Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Architecture in Uniform: Designing and Building for the Second World War

A German poster printed in the Netherlands, 1943: "Atlantic Wall: 1943 is not 1918"

This is an excerpt of Martin Filler´s review for The New York review of books: 

 There has long been a tendency to see the most important innovations of Modernism as arising directly from progressive causes. War, in this view, was considered a limiting if not wholly destructive force that stymied civilian architecture in favor of retrogressive military structures. But in his groundbreaking recent book Architecture in Uniform: Designing and Building for the Second World War, the French architectural historian and architect Jean-Louis Cohen establishes one big, awful, inescapable truth: the full potential of twentieth-century architecture, engineering, and design was realized not in the social-welfare and urban-improvement schemes beloved by the early proponents of the Modern Movement, but rather through technologies perfected during the two world wars to slaughter vast armies, destroy entire cities, decimate noncombatant populations, and industrialize genocide. It is hard to come away from Architecture in Uniform without the same feelings of profound horror and lingering dread that overtake readers of recent books on World War II by Max Hastings, Timothy Snyder, and other historians who continue to reveal with terrifying immediacy just how horrific that catastrophe was. And yet it also had paradoxical consequences for architecture. High among the major misconceptions that Cohen addresses in this heroic project—which included an eponymous exhibition he curated at Montreal’s Canadian Centre for Architecture last summer—is that World War II brought the building art to a veritable halt. Although non-essential commercial and residential construction were indeed banned for the duration of the war in the US, architecture and engineering proceeded apace in the military sphere. Urgent contingencies spurred the rapid development of new synthetic materials (especially plastics of all sorts) and imaginative technical solutions (including lightweight and portable structures as well as new forms of prefabrication) that would have taken far longer to emerge under less pressured peacetime conditions. Now a professor at NYU’s Institute of Fine Arts and the University of Paris VIII, Cohen was himself touched by the immediate legacy of the war in the French capital where he grew up. Although he recounts such inspiring feats as the wholesale retooling of American manufacturing for the all-out war effort—which spelled certain doom for the Axis once our industrially invincible country entered the conflict in 1941—darker episodes predominate. Impelled by the saga of his mother (the wife of a leading French Communist Party official), who was a slave laborer in the greenhouses appended to the Dachau concentration camp, Cohen recounts how design concepts devised for human betterment were most effectively reapplied by the Nazis to the vilest ends: 

 It was a kind of sadistic radicalization of the research on the minimum habitation that had been conducted under the Weimar Republic by architects in Berlin and Frankfurt, whose purpose was the large-scale production of affordable modern housing for large urban populations. The concentration camp version of the Existenzminimum was compressed beyond any imaginable limits.

Fritz Ertl: Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp, detention sheds, November 1944



  1. Myriam, siempre hay un lado oscuro y las artes figurativas o representativas o funcionales o arquitectónicas se funden y confunden con apertura o cerrazón de las ideas. No podemos negar que la industria de la guerra ha provocado un sinnúmero de investigaciones y aportes a todas las artes. La contradicción humana no tiene fin.

    Abrazos estructurados.

    *te quiero comentar que recibí tu comentario en mi bandeja de entrada, pero no aparece en los Antojos y no tengo idea el porqué. Disculpa, rebasa mi conocimiento de internauta.

  2. Sergio, no hice comentarios en este post porque la reseña es muy completa. Tengo dos libros que tocan temas relacionados, uno es sobre la arquitectura de la guerra fría, la de los bunkers. Y el otro, es más impresionante porque es sobre la destrucción de los edificios que son la memoria del pueblo. Dice el autor, Evans, que destruir un edificio público que es un símbolo del pueblo es un golpe moral muy fuerte y da innumerables ejemplos. Los targets se elegían para causar tales efectos.
    Con respecto al comentario, no hay problema, sabes que admiro mucho tu trabajo en letras y en pintura.
    Un abrazo,


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...