Archinect
anchor

Hejduk's Kreuzberg Tower - petition to save it!

ObiWanKenobi

The silent majority is not ranting in their heads because the facts have been kept from them by a complicit cultural revolution that wants the people to be too busy to think about anything but survival.

Guaranteed if people had the means to act more like human beings than machines for a whole day and were taken to a luxurious retreat/ seminar and presented with all the facts, at the end of the day a Hejduk inspired piece of architecture would be the last thing they'd choose to live in.

Mar 25, 10 1:00 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Prisonesque?

More retarded rantings from the Palinesque crowd. Idiot.

It's beautiful in its simplicity, not overly adorned with ridiculous, and supplementary details.

Simplicity = Beauty

Mar 25, 10 1:26 pm  · 
 · 
ObiWanKenobi

Simplicity = boring simpleton.

Just another "unhappy hipster" are we?

Mar 25, 10 1:52 pm  · 
 · 
justavisual

you should know some of the greatest things are the simplest.

not everything needs to be overly complicated.

Mar 25, 10 1:59 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Nope, far from it, but seeing as how your name references a 1977 Star Wars character, it would seem you are the one suffering from PBR, hipster t-shirts and an iPhone glued to your ears.

Mar 25, 10 2:00 pm  · 
 · 
marmkid

you do all realize this is all completely subjective

Just because you dont like a building or do like a building doesnt mean it is a universal fact

Mar 25, 10 2:04 pm  · 
 · 
nils

I'm overly impressed by the level reached by this interesting topic....
Could we please keep it on tracks?
thnx
Nils

Mar 25, 10 2:09 pm  · 
 · 
dlb

for Marmkid and IamGray:

"So, to the posters of archinect, what is it about this particular building that makes it work saving? "

"Inform me, please."

"Is there any sort of significance to the building that would warrant it being saved and never altered?"

"I admit to not knowing a whole lot about Hejduk, so perhaps if you could explain why this would be important to save, beyond it being one of his few actual built projects?"


To fill in some background on the Hejduk project and why "I" think it is significant (I am writing from my point of view - as i noted above, this is not a matter of group-think, but a personal response to a current situation), let me begin with the context.

The Hejduk project, was commissioned b Josef Kleihues, who was director of the IBA (Internationale Bauausstellung) for Berlin (1984-88). [german text - ]http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationale_Bauausstellung_1984] IBA was a program of the W. Berlin government, aimed at re-invigorating the city through the construction of new housing and other facilities, while filling in sites that had remained unbuilt from the period of WWII. This major redevelopment project produced over 35 building projects, primarily in the South Friedrichstadt section of W. Berlin, Kreuzberg and Tegel. The collection of architects commissioned for these barious projects was very mixed, with many seen as being within the "post-modern" camp, the "neo-modern", "critical-reconstruction", etc.

John Hejduk was commissioned for 3 different projects - housing at Tegel, a 'gate-house' in S. Friedrichstadt and a residential complex in S. Friedrichsradt at Besselstrasse and Charlottenstrasse (not far from Kochstrasse and CheckPoint Charlie). This project (which is the one threatened by an unsympathetic renovation) included two 5-storey residential wings and a thin, 13-storey residential tower. The tower is characterized by being fragmented into a main living area, with kitchen and bathroom separated but joined to the main room, and separated but joined stair (circular) and elevator towers, such that the composition is an ensemble of 5 formal elements joined to form a single tower.

This project (and most of the projects of IBA) were to provide affordable housing in W. Berlin. W Berlin at this point in time (before the wall fell in 1989) was subsidized by the Allies and the West German government. And although Berlin was seen as an exciting and lively arts and alternative lifestyle, the city itself suffered from a lack of employment, limited resources and options, restricted movement and an exodus of talented and qualified professionals. Part of the role of IBA was to provide for innovative and contemporary solutions to the city, its housing deficiencies and to repair the damages of the war to the urban fabric of the city. The IBA project also gave rise to the increased interest in Berlin as a tourist destination for its architectural experimentation.

[as a side note, the IBA of 1984-88, was not the first IBA. There was a prior project of smaller scale at Hansaviertal in Berlin (1957-61), with projects by Aalto, Gropius, Niemeyer and others]

John Hejduk built very little in his life-time. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hejduk] This was not for lack of talent or necessarily opportunity, but also because Hejduk remained deeply critical and skeptical of most real estate and commercial developments. He was loathe to get mixed up in the machinations necessary to gain commissions and to foster networks with development agencies and individuals with whom he was dubious of their motives.

Hejduk's perhaps best known built project is his renovation of the Foundation Building of Cooper Union, at Cooper Square, NYC. This intervention and reformulation of the architecture and art schools at Cooper Union, play off a Corbusian play with internal facades and spatial transfers, figurative elements within a framed space and the ordering of multiple grids.

John Hejduk was one of the most important educators in architecture. A graduate of Cooper Union in 1950, he returned to Cooper Union in 1964 to teach and eventually lead the school of architecture. He was part of a team of young architects and artists in the late 50's, (Colin Rowe, Bob Slutzky, Werner Seligman, Bernard Hoesli) [see: ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Rangers_(architects)] teaching at the University of Texas, known as the "Texas Rangers". Out of this experience, Hejduk developed several innovative design exercises that remained a fundamental part of the Cooper Union pedagogy. Hejduk wrote: "I believe in the social contract therefore I teach. I believe that the University is one of the last places that protects and preserves freedom, therefore teaching is also a socio/political act, among other things. I believe in books and the written word, therefore I fabricate works with the hope that they will be recorded in books. I am pragmatic and believe in keeping records. I believe to record is to bear witness. The book I wrote, Victims is to bear witness and to remember. I believe in the density of the sparse. I believe in place and the spirit of place."

I believe it is relevant and necessary to support the petition that is currently circulating to protect the original design and building of John Hejduk in Berlin for the following reasons:

- the design is unique and is a serious attempt at providing a poetic and non-conformist formulation of private space in an urban context. the design is infused with subtle reminders that the support of the collective is also support of the individual. retaining the specificity of the design - from its colour, its materiality and the spatial arrangements - are fundamental to the integrity of the project, and should be protected.

- the project was developed as part of a program of affordable housing. the on-going lack of financial support lead to the degrading of the building fabric. my understanding is that from this circumstance (and the fact that the management company was going bankrupt), a new management company took over the property and determined that by making the project more lively and fresh, they could get a better return on their investment. while there is a financial logic to this scenario, i believe that many who have signed the petition feel that this is an insufficient reason to lose one of the very few John Hejduk buildings in existence.

- John Hejduk was never the fashionable architect. He was never comfortable in surrendering his passion and integrity for the sake of a commercial opportunity. He was often "the one who refused to participate" (a reference to one of his projects). And yet, Hejduk had (and continues to have), a profound impact on architectural thought, pedagogy and discourse. This is not a direct justification for protecting the buildings in Berlin, but it is to say that with so few moments when architecture is so deeply moral as that expressed by John Hejduk, it would be a great lose to not have one of his works around to remind us of an ambition higher than mere production and commercial returns.

at the time of this posting (26 april, 2010) there were more than 2550 signatures on the petition.

Mar 26, 10 6:02 pm  · 
 · 
arnje

though i'm not sure of the wisdom of wading into this discussion, i feel a bit compelled; like unable to look away from a car wreck. i'm sure i will regret doing so.

i graduated from cooper in the 80s (in fact was there the year winston smith made his mark on the world) and got to know hejduk very well. i come to praise hejduk, not... anything else. i mention this, and that i did a m.arch elsewhere, to indicate i am not fully ignorant on the subject.

i have not read everything winston has written, and do not agree with much of what i have read. he reminds me of one fella i read somewhere else far away and long ago, a piggish sort. and yet he makes some strong, albeit exaggerated, often amusing, almost always intelligent and coherent, arguments that should not be so lightly dismissed. His views on modernism, branding, blind allegiance, abuse of power and so on, while not definitive, are at least worth consideration.

hejduk used to say, "the university is the last bastion of freedom." and yet he and his chosen gang (of four) were extremely harsh on non-conforming student thought. cooper union was an abusive institution under hejduk. he was tyrannical. still, he did some beautiful work e.g. his drawings and the foundation bldg reno. he coaxed great things out of some and beat others into submission - or insanity. he was a large man with a huge ego.

i think it was that ego that led him to make the unfortunate decision to let his "poetic" ideas get built in his later years. he was better served as an idealist. the delicacy of his drawings and ideas could never survive in the harsh reality of buildings. so, preserve them? sure. why not? not as an example of great architecture, which they are definitely not. but as a reminder of how things were. or not. no big deal either way.

Mar 27, 10 3:57 am  · 
 · 
starrchitect

Given the current global economic state, if demolishing this beast is gonna help some construction workers put food on the table, clothe their children and support their families, by all means tear the fucker down.

This isnt exactly FLW's Imperial Hotel and its seismic innovations were saving here...though that suffered a similar fate.

Mar 29, 10 10:03 pm  · 
 · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

Archinect


This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.

  • ×Search in: