Slovenci in secesija : The Slovenes and Secession

Slovenci in secesija secesiji na naših tleh in o ustvarjalcih tistega je bilo doslej malo napisanega. Preglede zaokroženih tem, ki Orazmeroma presegajo monografsko obdelavo enega spomenika ali dela enega čas arhitekta, lahko preštejemo na prste ene roke. O tem so pisali v prvi vrsti Nace Šumi v svoji pionirski razpravi o secesijski arhitekturi v Ljubljani in nato Fran Šijanec v svojem splošnem pregledu sodobne umetnosti na Slovenskem. Borut Rovšnik je pripravil pregled secesijske arhitekturne ornamentike, ob razstavi o seceseijski uporabni umetnosti je Narodni muzej izdal katalog. Franc Obal je v splošnih obrisih obdelal secesijsko arhitekturo v Murski Soboti, Damjan Prelovšek pa je objavil vrsto poglobljenih razprav o posameznih problemih secesijske arhitekture pri nas in o 1 delu nekaterih vodilnih arhitektov tega čas. Pomanjkljivost vseh dosedanjih obravnav secesije na Slovenskem je torej po eni strani njihova fragmentarnost in po drugi strani upoštevanje le nekaterih, avtorjem bolj znanih ali bolj ljubih vidikov tematsko širino oziroma "pokritost" vsega tega pojava. Še največo slovenskega ozemlja je dosegla kompilasija tekstov, zbranih v katalogu razstave o secesijskem oblikovanju. Zal temu dosežku ni sledila sorodna pobuda, ki bi omgčila pregled in ovrednotenje arhitekurnih in urbanistčh dosežkov tega čas na celotnem slovenskem nacionalnem ozemlju. Slovenci smo dobili prve primerke novega sloga nekaj let pred iztekom stoletja. V primerjavi z Dunajem to niti ni bilo tako veliko zamudništvo, če vemo, da je leta 1898 prestolnica monarhije dobila prvi dve, v celoti secesijski stavbi in to Paviljon treh komisij Maksa Fabianija in Rudolfa Bauerja 2 kot del razstave ob jubileju cesarja Franca Jožefa I. in znamenito razstvišče Secesija Josepha Marie Olbricha. Istega leta, to je 1898, so v kranjski prestolnici nastale prve arhitekture, ki so nosile zunanje sledove nove dunajske mode. To sta bili stanovanjsko - poslovni stavbi in sicer na vogalu sedanje Čopve in Prešernovega trga (Prešernov trg 3) in ob Wolfovi ulici št. 10. Stavbi nista delo arhitektov, temvč stavbenikov, zato nimata kakovostnih arhitekturnih potez. Istega leta je bila tudi odprta tako imenovana Narodna kavarna v pritlčju stavbe na Gosposki ulici 1, leto pred tem pa Meyrjeva kavarna v Filipovem dvorcu . Slednja je nastala po načrtih graškega arhitekta Leopolda Theyerja, sicer projektanta te stavbe in stavbe na nasprotni strani Stritarjeve ulice, tako imenovane Kresije ali ljudske imovine. Obe stavbi je Theyer oblikoval v zanj značilem novem rensačm slogu . Meyerjeva kavarna, ki je delovala le kratek čas, naj bi bila odličen primer "internacionalne mode pred 1900", 3 to je v secesijsko občuteni mešani ci nove renesanse in novega baroka. Projektant Narodne kavarne je bil mladi slovenski arhitekturni up, Janez Jager. Z opremo notrajščie te kavarne je Jager poskušal uveljaviti "slovenski narodni slog". 4 Tudi ta interier so leta 1932 ob predelavah popolnoma uničl . 21 Splošno je znano, da je ena od značilost secesijskega gibanja njegova internacionalnost. Hkrati je bilo to obdobje, ko so arhitekti secesije raziskovali možnosti, kako znotraj posameznih različc ustvariti nacionalni arhitekturni izraz. Tako so v različnh koncih Evrope - od Finske, Skandinavije in Švice do Madžarske, Češk, Slovaške, Poljske, Baltskih dežel in Rusije - nastali odvodi v tako imenovani domačijsk ali vernakularni slog. Ti poskusi so se v nekaterih primerih stopili z nacionalno romantiko osemdesetih in devetdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja. Tudi v primeru Jagrove Narodne kavarne je bilo tako. Jager je bil sicer prvi slovenski arhitekt, ki si je zastavil težko nalogo, kako prenesti dekorativni besednjak slovenske ljudske umetnosti na arhitekturo oziroma oblikovanje opreme. Kot je bilo ugotovljeno, je bil ta poskus razmeroma neuspešen. Po ohranjenih fotografijah sodeč, je slog Narodne kavarne bolj soroden staronemškemu kot čemurkoli drugemu. Manj je znano dejstvo, da je do prvih poskusov v smeri slovenskega domačijskeg sloga prišlo že nekaj let pred tem, natčej leta 1895, to je hkrati s praško etnografsko razstavo, pri kateri so češki arhitekti dobili navdih za stanovanjske vile v vernakularnem slogu. 5 V Cerkljah na Gorenjskem so po načrtih Čeha Jana Vladimira Hraskega v počitnšk rezidenco prezidali starejšo kmečo hišo. Investitor je bil Ivan Hribar, kasnejši ljubljanski župan, takrat še občinsk odbornik, zastopnik praške banke Slavija in goreč privrženec panslovanstva. Zunajšči stavbe posnema tradicionalno gorenjsko stavbarstvo in to tako, da uporablja lesene dekorativne dodatke, kot so balkonska ograja, okrasje pod napušči in v zatrepih, predvsem pa lesena kadilnica v začelnm prizidku z veliko leseno dekorativno "luneto" . Glavni likovni poudarek notranjih prostorov so neorensač groteske v repzntačih prostorih in v "narodnih" barvah poslikana lesena konstrukcija kadilnice. Cerklje na Gorenjskem, Hribarjeva hi ša Hribarju pripisujejo odlčuj vlogo pri uveljavljanju Ljubljane kot slovenskega politčnega, gospodarskega in kulturnega središča. To vlogo je začel uveljavljati po velikem ljubljanskem potresu leta 1895 in po svoji prvi izvolitvi za župana leta 1896. V urbanistčh in arhitekturnih vprašanjih se je opiral na mnenje dveh Čehov in sicer na že omenjenega Jana Vladimira Hniskega, deželnega stavbnega inženirja in hkrati načelik občinskega stavbega odseka, in na mestnega arhitekta Jana Duffeja. Oba sta bila pristaša historčn slogov, predvsem nove renesanse, ki je tudi v osemdesetih in devetdesetih letih prevladovala pri gradnji javnih stavb v Ljubljani, pa tudi v drugih mestih slovenskega nacionalnega ozemlja. Tako ne presnča, da so bila do preloma stoletja vsa naročil mestne občine in deželnih oblasti zaupana projektantom, ki so upoštevali konvencionalna arhitekturna načel. Kot dokaz o tem, kakšen okus je prevladoval pri politikih, lahko navedem primer gradnje nove stavbe deželnega zbora v Ljubljani. Na natečju, ki je bil leta 1896, je sodeloval tudi takrat še mladi in neuveljavljeni Olbrich. Njegov projekt je ponudil umirjeno in v prostorski zasnovi premišljeno črpa iz besednjaka baročneg arhitekturo . Dekoracija notrajščie klasicizma, na zunajšči! pa je Olbrich uporabil secesijsko odlčujih 22 najzčileš predelano historčn okrasje. Čeprav je dobil drugo nagrado 6 in prva ni bila podeljena, so deželni odborniki naročil oddali Hniskemu in še kasneje dali njegov projekt predelati dunajskemu arhitektu Josephu Hudetzu. 7 Podobno kot Olbrichu se je godilo mlademu Plečniku, le da je ta zgodba manj znana. Še med študijem pri Wagnerju je Plečnik sodeloval na natečju za novo mestno hišo v Idriji. Natečjni projekt je objavil v isti številki revije Der Architekt 8 kot Olbrich svojo na tečajno rešitev za deželnozborsko palčo v Ljubljani . Plečnikova naloga je bila veliko manj ambiciozna - Idrije seveda ne gre primerjati z Ljubljano. Pa tudi Olbrichova umetniška teža je bila v veliko večja. Tako primerjavi s takrat še neizkušenim Plečnikom Plečnikov idejni projekt deluje kot pomanjšana in do kraja poenostavljena Olbrichova rešitev. Če se omejimo le na primerjavo obeh glavnih fasad, potem lahko vidimo, da uporabljata sorodne oblikovalske motive. Ti motivi, kot na primer tridelna, simetrčna kompozicija, rustika, lovorjevi venci, kartuše in pilastri, še sodijo v krog historčne arhitekture. Njihova izpeljava je deloma "manierstč . Tako se, na primer, fasadni pilastri nad strešnimi venci iztekajo v slope s figuralno - vegetabilnimi zaključi. Arhitekturno oblikovanje pa deloma nakazuje moderno razumevanje fasade s tem, ko rustiko reducira na horizontalne linije, velike fasadne površine pa pusti prazne, brez dekoracije. Tudi v Idriji so se ob č insk možje odlči za konvencionalno rešitev. Po načrtih drugega arhitekta so leta 1898 zgradili novo mestno hi šo v anonimnem slogu severnjaške renesanse . Prvo pravo secesijsko fasadno okrasje je na Slovenskem uresničl arhitekt Fabiani. To je bil isti Fabiani, po čigar načrtih so leta 1898 na Dunaju zgradili paviljon treh komisij in isti M.F., ki je v prvih številkah revije Der Architekt objavljal uvodnike v rubriki Iz Wagnerjeve šole. 9 piscev o moderni dunajski arhitekturi in urbanizmu je skorajda prezrla Fabianijevo vlogo . Izjemo sta predstavJjala Fabianijev primorski rojak, Marco Pozzetto, in Madžar Akos Moravansky. 10 Šele v zadnjih letih postaja vse bolj jasno, da je bil Wagnerjevih idej o arhitekturi Fabiani najdoslednejši ur e sničevalc in urbanizmu nove dobe" in hkrati samostojna umetniška osebnost velikega formata. Zato je za nas še toliko pomembnejše, da je v Sloveniji in predvsem v Ljubljani ohranjenih veliko del tega odličnega arhitekta. Večina Leta 1900 je na mestu po potresu porušene redute nastalo novo načrte zanjo je pripravilo poslopje mestne dekliške šole . Natečjn projektantsko podjetje Krauss & Tolk. Kasneje so se občinsk veljaki odlči, da naj fasado zanjo doknča slovenski rojak Maks Fabiani, ki je v tem času predaval na dunajski Tehniški visoki šoli. Fabiani je imel zvezane roke pri dolčanju zasnove stavbe, osnovnega ritma odprtin, pri nameščju vhodov, pri dolčanju razmerij višin in širin. Kljub temu je svojo nalogo dobro opravil. Fasade so umirjene in moderne v svoji enostavnosti. Secesijska je samo dekoracija pod napuščem obeh stranskih polj glavne fasade, kjer je razpreden naturlisč rastlinski ornament v štuku, in stilizirani štukirani obrči za obešanje tkanine, ki pod napuščem zaključeo slopaste okvire fasad. Veji z lovorjevimi listi rahljata fasadno ploskev. Menim, da je lovor tukaj prispodoba mladega življenja, hrepnčga kvišku, in ne simbol habsburške vladarske hiše. 12 23 V naslednjih letih je Fabiani v Ljubljani postavil še vrsto drugih stavb, ki s posameznimi prvinami sodijo v krog secesije, v celoti pa v krog moderne arhitekture začetk našega stoletja. Najpomebnejše med njimi so opisane v naslednjem poglavju. Mestna občina Ljubljana je bila investitor novega mostu čez Ljubljanico. Tako imenovani Jubilejni most, ali, kot so ga Zmajski most, naj bi omgčil širitev poimenovali Ljublanči, mesta na zemljišč med starim mestnim jedrom in železniško postajo. Že leta 1896, ko je Hribar nastopil županovanje, je magistrat začel zbirati ponudbe za novi most. Doknčati so ga nameravali do leta 1898, ko je monarhija praznovala petdesetletnice vladanja cesarja Franca Jožefa. Dela pri regulaciji reke so se zavlekla in tudi odborniki se niso mogli odlčit, kakšen most naj zgradijo, da bo monumentalen in tudi, da bo čim manj obremenil mestno blagajno. Glede cenenosti je bila najugodnejša ponudba Praške mostarne in prve češkomravs tovarne strojev in to za most v jekleni predalčni konstrukciji. 13 Če bi že takrat in ne leta 1908 v Pragi stal most Svatopluk Čech projektantov Jana Koula in Jirija Skourupa, bi se čehofil Hribar morda odlči za to možnost. V drugem krogu zbiranja ponudb so se odborniki ogreli za predlog dunajskega podjetja G.A. Wayss, ki je predlagalo zgraditi most v tedaj novem gradivu, v železobetonu in to po sistemu Monier. 14 Konč so se odlči za drugega izvajalca in sicer za dunajsko gradbeno podjetje Pittel & Brausewetter, ki je uporabljalo patent moravskega inženirja Josepha Melana. Morda so k tej odlčitv pripomogla priočla, ki jih je Hribar dobil od župana mesta Steyr v Spodnji Avstriji. 15 V Steyrju je namreč isto podjetje med letoma 1897 in 1900 zgradilo železobetonski most po novem sistemu. Tako torej ne drži trditev, da je Zmajski most najstarejši tovrstni most v tedanji Avstriji. Res pa je, da je v obdobju, ko se je nova tehnologija gradnje mostov šele uveljavljala, ljubljanski most pomenil posrečn preplet tehnič rešitev - triločnega železobetonskega mostu - in secesijskega arhitekturnega oblikovanja, ki kasneje v Trstu delu joči Giorgio ga je prispeval Wagnerjev učenc, Zaninovitch. Arhitekt je oblikoval dekorativno-funkcionalne elemente iz dveh vrst materiala in sicer iz ulitega betona in iz brona. Betonske so balustrada in balustradni slopi, ki v mehkih linijah prehajajo v podstavke za skulpturalni okras, in zunanje obloge mostne konstrukcije, ki imajo domiselno secesijsko dekoracija. Štiri skulpture zmajev - simbolov Ljubljane in hkrati varuhov mostu so iz bakrene pločevin. Secesijske svetilke na mostu so iz ulitega in oblikovanega bakra. Most in njegovi arhitekturno-skulpturalni členi so kakovosten prispevek k ljubljanski uličn opremi in k estetiki urbane krajine. Čeprav mnogo manjši, ga lahko postavimo ob bok Chauderonskemu mostu pri Lausanni v Švici, ki so ga v letih 1904 in 1905 zgradili po sistemu Monier in katerega arhitekta sta bila Francoza Alphonse Laverriere in Eugene Monod. 16 Zmajski most v Ljubljani 24 Na prste ene roke bi lahko prešteli arhitekture, nastale na sedanjem slovenskem ozemlju do konca devetnajstega stoletja, ki jih pogojno lahko štejemo kot novega sloga. Med letoma 1900 in 1904 je njihovo število tudi v Celju, skokovito naraslo in to ne le v Ljubljani, temvč Mariboru, na Bledu in v Rogaški Slatini. V naslednjih petih letih je secesijska arhitektura nastajala povsod na Štajerskem in Kranjskem in to v mestih, v lokalnih središčh in na podeželju. Od slovenskih dežel je zajela tudi Koroško in Pomurje, ne pa Primorske. Zanjo velja, da so tod po letu 191 O nastale le posamične predstavnice novega sloga (predvsem Tartinijevo gledaišč v Piranu, arhitekt Gia como Zammattio, 1909 -191 O) ali kot posebna skupina spominskih obeležij, povezanih z boji na soški fronti po letu 1915. začetk Skratka, glavnina secesije na Slovenskem je nastala v prvem desetletju našega stoletja, kar je primerljivo z razmerami v drugih evropskih deželah. Pri tem so zanimivi podatki o prostorski razširjenosti secesijske arhitekture. V Ljubljani kot edini deželni prestolnici na sedanjem slovenskem ozemlju je nastalo več kot osemdeset secesijskih arhitektur. Ostali dve večji mesti tega čas, Celje in Maribor, sta v tem pogledu slabše zastopani. V Mariboru smo evidentirali štiriindvajset, v Celju pa enajst secesijskih objektov, če pri tem upoštevamo tudi za provincialno okolje značilo mešanico historizma in secesije. Po številu tovrstnih stavb je pred Celjem Murska Sobota. To mesto je skupaj s Prekmurjem do leta je Murska 1918 sodilo v madžarski del Avstro-Ogrske. Čeprav Sobota še leta 191 O štela precej manj od tri tisoč prebivalcev, jo lahko označim kot drugo najpomembnejše središč secesije na sedanjem slovenskem ozemlju. Res pa je, da so vse pomembejše secesijske stavbe v Murski Soboti nastale po letu 1907 in da je za večino njih zaslužen en sam arhitekt, Lazslo Takacz. Ljubljana in Murska Sobota sta značil primera, kjer je secesija dunajske oziroma budimpeštanske smeri bistveno prispevala k mestnemu videzu ulic in trgov. Nasprotno pa sta Maribor in Celje tudi po letu 1900 svojo mestnost gradila predvsem na odmevih historizma, je čuti neposreden vpliv štajerske deželne prestolnice v čemr Gradca. tradicionalnosti Maribora so se posamezniki za novi Kljub večji slog ogreli kmalu po prelomu stoletja. Prvi primerki so nastali v letih 1902 in 1903. Leto mlaj ša je secesijska Hidroterapija v zdravilšču Rogaška Slatina in, na primer z atributi novega sloga opremljena hranilnica v Slovenskih Konjicah, mestecu z eno samo, glavno ulico. Secesijske fasade so nastajale tudi v Ptuju, v Ljutomeru, Ormožu . Kot rečno, je v Celju secesije bolj malo. Do leta 1905 gre predvsem za fasade v mešanici med novim barokom in secesijskimi oblikami. Šele 1906 je nastala najbolj "secesijska" med vsemi stavbami v Celju, stavba na Glavnem trgu št. 2. 25 cepljenje novih modnih V nasprotju s Celjem je za Maribor značilo prvin na neorsač podlago, pri čemr sta zastopani obe vrsti renesanse, severnjaška in klasičn . Takšna razlika med Celjem in Mariborom v resnici nima globjega pomena, ker so se v obeh primerih lokalni stavbeniki opirali na vzore iz Gradca. Za Gradec v splošnem velja, da sta tam še precej let po prelomu stoletja prevladovala novi barok in "nova nemška renesansa", kar se je seveda skladalo s pregovorno konservativnostjo štajerske prestolnice in s tam močn prisotno nemško ideologijo . 17 Kot ponazoritev neposredih vzorov graške arhitekture za mariborske stavbenike lahko navedem naslednji primer. Leta 1901 je Friedrich Sigmundt v Gradcu na Glockenplatzu za trgovca Gottfrieda Mauerja zgradil enonadstropno poslovno-stanovanjsko hišo v slogu nemške renesanse. 18 Leto pozneje je mariborski trgovec Franz Bernhard pri mariborskem stavbeniku Rudolfu Kiffmannu naročil načrt preureditve svoje hiše ob tedanji Tegetthoffovi (sedaj Partizanski) Prvi skoraj dobesedno cesti. Kiffman je pripravil dva načrt. posnema stavbo na Glockenplatzu, le da je mariborska različc širša - ima dve okenski osi več, in je tudi spodnji del simetrčno oblikovan. Ker je naročik verjetno želel še večjo hišo, je stavbenik pripravil še en projekt, ki mu je preprosto dodal drugo nadstropje s segmentno zaključenim okni. 19 Skratka, graški arhitekti, kot so Theyer, Sigmundt in Pruckner, so povzemali vzorce z Dunaja, njih pa so posnemali stavbeniki v manjših štajerskih mestih, med drugim tudi v Celju, Mariboru in še kje. Za Gradec je bilo skorajda nezaslišano, da je "renesanist" Sigmundt sodeloval z dunajskim podjetjem Fellner in Helmer pri projektih za "secesijsko" veleblagovnice Kastner & Ohler na Sackstrasse, na novo zgrajeno leta 1912. 20 Nobenega pohujšanja pa niso doživeli Ljublanči, ko je isti Sigmundt že leta 1902 naredil načrte za eno najčistešh secesijskih arhitektur v kranjski prestolnici, za Urbančevo veleblagovnice. Nasprotno, sodobniki so jo celo hvalili kot "zanimivo, vseskozi moderno in apartno". 2 1 Za štajersko gradbeno dogajanje je pomembna še _ena okliščna, ki je Kranjska ni poznala, vsaj ne v takšni obliki. Ze sem omenila nemški nacionalizem kot enega pomembnih vzrokov za prevlado tistih historčn slogov, ki so imeli pravi nacionalni predznak- in v to vrsto je sodil tudi "heroičn slog Fischer von Erlacha". Konec prvega desetletja novega stoletja se je to gibanje okrepilo z ustanovitvijo štajerskega Združenja za domačijsk varstvo. 22 o primernosti posameznih Združenje si je prilastiJo pravico odlčati arhitekturnih projektov ne le v deželni prestolnici ampak tudi drugod. Terezijin dvor v Mariboru predstavlja enega najpoučeših primerov delovanja tega združenja. Kot je znano, je leta 1909 po dolgih pogajanjih z Dunajem padla odlčitev, da Maribor dobi novi državni cestni most. Nemški trgovci so prečil, da bi most prečkal Dravo na prometno in urbanistčo najprimernejši točki, v podaljšku Tržaške ceste in v višini leta 1898 zgrajenega slovenskega Narodnega doma ob sedanji Ulici kneza Koclja. Most so leta 1913 vendar tako, da je neposredno povezal postavili na starem mostišču, najvišji terasi na obeh bregovih Drave. Zato je bilo potrebno porušiti jugovzhodni del strnjeno pozidanega Glavnega trga in precej zgodovinskih stavb ob nekdanjih dovoznih cestah na stari most. Tako obsežno rušenje varstvenikov domačije ni prav nič motilo. Ko je mariborsko podjetje bratov Franz leta 1912 hotelo na vogalni parceli Glavnega trga in nove ceste na most zgraditi mestno kavarno, je Združenje za domačijsk varstvo gladko zavrnilo projekt, češ da predvideva prebogato dekoracija in je premalo enostaven. Zavzemalo se je za takšno rešitev, ki "bi dosegla čim manjšo izgubo harmonič oblikovanih sten, ki obdajajo trg", in celo predlagalo svojega arhitekta, Hansa Prucknerja. Investitor je kljub temu zahteval prvotnega projektanta, dr. Lea Cernyja. Ko je ta pripravil nov projekt v enostavnejših in hkrati bolj monumentalnih oblikah, mu je združenje dalo zeleno luč in pohvalil o novo rešitev vogala s pomo lom, "ki je kot utrdba, ki varuje dravski most". 23 Mestna kavarna v Mariboru 26 Podobna zgodba, a z drugimi nasprotniki in z drugačnim izidom, se je dogodila leta 1914 v Ljubljani. Nekaj mesecev pred tem je dunajska Centralna komisija za spomeniško varstvo na mesto deželnega konservatorja za Kranjsko nastavila Franceta Steleta. Stele se je prizadevno lotil dela. Ena prvih zadev, s katero se je spoprijel, je bila nadomestna gradnja hiše na Mestnem trgu 23 v Ljubljani. Trgovec Drofenik je želel zgraditi novo trgovino z moderno fasado v kombinaciji jekla, stekla in keramičnh ploščic. Projekt je izdelal češki arhitekt Karl Brunnler iz stavbnega podjetja Viljem Treo. Stele je v imenu Centralne komisije projektu nasprotoval in pri nadrejenih na Dunaju celo izposloval denar za pripravo novega projekta, ki ga je naročil pri arhitektu Fritzu Schmidingerju. Mestne oblasti so Drofeniku sprva naložile, da mora upoštevati Schmidingerjev projekt. Vendar se je investitor pritožil in uspelo mu je. 24 Konservatorjevo mnenje je obveljalo le v eni podrobnosti. Namesto barvnih keramičnh ploščic so na pročelju namešč temne plošče iz poliranega umetnega kamna. Gledano z današnjimi očmi je stavba dober primer prilagoditve nove arhitekture historčnemu okolju . Še več, gre za eno redkih posrečnih konstrukcijskih fasadnih rešitev pri nas, za vrsto "obešene fasade", izvedene v modernih materialih in nevsiljivih secesijskih oblikah, brez drobnega okrasja. Drofenigova hi ša V doslej predstavljenih drobcih iz zgodovine nastajanja secesijske arhitekture pri nas nastopa vrsta arhitektov in stavbenikov. Vsega skupaj smo evidentirali skoraj petdeset imen. Od tega jih je bilo dvajset "gostujčih in razmeroma več " domačinv", ne glede na to, ali so bili slovenskega rodu ali ne. Pri tem Maksa Fabiania štejem med domačine, čeprav je bil v tistem času spoštovan arhitekt na Dunaju in je leta 1902 doktoriral na dunajski Tehniški visoki šoli. Vsekakor sodi Fabiani med evropsko pomembne arhitekte svojega čas in po umetniški moči močn presega sicer skromno slovensko povrečj. Druga, širši evropski javnosti najbolj znana zvezda slovenske arhitekture, Jože Plečnik, je v času, ki ga obravnava pričujoa knjiga, živel in ustvarjal na Dunaju. Leta 1911 je prevzel Koterovo mesto na praški umetnoobrtni šoli. Deset let kasneje se je sicer preselil v Ljubljano, vendar njegove prve pomembnejše stvaritve v domovini segajo v čas po letu 1925. Med gostujčim secesijskimi arhitekti jih je največ prišlo iz Gradca in z Dunaja, kar je za tiste razmere običajn. Med domači je bilo kar precej stavbenikov in ne arhitektov. Če sodimo po priimkih, niso bili vsi Slovenci. Fritz Friedriger je bil Maribočn. O njem ne vemo veliko. Njegovo stavbno podjetje je delovalo od leta 1897 do leta 1905. V začetku je bil zanj za čil en novresači slog. Po letu 1902 se je obrnil v secesijo dunajske smeri. Je avtor "najčisteš secesijske stavbe v Mariboru, najemne stanovanjske hiše ob Prežihovi ulici. Za Josefa Hroneka, stavbnega mojstra, ki je avtor vrste secesijskih vil na Bledu, se ve, da je bil Čeh in da se je leta 1904 naselil v Radovljici oziroma na Bledu in odprl stavbno obrt. 25 Robert Smielovski je bil rojen v Biali v tedanji Galiciji. Kot diplomant graške državne obrtne šole se je leta 1891 zaposlil v stavbnem podjetju Filipa Supanči v Ljubljani in se kasneje osamosvojil. V kranjski prestolnici je zgradil vrsto dokaj zanimivih secesijskih stavb. Valentin Scagnetti je bil furlanskega rodu. Rojen je bil v Vidmu pri Krškem. Tako kot Smielowsky je končal graško obrtno šolo in imel do leta 1909 stavbno podjetje v Krškem, nato 27 se je preselil v Ljubljano. 26 Med največ talente lahko štejemo soboškega mladega arhitekta madžarskega rodu Lizsla Takacza (1880-1916). Arhitekturo je študiral na likovni akademiji v Budimpešti, kjer je bil nekaj čas tudi asistent. Leta 1907 se je osamosvojil in z Zoltanom Tornallyjem ustanovil arhitekturni atelje v madžarski prestolnici. Leta 1909 je postal vodja gradnje Parlamenta v Budimpešti. Večina Takaczevih samostojnih del je v Murski Soboti. Leta 1916 je padel na fronti, star šestintrideset let. 27 razvoja slovenske arhitekture je najpomembnejše, da je S stališč na prelomu stoletja svojo poklicno pot začel prvi Slovenec, ki je bil izšolan arhitekt in ki je vse svoje življenje deloval v domovini. To je bil Ciril Metod Koch. Rojen je bil istega leta kot, na primer Olbrich, to je 1867. Najprej je doknčal graško obrtno šolo in leta 1890 dunajsko likovno akademijo v razredu Karla Hasenauerja in hkrati tehniško visoko šolo. Najprej je delal pri Filipu Supanči. Leta 1893 se je zaposlil v ljubljanskem mestnem stavbnem uradu, kjer je ostal do upokojitve leta 1924. 28 Njegova najboljša dela so nastala v prvem desetletju našega stoletja. Od začetn precej trde in ploskovite secesije wagnerjanske smeri je prešel v bolj domiselno in velemestno elegantno oblikovanje na primer pri Čudnovi hiši (1904) ali pri stanovanjskih stavbah Kmečk posojilnice (1906 1907). Njegova najboljša arhitektura je_verjetno posojilnica, imenovana Cebelica v Radovljici (1906). Zal je Koch ovo delo še premalo raziskano, da bi o njem lahko bolj doknč sodili. Vsekakor velja ugotovitev, da je tudi Koch s svojim ustvarjanjem vzgajal občinstv in potencialne naročike. Tako je posredno pripomogel k temu, da je leta 1920, po ustanovitvi nove države Srbov, Hrvatov in Slovencev, Ljubljana v okviru tehnič fakultete nove univerze dobila tudi arhitekturni oddelek. Njen prvi profesor je bil mladi Ivan Vurnik. Leto kasneje je nanjo prišel poučevat tudi Plečnik. Skratka, Slovenci v obravnavanem času nismo imeli arhitekturne šole ali gibanja v slogu dunajske Secesije. Slikarji skupine Sava ali Vesna niso imeli sopotnikov med arhitekti in notranjimi opremljevalci. Povpraševanje po takšnih storitvah je bilo v naših in z krajih preskromno. Z gospodarsko krepitvijo meščanstv narščjem javnih naročil je ob koncu tega obdobja napočil čas, ki ga po zaslugi Plečnika in Vurnika in po zaslugi njunih učencv zaznamuje nastanek tako imenovane ljubljanske arhitekturne šole. Vrnimo se k predstavitvi secesijske arhitekture na Slovenskem. Rekli smo že, kako težko se je nova smer uveljavljala pri javnih naročilh. Zasebni investitorji so se zanjo laže odlčai. To so storili takrat, ko so se hoteli izkazati z okusom po novi modi, modi, kot je prevladovala pri bogatih Dunajčih. Zato ne presnča, da je velika večina secesijskih stavb namenjena zasebnemu podjetništvu ali stanovanjem. V širši skupini stanovanjskih stavb sta nabolj pogosto zastopani dve podzvrsti - najemna stanovanjska stavba in stanovanjska vila. Niti prva niti druga resda nista iznajdba čas na prelomu stoletja. Sta pa tako tipčn, da ne predstavljata le ključnih oblik fin-desieclovske meščansk stanovanjske kulture, temvč tudi dajeta pečat celim mestnim četrim v vsakem, malo večjm evropskem mestu tistega čas. Predmestja z vilami, repzntač četri z na zunaj bahavimi najemnimi stanovanjskimi stavbami za višje sloje in četri na manj urejenih, neuglednih ali "umazanih" lokacijah s -to je stanovanjskimi "kasarnami" za delavce in nižje nameščc znana slika tipčnega evropskega mesta od Velike Britanije do Rusije, od Skandinavije do Sredozemlja. 28 Britanski, belgijski in francoski arhitekti so na prelomu stoletja utirali nove smeri stanovanjske arhitekture z novimi tlorisnimi, funkcionalnimi in konstruktivnimi rešitvami. Srednja Evropa in z njo Avstro-Ogrska je v tem pogledu ostala na ravni novosti, ki jih je prinesel tako imenovani slog Ringstrasse iz čas po 1860. Okrog leta 1900 se je deloma spremenil le nači okraševanja fasad najemnih stanovanjskih hiš. Znamenite Wagnerjeve hiše na Wienzeile na Dunaju pomenijo le novo razumevanje "oblačenj arhitektur, v stanovanjsko kulturo pa niso prinesle posebnih novosti. Olbrichove, Hoffmannove in Plečnikov vile so sicer primeri celostnega razumevanja arhitekture, notranje opreme in uporabne umetnosti, vendar ne uvajajo svobodnega tlorisa, prepletanja zunanjega in notranjega prostora, prepletanja nivojev itd. Širom po monarhiji je bilo novosti še manj. Tudi pri nas je bil dobiček, začinje s ščep cem zadnje mode, glavno vodilo pri gradnji najemnih stanovanjskih hiš. Tako do začetk prve svetovne vojne v takšne hiše niso nameščli kopalnic. Vsa stanovanja v enem nadstropju so navadno imela eno samo pipo s tekoč vodo in to običajn na stopnišču. Tudi stranišč so bila v mnogih stavbah skupna. Značile primer pomanjkanja higiene je Kiffmannova najemna stanovanjske hiša v Mariboru (Partizanska cesta 27), zgrajena v letih 1902 do 1903 v značil mešanici severnjaške renesanse in secesije . Stavbenik Kiffmann je bil v tem primeru tudi investitor, vendar stavbe ni zgradil zase in za svojo družino. Z oddajanjem stanovanj je zaslužil lepe denarce. Zato ne čudi, da v stavbi ni uredil niti greznice in so vse do leta 1923, ko so dali odpraviti to pomankljivost, iztrebke zbirali v sodih v kleti, od koder so jih morali odvažati. 29 Pričakovl bi, da so vsaj gradnjo stanovanjskih vil vodile zgolj zahteve udobja in prestiža. Deloma je temu res bilo tako, saj so vile služile stanovanju svojih investitorjev. Za razmere v naših mestih je značilo, da so tudi vile praviloma imele vsaj dve stanovanji. V boljšem stanovanju v prvem nadstropju je stanoval lastnik, stanovanje v pritlčju pa so oddajali. Velikokrat je vila bila projektirana tako, da je imela v pritlčju tudi že od vsega začetk poslovne prostore, navadno dostopne neposredno z ulice. Višji stanovanjski standard se je izražal v tem, da so stanovanja že imela kopalnice. Novost, vezana na secesijo in nekaj manj na romantič historizem, pa so bila velika okna v dnevnih in repzntačih prostorih, pomoli, verande in pokrite terase. Novo "povpraševanje po svetlobi" je bilo deloma prisotno tudi v najemih stanovanjskih stavbah, ki so jih opremljali z vogalnimi pomoli in podobnimi okenskimi elementi, ki pa so praviloma bili oblikovani tako, da so posnemali historčn arhitekturo. Po številčnos drugo največo skupino secesijske arhitekture predstavljajo banke, hranilnice, pošte, trgovine, tiskarne in druge poslovne stavbe. Tudi pri teh gradnjah se jasno kaže, da je bila secesija slog kapitala, vezanega na poslovne dejavnosti v mestih, in hkrati arhitektura, prilagojena modernemu mestnemu življenju . Vendar lahko tudi zanje ugotovimo, da je kar v največ primerih poslovna funkcija stavbe kombinirana s stanovanjsko. Tako je bilo tudi pri Mestni hranilnici v Ljubljani (Čopva 3, 1903 - 1904), delu hrvaškega arhitekta Josipa Vancaša. Pri gradnji osrednje poslovne stavbe liberalne slovenske buržoazije je njen varčni upravni odbor zastavil takšen gradbeni program, da je stavba v drugem nadstropju imela stanovanja, v pritlčju pa trgovske lokale. Tako je oddajanje stanovanj in lokalov hranilnici prinašalo dodaten dohodek. 30 29 V zvezi z bankami in hranilnicami secesijske dobe velja omeniti naslednjo ikonografsko posebnost. Kar nekaj bančih poslopij iz tistega čas ima na vidnem mestu motiv čebl oziroma čebljga panja. Takšne so že imenovana hranilnica v Slovenskih Konjicah (1904), hranilnica v Radovljici (Josef Hronek, 1905), Hranilnica Južne železne županije v Murski Soboti (Laszlo Takacz, 1907) in kot najlepši primer Kochova Čeblica v Radovljici. Slednja ima osrednji del glavne fasade spremenjen v dekorativno ploskev z naturlisčo prikazano alegorijo pridnosti in uspešnosti. Podobne primere poznam le še iz češk in madžarske secesije, iz okolij torej, ki sta veliko dala na "idejni in magični" in ne le na estetski pomen dekoracije. 31 Hranilnica v Slovenjskih Konjicah Od začetk stoletja do prve svetovne vojne je nastalo razmeroma veliko hotelov. Takšnih s secesijskimi slogovnimi značilnostm je devet. 32 Večina repzntačih hotelov in turisčnh središč, kot so Bled, Portorož in Rogaška Slatina, je svojo podobo gradila na kopelih in na zdraviliški ponudbi. Hoteli tistega čas niso bili prostori za oddih in zabavo, temvč predvsem središča duhovnega in telesnega zdravja. Tudi Hotel Union v Ljubljani je bil zamišljen ne le kot prenočiš za tujce, temvč kot središč s kulturno ponudbo, velikim kopališčem in plavalnima bazenama. Žal je bil uresnič le prvi del zamisli, to je hotel z veliko prireditveno dvorano. je, da niti pri najemnih niti poslovnih stavbah tistega čas pri nas ne zasledimo angleškega izuma za boljše osvetljevanje prostorov, tako imenovanih "bay/bow-windows" . Kot je znano, jih je v dunajsko arhitekturo uvedel Maks Fabiani s svojo Artario. V slovenskem gradivu predstavljajo izjemo tri hiše v Ljubljani, vsaka z drugačnim odgovorom na osnovno vprašanje osvetljevanja . To so Hribarjeva hiša (Maks Fabiani, 1905), Ljudska posojilnica (Josip Vancaš, 1908) in Zadružna gospodarska banka (Ivan Vurnik, 1922). To tudi pomeni, da secesijskih stavb na Slovenskem ne odlikujejo razgibane fasadne ploskve. Značilo Čeblica v Rad ovljici Hranilnica v Murski Soboti 30 Pri trgovinah je razvoj šel v drugo smer. Tukaj je konureči boj trgovce silil v privabljanje kupcev s pomčju velikih izložb. Tako so za izložbe izrabili pritličja in tudi nadstropja trgovskih stavb. Izložbe so hkrati omgčale osvetljevanje notran- josti trgovin. Pri veleblagovnicah so dodatnemu osvetljevanju služila notranja komunikacijska jedra, navadno v obliki zasteklenih galerij. V našem gradivu imamo lep primer takšne arhitekture, to je že omenjeno Urbančevo veleblagovnice v Ljubljani. Drofenikova trgovina na Mestnem trgu v Ljubljani in trgovina ob sedanji Stanetovi ulici v Celju sodita v tip manjših trgovskih hiš z značilm velikimi izložbenimi okni v nadstropjih. Z adru žn a go spodarska banka v Ljubljani Hribarjeva hi ša v Ljubljani 31 Le manjši del secejskih stavb je neposredno služil javnim namenom. To so bile predvsem šole, narodni domovi in telovadnice. Med šolami sem že omenila Fabianijevo Šentjakobsko šolo kot prvo javno stavbo s secesijsko dekoracije. Fabianijev mestni dekliški licej v Ljubljani je v arhitektonskem pogledu poglavje zase. Z njim je Fabiani uresničl svoj pogled na realizem v arhitekturi, kot ga je zapisal v manifestu iz leta 1895. 33 Naslednji "val" šol je naše kraje zajel šele po letu 191 O, torej v času, ko so se secesijski nastavki že stapljali z novim realizmom in z različnm inačcm domačijskeg sloga. Tipčno pahljčo takšnih šol sestavljajo državna obrtna šola v Ljubljani (Vojteh Dvorak, 1910- 1911), kmetijska šola v Šentjurju pri Celju (1910), dekliška ljudska in meščansk šola v Mariboru ( 1913-191 7) in deška meščansk šola v Murski Soboti (Odon Hocholzer iz Szombathelyja, 1915 -1916). Narodni domovi so repzntač stavbe, značile za naše pozno devetnajsto stoletje. Slovenci smo jih povzeli po zgledu drugih slovanskih narodov, predvsem Čehov in Poljakov. Danes bi jih lahko poimenovali "večnamsk kulturna in družabna središča". Njihovi investitorji so navadno bila kulturna društva, včasih, tako kot v Celju in v Trstu, denarne ustanove. Ta društva so v naših razmerah imela izrazit narodnostni, to je slovenski predznak. Rečmo lahko, da so bili narodni domovi izrazite ideološke naloge. Nekaj med njimi jih je nastalo še pred uveljavitvijo secesije, tako na primer Narodni dom v Novem mestu (1872 -1885), v Ljubljani (1893- 1896), v Celju (1893 -1897)3 4 in v Mariboru (1897-1898). Zato ne presnča, da so slovenska narodno - buditeljska društva, z izjemo najstarejšega, novomeškega, in najmlajšega, tržaškega, h gradnji narodnih domov pritegnila češk arhitekte. Logična posledica tega je bila, da so slovenski narodni domovi nosili slogovni pečat nove renesanse. Narodna domova v Ljubljani in Celju sta se razmeroma dobro vključia v urbano podobo obeh mest, ker sta uporabila arhitekturni besednjak, ki je razmeroma blizu naši baročni tradiciji. Narodni dom v Mariboru je v tem pogledu tujek, saj je uvedel za naš prostor tuje oblike severne renesanse. Njegovo "slovenskost" je mogče razumeti let če poznamo slovenske vezi s Cehi in zgodovino panslovanskega gibanja. Nem ška hi ša v Celju Narodni d om v T rstu Sokolski dom v Ljubljani 32 Poučen je tudi primer nemškega narodnega doma v Celju, tako imenovane Nemške hiše (dunajski arhitekt Peter Paul Brang, 1900-1906). 35 Nastal je kot protiutež slovenskemu Narodnemu domu . Njegova arhitektura je slikovita mešanica različnh slogovnih elementov. Predvsem jo odlikuje razgibana in asimetrčn kompozicija celote, ki jo kronajo mogčen vogalni stolp in plastično učinkjoe, strme strešine. Ce bi stavba stala, na primer, na Finskem, bi jo brez zadržkov šteli med lepe primerke secesijskega sloga. V našem okolju in v času ostre narodne delitve je zanjo obveljala oznaka "staronemškega" ali "novogotskega" sloga. Tako je na širšem slovenskem etičnm ozemlju nastal le en "moderni" narodni dom in to v Trstu . Načrte zanj je izdelal Maks Fabiani (1902-1904). Stavbo lahko štejemo za eno najboljših Fabianijevih stvaritev. V njej je arhitekt združil sredozemsko kubično st s svojim razumevanjem "novega realizma", ki se je izražal predvsem v funkcionalni notranji zasnovi. 36 Obenem je posrečn interpretiral Semperjeve in Wagnerjeve nazore o fasadi kot o preobleki konstrukcije. Pročelj tržaškega Narodnega doma je učinkoval slikovito in lahkotno, čeprav je bil spodnji del preoblčn v kamen. Zgornji del je imel oblogo iz dvobarvne opeke. Njene barve in vzorci so optičn valovili, kot sta se spreminjala svetloba in gledačv zorni kot. Vzore za takšno optičn "mehčanj fasadnih ploskev najdemo v orietalski, bizantinski in gotski arhitekturi. Tako ne presnča, da je Fabianijev Narodni dom najbolj spominjal na doževo palčo v Benetkah. Žal ta odlična arhitektura obstaja le še v okrnjeni obliki, ker so jo leta 1920 požgali itaijanski nacionalisti . Kasneje je bila stavba prenovljena in preurejena v hotel, trg pred njo pa zazidan. Narodni dom v Kranju (Ivan Secesijsko obodobje zaključeo Vurnik, 1922-1923, kasneje predelan), sokolski dom Tabor v Ljubljani (prav tako Vurnik, 1923-1926) in sokolski dom v Ljutomeru (Jože Jelenc, 1924-1927). Arhitekturne kakovosti teh stavb ni mogče primerjati, saj je slednja le skromna, skorajda anonimna stavba, prvi dve pa pomembni stvaritvi znanega arhitekta . Vseeno jih omenjam skupaj in to zato, ker zgovorno kažeta na izzvenevanje secesije v monumentalni art-dec6 z izrazitim "nacionalnim" podtonom (Vurnik), oziroma v njeno obračnje v novi klasicizem Qelenc) . Nazadnje naj omenim cerkveno arhitekturo. Zanjo velja, da je bila v obravnavanem obdobju podrejena tradicionalnim vzo- rom, torej historčnm slogom. Zato je bila večinoma šablonska, brez ustvarjalnega žara . Izjeme predstavljajo naslednji primeri. Zunaj našega ozemlja, na Dunaju je med letoma 191 O in 1913 stvaritev, cerkev sv. Duha. Gre za nastala znamenita Plečnikova prvi primer "iskrene" uporabe železobetonske, skeletne konstrukcije v kaki cerkvi. Rečm lahko, da so betonske preklade in stebri, ki nosilci estetskega in delijo glavno ladjo od stranskih, ključni simbolnega sporčila. Druga izjemna stvaritev v smislu secesijske celostne umetnine je spominska cerkvica na Javorci nad Zatolminom, prav tako posvečna sv. Duhu. Njen avtor je dunajski slikar Remigius Geyling. Če je prva cerkev slavospev veri v odrešitev delavstva, druga izraža vero v odrešitev vojakov vseh narodnosti in celo veroizpovedi, ki so se na soški fronti borili pod avstroogrskim dvoglavim orlom. Novo poglavje v slovenski cerkveni arhitekturi je odprl Vurnik in to z ureditvijo škofovske kapele v Trstu (1913) in z novo dekoracija prezbiterija župne cerve sv. Katarine nad Medvodami (1919-1920). Po sredini dvajsetih let je na tem podrčju v Sloveniji začel delovati tudi Plečnik. Do konca življenja sta Vurnik in Plečnik ustvarjala vsak svojo cerkveno arhitekturo, notranjo opremo in predmete za bogoslužje. Skupna poteza njunega ustvarjanja je, da sta oba črpal iz najboljšega izročla secesije in ga s svQjim osebnim umetniškim darom preoblikovala v živo sporčil: Casu njegovo umetnost in umetnosti njeno svobodo. J elka Pirkov 33 č Nace Šumi, Arhitekwra secesijske dobe v Ljub/ja11i, Ljubljana, Mestni muzej, 1954. Razprava je 1 pionirska ne le zato, ker gre za prvo obdelavo secesijske arhitekture pri nas, tudi zato, temvč ker je to ena prvih umetnostnozgodovinskih obravnav sodobne slovenske arhitekture dvajsetega stoletja. Šijanec je v svoj širši pregled moderne slovenske umetno sti vključi ustvarjanja ključnih arhitektov secesijskega obdobja. Pri tem se je večinoma tudi pregled naslonil na Šumijevo razpravo. Fran Šijanec, Sodobna slovenska likov11a ume!rlost, Maribor, Obzorja, 1961. Borut Rovšnik, Stilni razvoj ornamenta na fasadah v Sloveniji od 1895 do prve svetovne vojne, ZUZ, 11. v., 16- 1980, str. 25-50; Franc Obal, Arhitektura v obdobju 1900-1941 v Murski Soboti, Murska Sobota, Kulturni center, 1982; Vera Baloh, Vesna Jasna Horvat, Mirko Bučic, Damjan Kambič, Prelovšek, Borut Rovšnik, Marjetica Simoniti, Hanka Štular, Andreja Vrišer, Matija Žargi, Secesija na Slovenskem: uporabna umetnostJ umetna obrt t·n njej sorodni pojavi v obrtni in industnj'ski proizvoduji, Ljubljana, Narodni muzej, 1984; Damjan Prelovšek, Olbrichov projekt deželnega dvorca v Ljubljani, Simez a, 18119, 1970, str. 23-30; isti, Janez Jager in slovenska arhitektura, Simeza, 26127, 1973, str. 65-72; isti, Ljubljanski mostovi v drugi polovici 19. in v začetku 20. stoletja, Kronika 23, 1975, str. 29 -37; isti, Poslopje Mestne hranilnice ljubljanske, Kronika, 24, 1976, str. 43-47; isti, hiša v Ljubljani in njen arhitekt, Sinteza, 38/39/40, 1977, str. Urbančev 112-116; isti, Ljubljanska arhitektura Hribarjevega čas, Grafwauerjev z bomik, Ljubljana, 1996, str. 579-650. Gre za eno redkih Fabianijevih arhitektur, ki jih lahko prištevam o med šolske primere dunajske 2 secesije. Zato je precej nefabianijevska. Fabiani sam je izbiro takšnega arhitekturnega besednjaka z besedami: " .. vodilna misel tega paviljona je, da bi bil v temelju in v namenu opravičel 'moderen'. Da ne bi ta majhen objekt ob velikih izginil, smo ga barvno s polihromiranimi povečali frizi, kar tudi poudarja jubilejno priložnost". Der Architekt: Wiener Monatshefte fiir Bauwesen und dekorative Kunst, IV, 1898, str. 36. Zanimivo je, da tudi Renate Wagner Rieger to Fabianijevo stvaritev označuje kot "posebej čisto utelešenje tega sloga", vendar zamolči njenega avtorja . Geschichte der bi/denden Kunst in Wien: Geschicllle der Architeklllr i11 Wim, n.v., zv. VII, 3, 1973, str. 225 . 3 Damjan Prelovšek, Slovenci in seceseija, Seceszj"a na Slovenskem, Ljubljana, Narodni muzej, 1984, str. 19. Fotografija kavarne je objavljena v knjigi Prestolnica Ljubljana nekoč in danes, Ljubljana, DZS, 1997, str. 92. 4 Isti, Janez Jager in slovenska arhitektura, Siuteza, 26/27 , 1973, str. 66. Sam Jager je o tej problematiki objavil razpravo z naslovom Kje je naša individualnost v arhitekturi: Naprednim slovenskim krogom v premislek, Slovenski narod, 13 1, 132, 140, 143, 144, 1898. 5 Peter Wittlich, Art Nouveau in Czechoslovakia, Art Nouveau!Jugendstil architeclltre in Europe. Hans-Dieter Dyroff, ed ., German Com mission for UNESCO, 1988 (Architecture and protection of monuments and sites of historical interes!, 26), str. 38. 6 Der Architekt: Wiener Monatsh eftefiir Bauwese11 und dekorative Kunst, IV, 1898, str. 24 . 7 Damjan Prelovšek, Olbrichov projekt deželnega dvorca v Ljubljani, Sinteza, 18119, 1970, str. 8 Str. 31: tloris nadstropja, str. 38: tloris 24-25. 34 pritlčja, slikovna priloga št. 75 -pogledi na fasade. M.F., Aus der Wagner Schule, Der Architekt: Wiener Monatshefte jar Bauwesen und dekorative 9 Kunst, 1, 1895, str. 53-54; ll, 1896, str. 45. Harry Frances Malgrave je ta Fabianijeva besedila kot "manifest sodobnega realizma v arhitekturi " . Ouo Wagner- Reflection on the Rai1nem označil of Model'llity (Series of the Geny Center Publication Programms) Santa Monica, CA, The Getty Centre for the History of Art and Humanities, 1993, str. 284. 10 Marco Pozzetto, Ma x Fabiani: Ein Archizekl der Monarchie, Dunaj, Edition Tusch, 1983; Ako s Moravansky, Die Emeuerung der Baukunsz: Wege zur Moderne in Mizteleuropa 1900-1940, Salzburg, Dunaj , Residenz, 1988; Marko Pozzetto, Maks Fabiani- vizije proswra, Kranj, Li bra, 1997 . " V letih 1894 do 1896 je Fabiani delal v Wagnerjevem ateljeju. Bil je očitn kot njegov več zaposleni. Wagner mu je zaupal delo s študenti. Obenem je bil Fabiani njegova desna roka pri pripravi projektov in glavni Wagnerjev pisec tekstov. urbanistčh " Lovor kot dekorativni motiv naj bi Wagner povzdignil v simbol habsburške vladavine. namreč Prelovšek, Ljubljanska arhitektura Hribarjevega 13 str. 600. čas, ZAL, LJU-489, Reg. 1, fasc . 1028, fol. 162. Ponudba nosi letnico 1890. 14 Damjan Prelovšek, Ljubljanski mostovi v drugi polovici 19. in v začetku 20. stoletja, Kronika, 23, 1975, str. 32. " ZAL, o.c., fol. 156. Ohranjeno je pismo župana Steyrja, v katerem pošilja prepis pogodbe med mestno in podjetjem Pittei&Brausewetter o izgradnji " Schwimmschulbriicke". občin 16 Jaques Gubler, The temperate presistence of Art Nouveau , Art Nouveau Architecture (Frank 17 Antje Senarclens de Girancy, Zwichen Tradition und Innovation: Architektur in Graz um 1900, Russell, ed., ponatis) New York, Arch Cape Press, 1986, str. \66-167. Ohne Erinnerung: Beizriige zum Umgmzg mil der Geschiclue der Architektur in Graz, Gradec, Ha us der Architektur, 1995 (HDA- Dokumente zur Arcitektur No 4/95 ) str. 39-48. Friedrich Bouvier, Veranderunge in Stadtzentrum, Bank-, Hotel- und Geschaftsbauten, 18 Stadzerweizerzmg von Graz: Griinderzeiz, Gradec, Dunaj, Leykam, 1979, str. 148 . PAM, Fond Uprava za regulacije in gradnje, Ma/940. 19 '" Sigmundt je naredil tudi načrte za prvo blagovnica Kastner & Ohler iz let 1894-1895 in sodeloval pri njeni prezidavi leta 1912. Trans/okat: 9 Sliidze im Netz 1848-1918, Gradec, Leykam, 1996, str. 472. 21 Fran Govekar, Miljutin Zarnik (ed .), Ljubljana po pozresu/895-1910, Ljubljana, s.a. , str. 164. 22 Verein fiir Heimatschutz . Delo pod opombo št. 17. 23 PAM, fond Uprava za gradnje in regulacijo , Ma/1 02 . Dopisi Združenja za domovinsko varstvo 24 Dokumente o tem primeru hrani arhiv Uprave RS za kulturno nosijo podpis grofa dr. Franza Claryja, sicer graške ga župana. dei fond Zentrai- š čino, Kommission fiir Denkmalpflege, leto 1914. O KarJu Briinnlerju vemo le to, da je bil rojen 1877 na Češkm , da je leta 1908 prišel v Ljubljano kjer je leta 1919, ko se je vrnil iz voja ške službe, zaprosil za sprejem v domovinsko zvezo v Ljubljani. ZAL, Reg. 1., fa sc. 1582, fol. 539 . Nika Leben, PoCimiške vile na Bledu od leta 1850 do druge svezovne vojne: diplomsko delo, Univerza 25 v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta, PZE Umetnostna zgodovina, 1990 (tipkopis), str. 35. " Vlado Valen č ič , Ljubljansko stavbeništvo od srede 19. do 20. stoletja, Kronika, 1970, začetk 3, str. 140 . 27 Franc Obal, Arhitektura v obdobju 1900-1941 v Murski Soboti, Murska Sobota, Kulturni center, 28 Oszerreichisches biographisches Lexikon 1815-1950, Dunaj et al., Bohlau Nachv., 1969, IV. knjiga, 1982, str. 3; in PAM, fond Okrajno glavarstvo Murska Sobota 1901-1910,2265/1909. str. 14 . 29 PAM, Ma/950. 30 Damjan Prelovšek, Poslopje Mestne hranilnice ljubljanske, Kronika, 24, 1976, str. 43-33. Peter Wittlich, Art Nouveau in Czechoslovakia, Art Nouveau!Jugendstil archizeczure in Europe, 31 Hans-Dieter Dyroff, ed., German Commission for UNESCO, 1988 (Architecture and protection ofmonuments and sites of historical interest, 26), str. 39. Četudi 32 uporabimo najširša merila, hotela Palace v Portorožu Qohann Eustacchio, 1908-1909) ne moremo opredeliti kot secesijskega. Palace je zgrajen v mešanici ekltičn zgodovinskih slogov in na njem ni niti ene secesijske prvine. Samo uporaba pač 33 še ne daje opore za trditev, da je to" ... odličen različnh materialov različnh primer Art Nouveau hotelske arhitekture." M.F., Aus der Wagner Schule, Der Archizekt: Wiener Monazshefze fiir Bauwesen und dekorazive Kunst, I, 1895, str. 53-54; ll, 1896, str. 45. 34 Avtor slednjega je v našem pregledu Hniskyja značilem jedkana stekla, nakazujejo secesijsko omenjeni Jan Vladimir Hrasky. Zgrajen je v za občutje. 35 Andrej Stud en, Beseda, dve o Nemški hiši v Celju, Celjski zbornik, 1991, str. 39-51. 36 Marko Pozzetto Fabianijev Narodni dom v Trstu celo hkrati označuje za "dobro utečn med pionirske stvaritve funkcionalizma. Marko Pozzetto, Fabianijeva palč: uvršča in dobro 35 večkrat slogu. Samo nekateri deli notranje opreme, na primer novresačm utečn stroj" in ga dom stroj, Narodni dom v Trstu 1904-1920, Trst, Založba Devin, 1995, str. 27-30. The Slovenes and Secession W ritings on Secession in Slovene regions, and on Slovene artists of the period, have been relatively few. Scarcely any thematic surveys exist that go beyond a monograph on a single monument or a single architect's oeuvre. Among the authors, mention should first be made of Nace Šumi, who presen ted the Secession architecture of Ljubljana in his pioneering study on the theme; then Fran Šijanec and his general survey of modern art in Slovenia; Borut Rovšnik made a survey of Secession architectural ornamentation; a catalogue was published on the occasion of the exhibition of Secession applied arts in the Narodni muzej (National Museum), Ljubljana; Franc Obal studied the overall features of Secession architecture in Murska Sobota; and Damjan Prelovšek has published a number of well-founded studies on individual problems of Secession architecture here and on the work of some leading architects of the period. 1 The shortcomings of all the studies on Secession in Slovene regions are, on the one hand, their fragmentary character and, on the other, the presentation of only a few aspects of this phenomenon, which are either more familiar to the authors or their preferences. The widest scope, both in terms of the theme and the inclusion of the entire Slovene territory, was achieved in the compilation of texts published asa catalogue to the exhibition of Secession applied arts. Unfortunately, no similar initiative followed to highlight and eval ua te the achievements of this period in the field of architecture and urban planning for all Slovene territory. The first examples of the new style appeared among the Slovenes a few years before the end of the past century. It was not much behind Vienna, considering that the imperial capital only acquired its first two fully Art Nouveau buildings in 1898: Maks Fabiani's and Rudolf Bauer's Pavilion of Thr ee Commissions 2 as part of the Emperor Franz Joseph I's Jubilee Exhibition, and the famous Secession exhibition building by Joseph Maria Olbrich. That same year, i. e. 1898, the first buildings reflecting the new Viennese fashion were built in Ljubljana, Carniola 's capital. These were two residential-business houses, one at the corner of the ulica and Prešernov trg (3 Prešernov trg) and the present Čopva other at 1O Wolfova ulica. The two buildings were not created by architects, but are the work of mere builders, so they bear no outstanding architectural traits. The so-called Narodna kavarna ("National Cafe") was also opened that year on the ground floor of 1 Gosposka ulica, and Meyer's Cafe one year earlier in Filipov dvorec (Filip Mansion; 9 Stritarjeva ulica). This was projected by the Graz architect Leopold Theyer, who made plans for the entire mansion and also for the building on the opposite side of Stritarjeva ulica (No 6), the so-called Kresija, or "public property" . Both buildings were designed in neoRenaissance style, typical of Theyer. Meyer's Cafe, which operated for only a short time, is supposed to have been an excellent example of "international fashion before 1900", 3 i. e. a mixture of 21 neo-Renaissance and neo-Baroque, with a touch of Secession. Narodna kavarna was designed by Janez Qohn) Jager, a promising young Slovene architect. Its interior decoration was an attempt at the creation of a "Slovene national style". 4 This interior, too, was completely destroyed by re-modelling in 1932. One of the general features of the Art Nouveau movement is its international character. This was also a time when, within individual national variants of Art Nouveau, architects examined the possibilities of how to create a national architectural style. So particular off-shoots appeared, i. e. vernacular styles, in various parts of Europe, from Finland, Scandinavia, and Switzerland, to Hungary, Bohemia, Slovakia, Poland, the Baltic countries, and Russia. In some cases these experiments intermingled with the national romantic movements of the 1880s and 1890s. Such was also the case ofJager's Narodna kavarna. Jager was the first Slovene architect to undertake the difficult task of transposing the decorative language of Slovene folk art into architecture or interior decoration. As has been said, this attempt was rather a failure. Judging from the surviving photographs, the style of Narodna kavarna resemb led the "old German" style more than anything else. The first attempts at a Slovene vernacular style had already been made a few years earlier, in 1895, coinciding with the ethnographic exhibition in Prague, at which Czech architects found the inspiration to build residential villas in vernacular style. 5 Hribar's summer house, Cerklje (the Gorenjska region) At Cerklje in the Gorenjsko regian, an old farmhouse was adapted by the Czech architect Jan Vladimir Hrasky, to serve as a summer residence. It was commissioned by the later Mayor of Ljubljana, Ivan Hribar, an ardent supporter ofPanSlavism, then a municipal councillor and representative of the Prague "Slavija" bank. The exterior of the house imitates the traditional buildings of Gorenjsko by employing wooden decorative additions, such as a balcony surround, barge-boards under the eaves and in the gables, and above all, the timber smoking-room in the rear extension, with its big wooden decorative "lunette". The principal artistic emphasis of the interior lie s in the ne o-Renaissance grotesques in the reception rooms, and the timber smoking-room construction over-painted in "national" colours. It is believed that Hribar's role was decisive in the promotion of Ljubljana as the Slovene political, economic, and cultural centre. He began to play such a role after the severe earthquake that struck Ljubljana in 1895, and after he was first elected Mayor in 1896. In matters of urban planning and architecture he relied on two Czechs, the above-mentioned Jan Vladimir Hnisky, the provincial building engineer and head of the municipal building sector, and the municipal architect Jan Duffe. Both favoured historical styles, primarily neo-Renaissance; it was the prevalent style of the 1880s and 1890s, employed for public buildings in Ljubljana and also in other towns on Slovene national territory. So it is not surprising that any work commissioned by the municipal or provincial authorities until the turn of the century was entrusted to architects who kept to conventional architectural principles . 22 The most characteristic evidence of the prevailing political taste was the construction of a new County Hall in Ljubljana. The competitors in 1896 inc!uded the young Olbrich, who had as yet won no proper recognition. His project envisaged a balanced building, with a carefully considered spa tia! organisation. The interior decoration drew on Baroque Classicism, while the exterior was to be adorned with historical ornamentation adapted to Art Nouveau style . In spite of being award ed second prize 6 (first prize was not awarded at all) O!brich was not commissioned to do the work which was, curiously, entrusted to Hnisky, whose project was later given to the Viennese architect Hudetz to be reworked. 7 A similar fate to Olbrich's befell the young Plečnik, but it is not so widely known. During his training with Wagner, Plečnik participated in a competition for a new town-hall at Idrija. He published his competition project in the same number of Der Architekt8 as Olbrich's competition project for County Hall in Ljubljana . Plečnik's task was far less ambitious: Idrija cannot, after all, be com pared to Ljubljana. Olbrich's artistic weight was much greater than Plečnik's, who was stil! unqualified at that time. So Plečnik's idea of the project appears to be a reduced and extremely simplified version of O!brich's solution. The two front fa~des use similar forma! motifs, for instance, a tripartite symmetrical composition, rustication, !aure! wreaths, cartouches and pilasters, which stil! belong within the sphere of the architecture of Historicism. Their execution is partly "manneristic". Thus, for example, above end as finials topped the roof cornices, the pilasters of the fa~de with figural-vegetal decoration . A modern comprehension of aris partly indicated by the reducchitectural design on the fa~de surtion of rustication to horizontal bands, leaving large fa~de faces blank, without decoration . In Idrija, too, the local authorities decided ona conventional solution: a new town-hall was built in 1898 to the plans of an other architect, in an anonymous northern Renaissance style . The first true Seccesion fa~de decoration on Slovene territory was realized by the architect Fabiani; the same Fabiani who designed the Pavilion of Three Commissions, built in 1898 in Vienna, and the same "M. F." who contributed editorials to the rubric From Wagner's School for the initial numbers of Der Architekt magazine. 9 Most authors on Viennese architecture and urban planning have virtually failed to recognize Fabiani 's role. Two exceptions are Marco Pozzetto, Fabiani's compatriot from the Littoral, and the Hungarian Akos Moravansky. 10 Only recently has the truth been ascertained that Fabiani was the most steadfast of all architects in putting Wagner's ideas about architecture and urban planning of the new era into practice, 11 remaining at the same time a great independent artistic personality. Therefore the fact that fairly numerous works of this excellent architect survive in Slovenia, particularly in Ljubljana, is even more important for the Slovenes. In 1900, a new municipal girls' school was erected on the site of the former "Reduta" (public dance-hall), which had been destroyed by the earthquake. The competition plans were made by the Krauss & Tolk architectural studio. Afterwards, the municipal authorities should be designed by the Slovene nadecided that the fa~des tive, Maks Fabiani, then an assistant lecturer at the Vienna Technical High School. 23 Fabiani was very restricted in defining the general scheme of the building, the elementary rhythms of the openings, the distribution of entrances, the relations between heights and widths. Nevertheare less, he managed to perform his task very well. The fa~des balanced and modern in their simplicity. Only the decoration beis of low the eaves of the two la tera! sections of the front fa~de Secession type: the surface is covered with naturalistic, plant stucco ornament, and stylized stucco hoops for hanging draperies which pilasters below the eaves. Two boughs terminate the la tera! fa~de with !aure! foliage make the fa~de surface look lighter. I believe that the !aure! is used bere as a metaphor of young life aspiring upwards, and not as a symbol of the Habsburg ruling house. 12 In the following years, Fabiani designed a number of buildings which belong with in the framework of Art N ouveau in term s of their individual elements, but belong as a whole to modern architecture of the beginning of this century. The most important of these will be discussed in the chapter which follows. Zmajski m ost (Dra gon bridge) , Ljubljani The municipality of Ljubljana commissioned a new bridge across the Ljubljanica river. The aim of the so-called Jubilee Bridge (or Dragan Bridge, as the citizens of Ljubljana soon be gan to call it) was to render possible the expansion of the town over the !and between the old town centre and the railway station. As early as 1896, when Hribar began his term as Mayor, the municipal authorities started to collect tenders for a new bridge. It was planned to have been finished by 1898, when the Monarchy was to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary ofEmperor Franz Joseph's rule. The regulation works on the river were delayed, and the committeemen were also una ble to decide what kind of a bridge it should be, to be simultaneously monumenta! and not too much of a burden on the municipal budget. In term s of price, the most attractive tender was submitted by the Prague bridge-making factory and the first Czech-Moravian machine factory for a bridge of steel box conbridge in Prague, projected struction. 13 Had the Svatopluk Čech by Jan Koula and Jiri Skorup, already existed then, rather than being built only in 1908, then the Czechophile Hribar might have opted for this. In the second round of tenders, the committeemen too k note ofthe idea of the Viennese enterprise G. A. Wayss, suggesting a bridge of the novel material, reinforced concrete, following the Monier patent. 14 Eventually they decided to en trust the work to another contractor, i. e. the Viennese building firm ofPittel & Brausewetter, in which they employed the patent of the Moravian engineer Joseph Melan. Such a decision might have been made on the grounds of a recommendation sent to Hribar by the mayor of the Lower Austrian town of Steyr, 15 sin ce the same firm had built a reinforced concrete bridge in Steyr according to the new patent between 1897 and 1900. So the claim that the Dragan Bridge was the earliest of its kind in Austria is incorrect. However, at a time when the new technology of bridge building was only finding its way into general use, the Ljubljana bridge represented a happy combination of technical solutions: a three-arched, reinforced concrete bridge, and an Art Nouveau architectural design contributed by Wagner's student, Giorgio Zaninovitch, later active in Trieste. The architect envisaged the decorative-functional elements in two materials: east concrete and bronze. The ballustrade and its pillars, which softly curve and end as pedestals to bear sculptural decoration, and the exterior coating of the bridge construction, which is embellished with imaginative Art Nouveau decoration, are made of concrete. The four statues of dragons, symbols of Ljubljana, functioning al so as the guardian s of the bridge, are made of wrought copper plates. The Art Nouveau candelabra on the bridge are made of east and wrought copper. The architectural and sculptural elements ofthe bridge make it an important contribution to the street design of Ljubljana and to the aesthetics of urban landscaping. Although much smaller, it can nevertheless be ranked with the Chauderon bridge by Lausanne, Switzerland, built according to the Monier patent between 1904 and 1905 by the French architects Alphonse Laverriere and Eugene Monod. 16 Very little of the architecture built on the present Slovene territory by the end of the nineteenth century could be considered to represent the beginnings of the new style. However, the amount increased enormously between 1900 and 1904, not only in Ljubljana, but also in Celje, Maribor, Bled and Rogaška Slatina. In the next five years, Secession architecture was being built all over Styria and Carniola, both in towns and in local centres and the countryside. It also spread to other Slovene territory: Carinthia and Pomurje (the Mura river region), for example, but not to the Littoral, where only occasional representatives of the new style were built after 191 O (to mention the Tartini Theatre in Piran by the architect Giacomo Zammattio, 1909-191 O, or a special group of objects commemorating battles on the Isonzo Front after 1915). In short: the main body of Secession architecture in Slovenia was built in the first decade of the present century, which is fairly comparable with other European countries. The spa tia! distribution of Secession architecture is also interesting. In Ljubljana, the only provincial capital on the present Slovene territory, more than eighty Secession buildings were erected. The other two major cities of that time, Celje and Maribor, can boast far fewer examples. According to our evidence, there are twenty-five Secession buildings in Maribor and eleven in Celje, provided we also consider mixed types, i. e. combinations of Historicism and Art Nouveau, which are characteristic of provincial environments. The number of Secession buildings in Murska Sobota even exceeds that in Celje. Until 1918, Murska Sobota, together with the Prekmurje region, belonged to the Hungarian part of Austro-Hungary. Despite the fact that as !ate as 191 O it had far fewer than three thousand inhabitants, it might be supposed to represent the second most important centre of Seccesion on the present Slovene territory, but all its important Secession buildings were erected only after 1907, and a single architect, Lazslo Takacz, was responsible for most of them. Ljubljana and Murska Sobota are two characteristic examples in which Viennese and Budapest Secession respectively, essentially contributed to the urban look of the ir streets and squares. In contrast, the urban character of Maribor and Celje continued to be form ed by echoes of the Ringstrasse Historicism even after 1900, through the immediate influence of Graz, the capital of the province of Styria. In spite of the more traditional mili eu of Maribor, individual citizens took a fancy to the new style soon after the turn of the century. The earliest examples appeared between 1902 and 1903. A year later, the Secession hydrotherapy facilities were built at the Rogaška Slatina thermal spa; and at Slovenske Konjice, a small town with a single main street, the savings bank building, for example, was embellished with the attributes of the new style. Art Nouveau fa~des also appeared in Ptuj, Ljutomer and Ormož. 25 As mentioned above, there is not much Art Nouveau in Celje . Until 1905, only a few fa<;ades are of some interest, showing combinations of the neo-Baroque style and Secession forms. It was only in 1906 that the most completely "Secession" of all buildings in Celje was constructed at 2 Glavni trg. Unlike Celje, Maribor was typified by the inclusion of new fashionable elements in the neo-Renaissance core, where both kinds of Renaissance are represented, the northern and the classical variants. In fact, such a distinction between Celje and Maribor is of no substantial importance since, in both cases, local builders relied on models from Graz. In general, it is true of Graz that the neo-Baroque and the "new German Renaissance" predominated for quite a long time after the turn of the century, which was in natural accord with the proverbial conservatism of the Styrian capital and its strongly rooted German ideology. 17 The following case illustrates how examples of Graz architecture served as direct model s for builders in Maribor: in 1901, Friedrich Sigmundt built a two-storey business-residential house in Glockenplatz in Graz for the merchant Gottfried Mauer; he designed it in the style of the German Renaissance. 18 A year la ter, a Maribor merchant, Franz Bernhard, commissioned from the local builder Rudolf Kiffmann a plan for the renovation ofhis house in the then Tegetthoffstrasse (today's Partizanska cesta). Kiffmann made two plans: the first almost literally imitates the building on the Glockenplatz, only the Maribor variant is wider: it has two additional window axes, and the lower part is also symmetrical. Because the client probably wanted hi s house to be even bigger than this, the builder made a second plan, in which he simply added another floor with segmentally terminated windows. 19 In short, Graz architects, e. g. Theyer, Sigmundt and Pruckner, imitated models from Vienna; and they were in turn imitated by builders in small er Styrian towns, including Celje and Maribor. There was almost a scandal in Graz when the "Renaissancist" Sigmundt collaborated with the Vienna firm of Fellner & Helmer in the project for the "Art Nouveau" department store of Kastner & Ohler in Sackstrasse, rebuilt in 1912. 20 On the other hand, there was barely a ripple in Ljubljana when the same Sigmundt made plans as early as 1902 for one of the purest Art Nouveau buildings in Carniola's capital, the Urbanc department store. On the contrary, contemporaries even praised it for being "interesting, perfectly modern and charming". zJ Another circumstance was important for building activity in Styria, which was unknown in Carniola, at !east in such a form. I have already mentioned German nationalism as one of the important reasons for the prevalence of those historical styles that demonstrated a true national character; the "heroic style of Fischer von Erlach" was al so of such a kin d. At the end of the first decade of the new century, this movement was reinforced by the founding of the Styrian Verein fiir Heimatschutz (Association for the Protection of the Homeland). 22 The Association claimed the right to jud ge the suitability of individual architectural projects, not only in the provincial capital, but elsewhere, too. Grand Cafe, Maribor 26 The Grand Cafe in Maribor is a very instructive example of this association's activity. It was decided in 1909, after prolonged negotiations with Vienna, that a new state road bridge be built in M aribor. German merch ant s prevented the bridge fr o m crossing the Drava river at the most suitable point as regards traffic, as well as urban planning, that is to say as a continuation of Tržaška cesta, near the Slovene community hall, which bad been constructed in 1898 in today's Ulica kneza Koclja. The bridge was built in 1913 on the old bridge site, but it was planned so as to link directly the highest terraces on either bank of the Drava. For this purpose it was necessary to pul! down the densely built-up south-eastern corner of Glavni trg and a number of historical buildings along the former drive to the old bridge. Such extensive demolition caused no concern at all to patriotic defenders . Drofenig House, Ljubljana When the Maribor enterprise of the Franz brothers proposed in 1912 the building of Grand Cafe on the corner site between Glavni trg and the new access to the bridge, the Association for the Protection of the Homeland flatly rejected the project, claiming that the envisaged decoration was too rich and was not simple enough. The Association pleaded for a solution that "would cause the !east possible loss to the harmoniously designed walls that encircle the square"; they even suggested their own architect, Hans Pruckner. The owner insisted on the original designer, Dr. Leo Cerny. When the latter proposed a new project, with simpler and more monumenta! forms, the association gave the green light and praised the new solution of the corner with a turret which "seems like a fort protecting the Drava bridge". 23 A similar affair occurred in Ljubljana in 1914, with other protagonists involved and a different outcome. A few months earlier the Viennese Central Commission for Monument Protection appointed France Stele as provincial conservator for Carniola. He set to work eagerly. One of the first matters he faced was the replacement of the house at No 23 Mestni trg, Ljubljana. A merchant, Drofenig, which wanted to have a new shop built, with a modern fa~de would combine steel, glass and tiles. The project was executed by the Czech architect Karl Brunnler, from the building firm of Viljem Treo. Stele objected to the project on behalf of the Central Commission; he even managed to obtain money from his superiors in Vienna for a new project, which he commissioned from the architect Fritz Schmidinger. The municipal authorities at first insisted that Drofenig was bound to keep to Schmidinger's project. However, the owner lodged an appeal, which was successful. 24 The conservator's opinion was considered in one detail only: instead of glazed tiles, dark slabs of polished artificial stone were fixed to . Seen from today's perspective, the building is a good the fa~de example of the adaptation of new architecture to its historical surroundings. And more: it is a rare example bere of a successful construction, a type of "curtain wall" executed solution to fa~de in modern materials and discrete Art Nouveau forms, without detailed ornamentation. A number of architects and builders appear in the fragmented hi story of the evolution of Art Nouveau architecture in Slovene regions, as presented above. Altogether, our records include almost 27 fifty names. There were twenty "guests" and relatively more "natives", whether or not they were of Slovene birth. Here 1 number Maks Fabiani among the natives, although at that time he was a highly-esteemed architect in Vienna and had received a doctorate at Vienna 's Technical High School in 1902. Fabiani undoubtedly ranks among contemporary architects of general European importance, and his creative power greatly exceeds the otherwise poor another "star" in the Slovene arSlovene average. Jože Plečnik, chitectural sky, and best known to the wider European public, was living and working in Vienna during the period, dealt with in the present study. In 1911, he succeeded Kotera at the Prague School of Applied Arts. Ten years la ter, he moved to Ljubljana, it is true, but his first important architecture in his homeland was done after 1925. The majority ofSecession architects came bere as guests from Graz and Vienna, which was, of course, fairly natural for the current circumstances. Among the "natives", many were only builders, not architects. Judging from their names, they were not all Slovenes. Fritz Friedriger was a burgher of Maribor. Not much is known about him. Hi s building enterprise opera ted from 1897 to 1905. At the beginning ofhis career, the neo-Renaissance style was typical ofhis work. After 1902, he turned to Art Nouveau of the Viennese kind. He is the au thor of the "purest" Secessionist building in Maribor, the apartment house on Prežihova ulica. The building master Josef Hronek was responsible for a number of Secession villas at Bled. He was a Czech by birth, but settled in Radovljica, and la ter Bled, where he started a building firm in 1904. 25 Robert Smielowski was born at Biala in what was then Galizia. A graduate of the State Craft School in Graz, he was employed in 1891 in in Ljubljana, later setthe building enterprise of Filip Supanči ting up his own business. He built a number of fairly interesting Secession buildings in Carniola's capital. Valentin Scagnetti was a Friuli by birth, but born in Videm by Krško . Like Smielowski, he had graduated from the Graz craft school and rana building business at Krško umil 1909, when he moved to Ljubljana. 26 One of the greatest talents was the young architect of Hungarian origin, Laszlo Takacz (1880-1916) from Murska Sobota. He studied architecture at the Academy of Fine Arts in Budapest, where he was employed for some time as an associate lecturer. In 1907, with Zoltan Tornally, he established an architectural studio in the Hungarian capital. In 1909 he became he ad of building works for the Parliament house in Budapest. The majority ofTakacz's independent works are preserved in Murska Sobota. He was killed at the front in 1916, aged thirty-sixY The first Slovene trained as a professional architect and active all his life in his own country, started his career at the turn of the century: Ciril Metod Koch. He was born in 1867, the same year as Olbrich . He first graduated from the Graz craft school, and in 1890 from Vienna's Academy of Fine Arts, as a student of Karl Hasenauer, and simultaneously also from the Technical High School. His first employment was with Filip Supanči; in 1893, he was employed in the Ljubljana city building office where he worked right up to his retirement in 1924. 28 His best works were executed in the first decade of this century. Initially, he was cl ose to a rather rigid and flat Secession in the Wagnerian vein, before developing a more imaginative and elegant design, closer to methouse (1904), ropolitan fashion, such as, for example, in Čuden or in the Peasants' Loan-Bank apartment houses (1906-07). His best architecture is probably the Ioan-bank building called Čeblica (The Little Bee) in Radovljica (1906). Sadly, Koch's oeuvre has not yet been studied thoroughly enough to enable a more definite estimation . ln any case, the creations of Koch certainly hel ped to educate the public and would-be clients. In this way, he indirectly contributed to the architectural department being included in the 28 Technical Faculty of the newly found ed university in Ljubljana in 1920, after the establishment of the new state of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. The first professor at the department was the young came to join him. Ivan Vurnik, and a year later, Plečnik To sum up, there was no architectural school or movement on Slovene territory in the period discussed here, comparable to Vienna Secession. The painters of the "Sava" or "Vesna" groups had no counterpart in the field of architecture and interior decoration. There was too little demand for this kind of service in this country. With the growing economic power of the bourgeoisie and the increase of public commissions at the end of the period under discussion, the time dawned which, thanks to Plečnik and Vurnik, and their pupils, marks the beginning of the so-called Ljubljana school of architecture. Let us go back again to the presentation of Secession architecture on Slovene territory. It has already been explained how difficult it was to establish the new trend in public commissions. Private financiers were more favourable, mainly when they wanted to show off the ir ta ste for new fashion, the fashion which prevailed among the rich Viennese. So it is no wonder that the great majority of Secession buildings were erected for private entrepreneurs and/or for residential accomodation. Two sub-groups appear most frequently in the general group of residential houses: apartment houses and residential villas. Neither, however, was introduced at the turn of the century, but they were so typical of that time that not only do they represent the basic forms of the fin-de-siecle middle-class way of life, but they also give character to whole town quarters in any major European city dating from that period. Suburbs with villas, outwardly pompous apartment houses for the better-off, and quarters on less cul tiva ted, undistinguished, or "dirty" locations with residential "barracks" for workers and lower officials - all these are well-known image s of the typical European city, from Great Britain to Russia, from Scandinavia to the Mediterranean. British, Belgian and French architects pa ved the way for new trends in residential architecture at the turn of the century; they invented new solutions in terms of plan, functionality and construction. Central Europe, with Austro-Hungary included, remained at the level of innovations which the so-called Ringstrasse style had introduced after 1860. Only the manner of decorating fa~des of apartment houses was partially changed around the year 1900. Wagner's famous houses on Wienzeile in Vienna only represent a new understanding of the "cladding" of architecture, otherwise they contributed no special innovation to housing culture. It is true that Olbrich's, Hoffmann's and Plečnik's villas are examples of an integral treatment of architecture, interior decoration and applied arts, but they did not introduce free plans, or the interlacing of the outer and inner space, or of different levels, etc. Innovations were even fewer elsewhere in the monarchy. 29 As elsewhere, so in our country, too, profit, seasoned with a pinch of the !atest fashion, was the guiding princi ple in building apartment houses. So, for instance, no bathrooms were included in such houses before the outset of World War I. All the apartments on one floor usually shared a single tap, often installed on the staircase. Toilets, too, were shared in most houses. The Kiffmann apartment house in Maribor (27 Partizanska cesta), built in 1902-03 as a characteristic mix ture of north ern Renaissance and Secession, is a typical example of the la ck of sanitation. In this case, the builder Kiffmann was also the investor, but he did not build the house for himself and his family. Renting out the apartments was profitable. No wonder he did not even provide a cesspit for the building, so until 1923, when this deficiency was made good, night-sai! was collected in containers in the cellar, from where it had to be carted away. 29 Radovljici It could be expected at !east that the construction of residential villas was guided merely by the demands of comfort and prestige. In part it was so, since villas were built to serve as a residence for their owners. It is typical of the situation in our towns that even villas generally contained at !east two apartments. The better one on the first floor was occupied by the owner, white that on the ground floor was ren ted out. A villa was often projected from the very beginning in such a way as to include business premises on the ground floor, usually accessible directly from the street. The higher housing standard was manifested in the fact that these apartments already had bathrooms. Innovations connected with Art Nouveau, and not so much with Romantic Historicism, included big windows in living-rooms and reception rooms, then oriels, porches and roofed terraces . The new "demand for light" was partly manifested al so in tenant houses furnished with corner turrets and similar window elements which, however, were designed in imitation of historical architecture. Savings Bank, Murska Sobota The second largest group of Art N ouveau buildings embraces banks, savings banks, post-offices, department stores, printing houses, and other business premises. In these architectural tasks, too, it is obvious that Art Nouveau was the style of the capitallinked with business activities in the city, and its architecture was adapted to a modern town lifestyle. However, even here we can see that in the majority of cases, the business function of a building was combined with the residential. Such was the case with the City Savings Bank in Ljubljana (1903ulica), the work 04;. 3 Čopva of the Croatian architect Josip Vancaš. In preparation for the construction of these central business premises of the libera! Savings Bank, Slovenjske Konjice The LoanBank "Čeblica, 30 Slovene bourgeoisie, the thrifty board of directors envisaged a profitable building programme: apartments were planned on the second floor of the building, and shops on the ground floor. The rent from the tenants gave the bank some nice extra income. 30 The Cooperative Bank, Ljubljani Hribar Hou se, Ljubljana A special iconographic feature is worth mentioning in relation to Secession banks and savings banks. Quite a number of banking buildings of that time were decorated with the motif ofbees or bee-hives, such as the savings banks at Slovenske Konjice (1904), Radovljica (Josef Hronek, after 1904), the Southern Vas District Savings Bank at Murska Sobota (U.szl6 Takacz, 1907), and, as the most outstanding example, Koch's Čeblica (The Little Bee) at Radovljica. The central part of the front fa~de of the last named is a single decorative surface with a naturalistic presentation of the allegory of industry and prosperity. I only know of similar examples in Czech and Hungarian Secession, so in the milieux in which the "conceptual and magical" meaning of decoration was at !east as important as its aesthetic aspects. 31 A relatively large number of hotels were built from the beginning of the century until the outbreak of World War l. Art Nouveau features can be traced in nine ofthem. 32 The majority of hotels and tourists centres, such as Bled, Portorož, and Rogaška Slatina, based their offer on providing bathing or medical treatment. Hotel s of that period were not primarily meant to be places of relaxation and entertainment but centre s of psychic and physical health. Even the Hotel Union in Ljubljana was not designed only to provide foreigners with accommodation for the night but also asa centre of cultural activities, with a big bathhouse and two swimming pools. Unfortunately, only the first part of the idea was realized, a hotel with a large performance hall. It is curious that here neither in apartment houses nor in business premises of that time can the English innovation of bay/ or howwindows be found, admitting more light into the interiors. They were introduced into Viennese architecture by Maks Fabiani, who first used them in his Artaria house. However, three houses in Ljubljana are exceptions in the Slovene material, each answering the basic question of lighting in a different way. These are Hribar house (Maks Fabiani, 1905), the People's Loan Bank Gosip Vancaš, 1908) and the Cooperative Bank (Ivan Vurnik, 1922). It means that Art Nouveau buildings on Slovene territory do not boast dyplanes. namic fa~de 31 German Hou se, Celje Slovene Community Hall, Trieste The Sokol Gym Association building, Ljubljana 32 Developments in the building of shops went in an other direction. Competition forced retailers to attract customers by means of large shop-windows. So they exploited both the ground floor and the upper floors of commercial buildings for shop-windows. These also enabled the lighting of the shops' interiors. Department stores were further lightened by means of inner communication nuclei, usually in the form of glass galleries. The above-mentioned Urbanc department store in Ljubljana is a beautiful example of such architecture. The Drofenig shop on Mestni trg, Ljubljana, and a shop on today's Stanetova ulica in Celje belong to the type of smaller department store with typical large shop-windows in the upper floors. Only a small number of Secession buildings served public purposes directly. These were mainly schools, national community halls and gymnasiums. I have already mentioned Fabiani's school at St. James as the first public building with Art Nouveau decoration. His municipal Girls' Primary School in Ljubljana is a special case in terms of its architectonic aspects. It was a realization of Fabiani's view of Realism in architecture, as he put it in hi s manifesto of 1895. 33 The next "wave" of school building in this country came only after 191 O, when Secession features had already begun to merge with the new Realism and with different variants of the vernacular style. Typical school s of this kind are the State Craft School in Ljubljana (Vo jteh Dvorak, 191011), the Provincial Agricultural School at Šentjur b y Celje (1910), the Girls ' Primary and Secondary School in Maribor (1913-17), and the Boys' Secondary School at Murska Sobota ( Odon Hocholzer from Szombathely, 1915-16). National community halls were typical public buildings here in the !ate 19th century. They were modelled on examples of other Slav nations, Czech and Polish in particular. They would be called "multipurpose cultural and social centres" today. They were usually financed by cultural associations, and sometimes, as in Celje and Trieste, by financial institutions. In Slovene circumstances such associations were of explicitly nationalist, i.e. Slovene, orientation. So the construction of national community hall s was a professedly ideological task. Some of them were built before the outset of Secession, for example, the national community hall s in Novo mesto (1872-85), Ljubljana (1893-96), Celje (1893-97) 34 and Maribor (1897-98). So it is not surprising that Slovene nationalist associations, with the exception of the oldest one in Novo mesto, invited Czech architects to come and design Slovene community halls. A logical result was that these buildings were marked by a neo- Renaissance style. The national community halls in Ljubljana and Celje were relatively well incorporated into the urban image of the two towns, because their architectural vocabulary is fairly close to the Slovene Baroque tradition. However, the national community hall in Maribor is an intrusion in this regard, since it introduced northern Renaissance forms that were alien. lts "Slovene nature" can only be understood in the light of Slovene links with the Czechs and with in the context of the history of the Pan-Slavic movement. The case of the German community hall in Celje, the so-called German House (by the Viennese architect Peter Paul Brang, 190006), is also instructive. 35 It was built to counter the Slovene community hall. lts architecture is a picturesque mixture of diverse stylistic elements; and its main attraction is the dynamic and asymmetrical composition of the whole, crowned with a mighty corner turret and steep roofing, giving an appearance of plasticity. Were the building located in Finland, for example, it would be ranked without hesitation among handsome examples of Art Nouveau style. But in our milieu, and in the time of strict nationalist separation, it was la bell ed "old German" or "neo-Gothic" . So only one truly "modern" national community hall was erected on the wider Slovene ethnic territory, the work of Maks Fabiani, built in Trieste in 1902-04. The building can be ranked among his best creations. It is a combination of the Mediterranean cubic character and Fabiani's own understanding of "new Realism", which found expression mainly in the functional interior scheme. He also imaginatively interpreted Semper's and Wagner's ideas of the fac;ade as being the cladding to construction. The Trieste community hall's frontage seemed soft and pictoresque in the changing light and the spectator's shifting view, which caused its colours and patterns to undulate optically. Models for the optic "softening" of fac;ade planes can be found in Oriental, Byzantine, and Gothic architecture. So it is not surprising that Fabiani's community hall was most reminiscent of the Doge's Palace in Venice. Unfortunately, this excellent piece of architecture only partially survives, since it was burnt down in 1922 by ltalian nationalists. The building was later renovated and converted into a hotel, and the original square in front of it was built up. The Art Nouveau era on Slovene territory came to an end with the national community hall in Kranj (Ivan Vurnik, 1922-23; later modified), the Sokol Gym Association building at Tabor in Ljubljana (also Vurnik, 1923-26), and the same association's building at Ljutomer (Jože Jelenc, 1924-27). It is not possible to compare the architectural qualities of the three buildings, since the last named is modest, almost anonymous architecture, while the first two are creations of a famous architect. 1 mention them together nonetheless, because they clearly demonstrate the decline of Art Nouveau and its transition into Art Deco, with an emphasized "national" undertone (Vurnik), or its turn towards a new Classicism (Jelene). Finally, 1 must mention ecclesiastical architecture. In this period, it followed traditional models, that is to say, historical styles. So it was mostly conventional, lacking any true creative impulse . However, there are some examples worth mentioning. Outside our terwas realized between 191 O ritory, a famous creation by Plečnik and 1913: the Church of the Holy Spirit in Vienna. It is the first example of the genuine use of a reinforced concrete skeletal construction in a church. It could be said that the concrete traverse beams and the columns that divide the nave from the aisles essentially bear the aesthetic and symbolic message. 33 Another outstanding creation in the sense of an Art Nouveau Gesamtkunswerk is the memorial church of the Holy Spirit on Javorca plateau above Zatolmin. It was designed by Remigius Geyling, a painter from Vienna . If the former church is a hymn to a belief in the salvation of the working class, then the latter is an expression of a beli ef in the salvation of the soldiers of all nationalities, and even all religions, who fought on the Isonzo Front under the Austro-Hungarian double-headed eagle. A new chapter in Slovene ecclesiastical architecture was begun by Vurnik with his reworking of the bishop's chapel in Trieste (1913) and with a new decoration in the presbytery of the parish church of St. Catherine ab ove Medvode (1919-20). Plečnik, too, be gan his activities in this field of architecure in Slovenia after the midand Vurnik would continue to create ecclesiastical 1920s. Plečnik architecture, interior decorations and liturgical objects, each in his own way, throughout their lives. There was one feature they had in common in their creative process: both drew on the excellent tradition of Art Nouveau, thus remaking it through their personal artistic gift into a living message: "To each age its art, to art its freedom" . Jelka 1 34 Pirkovč Nace Šumi, Arhitektura secesijske dobe v Ljubljani /Secession architecture in Ljubljana/, Ljubljana, Mestni muzej, 1954. The stud y is pioneering not only because it deals with our Secession architecture but also because it is one of tbe earliest art-history studies of contemporary Sl ovene architecture. In his general survey of modern Slovene art, Šijanec al so presents an ou tline of the oeuvres of the most outstanding Slovene architects of Art Nouveau; he mostly drew on Šumi's stud y. Fran Šijanec, Sodobna slovenska likovna umewost /Co ntempora ry Slovene visual arts/, Maribor, Obzorja, 1961 . - Borut Rovšnik, Stil ni razvoj ornamenta na fa sadah v Sloveniji od 1895 do prve svetovne vojne rfhe development of style s of ornamentation of fapdes in Slovenia from 1895 to World War Il, Zbornik za umetnostno zgodovino, n. v., 16, 1980, pp. 2550; Franc Obal, Arhitektura v obdobju 1900 do 1941 v Murski Soboti /A rchitecture in Murska Sobota from 1900 through 19411, Murska Sobota, Kulturni center, 1982; Vera Baloh, Vesna Bu č ic , Ja sna Horvat, Mirko Kambič , Damjan Prelovšek, Borut Rovšnik, Marjetica Simoniti, Hanka Štular, Andreja Vri šer, and Matija Žargi, Secesija na Slovenskem: Uporabrw umetnost, umetna obrt in njej so rodni pojavi v obrtni in industrijski proizvodnji /Secess ion on Slovene territory: applied and decorative arts and rela ted phenomena in handicraft and industrial production/, Ljubljana, Narodni muze j, 1984; Damjan Prelovšek, Olbrichov projekt deželnega dvorca v Ljubljani /Oibrich 's project for the County Hall in Ljubljana/, Sinteza, 18-19, 1970, pp. 23 30; id ., Janez Jager in slovenska arhitektura /Janez (John) Jager and Slovene architecture/, Sinteza,. 26-27 , 1973, pp . 65-72; id., Ljubljanski mostovi v drugi polovici 19. in v zače tku 20. stoletja /The bridges of Ljubljana in the second half of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century/, Kronika, 23, 1975, pp. 29-37; id. Poslopje Mestne hranilnice ljubljanske 1 The building of the City Savings Bank of Ljubljana/, Kronika, 24, 1976, pp. 43-47; id., Urbančev hi ša v Ljubljani in njen arhitekt (fhe Urbanc House in Ljubljana and its architect!, Simeza, 38 40, 1977, pp . 11 2- 116; id. , Ljubljanska arhitektura Hribarjevega čas /Ljubljana architecture in the age of Mayor Hribar/, Grafenauerjev zbornik, Ljubljana, 1996, pp. 579-650. ' It is one of the few of Fabiani's architectural creations that can be counted among test cases of the Vienna Secession; so it is fairly "non-Fabiani an". The architect himself acco unted for the choice of such an architectural vocabulary: "The leading idea of this pavilion is to be 'modern' in its essence and purpose. To prevent thi s small building from being !ost to sight by the si de of big ones, we made it seem bigger by means of colouring - the polychrome friezes, which al so st ress the jubilee atmosphere." Der Architekt: Wiener Monatsheftefiir Bauwesen und dekorative Kunst, IV, 1898, p. 36. It is interesting that Renate Wagner Rieger also defines this creation of Fabiani asa "particularly pure materialization of this style" ; however, she does not name the au thor. Geschichte der bildenden Kunst in Wien: Geschichte der Archizektur in Wien, VII, 3, 1973), p. 225. 3 Damj an Prelovšek, Slovenci in secesija /The Slovenes and Secession/, Secesija na Slovenskem, Ljubljana, Narodni mu zej, 1984, p. 19. The original photograph of the cafe is published in the boo k Preswlnica Ljubljane nekoč in danes: A Pictorial Chronicle of a Capital City, Ljubljana, DZS , 1997, p . 92. 4 Id ., Janez Jager in slovenska arhitektura /Janez (John) Jage r and Sl ovene architecture/, Sinteza, 26-27, 1973, p. 66. Jager himse lfpublished a paper on this issue , Kje je naša individualnost v arhitekturi: Naprednim slovenskim krogom v premislek /Where is our individuality in architecture: To be considered by progressive Slovene circles/, Slovenski narod,. 131 , 132, 140, 143, 144, 1898. 5 Peter Wittlich , Art Nouveau in Czechoslovakia, Art Nouveau!Jugendstil architecwre in Europe, ed. Hans-Dieter Dyroff- German Commission for UNESCO, 1988, (Architecture and protection of monuments and sites of hi storical interest, No. 26), p . 38. ' Der Architekt: Wiener M onatshefte fur B auwesen und dekorative K unst, IV, 1898, p. 24 7 Damjan Prelovšek, Olbrichov projekt deželnega dvorca v Ljubljani /Olbrich 's project for the County Hall in Ljubljana/, Sinteza, 18-19 , 1970, pp. 24-25. 8 P. 3 1: Plan of the fir st floor; p. 38: plan of the gro und floor; plate No. 75: elevations of the fapde s. ' M . F., Aus der Wagner Schule, Der Architekt: Wiener M onatshefte fiir Bauwesen und dekorative K unst l , 1895, pp. 53-54, Il, 1896, p. 45 . Harry Frances Malgrave defined these texts by Fabiani as a "manife sto of contemporary Realism in architecture". Duo Wagner: Reflection on the Raiment of Modernity (Series of the Getty Center Publica tion Programs), Santa Monica, CA, The Getty Centre for the Hisrory of Art and Humanitie s, 1993, p. 284. 10 Marco Pozzetto, Ma x Fabiani: Ein Architekt der Monarchie, Vienna, Edition Tu sch, 19 83; Akos Moravansky, Die Erneuertmg der Bauk unst: Wege z ur M oderne in M itteleuropa 1900-1940, Salzburg, Vienna, Residenz, 1988. 11 From 189 4 unti\1 896 Fabiani worked in Wagner's studio, but he clearly appears to have been more than just an employee. Wagner entrusted him with the task of working with students; and Fabiani was also his right-hand man in preparing urban plans, and Wagner's principal textwriter. 35 " La ure! asa decorative motif was established by Wagner asa symbol of the Habsburg Rule. Prelovšek, Lj ubljanska arhitektura Hribarjevega čas, Grafenauerjev zbornik, p. 600. u Zgodovinski arhiv Ljubljana (ZAL), LJU-489, Reg. 1, Fasc. 1028, Fol. 162. The tender is da ted 1890 . 11 ' Damjan Prelovšek, Ljubljanski mostovi v drugi polovici 19. in v 20.stoletja, Kronika, začetku 23, 1975, p. 32. " ZAL, op. cit., Fol. 156. A letter has been preserved written by the mayor of Steyr, which includes a copy of the contracr between the municipality and the Pittel & Brausewetter firm concerning the construction of "Schwimmschulbrticke''. " Jacques Gubler, The tem pera te persistence of Art Nouveau, Arr Nouveau: Architecwre, ed. by Frank Russel (reprint), New York, Arch Cape Press, 1986, pp. 166- 167. 1 ; Antje Senarclens de Gironcy, Zwischen Tradition und l nnovation: Architektur in Graz um 1900, in: O/me Eriuneruug: Beitriige zwn Umgang mit der gesclzichte der Architektur in Graz, Graz, Ha us der Architektu r, 1995, (HDA- Dokumente zur Architektur No 4/95, pp. 39 -48) . " Friedrich Bouvier, Veranderunge in Stadtzentrum, Bank-, Hotel- und Geschaftsbauten, in: Stadterweiterwzg von Gmz: Grii>zderzeit, Graz, Vienna, Leykam, 1979, p. 148. " Pokrajinski arhiv Maribor (PAM), Fund Uprava za regulacije in gradnje, Ma/940 . 10 Sigmundt had also made the plans for the first Kastner & Oh! er department store (1894-1895) and collaborated when it was rebuilt in 1912. Translokal: 9 Stiidt e im Netz 1848-1918, Graz, Leykam, 1966, p. 4 72. 11 Fran Govekar, Miljurin Zarnik (e d. ), Ljubljana po potresu: 1895-1910 /Ljubljana after the earthquake: 1895-1910/, Ljubljana, s. a., p. 164. " See nore No. 17, p. 43. " PAM, Fund Uprava za gradnje in regulacijo, Mail 02. Letters by rhe Verein fUr Heimatschurz bear the signarure of Count Dr. Franz Clary, the mayor of Graz. " Documenrs of this case are kept in the archives of the Uprava RS za kulturno deiščno 1 Cultural Herirage Office of Slovenia/, Fund Zentral-Kommission fiir Denkmalptlege, year 1914. The only data we have on Briinnler is that he was horn in 1877 in Bohemia , that he came to Ljubljana in 1908 and thar, after rerurning from the milirary service, he applied for permanenr residence in Ljubljana. ZAL, Reg. 1., Fasc. 1582, Fol. 539. " Nika Leben, Po vile na Bledu od leta 1850 do druge svetovne vojne: diplomsko delo. Univerza čilške v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta, PZE Umetnostna zgodovina, Kranj, 1990, p. 35/A Unive rsity of Ljubljana diploma work presenting summer houses at Bled, from 1850 until World War II. " Vlado Valenči , Ljubljansko stavbeništvo od srede 19. do začetk 20. stoletja /The Ljubljana buildings from the mid-19th century to the early 20th century/, Kronika, 18, 1970, No. 3, p. 140. '; Franc Obal , Arhitekwra v obdobju 1900 do 1941 v Murski Soboti, Murska Sobota, Kulturni center, 1982, p. 3, and PAM, Fund Okrajno glavarstvo Murska Sobota 1901-1910, 2265/1909. " Osterreichisches biograplzisches Lex ikon 1815-1950, Vienna er al., Bohlau., 1969, Boo k IV, p. 14. " PAM, Ma/950. 30 11 Damjan Prelovšek, Poslopje Mestne hranilnice ljubljanske, Kronika , 24, 1976, pp. 43-47 . Peter Wittlich, Art Nouveau in Czechoslovakia, Art Nouveau!Jugendstil architecture in Europe . Hans-Dierer Dyroff, ed. -German Commission for UNESCO, 1988 (Architecture and protection of monumenrs and site s of hi storical interesr; 26), p. 39. " Even by the most libera! standards, Hotel Palace at Portorož (Johannes Eustachio, 1908-09) cannor be classified as Art Nouveau in style. I r was built as an eclecric mixrure of severa! historical sryles, and there is nor a single Art Nouveau element on it. A mere use of varied materials is no foundation for the statement rhat this is" .. an excellent example of Art Nouveau hotel architecture". 33 M. F., Aus der Wagner Schule, Der Archirekt: Wie ner Monatshefte fiir Bauweserz und dekorarive Kunst, l, 1895 , pp. 53-54, II, 1896, p. 45. · It is an approximate translation ofrhe Slove ne expression "narodni dom", which actually means "the house of the nation" (translator's note) " Its designer was Jan Vladimir Hnisky, who has been already menrioned severa! times. It is built in neo-Renaissa nce style, typical of Hnisky. Only some items of interior furnishings, e. g. the etched glass, indicate the Secession atmosphere. 35 Andrej S ruden, Beseda, dve o Nemški hiši v Celju /A word or Two about the German Hou se in Celje, Celjski zbornik, 1991, pp. 39-51. 36