Het
Nie
uwe
Inst
ituut
Structuralism: An Installation in Four Acts is the first presen-tation on the subject. It is the starting-point of a research project mining the historical dimensions of 1960s structuralism while investigating its potential for today. An Installation in Four Acts con -centrates on the event of Dutch Structuralism in archi-tecture. For 2016 a follow-up project is planned: Total Space, which looks into the interdiscipli-nary aspects of structuralism as well as its international context.
programmeLandscape and Interior
fi leOngoing research on
Structuralism
projectStructuralism
curatorDirk van den Heuvel /
Jaap Bakema Study Centre
exhibition designLada Hršak / Bureau LADA
graphic design
Patrick Coppens
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
2 3
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
architect / author
architect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
54
The Event City of Dutch StructuralismDirk van den Heuvel
Dutch Structuralism was born from a unique confluence of people and events in the city of Amsterdam in the second half of the 1950s. Aldo van Eyck and Joop Hardy were teaching at the Academy of Architecture, a meeting place for Dutch modern architecture already before the Second World War. After the war, the school had moved to a new building at the Waterlooplein in the midst of the former Jewish quarter of the city, which would see dramatic changes in the next decades due to large scale modernization pro-jects such as the new town hall and opera house, the construction of the new underground and the fierce street fights over the course of urban renewal policies. With a relatively open studio system, the Academy was quite more advanced compared to the Delft University of Technology with its system of year professors who controlled the curriculum. Piet Blom and Joop van Stigt were among the most outstanding students who together with their teachers would fanatically pursue a new approach in architectural design, albeit rather intuitively as well. At the same time, Van Eyck’s Municipal Orphanage was under construction at the periphery. Joop van Stigt was Van Eyck’s supervisor and right hand during its construction. His role was especially critical after Van Eyck was denied access to the construction site after some serious conflicts with the client and builder that involved among others the tearing down of bits of the building by Van Eyck during nightly visits because they weren’t in accordance with his ideas.
When the Forum journal got a new editorial board in 1959 spearheaded by Jaap Bakema and Aldo van Eyck together with Joop Hardy, Jurriaan Schrofer, Gert Boon, and the young graduates Dick Apon and Herman Hertzberger, the new ideas found a platform that would dramatically enlarge its impact. The editors would initially meet at the
Academy before moving their weekly evenings to Hertzberger’s attic space. Exchange between teachers and students would be a recurring motif in the Forum issues. The first one, largely com-piled by Van Eyck and called ‘The Story of Another Idea’, was distributed at the last CIAM conference in Otterlo in 1959, organized by Jaap Bakema. It portrayed the history of CIAM and the beginnings of Team 10 from the perspective of its Dutch members, while it also made a strong plea for a new (or ‘other’) approach to architecture and plan-ning. Surprisingly, Van Eyck proposed Piet Blom’s student work as the ultimate and didactic example of this ‘other idea’, which was summarized with the evocative image of a casbah organisée.
The Algerian Kasbah was but one of the many ideal cities that can be found in the pages of the Forum journal of those years between 1959 and 1963, with a delayed issue published as late as 1967. Dogon villages, Pueblos, Mediterranean scenes of both urbane equipoise and lively socia-bility, amphitheatres such as the one in Arles, Diocletian’s Palace in Split and Joseph Rykwert’s ‘Idea of a Town’. Still, the ultimate city of Forum was undoubtedly the city of Amsterdam itself, par-ticularly so for the students it seems. For instance, both Blom and Van Stigt were born in Amsterdam. The Dutch capital was then still dirty, worn down, full of slums, but also brimming with everyday, urban life. The old working class neighborhoods of Jor-daan and de Pijp were sources of inspiration in the search for another architecture that was to bring about a new kind of social space beyond the clini-cal hygienic city of straightforward functionalism.
Social Space The notion of an inclusive, social space is one of the more appealing aspects of the struc-turalist discourse in architecture. Especially Herman Hertzberger would consistently elaborate this notion. When talking about structuralism or social space Hertzberger resists any definition in scientific or disciplinary terms, yet he tirelessly describes the phenomenon by countless observa-tions of all sorts of instances how people behave and how they appropriate space. The ‘social’ of structuralism was tailored against sheer econom-
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author objectnummer /
inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
An installation in four actsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
Ald
o va
n E
yck,
pla
ygro
und
Zaa
nho
f, A
mst
erd
am (
1948
)
Aldo van Eyck, Municipal Orphanage, Amsterdam (1955–1960)
6 7
ization of our cities and everyday lives. Also then in the 1950s, when Aldo van Eyck was building his Municipal Orphanage in Amsterdam and when he and the editors of the Forum journal laid out the ‘story of another idea’, the social and so-called humanizing of architecture and urban planning was part of a project to counter global moderni-zation and the homogenizing of urban spaces. So, what could be said about the kind of social space as proposed by the Dutch structuralists? What sort of architecture and what sort of city comes to the fore in their writings and projects?
The very word ‘structuralism’ can be called an afterthought or post-rationalism. While the term originates from anthropology and linguistics (Lévi-Strauss and De Saussure in particular), it wasn’t until the 1970s when it became current in architecture. Van Eyck would rather talk about the ‘configurative’ and Piet Blom spoke of ‘casbah-ism’ and ‘structure’. Hertzberger seemed to have pro-posed the term quite early on in the late 1960s, after which Arnulf Lüchinger popularized the term. It might be argued that we are looking at a chain of reinventions: with each new definition the idea of structuralism in architecture is renewed as well. The validity of the term is still disputed today, since any unambiguous definition seems hard to achieve. Still, there are a few reasons why the term Structuralism might help to understand the shift in architectural thinking that was brought about from the 1950s onward, and which hasn’t been absorbed completely until today.
First of all, there is the new awareness that archi-tecture is embedded, that it forms a part of the larger social structure that is society. That insight comes from anthropology. This might sound like kicking in an open door to some, but it is not. Con-ventional wisdom thinks of architecture (and cities) as accommodating individuals and communities. From this perspective the search for an archi-tecture of social space gets too often reduced to the idea of architecture as a frame for society and everyday life, a structure that accommodates indeed. The most utopian (and megalomaniac) proposals derive from such fallacy: universal structures that are open for all sorts of events, temporary infill and human appropriation, as in the case of the most radical examples of Constant and Yona Friedman, but the same can be said of some of the projects of Piet Blom and Jaap Bakema.
The reverse is usually overlooked or forgotten, namely that human activities and social institu-tions bring architecture into the world. To rethink structuralism in architecture and its specific achievement, it would be a most productive approach to also think of architecture itself as an event or piece of infill. It was Aldo van Eyck who mastered such reciprocal thinking like nobody else. His proposition of a city as a large house and a house as a small city is but the most famous and straightforward example. The sculpture pavilion in Sonsbeek (1966) is perhaps one of its most poetic demonstrations, in which the notions of structure and event are reversed, with the structure of the pavilion being derived from the events created by the encounters between the sculptures who inhabit the pavilion and the temporary visitors of the public.
The City of Events The city built up from a concatenation of events and encounters is a recurrent motif in structuralism. A building is no longer conceived of as an autonomous, solitary object, but as a piece of fabric enmeshed in a web of interrelations: between individuals, communities and their daily routines, between use and territory, built fabric and social fabric, or to put it in Ruth Benedict’s terms in ‘patterns of culture’. Alison Smithson called it ‘mat-building’.
Within the history of Dutch Structuralism, or its wider context of the last CIAMs and the Team 10 discourse on the future direction of modern archi-tecture, one finds many variants based on these two trends: one approach that seeks to accom-modate the social and its events by providing a structure, and another that conceives itself as an event part of a larger structure. The former is the more conventional one and is commonly associ-ated with the formal elaborations of structuralism, in particular Van Eyck’s Orphanage, Piet Blom’s Kasbah in Hengelo, or Hertzberger’s Centraal Beheer office building in Apeldoorn. The latter is the more irritant approach that was made opera-tive in the political debates and street fights over the course of urban renewal in the historic inner cities, Amsterdam in particular.
The formal characteristics of Dutch Structuralism present a paradox, since the basic starting point is the classic avant-garde notion that form is not an a priori given, but a result. Yet, looking back one cannot help but recognize a structuralist formal language based on the multiplying of small units into larger patterns or structures by way of all sorts of serialist compositional operations. One could even state that today we still speak of structur-alism in architecture, exactly because of its very formal specificity: the idea of labyrinthine clarity and the casbah organisée. It is also a naked kind of architecture, with untreated concrete, natural wood, bare bricks, that not only invite but actually
aim to provoke the user to appropriate the unfin-ished spaces of structuralism. The user is not just accommodated (as if such neutrality can exist in architecture), but actually forced into a certain mode of operating.
Within the urban renewal practices in Amsterdam, one finds an even more socially and politically charged approach that might be termed the second moment of Dutch Structuralism. In itself, the story is by now quite a familiar one, albeit rather stereotypical. During the 1960s, Amsterdam became a hotbed of anti-authoritarian activism and experimentation with Provo being the most radical exponent, clearing the way for the squat movement of the late 1970s and early 1980s. The inner-city and the historic districts were in desperate need of modernization. The large-scale schemes for new office development and motorway construction as planned for by the city raised immense protests. The construction of the underground, which was accompanied by massive demolition in the historic Nieuwmarkt neighbor-hood, triggered the start of street revolts against the city government. The city and its planning bureaucracy were forced to drop the initial plans and adopt a new approach. Supported by the local citizens, Aldo van Eyck together with students from the Amsterdam Academy of Architecture, espe-cially his later office partner Theo Bosch, would bring an entirely different approach to the recon-struction of the neighborhood. As early as 1970,
In 1967, the city of Amsterdam organ-ized an open competition to end the debates on a new town hall, which had lasted for decades already. 803 entries were submitted from all over the world. Among other things the competition meant a breakthrough for Dutch Structuralism since the new approach was recognized as an alternative for the large-scale projects for the Amsterdam inner city that were planned at the time.
The projects of Herman Hertzberger and John Habraken show two very different tendencies how to deal with the urban context. Hertzberger pro-posed a building that is a metaphoric image of a small city with a grid of small towers and inner streets and in the centre a handful of monumental volumes that house the ceremonial and democratic functions. Its diagonal positioning sets it apart from the old fabric of the city. Habraken based his design on the urban structure of the city; the construction of the new town hall, its measurements and zoning were derived from the way the urban blocks are divided up in smaller plots. His design is organized around two streets and two squares following the basic morphology of the site. A basic structure of party walls is provided. In his view each city department could hire its own architect to build their offices within this open structure.
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
architect / author
architect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
J. Habraken 1967
H. Hertzberger 1967
98
piecemeal and mixed development together with a highly differentiated housing typology and restric-tion of car access was to set the new standard of urban development.
The City of Architecture The new approach implied a city made out of architecture and not so much an architecture of the city, a proposition which was to become internationally popular among architects and urban planners mostly due to Aldo Rossi’s book of the same title and published in 1966. To comply with any hypothesized disciplinary autonomy and to follow the inherent hierarchies of urbanism and architecture was anathema to Van Eyck cum suis. To start with architecture and the small scale was an intent provocation as to resist the mech-anisms of planning and any top-down approach. Architecture was to be not just an act of the imagination to go beyond functionalism, but in this struggle for the city it also aimed to be an irritant to prevent assimilation in the smooth politics of a post-industrial, global era. The projects built in the Nieuwmarkt neighborhood invariably testify of this contrary mentality. It is an architecture that provokingly reappropriated the old city, a series of events and happenings that still highlight the pattern of former gaps in the urban fabric caused by the earlier demolitions.
If big institutional and corporate buildings would propose to ‘fuck context’ (in the famous words of Koolhaas), these small pieces of city events clearly state to fuck autonomy of the architectural disci-pline and the institutions that assign architecture to this sort of space in the larger dispositif of the power structure. From this, it also becomes logic that any classical approach in composition is left behind in this event-architecture: the cultivation of awkwardly unstylish facades and their materializa-tion, the unorthodox use of colors, they all signal the unruly kind of urban lifestyles of the period, just as they are a demonstration of a democracy of popular dissent rather than the current neo-liberal consensus. With the projects for the Nieuwmarkt neighborhood, most of which are still considered controversial within the architectural profession, Dutch Structuralism seems to find its ultimate urban definition. Structuralism itself becomes
embedded, a piece of the accumulation of histori-cal experience that makes up the European city, in this case the city of Amsterdam.
In a way, the numerous designs of playgrounds by Van Eyck, which he started to realize from 1947 onward, already held the seeds of such a defini-tion. The events created by playing children and supported by the configurations of elementary play furniture were to regenerate the fabric of post-war Amsterdam, both the old, historic neighborhoods and the new districts on the outskirts of the city. Still, the project of playgrounds aimed for a new harmony, such a project of reconciliation seems gone in the practice of urban renewal.
Ultimately, it was Piet Blom who delivered the endpoint of the city of events in his project for the Oude Haven in Rotterdam. He was called in by the city to redirect the development of the inner city into a more urban and differentiated environment that had to substitute a planned motorway and bridge landing. Blom’s approach leads to a still unsurpassable gesture one might claim (hence its quality as an endpoint). He succeeded in combin-ing the populist with the experimental, pop art with the historicist. Since the site was almost a terrain vague, only the so-called White House office tower and a row of old houses had survived the German bombardment of the Second World War, Blom decided to create a collage of faux city fragments by his own hand. The whole project consists of four separate projects all designed by Blom with the one of the Cube Houses as the most prominent and famous one. Together with the library by Van den Broek and Bakema on the north edge of the site, a vast collection of structuralist typologies is realized here. A collage of interconnected bits and pieces of clusters, Kasbahs, streets-in-the-air and terraced, horizontal landscapes, each fragment an example of the house-city analogy. Together, they create at least two big spaces for encoun-ter, the dock of the Oude Haven with its bustle of cafés and restaurants and the eerily quiet raised plaza under the cluster of Cube Houses that cross the busy street Blaak. Especially the latter, a very bright place because of the omnipresent yellow and the light coming down through the openings of the roof of cubes still defies any categorization.
H. Hertzberger 1967
J. Habraken 1967
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year objectnummer /
inventarisnummer year
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yearobjectnummer /
inventarisnummer year
architect / author architect / author
architect / authorarchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
H. Hertzberger 1967
J. Habraken 196710 11
J. Habraken 1967
H. Hertzberger 1967
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
architect / author
architect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City 1312
Speak, Memory!Guus Beumer
I was a student when doubt had already made itself felt. In the mid-1970s I walked into the Social Academy at Westblaak, Rotterdam – an 18-year old, embarking on my studies. You might say the social academy was one, if not the ideological center of the welfare state. Not only intended to shape the critical contours of everything that ‘social’ could achieve. It also provided the sup-port staff of social workers, community workers and socio-cultural workers for an intricate infra-structure of temporary refuges/shelters, crisis-, community- and youth centers, and the like. It was the time when the social aspect was sup-posed to function as the dynamic motor for a new society, aided by architecture and urban planning as agents of change. The academy building, more or less across the street from the architecture office of Van den Broek and Bakema in Posthoo-rnstraat, had the typical aesthetic of its day, with endless gravel-screed floors, flanked in places by pale grey walls of aerated concrete slabs. In addition, the interior was characterized, apart from a huge rope wall-hanging, by pragmatism. Looking back, it was mainly the vast numbers of washing machines (where else could a student do the laundry?) and the white Formica tables littered with plastic beakers that were typical appointments. From the very first day – and ultimately I spent four years there – every standpoint, every political truth, every personal ambition was analyzed, discussed and in the end rejected, so that everything seemed to be permanently in a state of flux, never to solidify. The first day all the lecturers were on strike, often themselves only four, five years older than myself; they refused to continue as ‘lesson-merchants’, demanding that the student take the responsibility for his own learning program. In my final weeks, the plenary meetings – the last vestige of an institu-tional structure – were dominated by paralyzing criticism of the individual character of the social infrastructure, which from the inside out….
Why am I writing this, why do precisely these anecdotes surface when I’m asked about the background of Het Nieuwe Instituut’s choice for long-term research into structuralism? For me, the reason lies in the analogy: I was a student when doubt had already made itself felt, doubt about welfare work, doubt about a social infrastructure, doubt about the eternal polarity between bot-tom-up and top-down, doubt about architecture and, by extension, urban renewal and community work as an instrument for social engineering and, of course, doubt about the idea of an equitable society. Doubt as regards the social aspect that Hans Achterhuis was to formulate brilliantly in ‘De markt voor welzijn en geluk’ [The Wellbeing and Prosperity Market] (1979). And those doubts, that were so at odds with the ideas of the post-war reconstruction genera-tion like Van Eyck and Bakema, inevitably formed the gateway to that other ideology, that of the market, of the consumer. I also remember the moment of intellectual release when all those reader-unfriendly publications by companies like Suhrkamp, for instance about false consciousness (1971, Wolfgang Fritz Haug, Kritik der Wahrenäs-thetik [Critique of Commodity Aesthetics]) made way for a more perceptive description of the superficial, which could cover every antithe-sis, and pop culture, fashion and punk were not automatically disqualified as expressions of civil proto-fascism. Nowadays, we know that that mar-ket and its endless flexibility did not provide the promised answer either, and once more a pro-ductive moment is being sought and the domain of the ‘social’, including the ideology of top-down versus bottom-up, and the possible role of design are being reassessed. Just when the polarity between market and government, between con-sumer and citizen, appears to have been abolished and we refer to ‘a culture of convergence’ (Henry Jenkins), to a creative industry and the moment when the contract between the citizen as a con-sumer and the government as the market, should be revised. In other words, now is the moment when the deployment and arsenal of Structuralism are again experiencing social urgency – to use it as a lens to take a fresh, yet investigative look at the present situation, with the infinite wealth of the institute’s archive providing a helping hand.
The artist and cultural philosopher Joop Hardy (1918–1983) exerted a major influence on the shaping of ideas within Dutch Structuralism. He was an editor of the journal Forum, a tutor at the Academy of Architecture in Amsterdam, and later a professor at Delft University of Technology (next to being Director of the Art Academy in Enschede, AKI). He published very little and lives on largely in the stories of con-temporaries. The archive of the Academy of Architecture contains an occasional lec-ture text such as the one published here.
Hardy’s teaching was associative, firing the imagination. He liked to refer to André Mal-raux’s idea of a ‘musée imaginaire’, which he defined as the simultaneous presence of all traditions from all corners of the world and from all periods. He was famous for his extensive collection of slides, his ‘imagetheque’, featuring images from the decadent Viennese fin-de-siècle period to the natives of Mekong.
Students were confronted in his classes with a cross section from the world of an-thropology, psychoanalysis and art history, from Ruth Benedict’s Patterns of Culture and Nikolaus Pevsner’s Pioneers of Modern Design to Johan Huizinga’s Homo Ludens.
A V A N T - G A R D E
Introduction by J. HardyDelivered onSaturday 8 February 1964
Ladies and Gentlemen,
When the three items planned for the ‘I 10’ exhibition:
small exhibition relating to the twenties and thirties2 or more seminarsexcursion
were being prepared, the Dutch monthly Goed Wonen got Simon Vinkenoog to conduct a survey on the concept ‘avant-garde’.
The survey revealed complete con-fusion concerning that concept. So it seemed like a good idea to focus attention on the term avant-garde at the start of this talk, since an evalua-tion of the twenties and thirties greatly depends on how the term is inter-preted. Also, it offers an opportunity to
scrutinize post-war avant-garde, which may or may not have existed, and link it up with the present day, thus avoid-ing all too pronounced a historical or museological attitude vis-à-vis the interwar period. In order to liven up the discussion, there is also a small exhibition com-prising three partitions devoted to the post-1945 avant-garde – with a view to highlighting a specific mood or couleur locale.
Avant-garde / Advance-guard: it implies something must follow: a group, a crowd. That group calls its predecessor the ‘avant-garde’. Someone sees himself as a precursor, pioneer, trailblazer of an idea, an idealistic group. It sees itself as avant-gardist of a society, community, partnership. The avant-garde plays its part for the guard, the upholders, the citi-zens, the mainstream admirers. For the avant-gardist the fact of being avant-gardist is a social role.
Think of Brecht, a photo of whom is pinned up here, and of the socio-an-archistic tenor of his early pieces and the man himself, who took hours in the morning to fix his curiously-cut hair onto his skull with water. And his carefully selected cap – all of which was intended to underline his position as precursor and trail-blazer.
Think of Dada and the role every member had to play in the propa-ganda circus.
Think of the Futurists and Surrealists and all the other activist groups and revolutionary circles who, with their art, as well as their actions and behav-iour, pressed for a sea-change of Man and society.
Think too of the anarchists, the big-gest of all social idealists.
Think of the Bauhaus with its ethic of material and technology, and passion for instructing, guiding, educating.
All this evidences an optimistic social idealism that frequently appears in highly exhibitionist guise, com-plemented by the voyeurism of the bourgeois and the art lover.
J. Hardy 1964 J. Hardy 1964
On the face of it, the present-day avant-garde, the existence of which I acknowledge, a priori, differs primarily from that of the pre-war period in a social sense. It does recruit support by way of stencilled leaflets, but other than that it is resigned and does not compete for society’s goodwill. Existentialist, and very aware of beat and hip freeloading off an organism that they despise and deny, but thank heavens without feelings of guilt. They benefit from a situation to achieve a certain modality.
Art is a term for the ‘guard’, for the guardians, the tenacious, the con-servers, the last of the Mohicans and, lastly, the OASers.* It has been replaced, not by ‘imagery’ – still a romantic watchword – but by alive ‘inter-est’, interior-ity, reacting time and again to the expressivity of reality, the world, the occurrence. Anyone singling out expressivity alone (so noncommittally) loses out. When a small sect is ‘in’, it operates on the fringe of a society, it is completely ‘out’, outside, exterior, status, status symbol, welfare state, sunshine consumer, in word (and I hope the contempt is clearly evident): tourist. A tourist, even in his own city and among the status symbols sur-rounding him, even in his own home.
This touristy world is ruled by hard-boiled political gangsters, who control the entire arena of manipulable reality. In contrast with those ‘power-brokers’ are the ‘softies’ – the marihuana, hash, and L.S.D. boys and girls, who maintain their shaky existence until they are perfidiously absorbed in the prosperity camp. Slapdash Juliette Greco was one of the first to advance from her concrete basement to the luxury hotel. Jean Genêt’s story demonstrates that not even prison can offer sufficient pro-tection. Colin Wilson became a literary insider with his book The Outsider. We might be cynical and say: it’s always manipulation, one with orgasms, another with power, and in the empty ‘in-between’, the intellectual manipulates ‘sacred reason’ as the only criterion for his freely-rambling criticism.
Someone believing in something, is naïve and, since 1800 (after Roman-ticism) has no raison d’être – except as a Sunday painter, but he has no longer been of interest since Rous-seau the customs officer either. Someone who believes in nothing is not a nihilist (since nihilism is a happy feeling), but a cynic… Someone who takes action is a criminal (Goethe), although, accord-ing to Sartre it isn’t bad if you dirty your hands…. Someone who doesn’t take action is not a ‘wise man’, but an acces-sory…. Someone who pursues something is fixated and mentally doomed. Someone who acts normally is a conformist, but he who acts abnor-mally because it’s the done thing is a conformist of nonconformity. Someone who acts normally because that isn’t ‘done’, is a noncon-formist of conformism. Someone who displays power (“power is inherently evil”, Burckhardt) is a fascist.
Someone who abhors power is not a pacifist (because it goes with the idealism of the twenties and thirties), but a yobbish individual. Someone who creates a place wherever he may be, is an enviable individual. But he who creates places everywhere where people have to be, resembles a terrorist more than an architect. What does architecture look like when designed from the perspective of a sleeping bag.
When, in our total negation (of both the chair and the city) we go looking for allies – allies prior to 1945 – we discover Jarry and Dada to start with. With Ubu, pataphysics is the splendid simultaneity of physical phynance [finance] and merde [shit]. And with Dada, it’s Marcel Duchamp’s foremost, humblest gesture – the beer mat. It was preceded by the spectac-ular bicycle wheel; the urinal and the bottle rack followed. It not only meant art must exist, art is manifest, but also represented
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year objectnummer /
inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author architect / author
architect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
14 15
J. Hardy 1964
the reality of the beer mat compared with the reality-deficient artwork, the compactness of cardboard compared with the emptiness of art. What Duchamp proclaimed was: thanks to the willingness – the deci-sion, choice, gesture – all ready-made art, i.e. ‘baptized objects’, that has lost its innocence because of its selec-tion, and can, therefore, enter into a person’s imaginary world. In 1960 that position was taken as the premise of neo-dadaists or neo-Merz à la Rauschenberg, and the neo-realists in Paris.
In a reaction to the weariness, the fatigue vis-à-vis lyrical abstraction, abstract expressionism, tachisme, action painting and vitalism, sym-bols whose value could no longer be defined, whose forms had lost their enchantment and magic, that (as showman-like material-aesthetic, industrial mannerism) had been drawn into the realm of affluence and chic luxury – a kind of Domus mentality. Then there are the everyday problems, the everyday conflict with a social reality that is becoming increasingly independent and threat-ening – propelled by an ever more powerfully mechanized civilization – to destroy the individual and cause him to abandon simple, individual and instructive needs. As an exponent of all those who are in danger of being overwhelmed, Nor-man Mailer says: that sacrifice is too great for a civilization that has moved only a short distance from barbarism.
As a reaction to the ambiguity of all the marks, notches, tattoos, sen-tences, letters, signs, craters, sores and burns, the wounding or vital actions, the products of accident and neglect, only those things remained for which one held oneself responsible. ‘Informal’ was also ambiguous. As Henk Peeters wrote in the exhibition catalogue for Herman de Vries at Metz: “A considerable austerity set in and, with that purism of the informal, we crossed the threshold to a new period.” In my opinion, the greatest purism could already be found in Yves Klein’s work, in the monochrome of his mechanically applied industrial blue. In that ‘perceivable emptiness’, in
that minimum of personal intervention, we found the source of 0 = zero.
From there, the multitude of new movements began: architecture of air sculpture of fire moved movement (Tinguely) snare pictures (Spoerri)
fixation of reality, unveiling of inti-macy décollage
The solidity of New Realism – that anti-symbolic, anti-romantic, anti-aes-thetic, anti-cubist, anti-baroque and anti-abstract, but pro-social or pro-so-ciological reality – teaches us that the world of things produces a permanent image and that, thanks to choice, can be elevated to a work of art.
That interpretation of life as pure expression, as a great happening, has taken poetic adventure to a new level. It is no longer a noncommittal game, but an existential matter.
“Making his own life an instrument of his liberation” (the link to Zen is clear) and assuming the responsibility for the existence of every object that I raise up because of its expressivity. (Art is showing, never explaining.) This is about a post-existentialist appropriation of the world of things. The victory over ‘nausea’, the positive continuation of the ‘roman-chose’ of the ‘force des choses’ to neo-constructivism that is in evidence everywhere. A conclusive step on the way to the conclusive conquest of the world as the beginning and end of all meaning.
A. The avant-garde between the two world wars was committed to society, idealist regarding technology, pro-gress, the salvation and liberation of mankind imbued with an ideal world empty of ‘things’. After the existential catharsis of emptiness, loneliness, boredom, disgust and the demise of aesthetic categories and artistic blue-prints comesB. the post-1945 avant-garde, com-mitted to itself and, in addition, to the world of ‘things’, matter and objects. They are small, almost closed communities juxtaposed to an ‘open society’ which absorbs everything that
submits, adapts, socializes. That includes – pursuing the art theme – the open museum that admits every manifestation, attracts every event and, in doing so, neutral-izes, invalidates it.
Through S. Giedion we are acquainted with architecture’s relation with suprematists, constructivists, neoplas-ticists, purists, geometric abstracts, or architecture as a cubist artwork. The connection with Dada and surrealists has always been awkward. The nausea, alienation and the whole process of appropriation, of integration and identification of anti-roman, roman chose, Pro-Ro-mane, nouvelle vague, cinéma vérité, modern poetry to facilitate an existence among obscure, no longer interpretable things has passed archi-tecture by.
If the poet is the bad conscience of his time (Saint-John Perse), the architect is, by definition, the optimis-tic conscience. The New Objectivity testified to that. But in the end the architect identified himself so much with the current state of society, its superficial problems and superficial optimism, that architectural differences acquired characteristics of superficial differ-entiation, and most architects can be defined as waste-makers.
I hope to have given sufficient offence to provoke a stimulating discussion. One that will have first to determine its own position before judgement can be made on the words of the twenties and thirties. After all, this is not about abstrac-tions like space, interpenetration, immaterialization, simultaneity, et cetera, but about a reality that exists outside all art, but of which, through art, we must first get a conception.
J. Hardy
* Organisation de l’Armée Secrète, active in Algeria from 1961–1962 [editor’s note].
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
Van
Klin
gere
n, D
e M
eerp
aal,
Dro
nten
(19
67)
Van
Klin
gere
n, ‘t
Kar
rega
t, E
ind
hove
n (1
973
)
1716
CO
MP
ETEN
CE
AN
D
PER
FOR
MA
NC
E IN
S
TRU
CTU
RA
LIS
T B
UIL
DIN
GS
Dur
ing
the
Str
uctu
ralis
m
exhi
biti
on, w
eekl
y 's
alon
s' w
ere
held
to
disc
uss
vari
ous
aspe
cts
of s
truc
tura
lism
wit
h ex
pert
s in
a
publ
ic s
etti
ng.
Aft
er t
he fi
rst
salo
n on
Dut
ch
Str
uctu
ralis
m, a
n e-
mai
l cor
re-
spon
denc
e de
velo
ped
betw
een
cura
tor
Dir
k va
n de
n H
euve
l, re
sear
cher
Pie
t Vol
laar
d, a
nd
Volu
me
edit
or A
rjen
Oos
ter -
man
dis
cuss
ing
the
succ
ess
of
stru
ctur
alis
m's
the
ory
and
form
al
lang
uage
on
the
one
hand
, and
th
e ac
tual
per
form
ance
of
stru
c -tu
ralis
t bu
ildin
gs o
n th
e ot
her.
One
of
the
gues
ts, P
iet V
olla
ard
men
tion
ed a
less
er k
now
n pr
o -je
ct o
f H
erm
an H
ertz
berg
er: t
he
com
mun
ity
cent
re D
e S
chal
m in
D
even
ter,
desi
gned
in 1
972
and
built
bet
wee
n 19
74 a
nd 1
976,
as
an e
xam
ple
of f
aile
d S
truc
tur -
alis
m t
o hi
ghlig
ht t
he li
mit
s of
st
ruct
ural
ism
in a
rchi
tect
ure.
On
26 S
ep. 2
014
, at
00:1
5
Pie
t Vo
llaar
d w
rote
:
Gen
tlem
en,
The
Dev
ente
r p
roje
ct is
inte
rest
-in
g fo
r its
line
ar, o
pen
, min
imal
st
ruct
ure,
tha
t ca
n b
e ex
tend
ed
(by
the
inha
bita
nts
of
cour
se).
A
bit
like
the
mul
titud
e o
f m
egas
truc
ture
s in
the
196
0s; a
co
nstr
uctiv
e su
pp
ort
(a
linea
r sk
ylig
ht in
bet
wee
n tw
o r
ow
s o
f
sup
po
rts)
allo
win
g cl
ip-o
n ex
ten -
sio
ns. T
he p
roje
ct p
rese
ntat
ion
in
Arn
olf
Lüch
inge
r , H
erm
an H
ertz
-b
erge
r 19
59–
1986
sta
rts
with
fo
ur
cart
oo
nesq
ue d
raw
ings
of
four
p
hase
s o
f ap
pro
pri
atio
n. S
o f
ar s
o go
od
. But
the
nex
t p
ages
sho
w
the
‘co
mp
lete
d’ c
om
mun
ity c
ente
r (w
as t
he p
roce
ss o
f ap
pro
pri
atio
n al
read
y fin
ishe
d d
urin
g d
esig
n?
;-).
It’s
no
t m
entio
ned
in t
he t
ext
if p
artic
ipat
ion
of
the
inha
bita
nts
of
the
neig
hbo
rho
od
was
par
t o
f th
e p
roce
ss, b
ut t
he d
escr
iptio
n su
gges
ts t
hat
the
inha
bita
nts
them
selv
es o
rder
ed p
refa
b st
ruct
ures
and
ad
ded
tho
se t
o th
e b
asic
str
uctu
re. I
t is
unc
lear
if
this
is w
hat
real
ly h
app
ened
, but
b
oth
the
aut
hor
and
the
arc
hite
ct
(I p
resu
me)
wer
e d
isap
po
inte
d w
ith t
he e
nd r
esul
t. "T
he r
esul
t is
d
isap
po
intin
g co
mp
ared
to
the
gr
eate
r sp
atia
l po
ssib
ilitie
s th
at
an a
rchi
tect
mig
ht h
ave
off
ered
th
em."
Ap
pro
pri
atio
n w
asn’
t to
b
e le
ft t
o t
he u
ser,
evid
ently
, and
H
ertz
ber
ger
wo
uld
kee
p t
his
in
his
ow
n ha
nds
fro
m n
ow
on.
A
po
t p
lant
on
a p
arap
et h
ere
and
ther
e is
per
mis
sib
le, b
ut a
dd
ing
an u
gly
pre
fab
ro
om
is d
ow
nrig
ht
‘dis
app
oin
ting’
.
Had
to
thi
nk o
f C
edri
c P
rice
’s
Inte
r-A
ctio
n C
entr
e in
Lo
n -d
on
(197
7) t
oo
, one
of
the
few
p
roje
cts
he a
ctua
lly b
uilt.
Thi
s IA
C a
lso
co
nsis
ts o
f a
stru
c -tu
ral s
upp
ort
(in
thi
s ca
se a
w
ell-
cons
erve
d o
pen
-end
ed
stee
l co
nstr
uctio
n) f
or
whi
ch
user
s co
uld
pro
duc
e th
eir
ow
n ad
diti
ons
. Ced
ric
was
so
mew
hat
smar
ter t
han
Her
man
by
pro
vid
-in
g a
cata
logu
e o
f av
aila
ble
off
th
e sh
elf
cont
aine
rs a
nd
uni
ts. A
nd if
I’m
no
t m
ista
ken,
he
incl
uded
a c
om
put
er p
rogr
am
to g
uid
e th
e p
roce
ss o
f ap
pro
-p
riat
ion.
The
idea
was
tha
t th
is
wel
l-co
ated
ste
el s
truc
ture
wo
uld
out
last
the
firs
t p
hase
plu
g-in
s an
d b
e ad
just
ed o
ver t
ime.
And
th
at’s
exa
ctly
wha
t ha
pp
ened
. H
ow
ever
, by
the
year
200
0 it
had
bec
om
e a
corr
od
ed m
ess
as
resu
lt o
f th
e o
ver-
enth
usia
stic
ex
tens
ion
and
den
sific
atio
n by
its
use
rs in
co
mb
inat
ion
with
in
tens
ive
use;
des
troy
ed b
y its
o
wn
succ
ess.
Whe
n C
edri
c fa
ns p
rote
sted
ag
ains
t d
emo
litio
n, it
was
Pri
ce
him
self
who
sai
d t
hat
dem
olit
ion
was
the
bet
ter
op
tion.
The
str
uc-
ture
had
out
lived
its
time.
And
so
it w
as d
emo
lishe
d, i
nclu
din
g th
e st
eel c
ons
truc
tion
that
was
stil
l in
goo
d s
hap
e; m
ayb
e th
ey r
euse
d it
else
whe
re.
Pie
t
On
29 S
ep. 2
014
, at
11:5
2
Dir
k va
n d
en H
euve
l wro
te:
Than
ks P
iet,
Her
tzb
erge
r d
id s
how
thi
s p
ro-
ject
as
an e
xam
ple
of
failu
re in
hi
s le
ctur
es a
t TU
Del
ft. B
ut it
s fa
ilure
is p
rim
arily
on
the
leve
l of
bea
utifu
l fo
rm, o
r le
t’s s
ay o
f th
e la
ngua
ge o
f ar
chite
ctur
e its
elf.
As
com
mun
ity c
ente
r, it
still
see
ms
to p
erfo
rm w
ell a
nd a
s p
roce
ss it
is
suc
cess
ful t
oo
; new
and
firm
er
add
itio
ns w
ere
add
ed, a
s G
oo
gle
stre
et v
iew
sho
ws
:-)
Bes
t, D
irk
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author objectnummer /
inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
Pla
n o
f ‘t
Kar
rega
t sh
ow
ing
op
en a
cces
s an
d f
unct
ion
mix
: tw
o s
cho
ols
, sho
ps,
and
a c
om
mun
ity
cent
er
Her
man
Her
tzbe
rger
, Co
mm
unity
Cen
ter
D
e S
chal
m, D
even
ter
(197
4)A
ntic
ipat
ed d
evel
op
men
t
18 19
On
30
Sep
. 201
4, a
t 23
:18
A
rjen
Oo
ster
man
wro
te:
Can
I ad
d H
ertz
ber
ger’s
Bo
uwR
AI
hous
ing
in A
lmer
e fr
om
199
0 to
thi
s fa
scin
atin
g se
ries
? It
an
ticip
ated
ext
ensi
on
with
out
p
resc
rib
ed e
xten
sio
n m
od
ules
(by
p
rovi
din
g ad
diti
ona
l fo
und
atio
n if
I rec
all c
orr
ectly
). T
hat
cont
rib
-ut
es t
o a
mo
re n
uanc
ed p
ictu
re
of
Her
tzb
erge
r an
d e
xten
sio
n p
erha
ps?
Arj
en O
n 1
Oct
. 201
4, a
t 13
:18
P
iet V
olla
ard
wro
te:
Hi A
rjen
,
Ser
ious
cha
nce
that
the
se
hous
es w
ere
not
exte
nded
or
chan
ged
. And
if s
o, t
hen
mo
st
likel
y d
iffer
ently
fro
m w
hat
HH
p
rovi
sio
ned
. Tha
t at
leas
t is
the
co
nclu
sio
n yo
u ca
n d
raw
fro
m
muc
h fu
rthe
r re
achi
ng a
dap
tab
le
hous
ing
in L
unet
ten
(Utr
echt
) by
S
AR
. The
ho
uses
wer
e fit
ted
out
w
ith h
igh-
tech
wal
ls t
hat
coul
d b
e sh
ifted
or
rem
ove
d w
ith a
sim
ple
cl
ick
syst
em. T
his
way
it s
houl
d b
e ea
sy t
o c
reat
e an
oth
er r
oo
m
or
a b
igge
r sp
ace.
Occ
upan
ts
also
rec
eive
d e
xtra
wal
ls. Y
ears
la
ter,
hard
ly a
nyth
ing
had
bee
n ch
ange
d a
nd t
he e
xtra
wal
ls w
ere
still
sta
ndin
g id
le in
the
ir st
ora
ge.
The
dem
and
fo
r ad
just
able
ho
usin
g is
oft
en e
xagg
erat
ed.
Ap
pro
pri
atio
n is
bei
ng d
one
w
ith p
aint
, pla
nts,
fur
nitu
re, a
nd
som
e p
ost
ers
on
the
wal
l. I s
ee
as p
rob
lem
tha
t so
me
arch
itect
s th
ink
they
hav
e to
pro
vid
e ‘s
om
e-
thin
g’ –
a s
pat
ial c
onfi
gura
tion,
a
tech
nica
l fac
ility
– t
o e
nco
urag
e an
d f
acili
tate
suc
h ap
pro
pri
atio
n.
That
‘so
met
hing
’ is
oft
en p
reve
nt-
ing
exac
tly t
hat.
That
’s w
hy t
he ‘d
oo
rzo
nwo
ning
’ [li
tera
l tra
nsla
tion:
sun
cro
ss-
ing
hous
e; a
cro
ssw
all d
wel
ling
typ
e ro
w h
ous
e, o
f w
hich
mo
re
than
a m
illio
n w
ere
bui
ld in
the
N
ethe
rlan
ds
in t
he p
ost
WW
2 p
erio
d, P
V]
is w
orl
d c
ham
pio
n ap
pro
pri
atio
n o
ptio
ns. I
t is
the
ab
solu
te n
eutr
al h
ous
e w
itho
ut
any
arch
itect
ural
cha
ract
eris
tics
(and
stil
l with
rem
arka
ble
var
ia-
tion,
with
in t
he t
ight
lim
its o
f its
si
ze a
nd ‘a
rchi
tect
ure’
). B
ut s
om
e la
rger
siz
e an
d s
pat
ial n
eutr
ality
d
on’
t ha
ve t
o r
esul
t in
a b
uild
ing
with
out
arc
hite
cto
nic
char
ac-
teri
stic
s, a
s V
an K
linge
ren’
s D
e M
eerp
aal i
n D
ront
en d
emo
n -st
rate
s. It
is h
ard
ly m
ore
tha
n a
stee
l-an
d-g
lass
she
d w
ith a
fri
nge
of
amen
ities
. But
ver
y ‘a
rchi
tec -
toni
c’ a
nd f
ar m
ore
ap
pro
pri
able
th
an m
any
a st
ruct
ural
ist
bui
ldin
g,
incl
udin
g va
n K
linge
ren’
s o
wn
‘str
uctu
ralis
t’ ‘t
Kar
rega
t in
Ein
d-
hove
n. I
wo
uld
n’t
kno
w o
f an
oth
er
bui
ldin
g th
at a
llow
ed s
o m
any
diff
eren
t us
es w
itho
ut p
hysi
cal
adju
stm
ents
.
Tho
ugh
neut
ral,
it d
id h
ave
a cl
ever
sp
atia
l co
ncep
t w
ith ju
st
eno
ugh
(tho
ugh
som
etim
es ir
ri-
tatin
g) in
duc
emen
ts f
or
diff
eren
t us
es. T
hat’s
why
De
Mee
rpaa
l is
bet
ter t
han
an o
rdin
ary
shed
of
the
sam
e si
ze. A
neu
tral
‘alm
ost
o
kay’
she
d is
no
t an
op
tion.
P
iet
On
1 O
ct. 2
014
, at
22:2
6 A
rjen
O
ost
erm
an w
rote
:
Hel
lo P
iet,
Fasc
inat
ing
exam
ple
s an
d I
end
ors
e yo
ur o
bse
rvat
ions
on
adap
tab
ility
. Hig
hly
ove
r-es
-te
emed
issu
e, I
thin
k, a
t le
ast
whe
n it
com
es t
o p
lug-
and
-pla
y ad
apta
bili
ty. M
ost
ho
uses
are
ad
apta
ble
, as
the
cont
aine
r fo
r co
nstr
uctio
n w
aste
ind
icat
es, t
hat
arri
ves
with
eve
ry n
ew o
ccup
ant
or
hous
e o
wne
r. K
itche
n an
d b
athr
oo
m a
re t
o b
e re
mo
ved
by d
efau
lt an
d m
ost
of
the
time
ther
e ar
e to
o m
any
wal
ls t
oo
. B
ut I
also
witn
ess
an in
clin
atio
n to
ext
end
the
new
pro
per
ty (
row
ho
use,
sem
i-d
etac
hed
or
sing
le
fam
ily h
ous
e). F
or
som
e re
aso
n,
peo
ple
live
in a
ho
use
that
is
too
cra
mp
ed. I
f an
op
tion,
thi
s is
so
lved
by
add
ing
a b
ackp
ack
(ext
ra fl
oo
r o
r co
nser
vato
ry).
A
nyw
ay, i
t ha
pp
ens
a lo
t an
d so
meo
ne li
ke H
ertz
ber
ger
cons
id-
ered
tha
t an
issu
e to
inco
rpo
rate
in
his
des
igns
. I t
hink
we
sho
uld
diff
eren
tiate
bet
wee
n ho
usin
g an
d a
co
mm
unity
cen
ter,
whi
ch
com
es w
ith d
iffer
ent
po
ssib
ili-
ties.
It w
oul
d b
e in
tere
stin
g to
kn
ow
if t
he t
rend
is f
or
smal
ler
apar
tmen
ts, c
ause
d b
y en
ergy
co
nsid
erat
ions
or
smal
ler
size
d fa
mili
es (
not
the
tren
d w
here
I liv
e by
the
way
; in
my
tow
n yo
u sh
oul
d h
ave
five
kid
s to
mee
t th
e no
rm).
Tha
t’ll b
e a
chal
leng
e fo
r ar
chite
cts,
if t
hat’s
wha
t is
to
com
e. N
ot
sure
if s
truc
tura
lism
is
a gr
eat
help
in f
acin
g th
at t
ask.
Che
ers,
Arj
en
On
2 O
ct. 2
014
, at
07:0
9
Dir
k va
n d
en H
euve
l wro
te:
Let
me
chip
in.
Bak
ema’
s ‘g
roei
wo
ning
en’
(ext
end
able
dw
ellin
gs)
in E
ind
-ho
ven
are
ano
ther
nic
e ex
amp
le
– Li
ke B
ijlsm
a, M
adel
eine
M
aask
ant,
and
Eire
en S
chre
urs
wro
te a
n ar
ticle
fo
r O
ase
abo
ut
that
– a
nd if
I’m
no
t m
ista
ken,
ev
eryt
hing
was
so
wel
l des
igne
d,
that
no
thin
g ha
d c
hang
ed. A
lso
a m
atte
r o
f ge
nero
us s
izin
g, t
hey
dis
cove
red
.S
truc
tura
lism
is a
bo
ut t
he
lang
uage
of
arch
itect
ure.
Suc
h a
lang
uage
is c
onn
ecte
d t
o a
ll ki
nds
of
soci
al is
sues
– fl
exib
ility
no
t b
eing
the
mo
st d
eter
min
ing
one
fo
r st
ruct
ural
ism
– b
ut a
t th
e en
d o
f th
e d
ay it
is a
bo
ut a
rchi
-te
ctur
e its
elf.
Wha
t ne
w la
ngua
ge
can
we
inve
nt t
o d
eal e
ffec
-tiv
ely
with
wha
t in
phi
loso
phi
cal
term
s is
cal
led
our
uni
nhab
itab
le
wo
rld
? It
is a
cul
tura
l iss
ue, n
ot
a te
chni
cal o
ne –
as
far
as y
ou
can
sep
arat
e th
ese
two
of
cour
se.
Ap
pro
pri
atio
n an
d in
duc
emen
ts
for
use
are
muc
h m
ore
cen
tral
to
Str
uctu
ralis
m –
and
whe
n it
com
es t
o t
hese
are
as, t
here
is
pro
bab
ly m
ore
fri
ctio
n to
be
foun
d b
etw
een
amb
itio
n an
d re
sult
than
with
reg
ard
to
flex
ibil -
ity. I
n th
e w
ork
of V
an E
yck,
firs
t an
d f
ore
mo
st. V
an E
yck
is a
n ar
t -is
t; H
ertz
ber
ger
rep
eats
tim
e an
d ag
ain
that
Van
Eyc
k d
idn’
t w
ant
anyt
hing
to
cha
nge
whe
n th
e B
erla
ge In
stitu
te w
as a
bo
ut t
o o
ccup
y hi
s O
rpha
nage
in A
mst
er-
dam
. Tha
t d
oes
n’t
mak
e th
is w
ork
un
inte
rest
ing,
but
co
min
g fr
om
a
com
ple
te d
iffer
ent
amb
itio
n th
an o
ne w
oul
d li
ke f
rom
an
engi
-
neer
’s p
oin
t o
f vi
ew.
Pie
t, I w
oul
d li
ke t
o k
now
why
De
Mee
rpaa
l is
not
a ne
utra
l bo
x,
wha
t sp
ecifi
c in
duc
emen
ts h
ave
bee
n in
clud
ed in
its
des
ign
– al
so
taki
ng in
to a
cco
unt
that
a h
ous
e is
sup
po
sed
to
be
as n
eutr
al a
s p
oss
ible
?
Bes
t, D
irk
On
02
Oct
201
4, a
t 12
:07,
P
iet V
olla
ard
wro
te:
Dir
k is
rig
ht, a
dap
tab
ility
(fle
x-ib
ility
, wha
teve
r) is
an
issu
e o
f b
uild
ing
tech
nolo
gy a
nd a
n o
bse
ssio
n fo
r ar
chite
cts
who
lik
e th
at a
spec
t in
par
ticul
ar. N
ot
som
ethi
ng e
xclu
sive
ly s
truc
tur -
alis
t. A
ltho
ugh,
one
co
uld
arg
ue
that
str
uctu
ralis
m p
icks
up
on
a cu
lture
of
chan
ge (
the
idea
o
f p
rogr
ess)
. And
tha
t cl
ashe
s w
ith p
eop
le’s
des
ire f
or
sta -
bili
ty (
spec
ifica
lly c
ultu
ral)
, fo
r tr
aditi
on.
Str
uctu
ralis
m h
ad li
ttle
af
finity
with
the
loca
l bui
ldin
g an
d ar
chite
ctur
e tr
aditi
on.
Why
did
A
lso
van
Eyc
k lo
ok
at t
he D
ogo
n an
d n
ot
at s
oci
ally
and
sp
atia
lly
trad
itio
nally
org
aniz
ed v
illag
es in
th
e N
ethe
rlan
ds;
the
re w
ere
still
p
lent
y o
f th
em in
the
195
0s. W
hy
trav
el t
he w
orl
d w
hen
you
can
go t
o n
earb
y re
mo
te a
reas
like
th
e ea
ster
n p
art
of
the
coun
try?
A
frai
d t
o b
e ca
lled
a t
rad
itio
nal -
ist?
Pie
t
PS
: The
mo
st s
pec
ific
elem
ent
of
De
Mee
rpaa
l is
the
‘op
en a
ir’
thea
tre
of
cour
se. I
t w
as d
one
in
such
a w
ay t
hat
qui
te d
iffer
ent
kind
of
spat
ial a
rran
gem
ents
w
ere
po
ssib
le (
van
Klin
gere
n w
as r
athe
r in
volv
ed in
the
atre
re
new
al o
f hi
s tim
e). A
long
its
bo
rder
s, a
men
ities
like
a c
raft
ro
om
, sm
all e
xpo
hal
l, an
d c
afé
(with
ter
race
insi
de,
no
t o
utsi
de)
w
ere
situ
ated
. Van
Klin
gere
n th
oug
ht o
f D
e M
eerp
aal a
s a
cov -
ered
sq
uare
. Per
hap
s it
is u
rban
d
esig
n in
the
gui
se o
f ar
chite
c -tu
re. D
esig
n is
all
ove
r th
e p
lace
, b
ut –
diff
eren
t fr
om
the
str
uc-
tura
lists
– t
here
was
no
att
emp
t to
cre
ate
spat
ial c
om
ple
xity
; on
the
cont
rary
, Van
Klin
gere
n w
as
focu
sing
on
(the
po
ssib
ilitie
s fo
r)
pro
gram
mat
ic c
om
ple
xity
with
a
min
imum
of
spat
ial m
eans
.Th
at is
the
big
diff
eren
ce, I
thi
nk.
The
idea
tha
t a
com
ple
x so
cial
st
ruct
ure
is b
est
serv
ed b
y a
com
ple
x sp
atia
l sch
eme
is o
ne o
f th
e m
isco
ncep
tions
of
stru
ctur
-al
ism
. O
n 0
2 O
ct 2
014
, at
13:5
4,
Dir
k va
n d
en H
euve
l wro
te:
In s
om
e is
sues
of
Foru
m
trad
itio
nal D
utch
vill
ages
are
re
fere
nced
, but
no
t m
any.
Joo
p v
an S
tigt’s
arc
hive
I sa
w a
st
udy
of
a p
old
er v
illag
e –
that
is
res
pec
ted
and
just
out
sid
e its
bo
rder
s a
new
ana
loge
ous
st
ruct
ure
is e
rect
ed –
so
me
-w
hat
like
Can
dili
s, J
osi
c an
d W
oo
ds’
str
ateg
y fo
r To
ulo
use
le M
irai
l – B
akem
a’s
des
ign
for
Ken
nerm
erla
nd is
co
mp
arab
le a
s st
rate
gy –
res
pec
t fo
r th
e ho
rizo
n an
d s
om
e ch
urch
to
wer
s an
d s
till
mo
der
nize
with
out
rem
ors
e.
By the end of the 1970s the Rot-terdam inner city was still visibly scarred because of the German bombardment during the Second World War. In the east part around the Blaak and Old Harbor area major projects were undertaken to enliven the inner city with a mix of pub-lic buildings, leisure facilities and housing.
The office of Van den Broek and Bakema was in charge of the new public library. It was one of the big-gest new public projects at the time. With a flexible plan and a waterfall of escalators it is conceived as a department store – a translation of the idea that culture and knowledge are fully democratized and accessi-ble to everyone. The building has an understated kind of appearance, only some of the technical facilities are highlighted with bright yellow colors. Piet Blom on the other hand opted for a collage of various city fragments, with the megastructure of Cube Houses that crosses the busy road of the Blaak as its main attraction. His project is both anecdotal, metaphoric and ‘structural’. It creates its own events with a narrative architecture such as the so-called ‘pencil building’. In the view of Blom this was meant to cheer up the dreary post-war recon-struction planning of Rotterdam and its working-class people.
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
architect / author
architect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
P. Blom 1978
Van den Broek en Bakema 1980
Co
mm
unity
cent
er D
e S
chal
m.
Act
ual d
evel
op
men
t
2120
Pie
t B
lom
was
to
tally
wild
of
his
ow
n ne
ighb
orh
oo
d D
e Jo
rdaa
n in
A
mst
erd
am o
f co
urse
; per
hap
s he
was
the
firs
t to
use
loca
l w
ork
ing-
clas
s ne
ighb
orh
oo
ds
as
insp
irat
ion?
D.
On
02
Oct
201
4, a
t 22
:03,
A
rjen
Oo
ster
man
wro
te:
Hi D
irk,
Th
e la
ngua
ge/u
se d
istin
ctio
n is
fas
cina
ting.
Co
rrec
t m
e if
I’m w
rong
, but
str
uctu
ralis
m
as la
ngua
ge (
let’s
ass
ume
that
ex
ists
) w
as d
evel
op
ed t
o c
oun
ter
a si
tuat
ion
for
whi
ch t
he e
xist
ing
lang
uage
was
inad
equa
te. L
an-
guag
e as
co
nseq
uenc
e, n
ot
as
goal
. Suc
h a
lang
uage
tak
es o
n a
life
of
its o
wn,
intr
od
uces
its
ow
n d
ynam
ics.
And
nex
t yo
u ha
ve
rhet
ori
c. I
agre
e w
ith P
iet
that
st
ruct
ural
ism
is m
ore
the
imag
e o
f fle
xib
ility
and
fre
edo
m o
ver
time,
tha
n th
e ac
tual
ach
ieve
-m
ent
of
that
idea
l and
tha
t a
bui
ldin
g lik
e D
e M
eerp
aal s
eem
s th
e m
ore
eff
ectiv
e an
swer
. A
rjen
On
03
Oct
201
4, a
t 00
:07,
P
iet V
olla
ard
wro
te:
Arj
en, t
hank
s fo
r yo
ur c
onc
ise
sum
mar
y “t
hat
stru
ctur
alis
m
is m
ore
the
imag
e o
f fle
xib
ility
an
d f
reed
om
ove
r tim
e, t
han
the
actu
al a
chie
vem
ent
of
that
idea
l an
d t
hat
a b
uild
ing
like
De
Mee
r -p
aal s
eem
s th
e m
ore
eff
ectiv
e an
swer
.” D
one
with
tha
t p
art
of
our
dis
cuss
ion?
In la
st w
eek’
s sa
lon,
Han
s va
n D
ijk r
efer
red
to
che
ss a
s an
oth
er
in m
etap
hor,
in r
eact
ion
to
Her
tzb
erge
r’s o
ften
use
d g
ame
and
fiel
d c
om
par
iso
n; a
rchi
tec -
ture
cre
ates
the
pla
ying
fiel
d, t
he
user
s p
lay
the
gam
e, a
nd t
hat
pla
ying
is c
alle
d a
pp
rop
riat
ion.
In H
ans
van
Dijk
’s w
ord
s: H
ertz
-b
erge
r p
rovi
des
a c
hess
bo
ard
and
rul
e se
t w
here
van
Eyc
k cr
eate
s a
mag
nific
ent
po
sitio
n o
n th
e ch
essb
oar
d (
chec
kmat
e in
sev
en m
ove
s). A
s o
ften
, th
e m
etap
hor
pro
duc
es s
om
e un
exp
ecte
d in
sigh
t (p
artic
ular
ly
on
Van
Eyc
k), b
ut a
t th
e sa
me
time
it p
rod
uces
all
kind
s o
f q
uest
ions
. The
firs
t b
eing
: do
the
p
laye
rs/u
sers
kno
w t
he r
ules
of
the
gam
e? In
oth
er w
ord
s: d
o un
iver
sal s
oci
al r
ules
/str
uctu
res
real
ly e
xist
, as
(no
n-ar
chite
c -to
nic)
str
uctu
ralis
m c
laim
s? R
ules
th
at d
on’
t ha
ve t
o b
e ta
ught
. If
so, I
wo
uld
love
to
kno
w, a
nd
I wo
uld
als
o h
ave
liked
to
be
hars
hly
exam
ined
on
thes
e ru
les
dur
ing
my
arch
itect
ure
stud
ies,
in
clud
ing
the
next
exa
m o
n ho
w
to t
rans
late
the
se s
truc
ture
s sp
a -tia
lly. I
do
n’t
reca
ll H
ertz
ber
ger
givi
ng s
uch
an e
xam
inat
ion
(I
was
a s
tud
ent
at T
U D
elft
whe
n H
ertz
ber
ger
was
tea
chin
g th
ere)
. In
fac
t, hi
s o
ften
use
d p
hoto
of
two
peo
ple
sea
ted
at
a ta
ble
in
the
tin
y sp
ace
bet
wee
n tw
o p
arke
d c
ars
real
ly s
how
s th
at
any
pla
ying
fiel
d, e
ven
the
mo
st
unlik
ely
one
, can
enc
our
age
pla
y.
It is
my
hunc
h th
at t
he s
truc
tur -
alis
ts (
the
arch
itect
s th
is t
ime)
d
idn’
t kn
ow
the
se u
nive
rsal
rul
es/
stru
ctur
es e
ither
, tha
t th
ey o
nly
intu
itive
ly g
uess
ed t
hey
exis
ted
. Th
e fie
ld m
ay h
ave
ther
e, b
ut t
he
rule
s w
ere
not
clea
r an
d u
nive
r -sa
l. V
an E
yck
may
hav
e cr
eate
d a
stro
ng p
osi
tion
on
the
ches
s -b
oar
d, b
ut h
e w
asn’
t in
tere
sted
ho
w t
o r
each
che
ckm
ate
in
seve
n m
ove
s.C
om
par
e so
meo
ne li
ke G
uy
Deb
ord
, who
des
igne
d a
bea
u -tif
ul c
hess
-lik
e se
t fo
r hi
mse
lf w
ith s
uch
com
plic
ated
rul
es t
hat
onl
y he
kne
w h
ow
to
pla
y th
e ga
me.
Or
Mar
cel D
ucha
mp
who
ad
just
ed t
he r
ules
of
the
gam
e at
will
onc
e in
aw
hile
, if
I’m n
ot
mis
take
n.
Des
igne
rs t
end
to
fo
rget
tha
t to
p
lay
free
ly c
om
es w
ith d
evel
-o
pin
g ru
les
(and
ad
just
ing
them
) w
hile
pla
ying
. Deb
ord
an
d D
ucha
mp
did
so
pla
ying
on
thei
r o
wn,
and
tha
t is
per
mitt
ed,
but
as
arch
itect
yo
u o
ffer
the
ga
me
to o
ther
s (a
nd y
ou’
re n
ot
pre
sent
whe
n p
eop
le a
re a
ctua
lly
pla
ying
).
In D
even
ter,
Her
tzb
erge
r p
ro-
vid
ed a
fiel
d a
nd s
om
e ru
les,
b
ut h
e w
as d
isap
po
inte
d b
y th
e ga
me
that
dev
elo
ped
– a
fai
lure
. P
erha
ps
like
Van
Eyc
k, h
e sh
oul
d ha
ve c
reat
ed a
str
ong
po
sitio
n o
n th
e ch
essb
oar
d h
imse
lf ;-
).
That
’s w
hat
he d
id in
his
late
r w
ork
. The
ris
k b
eing
tha
t th
e ga
me
is d
irect
ed t
o r
igid
ly, a
p
red
efine
d p
lay,
in w
hich
the
fr
eed
om
to
cha
nge
the
rule
s is
lo
st. I
’m e
xagg
erat
ing,
of
cour
se.
Or
am I?
Pie
t
Van den Broek en Bakema 1980
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year objectnummer /
inventarisnummer year
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yearobjectnummer /
inventarisnummer year
architect / author architect / author
architect / authorarchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
Van den Broek en Bakema 1980
P. Blom 1978 P. Blom 1978
22 23
Piet Blom: from Kasbahism to ‘structure’Francis Strauven
The address, found in the Blom archive, that was delivered at the opening of the ‘Structuur’ exhi-bition on 18 September 1965 at the Academy of Architecture in Amsterdam, is one of the few texts produced by Blom dating from that time. Although, on first reading, it seems rather erratic, somewhat rash, when carefully re-read the text proves to reveal much about Blom’s position at the time, and about the infancy of the movement that become known successively as ‘kasbahism’, ‘configurative discipline’ and ‘structuralism’. In his address, held when he was a 30-year lecturer and had been project-leader for a year, Blom, for all his insouciance, made a self-assured impression. As an undergraduate at the Academy, he had emerged as a gifted, brilliant designer. In September 1959, Aldo van Eyck had presented Blom’s study project The Cities will be Inhabited like Villages in Forum review as the outcome of ‘the story of another idea’. And at the CIAM congress in Otterlo, that project also featured alongside the plan of the Amsterdam orphanage, linked to it by the slogan vers une “casbah” organ-isée. Blom had continued working in the same vein, and had christened his design approach ‘kasbahism’. In 1962 Van Eyck, who recognized Blom’s study designs as a continuation of his own thinking, had developed a theory to explain and substantiate the new design method in the steps towards a configurative discipline, a pivotal article in which he did not fail to expose Blom’s achieve-ments. Admittedly, this propitious development was brazenly frustrated by the Smithsons, who, at the Team 10 meeting in Royaumont, had labelled Blom’s Noah’s Ark a form of fascism. Their odious condemnation caused Van Eyck to have misgiv-ings and temporarily spurn configurative design. However, his students continued the develop-ment. In 1962–63 Herman Hertzberger, in his
capacity of lecturer at the academy, had set up a ‘study of configuration’ – a project in which the configurative approach was elaborated into a step-by-step method. Blom, who was appointed as a lecturer a year later, had also directed a configurative pro-ject, of course in his own way and with his own emphases, which he expounded in his address. Remarkably, he made no mention of Van Eyck or the configurative principle. It looks as if he wanted to distance himself from Van Eyck and the whole story of configuration, which Team 10 had rejected, and that he, as the acknowledged initia-tor of Kasbahism, wished to continue developing that movement in his own way.He advanced the term structure as a ‘canopy’ covering the exhibited plans. He did not go into the geometrical or thematic composition of that structure, but focused mainly on its mediating role between social regulation and the aspira-tions of contemporary society. The ‘ordering and regulating character of the present day’ forms the base of the building brief and requires an ordered structure of the built environment. But it is the architect’s job to interpret that structure in such a way that it provides maximum freedom for developing life. Just as regulated working hours generate leisure time, the ordered structure must open up space for the great diversity of unor-dered life. The structure he envisaged was to be the opposite of a sequence of self-contained buildings that kept activities separate. He wanted an open structure enabling various happenings to be experienced at the same time. In his opin-ion, society was in a state of mutation. Life was enriched with a vast quantity of industrially-pro-duced things: machines, appliances, gadgets and other stuff. They form a kind of second nature and turn the human being into a new kind of animal. The human being is no longer a person with a fixed identity. “The centre of our individu-ality is at least situated outside ourselves.” Man becomes a decentred animal living in the plural. Looking back over his development, Blom felt that Kasbahism had been a productive design method, but it no longer corresponded to the new 1965 attitude towards life. He felt the explicitness of the structure particular to the term ‘kasbah’ was especially outdated. He switched his focus
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year
architect / author
architect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
P. Blom 1978
Van den Broek en Bakema 1980
2524
to the infinitely complex and elastic society that would want only smother structures. “A more vul-gar realism has gradually developed.” Blom gave his address at the height of the Provo [Dutch counterculture] era, and he was concretizing the structure he envisaged in “living as an urban roof”, a project that with its rhythmical config-uration of pitched roofs produced a ‘realistic’ reassessment of the Dutch urban vernacular. It is worth noting that nowhere in his talk did Blom use the word ‘structuralism’. And, contrary to what I wrote earlier, Blom was not the one who introduced the term. It was brought up in 1966 by Hertzberger when he presented his competi-tion entry for the Valkenswaard town hall: he told the press that this could be seen as an example of ‘structuralism’. Although a year later he still published students’ work from 1963 as a study of configuration, he apparently felt the need to distance himself from the term ‘configurative’. At the beginning of 1969, the term ‘structuralism’ (relating to the movement I have been discuss-ing) was launched in Dutch architectural circles by TABK-editor, Arnaud Beerends, who had heard Hertzberger use that qualification at the 1966 press conference. He went on to apply it to Hertzberger’s competition entry for the Amster-dam town hall. Five years later, it was adopted by Arnulf Lüchinger, who introduced it internationally in Bauen und Wohnen. Since the repetitive building structures to which the term ‘structuralism’ is applied have little in common with what, since the 1950s, has been generally understood in the social sciences as structuralism, that change of name remains an unfortunate choice.
Piet Blom (1934–1999) was Aldo van Eyck’s most famous and talented student at the Amsterdam Academy of Architecture. He was a son of a greengrocer in the working class neighbourhood of de Jordaan. Already as a student he gained a cult-status when his work was published in Forum as an illustration to Van Eyck’s plea for another kind of modern architecture which he captured with his slogan ‘vers une “casbah” organisée’.
The lecture printed here, was delivered at the occasion of a forgotten exhibition at the Amsterdam Academy called ‘Structure’ in 1965. There are no images, nor do we know what kind of projects were shown. Probably the work of Blom himself was on display, just as the work of his fellow student Joop van Stigt. Both were the two finalists to the Prix de Rome competition of 1962. In 1966 the exhibition travelled to Hamburg where Jaap Bakema was teaching; that edition contained the work of Blom, Carel Weeber and Jos Weber.
Opening addressat the exhibition
S T R U C T U U R
given at the Academy of Architecture
on 18 September 1965by the architect P. Blom
A guy walks to his scooter, carrying a helmet – before entrusting himself to the scooter, he corrects the shock-re-sistance of his head by putting on the helmet – he won’t smash his head while he’s on foot – right, now he’s more fittingly shock-resistant, like his scooter – he – she – it drives – his nervous system is connected in – at – and up, with the petrol engine – when it overtakes a girl and it slows down, it becomes a machine showing an inter-est in procreation – so – in context – the scooter is a new animal.
There they are – hastily gathered together – some of our design projects, and a word. While we seek strength in one another’s presence, we lose our faith in that work and in that word – that simply means struc-ture. If it’s quiet enough to get in touch with the almost impenetrable feeling of what we meant – we get a shock as we walk past our design work – those pertinent structures – adding that they aren’t structures – those predictions of brick, concrete, iron things with which you must invent faith healings, oil refineries, marriage proposals, traffic accidents, Greek dances, auto-pilots, anti-smoking magicians, fish auctions, heart surgery, slum clear-ance, tomato farms, astronauts and sewage treatment plants.
Or else, when categorically determin-ing the smallest necessary, absolute structure cell, so small and complete, we anxiously banish the nightmare of the stapler, toothbrush, little negro figurine, plastic toy elephant, photo album, pills, oil tank, gladioli, season ticket for the zoo, tropical fish, insur-ance policies, souvenirs, record player, shoe-clothes-carrot-pencil-scraper.
Yes, we design-makers have a go at everything and grimly stick to thinking
tactics to understand the essence of all that – if you raise it to the third power, it far exceeds the cubic meter volume of all the buildings together – so we can apply some supports – hard surfaces – to that choking crust of everyday objects. As a bonus we also subject it to some nice spatial and formal rules.
Among this nature-crushing quantity of articles, from aspirins to under-ground rocket installations, we remain, having become, pre-eminently, the most sublime animal. We collect a cat and a begonia that acquire a safe spot among the box files on which we have also pinned a birthday calendar.
Though we have not specifically agreed on it, it transpires that we do not take an interest in airplanes, drill-ing platforms, deep-sea capsules or radar screens. Admittedly, a launcher for a space satellite is the ultimate tower, but we thought we should confine ourselves to doors, windows, escalators, sliding partitions, sliding roofs, turnstiles and mobile pave-ments.
We invoke, theoretically and aca-demically, the history of architecture and are faced with the challenge of constructing the Hagia Sophia from telephone cables, radiant heat, goods lifts, petrol stations, supermarkets, domestic appliances, jukeboxes, traffic lights and speedboats for a few awesome jazz concerts. Meanwhile, we must get used to the fact that our orders can now be spoken, written – reproducible – simultaneously in 30 languages, dispatched or expressed in punch card words.
If this sensual, amorphous, rampant enumeration of conditions is ludi-crous, the word ‘structure’ is equally ludicrous with respect to our plans.
The word ‘structure’ – as a canopy covering our plans – wants to be a siren, warning of a hole, the emptiness between unseen reality and imagi-nation. We feel it’s an urgent need to discover the nature, reason and sentiment of a(n otherwise absurd) reality. Because, if that reality escapes us, the reward – the celebration of that reality – escapes us. It’s just as if
P. Blom 1965
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
2726
architecture has to be set free from its aristocracy, time and again, and then, time again, from a different aristoc-racy.
What I call ‘aristocracy’ is the design habit of pressing buildings with addi-tional-infill-and sub-structures, with expressive frills and furbelows, and puffed up congress halls and inte-gration plans included, into their skin to form the overall fabrication, and conceived to include every possible external effect. Aristocracy in the sense of power, armed by spatial preference, tackling everything with sacred spatial laws, with which what is legitimate is determined by the aes-thetic and preference for emptiness. Aristocracy when everything can be read, measured, counted. Aristocracy when everything, from drying laundry to cars, has to be kept out of sight for the sake of that sacred emptiness. The word ‘structure’ warns against that stubborn building carry-on, where every design process still ends at the safe, rectifiable exterior.
As long as buildings are being made, a church is a church and a house is a house, a station a station, a library a library, and as long as you build what is stated, and what was forgot-ten ends up in the gutter. That’s why inside and outside now resemble hell and heaven. The immense number of things we live with have declared war against sacred space, and they will win – then space will, at last, become mundane, then living in structure will no longer be inhibited by inside and outside, by being in- or outside things. Nature will be restored for the human animal. Compared with the way a building is a person and personality, we human beings have long ceased to be persons. The centre of our indi-viduality is at least situated outside ourselves and will be constantly changing.
The discovery that we live in the plural enables us to discover that we live in structure as complex particles.
If we were to create a profile of our current living structure it would prove just about possible, with the aid of specialists, based on data applying to a working day and in a working
hour. Compared with that profile the actual situation will be infinitely more complex. Without that working hour or working day, it is not even possible to compose such an average program profile. Changes occur several times a day and are incredibly numerous.
When faced with the limitless elastic-ity in which we use existing forms of ordering, our imagination as builders of ordering is sorely tested.
There is a pressing need to examine the recurring building briefs to find laws governing program structure that enable them to serve as struc-tural material in the field of what is completely unspecifiable. That unspecifiability is what forms the soul of our living structure and, as yet, is abruptly excluded by the specifiability of the buildings.
Just as regulated, well-organized working hours generate leisure time, the regulable, ‘nameable’ build-ing volume should generate the non-regulable volume as a reward, as a celebration, as leeway. Practi-cal boundaries will have to be found within the limitless that is inherent in the term ‘structure’. A boundary factor of that type might be called a struc-ture component, and its programmatic boundary might be established from the requirement that it be used to construct a general volume – simply on the basis of economy (material economy).
Architecture can contribute to the deep desire to experience occur-rences fully (uncategorized) thanks to its facility to ‘regulate’. The ordering and regulating character of the pres-ent day is, on the one hand, the base from which our building brief arises. On the other hand, the reason to reg-ulate in such a way what is regulated becomes the unseen – invulnera-ble – body of regulations. We build the temple like that, as an ongoing process, ongoing and indecipherable. It has become a harmful habit to pri-oritize building briefs into briefs with maximum motives for repetition. It is practiced by people who are so close to the architect that it must be our responsibility to change it. It is, after all, the worst enemy of structure!
In their youthful vulnerability, terms used in this exhibition like ‘linear meter of city’ or ‘automatic design process’ or ‘general extensiveness’ deserve our protection. I hope these opening argu-ments have made them as meaningful for you as they are for us.
I believe that the birth of an arche-typal assignment is hidden in the framework structure. I contend, with respect to that anticipated seminal brief, that as yet we have limited ourselves to components that cannot be extracted from it with impunity. The lack of context has meant that pres-ent-day structures have been deprived of signs of life.
Eight years ago, in this very same hall, I gave a talk accompanying the exhibition of my first Kasbah plan. I automatically compare the word Kasbah and the people and discus-sions that I associate with it with this exhibition and the word structure. Kasbah-ism generated a produc-tive design method, which has been detached from what, at the time, was the Kasbah feeling for us. I’m not sorry about that split between method and feeling, because I believe a more mundane realism has gradually devel-oped between the two, meaning that the distinctiveness of the structure as intimated by the term Kasbah has been superseded. But the distinctive-ness of our feeling about our living structure will be necessary if more realistic methods are to be found for structuring things.
This exhibition must be opened to enable it, in the coming months, to become a sanctuary for our creed, a reference for our capacity for appreci-ation, a challenge to be elaborated on, with words or events, by every individ-ual in this country who experiences its attraction.
We consider such elaboration as assistance to get through the spasm of value-change. Write your creed on the walls of our building.
A bottle of aspirin and a bunch of gladioli will not harm this exhibition – as far as I’m concerned, it’s opened – an o p e n i n g –.
P. Blom 1965
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yeararchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City 2928
An
Inst
alla
tion
in F
our
Act
s:
Edu
cati
on, I
deal
s, B
uild
ing,
th
e C
ity
Cur
ator
ial S
tate
men
t
Dir
k va
n d
en H
euve
l and
B
urea
u L
AD
A/L
ada
Hrš
ak
The
rese
arch
pro
ject
‘Str
uctu
ral-
ism
: An
Inst
alla
tio
n in
Fo
ur A
cts’
w
as d
evel
op
ed a
s a
per
form
ativ
e ex
hib
itio
n. A
fter
the
pre
sent
a-tio
n in
the
Dut
ch p
avili
on
at
the
Ven
ice
Bie
nnal
e 20
14, i
t is
th
e fir
st p
ublic
pre
sent
atio
n in
th
e N
ethe
rlan
ds
of
the
wo
rk o
f th
e re
cent
ly e
stab
lishe
d J
aap
Bak
ema
Stu
dy
Cen
tre,
a c
olla
b-
ora
tio
n b
etw
een
Del
ft U
nive
rsity
of T
echn
olo
gy a
nd H
et N
ieuw
e In
stituu
t in
Ro
tter
dam
. The
inst
al-
latio
n is
one
hal
f o
f a
do
uble
ex
hib
itio
n d
evo
ted
to
the
sub
ject
o
f D
utch
Str
uctu
ralis
m. T
he o
ther
ha
lf is
des
igne
d a
nd c
urat
ed
by H
erm
an H
ertz
ber
ger,
one
of
the
fore
mo
st r
epre
sent
ativ
es o
f D
utch
Str
uctu
ralis
m. W
here
as
Her
tzb
erge
r’s p
rese
ntat
ion
mig
ht
be
lab
eled
as
livin
g hi
sto
ry, a
n in
sid
er’s
sto
ry, t
he In
stal
latio
n in
Fo
ur A
cts
ente
rtai
ns a
n o
utsi
d-
er’s
per
spec
tive
, one
of
rese
arch
, cr
itiq
ue a
nd r
eflec
tio
n.
An
Inst
alla
tio
n in
Fo
ur A
cts
do
es
not
aim
to
pro
duc
e a
new
can
on
of
Dut
ch S
truc
tura
lism
. On
the
cont
rary
, it
seek
s to
dev
elo
p n
ew
que
stio
ns t
hat
mig
ht b
e p
rod
uc-
tive
in li
ght
of
curr
ent
issu
es. O
n th
e o
ne h
and
, urg
enci
es a
nd f
as-
cina
tio
ns (
not
to s
ay n
euro
ses)
o
f co
ntem
po
rary
arc
hite
ctur
e an
d p
lann
ing
mig
ht s
hed
a n
ew
light
on
the
rece
nt p
ast
bri
ng-
ing
out
ove
rlo
oke
d q
ualit
ies
of
the
hist
ori
cal p
rod
uctio
n. O
ne
thin
ks f
or
inst
ance
of
the
spe
-ci
fic r
esea
rch
into
the
rel
atio
n b
etw
een
arch
itect
ure,
sp
ace
and
use
r, o
r th
e w
ay a
rchi
tec-
ture
is c
onc
eive
d a
s a
pie
ce o
f a
larg
er, u
rban
fab
ric,
incl
udin
g th
e o
rche
stra
tio
n o
f en
coun
-te
rs o
f ‘th
e o
ther
’. O
n th
e o
ther
ha
nd, t
he h
isto
rica
l mat
eria
l ga
ins
in c
ritica
l po
tent
ial i
n fa
ce
of
tod
ay’s
ob
sess
ions
, exa
ctly
b
ecau
se it
is b
eco
min
g hi
sto
ry.
Hen
ce, t
he in
stal
latio
n is
co
n-ce
ptu
aliz
ed a
s a
sup
po
rt t
hat
gath
ers
the
arch
ival
mat
eria
ls
into
new
co
mb
inat
ions
. Mak
ing
goo
d u
se o
f th
e ri
ch c
olle
ctio
n o
f H
et N
ieuw
e In
stituu
t to
geth
er
with
add
itio
ns f
rom
pri
vate
ar
chiv
es s
uch
as t
he o
ne o
f A
ldo
van
Eyc
k, t
he e
xhib
itio
n o
f m
ater
ials
shi
fts
vari
ous
tim
es
dur
ing
the
exhi
bitio
n p
erio
d. F
our
ac
ts f
orm
the
bas
ic f
ram
ewo
rk
to r
eco
nfigu
re t
he m
ater
ials
: E
duc
atio
n, Id
eals
, Bui
ldin
g, T
he
City.
Act
One
‘Ed
ucat
ion’
fo
cuse
s o
n th
e m
om
ent
whe
n D
utch
S
truc
tura
lism
was
bo
rn s
o t
o
spea
k, w
ith
the
confl
uenc
e o
f th
e ne
w e
dito
rial
po
licie
s o
f th
e Fo
rum
jour
nal a
nd it
s sl
oga
n ‘T
he
Sto
ry o
f A
noth
er Id
ea’,
and
the
co
nstr
uctio
n o
f th
e A
mst
erd
am
Orp
hana
ge b
y A
ldo
van
Eyc
k,
but
mo
st o
f al
l the
inte
ract
ions
b
etw
een
teac
hers
and
stu
den
ts
at t
he A
mst
erd
am A
cad
emy
of
Arc
hite
ctur
e, in
clud
ing
Van
E
yck,
Her
tzb
erge
r, D
ick
Ap
on,
P
iet
Blo
m, T
heo
Bo
sch,
Pau
l de
Ley,
Jo
op
van
Stigt
, Han
s Tu
pke
r an
d J
an V
erho
even
. Act
Tw
o
‘Idea
ls’ s
pea
ks o
f th
e o
bse
ssiv
e
dev
elo
pm
ent
of
new
geo
met
ric
syst
ems
as a
par
alle
l to
the
dem
-o
crat
ic s
pac
es o
f th
e 19
60s
and
19
70s,
whi
le A
ct T
hree
‘Bui
ldin
g’
loo
ks in
to t
he w
ay s
truc
tura
list
arch
itect
ure
bec
ame
a d
om
inan
t tr
end
in t
he la
rger
pro
ject
fo
r th
e D
utch
wel
fare
sta
te. T
he fi
nal a
ct
‘The
City’
loo
ks a
t th
e se
cond
m
om
ent
of
Dut
ch S
truc
tura
lism
re
volv
ing
aro
und
the
hea
ted
deb
ates
on
the
rene
wal
of
the
Am
ster
dam
inne
r ci
ty a
nd t
he
mo
der
niza
tio
n o
f th
e hi
sto
ric
dis
tric
ts.
Vis
its
to t
he e
xhib
itio
n ar
e th
eatr
iciz
ed, s
om
etim
es b
eco
me
per
form
ance
s in
the
cas
es o
f th
e o
pen
ing
and
pub
lic d
ebat
es
in t
he e
veni
ng. T
o t
his
end
the
in
stal
latio
n is
co
ncei
ved
as
bo
th
a p
od
ium
and
a la
rge
furn
i-tu
re p
iece
. The
‘sp
aces
’ of
the
inst
alla
tio
n al
so a
im t
o e
voke
the
sp
aces
of
rese
arch
and
lear
n-in
g by
incl
udin
g am
ong
oth
ers
heav
y ch
ests
with
dra
wer
s fil
led
with
extr
a m
ater
ials
fro
m t
he
arch
ive,
a s
mal
l lib
rary
dev
ote
d
to t
he t
each
ings
of
the
forg
ott
en
Joo
p H
ard
y, a
dig
ital
rep
osi
tory
o
f im
ages
of
the
vast
co
llect
ions
o
f th
e In
stitut
e, a
nd a
sem
i-na
r sp
ace
for
wee
kly
pub
lic
conv
ersa
tio
ns a
nd im
pro
vise
d
mee
ting
s. T
he d
esig
n o
f th
e in
stal
latio
n by
Bur
eau
LA
DA
ev
entu
ally
evo
kes
the
spac
es
of
Dut
ch S
truc
tura
lism
and
its
larg
er in
tern
atio
nal c
ont
ext, t
he
deb
ates
on
the
futu
re o
f m
od
ern
arch
itect
ure
whi
ch t
oo
k p
lace
b
etw
een
the
mem
ber
s o
f Tea
m
10, t
he J
apan
ese
Met
abo
lists
an
d s
uch
cruc
ial i
ndiv
idua
ls a
s Lo
uis
Kah
n. T
he in
stal
latio
n is
a
min
i-m
egas
truc
ture
, a la
ndsc
ape
and
env
iro
nmen
t at
the
sam
e tim
e. It
ho
lds
refe
renc
es t
o t
he
spac
es o
f Van
Eyc
k’s
Orp
hana
ge
(the
co
nver
satio
n p
it),
and
the
ro
ofs
cap
es o
f P
iet
Blo
m. A
nd it
is
, in
a w
ay, t
he m
ater
ializ
atio
n o
f th
e fo
ur a
cts
by t
rans
lating
th
em in
diff
eren
t sp
atia
l rel
atio
ns
bet
wee
n vi
sito
r, m
ater
ial o
n d
is-
pla
y an
d in
stal
latio
n –
insi
de,
on
top
, or
next
to
, and
loo
king
do
wn
on,
or
at, o
r in
to t
he in
stal
latio
n.
One
co
uld
eve
n se
e th
is a
s a
refe
renc
e to
Bak
ema’
s id
ea o
f w
ays
to r
elat
e to
the
wo
rld
: liv
ing
bel
ow
, bet
wee
n an
d a
bo
ve t
he
tree
s.
objectnummer /inventarisnummer year objectnummer /
inventarisnummer year
objectnummer /inventarisnummer yearobjectnummer /
inventarisnummer year
architect / author architect / author
architect / authorarchitect / author
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City
An Installation in Four ActsEducation, Ideals, Building, the City30 31
This
pub
licat
ion,
a s
upp
le-
men
t fo
r Vo
lum
e 42
, is
a co
llab
ora
tio
n b
etw
een
Het
N
ieuw
e In
stituu
t, T
U D
elft
an
d t
he J
aap
Bak
ema
Stu
dy
Cen
tre.
It a
cco
mp
anie
s th
e ex
hib
itio
n S
truc
tura
lism
: An
Inst
alla
tion
in F
our
Act
s.
Con
trib
utor
sG
uus
Beu
mer
, Pie
t B
lom
, D
irk
van
den
Heu
vel,
John
H
abra
ken,
Jo
op
Har
dy,
H
erm
an H
ertz
ber
ger,
Lad
a H
ršak
/ B
urea
u L
AD
A, A
rjen
O
ost
erm
an, F
ranc
is S
trau
ven,
V
an d
en B
roek
en
Bak
ema,
P
iet V
olla
ard
Edi
tors
Dir
k va
n d
en H
euve
l w
ith
Vo
lum
e /
Arj
en O
ost
erm
an
Tran
slat
ions
Wen
dy
Van
Os-
Tho
mp
son
Cop
y E
dito
rA
dam
No
wek
Illus
trat
ion
cred
its
Joha
nnes
Sch
war
tz p
p. 2
-4;
Ald
o v
an E
yck
arch
ive
p. 6
;W
im B
russ
e, A
ldo
van
Eyc
k ar
chiv
e p
. 7;
Co
llect
ion
Het
Nie
uwe
Inst
ituu
t, R
ott
erd
am
pp
. 9-1
2, 1
4, 1
5, 1
7, 1
8,
21-2
4, 2
6;
Her
man
Her
tzb
erge
r
pp
. 18-
20;
Lad
a H
ršak
/ B
urea
u L
AD
A
pp
. 29-
31;
Mad
elei
ne S
teig
enga
p. 3
1;S
cagl
iola
/Bra
kkee
p. 3
2
Des
ign
Pat
rick
Co
pp
ens
Pri
nted
by
Die
Keu
re, B
elgi
um
Top Related