J.L.M. LAUWERIKS AND THE DUTCH SCHOOL OF PROPORTION
Author(s): Suzanne Frank
Source: AA Files, No. 7 (September 1984), pp. 61-67
Published by: Architectural Association School of Architecture
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29543418 .
Accessed: 01/03/2014 14:42
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Architectural Association School of Architecture is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to AA Files.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:42:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ILM
AND
LAUWERIKS
THE
OF
DUTCH
SCHOOL
PROPORTION
Suzanne Frank
Ludovicus Mathieu Lauweriks
(1864-1932) (Fig.l),
de Bazel, H.P.
his Dutch colleagues K.P.C.
with
together
was
to the sys?
and
J.H.
de
committed
Groot,
Berlage,
strongly
tematic application of proportional relationships to architecture.
These members of the Dutch school were convinced that such an
application could confer a beauty on architectural work compar?
Johannes
able to that of the buildings of the ancient world. Like their
Renaissance predecessors, the Dutch proportionists sought archi?
tectural equivalents for the harmonic proportions of nature. The
most prevalent proportional system in use during the early 1900s
was that of the Egyptian triangle. Lauweriks, however, despite his
interest in Egyptian culture, never actually employed it.His pref?
erences were for other, similar proportional
systems, which he
outlined in detail inDer Ring, the art magazine which he edited
for its year-long existence. In an article analysing the formal prin?
ciples of a church that he had designed, Lauweriks provided his
colleagues with one of themost thorough treatments of the issue
of proportion in his time.
It ismore than likely that Lauweriks
became involved with pro?
portional systems through theosophy, to which he was converted
in 1895. By 1904, when Rudolf Steiner, then a theosophist, gave a
the
speech inAmsterdam entitled 'Mathematics and Occultism',
influence of theosophy in Holland was well established. Since
Steiner did not break away from theosophy until 1913, when he
there is every
founded his own discipline of anthroposophy,
reason to believe that he personally had a major role in themath
ematicizing of Dutch
theosophical
thought. As
iswell known, the
mathematician-mystic Dr M.H. J. Schoenmaeker was to exercise a
similar influence, above all on Piet Mondrian.
The depth of Lauweriks's
theosophical experience is indicated
at the
in four articles that he wrote for themagazine Theosophia
turn of the century. While these writings contain no direct treat?
ment of proportional systems, they reveal a similar quest for uni?
versal order and unity:
The unity of all Being, thebasis of all religions,of everyphilosophy, and
of all social institutions,thuswas the lesson continually held out toman?
kind, for its understanding and passion would finally open up the great
truthwhich can be adopted; this cosmic unity consciously in recognition
and salvation of thisgodly existence; this is the task of theosophy now: to
proclaim this ancient lesson again, to trace the forgottenmemory again,
and to bring back the power of this everlasting ideal again.1
Lauweriks's
background
Lauweriks's father, Jean Hubert Lauweriks, worked as an appren?
tice to J.P.H. Cuypers during his son's childhood. Cuypers, the
acknowledged master of late Dutch eclecticism and rationalism,
was known both throughout Holland
and internationally. The
elder Lauweriks went with the Cuypers entourage to Roermond,
where he served as sculptor in the workshop, and, in 1865, the
year after Mathieu Lauweriks was born, the Lauweriks
family
went to Amsterdam
together with the Cuypers family. Mathieu
Lauweriks grew up in the Cuypers house, living there until the
death of his father.
Following in his father's footsteps, Lauweriks started his career
as an assistant/apprentice
to Cuypers. While working there he
came into close contact with De Bazel, another theosophist archi?
tect, with whom he later taught history in the so-called Vahana
course. In 1895 the two men started a design practice together.
During his apprenticeship to Cuypers, Lauweriks also pursued an
academic education. From 1883 until 1887 he was a student at the
Rijksnormal School forDrawing Educators inAmsterdam, where
he received lessons in building and mechanical
(engineering)
drawing. After he finished his basic education there, he stayed on
for another year (1888) as a teacher-trainee. In 1889 he attended
voor Beeidende K?nsten
the evening course at the Rijksacademie
1. J.L.M.
AA FILES
Lauweriks,
woodcut
by J.B. Heukolm,
7
1895.
inAmsterdam while still continuing to work in Cuypers's office.
He did not leave the office until 1895, the year after he became a
theosophist, establishing both his religious commitment and his
professional independence. After leaving Cuypers's office, Lauw
61
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:42:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2. Thorn-Prikker
House
in the artists'
colony
at
the Stirnband,
c.1907.
Hagen,
eriks became increasingly interested in geometric relationships,
lecturing on this subject to the Theosophical Association of Haar?
lem. Focusing on the concept of unity, and on the underlying
cause of being, he described the necessity of beginning any com?
plex design with the simplest form. A newspaper report of the
speech paraphrased him as follows:
the concentrate?
It is a fact that complete knowledge of the seed?
were
if
of
theplant, for this
entail
absolute
it
would,
knowledge
possible,
is better than a view of themore intricatedistracting, subsidiary proper?
ties of the aforesaid plant.
The simplest forms that we now know of are the geometric. The
speaker (Lauweriks) demonstrated how the line, the plane, and the space
developed
from
the point
?
the most
concentrated
form
?
went
to?
gether. Beyond thatwere the various perceptions of number, weight, and
measure. By these perceptions we arrived at the general limitsofmaterial
matters.2
At the age of 31, in 1896, Lauweriks became a member of the
et Amicitia,
and at the
architectural association Architectura
same time became the secretary and an editor of Architectura, the
association's
journal. By 1906 he had become the chief editor of
this publication. During this period he saw himself as the prophet
of a new direction in art, claiming that a new style should come
into being, not only because form was changeable, but also be?
cause this new style had a scholarly foundation. He began to
acquire a reputation as an ideologue and attempted to elaborate
his theory of art in the Vahana course on the history of architec?
ture, a series of lectures given in the old pre-Kromhoutian Ameri?
can Hotel, Amsterdam.
Also around this time De Bazel and Lauweriks
joined the
broadsheet Licht en Waarheid
anarchist-theosophist
(Light and
Truth), which was an organ of Wie Denkt Overwint (Who Thinks
an ethical-anarchist organization which eventually
Conquers),
to
converted
theosophy. Among the seminal articles to appear in
this journal was one by Annie Besant entitled 'Why I Became a
Herein she expounded how, after fifteen years of
Theosophist'.
she
had
returned to the great pantheist idea.3
atheism,
The strong friendship between Lauweriks and De Bazel had
been confirmed by their becoming members of the Theosophical
Society on the same day: 31May 1894. In an atelier at Nie. Beets
straat 20, Amsterdam,
they established a private practice to?
arts
in
and crafts, including decorative paint?
gether, specializing
and
ing
sculptural work, ceramics, wrought-iron, tapestries, illus
trations, woodcuts, and wood, stone, and iron compositions. Oc?
casionally they also produced working drawings, for which De
Bazel, as themore experienced of the two, took themain respon?
seems to have concentrated on furniture
sibility. Lauweriks
design. The two men, as has been suggested, also collaborated on
numerous activities outside the office. Not only were they fellow
activists inArchitectura etAmicitia and colleagues in teaching the
Vahana course, but they were also founding editors of Bouw en
a magazine
Sierkunst (Building and the Art of Ornamentation),
which was to attract some of themost important modern artists as
its audience.
As far as De Bazel and Lauweriks were concerned, therewas no
contradiction between modernism and ornament. The elegant,
fanciful typography they devised for the magazine
represents a
?
objectiv?
rejection of the emerging Dutch aesthetic of zakelijk
ity. De Bazel seems to have expressed himself even more force?
fully than Lauweriks about the spirituality of architecture. For De
Bazel, the architect was a chosen priest-mediator to whom the
to his theory,
higher order of things was revealed. According
although every building was limited by its character, it testified to
'unity in diversity'.4
3. Walter SteinHouse, G?ttingen, 1912.
62
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:42:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AA
FILES 7
1^^^^
^^^^^^
4. Exhibition for Christian art,D?sseldorf,
1909. This modernist stacking of cubes
illustratesthediversity of visual imagery in
Lauweriks's
work.
5. Werkbund Exhibition, Cologne, 1914: spiral
spatial convolutions at the entryand free-form
figures on theplanes suggest the individualism
of
the Amsterdam-school
From 1900 to 1904 Lauweriks
taught at the arts and crafts
school in Haarlem.5 Then, in 1904, when the leading German
architect Peter Behrens asked Berlage to become the head of archi?
tecture at the Arts and Crafts school inD?sseldorf,
and Berlage
turned down the offer, Lauweriks was asked to fill the position.
Lauweriks agreed, remaining in Germany from 1904 until 1916,
when he had to return to Holland because of the outbreak of the
First World War.
It was during this period that Lauweriks made
his greatest mark as an avant-garde proportionist and as a
craftsman. Apart from devoting himself to proportional studies,
he engaged in craft and exhibition designs during this time.
Around
1907 he designed a series of single-family houses for the
artists' colony in H?gen
sponsored by the wealthy patron K.E.
Osthaus. These houses featured Lauweriks's proportional system;
themost notable was the house for the Dutch Art Nouveau artist
Thorn Prikker (Fig.2). It was this house, with its intense linear
attention to Lauweriks; as
decoration, that drew Le Corbusier's
late as Modulus
I,6 Le Corbusier remarks approvingly on these
6. War
1915.
monument,
Brussels,
movement.
his graphic signature, as can be seen in the frontispieces that he
designed for Wendingen (Fig.7), the periodical which functioned
as the ideological vehicle of the Amsterdam
school. Lauweriks's
manifest method of balancing individuality of expression with geo?
metrical control clearly exerted an influence on the Amsterdam
school. According to John Vloemans,
theDutch antiquarian who
in 1980,
helped to mount a recent exhibition on Wendingen
Lauweriks was its 'guiding light'.
in 1916, Lauweriks became
On his return toHolland
of the Amsterdam Craft Centre, the Quellinusschool,
which he held until at least 1924.8
the director
a position
IMEllllEEIi
-W" OUDOB?FMMWINKCM
?(MCTif
KM?-If STML
cJ
MJUUW
NH0O
<r*&C
inCl NEM?l*MMCMi
,
?UNT
TAM,
IM
MtM
MlSit FW
OfH
l BWWCH
11HCl
HvtcntiT
i Mftl
?tMOiNCf
WOIDT
UITQIAIWIN
OOO?
CVtMN
TlMMTMOiT
TELIFOON
MM
wtmauMtH
CCMUI!
NUUn.
CM
VAN
MLMM
IPCMUU*
TtHI
>mmmhi*t
?uotmic.f*f
?** ?uotnm
houses. In 1909 Osthaus
invited Lauweriks to H?gen. With the
help of Osthaus and Behrens, he became head of the Staatlichen
at an
(State Manual
Skills) seminar in H?gen,
Handfertigkeits
institute that taught crafts, including pottery and the construction
of lightweightmodular furniture. In 1910 Lauweriks made a study
trip to America before taking up his position as head of the
institute.
In 1912Lauweriks saw the completion of his designs for a house
for the history professor Walter Stein and his wife, the sister of
K.E.
Osthaus
in G?ttingen,
it had brick and
(Fig.3). Located
rough-hewn masonry, and an especially provocative entry with
stone capping and framing columns. With its curved, heavy stone
entry it seems tomanifest Lauweriks's preference for the titanic in
art. In this and his Stirnband houses he apparently opened himself
to the influence of H.H. Richardson.
Lauweriks followed his designs for theH?gen housing with two
important exhibition designs, the first for an exhibition of Chris?
in 1909 and the second for an interior
tian art staged inD?sseldorf
for the Werkbund
in Cologne
in 1914. These two
Exhibition
designs contrast with one another in an interesting way: in one the
major motif is the stacking of cubes (Fig.4), in the other it is a
spiralling wall treatment with wavy linear decor (Fig.5). Lauw?
eriks pursued the wavy manner in a competition for a war monu?
ment in 1915 (Fig.6),7 and this labyrinthine motif rapidly became
AA FILES
7
7. Frontispiece for Wendingen,
1918.
The use of proportional systems by Lauweriks and his
contemporaries
at
There were numerous proportional systems in use in Holland
the turn of the century, but themost frequent type of triangulated
system was the so-called 'Egyptian triangle', composed of sides in
the relationship of 5:8:3. The most famous application of this
during the period was Berlage's Amsterdam Stock Exchange, the
Beurs, which had triangles arranged all along its elevations, con?
trolling the alignments and the spacing of apertures.9 As always in
the application
of such systems, there were slight variations
between grid lines and architectural features. Berlage's use of the
Egyptian triangle in the Beurs seems zakelijk, however, because
63
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:42:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8. H.P.
Berlage
Amsterdam,
-
1898.
Egyptian trianglegrid overlaid on theDamrak elevation of theBeurs,
9. Project for a church,published inDer
Ring, 1909: rendering by Christian Bayer of
the nave,
impart discipline and austerity to the
straight lines unquestionably
form (Fig.8).
Berlage's Grundlage und Entwicklung der Architektur (Bases
and Development of Architecture) of 1908 devotes a great deal of
its text to a treatment of proportional systems. Although he attri?
butes the origin of the Egyptian triangle to J.H. de Groot, itwas
had first introduced this
widely believed that Viollet-le-Duc
system in his Entretiens. In the ninth Entretien he writes that,
although this Egyptian method is not found inWestern classical
structures, triangulations are frequently encountered inmedieval
architecture, especially among secular architects. These architects
either relied on ancient texts and mathematical
traditions or
to
maintained mystical principles known only
the initiated. Viollet
does not, however, recommend a revival of the Egyptian triangu?
lar system, although he does cite Jomard's Description
de
account
and
of
which
its
Plutarch's
VEgypte
Egyptian triangle,
had the proportions 3:4:5 and which, when the base was doubled,
stood ina ratioof 8:3 (therightleg) to 5 (the leftleg).
It was no doubt Cuypers who, as a follower of Viollet, intro?
duced the Egyptian triangle to both De Bazel and Lauwericks
when theywere working in his office. Soon after leaving Cuypers,
in 1895, De Bazel firstused the Egyptian triangle in a design for a
bath-house competition.10 Although Lauweriks similarly had an
affinity for Egyptian culture, he never employed the Egyptian
in an
triangle in his own work. But his daughter Lea Lauweriks,
on
her
father's
interview in 1978,11 placed
special emphasis
? his
books on Egyptian art, his great fascina?
Egyptian interests
tion with initiations, especially those conducted within the Cheops
pyramid, where the ritual was said to cure blindness. Mejuffrouw
Lauweriks
has stated that her father probably
considered
In
and
to
be
beliefs
synonymous.
virtually
theosophical
Egyptian
this vein, H.P. Blavatsky, the founder of the theosophical move?
ment, says in her Isis Unveiled that the pyramid 'symbolized the
creative principles of Nature and illustrated also the principles of
geometry, mathematics, astronomy, and astrology'. For her the
pyramid was traditionally the site of initiation, 'a temple of in?
itiation where men rose toward the gods and the gods descended
toward
men'.12
In his comments of 1899 on the book by the Beuron monk
Desidier Lenz, Zur Aesthetik der Beuronce-Schule
(On the Aes?
thetics of the Beuron School), Lauweriks
relates how religious
ideas are frequently connected with a system of proportions. It
apse
and
cupola.
seems to have been as a result of his review of Lenz's work that
Lauweriks made his first strong commitment to proportion. In
'Schoonheidleer'
(Aesthetic Lesson), the title of a series of articles
on Lenz's work, Lauweriks points out the basic proportional
ratios in Greek tradition, these being 1:2:3 and 1:3:4, and dis?
tinguishes between these and the Egyptian proportion of 10:12:20.
Lauweriks's major theoretical contribution to the quadrature
in 1909 in the April issue of Der
system of ordering appeared
Ring. In this article he used his own design of a church together
with illustrations of it executed by Christian Bayer to exemplify
his proportional theories. Lauweriks's geometric formulations are
among the few examples in the literature of proportions where
numerals, as opposed to ratios, are related as a proportion. His
preferred proportional relationship was 4:5:6, and he claimed that
it stemmed not from geometry, but from nature itself?
namely
from the biological cell:
In philosophical terms, these constitute the . . . total assembled cells of
thebuilding's body, these units or cell systemsupon which thebuilding is
developed and out of which the architectonic organism forms itself is
from the general rhythmicbasis which must always exist and without
which the designs of a building are impossible for thisorganization.13
Despite his concern for fixed numerical relations, Lauweriks re?
cognized that the designer could not be bound to any rigid system.
He wrote, inDer Ring,
The systemdescribed here applies to all parts of the church, yet at no time
is the artist restricted in his language of forms to a single solution; he
always maintains sufficient freedom to be able to regulate according to
other points of view, and thisprovides him with thenecessary support for
carrying through the system.14
The plates illustrating this article ?
richly ornate, except for
four plain perspectives of the church (Fig.9) ?
show all the floor
one
to
be
which
is
for
square (Fig. 10).
plans
rectangular, except
The most detailed of these has massive walls and columns, some?
like Bramante's
plan for St Peter's with its centralized
dome. All the plans display a playful experimentation with tiny
grids, about 1/32-inch square, with circles and arcs overlaid on
them along the edges. The central arrangement is themost com?
plex, in the sense that massive walls and columns define three
?
the entrance, the nave, and the dome.15
major areas
Lauweriks's church must be seen in the context of not only Ber?
lage but also a third figure active in the Dutch proportional
what
64
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:42:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AA
FILES 7
10. Project for a church, 1909: two of theground plans (above) and
diagrams (below left). The circle inscribedwith arcs seems to establish
theproportions used in theplans, which are generatedfrom the square
grid.
65
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:42:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
//.Michel de Klerk - Competition design for mourning chapel, 1910.
school, J.H. de Groot (1865-1932). De Groot was the practitioner
such geometrically-based
who probably did most to popularize
seven books on the sub?
no
less
than
design systems, publishing
Jan de Meijer,
in an
the
achitectural
writer
ject. Interestingly,
in
De
Weekblad
Architectura
of
Groot
Bouwkundig
obituary
in a sur?
(1932), portrayed him as being similar to Lauweriks
an
to
number
occult
of
aspect in his
respects, alluding
prising
character. While we do not know ifDe Groot was a mystic, we do
and plans, while Lauweriks exclusively makes use of plans and
perspectival views.
The thirdmember of the triumvirate, De Bazel, resembled his
as well as Berlage,
in
and De Groot,
colleagues Lauweriks
a
and
notion
of
the
purely objective system
advocating
refusing
instead a kind of rational architecture with mystical overtones. As
far as he was concerned, the grid system, with itsmathematical
basis, should not be regarded merely as a zakelijk device. He con?
know that both men taught at the Quellinusschool.
According to
De Meijer's article, De Groot, De Bazel, and Lauweriks formed a
like-minded triumvirate.16
De Groot's design systems illustrate his interest in surface ef?
illustrators whose designs were
fect. Unlike other Art Nouveau
use regulating systems. When
to
De
Groot
tried
purely arbitrary,
he and his sister Jacoba published their firstbook, Triangles with
in
Ornamental Designs for Independent Study and for Schools,
a
set
In
series
similar
studies.
for
of
the
the
1896, they
stage
statement that the draughtsman should
curred with De Groot's
allow fantasy to inform the lines.18
After his three earliest designs which displayed no interest in
proportions, De Bazel's entry for a bath-house competition held
in 1895 clearly demonstrates the use of controlling ratios deter?
mined by sixty- and forty-five-degree angles. A similar use of pro?
portional systems is evident in his entry for a library competition
I never copied but always built on and therebyarrived at resultswhose
origin was as simple and indestructibleas possible. ... I also saw later
that,with few exceptions in other works, thatwhich was feelingor acci?
After 1900, De Bazel employed triangles less frequently; in?
stead, all-over grids permeate his designs, determining aperture
placements as well as other elevational features. The grids facili?
tate the addition and subtraction of selected cubic elements, as
well as serving to unify parts into a whole. At times De Bazel
employs 1:2 triangles or forty-five-degree inclines to determine the
height of a roof or a facade.
Finally, the influence of the Dutch proportionist school on
Peter Behrens should be mentioned. Behrens's use of grids was
preface, De Groot wrote,
dent
was
in fact
conscious
in earlier
styles.
.
.
. The
communicate throughornament just as in the past.17
purpose
is to
De Groot explained that this method of design was to start
from nature and then to abstract its images to form a rhythmic
configuration of lines. In two plates published in the book, De
Groot demonstrates such geometricizations of nature. The figures
such as a bird, a
in the plates seem to be both naturalistic forms?
?
a
or
and
human
the
horse,
encapsulation of these forms
being
in regulated triangles. This exercise closely resembles the images
in Samenleving (Beauty in
Berlage uses later, in his Schoonheid
1919.
of
Society)
Although De Groot's first book may have been inspired by the
handbooks of the English pioneer Arts and Crafts theorists Owen
Jones and Christopher Dresser, the next text he and his sister pro?
duced, Ontwerpen inArchitectur (Designs inArchitecture), pub?
lished in 1900, extended back to the past, especially the Renais?
sance. In one plate De Groot acknowledged the Renaissance par?
tiality for the 1:2 rectangle. De Groot also presented proportional
illustrations of the classical orders. De Groot's
presentation
differs from that of Lauweriks, for he gives us overlaid elevations
of the same year, where he employs the Egyptian triangle, and it
reappears in a design for the Architects' Association
building.
Here De Bazel also employs a 1:2 triangle to determine the roof
line and, as in Berlage's Beurs, a grid for the ground plan.
firstdiscussed in 1913 by Fritz Hoeber, who traced their origins to
Behrens's designs for the Oldenberg Pavilions of 1905.19Behrens
may have become aware of such systems at the time of his peda?
and, simi?
gogical collaboration with Lauweriks at D?sseldorf;
near
near
at
his
crematorium
Delstern,
Celstern,
H?gen,
larly,
completed in 1907, one of the most lavish buildings designed in
western Europe at this time, indicates his close sharing of the pre?
in Florence, a
vailing Dutch ideas of the time. Like S. Miniato
most certain influence on it, itwas adorned inside and out with
dark versus light stones ordered in a
stonework ?
Cosmati-like
strict geometrical pattern. Although this can hardly be cited as
conclusive evidence of Lauweriks's
influence, Lea Lauweriks re?
members that when she first saw the building she thought itwas
by her father.
66
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:42:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AA
FILES 7
The Dutch school continued to prevail after the First World
War, with De Bazel's completion of the Trade Society building in
1926, a structure which was based on a three-metre module.
Lauweriks continued to direct and teach at the Quellinusschool
until 1924, though we do not know whether he continued to
advocate the use of proportional systems, nor is it clear whether
Berlage used them in his post-war work. De Groot was the only
member of the trio to continue to write about such systems.
Lauweriks' s strong impact on the Dutch Expressionist move?
ment, the Amsterdam
school, is indisputable. The leader of the
Michel
de
movement,
Klerk, displayed his familiarity with pro?
in
the
portions
design of a mourning chapel as early as 1909
This
influence
could have stemmed from any one of the
(Fig. 11).
Dutch proportionalists, but theAmsterdam school's later, seem?
ingly free-curved masses may especially be likened to two of
Lauweriks's German designs: the Werkbund
Exhibition design
curves
with
its
of the 1915 design
and
the
foulard
(1914)
spiralling
for a war monument.
Even more convincingly, Lauweriks's
crafted design forDer Ring anticipates Wendingen's
format.
Lauweriks's work also forms a decisive link with that later as?
pect of Dutch modernism identified with the school of Aldo van
Eyck. Although Van Eyck himself has never espoused any reli?
gion which would have specific implications for his work, it is
nonetheless pervaded by a strong spiritual sense which contrasts
with the rationalism of the CIAM generation. However,
itmust
be acknowledged
brand of mysticism
that, where Lauweriks's
stemmed directly from an oriental-influenced
religion, Van
Eyck's
spirituality ismore
directly grounded
inmodern
anthro?
pology.
Only four writers and an exhibition have brought Lauweriks's
name to the forefront in recent years: 'Mechteld de Bois' (1983),
A. Windsor
(1980), Francois Verif (1976), theArchitectura exhi?
bition and catalogue (1975), and the real champion of Lauweriks,
Nie. Tummers (1971). It is to be hoped that through those Dutch
and English efforts, and this introduction, Lauweriks will emerge
from partial obscurity and be accorded his rightful place in
modern
architectural history as an influence on spiritually
inspired thought and design.
Notes
1. J.L.M.
Lauweriks,
p.158.
2. J.L.M.
Lauweriks,
'De
Eenheid
der Theosophie,,
in the newspaper
report on 'Beteekenis der geometrie'
16 January 1897.
de Bazel, Architect
Pers,
(Leiden: Universitaire
Courant,
Opr. Haarlemmer
3. Dr A.W.
Reinink, K.P.C.
1965), p.19.
4. K.P.C.
de Bazel,
van de Bouwkunst
tot de godsdienst
De
Verhouding
(Amsterdam,
1965), pp. 15-16.
1893-1918 (Amsterdam: Van Gennep,
1975), pp.93-7.
comments on the house of Thorn
Brick (?), a Dutchman
(about
(Voordracht)
5. Architecture
6. Le Corbusier
1909)'
in The Modulus,
A Harmonious
to Architecture
ally Applicable
Measure
and Mechanics
to theHuman
(London:
Scale Univers?
Faber
and Faber,
1951), p.26.
7. Karl Osthaus
was asked to put on an exhibition of art inwar. Itwas not to be
but on a concept contrary to a human
dependent on victors or hero-worship,
drama of world war. Thus many of the features in Lauweriks's
imagery are
to restful contemplation.
Tummers, J.L. Mathieu
conducive
8. Nie.
H.M.
architectuur
en vormgeving
rond
Lauweriks,
zijn werk en zijn invloed op
1910: 'De Hagener
Impuls' (Hilversum: G.
van Saane,
1968).
Idea
9. Pieter Singelenberg, H.P.
Berlage,
Dekker
Architecture
(Utrecht: Haentjens
10. A.W.
and Style: The Quest for Modern
and Gumbert,
1972), pp. 135-36.
IV.
de Bazel,
Reinink, K.P.C.
chapter
11. Lea Lauweriks was kind enough to talk with me about her father and show me
his work
in the fall of 1978.
12. Peter Tomkins,
Secrets
of the Great Pyramid
(New York:
Harper
Colophon
Books,
13. J.L.M.
1978), pp.256-57.
'Einen Beitrag zum Entwerfen auf Systematischer Grund?
Lauweriks,
to System-Based Designs
inArchitec?
(A Contribution
lage in der Architectur'
1909, p.28.
ture), Der Ring, April
14. Ibid., p.35.
15. Ring.
Weekblad
Architec
16. Jan de Meijer,
obituary for J.H. de Groot, Bouwkindig
tura, no. 13, 26 March
1932, pp. 1-2.
17. J.H. and J.M. de Groot, Driehoeken
bij ontwerpen van Ornament
(Joh. G.
Stemler Cz.,
1896), p.5.
18. Ibid., p.31.
19. Fritz Hoeber,
Peter Behrens
(Munich: Muller
& Rentsch,
1913), pp.34-8.
Acknowledgements
Nederlandse
Figs.4,8: from Architectural
Figs. 7,11: from Wendingen;
J.L. Mathieu
architectuur
Tummers,
1893-1918; Figs. 1,2,3,6: from Nie. HM.
Lauweriks,
zijn werk en zijn invloed op architectuur en vormgeving rond 1910:
'De Hagener
Impuls'
(Hilversum:
G.
van Saane,
Ring.
AA FILES
11 (1902),
Theosophia
7
67
This content downloaded from 132.206.27.25 on Sat, 1 Mar 2014 14:42:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1968); Figs.9,10:
from Der