Wyniki wyszukiwania - BazTech

Ograniczanie wyników

1 Architecturae et Artibus

1 2019

Znaleziono wyników: 1

Liczba wyników na stronie

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Sortuj według:

Ogranicz wyniki do:

“Conservative Progression”. The influence of the Modern Movement on Hungarian architectural education during the interwar period

Karácsony Rita, Vukoszávlyev Zorán

Architecturae et Artibus

2019

Vol. 11, no. 3

42--53

The influence of the Modern Movement was increasingly felt in Hungary from the end of the 1920s. As time passed, architectural education also needed to respond to these changes. How did the professors, who designed in historical styles, react to the new situation, and how did the students respond? Who were the people who first stimulated interest in modern architecture, and who did they inspire? What kind of institutional or structural modifications did all these initiatives bring about at the Architectural Faculty of Budapest Technical University? There are three noteworthy episodes in the history of introducing modern approaches at the Faculty. The first event of great significance was the establishment of the Department of General Building Design in 1922 besides the three long-standing historical departments: the Departments of Ancient, Middle and Modern Ages. This began a disengagement with the era of historicism. However, students in the older years continued to receive their design assignments from the historical departments, and were expected to design in historical styles taught by the professors. Thus architectural education could be considered conservative even by the end of the 1920s. On the other hand, some students were able to bring progressive modernism directly to the University. At the student exhibition held in 1927, a few “brave” drawings independent of any department appeared among the designs in historical styles. These included a design by György Rácz inspired by Le Corbusier that was showcased thanks to the curator, a student named György Masirevich. Farkas Molnár – who returned from the Bauhaus school – submitted a design influenced by modern German architecture. Within a few years Masirevich, Rácz and Molnár joined CIAM, and then its subgroup: CIRPAC. It was not only students, but also some professors who played an indisputable role in ushering in modern architecture, even if their work and teaching methods could generally be regarded as examples of “conservative progression”. The third and most important date of the investigated period was 1930, when architectural education began to be given high priority. That year another student exhibition was organised by a professor, Iván Kotsis, which was linked to the 12th International Congress of Architects held in Budapest. Plans designed by students in the modern spirit constituted the majority at that exhibition. It was in the same year that professor Hültl as the Rector of the University voiced his opinion on modern architecture: according to him, modernism should not be used for certain types of buildings; however, he did not want to oppose all new directions in architecture. This duality of approach can well be detected in his private practice. Therefore it was the so-called “other modern” rather than progressive modernism that became institutionalized at the Faculty due to the influence of some professors whose aim was to comply better with local circumstances and materials. To achieve this it was indispensable to get the knowledge of the past, so teaching history of architecture remained a significant part of the curriculum. It was Professor Kotsis and his colleagues who laid out this path and their heritage was still prevalent after WWII.