990026jan buijs and de volharding, the hague, holland

7/22/2019 990026Jan Buijs and De Volharding, The Hague, Holland

1/15

Jan Buijs and De Volharding, The Hague, HollandAuthor(s): Chris RehorstSource: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 44, No. 2 (May, 1985), pp.147-160Published by: University of California Presson behalf of the Society of Architectural HistoriansStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/990026.

Accessed: 26/08/2013 16:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of California Pressand Society of Architectural Historiansare collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access toJournal of the Society of Architectural Historians.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucalhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sahhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/990026?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/990026?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sahhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal


2/15

J a n B u i j s a n d e Volharding T h e H a g u e H o l l a n dCHRIS REHORST University of Leiden

In 1927-I928 the Dutch architectJan Buijs (1889-I96I) built forthe socialistco-operativeDe Volharding" stunning "glasshouse"in TheHague.The buildingwasparticularlyemarkableforherev-olutionaryway in whichBuijs interpretedis client'sdemandforanighttimedisplayof advertisementsn the aades. At nightDe Vol-harding eemedtransformedntoa grand,luminousbillboard.

Althoughthe buildingachievedan internationalreputation s arevolutionaryxampleof the new architecture,ts cubist-aestheticap-pearancenditsfailure oconformothe enetsofthe "NewObjectivity"doomedit to oblivion during the i930s.

If we applya view otherthan thepolar,historical iew of Dutcharchitecture,e Volhardingnd otherbuildings yBuijsappearobe,like the workof Dudok andJan Wils,partof an independentrendthatdeserveso be tudied n itsownright.De Volharding asinfluencedby the artof De Stijl and byRussianconstructivism,utthe ideaofincorporatingightas Buijsdid in this buildingoriginatedwith PaulScheerbartnd theexpressionistircle roundBrunoTaut,with whomBuijswas acquainted.The crystalworldof his Germanfriendsfasci-natedBuijs;he was an ardentcrystal ollectorwho usedsophisticatedlightingto bringout the ull beautyof his stones. n muchthesameway,De Volharding chieved ts truesignificance y meansof light.It became beaconlightn thedarkness, n exampleof an architectureofglassand light,and a symbolof the 920os' ptimistic xpectationsof thefuturesociety.

IN 1927 the socialistco-operative"De Volharding"(The Per-severance)at The Hague commissioned the Dutch architectJanBuijs to design the new headquarters or the rapidly growingorganization. The resulting edifice, inauguratedin I928, was astunning building, in particularfor the revolutionary way inwhich the architect interpreted his client's demand to use itsfacadesfor nighttime advertisements.At night the whole struc-ture seemed transformedinto a grand, luminous billboard, ra-diating its messages into the darkness(Figs. I, 2).This spectaculareffect was achieved by the execution of theparapetsas internally lighted glass-paneled boxes into whichvarious letters and figure patternscould be inserted to producea silhouette effect of texts and objectsto be seen from the street(Figs. 2, 3). The combinationof these lucid horizontal elements,the illuminated vertical components of staircase and elevatorshaftcomposedof glassbricks,andthe lighting fixture that soarsinto the sky, made the building a shining beacon of glass-and-light architecture and at the same time a vigorous medium ofpropagandafor the socialist co-operative.1Jan Buijs, his lifeand work

Jan W. E. Buijs (1889-196I) was born at Surakarta n theformer Dutch East Indies and came to The Hague, Holland, in1908. At the age of 19 he commenced his studies in architectureat the Institute of Technology at Delft, from which he wasgraduated n I9I9. In the same year he was appointed assistantarchitect to the municipality of Haarlem, where he met JoanB. Liirsen(born 1894), his later partner n the architect'soffice,

*Thispaperwaspresentedn partat the conference DutchArchitec-turebetween he Wars"atM.I.T.,CambridgeMass.),n November1982,andanotherpartat theInstitute fArchitecturendUrbanStudiesin New York.Itis asummaryf achaptern mydissertation,Januijs,architectanDe Volharding.earchitectuuranhetbureaur.J.W.E.BuijsenJ. B. Liirsen,Leiden, 1982, published by the Staatsuitgeverij,TheHague, I983.I want to express my gratitude to Mrs. S. Van Andel-Rose for herassistance n translatingthis article.i. The co-operative, now called AZIVO, has left the building, andalthough hebuildingwas restoredn 1973, he parapetsreno longerused for advertisements.JSAH XLIV:r47-I60. MAY 1985 I47

This content downloaded from 193.140.151.121 on Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:19:00 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/15

148 JSAH,XLIV:2,MAY1985

Fig. i. JanBuijs,De Volharding, The Hague, 1927-1928 (coll. Rehorst). Fig. 2. Jan Buijs, De Volharding, The Hague, 1927-1928, by night(photograph928,coll. Rehorst).

Buijs en Liirsen, at The Hague. In this partnershipBuijs wasthe designer, while Liirsen supervisedthe construction of thebuildings.Even as ayoung man,Buijswas familiarwith modern currentsin art. During his student years he conceived a sympathy forGermanartists,and in the I92os he deepened his contact withGermany,particularlywith Berlin, which he called his secondhome. Buijs collected paintings and graphics of the Germanexpressionistmovement2 and became friendly with Kandinsky,Campendonk, Hannah Hich, and Rudolf Belling. When hebuilt his own house, in I928, he introducedfurnitureby MarcelBreuer (Fig. 4).

There areyet more instances of Buijs'ssympathyfor Germanart.In 1920 he gavethe "Der Sturm"painterJacobavan Heems-kerckthe opportunityto execute her first stainedglasswindows.3

2. A partof hiscollectionwasbequeathedo The HagueMunicipalMuseum.3. In the WulffraatHouse,Wassenaar,920. See: C. M. Rehorst,"JacobaanHeemskercknir.JanW.E.Buijs.Tweeglas-in-loodramenin het huisWulffraateWassenaar,"ederlandsunsthistorischJaarboek,

31 (I980), 544-554, andJacobavan Heemskerck1876-1923, kunstenaresvanhetexpressionisme,at.MunicipalMuseum,The Hague, 982.

He commissionedRudolfBelling,who also workedwith MaxTaut,to makea sculptureor the publicadministrationoomof De Volharding Fig. 5). In Buijs'sopinion,there were noDutch artistswho couldsatisfactorilyopewith such a com-mission. nthe 1930SBuijs ookpains o secureHeinrichCam-pendonk's ppointmentsprofessorttheAcademy f FineArtsat Amsterdam fterhis dismissal y the Nazis from the Diis-seldorfAcademyn I933.4

Buijswas an individualist.He wasnot involved n architec-turalcircles,nor washe invitedtojoin thesegroups.Further-more,hedidnotengage ntheoretical isputes, ordidhewriteaboutarchitecture,ndalthoughhe hadgivenseveral ecturesbeforethe war,the content of only one, delivered n 1924, s

Buijsmet VanHeemskerck,ho was a memberf the GermanexpressionistDerSturm,"n 1916.Buijsevenbecamea memberof"DerSturm"imself. ee etter, acobaanHeemskercko HerwarthWalden, o June 1917,Berlin,Staatsbibliothekreussischer ulturbe-sitz,Sturm-Archivacoba anHeemskerck 1.322.4. See:Rehorst,an Buijs,architectanDe Volharding,983,87-88,andH.L.C. affe, Emigratien de beeldendeunst-hetgevalCam-pendonk,"Nederlandn hetDuitseExil I933-1940, Amsterdam,982,258-273.



4/15

REHORST: JAN BUIJS AND DE VOLHARDING I49VcT?BD57E ,r ?DE :BL323A

Ii- - w

vi4mt: aEOTI NQ 5$7' WmnAM m 7 r-- -I.dnhl"vM '1 V V I: UELRJ |Fig.3. JanBuijs,De Volharding, heHague,1927-1928. econd loor Fig.4. Jan Buijs,Buijs'sown house,The Hague,1928. Interiorwithplan(NederlandsDocumentatiecentrumoorde Bouwkunst,Amster- furniture y MarcelBreuer.Destroyedcoll.Rehorst).dam).

known. He spoke of the modern styles of painting, of themachineas saviorof humanity,andof the symbolicmeaningof shapesand colors-on the final point in a mannersimilar tothe writings of Kandinskyand Rudolf Steiner.6

Buijs's first independent buildings were country houses inThe HagueandWassenaar, suburb f The Hague.His earlystylewasrelatedotheSchoolofAmsterdamWulffraatHouse,1920; Fig. 6), with a combination f elementsof earlyDe Stijlandthe work of FrankLloyd Wright. Examplesarethe ArnoldHouse,921 (Fig. 7), in which the composition is similar to thatin contemporary ork of JanWils, and the Grammar chool

Fig.5. JanBuijs,De Volharding, heHague,1927-1928.Administra-tionroomwithsculptureyRudolf ellingcoll.Rehorst).5. Weknow hecontentsfthis ecturenly rom ewspapereports.6. W. Kandinsky,eberasGeistigen derKunst,Munich,912. Onthe nfluencef Steiner nKandinksy'sheory,ee S.Ringbom,Artin the Epochf the Great piritual,"'ournalftheWarburgndCour-tauldInstitutes, 9 (I966), 386-4I8.

- t

I



5/15

150 JSAH, XLIV:2, MAY 1985

Fig. 6. Jan Buijs, House Wulffraat, Wassenaar,I920. Exterior (.H. W.Leliman ndT.K.L.Sluyterman, etmoderneandhuisnNederland,heHague, 1922).

Building at Haarlem,1923-1924 (Fig. 8).7Through a friend, theleader of the Dutch branch of the Anthroposophical Society,Buijs obtained commissions from anthroposophical organiza-tions. In 1925 he was given the importantcommission to buildthe Rudolf Steiner Clinic (opened 1928; Fig. 9). Although de-signed in a style that Steiner himself set forth as satisfying therequirementsof the anthroposophists(Fig. Io), the clinic was adiversionin Buijs'sown stylistic development. This is especiallyevident when we look athis other two, both unexecuted,designsfor the anthroposophists:the AnthroposophicalSociety Build-ing (1924; Fig. II), and the design for the Vrije School (1926;Fig. 12), in which the main characteristicsof his style are clear:acubical,often plastic,structurewith horizontal lines andstrongverticalaccents, in which the blocks exist as delineated entities,especially in the corner and entrance parts. These features areto be seen also in his 1926 purist design for the Maas House,which unfortunately was never executed (Figs. 13, I4),8 and inhis most famous building, De Volharding (1927-1928;see Figs.I, 2). With the completion of the latter, Buijs's position as anarchitect was established.

As amember of the SocialDemocraticWorkers'Party SDAP),under the leadershipof his friend P. J. Troelstra,Buijs received

7. Wrightwaspopularn HollandduringBuijs's tudent ears,hiswork largelyknown throughthe Wasmuth editions:FrankLloydWright,Ausgefuhrteauten ndEntwiife,erlin, 9Io,andC. R.Ashbee,FrankLloyd Wright-Chicago, Berlin, I9II. Buijs's student friend A. J.van derSteurwrote about he trainingn Delft,where the professorstalked bout he Viennaarchitects,utthe students tudiedFrankLloydWright; BouwkundigWeekblad,50 (1929), 353-354. The interest inWright was stimulated again in 1925 by the Wendingenssues on hiswork;"FrankLloydWright,"Wendingen,(1925),nos.3-9.8. This projectwas only publishedn France:R. Mallet-Stevens,GrandesConstructions,aris [1928], pi. 20, no. I.

two important ommissionsrom the socialistmovement.In1930he wasasked odesign he mausoleumorTroelstra, hichwas never executed.In 1929work startedon his majorcom-mission, hebuilding or De ArbeidersperstheWorkers'Press)on a difficult ite in Amsterdam earthe CentralStation, hefirstexampleof "New Objectivity"theDutchfunctionalism)in the old town (Fig.I5).It earnedBuijs he titleof "architectof the SDAP."9

AlthoughBuijs's irmwasaffected y the worldcrisis n theI930S,he still hadseveral ommissions.At timeshisworkcameclose to the so-calledInternational tyle, as in the AlbrechtHouse 1933;Fig.i6). He neverdeveloped is forms nthemostdirectandeconomicalwayfrom hefunction,whichthe Dutchfunctionalists laimedwas the best andonly true modernwayof organizinga building.He alwayskeptformalprinciplesnmind,as can be clearly eenin the Leembruggen ouse(1935;Fig. 17). There the strongverticalaccent n the garden acadehas no spatialunctionbut worksaestheticallys a counterbal-anceto the horizontal inesof the balconies.

Duringand afterWorld War II Buijsdesigned dealplansforapartmentuildingsand fordestroyed artsof The Hague.Despitesomeimportantommissions, e failed o playa majorrole in the reconstructionf Holland after the war. In 1955severe llnessforcedhim to leave his office. Sixyears aterhedied in the SteinerClinic, his firstmajorwork as a privatearchitect.De Volharding

Considering uijs'swholeoeuvre,De Volharding ppearsobethe mostelaboratendmost nteresting uildingn his entirecareer.Following tscompletionn 1928, hebuildingwas con-sidereda revolutionaryxampleof the new architecture.nHolland t waspublished s suchtogetherwith Brinkman ndVan derVlugt'sVanNelle Factory t Rotterdam ndDuiker'sSanatorium onnestraal earHilversum.10nGermany,GustavAdolf Platzdepicted he building n the Propylienseriesvol-ume,DieBaukunst erneuesteneit 1930), andRichardHamanneven included t in his surveyof Westernarthistory,GeschichtederKunst(I933).1 InItaly,AlbertoSartorisalledDeVolharding

9. The Dutch artistanddirectorof the Academyof Fine ArtsatAmsterdam,R. N. RolandHoist, in a letter to the chairman f theSDAP,J. Oudegeest,30 July 1930;Internationalnstituteof SocialHistory,Amsterdam-SDAP rchivesno. T/4-1930, Troelstramauso-leum.io. For nstance, yA.Boeken nAlgemeenandelsblad,7April 929.xi. G. A.Platz,DieBaukunsterneuesteneit,Berlin,19302, 31, 86,and ll. xxvII. R.Hamann,GeschichteerKunst onder ltchristlicheneitbiszurGegenwart,erlin,1933,888 and ll. II07.



6/15

REHORST: JAN BUIJS AND DE VOLHARDING 151

-if; LANEW TIETVA/NAAb5- f1 .Ua'WTa3Ea.tID-.I:. Lr..PAlNOLIDc _ ' Il W1"=n= It-- - . M..iNT tiBPihM H

rr

iC,14A=..*r00-M-00oCo iw

'CUAAL:100

Fig. 7. Jan Buijs, House Arnold, Wassenaar, I921. Facadedesigns. Not executed (Nederlands Documen-tatiecentrum voor de Bouwkunst, Amsterdam).

Fig. 8. Jan Buijs, GrammarSchool, Haarlem,1923-I924 (coll. Rehorst).

Fig. 9. Jan Buijs, Steiner Clinic, The Hague, I926-I928. Exterior(coll.Rehorst).

| |-~ '\1e-al = - IIl l 1 I -

- -- -----??- ____ - - ?---?----- - -- ----?------------ _____....

Ctr/Wk 10oAbD I

nturtrrrDuairi ;cprr -



7/15

trvrtMD x)crk=-iaT av vom I=

OCrAAL 4A00

Fig.io. RudolfSteiner,GoetheanumI,Dornach Switzerland),924-1928 (H. Biesantz and A. Klingborg, Das Goetheanum.Der Bau-impulsRudolf teiners,ornach,1978).

one of the finestexistingrealizations f glass-and-lightrchi-tecture.12 ollowingthis enthusiastic nternationaleception,however,De Volhardingwashardlymentioned tall in archi-tecturalhistory,eithernationally rabroad, ntilI965.At thattime it reappearedn the international cenein an articlebyAlison and PeterSmithson,"The Heroic Period of ModernArchitecture."'3

Between he1930S nd he I96osthebuildingwasforgotten.Why?The first ndicationof a change n opinionconcerningthe building s to be found nJ. B. vanLoghem'sunctionalistpamphleton the "New Objectivity" ntitled bouwen, auen,bdtir, uilding.olland1932)14whereDe Volhardings describedas ollows:"cooperativetorebuilding, hehague.goodexampleshowingthe effectof a buildingat night.the architecturetillbeingdecorative oes not enter nto the scopeof this book."15In otherwords, he book was limitedto examples f the NewObjectivity,or moreexplicitly,to models that conformed othe functionalist heoriesexpressedn the manifestosof theCongresnternationaux'architectureoderneCIAM)andby theDutch "de 8 en Opbouw"architects s sole representativesfmodernarchitecture.

12. A.Sartoris,IIvetronell'architetturaoderna,"aCasa ella,8 (1930), no.33, II-I9. A. Sartoris,ntroduzionellaarchitetturaoderna,Milan,1944,146.13.A. andP. Smithson,TheHeroicPeriod f Modern rchitec-ture," ArchitecturalDesign,35 (I965), 624.14.J.B. vanLoghem,ouwen,auen,dtir,uilding.olland,mster-dam, 1932; reprint ed., Nijmegen, I980.15. Ibid.,66. This is the originalEnglish ext in the quadrilingualbook.

DC rOh-ui r LNyL L 1 >lZ^--S=Z

Fig. i. JanBuijs,Buildingor heAnthroposophicalociety,TheHague,1924.Design facadeand sections.Not executed NederlandsDocu-mentatiecentrumoordeBouwkunst,Amsterdam).


I I

r----ra?r???-?--- ??-------r---- I

I



8/15


Fig. 12. Jan Buijs, Vrije School, The Hague, 1926. Perspective. Notexecuted (coll. Rehorst).

:: . i. . . _?.:.~i,:p at y. :, .: ~ ~ ~ i-8 -or~u 4, ..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ r-. f=:; iaf * ,; . C ;;:

r i ~ ~?_i ir :m f } T S X e~~1 :IF: _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

Fig. 13. Jan Buijs, House Maas, Wassenaar,1926. Plans. Not executed (Nederlands Documentatiecentrum voor de Bouwkunst, Amsterdam).

Fig. 14. Jan Buijs, House Maas, Wassenaar, 1926. Maquette, southfacade.Not executed (coll. Rehorst).

--- --- ------ -------- ------- -:.---.I--- .. ? ___



9/15


Fig. 17. Jan Buijs, House Leembruggen, The Hague, 1935. Gardenfacade coll.Rehorst).

Thequestion rises f whetheran edifice ike De Volhardingproperlydeserves place n the modernmovement.Dutch ar-chitecturebetweenthe wars was divided nto strictlydefinedcategories y contemporaryritics.Distinctionswere madebe-tween De Stijlandthe Amsterdam chool,and laterbetweenthe New Objectivity nd the so-calledTraditionalism, com-pilationof anti-modern-movementrchitecturalroductshatreceivedittlenoticeat all.Theserigidanddogmatic istinctionsoriginatedn theearly193os.Dutch architectsndcritics inkedwith the CIAM shared he opinionthatthe true modernar-chitectputsallformal tarting ointsasideanddesignshis build-ing byfirstanalyzinghe functionandthenrationally ecidingthe bestshape or it. ConsideringDe Volhardingn I935, theinfluentialDutch criticJ. J. Vriendudgedit to be a structuredominated ycubist-aestheticrt heoriesandas suchnotqual-ified to be calleda ModernBuilding.16The resultof thedivisionof architecturalistoryntostrictlyprogramedmanifestos nd deologies,with no room for build-ingsorarchitectshatwere"notpure,"wasthatastructureikeDe Volhardingellvictim o ababelof interpretationsndcouldnot be understood s a specimenof any specificarchitecturalconception.The consequencesf thisideological pproachanbe tracedas late as Vriend'sbook Architectuurandezeeeuw,publishedn 1959,which containsan illustration f the build-ing.17De Volhardings groupedwith worksof the De StijlarchitectsRobvan't Hoff,J.J.P.Oud,and G. Rietveld,18utitis not mentioned n the text thatprecedeshe illustrations.nthe conclusion,however,De Volharding ndDe Arbeiderspersare described s "goodexamplesof pre-war unctionalism."19

I6. J.J. Vriend,Nieuwererchitectuur,msterdam,935, ii6.17. JJ.Vriend,Architectuurandeze euw,Amsterdam,959, ll. 42.i8. Ibid., 81.19. Ibid., 80.

Fig.15.JanBuijs,De Arbeiderspers,msterdam,929-193I. Main a-cade. Destroyed 1973 (coll. Rehorst).

-,

Fig. i6. Jan Buijs, House Albrecht, The Hague, 1933. Perspective.NotexecutedNederlands ocumentatiecentrumoor deBouwkunst,Am-sterdam).



10/15


Fig. i8. W. M. Dudok, De Bijenkorf, Rotterdam,1929-1930. Destroyed (M. Cramer, a.o., W. M. Dudok1884-I974, Amsterdam, I98I).

This is a clearexample of the problem critics had in classifyinga building like De Volharding.In the course of this century there have been a number ofbuildings and architects whose very existence has hardly beentaken into account because they did not fit into the "mainstream"of development. The historianwho divides history intorigidprogrammaticcategoriesis obviously forced to rejectthoseartistswho do not fit perfectly in his schedule, becausethey donot illustratehis point. This leadsto abiasedview of the historyof architecture.

Dutch architecture between the wars is far richer and infi-nitely more varied than most surveys suggest-or, to be moreaccurate, han the commonly applied"divisionsystem"permits.Giovanni Fanelli mentioned this in I969 in the introduction tohis Architetturamodernan Olanda1900-1940:

Yet, until now anincomplete andoften forcedimage is presented.Everyaspect has been judged from one train of development only. ... Thefact that different tendencies diffused or co-existed has not been ac-knowledged: the specific nature or the results of these interrelationscausedthe total omission of some factorsand the grossunderestimationof others.20Still, in this book, Jan Buijs, architect of the ambiguous DeVolharding, is ranged on the side of the New Objectivists.21

20. G. Fanelli, Architetturamodernan Olanda 9oo00-940, Florence,I968, 13. The whole passagereads as follows:Lastoriagrafiaell'architetturaoderna ariconosciutol'importanzadel contributo landese. n pratica, uttavia,ne ha datofinoraunbilancio imcompleto e spessoforzato,unilaterale,peraverconsideratoognifenomenon funzionedi unoschemainearedi sviluppo pernonavereesaminatoutte-nessunaesclusa-le componentin atto.Leconseguenze i tale mpostazioneonoparticolarmenteraviper-che adessacorrispondenapossibilitaicomprensionencompatibilecon lacaratteristicheell'architetturaodernan Olanda, ellaqualele opere ingolari,mergenti, onpossono ssere onsiderateoltantoa se stanti,ma rientranon un quadrodi culturaarchitettonicaurbanisticaiffusa, diffusa un gradoche non si ritrova,orse, nnessun'altrarea. I mancatoiconoscimento elladiffusione com-presenza ellevarie endenzeoperanti, ellanatura deirisultati eiloro rapporti quindiaddirittura'omissionede alcune de esse ol'estrema ridusione rispetto alle altre, e causa de incertezze e affer-mazionicontrastantieivaricritici.

In the Dutch version, Moderne rchitectuurn Nederland900-1940, TheHague, I978, 9,21. Ibid., I32; (Dutch), I68-I69. In 1968 Fanelli knew only the fewbuildings by Buijs that had been published.



11/15


Fig. 19. JanWils, OlvehBuilding,The Hague, 930. Destroyed HaagsGemeentearchief,he Hague).

Fanellimighthavesolved he dilemmaof classificationyhan-dling Buijs n the samewayhe treatedW. M. Dudok:Between 1924 and 1930 some De Stijl elements and certain aspects ofrationalismlendedwithprevious rchitectonicharacteristics,ndDu-dok's ndividualesearch esults n importantworks,such as the Hil-versumTown Hall andthe RotterdamBijenkorfbuilding [Fig. I8].Theseare individual olutionsof high qualityandgreatsignificance,nationallyswellas nternationally,ot so muchasmodelsof new ideasor as the beginningof possibledevelopments, ut aboveall as theabsoluteynthesis f different urrentsn modernarchitecture...22FanelliallowsDudokanindependent lace n Dutcharchitec-turalhistory.Hewritesaboutpersonalolutions fhighquality.Butwhat fwe do notregardhiswayofbuilding san ndividualcapriceof one particularrchitect,andinsteadassemble hesecharacteristics-thegroupingof cubicmasses;he plastic,DeStijl-likereatment f buildingvolumes;heplayof horizontals

22. Ibid.,103; (Dutch), 28-129.Tra il 1924 e il I930 l'apporto del neoplasticismo e de razionalismosi integrano on le precedenti omponenti la ricercapersonale iDudok si concretan capolavoriomeil Municipiode Hilversumi grandimagazziniDie Bijenkorf i Rotterdam. ono soluzioniper-sonalidi grandeivelloqualitativohe hanno mportanzan Olandae sulpiano nterazionalepi6come valoriasolutidi sintesiraggiuntadellevariecomponentidell'architetturaoderna-dalla continuitarispetto lpassato llenuoveprospetticeviluppateal 900o in poi-checome ndicazioni inuove dee e come awio asviluppiulteriori.

andverticals; omefeatures f the Amsterdam choolandofFrankLloydWright'sarchitecture-intoanew,coherentwholeandregardhis "absoluteynthesis" sanindependentrend n2oth-centuryDutcharchitecture?

Takingthispointof view, we discover hatsimilar raitsofdesign n the buildingproductionn the I92os and the 193os,alongwith sober unctionalism,re o be found n theworkofa numberof architects.We mentionedDudok.Jan Wils isanother xample.Owing to his briefparticipationn De Stijl,Wils usually s incorporatedn this "group,"althoughfrom1924 onward he samestatus hat FanellibestowsuponDudokwould applyto him as well.23 Wils's unfortunatelydemolishedOlveh Building(1930; Fig. 19) and his CentraleOnderlingeOfficeBuilding(I932), both in The Hague,areeloquentex-amples.

Inthisproposed iew, the acceptancef "New Objectivity"principless evidentbut is subordinateo considerationsf anaesthetickind.These worksof architecturendeedwouldnotenter ntothescopeof VanLoghem's ook,butdoesthatmeanone should gnorethemcompletely,asmanyhistorians id?

23. Fanelli oes uggesthis,as hewrites: Nelleopere uccessiveWils viluppaoerentementenapersonaleintesi icomponentiiDeStijle dellaScuola i Amsterdam,helo avvicinaercertiaspettiDudok...."("... Wilsrealisedpersonalynthesisf elementsromDeStijl ndromheAmsterdamchool.With hishecomesn certainrespects ear o Dudok...."); ibid.,II5; (Dutch),143.



12/15


Fig. 20. BrunoTaut, GlassPavilion,Cologne, 1914.Exterior.De-stroyed (K. Junghanns, BrunoTaut 1880-I938, Berlin, 19832).

In the work of Dudok, Wils, and Buijs one can discern anassimilation into a new whole of components of the "NewObjectivity," the first phase of De Stijl, so-called cubism-or,more precisely, constructivism-and a dwindling influence ofFrank Lloyd Wright. De Volharding has to be considered atypical specimen of this "synthesis"in Dutch architecture.Thesynthesis becomes the more clear in De Volharding, whichincorporatesstill other ideas and influences that determine theform, the materials,and the meaning of the building.Glass-and-lightrchitecture

In 1914the visionary Germanwriter Paul Scheerbart(I863-1915) published the book GlasarchitekturSturm edition), a fas-cinating collection of briefparagraphsprophesyinganearth cladwith structuresof glassinstead of brickthatwould bringparadiseon earth. Light too played an important role in these visions.Scheerbart wrote: "The glass house is, when internally lit, aself-sufficient illuminating body."24The influence of Scheerbart'sbook on architectsis evident inBruno Taut's Glass Pavilion atthe Werkbund exhibition of I914

24. P. Scheerbart,Glasarchitektur,erlin, 1914,XLVI: Das Glashausistja, wenn es innerlicherleuchtetwird,ein ganzselbstandigerllu-minationskorper."

Fig. 21. Bruno Taut, GlassPavilion, Cologne, 1914. Interior.Destroyed(K.Junghanns, BrunoTaut, I880-I938, Berlin, i9832).

inCologne,whichwasdedicatedo Scheerbart-asScheerbart'sbookwasdedicatedoBrunoTaut(Figs.20,21).Taut'sdrawingsin his bookAlpineArchitektur,ketchesof mountains overedwith glassand crownedwith glasscathedral-liketops, weretranslationsfScheerbart'santasiesFig.22).25 lso, heutopiancorrespondenceetweenarchitects ndcritics,nitiated yTaut,showedanobsessional rgeto drawglassstructures.26he de-signs the participantsent eachother, highlightsof Germanexpressionism,ealtmostlywith glass, ight,andcrystals: lassbuildings,revolvingcrystalhouses,and floatingarchitecture(Fig.23).The participantsll shared faith n the moraleffectof formandmaterial,hebeliefthatthecharacteristicsfbuild-ing materialswould influence he characterf humanbeings.Crystalswere, n theiropinion, hepurestmaterial f theearth,andglasswas theequivalent f theserenity nd ightnessof thespirit. nTaut'sbook DieStadtkronehe highestbuilding n thecity is the crystalhouse,which marks he center.27 aut and

25. B. Taut,AlpineArchitektur,agen,1919.26. See Die Glaserne ette.Visionire rchitekturenus demKreisumBruno aut 919-920, Leverkusen/Berlin,963. Participantsere,amongothers,Hablik, charoun,heLuckhardtrothers,he Tautbrothers,and,o a lesserxtent,Gropius.27. B. Taut,DieStadtkrone,ena,1919.



13/15


, I4 I

a,>

'%.,s 4 a

* 0? -1

- i b i r a c ir ;l?T r. 'il"'? ? ?ITr ' UY"."'`?Lr una S.J?nn(Z*CLLII(((i Ci(l/ Jirnu\U ;t'' cl.\ ?;c 7(151?i.?.-Ylbc;. I.fVil c5 .. ab??rUJh??

::);ZCyfY1/7't ;5C )CuV; VCkaC*L*CI(UL,lra Opfnsll Illlt rr.l?* rr??i("-i?L.nl 3cn MensJir,t dP1Z(""ISE:CLI.ji;(h'l

Fig. 22. Bruno Taut, "Schnee-Gletscher-Glas,"AlpineArchitektur,9I9(DerHangzum Gesamtkunstwerk,arau,I983).

Walter Gropius spoke about the future society and about therole of architecture in terms of crystals.28Gropius called ar-chitecturethe crystallineexpressionof the most noble thoughtsof man.29Wenzel Hablik even wanted to change the word buildto crystallize.30othar Schreyer,who made a stained glass win-dow in Buijs'sSteinerClinic, regardedLyonelFeininger'spaint-

28. Taut: "All stronglonging for the futureis becoming architecture.There will be an outlook on life, and that also will be her sign, hercrystal-the architecture." ("Alle starke Zukunftssenhnsucht ist wer-dende Architektur. Es wird einmal eine Weltanschauung dasein, unddann wird auch ihr Zeichen, ihr Kristall-die Architekturdasein.") In"Der neue Baugedanke,"pamphlet of the "Arbeitsrat ir Kunst,"April19I9, published in U. Conrads,ProgrammendManifeste ur Architekturdes 20.Jahrhunderts, iitersloh, Berlin, Munich, I971, 44.Gropius:"Architectureand sculpture and painting, that out of mil-lions of hands of the craftsmen one day will ascend to heaven as thecrystallineemblem of a new, coming belief." ("Architekturund Plastikund Malerei, der auf Millionen Handen der Handwerker einst genHimmel steigen wird als kristallenes Sinnbild eines neuen kommendenGlaubens."). n "Programmdes StaatlichenBauhauses n Weimar, I919,"published in Conrads,Programme ndManifeste, 7.29. In the "Arbeitsrat ir Kunst" pamphlet, April 19I9 (see n. 28,above): "What is architecture?Still, the crystalline expression of themost noble thoughts of men." ("Was ist Baukunst?Doch derkristalleneAusdruck der edelsten Gedanken der Menschen.")

Fig. 23. Wenzel Hablik, design for an exposition building, 1921 (F.Borsi and G. K. Konig, Architettura ell'Espressionismo, enoa, I967).

ings ascomposed of crystals.31And Feininger'swoodcut for thefirst Bauhaus manifesto showed beams of light atop the Gothiccathedral,a beacon for the future. Is it bold to interpretMiesvan der Rohe's skyscrapermodels in a Scheerbartian-Tautianway? Although Mies himself did not discuss them in mysticalterms, nevertheless he did see them as reflectorsof light.32

Reyner Banham in 1959 was the first to acknowledge PaulScheerbartas the literaryprecursorof glass architecture,but hedid not mention De Volharding.33Other articles on Scheerbart,for example, those by Rosemary Haag Bletter, or WolfgangPehnt's epilogue in the reprintof Scheerbart'sbook, also omit

30. In "Die freitragendeKuppel,"Friihlicht, I, 1923. SeeU. Conrads,Friihlicht,EineFolgefiirdieVerwirklichungesneuenBaugedankens,erlin,Frankfurt,Vienna, I963, 176.3I. L. Schreyer, Erinnerungen n Sturm undBauhaus,Munich, I966,82.

32. L.Mies vanderRohe in Friihlicht,v, I922. See Conrads,Friihlicht,213. See also N. Huse, "NeuesBauen"1918bis1933. ModerneArchitekturin derWeimarerRepublik,Munich, 1975, 39-42.33. R. Banham,"The GlassParadise,"Architecturaleview, 00 (1959),87-89.

;

I



14/15

mention of De Volharding.34Yet, I think De Volharding owedits conception to Scheerbart's deas. Its designer, Jan Buijs, wasacquaintedwith the ideas of Scheerbartand Taut. He ownedthe book Glasarchitekturnd we know he esteemed it highly.And Buijs still had these ideas in mind when Taut himself andothers like Luckhardtand Gropius had turned away from ar-chitecture with Scheerbartianovertones.The exterior of De Volharding, as mentioned above, wasadaptedto the use of nighttime advertisements. Not just theoffice windows but all the external facing was made of glass:the parapetswere made of opal glass; he friezes abovethe shops,as well as the elevator shaft and staircase,were made of glassbricks.The light sign was made of glasspanesin white, yellow,and blue, with the blue line extending between the elevatorshaft and the staircase.During the day De Volharding was a"glasshouse," and at night it was "aself-sufficientilluminatingbody." At the inaugurationof the building Buijs told the presshe had wished for a long time to make a construction thatseemed to consist of light.35Already in his first house he hadtransformed he hall into a multicolored spaceby incorporatinga stained glass composition by Jacoba van Heemskerck as oneof the walls.36

It is evident that crystalshad a symbolic meaning for certainDutch architects too. In 1924 Wijdeveld devoted one of theWendingenssuesto crystals,and in the introduction he insistedon the inspiration crystalscould give the architect because oftheir seemingly chaotic but extremely orderly multiplicationsystem.37 an Buijs, too, was fascinatedby crystalsand no doubtinfluencedby the crystalmaniaof his Germanfriends(rememberSchreyer'swords about Feininger's paintings, which Buijs in-cluded in his collection). He was an eager crystalcollector him-self and arrangedhis collection in a cupboardwith each piecesubtly lighted. Buijs was especially fascinated by the play oflight and color, and this was not a temporaryinterest;letters ofthe I930Sand oral statements of the 1950Sgive evidence for hisconstant love for these precious stones.38

34. R.HaagBletter, Paul cheerbart'srchitecturalantasies,"JSAH,34 (I975), 83-97; idem, "The Interpretation of the Glass Dream-Expressionistrchitecture nd the Historyof the CrystalMetaphor,"JSAH, 40 (1981), 20-43. W. Pehnt, "Paul Scheerbart,ein Dichter derArchitekten," lasarchitektur,unich,1971,141-161.35. Reports f the previewof the building n localnewspapers,2December 1928.36. See n. 3.37. Wendingen, (1924), nos. ix and 12.38. Letterswrittenby Buijs o HannahHoch and Til BrugmannBerlin I933); interviewby the authorwith HannahH6ch,12January1978;G.Jonker,"1959:EengedenkjaaroorBuijsen Lirsen,"Bouw-kundigWeekblad,7 (1959),393.

REHORST: JAN BUIJS AND DE VOLHARDING 159The commission of De Volharding,with the requirementfor

nighttime advertising, gave Buijs the opportunity to fulfill adream he could not realize in other buildings.Just as the crystalsin Buijs'scollection blossomed fully through sophisticated ight-ing, De Volharding achieved its true meaning through its il-lumination. Buijs used artificial light to make the building aninternally illuminated beacon in the night, thus fulfillingScheerbart'soriginalvision. De Volhardingillustrates hatBuijs'sideas were not linked solely to fantasticexpressionism.Constructivism

De Volharding had other influences that must be taken intoaccount, namely, Russian constructivism, the art of De Stijl,and the Bauhaus. The way in which the corner is designed andthe fact that the advertisement s integrated n the building showthe influence of De Stijl and constructivism. The sculpturalcornerpart s related to the works of Malevitsch and GeorgesVantongerloo. The desire to make the building an advertisingsign, in which the movement of the elevator and the shadowof the human being climbing the stairs are visible from theoutside, cannot be explained by the glass staircasesof Gropius'smodel factory in Cologne (I914) or by the ideology of air andlight in the Sanatorium Zonnestraaland the Open Air Schoolat Amsterdam,both by Duiker. The source is futurism,whichintroduceddynamismin modern art andwas called by Buijs thefirst important movement in modern painting.39Even moreinfluential here is Russianconstructivism.Adolf Max Vogt hasshown how in Russian constructivism the "labor" motif playedan important role.'4 In the well-known design by the Vesninbrothers for the Leningrad Pravda in Moscow (I923-I924; Fig.24) the work of human beings is made visible on the outside(here also elevators play a role) and is shown by texts on theexterior. Likewise, in designing a building to house a socialistco-operative, Buijs made his De Volharding a symbol of laborin accord with the co-operative'svision of society.Like Russian constructivistbuildings, De Volharding did notadapt itself to the surrounding townscape but presented itselfvigorously, even aggressively. It was impossible to ignore theglowing advertisementsat night, and duringthe daytime,whenthe parapetsdid not convey messages, the new forms and thecrowning logotype emphasized the meaning of the building.

39. Buijs in his Haarlem lecture of 1924.40. A. M. Vogt, Russischeundfranzosische evolutionsarchitektur1917/1789, Cologne, 1974, chap. 5.



15/15

I60 JSAH, XLIV:2, MAY 1985El Lissitsky'sstatement concerning the Pravdadesign is ap-

plicable to De Volharding:Thedesign s a characteristicieceof work or an erayearningorglass,iron andreinforced oncrete.All the secondarywork that relates hebuildingo themetropolitantreet,ikepainting, dvertisements,locks,loudspeakers,ven internal levators, re drawn nto the compositionasequally mportant artsand areunified.These arethe aesthetics fconstructivism.41

.

990026jan buijs and de volharding, the hague, holland

Documents