Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T07:57:54.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Claus and Kaan: high theory and low practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2008

Charles Rattray
Charles Rattray
Affiliation:
The Scott Sutherland School of Architecture, The Robert Gordon University, Garthdee, Aberdeen AB10 7QB, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The work of Amsterdam architects Felix Claus and Kees Kaan is moving away from formulae associated with modern architecture. This paper studies their attempt to find meaning which is at once more abstract and more direct, and notes that a guiding light in their search is a fundamental concern with the physical realities and compromises of the building process.

Type
Design
Information
arq: Architectural Research Quarterly , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , Spring 1997 , pp. 26 - 37
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, S. (1996). ‘Field Conditions in Architecture and Urbanism’, in The Berlage Papers no.17, 01, the Berlage Institute, Amsterdam. For an extended version of the discussion, see Architectural Design vol. 67, no. 5/6, May 1997: ‘Architecture After Geometry’ edited by Don Bates and Peter Davidson.Google Scholar
Berlin, I. (1945, 1992). The Hedgehog and the Fox, Phoenix (Orion Publishing), London.Google Scholar
Betjeman, J. (1954). ‘Norfolk’, in A Few Late Chrysanthemums, John Murray, London.Google Scholar
Buchanan, P. (1985a). ‘Herman Hertzberger’, in The Architectural Review vol.177, no.1055, 01, p.25.Google Scholar
Buchanan, P. (1985b). ‘Carel Weeber’, The Architectural Review p.42.Google Scholar
Colquhoun, A. (1974). ‘Centraal Beheer’, in Architecture Plus vol. 2, no. 5, 09 – 10 1974. Reprinted in Essays in Architectural Criticism, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, 1986, pp. 104–109.Google Scholar
Gombrich, E. (1985). ‘On Physiognomic Perception’, in Meditations on a Hobby Horse and Other Essays on the Theory of Art, Phaidon Press, London, pp. 48–50.Google Scholar
Holzbauer, W. (1991). In Kloos, M. (ed.) Architecture Now, Architectura and Natura, Amsterdam, p. 84.Google Scholar
Hulsman, B. (1996). ‘On Claus en Kaan’, in Architecture et Urbanisme no. 307, 04.Google Scholar
Koolhaas, R. (1996). Quoted in S., Kwinter (ed) Rem Koolhaas: conversations with students. Rice School of Architecture and Princeton Architectural Press, New York, p. 56.Google Scholar
Lancaster, O. (1963). Pillar to Post, John Murray, London, pp. 98–99.Google Scholar
MacCormac, R. (1984). ‘Actions and Experience of Design’ in The Architects' Journal, vol. 179 nos. 1 and 2, 4 and 11 January, p. 45.Google Scholar
OMA (1980). Design account of their 1978 Dutch Parliament competition entry. In International Architect vol. 1 no. 3, p. 50.Google Scholar
Raman, P. G. (1979). ‘Meditations on a Collage House’, in Edinburgh Architectural Research, vol. 6.Google Scholar
Read, H. (1972). The Meaning of Art, Faber and Faber, London, p. 266.Google Scholar
Rowe, C. and Koeter, F (1975). ‘Collage City’, in The Architectural Review. vol. 158. no. 942, 08. pp.66–91. Rowe and Koeter's book Collage City published by MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1984, has the same discussion.Google Scholar
Summerson, J. (1957). ‘The Case for a Theory of Modern Architecture’. In RIBA Journal, vol. 64 no. 8, 06, p. 310 and (for Smithson's contribution) p. 312.Google Scholar
Valéry, P. A. (1924). Dialogues: Eupalinos ou l'architecte, quoted in translation in Mackay, A. E. (1961, 1980), The Universal Self: A Study of Paul Valéry, William Maclellan (now Stuart Titles), Glasgow, p. 218.Google Scholar
Welsh, J. (1993). ‘Class Walls’, in RIBA Journal vol. 100, no. 9, 09, p. 58.Google Scholar