the architects of the modern movement, while attempting to remove ornament, in their neglect, actually allowed the process of decoration to develop and gather momentum in architecture.pdfen-NZAesthetics in architectureFunctionalismMoral and ethical aspects of architectureText