3J7-1

Architecture Culture 1943-1968

A Documentary Anthology

.Joan Ockman
with the collaboration of Edward Eigen

Columbia University
Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation

· Books of Architecture
Colum bra
/ ~?9Jl : .. ,I
Architecture Culture 1943 1968.A Documentary Anthology IS a Columbia
Book of Architecture It was produced at Columbia University Graduate
School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation through the office of the Dean,
Bernard Tschurm, and the Director of Publications, Joan Ockman

First published In the United States of America In 1993 by

Rlzzoll International Publications, Inc
300 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10010

Copyright © 1993by
The Trustees of Columbia University In the City of New York
and Rlzzoll International Publications, Inc

Reprinted 1 96, 2000

All rights reserved

No part of thrs book may be reproduced In any manner whatsoever without
permission In writing from RIZLOIIInternational Publications, Inc

This book was supported by a grant from the Graham Foundation for Advanced
Studies In th Fine Arts

Book design by Jennifer Tobias

Printed and bound In Singapore

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Archu cture Culture' 1943 19 8, A Documentary Anthology / edited by Joan
Ockrnan with the collaboration of dward Elgen
p cm
"A publication of Columbia University Graduate School of Architecture.
Planning and Preservation '"
Includes bibliographical references and md x
ISBN O 8478 1511 O (hc)
ISBN O 8478 1522 6 (pbk)
1 Archrt cture. Modern 20th century 2 Architectural design
Ockman, Joan. II Eigen, Edward III. Columbia University Graduate School
of Architecture. Planrunq and Preservation
NA680.A57 1 93
724' 6 dc20 91 38729
CIP

UNIVERSIDADE DE COIMBRA
Departamento de Arquitectura
• " DARO

111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
1320738434
Contents

List of Documents 7

Foreword by Bernard Tschumi 11

Acknowledgments 12

Introduction 13

1943-1949 25

1950-1959 123

1960-1968 317

Selected Bibliography 463

Index of Authors 464

As flowers turn toward the sun, by dint of a secret heliotropism the past strives
toward that sun which is rismg in the sky of history.

-Walter Benjamin,Theses on the Philosophy of History, 1940

 List of Documents

1943 Nine Points on Monumentality 27

Jose LUIsSert. Fernand Leger. Slgfried Giedion

1943 In the Nature of Materials: A Philosophy 31

Frank Lloyd Wright

1943 A Swede Looks at Sweden 42

Sven Backstrom

1944 Monumentality 47
Lours Kahn

1944 Mr. Moses Dissects the "Long. Haired Planners" 55

Robert Moses

1945 Ineffable Space 64

Le Corbusier

1945 Constitution of the Association for Organic Architecture in Rome 68

APAO

1945 The Post·Modern House 70

Joseph Hudnut

1946 Program: Domus, the House of Man 77

Ernesto Nathan Rogers

1946 Return from America 80

Marcel Lods

1946 Designing a New Industry 86

R Buckrmnster Fuller

1946 New Education-Organic Approach 93

Laszlo Moholy-Nagy

1947 Reaffirmation of the Aims of ClAM 100

ClAM 6. Bridgwater

1947 Mr. Oud Replies 103

J J P Oud

1947 The Skyline [Bay Region Style] 107

l.ewis Mumford

1948 The Oneiric House 110

Gaston Bachelard

1949 Townscape: A Plea for an English Visual Philosophy 114

I de Wolfe [Hugh de Cronin Hastings]

1949 [Ar1 Belongs to the People] 120

Helena Syrkus
 1950 Sixteen Principles for the Restructuring of Cities 125
German Democratic Republic

1951 Concerning the Building Art 129

Rudolf Schwarz

1951 Summary of Needs at the Core 135

ClAM 8, Hoddesdon

1951 The International Style Twenty Years After 13T

Henry-Russell Hitchcock

1951 Origins and Trends in Modern Architecture 149

a thew Nowicki

1952 Education and Design 157

Max Bill

[1953] [With Infinite Slowness Arises the Great Form] 163

Ludwig Mies van der Rohe

1953 Formulary for a New Urbanism 167

Gilles lvam [Ivan Chtcheglov]

1954 Arguments apropos of the International Movement for an

Imaginist Bauhaus, against an Imaginary Bauhaus, and Its
Purpose Today 172
Asger Jorn

195. t Steps toward a Solid Architecture 176

Water Gropius

1954 Doorn anifesto 181

Jacob Bakema, l!>Ioo~ Eye H P. Daniel van Grnkel, Hans Hovens-Greve,
Peter Smithson, John Voelker

1954 Remove Shortcomings in Design, Improve Work of Architects 184

Nikita Khrushchev

1955 The Seven Crutches of Modern Architecture 189

Philip Johnson

1955 Cityscape and Landscape 193

Victor Gruen

1955 Preexisting Conditions and Issues of Contemporary Building

Practice 200
Ernesto Nathan Rogers

1956 Transparency: Literal and Phenomenal (Part 2) 205

Colin Rowe and Robert Slutzky

1957 The Case for a Theory of Modern Architecture 226

John Summerson

1957 Machine Made America 237

John McHale
1957 The New Brutalism 240
Alison and Peter Smithson

1957 Regionalism and Modern Architecture 242

James Stirling

1957 The Architect's Conscience 249

Alvar Aalto

1957 Architecture and Ideology 253

Gruho Carlo Argan

1957 The Architect, the Artist 260

GIO Ponti

1957 On Building in Our Time 266

Konrad Wachsmann

1957 Architecture Is the Thoughtful Making of Spaces 270

l.oins Kahn

1958 Program of Mobile Urbanism 273

Yona Friedman

1958 Human Setting in an Industrial Civilization 276

Richard J. Neutra

1958 New Developments in Industry and the Training of the Designer 288
Tomás Maldonado

1959 The Evolution of Architecture: Reply to the Custodian of

Frigidaires 300
Ernesto Nathan Rogers

1959 Form and Function in Architecture 308

Oscar Niemeyer

1959 The Great Game to Come 314

Constant

1960 Toward Group Form 319

FurrurukoMaki and Masato Ohtaka

1961 A Plan for Tokyo, 1960: Toward a Structural Reorganization 325

Kenzo Tange

1961 It's Not Geniuses We Need Now 335

J. A. Coderch de Sentmenat

1961 from The Death and Life of Great American Cities 338
Jane Jacobs

1962 The Modern Movement in Architecture 341

Alan Colquhoun

1962 Steps toward a Configurative Discipline 347

Aldo van Eyck
1963 The City as a Work of Art 361
O. M. Ungers

1964 Zoom and "Real" Architecture 365

Peter Cook

1965 A Home Is Not a House 370

Reyner Banham

1965 A City Is Not a Tree (Part 2) 379

Christopher Alexander

1965 Nonstraightforward Architecture: A Gentle Manifesto 389

Robert Venturi

1966 from The Architecture of the City 392

Aldo Hoss:

1966 Architecture, Environment, Nature 399

Vittorio Gregottl

1966 Invisible City 402

Arata tsozaki

1966 The Oblique Function 408

Paul Vmlio

1967 Semiology and Urbanism 412

Roland Barthes

1967 Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias 419

Michel Foucault

1967 The Right to the City 427

Henri Lefebvre

1967 Invention Design and Evasion Design 437

Superstudio

1967 Democratic Planning 442

Paul Davidoff

1968 On Ducks and Decoration 446

Denise Scott Brown and Robert Venturi

1968 Introduction to Theories and History of Architecture 449

Manfredo Tatun

1968 Motion of May 15 456

Strike Committee. Ecole des Beaux-Arts

1968 Everything Is Architecture 459

Hans Hollern
Foreword

Columbia's commitment to the documentation and reassessmentof twentieth-century

architecture, and especially its development over the last half century, goes well
beyond being a desirable scholarly activity within the walls of a major university.
Throughout its long history,architecture has displayed an unusual fascination for
the interplay between words and images, manifestos and actual buildings. From
Vitruviusto Alberti to Le Corbusier to the present, the historyof architecture is as much
the historyof itswritings as of its buildings. Almost nevercan architecture be separated
from the ideological context in which it was produced.
The following anthology aims to examine the relationship between historical
documents and the culture in which they were first introduced. It also aims to relate
these texts with an ongoing and very contemporary discourse that calls into question
the boundaries between theory and practice. New interest in the idea of a theoretical
practice for architects-that is, a practice grounded in theory-makes this book a very
timely proposition, as many of the questions being raised today can be directed to the
architecture of the recent past. Do architectural texts belong to the realm of objectivity,
similarto scientific theoremswhose validity can be demonstrated by actual buildings?
Or do they on the contrary belong to the realm of poetic gestures and programmatic
statements motivated by partisan interests? Are texts-and all theory--essentially
descriptive or prescriptive?
Today,participating inanunprecedented exchangeof ideasbetweendisciplines-
the arts, philosophy, literary criticism-current writings in architectural theory tend to
differ significantly from the texts produced up to 1968. Paradoxically, the radical
questioning that accompanied the événements of '68 made possible a concept of
architecture as "theoretical project," as a critical project not so much aiming to be a
model for future practice as meant to remain theoretical. In contrast, the underlying
ideological stance of most written work produced by the generation active in the
quartercenturythat followedthewarmorecharacteristicallyyearnedtowardresponsible
ways and means to correct the ills of society.
This is not the place to oppose generations. On the contrary, this anthology of
documents and their careful mise-en-contexte by Joan Ockman should prove one
point: that for the last half century, it has been impossible to be an architect without
simultaneously acting as a critic, without thinking about the critical function of one's
activity. The critical value of this publication within the overall pedagogical program of
architecture thus cannot be underestimated. Itisour hope that beyond serving as a key
reader and companion for those concerned with issues of history and theory, it may
ultimately suggest modes of articulating theory and criticism with reality, in order to
achieve the transformation of that reality.

Bernard Tschumi

11
Acknowledgments

This book was produced through the Office of Publications at the Graduate School of Architecture.
Planning and Preservation. Columbia Uruversuy. Dean Bernard Tschurru was Instrumental In the
project's conception and facilitated It In every way during the course of development Professor Kenneth
Frampton kindly served as an advisor The book was aided by a generous grant from the Graham
Foundation David Morton of Hrzzof International Publications provided friendly eduonal
encouragement
To the many contributing authors. their family members. and agents who nor only graciously
permitted their writings to be published here. but In many cases provided useful background
Information and Ideas or further research. much gralitude ISowed Special thanks to Max Bill. Alan
Colquhoun. Yona Friedman. Tomás Maldonado. Colin Rowe. Denise Scott Brown. and Aida van Eyck
I wish to express deep appreciation to Mary McLeod. my colleague at Columbia. who read
portions of the manuscript in different stages and offered all manner of Intellectual assistance and
friendship; and to Jean-LOUISCohen. Parts. for scholarly advrce and answers to numerous questions
am also Indebted to Jos Bosman. of the tnsntut fur Geschictue und Theone at the ETH. ZUrich.
Francesco Dai Co. Venice. Jacques Gubler. Lausanne. and Fritz Neumeyer. Berlin. for generously
sharing their Insights with me Among those whose memories. personal papers. or knowledge of
particular subjects afforded valuable material are Richard Bullene. Anthony Eardley. GUillaume .Jullran
de la Fuente. Aiessandra Latour, JerLy Soltan. Thomas Hines. and Wlm de Witt Helpful suggestions or
Information came from Peter Eisenman. Mirram I)sseling. Sara KSiazek. Robert McCarter. Tom Mellins.
Andrea Monfried. Dan Naegele, Werner Sehqrnann Ignasl de Solá-Morares Hubió. Robert A M Stern,
Alison Smithson, Marc Treib, Pierre von Meiss. Michael Webb. and Val Woods
Research was carried out In numerous libraries and collections. especially Avery Archltectura and
Fine Arts Library, Columbia University, the New York Public Library; and the library of the Museum o
Modern Art, New York City Appreciation goes to the librarians and staff of these msutuuons. In
particular Kitty Ctubruk of the Avery library. Marc Dessauce. M Françors Ewald, Thomas Regan. anel
Góran Schildt kindly aided In securing specific material. as did Mary Wollever of the Art Ins note of
Chicago. Bonnie Goldstein 01the Buckrrunster Fuller tnstnote. Evelyne Tréhin 01the Fondatron Le
Corbusier. Oscar Munoz of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. and Jonathan Kuhn. Parks Histonao of
the City of New York
Almost allol the photographs In the book were taken by Peter Talkin and Jeff Grllers For
translating assistance, my gratitude to Jórg Glener. Lynnette Widder. and especially Christian Hubert
and Rebecca Williamson Sincere thanks are owed to Stuart and Natalie Elgen lor their support of this
publication, to Madeleine Gekiere for her hospitality. and to David Hinkle for facilitating many things
In spring 19921 taught two seminars based on the material In thiS book. at Columbia University
Graduate School of Architecture and at the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Fine Arts For
the latter opportunity I Wish to thank Professor Joseph Rykwert. chairman of the doctoral program In
architecture I am deeply grateful to my students In both seminars for their receptiveness to the
manuscript and their keen and rnsrqhttul comments on ItScontent
Heartfelt appreciation to jennifer Tobias. who desiçned the book Withgreat skill and offered
countless valuable suggestions In the course of ItSdevelopment She brought intelligence and patience
to an often unwietov project
Edward Elgen was my constant critical Interlocutor He fully shared the responsibilities and
pleasures of bringing trus project to Irumon from ItSInception. conducting much of the research and
drafting a number of the Introductory articles My lasting gratitude for rus friendship and collaboration.
sme qua non.
To Zoe Slutzky and. finally, to Bob Slutzky, who lived through It twrce ürst the period. then the
making of thrs book the present volume ISdedicated. Any thank you would be an understatement

JO

12
Introduction

1943-a year with nothing special about it, situated perhaps at the point of inflection
between the sum of the errors made and the dawn of a new start.'

The years delimited by this book appear at once close and distant. Part of the lived
experience of the generation currently dominating the senior ranks of the profession
and schools, they span a period that has only recently come intocritical focus. With the
passage of the last quarter century, it is now possible to view with some clarity the
developments that followed the "heroic" epoch of modern architecture. The present
selection of writings aims to broaden this knowledge and to illuminate the role of
ideology in architecture's evolution since the Second World War. It has been culled
from a great variety of sources, reflecting the diversity of the field and the proliferation
of published material. Limited to the literary record, it must necessarily be read in
context of the contemporary buildings and projects.
"Architecture culture" underwent a significant transition during these years. In
retrospect,theymaybesaidto constitute the interregnum between modernism and what
is now called postmodernism. Modernist architecture became dominant while being
subjected to increasingly intense questioning. The traumatic events that marked the
end of the war-the revelation of genocide on a previously unfathomable scale of
organization and brutality, and the advent of atomic warfare-could only engender a
profound crisis in rationalist thought. An ethos of progress predicated on functional
determination and technical advancement offered, as many architects realized, no
guarantees as far as humanevalues were concerned. Evenas standardized building,
scientific planning, and development of new technologies accelerated after the war in
the context of reconstruction and rehousing, continuing the positivist orientation,
prewar doctrine began to be revised along some of the following lines:

1. a reconciliation and integration of functionalism with more humanistic concerns:

symbolicrepresentation,organicism,aestheticexpressiveness,contextualrelationships,
and social, anthropological, and psychological subject matter;
2. a recovery of premodernist and antimodernist themes-above all,history,and with
it, monumentality, the picturesque, popular culture, regional traditions, antirationalist
tendencies, decoration, etc.-within a perspective of "evolution";
3. a replacement of functionalism by other theorieslikestructuralism,semiology, and
sociology as new bases for a "scientific" determination of form;
4. neo-avant-gardism: a reassertion of the critical or radical side of modernism, but
in a more ironic and dystopian context;
5. an outright rejection of modernist ideology as fatally linked to the ills of urban
development and modernization,and recourse to politics or (conversely) aestheticism
and autonomy.

This cultural critique was bound up with the ongoing trajectory of modernization. The
mobility aHorded by mass availability of automobile and air transport, the globalization
of informationand communications, and demographic and territorial shifts produced
major changes in contemporary life. Primaryamong these was the rapid growth of the
residential suburb, especially in the United States. On the global scale, postwar

13
geopolitical reconfigurations inflected not only ideological positions but long-range
planning strategies. The war also catalyzed a second industrial revolution, bringing to
the construction site a new array of synthetic materials-plastics, resins, fibers-and
putting in place the infrastructure for electronic and cybernetic technology.

Crisis or continuity?
We begin in the middle of things, at the turning point of the Second World War. As
historic capitals and cultural centers were being devastated in Europe and parts of
Asia, pawns in a strategic and tactical game of aerial warfare, the first Liberty ships
were being launched from the United States. Major victories in Italy, North Africa,
Russia,and the Pacific and the decisive mobilizationof American technical capability
successively shifted the balance in favor of the Allied armies.
"Architecture" was hardly of primary consideration in 1943 amid a cataclysmic
world picture. Yet many architects around the world, if not militarily engaged, were
already employed in drawing up plans for the postwar rehabilitation of cities, towns,
and villages. Those charged with the program of reconstruction had not only to
address the urgent needs of rehousing and rebuilding, but also to project a vision of
postwar society. On the one hand, the war had proven the potency of coordinated
functional planning and industrialized production, confirming modernist ideology. In
a pictorial essay entitled "Design for War," the editors of Architectural Forum wrote,

After many decades of functionalist preaching, this century is today producing

functionally designed objects for the first time on a tremendous scale. In other words,
in an extreme emergency we turn unquestioning to functional design. It is important to
note that these products of ingenuity, economy, and utmost exploitation of limited
materials have quite unconsciously become the most satisfying designs of our
machine civilization?

Yet the massive destruction of human life and the built fabric through this formidable
instrumentalityprovided a more cautionary and ambivalent lesson.
The issue, as it now appeared to planners, was how to convert the vast war
machinetotheneedsofpeace.TheAthensCharter,theofficialcodificationoffunctionalist
urbanism, was published in German-occupied France in 1943, a decade after the
fourth congress of the Conqres Internationauxd'Architecture Moderne (ClAM) drew
it up. Appearing under the imprint of the French ClAM group, it had been edited by Le
Corbusier anonymously in 1941-for fear of antagonizing the fascist caretakers in
Vichy, who were to spurn his grand urban schemes a year later-and contained an
introduction by the playwright and urbanist Jean Giraudoux. The latter heralded, with
a trepidation unknown to those who drafted the charter in 1933, "the threshold of this
newage."3LeCorbusier for his part reflected thatthe current mobilization,wresting the
French economy from its previous stagnation, would be the war's major positive
outcome. As he stated in Sur les quatre routes, also published during the war years,

In wartime the farsighted have realized immense possibilities in an alliance between

theplanners and industry Thewaritselfhas bequeathed tothecountry a workingplant.
A quantity of the elements of housing can be produced in factories. dry assembly, the
prefabricated house. Provisionof housing willbecome thelargest, themost urgent, the
most fruitful item of the industrial program"

14
 In America the potential of transforming wartime production to meet the desperate
need for housing was immediately grasped by Buckminster Fuller, among others.
Before the war's end he turned his energies to persuading a Kansas aircraft manufacturer
to retool its factory for the fabrication of low-cost metal houses. By 1946 his "Dymaxion"
prototype was readied and exhibited to an enthusiastic public. Yet already a strong
countercurrent was in motion. "Let Bucky Fuller put together the dymaxion dwellings
of the people so long as we architects can design their tombs and monuments," as
Philip Johnson-having in 1932 been the emissary of European modernism in
America-was to put it Johnson's remark, an ironic commentary on a statement made
by Adolf Laos half a century earlier, reflected a widespread desire that emerged during
the war years and became an ongoing debate of the period: for a "new monumentality. "',
In 1943 Sigfried Giedion, José Luis Sert, and Fernand Léger, all taking refuge from
the war in New York City, jointly wrote a paper entitled "Nine Points on Monumentality."
In it they voiced the desire to invest modern architecture with new means of collective
expression. Despite its traditional association with authoritarian regimes, they argued,
monumentality was not incompatible with democracy. Itwas, instead, a "true expression"
of the human spirit, capable of being conveyed in a language of modern forms and
materials. Their statement translated (consciously or not) the esperanto of a proud and
powerful nation on the eve of world triumph. Both the isolationism and the anticapitalist
criticism of the late 1930s had subsided in the United States. Succeeding them was
a climate of magnanimous internationalism, epitomized in Wendell Wilkie's best-selling
book of 1943, One World,and soon to be focused on the building of the United Nations.
A world rid of its recent tyrannies required, they sensed, appropriate symbolic forms.
The most potent reconciliation between an "architecture of democracy" and the
modern sensibility was offered by Frank Lloyd Wright in these years The second
volume of his Autobiography appeared in 1943 with its credo "In the Nature of
Materials." In it he continued his crusade for an "organic" architecture placing machine
technology in the service of humanistic values. Also published in 1943 was Ayn
Rand's novel TheFountainhead, in which the Wrightian protagonist was romanticized
into a full-blown American symbol: the modernist genius-architect, at first thwarted
by an uncomprehending society, then triumphantly vindicated for his foresight and
individualism. Wright, of course, could hardly have been imagined any larger than life.
The same year, he sent a petition to the United States government requesting a
mandate to build his suburban dream, Broadacre City, throughout the entirety of
America. He solicited signatures from John Dewey, Albert Einstein, Buckminster Fuller,
Walter Gropius, Henry-Russell Hitchcock, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Robert Moses,
and fifty others." In this respect, Wright and Fuller (and Moses for that matter) were
alike-they believed in thinking "in the biggest way that you know how "7

If bravado was possible in a country that had come through the war physically
unscathed, in Europe the day of inflated conceptions had passed. Pragmatism and
relief tinged with hope characterized the immediate postwar period. In the war-
damaged areas of the Western countries, rebuilding proceeded quickly, providing
major new jobs for architects. The work was carried out with dedication, if sometimes
shoddy results. In England forced austerity inspired a disciplined and on occasion
distinguished design of schools, housing, and towns. Le Corbusier's Unité d'Habitation
rose in Marseilles, a supreme emblem of the functionalist aesthetic. Yet on its
completion, the very singularity of this great urban ship-intended prototype of a
convoy that never materialized in the French landscape-lent it a tragic dimension. Its

15
sculptural presence and surreal roofscape "spoke" with a new poetics.
ClAM, meeting in 1947 in Bridgwater, England, after a decade of inactivity,
reaffirmed its earlier stance on functionalism but put new emphasis on spiritual and
emotional values. Two themes were introduced: aesthetics, and how to bring modern
architecture to the "man on the street." The first, passionately advanced by the young
Aldo van Eyck, was, like Le Corbusier's credo of "ineffable space," a call for an infusion
of poetic imagination into architecture. The second, bound up with the monumentality
debate, became increasingly urgent as Stalin's social realism pervaded Eastern
Europe, obliterating the culture of modernism that had thrived there prior to the war.
With heightening Western perception of Soviet repression, America appeared a
beacon of freedom and opportunity. The architectural emigrés from Germany who
entered this country starting in the mid-1930s-Walter Gropius, Ludwig Mies van der
Rohe, Marcel Breuer, Erich Mendelsohn, and others-found an environment receptive
to their ideas. Bruno Zevi, who finished his education in America during the war, went
home to Italy bearing Wright's message of organicism, while the French architect
Marcel Lods reported to his compatriots, after a tour in 1946, his "enthusiasm and
euphoria" at witnessing the products of American civilization. Alvar Aalto, visiting the
United States in 1940 at the height of Russo-Finnish hostilities, also was drawn to
America during the war years. His country's pact with the Nazis halted further contacts;
in 1943 he found himself obliged to head an entourage of Finnish architects to inspect
German military installations, hosted by Albert Speer, Hill r's new armaments minister.
But after the war he returned to teach and build Baker House at Massachusetts Institute
of Technology. His infatuation was not to last, though. At first eager to establish a base
here, he soon became critical of the excessive materialism of American culture.

The Americanization of modernism

With the aid sent by America under the Marshall Plan, Western Europe largely
recovered from the postwaremergency by theearly 1950s.Itnow braced fora different
onslaught as the progressive modernism it had exported to the United States in the
1920sand 1930srecrossed theAtlantic inthe reversedirection. Along with the material
goods of the new pax Americana came a new set of cultural values.

The American invasion of Italy brought not only peace and national liberation, the end
of destroyed cities and prostitutes, but also chewing gum, powdered milk, and Coca-
Cola, and first and foremost the idea of "comfort" and the mechanization of the home.
The myth of the refrigerator was born ..

If the great symbolic client of modern architecture had been the proletariat, heroic
protagonist of an idealistic socialism, that of the period after was the middle class. For
geared-up capitalist economies nowfacing the threatof overproduction, theAmerican
slogan of "better living through technology" was a manifestdestiny. Focusshifted from
productiontoconsumption,marketing,and "plannedobsolescence";from"revolutionary
producers" to a new class of consumers happy to leave behind the asperities of
Existenzminimum, desirous of an ever higher standard of living and the leisureto enjoy
it. The emphasis on the domestic environment gave women a central role in the
marketplace evenas theywere denied one intheworkplace (a contradiction thatwould
have political consequences by the 1960s) From Germany Year Zero to Miracle in
Milan to La Dolce Vita. the route led from the rigors of scarcity to an "a sthetics of

16
plenty. "9 Bytheend of thedecade the"economic miracles"created by thereorganization
of West Europeanproduction to servetechnocratic and acquisitive ends had made the
world ripe for full-blown consumerism. Whether the culture purveyors would play an
affirmative or a critical role in this formation was not yet, however, clearly discerned.
For some, the transformation of functionalism from socialist to capitalist utopia
occurred seamlessly.To Gropius therewas ostensibly littledisjunction inadapting the
program of the Bauhaus, where he had first aspired to a partnership between art and
industry, to American managerial democracy. Only a shift in rhetoric signaled the
change: from "totality," an all-encompassing synthesis of art and handicraft or
industrial production, to "team," a well-coordinated group of specialists. Ironically,the
new corporate professionalism of the 1950s-soon decried by sociologists as
engendering a society of "organization men"-was the antithesis of the cultural and
social nonconformism embodied in the diverse group of personalitiesat the Bauhaus.
At the Hochschule für Gestaltung In Ulm, West Germany, which opened In 1955
on the Bauhausmodel, thecontradictions wereonly gradually elucidated insuccessive
restructurings of the curriculum. An initialconception of the designer as creator of gute
Form(Max Bill's position) gave way to thatof the designer as captain-"coordinator"-
of industry (Tomás Maldonado's), retreating by the mid-1960s into a critical theory of
design largely confirming the FrankfurtSchool's critique of culture. Abraham Moles, a
lecturer on information theory at Ulm, would write,

functionalistdoctrine ... is essentiallyan ascetic doctrine and manifestationof a certain

philosophy of life.'that of scarcity, of rational application of existing means for clearly
defined purposes. Withincertain sectors of culture functionalism will retain its validity.
But recently functionalism has entered a critical period due to the growth of affluent
society. ... Functionalismnecessarily contradicts the doctrine of affluentsociety which
is forced toproduce and tosellrelentlessly.. .{Thelatter}creates a systemof neokitsch
by accumulating objects in the human environment. At this point the crisis of
functionalism becomes manifest. 10

Symptomatic was the fact that functionalism was now increasingly perceived as
a stylistic manifestation linked to an earlier historical period. As such, it was doubly
condemned: too abstract and elitist for the symbolic populism promulgated in the
communist countries under Stalinism, it was too abstract and antiindividualistic for
those in the Western countries paranoiacally professing "freedom." While the
consolidation of state power in Eastern Europe left architects little leeway for opinion,
in the United States for several years McCarthyism created a xenophobic climate for
many of the same emigrés the country had welcomed earlier.A public housing project
in Los Angeles by Richard Neutra was quashed in 1951 as "creeping socialism."!'
Yet this was simply demagoguery on both sides, a battle of ideology fired by the
intensifying Cold War. Khrushchev, seizing power shortly after Stalin's death in 1953
and more pragmatic in economic matters, reinstated functionalist building and
outlawed decorative excesses. Meanwhilethe cost-effectiveness implicit ina stripped
aesthetic was hardly lost on capitalist builders and speculators. Big business became
the second major client for postwar architecture. The new multinational corporations,
surrogates for governments struggling to preserve their spheres of influence around
the world, offered lucrative commissions. The leading architects were soon more
preoccupied with corporate or government headquarters and single-family houses

17
than with solutions to factories and social housing. Modernism, as now reinterpreted,
largely meant a frame with repetitive components. Flexibility became interchangeability
as the "modular plan" replaced the free plan and "form follow[ed] form."12
The ubiquitous glass curtain wall turned out to be, paradoxically, a plane as
absolute as the Iron Curtain. As with the new American painting of these years,
successfully proselytized by the ex-Marxist art critic Clement Greenberg, an abstract
aesthetic sublimated disturbing subsurface contents. 131narchitecture, Henry-Russell
Hitchcock and Philip Johnson's selective and formalistic adaptation of the modern
movement, propounded two decades earlier, had a similar effect. As the received
version of modernism by the 1950s, the authors' denatured concept (more nuanced
in its original formulation) enabled architecture to be abstracted from specificities,
making possible a truly "international style." It now p n lrated all corners of the world,
including the newly decolonized "Third World" countries aspiring to Western living
standards, at times hybridizing local vernaculars. An exception to the mostly superficial
efforts at contextualism was Le Corbusier's work in Chandigarh, a brilliant, if flawed,
effort to wed Indian tradition to modernism. Closer to home, Lewis Mumford touted the
"native and humane" regionalism of the San Francisco Bay area. The language of
corporate hegemony was also inflected with personal inputs Yet the subjective design
approaches that now proliferated, from the eclecticism of Johnson himself or Edward
Durrell Stone to the sculptural expressionism of Eero Saarinen in America, or the
virtuosities of Oscar Niemeyer in Brazil and Kenzo Tange in Japan, were the other side
of the glazed grids perfected by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill. "Form was kinq."!'
In American design education as well, the postwar revaluation of modernism
tended along formalist lines. Starting in the late 1930s, the presence of Gropius at
Harvard, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy at the Institute of Design, and Mies van der Rohe at
Illinois Institute of Technology grounded American pedagogy in traditions established
at the Bauhaus. The didactic exposition of modernist form and materials led in many
instances to refined and sophisticated results. In others, overemphasis on functional
expression produced the clichés of the "decorated diagram." 15Possibly the old Beaux-
Arts orientation had been exorcised only superficially. Louis Kahn, a charismatic
presence at Yale and the University of Pennsylvania during the 1950s and 1960s,
arrived at his own synthesis. Meanwhile, at an educational outpost like the University
of Texas at Austin, an innovative curriculum was predicated on rigorous analysis of
form. The English architect-historian Colin Rowe, who was to influence two generations
of American students (the later one postmodernist), linked modernism to academic
tradition in his rereadings of modern architecture, calling into question the sociotechnical
Zeitgeist that had been 'an article of faith for preceding historians.
A similar argument was made, though with opposite consequences, by Reyner
Banham in his seminal Theory and Design in the First Machine Age (1961) and in Italy
by Giulio Carlo Argan. For the latterwriters, and for other inheritorsof the "functionalist
tradition," the relation between "ethics" and "aesthetics" remained a vexed one. Peter
and Alison Smithson in England, initially affected by the neo-Palladianism of the
Wittkowerian school, soon began challenging the modernist establishment in less
academic ways, seeking a "socioplastic" basis for design. Under the bannersof Team
10 and the New Brutalism they promoted an architecture of "growth and change,"
seeking inspiration in the spontaneity of popular culture and anthropological sources,
and rejecting ClAM's mechanistic model of urbanism for more empirical "patterns of
association."John Voelker,a cofounderof Team 10,articulatedthe new concerns:

18
lmeqes:
1930. The frame building and the multilevel high-rise city, images which contained a
complete urban system
1950..Random images drawn from many sources containing single ideas which, one
by one, contribute to, change, and extend the experience of space.
Program:
1930. To popularize the already established style of the modern movement-didactic.
1950. To search for a plastic system which reciprocates and intends in architectural
form existing ecological patterns.
Method.
1930. To categorize the general situation and to develop it through the dialectical
manipulation of the categories made.
1950. The empirical observation of particular situations and development through the
architectural expression of those unique patterns observed within them
Technique:
1930. To replace existing buildings and cities with new categorically formulated
elements.
1950. The time-conscious techniques of renewal and extension derived from the
recognition of the positive ecological trends to be found in every particular situation.
Results:
1930. Prototype buildings and master plans, each charged with the full "international"
urban program Irrespective of location-didactic.
1950. Building in unique situations. The elements articulate and resolve the ecological
patterns, and provide instruments of research into possible development of each
location. 16

Spearheaded by Team 1O's critique, the breakup of ClAM at the end of the decade was
a major symbolic event. The organization had greatly broadened its base during the
postwar period, drawing participants from allover the world to its ninth congress in Aix-
en-Provence in 1953, and fêting the completion of Le Corbusier's Unité d'Habitation
in Marseilles on this occasion. But the nocturnal celebration on the building's roof
augured the end of the dream of rationalism. The "younqers," as the incipient Team 10
thought of themselves, were in an oedipal relationship with the generation of the
masters, reverent but restive. Le Corbusier himself was now building Ronchamp. Three
years later, absenting himself from ClAM's last official congress, held at Dubrovnik, he
acknowledged the incurable rift:

It is those who are now forty years old, born around 1916 during wars and revolutions,
and those then unborn, now twenty-five years old, born around 1930. during the
preparation of a new war and amidst a profound economic, social, and political crisis-
who thus find themselves in the heart of the present period the only ones capable of
feeling actual problems, personally, profoundly, the goals to follow, the means to reach
them, the pathetic urqency of the present situation. They are in the know Their
predecessors no longer are, they are out, they are no longer subject to the direct impact
of the situation. 17

By 1959 ClAM was gone. Its "museum meeting" at Henry van de Velde's Krbller-Müller
in Otterlo succeeded in consigning modernism-now the "great tradition"-to history.

19
From metropolis to global village
If the manifesto was the generic expression of the emergent aspirations of the early-
twentieth-century avant-gardes, indeed of the period of high modernism itselt." its
moment was over by the midcentury. An architecture culture largely in retrenchment
after the war, engaged in reconstructing its interrupted development or else
institutionalizingitselfin the professionaland academic mainstream,was notdisposed
to such a positive form of enunciation. The missionaryspirit that had once animated it
deflated in a widening breach between theory and practice.
The dissolution of the unitary formation previouslycoalesced under the banner of
ClAM further tended to produce a fragmented succession. In England, historianJohn
Summerson wrote of British architecture in the 1950s:

... the old notion of a party line, a "cause" to be argued and supported by any amount
of didactic talk, no longer has the slightest relevance, any more than the notion of "the
international style" of the thirties has the slightest relevance .... We are no longer in the
period of "towards an architecture. " It is architecture or nothing. And if it is architecture,
it is architecture continually redefined-not in words but in forms. 19

Across the continent, in Italy, revisionism was the order of the day. The bourgeois
tradition that modernism had repressed was now recuperated by means of a new
emphasis on historical continuity and contextualism, lent credence by the editorial
activity of Ernesto Rogers at Casabella-Continuità. So eclectic was the architecture
emerging out of the rationalist legacy that Rogers was led to remark that the only new
orthodoxy in Italian architecture was that of heterodoxy itself.20
Yetdespite-or because of-this apparent vacuum, a "cultureof criticism" began
to reemerge. Indeed in Italy, where fascism and modernism had had a particularly
involved relationship, an exceptionally high level of intellectualdebate persisted from
the earlier period. During the 1930s, Casabella had functioned as a rallying point for
Italian rationalism under the legendary figures Edoardo Persico and Giuseppe
Pagano. After the war, this tradition continued in critical battles of position, if not
polemic, waged in the architectural press. Within a few years after the war, despite
economic scarcity, at least a dozen significant journals concentrating on architectural
subjects were publishing. Inthe 1950s,when Rogers renovated Casabella adding the
suffix Continuità, it was the most dedicated journal "of tendency" in the world."
Elsewherethemajorjournalsweremoretypicallygeared toboostingtheprofession.
YetinEngland,notwithstandingthegenerallackof position-takingnotedby Summerson,
critical discourse was forwarded inthe Architectural Review, where the postwareditors,
once staunch modernists, now championed Swedish informality and townscape
picturesque with nearly equal fervor. By 1953 the Review had a less sentimental
interlocutorin Architectural Design, redesigned by the young Theo Crosby with an eye
to the increasingly important student readership.
The theory-practice split was likewise ingrained in the American professional
journals, which now publicized a mainstream modernism. Yet in LosAngeles Arts and
Architecture under John Entenza positioned itself more critically relative to new work.
Inaugurating its "Case Study Houses" program in 1945, it sponsored innovative
designs by Californians like Charles Eames and Richard Neutra. "Little magazines,"
often of academic provenance, also cropped up as forums for debate, likeYaleSchool
of Architecture's Perspecta, founded in 1952 by George Howe, responsible for early

20
expositions of Kahn's work and ideas.
Later in the decade, more tendentious publications appeared, aligned with
specific movements. In 1958 Le Carré bleuwas launched in Helsinki,tofunction largely
asavehicleforTeam 10ideas,and Ulmwas published by theHochschulefürGestaltung.
Thefirstnumberof theavant-garde International Situationistalso appeared, advancing
a "unitary urbanism." In 1959 Van Eyck became principal editor of Dutch Forum,
making it another arena for the post-ClAM critique. The first (and only) issue of
Metabolism came out in Japan in 1960. During the 1960sthe postwar media reached
a new threshold with the transformationof the architectural journal intoa radical project
in itself. In the paper polemics of the British Archigram, its first broadsheet published
in 1961, and other groups, the "antiarchitecture" position vividly unfolded.
This diverse activity worked to break down national parochialisms and to
penetrate countries isolated by geography, technological backwardness, and
repressive political regimes. It preceded and followed the shifting cultural axis from
Europe to America, as well as to places outside the usual centers of ferment, where
crucial architectural developments were occurring-Scandinavia, Japan, South
America, Eastern Europe, India. Nor was the expanded journalistic network solely
responsible for the circulation of ideas. The internationalization of firms, prestige
associated with the commissioning of foreign architects, the cosmopolitanism of the
schools, wider travel, and other mechanisms of dissemination contributed to the
universalizingof architecture culture. At the same time, decolonization allowed voices
to be heard (or images seen) from regions that a Eurocentric architecture had long
ignored or relegated to exotica. The great metropolises virtually synonymous with
modernism earlier in the century found themselves reduced to the scale of historical
nodes in what would be described by Marshall McLuhan in 1964as a global villaqe."
Thatsameyearthesuccessof BernardRudofsky's"ArchitecturewithoutArchitects"
exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in New York underscored the desire of
architects to look outside their discipline for new meaning and less egotistic models.
The economic boom of the 1950shad slowed by the beginning of the 1960s,while the
Cold Warwarmed intothe tenseconfrontationof the Cuban missilecrisis and an (outer)
space race. The resurgence of a leftist critique of culture and steady American
escalation of its misguided adventure in Vietnam now elicited a wave of anti-
Americanism. Some architects attempted to regain control over a troubling reality
through a return to technological solutions and scientific methodologies, while others
translated their criticism into sociopolitical protest and utopian prophecy. Still others
embraced popular culture or its countercultural spin-efts. learning to like Levittown or
building domes in the desert.
The first tendency constituted a belated success for rationalism, now as a
metalanguage. Structuralism, having originated earlier in the century, replaced the
existentialist Angstof the 1950sas privileged intellectual current. Linguistic, semiotic,
and typological approaches to design flourished on the border between science and
culture,affordingmethodsand modelstothetechnicallyminded wing oftheprofession-
architect-planners like Kevin Lynch, Christopher Alexander, Yona Friedman-as well
as to new theoreticians of architectural history and form like those in Venice or at the
InstituteforArchitecture and Urban Studies in NewYorkCity, the latterfounded in 1967.
On the critical-activist side, the range of responses ran the gamut from the social
reformism spurred by Jane Jacobs in America to Archigram's futurism. While Jacobs
preached an urbanism continuous with the fabric of the city, Archigram projected a

21
house for the year 1990 with adjustable walls and floors, inflatable furniture, a hovercraft
bed-capsule, and robotized servicing. Despite their different visions, though, the two
were linked by the vehemence of their attack on modernism and the breadth of their
impact. Cultural connections bridged international boundaries in unprecedented
ways. The radical school had protagonists in Japan, Italy, France, Austria. As Hans
Hollein was to put it, "Anybody who wants to be on good standing has to have a plug-
in city project in his pocket or an inflatable text-pavilion."23
The student protests of 1968 would seem to represent a culmination in the course
of late modernism, at least within a broader cultural perspective, and were proclaimed
to be such by intellectuals. Herbert Marcusewrote in TheEndof Utopia(1967),"Historical
possibilities must be thought according to forms that put the accent on rupture rather
than continuity with past history,on negation rather than on the positive, on difference
rather than prooress.v'Jnevitabty, though, the regressions that followed the revolts in
the universities counter such a periodization. With regard to architecture, the strikes
that closed the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in France after 250 years largely failed to bring
about the sweeping professional and social reforms to which radical architects
aspired. Instead,the firstwave of postmodernism in the 1970svindicated many values
epitomized by the old academy. In 1975 the Museum of Modern Art in New York,
bastion of modernism, would mark the return of historicism with a major exhibition on
Beaux-Artsarchitecture?' The publication in 1966of RobertVenturi's Complexity and
Contradiction in Architecture and Aldo Rossi'sArchitecture of the City proved a truer
portent of the two decades to come than the short-lived "events of May."

History is not a tree

The preceding sketch barely evokes the rich dynamics of a period as complex and
disparate as that represented in this anthology. Indeed, the heterogeneity of the
subject matter poses special problems for the volume as a whole. Within the purview
of contemporary "architecture culture" falls the widest possible range of formal,
technical, and institutional considerations, all variously intersecting with intellectual
models, modes of production, and modes of consumption.
It is with the realizationof the diversity of the field ratherthan out of eclectic criteria
of selection that visions as different as an early meditation by Gaston Bachelard on the
spatial poetics of the house and Buckminster Fuller'sDymaxion proposal of nearly the
same date both find a place here. Urbanism is the subject of this volume as much as
architecture, especially as the relationship between the two disciplines remained a
critical issue after the war. Also deemed "architectural" are documents like Nikita
Khrushchev'sdictumonfunctionalismand RobertMoses'sassaultonutopianplanning-
two ideologically opposite statements, but both revealing in terms of the way different
levels of spatial production (what used to be called the base and superstructure) act
upon each other. The decision to organize the presentationchronologically ratherthan
thematically stemmed from the desire not to suppress such interrelationships. At the
same time, in order to give the reader an indication of some threads interwoven in the
book, cross-references-on occasion suggestive rather than direct-have been
provided in the margins of the introductory articles.
One of the immediate problems of defining the criteria for the selections was to
reconsider the meaning of the "document" during the period at hand. As Michel
Foucault has pointed out, the primary task of historical work in our time is the
"questioning of the document." In particular, what is an architectural document? In the

22
case of architecture, the relationship between written, graphic, and built record-
reductively seen as a relationship of theory or criticism, representation, and practice-
is particularly intricate. Material of the type that follows intervenes in both the production
and reproduction of the built world; it is part of the construction of historical space. This
reflection gives rise to a rather broad definition of document here. Rather than requiring
that a text have had a specific reception or novelty when it appeared, we found it more
useful to consider the document as a manifestation implicated in a significant way with
a major constellation of discursive thoughtor practice. Thusalong with many "classics,"
a certain amount of material has been included whose importance could only become
apparent in retrospect.
In some cases, an obvious choice has been omitted for reasons of length-to
avoid having to make meddlesome cuts-but also on occasion in the interests of
drawing the reader's attention to a lesser known writing. We have also sought, when
appropriate, tomake available previouslyuntranslatedmaterialratherthan reissuethat
which already exists; thus a number of writings appear in English for the first time. In
other instances, a text was chosen more for "internal" reasons: because it had a
significant connection to another in the book, or conversely, to avoid redundancy.
Through the process of selection we have also tried to convey a sense of the time
that an idea or conception entered architectural discourse. With regard to Team 10,for
instance, the "Doorn Manifesto," though less crystallized than some other statements,
pinpoints thecoalescence of thatgroup's thinkingas itoccurred rightafterClAM's ninth
meeting. On the other hand, historyis as much a matterof arrivalsas departures Frank
Lloyd Wright's statement of 1943 is a synthesis of his previous thinking at a moment
when hispositionhad great impact. Naturally,despite theattemptto beas discriminating
as possible in such choices, the ultimate compilation represents a subjective and
occasionally pragmatic judgment and makes no claim to be exhaustive or "correct."
On the contrary, the reader is invited to argue with both its inclusions and omissions.
(It might be stated in anticipation that a few of the latter were owed to the difficulty of
obtaining a text efficient enough to accommodate the present format)
In line with the above notion of timeliness, we have placed the documents in
sequence according to their original date of utterance or writing, when this could be
ascertained, ratherthan the date they were first published. Thiswas done inview of the
fact that ideas in architecture often have a significant half-life prior to reaching print.
Occasionally this caused complications when the author made later revisions. Such
problems have been adjudicated on an individual basis,and the versionof the text here
adopted is indicated in the introductory article or source note.
Editing of documents has been kept to a minimum throughout, except that
spellings have been Americanized and typographical and other obvious errors
corrected when these had no reason to be perpetuated. As a general policy as little
excerption or internal cutting as possible was done; where it was unavoidable, the
intervention has been indicated by three dots in brackets. Unbracketed ellipses
belong to the original text. The illustrationsin the book are those that accompanied the
document originally, or a selection of them, unless otherwise indicated. Unascribed
translationsare theeditor's. Finally,everyattempt has been made to secure permission
for publication from the appropriate copyright owner or owners. This information
appears in the source note accompanying each document. Oversights are sincerely
regretted and, upon proper notification, will be rectified in future editions of this book.
How to read a compendium of this type? In different ways: as a sourcebook, as

23
a narrative, or-in the spirit of the f/âneur-just by browsing. The introductory articles
provide, inveryabbreviated form,some background for the documents and arewritten
so that the latter may be read independently. Selective bibliographic references in the
articles and at the back of the book offer some points of departure for further study.

Joan Ockman
August 1992

Notes
1 Le Corbusier. Looking at CIty Ptannmg, trans. Eleanor l.evieux (New York Orion Press, 1971), p. 1
2. Architectural Forum, September 1943, p. 4.
3 Le Corbusier. TheAthens Charter, trans. Anthony Eardley (New York Grossman Publishers, 1973),
p. XIX See also Slgfried Greoron, "ClAM at Sea: The Background of the Fourth (Athens) Congress," trans
p, Morton Shand, Architects' Yearbook 3 (1949), pp 36 39
4 The Four Routes, trans Dorothy Todd (London Dennis Dobson t.uruted. 1947), p. 15 (translation
modified). Original French edition 1941
5. PhilipJohnson, "WhereAreWeAI?" InArchitectural Review.September 1960,p 175 Seealso Johnson's
earlier "War Memorials. What Aesthetrc Price Glory? Art News44 (September 1945), pp 8 10,24 25. Loos
had written, "Only a very small pari of architecture belongs to art the tomb and the monument. Everything
else, everything which serves a purpose, should be excluded from the realms of art" ("Architecture," 1910)
6 Wllght's decentralist vision of society was first conceived In the early t930s and further elaborated
during the postwar period In When Democmcy BUIlds(1945) and TheLlvmg Cttv (1958) For the document
mentioned, see John Sergeant. Frank Lloyd Wnght's Usoruen Houses. The Case for Orqetvc Arcrutectore
(New York Whitney Library of Design, 1976), p 20 t
7 See Deslgnmg a New Industry A Composite of a Senes of Talksby R Buckmmster Fuller, 1945 19.J6
(Wichita Fuller Research Institute, 1946), p 9
8 VutonoGreqotu. "ltahanDesign 1945 1971,"InErruüoArnbasz. ed , Italy: TheNewôomestic Landscape
(New York. Museum of Modern Art, 1972), p 322 (translation modified)
9 A phrase first COinedby Lawrence Alloway In 1959. See Alloway's essay "The Independent Group
Postwar Britain and the Aesthetics of Plenty," In the catalogue of the same title, ed. David Robbins
(Cambridge: MIT Pr ss. t990), pp 49 53
10 "Functronahsrn m CriSIS."ulm 19/20(August 1967), p 24
11 SeeThomasHtn s. Richard Neutrs and theSearch forModernArchlteclure(New York Oxford University
Press, 1982), pp 229 30
12 Matthew NOWiCki,"Origins and Trends In Modern Architecture" (1951) In trus volume, pp.150 56
13 See Serge Guitbaut. "The New Adventures of the Avant-Garde InAmerica Greenberg, Pollock, or from
Trotskyism 10the New Liberalism of the 'VItal Center .., trans Thomas Repensek, In FrancIs Frascina. ed.,
Pollock and Atter The Cmicet Debate (New York. Harper and Row, 1986).
14. Robelt Venturi's charactenzauon Seehis preface to the second edition of Comptexnyand Contradiction
in Architecture (New York Museum of Modern Art. 1977), p 14
15. For a Critical assessment of the Gropius pedagogy at Harvard, see Klaus Herdeg, The Decoraled
Diagram Harvard Arcnuecture and ttie Failure of the Bauhaus Legacy (Cambridge. MIT Press, 1983). A
history of postwar American archuecture education remains to be written
16 Published In Oscar Newman, New Frooters In Architecture ClAM '59 tn Otterto (New York: Universe
Books, 1961), p 16
17. Letter to ClAM lO, Dubrovruk. In Newman, New Frontiers m Arctntecture. p 16.
18 As exemplified by Ulrich Conrads s anlhology Programs and Manifestoes on 20th-Century Arctutecture.
trans Michael Bullock (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1970) Conracss book goes up to 1963.
19 Introduction to Trevor Dannatt. Modem Arcmtectore m Bntam (London Batsford, 1959), p 28
20. See Ernesto Rogers, "L'Ortodossra dell'eterooossra." Casabella 216 (June July 1957), pp 2-4
"Connnurtà o CrlSI"ISthe title of an editorial by Rogers In Casabella 215 (April May 1957), pp. 3 4.
21 On the relations belween theory and practice In postwar Italy and France and the arcrutects
mtellectual role, see Jean-LOUISCohen's valuable La Coupure entre erctutectes et mteuectuets. au les
enseignements de tuetoptnue (paris: Ecole d'Archnecture Pans-Villermn. 1984)
22 Understandmg Media The Extensions of Man (New York McGraw-HIli, 1964), p. 20
23 Alchlteclural Design, February 1970, p 2
24 As clled by Jean Baudrillard III Utople Revue de soclologle de I urbam, May 1969, p 14
25 Tile calalogue of the exhibition ISArthur Drexler, ed , The Architecture of the Ecole des Beau~-Arts
(New York Museum of Modern Art. 1 77) The events of 1968 figure on one page of thiS500-page volume

24