Mark Chirnside
Member
I find it a fascinating study that compares the interior design of the ‘Lusitanias’ and ‘Olympics’ with the lavish German ideas seen onboard ‘Imperator’ and her sisters.
Previous historical analysis — which I broadly agree with — has concentrated on the Olympic’s interiors as being ‘restrained good taste’ compared to the Germans which followed her. Olympic’s public rooms set new standards in terms of their size, but I have always felt that their décor was restrained, for its own good; true, her interiors were lavish, but they did not see the over-done carvings or festooned slabs of marble which make Imperator look monstrous, in my opinion.
Already, by 1911 passengers — and in particular Americans — were turning away from the scheme of décor which characterised turn of the century Norddeutscher Lloyd or HAPAG vessels; in favour of a simpler, but plush and nonetheless smart style. Even a ‘modern look.’ By the mid-1920s new styles were coming out entirely, and by the end of the decade both Olympic and other ships had seen touches to try and keep them up to date with tastes. The process accelerated for the older pre-war ships in the early 1930s, culminating in Olympic’s case with much colouring and other changes in 1933.
Cunard, when designing Aquitania, apparently took into consideration the trend for simpler design, but nonetheless her interiors included such examples as the Palladian lounge and smoke room, which might not have looked out of place if we had lifted them up and transported them to one of the new 50,000-ton German liners. Nonetheless, her first class suites look far simpler in design than Olympic’s few grandest, such as her Louis XVI, but in comparison with some of Olympic’s suites such as the Regency(?) they retain the same kind of elegance underpinning their design.
You can tell I am rambling (as always!) but it is interesting that even before the first world war design styles were changing. I am hopeless with decorative lingo. Certainly changes did not go far, especially compared to the Ile de France or something, but the trend certainly seemed to be for less lavish, but more dignified, design features. Grandiose carving was giving way to cultured decorative finishes; massive domes and skylights slowly giving way to flatter, perceptively nicer designs.
Olympic may have had a grand style, her interiors festooned with detailed carvings and lavish decorative features, but it is to her credit that her á la Carte restaurant was not a gigantic medieval banqueting hall, nor her grand staircase’s beautiful dome anything rivalling the Great Pyramids in size or pretension. Three decks for a dining saloon seems excessive. She was more in keeping with slowly developing trends of the travelling public than the grandiose Germans that followed her, I believe. As was Aquitania, perhaps to an even greater extent.
(Now you know why I am not an interior designer, having read this weird critique!)
Best regards,
Mark.
Previous historical analysis — which I broadly agree with — has concentrated on the Olympic’s interiors as being ‘restrained good taste’ compared to the Germans which followed her. Olympic’s public rooms set new standards in terms of their size, but I have always felt that their décor was restrained, for its own good; true, her interiors were lavish, but they did not see the over-done carvings or festooned slabs of marble which make Imperator look monstrous, in my opinion.
Already, by 1911 passengers — and in particular Americans — were turning away from the scheme of décor which characterised turn of the century Norddeutscher Lloyd or HAPAG vessels; in favour of a simpler, but plush and nonetheless smart style. Even a ‘modern look.’ By the mid-1920s new styles were coming out entirely, and by the end of the decade both Olympic and other ships had seen touches to try and keep them up to date with tastes. The process accelerated for the older pre-war ships in the early 1930s, culminating in Olympic’s case with much colouring and other changes in 1933.
Cunard, when designing Aquitania, apparently took into consideration the trend for simpler design, but nonetheless her interiors included such examples as the Palladian lounge and smoke room, which might not have looked out of place if we had lifted them up and transported them to one of the new 50,000-ton German liners. Nonetheless, her first class suites look far simpler in design than Olympic’s few grandest, such as her Louis XVI, but in comparison with some of Olympic’s suites such as the Regency(?) they retain the same kind of elegance underpinning their design.
You can tell I am rambling (as always!) but it is interesting that even before the first world war design styles were changing. I am hopeless with decorative lingo. Certainly changes did not go far, especially compared to the Ile de France or something, but the trend certainly seemed to be for less lavish, but more dignified, design features. Grandiose carving was giving way to cultured decorative finishes; massive domes and skylights slowly giving way to flatter, perceptively nicer designs.
Olympic may have had a grand style, her interiors festooned with detailed carvings and lavish decorative features, but it is to her credit that her á la Carte restaurant was not a gigantic medieval banqueting hall, nor her grand staircase’s beautiful dome anything rivalling the Great Pyramids in size or pretension. Three decks for a dining saloon seems excessive. She was more in keeping with slowly developing trends of the travelling public than the grandiose Germans that followed her, I believe. As was Aquitania, perhaps to an even greater extent.
(Now you know why I am not an interior designer, having read this weird critique!)
Best regards,
Mark.
