|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|

|
|
Dictionary of Art
and Artists

|
|
|
|
|

|
CHAPTER THREE
TWENTIETH-CENTURY ARCHITECTURE
|
Part I.
ARCHITECTURE -
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
Part II. ARCHITECTURE -
11,
12,
13,
14,
15,
16, 17,
18,
19, 20,
Part III. ARCHITECTURE -
21,
22, 23,
24,
25, 26,
27,
28, 29
|
|
|
|
|
ARCHITECTURE
|
|
THE BAUHAUS.
|
In Weimar the State Bauhaus was created in
1919 under the directorship of Walter Gropius
from the Grand-Ducal Saxon School of Arts and Crafts founded by Henry
van de Velde in 1906 and
the Grand-Ducal Saxon Academy of Fine Arts. Its early years were still
clearly influenced by the impassioned introspection of post-war
Expressionism, as could be read in the first manifesto of
1919: "Let us therefore create a
new guild of craftsmen without the class divisions that raise an
arrogant barrier between craftsman and artist! Let us together desire,
conceive and create the new building of the future, which will combine
everything in a single form: architecture, sculpture and painting
... a crystalline symbol of a new
and coming faith."
After only a few years, however, signs of a polarization emerged
at the Bauhaus which was viewed inside the school as a conflict between
Itten and Gropius. Itten was thereby equated with "Indian cult,
Wandervogel movement, vegetarianism", and Gropius with
"Americanism, progress, the wonder of Technology and invention". The
Bauhaus production principles of 1925 revealed no further trace of the
mysticism of the Gothic stonemason's lodge. Gropius spoke instead
of future crafts determined equally by technology and form and acting as
a "medium of experimental work for industrial production". "The Bauhaus
wishes to contribute to the development - appropriate to the times - of
housing, from the simplest appliance to the finished dwelling. Convinced
that house and furnishings must relate to each other rationally, the
Bauhaus seeks - by means of systematic theoretical and practical
research into formal, technical and economic fields - to derive the form
of an object from its natural functions and limitations ... The nature
of an object is determined by what it does. Before a container, a chair
or a house can function properly its nature must be studied ... Such
research into the nature of objects leads to the result that forms
emerge from a determined consideration of all the modern methods of
production and construction and of modern materials, forms which d'verge
from existing models and often seem unfamiliar and surprising."
With the Bauhaus' move to the city of Dessau, Walter Gropius was
given the opportunity to tailor a brand new building for the institute.
In fitting with Gropius' analytical standards, the entire complex was
organized according to function. There was a workshop wing, an
accommodation and studio block for Bauhaus students and a teaching wing
for the Dessau Technical College, which was also to be housed in the
Bauhaus complex by wish of the city magistrate. Gropius linked the three
main sections, clearly differentiated in their external appearances,
volumes and heights, through a raised administrative section and a lower
connecting wing with auditorium, theatre and canteen to create a
balanced, rectangular structure. The most spectacular element of the
complex was the central workshop wing, clearly visible from afar. A
delicate skin of glass held in a regular grid of slender black steel
bars covered three sides of its reinforced-concrete frame. Its large
prismatic body thus assumed a light, crystalline transparency. In
addition to the new Bauhaus building, Gropius also built a
Director's House and three semi-detached houses for the Bauhaus Masters;
conceived as models of a new lifestyle in keeping with the machine age.
They were based on the modular system of a "large-scale set of building
blocks: houses which are composed of combinations of variable
prefabricated off-the-shelf pieces." Although the goals of
standardization and the industrialization of construction were not
achieved in Dessau (his houses were in fact built in entirely
conventional manner), the formal handling of volumes nevertheless
convincingly demonstrates the aesthetic presence that can be achieved in
the reduction to a few basic cubic forms.
In Holland in 1917 the
De Stijl group formed with the aim of creating a style valid for the
"new consciousness of the age", which would replace the "individual"
with the "universal". In painting this meant the rigorous rejection of
all representational reference, including the Cubist and Purist. Nature
was too material, too individual. "Universal" art allowed only for
abstract composition, as an "equilibrium of position and weight of
colour". The pictures by Piet Mondrian, the most important painter in
the group, were reduced to straight black lines in rectangular
arrangements, in conjunction with the primary colours of red, blue and
yellow, supported by much white and some grey.
The architects of De Stijl were concerned with the calculated distribution of unequal masses
in an anti-cubist system which exploded the closed contours of
volumetric bodies. In 1918
Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud, then city architect in
Rotterdam and a founder of De Stijl, described the role played by Frank
Lloyd Wright and his ideas on the "destruction of the box": "Wright
created the bases for a new plasticity in architecture. Masses shoot in
all directions - forwards,
backwards, to the right, to the left ... In this
way, modern architecture will increasingly develop into a process of
reduction to positive proportions, comparable to modern painting."
One of the few buildings to consistently adhere to these maxims is
the Schroder House built in Utrecht by Gerrit Rietveld, who
joined the group in 1918. The basic form is
cuboid, but is "de-composed" by horizontal projections and vertical wall
slabs, parapet panels and supports. The right angle which Mondrian
elevated to the level of dogma governs even the details: windows opening
outward can thus only be secured in one position, namely exactly
90 degrees to the facade. The colour scheme is
that of Mondrian: all linear elements are red, blue or yellow, while
surfaces are white or grey.
The large popularity which De Stijl achieved within just a few years
was due above all to the painter and architect Theo van Doesburg,
spiritus rector, organizer and driving force behind the group. He ran
its magazine, organized exhibitions and travelled through Europe with
his programme of lectures. It was his initiative, for example, which led
in 1923 to an important exhibition in Leonce
Rosenberg's avant-garde gallery "L'Effort Moderne" in Paris where, in
addition to De Stijl projects, works by Mies van der Rohe
could also be seen. Contacts with the Soviet Russian avant-garde were
strengthened that same year when artist-architect El Lissitzky (who saw
himself as an "artist-engineer") joined the group. Van Doesburg's
attempt, in 1922, to cleanse the Weimar Bauhaus
of its "Expressionist degeneration" through a full-scale "siege" failed
miserably, however.
Adolf Loos' primary concern lay not with abstract, formalist
principles - he rejected drawing-board
experiments - but with human proportions and
reguirements, around which he sought to develop space. He designed room
seguences not along the usual horizontal plane, but instead organized
his plan on different levels. He found the rigid convention of regular
storeys too narrow a strait-jacket; varying floor heights were subsequently among the
most significant results of his thoughts on the "Raumplan" (volumetric
plan). He "solved the plan in space", as he himself put it. Low, private
niches thereby correspond via "neutral" intermediate levels to an open
hall. The access to the living quarters is often very complicated and
not always successful.
Before reaching the so-called "small hall" in the Moller House, for
example, the visitor will have gone round in at least one full circle,
during which time he may have got rid of his hat and coat but will not
have seen much more than the narrow vestibule behind the front door and
the closed walls of the staircase
-for
it is necessary to pass the service flat, domestic quarters and garages
before gradually approaching the centre of the house. The strict cube-symmetrical
enclosures with which Loos clad his houses led, understandably if not
inevitably, to a contradiction between interior and exterior. In his few
completed houses, however, he pointed out the restrictions still
affecting the designs of his contemporaries.
|
|
|
Willem Marinus Dudok.
|
Willem Marinus Dudok
Willem Marinus Dudok, (born July 6, 1884, Amsterdam,
Neth.—died April 6, 1974, Hilversum), Dutch architect whose
work is related both to the school of Amsterdam, which
emphasized individual expression, and to the De Stijl group,
which stressed geometric form. He attended the Royal
Military Academy at Breda and remained in the army until
1913. He became municipal architect of Hilversum in 1915 and
thereafter designed many buildings for the city, notably the
Dr. H. Bravink School (1921), the Vondel School (1928–29),
and the Town Hall (1928–30). These structures, though
compositions of cubes, convey solidity and texture through
the use of solid brick.
Other Dudok works include
the Netherlands House, Cité Universitaire, Paris (1927–28);
the Bijenkorf department store, Rotterdam (1929–30), which
was destroyed in World War II; and the Erasmus Huis,
Rotterdam (1939–40).
Encyclopædia
Britannica
|
|
|
|

Willem Marinus Dudok. Dr. Bavinck School in Hilversum, The Netherlands,
1921-1922.
Plan of the upper storey

Willem Marinus Dudok. Pump Station in Hilversum,
The Netherlands, 1919-1920

Willem Marinus Dudok. Townhall in Hilversum,
The Netherlands, 1923-1931

Townhall in Hilversum. Plan

Willem Marinus Dudok. Townhall in Hilversum.
Interior
|
|
|
Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud.
|
Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud
Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud, (born Feb. 9, 1890, Purmerend,
near Amsterdam—died April 5, 1963, Wassenaar, near The
Hague), Dutch architect notable for his pioneering role in
the development of modern architecture.
Oud was educated in
Amsterdam and at the Delft Technical University, after which
he worked with a number of architects in Leiden and Munich.
In 1916 he met Theo van Doesburg, and together the two men
founded in 1917 the influential review De Stijl, which set
forth the theories of the de Stijl group of avant-garde
artists. Oud soon became the chief proponent of the de Stijl
idiom in modern architecture. Among his earliest
architectural projects in this austere, highly geometric
style were theoretical projects for houses at Scheveningen
(1917) and for a factory at Purmerend (1919). He designed a
hotel at Noordwijkerhout (1917) and the Allegonda villa at
Katwijk (1917). These and other buildings featured subtle
oppositions of horizontal and vertical lines; long, straight
walls wrapping into smoothly rounded corners; building units
enclosing an open space; and simplified rectilinear and
circular forms that achieve a subtly poised equilibrium
despite their assymmetrical arrangement.
In 1918 Oud was appointed
housing architect to the city of Rotterdam, in which post he
was required to supply sorely needed mass housing for
workers. The housing blocks he subsequently designed and
built at Spangen (1918), Tusschendijken (1920), and Hoek van
Holland (1924–27) had a sober and functional austerity that
contrasted strongly with the picturesque elaboration of
detail typical of the school of Amsterdam led by Michel de
Klerk. His Café de Unie (1924–27, destroyed in 1940) and
Kiefhoek estate (1925–27), both in Rotterdam, also
emphasized de Stijl principles, although by then he was
tending toward separation from the movement. Oud’s book
Höllandische Architektur (1926) gave him an international
reputation.
Among his late works are
the monumental and somewhat ornate Shell Building (1938) in
The Hague, which disappointed some because of Oud’s evident
abandonment in it of de Stijl principles. The Bio-Children’s
Convalescent Home (1952–60) near Arnhem, however,
convincingly demonstrated Oud’s continuing mastery of the
elegant geometrical compositions typical of what had become
known as the International Style.
Encyclopædia
Britannica
|
|

Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud. Cafe "De Unie" in Rotterdam,
1924-1925
|

Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud.
Cafe "De Unie" in Rotterdam,
Facade design
|

Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud. Housing Complex in Hoek of
Holland,
The Netherlands, 1924-1927

Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud. Tusschendijken housing estate,
Rotterdam, 1920

Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud. De Kiefhoek housing estate,
Rotterdam, 1925
|
|
|
Hans Scharoun.
|
Hans Scharoun
Hans Scharoun, (born Sept. 20, 1893, Bremen, Ger.—died Nov.
25, 1972, West Berlin), German architect who was closely
associated with modern architectural movements of the 1920s,
much later producing his best known work, the hall for the
Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra (1963).
Scharoun received his
training at the Technische Hochschule in Berlin from 1912 to
1914. After World War I he became a follower of the Berlin
architect Bruno Taut, and in 1925 he joined the group known
as Der Ring, formed to defend the modern movement in
architecture. For the Deutscher Werkbund exhibition at
Stuttgart (1927), featuring the work of prominent
contemporary architects, Scharoun built a private residence.
Among his outstanding projects before World War II were an
institution for the aged at Breslau (1929), houses of the
Siemensstadt Housing Estate in Berlin (1930), and the
Schminke House at Löbau, in Saxony (1932).
When the Nazis came to
power, his architectural activities were severely curtailed,
but after World War II he served in a number of government
and academic posts related to town planning. Among his best
known postwar works are the Geschwister Scholl Schule at
Lünen, Westphalia (1955–62), and the multi-facetted Romeo
and Juliet apartment buildings at Stuttgart (1963).
Encyclopædia Britannica
|
|

Hans Scharoun. Apartment buildings in Siemensstadt,
Berlin, 1929-1931

Hans Scharoun. Villa Schminke in Lobou Saxony, Germany, 1933

Hans Scharoun. Villa Schminke in Lobou Saxony, Germany, 1933

Hans Scharoun. Hostel for Single People and Newly-married Couples at the
"Wohnung und Werkraum" Werkbund Exhibition in Breslau, 1929

Hostel for Single People and Newly-married Couples. Plan

Hans Scharoun. Hostel for Single People and Newly-married Couples at the
"Wohnung und Werkraum" Werkbund Exhibition in Breslau, 1929
|
|
|
Hans and Wassili Luckhardt,
Alfons Anker.
| |
Hans Luckhardt
(June 16, 1890 in Berlin-Charlottenburg) – October 8,
1954 in Bad Wiessee) was a German architect and the brother
of Wassili Luckhardt, with whom he worked his entire life.
He studied at the University of Karlsruhe with Hermann
Billing and was a member of the Novembergruppe, the
Arbeitsrats für Kunst, and the Glass Chain. Together with
Anton Lorenz, he designed furniture in the 1920s and 1930s,
predominantly steel-tube and moveable chairs.
From 1921 until his death he was in practice with his
brother Wassili. From 1924 to 1934 their practice was also
shared with Alfons Anker.
In the 1920s the brothers
were among the world's top architects. Originally
Expressionists, they later turned to Modernism. Their
buildings are typical examples of Modernism, with skeletons
of steel or reinforced concrete.
During the Nazism era, the
Luckhardt brothers tried initially to reconcile their
architecture with the new ruling powers, even joining the
Nazi Party. It quickly became apparent, however, that the
new regime required a different architectural language. They
were professionally disqualified, and only built three
single-family houses during this period; the exteriors were
made to blend in with the preferred style of the Nazi era.
After World War II they
tried to return to their pre-war work. From 1952 to his
death, Hans was a professor at the Berlin State School of
Fine Arts.
|
|
|
Wassili Luckhardt
(b. 22 July 1889, Berlin; d. 2 December 1972, Berlin)
was a German architect. He studied at the Technical
University of Berlin (Technische Universität Berlin) and
Dresden. Luckhardt and his brother Hans worked closely
together for most of their lives. Both were members of the
November Group (Novembergruppe), the Arbeitsrat für Kunst,
the Glass Chain and, from 1926, the progressive architecture
group Der Ring. The brothers shared an office with the
architect Alfons Anker (b. 1872, d. 1952).
In the 1920s the brothers
belonged to the 20th centuries rising architects. Originally
Expressionist they then turned to modernism. Their buildings
are typical examples with skeletons of steel or reinforced
concrete. During National Socialism the Luckhardt brothers
tried initially to reconcile their architecture with the new
ruling powers and joined even the Nazi Party. It quickly
became apparent however that the new regime required a
different architectural language. They were professionally
disqualified and could only build three single family houses
in this time, the exterior of which was made to blend in
with the preferred style of the regime.
After World War II they
tried to return to their pre-war work. After the death of
his brother Hans, Wassili ran the office alone. The 1959
competition for the Haus der Bremischen Bürgerschaft (city
assembly in Bremen) was only realized after long discussions
and repeated revision. In 1960 he was one of three
architects shortlisted in a competition for the
transformation of the Berlin Reichstagsgebäudes.
|
|
|
Alfons Anker was
born in Berlin in 1872. He practiced architecture in Berlin,
first on his own, then in partnership with the Luckhardt
brothers. This successful partnership came to an abrupt end
in 1933 when his partners joined the National Socialist
Party. In 1939 he managed to flee to Sweden, but never
succeeded in re-establishing his career as an architect.
Anker died in Stockholm in 1958.
|
|

Hans and Wassili Luckhardt with Alfons Anker. Villa Kluge, "Am Rupenhorn"
in Berlin, 1928.
Plans

Hans and Wassili Luckhardt with Alfons Anker. Villa Kluge, "Am Rupenhorn".
Library and living room

Hans and Wassili Luckhardt with Alfons Anker.
Telschow House in Berlin, 1928
|
|
|
|
|

|