Landmarks from a bygone era
Alweer een sieraad voor de stad Nederlandse architectuur in IndonesiĂŤ 1897-1927
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 1
21-07-20 14:46
In all cities mentioned on the maps, Ed. Cuypers and Hulswit-Fermont had built one or more projects by 1928 con
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 2
21-07-20 14:46
Obbe Norbruis
LANDMARKS FROM A BYGONE ERA Life and Work of Ed.Cuypers & Hulswit-Fermont in the Indonesian Archipelago 1897-1927
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 3
21-07-20 14:46
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 4
21-07-20 14:46
CONTENTS
1
Intro
2
Preface
7 9
Notes accompanying chapters 1 and 2
3
15
At the offices of the architecture firm in Amsterdam and Jakarta Eduard Cuypers: young and promising Hulswit the pioneer: 1895-1907
15
20
Ed. Cuypers and Hulswit: 1907-1915
34
Hulswit-Fermont and Ed.Cuypers: 1915-1921 Hulswit-Fermont-Cuypers: 1921-1927 Notes accompanying chapter 3
4
List of works
5
Catalogue of works
6
The Architects
93 299
Henri Estourgie (1885-1964)
300
Arthur Fermont (1882-1967)
301
Marius Hulswit (1862-1921) Willem Jaski (1876-1958) Han de Jongh (1886-1965) Rijk Rijksen (1872-1944) Theo Taen (1889-1970)
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 5
8
Abbreviations
9
Index
62
91
299
Bibliography
50
80
Eduard Cuypers (1859-1927)
7
15
302 303 304 304 305
309 317
319
21-07-20 14:46
Jakarta, the former Javasche Bank (since 1953 Bank Indonesia) at night, designed by the architect Eduard Cuypers (1859-1927) photo f. basri 2013 internet
Jakarta, the cathedral at night, built by Marius Hulswit (1862-1921) photo d. habibi internet
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 6
21-07-20 14:46
7
1
INTRO
Little is known about Eduard Cuypers (1859-1927) and Marius Hulswit (1862-1921). Their buildings became famous when first built. After their deaths followed a period in which their works were shunned in the Netherlands. After the Second World War their work area of the Dutch East Indies (now: Indonesia) disappeared for the Dutch. Cuypers and Hulswit worked on the development of a colony that had to be ‘western’. Marius Hulswit learned the trade on the building site of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. He left for the Dutch East Indies in 1884, where he began to work with a contractor, only to return to the Netherlands shortly afterwards, because of the pregnancy of his future wife. In 1893 he travelled with his wife and child back to the colony to settle there, but now permanently. There he was a master at the construction site in improvising, arranging and mediating. This was useful in a country where the construction projects were sometimes far apart. Hulswit spoke the language of the laborers whom he himself trained. He built his first project in the Dutch East Indies in 1895. A few years later he completed the cathedral of Batavia, later called Jakarta. Only then did buildings follow to his own design. This book is about him and about his collaboration with Eduard Cuypers. In 1908, as an architect with a considerable track record, he made his first design for the Dutch East Indies. His office had already completed more than sixty projects in the Netherlands. His fluency and the surprising variety in his work brought him to the forefront in the world of Dutch architecture. His designs were sparkling, fresh and original, which was partly thanks to his talented employees with whom he worked, without dogmas, both traditional and early modern. His firm followed the latest international trends in architecture, applied the latest techniques and always developed its plans in close consultation with the client. For Eduard Cuypers, an architecture firm was first and foremost a company that had to make something beautiful for the client and thus provided work for him and his employees. However, he noticed the group of dissenting architects growing around him. He heard that they called him commercial and noticed that each and every one of them strove for originality, glorified each other as artists and sporadically finished a structure. He openly reproached them for a ‘pathetic craving
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 7
for originality’. Stimulated by the Dutch architect H.P. Berlage (1856-1934) this group grew continuously in size and influence. Berlage and his followers wanted to close the door on the past, not only politically but also with what emerged from the nineteenth century, what they called ‘the age of ugliness’. The Dutch standard work on building styles, published by E. Gugel (18321905), a lecturer at Delft University of Technology was regularly copied until 1918, which was the last time extensive attention was paid to the nineteenth century. In the book Eduard Cuypers was still regarded as ‘one of the first architects to accept modern views’. There were no reprints after 1918. Architects, such as he, were boycotted in the history of Dutch architecture, as was their approach to design. Cuypers felt this coming. He picked up utilitarian projects in the Netherlands which were less affected by control of a building’s external appearance. He shifted his field of work to the Dutch East Indies, to build together with Hulswit and later Fermont. This work may not have been appreciated in the Netherlands, but internationally, it was. The scathing verdict of Berlage on two buildings by Cuypers and Hulswit in the Indies confirmed his premonition. In the Netherlands, people learned to observe architecture in a ‘rational way’. The individual who immersed himself in the pre-war western architecture in the Dutch East Indies followed Berlage’s dismissive opinion about the work of Eduard Cuypers and Hulswit-Fermont, even without their oeuvre having been mapped. In Indonesia many of their buildings are still fantastic. Some are literally in the spotlight. Young Indonesians take selfies in front of them. Is this because they have learned to look at architecture differently? Consider the former Javasche Bank (now: Museum Bank Indonesia) or Hulswit’s neo-Gothic cathedral with the two brightly lit cast-iron spires towering radiantly above a city. This city grew into a city of millions. Who has any idea of where the Netherlands is and its influence on architecture? It seems as if all the shameful words that were once uttered concerning the work of Eduard Cuypers are silenced in the sounds of this metropolis.
21-07-20 14:46
The Indonesian archipelago, superimposed on the map of Europe colijn 1911, p.1
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 8
21-07-20 14:46
Verantwoording
2
PREFACE
This book describes the life of Eduard Cuypers, Marius Hulswit, the people around them and their projects in the Dutch East Indies, where they worked in both Amsterdam and Jakarta. The choice was made for a story with a chronological structure, which takes place alternatively in the Netherlands or in the Dutch East Indies. The architects have left a very small archive which makes a thorough investigation into their work difficult. Thanks to the internet, digitised archives, a few interviews with relatives, visits to Indonesia and the discovery of part of the archive of Fermont-Cuypers, it was possible to reconstruct their story in broad lines. Many of their buildings in Indonesia are still there, despite all the changes there. After the death of Eduard Cuypers, the agency in Jakarta continued under the name Fermont-Cuypers.1 That name unintentionally led to confusion, because it seemed as if Eduard Cuypers, even after his death, still had buildings in his name. The office in Amsterdam continued after the death of the founder under the name Eduard Cuypers, which led to similar misunderstandings. The period 1927-1957, in which the architecture firm in Jakarta, ‘Fermont-Cuypers’ was called, is covered in another book entitled: Architecture from the Indonesian past.
For whom This book contains facts of which in the Netherlands there is little or no knowledge, even though they belong to Dutch architectural history. That gives this book its raison d’être. This book is necessary because it informs the population of Indonesia about buildings that are still in use and whose backgrounds they do not know. I have used present-day geographical names, including Jakarta (Batavia, Djakarta) and Bogor (Buitenzorg), but I do speak of the Dutch East Indies.2 This book shows that the buildings that the Dutch left behind in Indonesia are often very worthwhile. Many Dutch architects have now made their name in Asia. This book shows how their predecessors worked there in a different time and under different conditions. This book is necessary because this topic remained unspoken, partly because the colonial situation overshadowed this past. This book describes the creation of buildings, which were ini-
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 9
9
tially intended for western companies and agencies, but which are now in use by Indonesian companies. These now occupy their buildings with pride. This book is also meant for them. This book is for everyone who is interested in Eduard Cuypers, Marius Hulswit, Arthur Fermont, their architecture firms and the work they left behind.
Method Biographies of many fellow contemporaries of Eduard Cuypers have appeared in the Netherlands. Books have been published about his colleagues and his former employees who became well-known architects.3 Yet, little was known about Cuypers himself. Calls for a thorough study have so far not been heard.4 I had to identify and interpret most sources and archives in the Netherlands and Indonesia by myself. The meetings with the people in Indonesia confirmed my suspicion that my research was based on a eurocentric approach.5 There is no getting away from it, I am not an Indonesian. The people I describe were not either. They were foreigners in a country where they had or thought they had a mission.6 The Dutch writer Hella Haasse wrote; ‘I was born in the Dutch East Indies [...] and yet, I was nothing more than a stranger’.7 I have not visited all the projects that I describe here. That is partly due to the long distances that have to be covered. During the life of Hulswit and Cuypers, those distances were no less so. It was logistically a huge task to get anything done. Add to this the scarcity of western building materials and skilled craftsmen in the Dutch East Indies. All in all, there is sufficient reason to judge the work done in the Dutch Indies differently to the work done in Europe.
Sources Books about Eduard Cuypers do not exist, let alone about Marius Hulswit. A thesis was published in 1979 about Eduard Cuypers.8 This work was, together with a few inventory lists, the basis from which I worked.9 This was also the only source for the small group of people who have worked in the Netherlands on publications about pre-war architecture in the Dutch East Indies, so that the inaccuracies in the thesis regularly reappeared.10 Even
21-07-20 14:46
10
Landmarks from a bygone era
once pronounced prejudices about Cuypers’ work stubbornly persisted. Architectural historians often viewed his work in the light of Berlage’s rationalism, which was a harbinger of modernism. Architecture that did not meet one of the two ‘-isms’ was not appropriate in the post-war cultural climate, in which modernism was considered an inevitable and also desired final phase of history. This view of history led to the condemnation of architects such as Eduard Cuypers as someone who went in a different direction and that you had better not talk about.11 At the end of the last century, resistance began to arise against this approach. Watkin states that even the best historians regarded modern architecture as an unchanging standard with the idea that man and his ideals had fundamentally changed. According to Watkin, that was an incorrect assumption. For many, there was still a need for the ‘classical language of forms, which for centuries had enabled architects to express their imaginations to the full’.12 This encouraged me to revisit what has been written about Eduard Cuypers and Hulswit and to write about them from another perspective.
The firm Eduard Cuypers was responsible for most works in this book. It remains uncertain which of his employees were involved in the successive projects and what Cuypers’ exact role was in the design process. Just as other large agencies, he employed a large number of employees who, depending on their experience, more or less independently delivered a partial contribution. Cuypers in any case did not create a uniform style at his architecture firm and during the design process he was strongly influenced by specific ideas of his most creative employees.13 Eduard Cuypers always first drafted the design himself which was then discussed with the talented employees. Then he asked one of them to work out the plan using the construction and presentation drawings.14 Before a drawing left his office, he always put his name on it. He was, with Hulswit, ultimately responsible for what happened in the Dutch East Indies, more than 11,000 kilometres from Amsterdam. The Indies work of Eduard Cuypers mainly originated in Amsterdam. If necessary, the finishing touches took place in Jakarta, in consultation with Eduard Cuypers. Logistics of everything must have been complicated. All transport was by ship’s post ? between Amsterdam and Jakarta, a single journey took about a month. What is striking is that with the passage of the years the office in the Dutch East Indies went on to do more itself. The office in Jakarta changed its name a few times. Until 1914 the agency was called Ed. Cuypers and Hulswit. After Arthur Fermont joined in 1914 as a partner, it was called Hulswit-Fermont & Ed. Cuypers until 1921. Between 1921 and 1927 the office continued under the name ‘Hulswit-Fermont-Cuypers’.
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 10
Architectural styles Until now the architecture of Eduard Cuypers has always been associated in the Netherlands with eclecticism. This design method, which was applied worldwide throughout the nineteenth century, was taboo after 1918 in the Netherlands.15 Architects such as H.P. Berlage argued that eclecticism had ‘degenerated into applying historical forms without expert knowledge’, resulting in the ‘age of ugliness’. Eduard Cuypers also had problems with contractors and architects who simply added ‘historical’ ornaments from a catalogue to a moderately designed building.16 Nevertheless, for years, regardless of the quality of the design, he was associated with these builders, only to be completely ignored after the Second World War.17 Since then, the history of twentieth-century Dutch architecture began with the forerunners of ‘rationalism’; starting with the Beurs van Berlage (commodity exchange building) in Amsterdam and the ‘triumphal procession of the moderns’.18 Requirements, formulated from abstract theory, had to ensure that architecture was created, without the arbitrariness of motifs from all conceivable periods. Berlage and his followers sought firmness in a new building style, which they could link to ‘a new era’.19 Although Eduard Cuypers was open to practically every architectural movement, he did not let himself be pinned down to one of them, and certainly not to this rationalist architectural vision from the Netherlands. He related more to fashionable international styles, comparing himself to the great American architects. As was their practice, Eduard Cuypers preferred to work eclectically, because it offered him great design freedom. He did not want to be bothered by demands that created a ‘style-pure’ building. Because of this attitude, he received criticism from Berlage and his followers, who blamed him for conservatism. Eduard commented that there was something strange about assessing building plans. It was no longer asked whether something was beautiful or ugly, no it was investigated in what style they were designed. ‘And once a building was ‘in style’, it was automatically found to be beautiful too’.20 And as for that ‘new age, there was no new age for Eduard Cuypers. One period automatically spilled over into another. Every period has its architectural developments that, in the opinion of Eduard Cuypers, must at the same time be innovative and grafted onto the past. In this, too, he differed from his opponents who wanted nothing to do with the past. This astonished him and he stated that ‘everything that has style has been found to be beautiful, except buildings designed in a historical style, because they are likely to be ugly’.21 Initially, Cuypers worked on his Dutch East Indies projects before the First World War in the international style of the École des Beaux-Arts. According to Auke van der Woud this was ‘the cradle of modern representative architecture, which enjoyed high esteem in all countries, except in a few Dutch coteries’.22 What took place
21-07-20 14:46
Preface
around 1900 in architecture in cities such as Singapore, Manila, Calcutta, Melbourne and Sydney, was virtually unknown in the Netherlands, while the architect Eduard Cuypers was open to it. The Dutch professor Temminck Groll later posted a link there in 2002, to immediately zoom in on the ornaments of the Javasche Bank, as Berlage did seventy-five years earlier: ‘The Ed. Cuypers and Hulswit Office displayed the Classicist style that would become characteristic […] throughout the archipelago. On the one hand, it was reasonably international – similar buildings can be found in both the British and French spheres of influence- but it also had modest references to the Indonesian world due to the application of decorative elements derived from old Hindu-Buddhist architecture’.23 Incidentally, many of the ornaments that had “bothered” Berlage at the time had already gone with the arrival of a new front building in 1937.24 A building style developed more specifically for the Dutch East Indies enjoyed the preference of the architect P.A.J. Moojen (1879-1955), who lived and worked only briefly in the Dutch East Indies. Moojen wanted to enforce this building style, which he called ‘DutchIndies’, and was prepared to use all means available for this. He did like to compare himself with Berlage, who in turn characterised Moojen as the man who had a ‘lonely struggle in the Dutch East Indies for another concept of art’.25 Moojen owed much to Berlage’s embrace of his efforts, because since then he was generally considered within the Dutch clique as a person who strived for the right thing in the field of architecture in the Indies. Eduard Cuypers represented an opposite pole within that image.26 Hulswit and Ed. Cuypers only built in the ‘DutchIndies style’ in Jakarta between 1910 and 1915. An official committee could, partly on the advice of an external consultant, reject construction plans submitted. The external advisor during that period was P.A.J. Moojen.27 The buildings that Cuypers and Hulswit-Fermont subsequently completed until 1928 show international style characteristics that changed over the years from Expressionism via Art Deco to more Modernism. Other architects working in the Dutch East Indies were also internationally orientated. As a result, the Dutch East Indies developed its own western architecture with different stylistic features, different from the introverted Netherlands. Apart from the architecture, it is noticeable that the individual who expressed himself in those years about western architecture in the Dutch East Indies, hardly noticed the significance of the building for the cityscape. In Ed. Cuypers’ publications, this was explicitly defined, establishing him as an innovator.28
Architecture In the small amount of literature about Eduard Cuypers it is often stated that he, as an architect, missed the boat towards rationalism. The fact that he deliberately ignored rationalism and that this was a positive choice for him, could not be under-
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 11
11
stood by these writers, since they assumed modernism as an inevitable new phase to which all had to comply.29 This book discusses the architectural views of Eduard Cuypers and his office, insofar they have any bearing on his Dutch East Indies work. For Cuypers, evoking an atmosphere in architecture was more important than applying rules focused on composition and coherence. For him, designing was a creative process with room for unexpected ideas. The success of this process, in which he involved talented employees, required knowledge of the latest developments in the field of building technology as well as both current and historical building styles. These styles were the source of inspiration, never an example that had to be copied. From this mix something surprising came about. ‘You can let yourself be inspired by the past and historical styles, but in such a way that they are originally dealing with a modern character,’ says Eduard Cuypers in 1904.30 He attached great importance to the creative input of the designer but found that somebody’s personal taste should not influence the end result too much. A building was not a work of art, it had to meet primarily the client’s requirements. The main design had to be simple, with attention to the details. The surprising thing for him was the deviation from the predictable. Eduard Cuypers, for example, often consciously worked asymmetrically during a certain period and developed compositional work, such as the position of the windows and the doors. He applied classical elements, which he stripped of their historical connotation, by applying them lightly and often purely as a decoration. He loved decorations as long as they were crafted by professional artists whom he considered to be completely equivalent. The fact that Eduard’s father was a decorator undoubtedly contributed to this. Eduard Cuypers built up a relationship with his client and developed a building plan with the principal in an interactive way. That design process was at odds with rationalism and later modernism, which would lead to often useful rules of thumb for architects with whom Cuypers had nothing in common. The rationalists and modernists turned it around. A Berlage adept, said in 1983; ‘Under the dictatorship of the historical and eclectic school, the originality was exclusively in the personal variation of the available forming apparatus and the available composition schemes’.31 Cuypers, if he had been aware of this statement, would almost certainly have expressed his astonishment at the word ‘exclusively’. Not his working method, but rather that of ‘rationalists’ and modernists led to predictable results in architecture. Resistance eventually arose against this modernist vision. In the words of the Dutch professor Auke van der Woud from 1993; ‘We look again for the infinitely expressive possibilities of architecture, for a design which shows that a building is distinguished, festive, or subdued, or witty - in short, that it has character.32
21-07-20 14:46
12
Landmarks from a bygone era
Oeuvrelist Those who wrote about the work of Cuypers and Hulswit in the Dutch East Indies and who expressed a judgment on their accomplishments, compared this quite often with the works of architects who lived years later and were modern educated also.33 On that basis it was concluded that the firm was not innovative.34 It was often unclear which firm was meant, that of Eduard Cuypers who died in 1927, or that of his successors working at the firm Fermont-Cuypers? Akihary accredits Eduard Cuypers with designs long after Cuypers’ death.35 In order to prevent such confusion, the year of Cuypers’ death forms a break. The end of this book is therefore limited to the period 1897-1927. From 1927, politics also changed considerably in the Dutch East Indies thanks to the rise of Indonesian nationalism. More than ninety projects from Hulswit-Fermont and Ed. Cuypers were completed in the Dutch East Indies. For thirteen buildings once attributed to them, I found no or insufficient proof of their authorship or I discovered the name of another architect.36 Because virtually all design data of the buildings is unknown, the buildings are arranged in the order of the year of their completion. The description per project is almost always that of the building shortly after completion. The current state and the current use will also be included. For each project, historical photos are included, if available, in order to do as much justice as possible to the time frame. Because buildings mainly speak when the people behind them come to life, they have a prominent place in the description.
Author I do not have a (family) bond with Indonesia. In the Netherlands I belong to the generation with whom there was no nuanced talk about the colonial past. In 2010 I decided to visit Indonesia. I wanted to see what had been built there in colonial times with my own eyes. Relatively little about it had been written.37 Strange that a country such as the Netherlands, which attaches so much importance to its own building past has charted so little of the past that it shares with Indonesia. ‘Most people here on land will not know much about the many works that have been built there by Dutch architects over the years’, wrote an architect in 1959 with some sadness.38 I visited Indonesia several times, armed with old and new city maps. I was surprised by the countless old buildings that I knew nothing about. Trained and working for many years as an urban planner, I looked freely at those buildings from a different perspective than someone with a cultural-historical background would have done. I shared my discoveries and findings with various, more experienced people in the field, and that is how this book came to be written about an unknown group of people and their architecture. Obbe H. Norbruis, Amsterdam 2020
Notes accompanying chapters 1 and 2 1
The book about the Fermont-Cuypers period from 1927-1957 appears
9 List of works: Vissering (1927), Fanelli (1981), Akihary (1990).
separately, titled: Architecture from the Indonesian Past.
10 Passchier (2016) p. 176. Two obvious inaccuracies that were published
2 The Dutch East Indies, I reserve the name Indonesia for the independent republic. 3 Piet Kramer (Kohlenbach 1994) Michel de Klerk (Bock 1997), Berend
until recently are that Fermont died in 1954 and that the FermontCuypers firm ceased to exist. A.A. Fermont died in 1967 and the FermontCuypers firm ceased operations informally in 1957 under pressure from
Boeyinga (Beekum 2003), Guillaume la Croix (Beekum 2008), Johan
political circumstances and was formally naturalised by Indonesia in
Melchior van der Meij (Kruidenier 2014).
1960.
4 Woud (1997), p. 367; Ibelings (1995), p. 23; Beekum (2008), p. 15. 5 Doorn (2003), p. 17. 6 Doorn (2003), p. 12: translated from Dutch: ‘What can also be said to the detriment of colonialism, it must primarily be understood as a route
11 Woud (1997) p. 369. Van der Woud wrote: ‘there was no term so useful for distinguishing the ‘logical’ approach from the apparent architecture.’ 12 Watkin (1994), p. 8. 13 Ed. Cuypers (1914) Eduard Cuypers was a friend of Joseph Maria Olbrich,
to prosperity and civilisation, a phase in history in which the more
who worked at Otto Wagner for five years. Olbrich could have informed
developed western world, driven by their own interests, seized lesser-
him how the Otto Wagner office worked. In 1900, Wagner employed more
developed societies against their will to make a better future.’ 7 Haasse (2010), p. 94. 8 Gerlagh (1979).
than seventy people according to Geretsegger (1978), p. 14 14 Whyte (1989), p. 31. At a large architecture firm like that of Otto Wagner ‘the tasks between the main architect and the assistants cannot be clearly defined’. That would have been the case at Cuypers’ office.
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 12
24-07-20 11:46
Preface
15 Fletcher (1975) p. 1245. The First World War is seen as a clear watershed between the old and new architecture in the western world. 16 Bock (1975) p. 47. In 1893 W. Kromhout calls for measures against incompetent builders. Eduard Cuypers agrees, ‘because it is necessary in the
33 Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant, February 9, 1924. ‘Brieven over Bouwkunst’ In his second lecture on ‘Modern Architecture in the Dutch East Indies, Berlage showed work of the most diverse architects in the colony that he provided with comments’.
interest of architecture and its practitioners to combat the abuses with
34 Passchier (2016) p. 190.
suitable means’.
35 Akihary (1990) p. 101.
17 Woud (2008), p. 79: ‘In the Netherlands it is still not possible to conduct an open scientific debate on nineteenth-century architecture’. 18 Bock (1983) This vision culminated in the extensive thesis of Manfred
36 The following buildings have been accredited to Ed. Cuypers and Hulswit, but this is incorrect or I could not prove this: Jakarta: Nederlandsch Indische Handelsbank: Kali Besar Barat (19th century building); 1908:
Bock, in which Berlage’s vision of history and his place in architectural
Surabaya: Nederlandsche Handel-Maatschappij, Jl. Kalet No.106 (W.
history was taken very seriously and worked out to the limit.
Westmaas); 1910: Jakarta: Schools of the Ursuline Sisters of Weltevreden,
19 Buiting (2003), p. 600. Berlage wrote in the Sociaal Democratisch
Jl. Pos No.2 (B.O.W.); 1913: Surabaya: Escomptobank, Jl. Kembang Jepun
Maandschrift, (1919) 24, pp. 713-723 and 748-753 ‘The individualistic nine-
No.180 (P.A.J. Moojen); 1905: Malang: Ursuline Sisters School Jl. Jaksa
teenth century displays the most diverse architectural styles. Currently
Agung Suprapto No.55 (W. Westmaas); 1923: Malang rk his School; 1923:
looming socialism has already announced an artistic renewal, in which
Jakarta: Escomptobank Kota Tua (L.M. van den Berg and W.H. Pichel);
architecture no longer has a chaotic change of shape, but is characterised
1926: Malang: Fraters School and convent, Jl. Jagung Suprapto No.21
by simplicity, formal beauty and a new ornamentation.’
(Smits, skh architects); 1908: Semarang: Building of the Franciscanessen
20 Het Huis (1904) p. 122.
Bangkong; 1916: Jakarta: Sluyters & Co Kali Besar Tim. 5-7 (P.A.J. Moojen);
21 Het Huis (1904) p. 124.
1916: Jakarta: Tiedeman & Van Kerchem, Kali Besar Tim. No.3 (L.M. van
22 Woud (1997), p. 368. Auke van der Woud remarks: ‘Henri Evers was the
den Berg and W.H. Pichel); 1923: Medan Town hall; 1932: Jakarta: De
only one who dared to write positively about the École des Beaux Arts; the cradle of modern representative architecture, which was highly appreciated in all countries, except for a few Dutch coteries. H. Evers (1855-1929) had been head of the Department of Architecture at the
13
Factorij, Jl. Lapangan Stasiun No.1 (C. van de Linde and A.P. Smits). 37 Leushuis (2011). This practical guide from Leushuis had not yet been published. 38 Bouwkundig Weekblad, March 14, 1959, p. 130, M. Westerduin.
Academy of Fine Arts and Technical Sciences in Rotterdam since 1887. From 1902 to 1926 he was a professor at Delft University of Technology. His designs include the Rotterdam City Hall (1914), which has some affinity with the Javasche Bank of Ed. Cuypers in Jakarta (Batavia) from 1913. 23 Temminck Groll (2002), p. 153. 24 Berlage (1931), p. 31. Berlage saw the Javasche Bank in Jakarta (Batavia) in 1923. His verdict was: ‘a modernised and therefore weak renaissance, with an unsatisfactory attempt by Hindu-Javanese ornament motifs’ 25 Rotterdamsche Courant, February 9, 1924. 26 Moojen (1909) pp. 394-397. 27 This committee was set up to assess and sanction construction plans similar to the Advisory Committee in Amsterdam, established in 1898, the later ‘Schoonheidscommissie’ 28 Het Nederlandsch Indische Huis Oud & Nieuw 1913 pp. 113-123, pp. 177-193. Nederlandsch-Indië Oud & Nieuw Sept. 1922, pp. 145-148. 29 Eduard Cuypers had nothing to do with the architecture of the Berlage’s Beurs building in Amsterdam, let alone with his fully stripped-down public housing construction. He preferred to build in the richer style of the nearby Bijenkorf and Rotterdam City Hall. Buildings that had and have much appeal then and now. 30 Het Huis (1904) p. 130 31 Bock (1983) p. 260 32 Woud (1993) p. 25.
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 13
21-07-20 14:46
Amsterdam and Batavia (Jakarta) around 1880 photo g.h. heinen cra / photo woodbury & page csm
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 14
24-07-20 11:47
15
3
AT THE OFFICES OF THE ARCHITECTURE FIRM IN AMSTERDAM & JAKARTA
Eduard Cuypers: young and promising Amsterdam: 1872-1878: From Roermond to Amsterdam
Born in Roermond in the southern part of the Netherlands on April 18, 1859, Eduard Cuypers completed his schooling in 1875.1 When not at school he was a regular visitor at the workshop of his uncle P.J.H. (Pierre) Cuypers (1827-1921). Although his uncle moved to Amsterdam in 1865, he kept his workshop in Roermond for the production and restoration of church sculptures. Pierre Cuypers had steady work and took on an average of fifteen new construction projects annually, especially in Germany. He travelled back and forth a lot between Amsterdam and Roermond and frequently visited his clients, to monitor progress on the construction site. From 1874 onwards, Pierre Cuypers worked annually on more than fifteen new churches, mainly in the Netherlands. He designed in neo-gothic style, his signature style. A year later Pierre Cuypers received two important assignments in Amsterdam: Central Station and the Rijksmuseum. Pierre owed these secular building projects to his brother-in-law, Joseph Alberdingk Thijm and his friend and government advisor Victor de Stuers. Both used their favourite neo-Gothic exclusively. They regarded it as the only answer to classicism and other imitations, and they would also like to find this architecture in government buildings. For fear that those buildings would become too neo-gothic, read too Catholic, many architects opposed these assignments. Young Eduard must have noticed that opinions about architecture can be quite divided. Differing opinions also came to the forefront in the Architectura et Amicitia Society (A et A) in Amsterdam, where P.J.H. Cuypers was an honorary member. Eduard Cuypers moved with his parents and three sisters to Amsterdam in 1876, where he could follow his uncle closely. He must have identified less with the world view of his uncle, grafted on the Catholic Church and the Middle Ages. He was for renewal. On January 13, 1877, the first of 8,000 poles went into the ground for the Rijksmuseum. To allay fears that it would become a typical Catholic building, Pierre Cuypers chose to use sculptures and ornaments from Dutch history. He set up
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 15
a workshop for this purpose in a shed on the construction site. Pierre needed, as he said, ‘young people who are going to carry out the decorations on the building, in the first place sculptors’. Eduard also went to work there and had to work strenuously, as he said later. He could not sculpt himself, but made sketches, drawings and building plans, that appealed to him, as did the organisation around it. It is possible that he met Marius Hulswit on the construction site, who was then the 15-year-old son of an Amsterdam apothecary.2 Eduard observed the building process. He may have been involved in the discussions about the most ideal light in the museum, because he later devoted much attention to light in his designs.3 He set aside part of his earned money to set up his own architecture firm Eduard, unlike his uncle, was open to the latest developments in architecture. 4 For that reason, he spent a great deal of money on books and international journals in the field of architecture.5 In 1878 he became a member of the architects’ association Architectura et Amicitia (A et A). His uncle may have recommended his young cousin. Perhaps Eduard travelled to Paris that year to get inspiration at the World’s Fair, but also to see a city that must have fascinated him. Paris was a city full of new construction in the style of the French Renaissance and classicism. Amsterdam 1879-1884: ‘Family is family’
In 1879 Eduard worked on the construction of the first American Hotel in Amsterdam, the predecessor of the present one. His father also contributed to this as a decorative painter, by applying the coats of arms of the various American states on the ceilings. In 1879, Pierre Cuypers’ workshop on the building site of the Rijksmuseum was formally converted into the drawing school for art crafts ‘Kunst-Nijverheid-Teekenschool Quellinus’. Here Eduard followed an architectural training. Hereby he obtained access to the necessary papers to start his own architecture firm. In 1881 he began working as a small independent entrepreneur using the name Ed. Cuypers, in order to avoid confusion with the office of his uncle Pierre. He designed a representative façade for the Rondeel Hotel in Amsterdam. ‘The façades were erected in the style of the new
21-07-20 14:46
16
Landmarks from a bygone era
Amsterdam, Hotel Rondeel designed by the 23-year-old Eduard Cuypers. ‘The façades have been erected in the style of the new German Renaissance’, according to the Algemeen Handelsblad on September 6, 1882. ‘The decoration includes seven medallion busts of famous world travellers’ saa
Amsterdam, the office stamp hni-croi
Amsterdam, the first American Hotel on the Leidseplein co-designed by the 20-year-old Eduard Cuypers, who made this drawing saa, atlas kok xxix-084
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 16
21-07-20 14:46
At the offices of the architecture firm in Amsterdam and Jakarta
Amsterdam, Eduard Cuypers, older than thirty-five years saa gerlagh 2007 p. 134
Amsterdam, Maison Stroucken designed by Eduard Cuypers saa, gerlagh 2007 p. 139
German Renaissance’, according to the Algemeen Handelsblad newspaper, ‘The decoration includes seven medallion busts of famous travellers’. ‘The models are supplied by the sculptors Van den Bossche and Crevels, two highly talented young artists, according to the newspaper. Both would soon break through as the two best-known sculptors in the Netherlands.6 Eduard received another commission in Amsterdam, Maison Stroucken. He designed the banquet hall and gave the façade something theatrical in a variant of the French Renaissance. ‘No expense has been spared to make it pleasant and comfortable for visitors. That this honours the young architect, everyone will agree with us, ‘wrote a journalist. The building is now part of the renewed De Lamar Theatre. Because the renaissance styles gave him little design space, Cuypers soon turned to eclecticism. This is not so much a building style as a design rule-free method that could be free and decorative. He must have experienced this as very liberating.7 He allowed his client to decide on the style, neo-Renaissance, classical, or eclectic. He aimed at a different market segment than his uncle with the emphasis on private houses, hotels and restaurants, building types where the personal wishes of the client played a prominent role. This meant that he was not in competition with his uncle and that he could even hope that his uncle referred clients to him. Eduard was himself different from his uncle, who mainly positioned himself as a master builder
and, above all, as an expert, as someone who knows what is good for a client.8 As with many other architects, Pierre Cuypers referred to knowledge and insights that were documented in manuals. Eduard, on the other hand, wanted to create a relationship with the client as a starting point for his design. He presented his client with examples from books and recently published international journals. His orientation was international. He attached great importance to applying the latest techniques. ‘Hundreds of people used the new lift in the’ American Hotel ‘on the Leidseplein during both Whitsun days’, according to the Algemeen Handelsblad on May 31, 1882. Presumably, the 23-yearold Eduard Cuypers helped to ensure that one of the very first passenger lifts was introduced in the Netherlands. Since his membership of the A et A, the social life of the Society flourished. He organised evenings and excursions. The ‘Rijksschool voor Kunstnijverheid Quellinus’ became a success in the meantime. The school had about sixty pupils in 1882. P.J.H. Cuypers was on the school board. The twentyyear-old Marius Hulswit taught here, first in drawing and later in what was called ‘all kinds of techniques’. He did so that for at least three years. Eduard Cuypers did not allow himself time for such an activity. He preferred to put all his energy into his own architecture firm. In 1882 Eduard ‘s mother died at the age of 53. He decided to move in with his father and his three
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 17
17
21-07-20 14:46
18
Landmarks from a bygone era
younger sisters. His architecture firm was at a different location. Undoubtedly, he visited the International Colonial and Export Trade Exhibition, which took place in Amsterdam in 1883. There he saw for the first time what the Dutch East Indies had to offer: beautiful fabrics and many arts and crafts. In 1884 Eduard became a board member of A et A. As the society’s librarian, he ensured that the small library of the society grew into a ‘visual school’ for architects.9 Due to his enthusiasm, the number of members increased from about one hundred to about 250. In 1884, A et A relocated from Maison Stroucken, where the club was bursting at the seams, to the American Hotel. Internally there were frictions. As the construction of the Rijksmuseum progressed, the criticism increased, also on the designer P.J.H Cuypers, both within A et A and nationally. Although Eduard’s architecture had taken a different path, he kept himself out of the discussions. Family is family. Surabaya 1884: A return trip to Surabaya
Marius Hulswit sailed to the Dutch East Indies in April 1884 to start a new life there.10 But in December of the same year he sailed back with his future wife, a Dutch woman, whom he had met in Surabaya. She was the daughter of a contractor who had hired him. Shortly afterwards she had become pregnant by Hulswit. They travelled together to Genoa. On their way to Holland, Marius Hulswit and Johanna Merghart decided to marry in Switzerland. They travelled by train to the Netherlands where they registered in Roosendaal on January 28, 1885 as a married couple. They went to live in Apeldoorn, where their son Jan Frederik was born on April 18, 1885.11 Amsterdam 1885-1895: Building with the latest techniques
In 1885 the opening of the Rijksmuseum took place. The Dutch king Willem III failed to attend, he did not want to go this event. Without saying this publicly he thought the building was a Catholic cathedral. A new concert hall was built in the garden behind Maison Stroucken, designed by Eduard Cuypers. In addition, Eduard provided the layout of the halls of the International Art Association, which led to a follow-up assignment, namely the design for the studio of Van den Bossche and Crevels, who become good friends of his.12 Commissioned by Eduard, they would later make the statues and ornaments that adorn various bank buildings of the present Bank Indonesia.13 Through them he came into contact with other sculptors, who inspired him to search for new forms of art in the style of the English Arts and Crafts, which precede those of Art Nouveau or Jugendstil. Marius Hulswit lived in Amsterdam again at the end of 1885. He worked at the architecture firm of Van Rossem and Vuyk. There they mainly designed utilitarian buildings with iron constructions, which made Hulswit extensively acquainted with
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 18
them. Perhaps he knew about the construction of the SaintJoseph church in Groningen. The church, fairly unique to the Netherlands, featured an openwork spire of cast iron. During the construction, Father Antonius Dijkmans S.J. (1851-1922) was involved, chosen by the church administration, as supervisor. In 1889, Ed. Cuypers designed no less than four capital mansions on the Sarphatistraat. Possibly he met Marius Hulswit there, because the architects Van Rossem and Vuyk worked at the same time on the construction of an adjoining building. After completion of the Rijksmuseum, the discussions between proponents and opponents of P.J.H. Cuypers became more intense within A et A. Most members wrote him off as someone who belonged to the past. That was, in their eyes, everyone who held on to the international neo-styles. While discussing, they agreed on the idea to look for a Dutch national style. The debates also dealt with the role of technology in construction. For Eduard, the application of new techniques was self-evident. The great élan that Eduard Cuypers had brought into the Society for five years disappeared through all those discussions. In 1888 he left the board of the association. He remained a member of A et A for more than 25 years, but whether he was there frequently is doubtful.14 He may have escaped that oppressive architects’ coterie with a visit to the impressive world exhibition in Paris. In the years that followed, his office produced many designs in the style of the neo-Renaissance, including that for the station of ‘s-Hertogenbosch. Its style was different to that of Amsterdam’s Central Station, it was unfortunately destroyed by bombing in the Second World War. In 1892 the architectural office of the 33-yearold Eduard delivered the twentieth project. The audience saw the opening of Hotel Polen on the Kalverstraat as a sensation, due to the contemporary but still extremely rare facilities such as electric lighting, central heating, a hydraulic lift and numerous telephone connections. At the same time, Berlage who was three years older and without even one building to his own name, taught at the Quellinus school.15 The name of his predecessor Hulswit would certainly have been mentioned. Outside the school walls, Berlage held fascinating lectures about what he considered good and bad in architecture. Many young people were hanging on his every word. Eduard Cuypers was given another project. Amsterdam received another appealing building in the same year following the latest architectural developments in America.16 At the Spui, a shop was built, which with its high windows was impressive and inviting. The furniture store Jansen received positive criticism from abroad. There was something sparkling about his concepts, which were lacking in later rationalism advocated by Berlage.17
21-07-20 14:46
At the offices of the architecture firm in Amsterdam and Jakarta
19
Amsterdam 1890, for Eduard Cuypers, the city had to be an artwork. He designed the richly decorated houses on the right in Sarphatistraat photo: g.h. heinen cra
‘S Hertogenbosch 1896, Eduard Cuypers designed the station in this city, visible in the background. Visitors were greeted with very representative and decorative buildings and Eduard Cuypers was happy to contribute con
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 19
24-07-20 11:48
20
Landmarks from a bygone era
Hulswit the pioneer: 1895-1907 Jakarta 1890-1895: Hulswit returns to the Dutch East Indies
On April 9, 1890, the Roman Catholic Church of Jakarta collapsed with thunderous sound.18 Thankfully, there were no victims. The building, once a residence, was converted into a church in 1880 with a ‘fitting front’. A new church had to be built. Pastor Dijkmans S.J., who had swapped his field of work in the Netherlands in 1888 for Jakarta, started to design it himself. He drew a large neo-Gothic cathedral. Possibly he felt that Jakarta did not have to be inferior in relation to Cologne in Germany, where barely ten years earlier the impressive Gothic cathedral, after many centuries, had been completed. Although there was no money for such a large building, the construction commenced. After a few months the foundations were there, but there was no money left. The church services were forced to take place in a wooden shed specially built for that purpose. Father Dijkmans S.J. left for the Netherlands on sick leave. Money, a lot of money, had to be collected, especially in the Netherlands, to carry out the ambitious plan. In 1893, Marius Hulswit returned to the Dutch East Indies with his wife and child, to build a new life there. The young family settled in Jakarta. Hulswit was employed by an employment agency, which leased professionals to companies. In order to publicise their activities, the firm regularly placed advertisements in newspapers with texts such as: ‘Our technical engineer, Mr. Hulswit, who has managed construction of large buildings both in Europe and in the Dutch East Indies, can perform all work in this area with knowledge and accuracy. Of this we can assure you’.19 It worked. He was approached for the construction of the accommodation of the Court of Justice in Surabaya. An engineer from the Waterstaat had made a sketch plan for this.20 They asked him if he wanted to check whether this was constructively correct, but also whether he wanted to build it. He wanted to, but not from Jakarta. On May 4, 1894 he left Jakarta and he sailed with wife, child and sister-in-law to Surabaya.21 Presumably, his parents-in-law also suggested that he join in their family business at that time. From that moment his place of work was the Boomstraat (now: Jl. Branjangan) in Surabaya. Here he presented himself not only as a contractor, but also as an architect. Weekly advertisements appeared in the newspaper in which he advertised his workmanship. Meanwhile he worked together with the engineers of Waterstaat on the construction of the Court of Justice. The design was largely based on the manuals of which Waterstaat made intensive use. These were based on building practices in Europe.22 In the Dutch East Indies, however, much had to be improvised, especially with regard to building materials, because otherwise everything had to come from Europe. In 1895, part of the roof came down during construction.23 Inspections followed to see if the con-
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 20
struction was reliable.24 That was not the problem. The soil was not very suitable which Hulswit could not be blamed for. He expanded his network within Surabaya and came to be known as a practical builder. This also contributed to his involvement with the extension of the Ursuline Sisters’ building. He also presented himself as a specialist in the field of plastering with portland. That made money, because almost every building in the Dutch East Indies was built using plaster because of the inferior quality of the indigenous brick. In August 1895 the Court of Justice opened its doors in an appropriate way. There was further subsidence, but that was not visible on the building as long as the seams were regularly closed with cement. Around that time, the Catholic parish in Surabaya needed a new church building, for which Hulswit made a proposal in 1896. He designed a church in Roman style and added a rough price estimate of the construction costs. In consultation with the church administration, he adapted the design, but after recalculation the plan proved to be too expensive and the execution did not go ahead, perhaps not only because of the costs, but possibly because of the architectural style. In the Netherlands and, apparently also in the Dutch East Indies, every Catholic church had to be neo-Gothic in style. Amsterdam 1896-1897: There is more than the Netherlands
In 1896 Berlage came to the conclusion that: ‘The architecture of P.J.H. Cuypers is the only one that deserves to be viewed, simply because that is the only architecture with lasting value’.25 Eduard Cuypers’ station in ‘s-Hertogenbosch, which was completed shortly before, apparently did not deserve that attention. Berlage’s influence grew in the Netherlands constantly. The station was given a negative judgment by the professional world for decades. George Willem van Heukelom (1870-1952), working for the railways, made the station roof in front of the station in ‘s-Hertogenbosch. Cuypers and he worked together very well and became friends. Made curious by Berlage’s statements, they attended Berlage’s lecture to find out his secret.26 They must have discovered that Berlage’s comments on architecture were fascinating, but that he was rather compelling in his judgments. He also was calculating shortly thereafter, P.J.H. Cuypers, as councillor of Amsterdam, suggested Berlage as architect for the construction of the Stock Exchange the socalled Beurs in Amsterdam, Berlage called it an ‘immortal merit’ of Pierre Cuypers that he had ‘enabled the recovery of architecture’.27 To interfere in discussions such as this did not interest Eduard. He did not think and did not design from the theory, but he did work intuitively. For him architecture did not belong to the pleasures that could come about through the reason. Yet Berlage aroused his admiration, if only because his view of architecture aroused debate among all his colleagues. Despite this view of Berlage, Eduard made a number of critical com-
21-07-20 14:46
At the offices of the architecture firm in Amsterdam and Jakarta
21
Surabaya, Court of Justice around 1930, built by M.J. Hulswit in 1895. It was demolished after major war damage con
‘s Hertogenbosch, the railway station was completed in 1896 and designed by Ed. Cuypers. It was badly damaged in World War II and then demolished con
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 21
21-07-20 14:46
22
Landmarks from a bygone era
Amsterdam, inaugural festivities in 1898 with honoured visitors from the Indonesian archipelago, including, seated from left to right: Amidin Pangeran Mangkoe Negoro, son of the Sultan of Kutai, Pangeran Ario Mataram, brother of the Sushuoenan of Surakarta, Jang di Pertuwan besar Sjarif Hashim Abdul Djali Saifuddin, Sultan of Siak, Hassanmudin Pangeran Sosro Negoro son of Sultan of Kutai. Standing from left to right: Raden Mas Aryo Kusumowinoto of Surakarta, Guards Mas Pandji Puspo Atmodjo of Surakarta, Raden Mas Matthes, son of the Pangeran Ario of Mataram gedenkboek 1898 p. 313 ss Amsterdam, het architec tenbureau Ed. Cuypers in 19 02 met staande van links naar rechts, Rijk Rijksen, Guillaume la Croix, onbekend, Joan van der Meij, Amsterdam, tekening van Eduard Cuypers voor de versiering van Michel de Klerk en staande daarnaa st Nico L ansdorp. Eduard Cuypers poseer t in het midden hni-croi de Hogesluisbrug met op de achtergrond het paleis van Volksvlijt Gedenkboek 189 8 p. 26 8
Amsterdam, during the trip, royalty from the Indonesian archipelago is cheered saa
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 22
21-07-20 14:46
At the offices of the architecture firm in Amsterdam and Jakarta
Amsterdam, het architectenbureau Ed. Cuypers in 19 02 met staande van links naar rechts, Rijk Rijksen, Guillaume la Croix, onbekend, Joan van der Meij, Amsterdam, tekening van Eduard Cuypers voor de versiering van Michel de Klerk en staande daarnaast Nico Lansdorp. Eduard Cuypers poseer t in het midden hni- croi de Hogesluisbrug met op de achtergrond het paleis van Volksvlijt Gedenkboek 189 8 p. 268
ments in 1896, and commented publicly, on the design of the Beurs presented by Berlage.28 His objections mainly concerned the façade at the Damrak side of the building in Amsterdam. He found this façade design much too closed and therefore downright unkind in terms of experience. Moreover, he regarded it functionally as very illogical that the public entrance was visibly more important than access for traders. Berlage did not agree and neither did the client, the municipality of Amsterdam. Since then, Cuypers refrained from commenting on other people’s work, while most colleagues increasingly made a habit of it. For example, the city of Amsterdam introduced a regulation in 1899, which stipulated that the architecture of a building first had to be approved by the municipal council. Only then did the municipality sell the building plot. This must have been experienced by Eduard as curtailing creativity.29 It undoubtedly also went against his feeling that not a municipality, but that the client determined the character of a building. Cuypers must have feared that he would soon be dictated a style of closed façades with a sober character. Eduard had no interest in ‘walls that completely surround you because they isolate and make you gloomy’. In his own words: ‘the cheerfulness of a room or a building is in the closest connection to the number of openings that it possesses’.30 At a meeting of the ‘Maatschappij ter Bevordering van de Bouwkunst’ (Society for the Promotion of Architecture) he spoke excitedly about his most recent building, the Amsterdamsche Bank on the Herengracht in Amsterdam. Enthusiastically, he showed his colleagues the building after the meeting. The façade on the Amsterdam canal was transparent with high windows and was in a cheerful Tudor style with a touch of Art Nouveau here and there.31 Eduard’s source of inspiration consisted of a mix of innovative influences from England, France and Belgium. Later reactions from colleagues showed that both Art Nouveau and the Arts and Crafts from England were dismissed by many as ‘sickly, unnatural and un-Dutch’.32 They found the bank building not rational and not ‘Dutch’ enough. They pointed to the national building tradition and a national style. In architectural education also, ‘a search for an original and contemporary Dutch beauty’ took place with the underlying goal of finding its own style. Eduard ignored these attempts to reduce architecture to one or two styles. He preferred to concentrate on developments abroad. Because of his involvement in the construction of the Dutch pavilion at the exhibition in Brussels in 1897, he must have come into contact with foreign colleagues.33 That will have prompted him to look for it especially outside Dutch borders. Amsterdam 1898: Amsterdam looking festive
23
Amsterdam, the ‘Amsterdamsche Bank’ designed by Ed. Cuypers in 1897 with a completely open, imaginative façade. The building was demolished in 1966, even though the city only owned one such special building saa
Amsterdam, after the inauguration of Queen Wilhelmina cra ss nieuw
Amsterdam, the ‘Nederlandse Bank’ (Dutch Bank) festively decorated on September 6, 1898 photo j. olie saa
In 1898 the inauguration of the Dutch Queen Wilhelmina took place in Amsterdam. The Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad of September 5 reported: ‘The festive decoration of the arrival
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 23
21-07-20 14:46
24
Landmarks from a bygone era
route is designed by the architects Ed. Cuypers and W. Kromhout. The part that Mr. Cuypers designed personally is truly festive, light and colourful [...] Mr. Cuypers did not need triumphal arches. High poles, widened at the foot by a square shell painted in light colours. Here and there the poles along the centre have been widened with flower baskets. On the Frederiksplein there are masts around the large fountain, from which curls jump in asymmetrical, pleasantly modern style and carved from thin wood painted in light colours’. The newspaper continued: ‘The golden carriage was the most talked about. This ‘tribute from the Amsterdam people to Her Majesty Queen Wilhelmina’ was on display in the Paleis voor Volksvlijt’. The sculpture on the carriage was by Van den Bossche and Crevels, with whom Eduard maintained a friendly bond. The paintings on the carriage show residents of the the Indonesian archipelago, who bring a tribute to a European-looking dignitary. The young queen got written congratulations from: the Susuhan of Surakarta, the Pangeran of Pakualaman and the Sultans of Yogyakarta, Mangkunegaran, Sambas, Riouw, Pontianak, Langkat, Siak and Deli. Some royalty had come over and were received with many others in the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam. Eduard Cuypers, who came here regularly as concert-goer, had redecorated the big hall for this occasion. The visitors were impressed by the result. At his architectural firm, he and his men worked on plans for four villas, including the house and the adjoining architect’s office for Eduard himself. Beside the architect’s house the building also offered space for the architecture firm, several showrooms and a studio and living space for employees such as Joan Melchior van der Meij (1878-1949) and Michel de Klerk (1884-1923).34 Surabaya 1898: Berlage also knows better at a distance
Marius Hulswit suffered many setbacks in Surabaya. His wife was probably admitted to a mental institution. From the board of the Catholic Church he heard that his colleague W. Westmaas (1848-1914) from Semarang was commissioned to build the new church of Surabaya. Westmaas produced a neo-Gothic design and the budget was approved. Hulswit was awarded a project to build an office building on the Willemskade (now: Jl. Jembatan Merah) in Surabaya for the life insurance company ‘De Algemeene’. His design was sent to the head office in Amsterdam for approval. It took a long time before he received a response because Berlage was also asked for his opinion.35 Berlage rejected it. In a letter to the client he wrote: ‘the design is that of a villa-like shophouse designed by a small architect. It is this architecture that has made our beautiful cities and towns ugly.’ 36 He was later to repeat these words at a lecture. Hulswit made a new design, which was again subject to Berlage’s judgment. He remained dissatisfied and now started to draw it him-
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 24
self. He adopted the design of Hulswit and mirrored the façade, creating symmetry. This doubled the building in width. In the high cowl he incorporated several work areas, which was unusual in the Dutch East Indies: a roof was there only for ventilation.37. The architect Charles Wolff Schoemaker (1882-1949) later called the building ‘completely unsuitable for the tropics’.38 As a consolation, Hulswit was told that he could be the supervisor at the construction site. The company J.E. Scheffer became the contractor.39 With Berlage’s design almost all building materials had to come from the Netherlands. Hulswit had a hard job on his hands as site supervisor. Fortunately, there was better news from Jakarta. 40 On the basis of an approved cost estimate, he was allowed to complete the new Catholic church there.41 The basic design did come from the aforementioned pastor Dijkmans, but he had finally left for the Netherlands. The foundations were now hidden under overgrown vegetation, but funds were sufficient. Hulswit decided to move to Jakarta and sold, as was customary in the Dutch East Indies, his household effects on a so-called ‘vendutie’. He sent his 13-year-old son by boat to the Netherlands. 42 Jan Frederik grew up with his uncle and aunt. Hulswit entrusted his company to a partner, with the consent of his in-laws, who still participated financially. Perhaps he did not rule out that he would return to take it again. Without the involvement of Hulswit, the contractor Scheffer finished the design of Berlage, based on that of Hulswit, at the Willemskade (now: Jl. Jembatan Merah) in Surabaya.
Batavia , pater Antonius Dijkmans sj (1851-192 2) die het ontwerp voor de kathedraal ma akte cnw Batavia , het Waterlooplein in de jaren Batavia: der tig met de kathedraal opjaren de achtergrond De kathedra al in de der tig chw con
Jakarta 1899: The cathedral is completed
The construction of the cathedral in Jakarta underwent a veritable restart in 1899. Hulswit selected the people who could do the job. He worked with them as his teacher P.J.H. Cuypers had done during the construction of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. During the construction of the church he met a new love, Elize Karthaus (1880-1930), a woman from a wealthy family. In Surabaya, his first marriage was formally dissolved. 43 Shortly after, the couple became engaged.44 Hulswit came in contact with pastor M.J.D. Claessens in Bogor. With him he arranged that the older boys at the Vincentius Institute could make the church furniture in his workshop, which he arranged there. He also worked on the new building for this institute. The plans were already finalised and had been drawn up by the architect Van der Ploeg who died suddenly. The first phase of this building was completed on February 15, 1900. Hulswit followed the plan of Father Dijkmans for the cathedral with the exception of the spires. Hulswit opted for cast iron. He made the drawings for the spires, which went to Europe by ship, to be manufactured there. A few months later the spires arrived by ship in parts in Jakarta. All parts of each tower peak were hoisted about fifty meters high along bamboo scaffolding. 45 At that height they were assembled.
21-07-20 14:46
At the offices of the architecture firm in Amsterdam and Jakarta
25
Jakarta, the Waterlooplein (now: Taman Lapangan Banteng) in the 1930s with the cathedral in the background con Batavia, pater Antonius Dijkmans sj (1851-192 2) die het ontwerp voor de kathedraal maak te cnw Batavia, het Waterlooplein in de jaren der tig met de kathedraal de achtergrond Batavia: De kathedraal in deopjaren der tig chw con
Jakarta, Father Antonius Dijkmans S.J. (1851-1922) who designed the cathedral cnj
Jakarta, ‘Design of a Roman Catholic Church in Batavia’. Architectural drawing by Anthonius Dijkman S.J. from 1890 cnj
Cuypers 1 engels_p001_320_HT.indd 25
21-07-20 14:46
