Dutch revolution versus Danish evolution
DUTCH REVOLUTION VERSUS DANISH EVOLUTION The difference between the Superdutch and the Danish School Between the 1950’s and 1970’s the Danish Modern movement was famed all over the world. The precisely detailed designs made with natural materials of Jørn Utzon, Poul Kjærholm, Hans Wegner and Arne Jacobsen provided a combination of craftsmanship and modernism. Since then Danish architecture has for a long time been hanging on to this craftsmanship tradition and its importance has moved towards the background. This tradition is still clearly visible in the current work of some of the older Danish architectural firms, like Schmidt Hammer Lassen Architects 1 and Henning Larsen Architects 2. In recent years architecture from the welfare state Denmark has once again come to the forefront of international architectural discourse. A whole group of young Danish architects create bold design proposals that are presented overly clear in their famous -almost childishly simplediagrams, their clean models chucked full of happy red scale persons and their epic but more or less generic renderings. The ‘’Danish school’’, as Shohei Shigematsu of OMA has labelled them 3, is headed by the now famous BIG but is followed by dozens of other firms carrying names like JDS, ADEPT, COBE, EFFEKT, SLETH and many more. In these fancy capital letters there already seems to be a clue towards the Dutch firms like OMA and MVRDV, commonly referred to as the Superdutch. This clue is not wholly unjustified taking in mind that the bold, conceptual and
diagrammatic design approach that is applied by the Danish is already clearly visible in the designs proposed by the Superdutch movement in the 1990s. Even so when asking any member of the Danish school if they are influenced by the Superdutch they would stoutly confirm. Leaving Winy Maas to state that the new Danish School is: ‘’Dutch Copy Paste – but sometimes better’’ 4. And the Danish to reply: ‘’Dutch Copy Paste – but (always) better’’ 5. Of course the relation between the Superdutch and the Danish School is not as simple as a mere ‘copy paste’. In this paper I will focus on the differences between the two movements and how these differences manifest themselves in the theoretical background that sustains the architecture. I would like to start with understanding where the metaphor of the ‘copy paste’ comes from in order to understand more clearly the influence the Superdutch have had on the Danish School. According to Joris Brorman, a specialist on contemporary Danish architecture, the adaption of the Danish to the Dutch architecture is not a coincidence. First of all Danish architecture was trapped in a sort of dead end at the turn of the century. Under the lasting influence of the craftsmanshipmodernism of the Danish Modern movement architecture was diminished to the so called ‘box game’ or ‘the perfection of the box’ 6. All major Danish architectural firms made highly detailed boxes in all kind of sizes that where almost too perfect, but ultimately quite dull. Under influence of the box game the
1
Ahlmak, K., Schmidt Hammer Lassen Architects lecture 28 november 2013, in DK@BK, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. 2 Kurek, J., Henning Larsen Architects lecture 21 november 2013, in DK@BK2013, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. 3 Weiss, K.L., A brief conversation with: Shohei Shigematsu OMA; New Danish School. Arkitektur dk, 2012. The pragmatic turn in Danish architecture of the 00's, Part 2(02 2012).
4
Weiss, K.L., Copy paste but better - Winy Maas interview. Arkitektur dk, 2012. The pragmatic turn in Danish architecture of the 00's, Part 1(01 2012). 5 Jensen, J.B., Lecture 14 november 2013, in DK@BK2013, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. 6 ibid.
1
Dutch revolution versus Danish evolution architectural discourse was reduced to a point were the only debate was about personal taste, the like versus the dis-like. This also meant that non-architects were excluded from the architectural debate, because they didn’t have a developed ’taste’ 7. Danish architecture had closed in on itself.
Superdutch has been so strong on the Danish is, according to Joris Brorman, a very simple one; the geographical proximity of the Netherlands. Because of this proximity it was relatively easy for the young Danish to visit the buildings of the Superdutch or to gain working experience in the Netherlands 10. As has been said the similarities between the Superdutch and the Danish School are numerous, the direct influence of the Dutch translates itself in the extensive use of models, Photoshop, renderings and diagrammatic explanations. These similarities are however mostly found in the formal modes of representation. More interesting it is to focus on the differences or the developments away from the characteristics of the Superdutch. This search for significant distinctive elements has been done by Joris Brorman while opposing the Linear ‘Out of Holland’ Genealogy in A+U 11. The first major distinction found is that the described -closed off- architectural climate in Denmark has opened up under influence of the Danish school. The young Danish offices have rediscovered a livelier architectural debate that is not solely about aesthetics but more about how to improve and to push the boundaries of the urban tissue and the public space. The second important distinction is that in this debate there is also a prominent role for the non-architect and more importantly; popular culture. Architectural discourse and designs are made more accessible through common narratives and there is no need for any intellectual background to understand and debate architecture. The main distinction, according to Brorman, is that by embracing this popular culture as a reference the Danish have taken a stand that articulates social
The perfection of the box 8
Young architects and students were diligently searching for an alternative, which they eventually found in the Superdutch. Dan Stubbegaard of COBE describes in his lecture that they, the students, were sort of lost; they were making beautiful models, drawings and designs with high level of craftsmanship without exactly knowing what they sought after. All they knew is what they were told by their well dressed box making tutors. When Winy Maas came to their faculty -complete with orange pants- they were for the first time confronted with a very different view on architecture. An architecture that was not so much concerned with formal language, craftsmanship or detail, but more with pragmatically received data that was used to design radical new types of buildings through strong conceptual designs 9. The second reason that the influence of especially the 7
Lindebrug, S. (2012). The Big Bang. Arkitektur dk, The pragmatic turn in Danish architecture of the 00's, Part 1(01 2012). 8 Black Diamond Library in Copenhagen by Schmidt Hammer Larsen Architects; retrieved from: http://shl.dk/eng/#/home/about-architecture/the-royallibrary 9 Stubbegaard, D., COBE lecture 14 november 2013, in DK@BK2013, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft.
10 Jensen, J.B., Lecture 14 november 2013, in DK@BK2013, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. 11 Jensen, J.B., Out of Holland? - Opposing a Linear Genealogy. Architecture + Urbanism, 2012. Super Danish - Design from Denmark?(505).
2
Dutch revolution versus Danish evolution ambitions and improvements for the masses. This means a definitive moving away from the cynical-realism of the Superdutch. This difference is by some seen as a ‘’ (…) degradation of the post-modern-ironic and subversive method of its forerunners (the Superdutch) into an uncommitted attitude of hedonistic agnosticism’’ 12. Others, like Brorman, advocate this moving away as a next step that goes beyond the cynicism, criticism, paradoxes and conflicts of the Superdutch to an architecture that dares to take a normative stand. This normative stand is based on ‘pragmatic utopism 13’ and fed by popular culture and the Danish welfare state. A consequence of this normative stand is that the Danish place themselves into a more vulnerable situation where they could be wrong, a position where the always critical Superdutch have never been.
made in the design process; each of them is tested on the values of contemporary society 15. In the Danish School the forces of contemporary society –popular culture and the welfare state- decide which idea can live and which can die. The Superdutch on the contrary can be seen as a radical architect trying to start a revolution through architecture. This revolution is based on his own idea about how contemporary society should be and this idea is then questioned over and over again, never choosing a definitive side and always staying a spectator of society and his own ideas. The Dutch revolutionary architect who never takes a normative stand is portrayed in the book Yes is more! through Rem Koolhaas stating: ‘’...more and more, more is more... .’’ 16 remaining in an endless cycle of his own ideas.
All of the above points are present in the ‘manifesto’ Bjarke Ingels has written in the beginning of his book Yes is more! In his manifesto ‘A theory of evolution’ he first bashes the radical architect (a.k.a. the Superdutch) and continues with bashing the Danish architecture climate that can only produce highly detailed generic boxes under influence of the consensus based Danish welfare state. Then he proposes to make architecture that turns pleasing into a radical agenda, instead of making a consensus he tries making everybody happy; ‘’…an architecture where you don’t need to chose one over the other, but you get to have both.’’ 14 The way to achieve this ‘pragmatic utopian architecture’ is to embrace Darwinistic evolution instead of the revolution of the radical architect. This idea of evolution is mostly evident in the many models that are
Evolution of an idea through models
17
This Superdutch revolutionism versus the Danish School evolutionism is, I think, the most significant distinction between the two architectural movements. On the one hand the revolutionary Dutch rebel against the contemporary society trying to expose their intrinsic contradictions and flaws, on the other hand the evolutionary Danish are trying to press forward the strengths of this society.
15
Krogh, M., ADEPT lecture 21 november 2013, in DK@BK, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. 16 Ingels, B., Yes is More - an archicomic on architectural evolution2009, Copenhagen: Dansk Arkitektur Center. 17 The evolution of a courtyard concept by ADEPT; retrieved from: http://www.adept.dk/index.php ?id=33#64^1^1390
12
Ibid. Ingels, B., Yes is More - an archicomic on architectural evolution2009, Copenhagen: Dansk Arkitektur Center. 14 Ingels, B., Yes is More! - A theory of evolution. Yes is More - an archicomic on architectural evolution, 2009. 13
3
Dutch revolution versus Danish evolution From this perspective we can start understanding more how the Danish School came into fruition. When we take the ongoing economic crisis into account it seems almost logical that the positive and idealistic, maybe populist, attitude of the Danish became popular so fast. When things are going bad already, who would want an overly critical (Dutch) architect that knocks you into the ground with his revolutionist theories? It seems much nicer to work with a positive (Danish) architect who listens to your ideas and tries to incorporate them using evolutionist theories. There is almost a direct parallel here with the development of politics in the economic crisis. Populist politics, that apply the same tactics of listening to the masses and trying to evolve the ideas of the masses, became hugely popular all over Europe during the economic crisis 18. During economically bad times people tend to search for new approaches and since architecture is a servient profession it is most successful when it goes with the flow of this search. The Danish School achieved becoming so successful by following popular culture, just like the populist politicians.
From this Danish evolutionism perspective we can also try to understand how the Danish school might continue to develop. The Danish School architecture could more and more develop itself towards an architecture for the people. Where architecture continuously is trying to find more soothing ways to enhance contemporary society and where the soothingness of different ideas is again and again tested on the conditions of this society. This future could be quiet bright and has the potential of becoming a global movement because of the populist tactics they have embraced; including their strong selfadvertisement skills. One difficulty the movement should find a way to deal with is the contradiction between the inflexibility of the build object and the continuous changeability of contemporary society and popular culture which they took as a reference.
Danish hedonistic evolutionism 20
Possible future pitfalls of the Danish School are also related to their evolution theory and their adaption to the idea of the masses. The first trap could be oversimplification. The Danish School tends to explain every architectural design with one simple -almost na誰ve- diagram in order to make it easily communicable with the non-architect. This combined with little self-critique could easily
Dutch cynical revolutionism 19
18
Ferluga, E. Populism and Nationalism in the Context of the Economic Crisis. 29.10.2013 accesed: 25.12.2013; Available from: http://www.liberalforum.eu/en/ news/details/populism-and-nationalism-in-the-contextof-the-economic-crisis-press-release.html. 19 EXPO 2000 by MVRDV; retrieved from: http://www.adept.dk/index.php
?id=33#64^1^1390http://www.mvrdv.nl/en/projects/EX PO/expo.jpg/ 20 EXPO 2010 by BIG; retrieved from: http://www.big.dk/#projects-xpo
4
Dutch revolution versus Danish evolution Written by Anton Zoetmulder, 1353640
lead to the forgetfulness of the complexities faced in architecture. This awareness of complexity is still fully present in the work of the Superdutch and is also communicated as such. A second pitfall could be that the utopian pragmatic mood of the Danish School will deplore into economic pragmatism. The utopias designed by the Danish School will only be feasible when their built-in hedonistic elements will be able to generate extra money. This shift is not unthinkable since this sort of scenario also happened to the ideals of the post-war Modernism, where the modern ideals became universally accepted only after investors found out they could make huge profits with them. A third trap could be that evolving turns into perfecting. The strategy of continuously evolving the ideas of popular culture could lead to the near perfection of the employed forms of these ideas. This is almost the same thing that had happened in Danish architectural history before. The perfection of the box (and the detail) was in essence founded upon the strategy of evolving and perfecting the idea of craftsmanship. Danish architecture would in this instance close in on itself again.
06/01/2014, Delft
To conclude; the Danish School movement has several similarities to the Superdutch movement but most of these similarities are only found in their formal modes of design representations. The differences between the two are however more significant. Especially the difference between the radical revolutionary thoughts of the Superdutch and the positive evolutionary tactics of the Danish School indicate a definitive split between the two. Through this distinction we are able to explain the successfulness of the Danish School within contemporary society. Also it can give clues towards future developments of the movement and the future troubles they might come to face.
5
Dutch revolution versus Danish evolution Tranberg, L. (2013). Lundgaard & Tranberg lecture 12 december 2013. DK@BK. Delft: Capita Selecta/TU Delft.
Bibliography: Ingels, B., Yes is More - an archicomic on architectural evolution2009, Copenhagen: Dansk Arkitektur Center.
Images: Black Diamond Library in Copenhagen by Schmidt Hammer Larsen Architects; retrieved from: http://shl.dk/eng/#/home/aboutarchitecture/the-royal-library
Ferluga, E. Populism and Nationalism in the Context of the Economic Crisis. 29.10.2013 accesed on: 25.12.2013; retrieved from: http://www.liberalforum.eu/en/ news/details/populism-and-nationalism-inthe-context-of-the-economic-crisis-pressrelease.html.
The evolution of a courtyard concept by ADEPT; retrieved from: http://www.adept.dk/index.php ?id=33#64^1^1390
Kjeld Vindum, K. L. W. (2012). The pragmatic turn in Danish architecture of the 00's, Part 1 (Vol. 01 2012). Copenhagen: Arkitektens Forlag.
EXPO 2000 by MVRDV; retrieved from: http://www.adept.dk/index.php ?id=33#64^1^1390http://www.mvrdv.nl/en/p rojects/EXPO/expo.jpg/
Kjeld Vindum, K. L. W. (2012). The pragmatic turn in Danish architecture of the 00's, Part 2 (Vol. 02 2012). Copenhagen: Arkitektens Forlag.
EXPO 2010 by BIG; retrieved from: http://www.big.dk/#projects-xpo
Noboyuki Yoshida, A. T. (2012). Super Danish Design from Denmark? (Vol. 2012:10 No.505). Kasumigaseki, Japan: A+U Publishing Co., Ltd Lectures: Ahlmak, K. (2013) Schmidt Hammer Lassen Architects lecture 28 november 2013, in DK@BK, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. Jensen, J.B. (2013) Lecture 14 november 2013, in DK@BK2013, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. Krogh, M. (2013) ADEPT lecture 21 november 2013, in DK@BK, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. Kurek, J.(2013) Henning Larsen Architects lecture 21 november 2013, in DK@BK2013, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft. Stubbegaard, D. (2013) COBE lecture 14 november 2013, in DK@BK2013, Capita Selecta/TU Delft: Delft.
6