Page 41 - Studio Internatinal - October 1974

TWO BELGIAN ARCHITECTS

FRANCIS STRAUVEN

In the field of architecture Belgium traditionally ideals of modern architecture. Especially in backs of most houses, where public control
has an ambiguous reputation. Although some progressive Holland, where people actually mostly doesn't apply at all and where people
of its architects, like Horta and van de Velde experienced the impact of CI AM planning, the patiently create an intriguing ad-hoc vernacular,
played a major role in the development of participation movements unveiled the by now the place they actually dwell in, offering the
European architecture, the ideas of the Modern well known deficiences of their modern full-blooded side of the chaos Ian Nairn was
Movement did not until recently find acceptance environment (univalence, monotony, lack of talking about. Today, it is often thought that
with the Belgian public and hardly reached the personal expression and identity, lack of such a non-plan situation is indispensable for
authorities concerned at all. There are, of freedom). And as one of the unexpected results the development of an alternative environment
course, only a few countries like Holland where of this awareness, a lot of Dutch progressives but, on the other hand, it is understandable that
CI AM principles acquired a sort of official felt, and still feel, attracted to Belgium, the Belgians traditionally felt little need for the
status, but Belgium is probably the only visual opposite of Holland. On holidays they semantics of modern architecture. Liberalism
European country where the structuring of the cross the border for sight-seeing, or rather stimulated people to take over the life styles of
environment was from the outset ruled by a 'house-seeing' trips. Although they certainly the upper classes and led to competition in
sort of 'non plan' avant la lettre. 'Planning' in experience Belgian building as an unlikely cross- domesticated monumentality. After the Art
Belgium was never due to collective concerns breeding of camp and pop, they nevertheless Nouveau movement Belgian modernists like
but to legally supported individualism. Housing acknowledge its manifest freedom and richer De Koninck, Bourgeois and Hoste in the
was not cared for by building societies, but was amount of meaning. As the Dutch architect twenties and the thirties continued to make
left to private initiative, stimulated by a Herman Hertzberger stated: 'As yet, I find in considerable efforts, but until the early sixties
premium system. The authorities merely that whole chaos in Belgium more meaning than modern architecture remained an isolated
provided the infrastructures necessary to in this whole chaos of ours, which is well phenomenon, in fact a sub-culture, only to be
satisfy the private aspirations (only nominally trimmed and indeed cleared of so-called weeds, detected with a magnifying glass, and hardly
limited by escapable bylaws). Seemingly they but it's the same chaos here. It is only slightly reaching the international scene.3
didn't appreciate the benefit of public spaces varnished and you have to scratch before you During the sixties neo-functionalism became
for human interrelation, and confined public reach it. In Belgium everything is straight- the current idiom, but just as everywhere else
building activity to monumental devices forward and I do prefer Belgium to Holland in it turned out to be a new routine without
designed to leave a visible mark of their this respect.'2 content, a new academicism offering no
pretended greatness. Ian Nairn once declared in From a semantic point of view, the Belgian guarantee of architectural quality and jettisoning
The Observer: 'Belgium, the joker in the environment offers a faithful translation of the specific values of the traditional Belgian
European pack has managed to create an social relationships. Inequalities and environment. As in all other countries only a
architecture of such splendid and full blooded contradictions are not veiled by a unified style minority of architects managed to overcome
judgement'.1
chaos that the visitor suspends all normal but they manifest themselves with an artless this contradictory state of affairs, and to create
sincerity. The differentiation is not limited to a viable space. Within the present compass there
Local modernists were even more pessimistic few hierarchical monuments, but it is a constant is of course no space to make a general account
and didn't hide their helpless indignation. Their pattern in the whole environment. Although it of these efforts. This has been done before
best known spokesman is Renaat Braem, the certainly illustrates the relative money power of So I will confine myself at present to some
leading Flemish modernist of the fifties who the individuals concerned, it also expresses, if recent work by two architects, Bob van Reeth
wrote a gloomy pamphlet in 1968 'Het not their identity, at least the way they want and Charles Vandenhove, who reacted each in a
lelijkste Land ter Wereld', 'The ugliest country to be identified by others. Owing to capitalist different way against functionalism, and
in the world', 'a walking guide through the implications, this structure can never be more succeeded in developing a personal and
Belgian jungle'. One can easily agree with the than a parody of democratic order. Moreover in personalising idiom. Both are currently working
structural aspect of such criticism: the spread most houses the individual expression is on large projects, such as schools and university
of individualistic building mania devours the confined to the facade, the tangent plane buildings, but for the sake of comparison I will
landscape and discourages participation while it between dwelling and public functions, mainly deal with some of their private houses.
isolates the individuals concerned in self- whereas the inner structure of the house is Although their work is the result of different
contained units. But critics mainly aimed at the conventional. On a purely visual level, however, approaches, the idealist and the intuitive5,
visual chaos resulting out of individualism, the the façades constitute an image which isn't they have much more in common than just
total lack of some kind of Ruskinian unity, the imposed from above, but which has grown from reacting against functionalism. Both are no
proliferation of styles producing the 'ugliness' underneath, i.e. the individual forces of society: longer concerned with functions but with
which van de Velde considered an expression of an image which doesn't express the sameness relations, and both are generating, each in his
the corruption of individuals. However, at the but something of the different identity of own 'writing', polyvalent space, which structures
very moment these criticisms were stated, one everybody. life but which does not lock it up in a one-
felt an increasing distrust for the conventional This is even more true with regard to the dimensional pattern. Their spaces suggest

139