The Hideous Duty of Isaiah Berlin

Nicolas Kemper

IsaiahBerlin,clockwisefromtopleft,onthebeachatParaggi,Italy,c1972(©IsaiahBerlinLiteraryTrust);

inhisstudyatHeadingtonHouse,1971(©NoelChanan);inthegardenofhishouse

inParaggi,Italy,1969(©IsaiahBerlinLiteraryTrust);inOxford,1977(©BernardLee(‘Bern’)Schwartz/

NationalPortraitGallery,London)

128 aafiles72

‘Myheadisswimminginarchitects.Iamslowlybeingdrivenmadby this fearful problem, particularly when I observe architectsexchangingglancesinmypresenceasiftosay:“Whoistohaveacutofthislargeandfoolishfigure,whodoesnotknowhisownmind”?’1This‘largeandfoolishfigure’wasoneofthemostsignificantpoliti-calthinkersofthetwentiethcentury,IsaiahBerlin.Atthetimehewrotethesewords–inalettertoafriendinDecember1966–hewasfeted on both sides of the Atlantic. Instrumental in the develop-mentof‘Oxfordphilosophy’,andrenownedforhisconversationalbrilliance,Berlinclaimedhehadtotalktothink.Andhowhecouldtalk,seemingto ‘bubbleandrattle likeasamovarontheboil’ashiswordsattainedavelocity‘courtingthespeedoflight’.2Bornin1909intheBalticseaportofRiga,BerlingrewupknowingRussian,HebrewandGerman.TothishesoonaddedEnglish,whenhisafflu-entfamilyfledtheRussianRevolutionandwashedupinSurbitonin1921,andthenLatinandGreek,whenheattendedaLondonpublicschool,StPaul’s.

‘Iamanintellectualtaxi;peopleflagmedownandgivemedes-tinationsandoffIgo’,Berlinoncesaid.3JohnFKennedy,forexam-ple,hadhailedhimontheeveoftheCubanmissilecrisis,seekinghisadvice.Andhisrangeextendedfarbeyondthepolitical:PabloPicasso,JohnMaynardKeynes,AlbertEinsteinandBorisPasternakwere among the multitude who found themselves ‘lifted up intothevertiginousclimbofaBerlinconversation’–amassswollenbyhis popular radio broadcasts on bbc’s Third Programme and byhisMellonlecturesintheus.4Yet,inthemid-1960s,thisformida-bleintellectwasbadlybruisedbyanencounterwiththemotherofallarts.‘Thethingaboutarchitectsisconfusing,bewilderingandfrightening’, he confided to the legal scholar Ronald Dworkin.5Aletterwrittentoanotherfriend,thehistorianJackHexter,spellsouttheparticularsourceofthisbewilderment:‘Butifthereisany-body interested in architecture in your vicinity do ask them, foruponmeliesthehideousdutyofbuildingacollegeandthechoiceof architect is agonising beyond all belief. Nobody agrees. It is aworldmorefilledwithstabsintheback,doublecrossingsandgen-eralskulduggerythaneventhoseofarchaeologyorarthistory,andbelieveme,thatissayingsomething.’6

Ithadn’tseemedsuchaskulduggerousprospecttheyearbefore,when Berlin had taken on the responsibility for building a newcollegeatOxford.Studentnumbersattheuniversityhadleaptbyaround40percentsincetheendofthewar,inlinewiththegeneralprinciple–backedbyincreasedgovernmentfundingforhigheredu-cationacrosstheuk–thatuniversityplaces‘shouldbeavailabletoallwhowerequalifiedforthembyabilityandattainment’.7Whilesome3,000extraundergraduateshadbeeneffectivelysqueezedintotacked-onextensionsorsubdivisionsofexistingquarters,itbecameclearthatOxford’sfast-multiplyingpopulationofgraduatestudentsandscientistswouldneednewhomesoftheirown.8In1965Oxford’sCongregation therefore founded two new colleges, Iffley andStCross,toaccommodatedonswhowerenotattachedtoexistingcollegesastherewasinsufficientdemandforundergraduateteach-ingintheirsubjects.Thefirstofthese,Iffley,wasacommunitywithfewresources,incontrasttomostOxfordcolleges.Ithadbeenallo-catedsomefundstohelpwithrunningcostsintheearlyyears,butnomoneyatallfortheconstructionofanewbuilding.Itneededacapableleader.Beingmainlyscientists,thefellowsturnedfirsttoCharlesCoulson,anaccomplishedmathematicianandtheoreticalchemist,buthewasunwillingtotakeonthechallenge.Rebuffed,

they approached Berlin, perhaps not the most obvious choice,ashewasneitherascientistnor,evidently,akeenadministrator–in1953hehadturneddowntheopportunitytobecomethewardenofanothernewOxfordcollege,Nuffield.

Confounding expectations, Berlin told Oxford vice-chancellorKenneth Wheare he would consider accepting the post.9 In hiseyesOxfordneededtoreformifitwastoavoidthe‘Salamancasyn-drome’–so-calledafteroneofthegreatuniversitiesofthemedi-eval world, which had declined into irrelevance when it failed toadaptandkeeppacewithitspeers.Hehadevenattemptedtoper-suadehisowncollege,AllSouls,a richandexclusive institution,touseitsampleresourcestobringingraduatestudents;later,healsoproposedamergerwithStAntony’stocreateaPrinceton-likeInstituteofAdvancedStudyatOxford.10Buttheseeffortshadcometo naught. In the prospect of overseeing a new college, however,hesawanopportunitytocreateaninstitutioninhisownmould–international, democratic, egalitarian. And so after bonding withadelegationof fellowsfromthenewcollege ledbyFrankJessup,BerlinofficiallyagreedinNovember1965tobecomeIffley’sfound-ingpresident,providedthathemanagedtoraisethefundsforcon-structingthenewbuildingwithinsixmonths.11

TappingafriendshipthatdatedbacktohisteachingdaysatHar-vard,BerlinapproachedMcGeorge(‘Mac’)Bundy,LyndonBJohn-son’sformernationalsecurityadvisorandtherecentlyappointedpresidentoftheFordFoundation,thenthelargestcharitablefoun-dationintheworld.WithinamonthBundyhadpromisedthenewcollege$4.5million(c£1.6million),ontheconditionthatmatchingfundsbesecuredfromaBritishdonor.Berlin,the‘mostrespectedJewishfigureinBritishintellectuallife’,12sawalikelycandidateintheretailerandphilanthropistIsaacWolfsonandhissonLeonard,butencounteredsomestiffresistancefromtheboardoftheWolf-sonFoundation,andspecificallyfromSollyZuckerman,thegovern-ment’schiefscientificadvisor,whosawOxfordasthe‘graveyardofBritishscience’andthoughtthemoneywouldbebetterspentononeofBritain’s20newuniversities,suchas,forexample,theUni-versityofEastAnglia,wherehehimselfhappenedtoteach.13Intheend,theZuckermanproblemwasneutralisedbyBundy,whoclearlydid ‘not mind walking over corpses’, as Berlin once noted (add-ingthatwasfinewithhim,solongasthecorpsewasn’thisown).14At a dramatic meeting of the Wolfson board in June 1966 Bundydeclared Ford’s unambiguous support for the project and gotLeonard Wolfson to confirm the donation of £1.5 million he haddiscussed with Berlin, at which point everyone around the tablehad the pleasure of seeing Zuckerman gather up his papers andstormoutlikethe‘moustachioedvillainofamelodrama’.15

IsaiahBerlinnowhadallthemoneyheneededtobuildhisnewinstitution,whichwasrenamedWolfsonCollegeinrecognitionofitsBritishbenefactors.Thussomeonewhohadpreviouslydemon-stratednogreatinterestinarchitecture–music,art,ideas,politicsandgossipweremuchmorehisthing–suddenlyfoundhe’dbecomeanarchitecturalhoneypotinpossessionofapurseof£3millionandaprestigiousprogramme.Architectscameswarming.

Leading the charge was Philip Johnson: ‘I read by the pub-licprintsaswellashearingfromJayneWrightsmanthatWolfsonCollegeisgoingtobecomeareality’,hewroteon13July1966.‘Iamwonderingifyoustillhaveinmindtalkingtheprojectoverwithme.Istillwouldconsideritthegreatesthonourofmycareertobeabletoworkwithyou,andIcancometoEnglandtoseeyouanytime.’16

aafiles72 129

Thetwohadmetin1944,duringBerlin’stimewiththeBritishdip-lomaticserviceinWashingtondc.Thoughtheywerefirmfriends,Berlinstillhadsomereservations(perhapsunderstandable,givenJohnson’sdallianceswithNazisminthe1930s).‘Heisagreatmanofakind,ofcourse’,heconfidedtoanotherfriend,‘butIfeelslightlynervous about him’.17 All the same, he wrote back to schedulea meeting for 17 September 1966, taking the opportunity to warnJohnsonagainst‘fearfuldifficultiesaboutbuildinglicences,oppo-sitionto“foreign”architects;collegesaredemocraciesindeedaswellasword,andmycolleaguesaremostjealousoftheirrights’.18Unperturbed,Johnsonrepliedwithintheweek,‘Iamnotabitwor-riedaboutthelocalarchitectquestion.Ofcourseitwouldbeajointventure with a distinguished British firm, such as Basil Spence,HughCassonorJamesCubitt.Thatwillbeapoliticalquestionwecansettlewhenwemeet.’19

Berlinwasnotsooptimistic. Ina letterof18August toLionelRobbinshewrote:‘HereIsitwithmymountainofgold,broodingaboutanarchitect.IwishEnglisharchitectswerebetter.IfaforeignoneisinvitedtobuildWolfsonCollege,whatfearfulobloquywillbeheapedagainuponmypooroldhead.Andyet,Isuppose,onemustthink about absolute values, posterity, etc.’20 Quietly, he pursuedhisownenquiries–laterthatmonthhewasgoingtoParaggi,wherehehoped,throughintroductionsmadebythehistorianBrunoZevi,tomeetsomeItalianarchitects.HealsosentanotetoKenzoTangeinTokyo.

Bothofhisbenefactors,theWolfsonsaswellasMacBundy,alsosenthimsuggestions forarchitects.While the former’swere ‘notv interesting’, Bundy forwarded him a note from Kevin Roche –withwhomhe’dworkedonthenewFordFoundationheadquartersinManhattan–assessingtheEnglishscene.Theassessmentwassomewhatgloomy.Otherthantwoestablishedpractices,AlisonandPeterSmithsonandJamesStirling (‘unquestionably themost tal-enteddesignerworkinginEnglandtoday’),andtwoyoungerarchi-tects,ColinStJohnWilsonandPatrickHodgkinson,‘Idonotknowof any other English architects that I would care to recommendtoyou’,Rochewrote.21

ThemasterofTrinityCollegeOxfordalsochippedinwithasug-gestion:RobertMaguireandKeithMurray,thearchitectsofarecentaddition to his own college. But Berlin was not so easily swayed.Another new Oxford college, the starkly contemporary St Cath-erine’s(StCatz),designedbytheDanisharchitectArneJacobsen,hadwonagreatdealofpraise,butBerlinremainedunconvinced.WritingtoYakovTalmonon7September1966,heasked:

Tellme,haveyouseenasinglemodernbuildingbuiltinEnglandinthelast20or30yearsorevenlongerwhichcaughtyourimaginationandmadeyouthinkthatitwasnotmerelynotugly,ornotunsatisfactory,butpositivelybeautiful,noble,thoroughlyworthy?StCatherine’sistheonlybuildingthatisevenacandidateforsuchastatusinOxford,andthatIfeel[is]apositive,full,powerfulanswertoaquestion,butthewrongone…foritiscertainlyabuildingwithastronganddefinitepersonality,andnotsimplyafeeblecompromisebetweenstyles,orapieceofhalf-heartedimitationofthemodern.Nevertheless,Ithinkitugly,andevenrepellent,asoneoftendoeswithpowerful,positivepersonalitieswhichonecannotstomach.22

ToMacBundythatsameweekhewentontocomplainthat‘mycolleagueswritemecautious lettersaboutsomeone interested indomesticarchitecture,andnotmerelygreatmonuments:Ifeeltheyaresimplyhumouringtheoldman–Iamobviouslysomeempyrean

with thoughtsofPhilip JohnsonandMrTange,whereas theyarethinkingmorepracticalandmorehomeboundthoughtswhichintheendwillprevail.Iratherhopenot.’23Andtoonesuchcolleague,HBParry,hewrote:

Ifeelthatwiththislargesumofmoneyatourdisposal,andsomar-vellousasite–itwouldbeaswellnottomaketoomuchhaste:wehavetheopportunityofputtingupabetterbuildingthananyothereduca-tionalinstitutionhasyetdone;itwouldbeasourceofprideandprestigetousasnoother;woulditnotbeanexcellentthingifwecouldriseabovethemerelyinoffensive,decent,competent,andultimatelyconventional,into something as original as St Catherine’s, but more beautiful andmorepleasing tousall–orasmanyofusas takeagenuine interestinthesematters.24

Thoughbesetatthispointbysolicitousarchitects,Berlincontin-uedhisindependentinvestigations.WithhismeetingwithPhilipJohnsonnowimminenthereachedouttoafriendatHarvard,themagisterialElliottPerkins:

WhatwouldyourecommendinthewayofanarchitectforWolfsonCollege?Patrioticconsiderationsapart…haveyouaviewaboutPhilipJohnson?OranyonewhohasbuiltatHarvard?Ihaveafeelingthatourviewsastowhatmightbedesirable,neitherpurepastiche,norbrutalmodernjustforthesakeofit,mightwellcoincide.Ourarchitectsseemtometobeconscientiousimitators,whohavenooriginalityofvision,oranythingelsewhatever.Iwonderifthishideouslyunpatrioticsenti-mentismerelytheproductofacertainlackofvisualaesthetic,whichIacknowledgemyselftohave.Oralternativelyisthetruth.25

ThreedaysaftersharinghisdoubtswithPerkins,Berlinwouldsendaletterthatpromptedadecisiveturninhissearch.‘MayIpre-sumeonaveryslightacquaintancetoaskyouforaveryconsider-ablefavour?’,hewrotetoNikolausPevsner,thenattheheightofhisreputationasBritain’s foremostarchitecturalhistorian.26Thoughtheiracquaintancemighthavebeen‘slight’,PevsnerandBerlinhadasurprisingamount incommon:bothwereacademicallyaccom-plishedfromanearlyage,bothwereexileswhowouldinfiltratetheheartoftheBritishacademicestablishment.WhileBerlindefinedanddefendedtheideasuponwhichthecountry’sliberaltraditionrested, Pevsner, through his Buildings of England series, definedand documented its architecture. But there were marked differ-encesintheirpersonalcircumstances.Berlinwasanindulgedonlysurvivingchild;Pevsnerspenthisyouthintheshadowofhismorecharismaticolderbrother.Berlindidnotmarryuntilhewaspast30,andthenmarriedintowealth.Pevsnermarriedhiswife,Lola,before entering college, and supported two children through hisstudies.BerlinarrivedinEnglandasachild,wonascholarshiptoOxfordandin1932becamethefirstJewishfellowofAllSouls.Pevs-nercametoEnglandin1933asalastresort,afterhisbuddingcareerwascutshortbyNazianti-Semiticlaws.WhileBerlinspentweek-endswiththeRothschilds,researchedMarxanddebatedanalyticalphilosophy in his rooms overlooking the Radcliffe Camera at AllSouls,Pevsnerlivedasarefugee,eatingpackedlunchesinRegent’sParkandwalking10kmadaytosaveonbusfares–hehadotherpriorities,needingtoraisethemoneytobringhisfamilyoverfromGermany.YetitdidnottakelongforPevsnertoestablishhisreputa-tioninBritainwithhis1936surveyhistoryThePioneersofModernDesign,arelativelybriefaccountthatpresentedmodernismastheculminationofaprogressionasinevitableasthatfromthecarriagetothecar–anewparadigmthatwouldendure‘aslongasthisistheworldandtheseareitsambitionsandproblems’.27

130 aafiles72

When Berlin wrote to Pevsner for advice he expressed hisdread of the kind of Riba competition that had ‘led to ChurchillCollege,whichdoesnotseemtome(Ionlyhopeyouagree!)averyfortunate example of contemporary British taste’.28 He confessedthat he was ‘thrilled’ by Kenzo Tange and mentioned that PhilipJohnsonwascoming tomeethim.WhileOxford’spostwarbuild-ings ‘varied in quality’, he said, none of them seemed to him of‘overwhelmingexcellence’.‘Ayounggeniuswouldbeverynice–notperhapseasilyfound.’29

Pevsner took a while to formulate his reply. In the meantimeElliott Perkins wrote back to relay rumblings of discontent fromtheothersideoftheAtlantic.ReportingontheeffortsofHarvardpresident Nathan N Pusey, he quoted H M Jones’s verdict: ‘“Hefound Cambridge harmonious, and left it moderne”. The taste-lessbastard.’30HewarnedBerlintoavoidtowers:Harvard’s‘Lever-ettTowerswerebuilt“highrise”asamatterofprinciple,andtheyhaveprovedtobeinimicaltothegrowthofasenseofcommunity’.31He had to admit, however, that Saarinen had done a good jobatYale.

OnBerlin’snexttriptoNewYorkattheendofSeptember1966heandhiswifeAlinehaddinnerattheBlackstoneHotelwithMacBundy.HealsohadlunchwithKidderSmithattheCenturyClub,who told him ‘Pevsner’s a very great friend … but a man of verypoorjudgement.Theyallsaythisabouteachother,withoutfail.Itisastrangeworld’,Berlinreportedtohisvicepresidentandbursar,MichaelBrock.32KidderSmithevensuggestedhehostanarchitec-turalcompetition,butBerlinwasreluctanttorelinquishcontroloftheprocess.Ifitcametothat,hetoldBrock,‘Iwouldhavetosee’thatnotjustPevsnerbutJMRichardsandeventheendorsementoftheRiba‘couldbeeasilyoutvoted’.33

On 18 October 1966, more than a month after Berlin’s initialapproach,Pevsnerfinallywroteback.HemadeitquiteclearthathewasnotimpressedwithBerlin’scandidates:

Yousay‘worthy’,andIagree.Yousay‘PhilipJohnson’,andIdonotagree.Yousay ‘KenzoTange’,andIemphaticallydonotagree.Philipcouldbeguided.Hehasaproteancharacter, intentonsurprisinghispublicbyever-unexpectedturnsofstyle,butheisreadytoacceptacli-ent’scharacterandwishes,iftheyareunequivocallyexpressed.KenzoTangeismuchtoostrongtobeguidedandhisstylewould,tomywayofthinking,beadisasterinOxford.34

Pevsnernaturallyhadsomelesswilfulcharactersinmind:theEnglisharchitectsPowell&Moya,aswellastheDane,ArneJacob-sen, and theAmerican,Gordon Bunshaft. ‘You will see from thisthatwhatIamtryingtodissuadeyoufromisastylewhichIconsidertoo personal for collegiate buildings. For a college, Pevsner said,‘nothing sensational should be permitted’.35 Noting his displeas-urewithRonchampandChandigarh,healsoadvisedagainstwhathesawasEngland’sCorbusianimitators,DenysLasdunandLeslieMartin.Ashisonewildcard‘genius’,hethrewinCharlesEames:‘Hehasneverbuiltabigbuilding,andhemightbehelplessattheprac-ticaltasks,buthewould,Iamsure,lovetodesignforOxford,andwouldhavealotoffeelingforanOxfordcollege.’36

AtthebeginningofNovember1966Berlindutifullydrewuphisfirst list of possible English architects, complete with their ages.WhiletherewasnoPowell&MoyaorLeslieMartinonthelist,itdidincludeAlisonandPeterSmithson(42yearsofage),JamesStirling(43),BrianHenderson(40),WilliamHowell(40)andAlanFletcher& Colin Forbes (45). Pevsner’s disapproval notwithstanding, he

scheduledameetingwithTangeinNewYorkon20November.Onthesametrip,withJackHexter,hearrangedtoursofHarvardandYale, as well as meetings with I M Pei and Paul Rudolph. It wasTange,however,whoinspiredthemostadmiration.InaletteraftertheirmeetingBerlinwrote:

ThisisonlytosayhowmuchIenjoyedourluncheon–thatIshalldonothinguntilyoucometoEnglandtowardtheendofJanuaryorthebeginningofFebruary,nomatterwhatforcesIhavetoholdoff,andifthereisanythinginEnglandthatIcanpossiblydoforyouIshallbegladtodoit.

AnarchitecturalmasterpieceissomethingthatEnglandhasnotbeenfavouredwithforatleasthalfacentury,andalthoughmasterpiecesdonotcomeaboutbybeingdeliberatelyaimedatassuch–poetsmustnotsetouttobepoetsonlytowritepoetry–architectscannotsetouttobegeniusesonlytobuildbuildings–yetyouwillknowwithoutmysayingithowwonderfulitwouldbeifthiscameabout.’37

OnthistriptotheusBerlinalsodiscoveredthat‘allthearchitec-tureexperts,architects,etcareviolentlyanti-Pevsner,&regardhimasaneruditepedant,withnoknowledgeof,orfeelingfor,contem-poraryartofanykind.Sowherearewe?’,hewrotetoMichaelBrockon 11 November. Turning to Noel Annan, at the time provost ofUniversity College London, Berlin expanded on his complaints,‘IhavenowhadaletterfromPevsnerdenouncingmoreorlessallmodernarchitectsexceptJacobsen,whosebuildinginOxfordIthinkprettyhideous.’38

ButinreplyingtoPevsnerhimselfthatsameday,11November,hechoseamorediplomatictack,‘Iseethatyouhavestrongviewson this matter, and am duly influenced by them… I see that per-hapsanobstinate,uncompromisingpieceofJapanese-Kahn-influ-enced design might be appallingly dissonant in Oxford’.39 At thesametimeheadmittedtoanewinterestinGordonBunshaftandsaid thatheplannedtoseehisHartfordLife Insurancebuilding.(‘AmItoavertmyeyefromtheBeineckeLibraryatYale?Isupposeso.’)40However,herefusedtotakeanyfurtherPevsner’ssuggestionofCharlesEames,insistinghenolongerbuiltanything,41andmostof all took issue with Pevsner’s perception that he was inspiredby brutalist architecture, ‘the bleak and the brutal, eg, the newWhitneyMuseuminNewYork,inwhichBreuerglowersverymen-acinglyover thepublic’.42Still,hehad toadmit,hewasdrawntodrama: ‘So the difference between us is not great; it is only thatI still feel a certain Drang towards those, to me, very thrillingphotographsofTange’scathedral inJapan, irrelevantas thismayturnouttobe.’43

Anyway,thatiswhatBerlintoldPevsner.Whathetoldtheecon-omistLordKahnwasthatthemomenthementionedanarchitecthegot‘aletterfromsomecentralauthoritylike…Pevsnersaying,“I have heard that you are thinking of a Japanese architect – nogreatertragedycouldbefallEngland–Ishouldregardthisadisasterofthefirstmagnitudeandshallsparenoeffortinetc,etc”.’44

Berlincontinuedhis tourofAmerica.Hehaddinnerwith theheadoftheNationalGalleryandhiswife,who,justbackfromJapan,ravedaboutTange.45HewenttoYale,wherehefoundRudolphvery‘brutal’,46wasimpressedbyhismeetingwithRoche,but‘contrarytoalladviceIlikedtheBeineckeLibrarymuchmorethananythingbyRudolph(orevenJohnson)’.47HevisitedthenewMetropolitanOpera House, designed by Wallace Harrison, a ‘disappointmentboth to those who believe in the most bleak modern architec-ture(whichismeanttoattacktheobserverandforcehimintothe

aafiles72 131

consciousnessoftheferociousforcesabroadtobreakthroughhisphilistinecrust–thisisaconceptionbehindthearchitectureofMrRudolphandBreuer)andthosewhoreally likeCorinthianpillarsandsweetnessandelegance.Itisneitheronethingnortheother,andmuchregrettedbymanypersons.’48AndhewenttoCambridge,Ma‘toinspectthelaboursofAalto,Sert,Pei,etc’.49HewenttoseeI M Pei, who sent him a postcard to say that he’d enjoyed theirmeetingandthatifhedidholdacompetition,heshouldbesuretoincludeStirlingandvanEyck.50

ThepaceofcorrespondencewithPevsnerwasalsohottingup,forthe‘centralauthority’haddecidedthetimewasripetopushthecaseforArneJacobsen.‘ToenterStCatherine’s’,PevsnerwrotetoBerlinon15November1966,istofindyourselfinheavenlypeace,andthisisthemoodIthinkacollegeshouldconvey’.51ForBerlinthisseemstohavebeenthefinalstraw,eveniftoPevsnerhemain-tainedbutasmallprotest:‘IlovethemasterofStCatherine’s;andIlikeitsfellowsparticularly;aboutthebuildingitselfIdonotthinkIagree,butthisneednotdivideusaboutthenotionofthefunctionofacollege–heavenlypeaceisquiteright’.52Tohiscolleaguesheletrip:‘IhavenowhadaletterfromPevsnersayingthatheregardsStCatherine’sasbyfarthebestbuildinginOxford,and“ahavenofheavenlypeace”orsomethingtothateffect,complainingthathehasnothadananswertohislettertome–whichIhavenowinfactanswered–ittookamonthtoreachmesomehow–andwonderingwhetherIdonotagreewithhimthatStCatherine’sisamarvellousmasterpiece … if St Catherine’s is his ideal college, and he moreorlesssaysso,heisnotthemanforus.AboutthatIamnowquiteclear.’53Fromnowon,Berlinconcluded,hewouldcontinuetocor-respondcordiallywithPevsner,butwouldignorehisopinions:‘nomatterhowgreatanauthorityonthehistoryofarchitectureheis,hisowntasteisdeplorable’.54

Moresurenowofhisownarchitecturaltastesandpredilections,by22November1966Berlinhadadraftshortlistforhisinvitedcom-petition:‘Bunshaft,Roche,Tange,Pei,JohnsonandanythreeEng-lisharchitectsyoulike.MyGod,weshouldhavetopackthejury’,he told Michael Brock.55 He continued to resist the advances ofthe British architectural establishment, demurring when pressedby Wolfson to meet Lord Esher, president of the Riba: ‘I wish toavoidthisforobviousreasons’.56HealsofailedtorendezvouswithPhilipJohnson,whoneverthelesshelpfullysenthimattheendofDecemberaplotplanofWolfsonCollegeandsuggested‘ifyouarelookingfora“farout”architect’,thenvisitJimStirling’sbuildingsatLeicesterandCambridge.57

BarelytwoweeksafterBerlinhaddecriedPevsner’s‘deplorabletaste’,heseemstohavehadasuddenchangeofheart.‘Thiswillgiveyouaclearerindicationofmyviews’,PevsnerhadsaidwhenhesentBerlinthetextofatalk,the‘Anti-Pioneers’,thathehadjustbroad-cast on the bbc.58 In his lecture, Pevsner had denounced a newtrend of ‘expressionism,’ calling for a return to orthodoxy: ‘to letformsdetractfromfunctionisasin,todayas30yearsago,howeverthrillingtheforms–asinagainsttheusers,committedforthesakeofself-displayofthearchitect’.59Andheprovidedaroll-callof‘sin-ners’,amongthemSaarinenandBunshaftinAmerica,UtzoninSyd-ney(‘Iwantmyemotionstobecreated…intheoperahousebythepowerofmusic–notbythearchitect’smood’60)andTangeinJapan.

Berlinrespondedto‘Anti-Pioneers’withenthusiasm:Ireaditwithabsolutefascinationandthinkthatitisamostbrilliant

piecewithwhich(forwhatthatisworth,anditisworthalmostnothing)

IagreeentirelyinthesensethatmywholenaturalpenchantistowardsthepermanentsymmetriesoftheNaturalLaw–andnottowardsexpres-sionism,wildindividualvagarieshoweverexcitingandoverwhelmingintheshortrun–deviationswhichintheendbecomenotonlysuperseded,butseemmeremeretriciousself-indulgenceofatrivialkindtothesterncriticsofthefuture.61

WhereBerlinhadsentPevsnerkindwordsbefore,onlytocom-plainbitterlybehindhisback,thistimetheconversionseemedgen-uine.NomoredisparagingcommentsaboutPevsneremerged.Thismayhavebeenamatterofcollegiateetiquette,too,forwhenBerlinreturnedtoOxfordinFebruary1967helearnedthatPevsnerwouldbeoneofhispeers,asSladeProfessorfor1968–69.

At theoutsetofhissearchBerlinhadbeendeterminednotto‘begotdownbydifficulties–passionsforcompromise’.62HehaddreamedofcommissioningTangetobuildsomethingthatwouldbe‘asourceofprideandprestigetousasnoother’.63Butmoreandmorehehadtofaceuptothelogisticaldifficultiesthiswouldentail:‘isitpossibletohaveanarchitectwholivesinTokyo,whowillnevercomehere,sothattheworkwillbeinthehandsofsomeremoteBritishagent?…Itallisveryworrying.’64AttheendofFebruary1967hewrotetoPevsner:‘This,ifever,isthetimewhenIoughttowriteTange,invitinghimtocome.Ihavenotwritten,andshall,Isuspect,notwrite.Verb.Sap.’65Tangewasoffthelist.

Thatsamemonthhemadeplans,reluctantly,togoandseethenewBritishuniversitiesforhimself:

For am I not bound to look at all modern academic buildings inEngland, praised extravagantly by our architects, commended in thepress, awarded prizes for their beauty, originality, appropriateness,conducivenesstostudyandcontemplation,and,asarule,ofanaggres-sive bleakness and hideousness which few other modern buildings–inAmerica,France,Finland,Brazil,wherevermodernbuildingsare–canmatch?Whyisitthatwehavenotonearchitectoffirstclassdistinc-tion–onlymenofsecond-rateorder,ofvariousdegrees?DoyouadmireCoventryCathedral?TheRoyalCollegeofPhysiciansinRegentsPark?ThenewTimesBuilding(&doyouknowMrRees-Mogg?Ishdbedeeplyinterestedinyourviewofhim.WhatisthoughtinOxfordIknow)theuniversitiesofSussex,Essex,EastAnglia,Warwick,York,etc,etc?66

Wryly, he then imagined their progress as some kind of Pick-wickianfarce:

Toallofwhichmycolleaguesand I, in somecomicalvehicle,willbeboundduringthenexttendaysorso,likethejourneysofthePick-wickClub:up&downthelandwego,entertainedbyvice-chancellorsandbursars,wearilytrudgingfrombuildingtobuilding,withmechani-calpraiseonourlipsforthebrutallookingcurvesofconcretestainedby rain in great ugly streaks, for the tiny bedsitting rooms designedtopunishtheirinhabitantsbytheUniversityGrantsCommittee:admir-ingthefreedomwithwhichsexes,colours,agesmixinsome:&admiringequallytherigidwallsbetweenthesesamegroupsimposedinothers.Imuststop.Thisislikeapieceofpseudo-Nicolsonprosewrittentobepublished.Iamsorry.ButthatiswhereIshallbeonthe8thMarch&forweeks&weeks&weeks.67

YetthetourwasnotthecompleteroutBerlinhadanticipated.InCambridgehefoundthenewPeterhouseCollegeunderwhelm-ing,butwastakenwithPowell&Moya’sCrippsBuildingatStJohn’s:‘ItseemstomethattheyarethebestBritisharchitectsnowwork-ing’, he wrote to the historian Hugh Brogan, then a fellow at StJohn’s.‘Ifyouknowhowmuchyourbuildingcostpersquarefoot–thatishowIthinknow–Ishouldbeverygratefulindeed.’68

132 aafiles72

In March 1967 John Summerson wrote to recommend bothPeterSmithson,‘theonlymanofgeniusinarchitecturetoday’,andDenys Lasdun.69 Berlin wrote back to say a source he would notnamehadcomplainedabouttheSmithsons’‘interiorarrangementsmostseverely…DareIputupabeautifulshell–aworkofart–oratleastberesponsibleforitandleavelatergenerationstocurseandreform?PerhapsIdare.’70AndhefoundLasdun’sUniversityofEastAnglia, inwhichhehadspentanight, too ‘strong’– ‘It isamag-nificentbuilding,menacing,powerful,withgreatbattlementsanddeepdarkstaircasesleadingtodungeons;hugegunwalesdirectedontoinvadersfromthevalleysallround.’71

On 4 April 1967 Berlin was travelling again, this time with Ste-phenStaples,whotookhimonatouroftheMontrealExpobeforeitopenedtothepublic.Berlinofferedapottedreviewoftheexpe-rience ina letter toGeorge Ignatieff, thenotedRussian-Canadiandiplomat(andfatherofhisfuturebiographer,MichaelIgnatieff).HewasnotkeenonMosheSafdie’sHabitat:‘ThedwellingplacesbythatIsraeliarchitectseemedtosomebold,hideousandatokenofwhatistocome–thewholeworldwillprobablygolikethisinabout20years’timesowemustlearntolivewithit,thoughyouandI,Idare-say,neverwilllearn.’72HedidlikeFreiOtto’spavilion–butOttowasdisqualifiedonaccountofhisnationality:‘IfearwecannotemployaGerman.Wewouldrunintotoomanysnags.’73BuckminsterFuller’sgeodesicuspavilionwasdeemedquiteappealing–‘aspherecom-posedofothersmallerbubble-likespheres,verygayandarresting’–thoughitwas‘notfrightfullyusefulfromourpointofview.’74ButboththeBritishandtheFrenchpavilionsprovedhugelydisappoint-ing:‘ahugeUnionJackontopstaringataveryshowyFrenchbuild-ingopposite–thecompetitionforthesoulofCanadaisobvious.’75

Berlin’s next site visits took him to Finland, on the advice ofIrwinMiller,‘whothinksthatAaltoispreferabletoanyAmericanarchitect’,76andcontrarytotheadviceofJMRichards,whothoughtAalto‘agreatman’,buttooold.RichardssuggestedyoungerFinnishfirms–Kaija&HeikkiSirenandAarnoRuusuvuori–butalsoputPowell&Moyaatthetopofhislistofrecommendations.77

On4May1967,adayafterhisreturnfromHelsinki,Berlinthenproducedhisfinalwishlist:AlvarAalto,HeikkiSiren,PhilipJohn-son,GordonBunshaft,KevinRoche,Powell&MoyaandAhrends,Burton&Koralek.On11May,BerlintoldTheTimesartcriticJohnRussell‘thehourforchoosinganarchitectdrawsnear’78–thoughhestillhadtimetofitinonelastquickarchitecturalday-triptoNew-castleon15May.

By 26 May 1967 everything was about to come to the boil. Butto say that Berlin was overbrimming with excitement would beanexaggeration.WritingtotheHarvardhistoryprofessorMyronPGilmore,heexplained:

Iexpecttheresultwillbeanti-climactic,insomeway.AtpresentwearevacillatingbetweenoneAmerican,twoBritishandaFinn;noneofthemaregreatmasters.ThegreatmasterAaltowouldbereadytobuildforus,buthe is70,and inFinland,whichwevisited, it isconstantlywhisperedthatheisnotanylongerinthetopofhisform,thatheisnotalwayssober(sowearetold,butdonotrepeatthis–itisplainlylibel-lous) and he is obviously highly dictatorial, unapproachable, and wewouldnotgetinawordedgewise,andsowhilewemightgetadistin-guishedbuilding,thecomfortsoftheinhabitantswithinwouldsurelybesacrificed(asiftheyareinthegraduatebuildingsatMIT).79

AtthispointBerlinseemstohaveentirelygivenuphisaspira-tionsofworkingwithanarchitectofgenius:

Asforme,IshallgetthereinJuly,Isuppose,ifIcangetawayfromthechosenarchitectand thebeginningsofa lifelongassociationwithsomeonewhominitiallyIamsureIshallnotbetooenthusiasticabout;itisasadsituation;whycannotonefindamaninwhomonecanwhollybelieve,ifonlyatthebeginning,evenifonlytobedisappointedattheend,whichalmostinvariablyhappens?Apartfrommenover70,whatarchitects are there? Whose academic buildings one could possiblyanticipatewithexcitement?CertainlynotMrPei,norPhilipJohnson,norRudolph,norBreuer.IlikeMrBunshaft’sBeineckeLibraryinYale,andyetwhenonelooksathisbanksandhisgalleries,theyaresochill-ing, impersonal, machine-made, even though marvellously efficient,elegantandpeaceful.Itisallveryterrible.80

Terribleornot,thefinaldecision–forPowell&Moya–wasmadeon1June1967.Ofthoseinvolvedinthesearch,onlyFrankJessupseemedreluctanttoagree.Recognisinghisresistance–‘AfterallthethoughtofP&Mwasprobably,attimes,literallyunbearabletoyou’81–Berlinneverthelessaskedhimtoserveonthebuildingcommit-tee.Jessupagreed:‘Whoknows,P&Mmayproduceagoodbuilding–theremustbeafirsttime–althoughIdidliketheir1951Skylon!’82

Berlin’s correspondence with Leonard Wolfson makes it clearthatthearchitects’nationalitywasakeyfactorhere:‘thisisonlytotell you thataftermuchgestation, to-ingand fro-ing, journeys toFinlandandelsewhere,we,ie,thecollege,havesettledonaBritisharchitect–weknewthiswouldgiveyoumuchsatisfaction,andthiswas not an inconsiderable factor, believe me, in determiningthechoice’.83

BerlinthenmadepeacewithPevsner,BunshaftandJohnson,offeringeachoneoftheminturnadifferentaccountofhowtheselectionwasmade.WithPevsnerhecharacterisedtheoutcomeasapredictablefailureofdemocracy: ‘Largebodies,democraticallygoverned by plebiscite, always tend to seek safety so we decidedpreciselyasyoupredictedwewould’.84HisBunshaftstoryexpandedon this theme: ‘We are, in the end, for better and for worse,ademocracy…not thebestorganisationfor theencouragementof original works of genius – as they are found in Florence,Venice and elsewhere’.85 And he offered a personal note of apol-ogy:‘Ifeellikesomeonewhowasexpectingchampagne,andfounda pleasant glass of cider awaiting him; but I do beg you not toreveal the contents of this letter to anyone, for why should thearchitectsinfactselectedbesubjectedtotheseperhapsaltogetherunjust pleasantries. They are gifted people, and will doubtlessdo an excellent job. Still, I wish it had been you – so do thecommittee: most of them were won over by your buildings andyourpersonality.’

Writing to Philip Johnson, he struck a similarly despondenttone:‘Youwereperfectlyright–onlytooright–Isaywithgloomyexultationinhumanmediocrity–ratherlikeDeMaistre.Intheend,as you correctly predicted, the English won, slowly, persistently,andbyattrition.Thereweresomeobjectivefactorswhichcouldberegardedasnot irrelevant–thefactthatweare lessrichthanwethoughtweshouldbe;thatthebuildingshavetogoupquickly,andwithaslittleexpenseasiscompatiblewithnothavinglow-pricedUniversityGrantsCommissionpre-fabs– thatgrim,ever-growingchainofbarracksthatourmodernuniversitiesareslowlybecom-ing.’86ForJohnson,Berlinmarshalledawholelistofculprits: thebudgetandtheBritish,theRiba,theWolfsons,architecturaljour-nalists:‘Ifwehadunlimitedresources,oratleastasmuchmoneyasevenStCatherine’shad,fiveorsixyearsago,iftheFordFoundation

aafiles72 133

werenotsofrightenedofbeingdraggedintothisasaformofAmer-icanpressure–whichonecanunderstand–iftaste,imagination,courage,couldbemadetoprevailoverthegreatcravingformedi-ocrityandphilistinismbywhichthiscountryisconsumed,thingsmighthavebeenotherwise.Butthingsarewhattheyare,andtheconsequenceswillbewhattheywillbe,asBishopButleroncesaid,sowhyshouldweseektobedeceived?’87

An‘excessiveanxietytoplease’washowIsaiahBerlinjudgedhisowngreatestweakness.88Andinchoosingthearchitectforhisnewcollege,Berlin’sconcernwithpleasingothersseemstohavecomeattheexpenseofpleasinghimself.‘Iseemyselfchoosingsomeverysafeandunenterprisingfigureandbeingrightlycondemnedforit’,hewrotetoStephenSpenderontheeveofmakingthedecision,‘butalltheunsafeenterprisingfiguresseemtobenogoodforonereason

or another. It is rather like preferring Graham Greene or AngusWilsontosayGinsbergorTheNakedLunch.’89Andyetatthesametime,Berlin’sdisappointmentwithhisfirstand lastarchitecturalcommissioncouldbeattributednotonlytohisowninherentdesiretoplease,butultimatelytoaninherentweaknessofpostwararchi-tectural practice, even of the entire species of architects. Berlin’ssummaryofthecurrentsceneservesasanapologiaforthebuildingofthenewWolfsonCollege:‘weareinacuriousuniversefilledwithhatred and fanaticism. In the old days there were two schools:the Bauhaus, all of whose admirers loved one another, and theCorinthian Pillar school, all of whom in their turn loved oneanotherandthatwasthat,andyoucouldchoose.Noweverybodyhateseveryoneandtherearenoacceptedvalues.ExceptthatTangeisacclaimedbyeveryoneotherthanPevsner.’90

1. IsaiahBerlintoFrancineGray,16December1966.TheBerlincorrespondencereferredtointhisessayisheldintheCatalogueofthePapersofSirIsaiahBerlin,1897–1998,withsomefamilypapers,1903–72,BodleianLibrary,UniversityofOxford.

2. MichaelIgnatieff,IsaiahBerlin:ALife(NewYork,nY:MetropolitanBooks,1998),p3.The‘speedoflight’comparisonwasmadebythepoetJosephBrodsky.

3. Ibid,p7. 4. Ibid,p268. 5. IsaiahBerlintoRonaldDworkin,

23December1966. 6. IsaiahBerlintoJackHexter,

14November1966. 7. Thiswasthe‘Robbinsprinciple’,as

formulatedinHigherEducation:ReportoftheCommitteeappointedbythePrimeMinisterundertheChairmanshipofLordRobbins1961–63(London:HMSO,1963).

8. In1946Oxfordhad6,680undergradu-ates,whereasintheacademicyearbeginning1965ithad9,800,anincreaseof42percent,from‘NotesonthePost-WarGrowthofBritishUniversi-ties’,authorunknown,1966.Post-graduatenumbersincreasedbyaboutthesamepercentagebetween1961and1965alone.

9. MichaelIgnatieff,opcit,p260.10. Ibid,p261. 11. Ibid,p260.12. Ibid,p263.13. NoelAnnan,TheDons:Mentors,

EccentricsandGeniuses(Chicago,il:UniversityofChicagoPress,1999),p227.

14. MichaelIgnatieff,opcit,p263.15. Ibid,p265.Berlin’swordsagain.16. PhilipJohnsontoIsaiahBerlin,

13July1966.17. IsaiahBerlintoLionelRobbins,

3August1966.18. IsaiahBerlintoPhilipJohnson,

4August1966.

19. PhilipJohnsontoIsaiahBerlin,11August1966.

20. IsaiahBerlintoLionelRobbins,18August1966.

21. MacBundytoIsaiahBerlin,19August1966.TheBundycorrespondencereferredtointhistextisheldintheMcGeorgeBundyPersonalPapers,JohnFKennedyPresidentialLibrary,Boston.

22. IsaiahBerlintoYakovTalmon,7September1966.

23. IsaiahBerlintoMacBundy,2September1966.

24. IsaiahBerlintoHB(‘James’)Parry,5September1966.

25. IsaiahBerlintoElliottPerkins,6September1966.

26. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,9September1966.

27. NikolausPevsner,ThePioneersofModernDesign(London:FaberandFaber,1936),p163.

28. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,9September1966.

29. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,20September1966.

30. ElliottPerkinstoIsaiahBerlin,16September1966.

31. Ibid.32. IsaiahBerlintoMichaelBrock,

5October1966.33. Ibid.34. NikolausPevsnertoIsaiahBerlin,

18October1966.ThepapersofNikolausPevsnerareheldintheGettyResearchInstitute,LosAngeles,California.

35. Ibid.36. Ibid.37. IsaiahBerlintoKenzoTange,

11August1966.38. IsaiahBerlintoNoelAnnan,

11November1966.39. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,

11November1966.40. Ibid.41. Hewouldbemoredisparagingina

lettertoMichaelBrockon18November

1966,assertingthatEames’furniturewas‘ofaconventionalitydifficulttoexaggerate’and,asforbuildings,‘whathehasbuiltprovedterrible(exceptforhisownlittlehouse)’.

42. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,11November1966.

43. Ibid.44. IsaiahBerlintoLordKahn,

16November1966.KahnwasbursaratKing’sCollege,Cambridge.

45. IsaiahBerlintoMichaelBrock,18November1966.

46. IsaiahBerlintoFrankJessup,29November1966.

47. IsaiahBerlintoJackHexter,22November1966.

48. IsaiahBerlintoGarrettDrogheda,2December1966.

49. IsaiahBerlintoMichaelBrock,29November1966.

50. iMPeitoIsaiahBerlin,18November1966.

51. NikolausPevsnertoIsaiahBerlin,15November1966.

52. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,23November1966.

53. IsaiahBerlintoMichaelBrock,22November1966.

54. Ibid.55. Ibid.56. IsaiahBerlintoMichaelBrock,

28December196657. PhilipJohnsontoIsaiahBerlin,

28December1966.58. NikolausPevsnertoIsaiahBerlin,

5December1966.59. NikolausPevsner,‘TheAnti-Pioneers’

inPevsneronArtandArchitecture,p303.ThetalkwasfirstpublishedinTheListener.

60. Ibid,304.61. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,

9December1966.62. IsaiahBerlintoMichaelBrock,

27August1966.63. IsaiahBerlintohbParry,

5September1966.

64. IsaiahBerlintohisprivatesecretaryPatUtechin,22February1967.

65. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,20February1967.

66. IsaiahBerlintoAvaWaverly,24February1967.

67. Ibid.68. IsaiahBerlintoHughBrogan,

28February1967.69. JohnSummersontoIsaiahBerlin,

21March1967.70. IsaiahBerlintoJohnSummerson,

30March1967.71. Ibid.72. IsaiahBerlintoGeorgeIgnatieff,

4April1967.73. IsaiahBerlintoFJessup,4April1967.74. Ibid.75. Ibid.76. IsaiahBerlintoMacBundy,

9March1967.77. JMRichardstoIsaiahBerlin,

13March1967.78. IsaiahBerlintoJohnRussell,

11May1967.79. IsaiahBerlintoMyronPGilmore,

26May1967.80. Ibid.81. IsaiahBerlintoFrankJessup,

1June1967.82. FrankJessuptoIsaiahBerlin,

7June1967.83. IsaiahBerlintoLeonardWolfson,

5June1967.84. IsaiahBerlintoNikolausPevsner,

7June1967.85. IsaiahBerlintoGordonBunshaft,

7June1967.86. IsaiahBerlintoPhilipJohnson,

7June1967.87. Ibid.88. NicholasShakespeare,‘TwoBookson

IsaiahBerlin:Review’,DailyTelegraph,17July2009.

89. IsaiahBerlintoStephenSpender,30May1967.

90. IsaiahBerlintoMichaelBrock,22November1966.

PaoloBerdiniwasanartandarchitecturalhistorianwhotaughtatStanfordandColumbiaUniversity.HereceivedhisPhDfromColumbiawithathesisonJacopoBassano,whichservedasthebasisforhissubsequentbook,TheReligiousArtofJacopoBassano:PaintingasVisualExegesis(1997)andwastheauthorofawidevarietyofessaysandbooksonsubjectsasdiverseasWalterGropius,Caravaggio,thearchitecturalpatronageofCardinalRichelieuandMichelangelo.HewasthefirsttotranslateColinRowe’sMathematicsoftheIdealVillaintoItalian(1990)andtowriteextensivelyinthatlanguageonthecontributionoftheEnglishcritic.BerdinireceivedhisarchitecturaltrainingbothattheUniversityofRomeandCornell,wherehegraduatedwithRoweashisthesisadvisorin1985,withaproposalforanewprojectenvisioningabranchoftheWarburgInstituteinItaly.

AlexanderBrodskyisaRussianartistandarchitect.Inthe1980s,togetherwithIlyaUtkin,heproducedaseriesofcelebratedarchitecturaletchingswhichwereexhibitedworldwide,andnowformpartofthepermanentcollectionsoftheV&AandTateModern.Hemovedtotheusin1996toworkasanartist,andreturnedtoMoscowin2000wherehehascontinuedtobalancearchitecturalcommissionsforrestaurants,apartments,galleries,museumsandmostrecentlyanAustrianbusshelter,withartworksandsculptures.HeiscurrentlypreparinganinstallationfortheRussianpavilionatthe2016Venicearchitecturebiennale.

HubertDamischisemeritusprofessorofthehistoryandtheoryofartattheÉcoledesHautesÉtudesenSciencesSociales,Paris.HehasalsoheldacademicpostsatCornellUniversity,ColumbiaUniversityandtheCentreforAdvancedStudiesintheVisualArts,Washington,dc,andistheauthorofnumerousbooks,includingThéoriedunuage:pourunehistoiredelapeinture(1972),L’originedelaperspective(1987),LejugementdePâris(1992)andSkyline:Lavillenarcissi(1996).

ThomasDaniellisheadofthedepartmentofarchitectureanddesignattheUniversityofStJoseph,MacauandavisitingassociateprofessorattheUniversityofTokyo.Widelypublished,hisbooksincludeFOBa:Buildings(2005),AftertheCrash:ArchitectureinPost-BubbleJapan(2008),HousesandGardensofKyoto(2010)andKiyoshiSeyTakeyama+Amorphe(2011).HisbookAnAnatomyofInfluenceisforthcomingfromaaPublications.

MoritzGleichisadoctoralcandidateattheethZurich,workingonthehistoryofmachinicmetaphorsandoperativethinkinginnineteenth-centuryarchitecture.

ItsukoHasegawaisaJapanesearchitect.AgraduateofKantoGakuinUniversityandTokyoInstituteofTechnology,shespentanumberofyearsworkingforthemetabolistarchitectKiyonoriKikutakeandtheinfluentialdesignerandtheoristKazuoShinoharabeforesettingupherownatelierin1979.Afterwinningfirstprizeinthe1986competitionfortheShonandaiCultureCentre,completedin1990,shehasgoneontorealisenumerouspublicbuildingsthathavebeenwidelyacclaimedfortheirinnovativeuseofmaterialsandemphasisonuserparticipation.

NicolasKemperhasrecentlycompletedhismastersattheYaleSchoolofArchitecture,wherehecofoundedthestudentarchitectureweeklyPaprika!andhostedanannualBurnsSupper.

EmmaLetiziaJonesisadoctoralcandidateattheUniversityofZurich,wheresheisresearchingtherelationshipbetweenprojectandcityinthedrawingsofKarlFriedrichSchinkel.Sheisalsoco-editoroftheLondon-basedjournalEROSandworksondesign,exhibitionandeducationprojectsaspartoftheZuricharchitecturecollectiveten.

SilviaMicheliisalecturerattheUniversityofQueenslandandwritesfrequentlyonpostwar,postmodernandcontemporaryItalianarchitecture.Sheco-authoredStoriadell’architetturaitaliana1985–2015(2013)andco-editedItalia60/70:Unastagionedell’architettura(2010),andin2015shecoordinatedtheinternationalseminar‘Italy/Australia:PostmoderninTranslation’onthecirculationofItaliandesignideasandtheoriesabroad.

MaxMoyaisaPeruvianarchitectandagraduateoftheaa’sMainHistories&CriticalThinking.In2015hetravelledtoSriLankaonthelastlegofaglobal,andgrand,architecturaltour,wherehevisitedanumberofworksbylocalarchitectGeoffreyBawa.DanielNaegeleisanarchitectandassociateprofessoratIowaStateUniversity.AgraduateoftheaaandYale,hewrotehisdoctoraldissertationunderthesupervisionofMaryMcLeodandJosephRykwertattheUniversityofPennsylvania.HiswritingsonLeCorbusierandarchitecturalphotographyhaveappearedworldwide,andhisLettersofColinRoweisforthcomingfromArtificein2016.

ColinRowewasbornnearBolton-on-DearneinSouthYorkshirein1920andstudiedarchitectureattheUniversityofLiverpool,architecturalhistoryattheWarburgInstituteandatYalewithHenry-RussellHitchcockonayear-longFulbrightscholarship.HetaughtattheUniversityofLiverpool(1950–52),theUniversityofTexas-Austin(1954–56),theUniversityofCambridge(1958–62)andCornellUniversity(1962–92),beforeretiringbrieflytoLondon(1993–94)andultimatelytoWashington,dc.HisbooksincludeTheMathematicsoftheIdealVilla&OtherEssays(1976),CollageCity,withFredKoetter(1978),TheArchitectureofGoodIntentions(1994),thethree-volumeAsIWasSaying(1996)and,withLeonSatkowski,ItalianArchitectureoftheSixteenthCentury,publishedposthumouslyin2002.RowediedinWashington,dcinNovember1999.HisashesarescatteredattheTempleoftheFourWinds,CastleHoward,Yorkshire.

PeterStJohnisapartnerofCarusoStJohnArchitects,whosecompletedprojectsincludetheNewArtGalleryWalsall,ChiswickHouseGardensCafé,theMillbankprojectatTateBritainandNewportStreetGallery.HeisalsocurrentlyaguestprofessoratLondonMetropolitanUniversity,andhaspreviouslytaughtatethZurich,BathUniversity,HarvardGsdandtheaa.

IrénéeScalbertisanarchitecturecriticandhistorianbasedinLondon.Hetaughtattheaabetween1989and2006whenhecoordinatedtheundergraduateHistoryandTheoryprogramme.HehasbeenavisitingdesigncriticattheGsd,andavisitingprofessoratParis-MalaquaisandattheTokyoUniversityofFineArts.HecurrentlylecturesattheschoolofarchitectureoftheUniversityofLimerickinIreland,andisavisitingprofessoratPOliMiinMilan.HismostrecentbookisNeverModern(2012).

HenrikSchoenefeldtisalecturerinsustainablearchitectureattheUniversityofKent,andcurrentlyleadsaresearchprojectinvestigatingthedesign,developmentandperformanceoftheoriginalVictorianventilationsystemofthePalaceofWestminster.Hiswriting,onenvironmentalpracticesinnineteenth-centuryarchitecture,hasbeenpublishedinArchitecturalResearchQuarterly,ArchitecturalHistoryandEngineeringHistoryandHeritage.

DanielShererisanarchitecturalhistorian,criticandtheoristwhoteachesatColumbiaUniversityandYaleSchoolofArchitecture.HeistheauthorofnumerousessaysonItalianRenaissance,modernandcontemporaryarchitectureandart,andisthetranslatorofManfredoTafuri’sInterpretingtheRenaissance:Princes,Cities,Architects(2006).Heiscurrentlyworkingonacollectionofessaysonthehistoricalrootsofmodernarchitecture–TheHistoricalSenseofModernArchitecture–whichwillbepublishedintheMitWritingArchitectureseriesin2017.

DavideSpinaisaPhDstudentatethZurich,whereheisexploringarchitecturalexchangesbetweentheusandItalyinthepostwarperiod.PriortothishecompletedthearchitecturalhistoryMaattheBartlett,ucl.

LaurentStalderisprofessorofarchitecturaltheoryattheethZurich.Hisresearchfocusesonthehistoryandtheoryofarchitecturefromthenineteenthcenturyonwards,andhispublicationsincludeHermannMuthesius:DasLandhausalskulturgeschichtlicherEntwurf(2008),ValerioOlgiati(2008),DerSchwellanaltas(2009,withElkeBeyer,AnkeHagemannandKimFörster),GOD&CO:FrançoisDallegretBeyondtheBubble(2011,withAlessandraPonteandThomasWeaver)andFritzHaller:ArchitektundForscher(2015,withGeorgVrachliotis).

Léa-CatherineSzackaisassistantprofessorattheOsloSchoolofArchitectureandDesign,whereshealsocoordinatesapedagogicprojectforthe2016OsloArchitectureTriennale.ShestudiedattheUniversitédeMontréalandiuaVbeforecompletingaPhDinarchitecturalhistoryandtheoryattheBartlettSchoolofArchitecture.HerresearchfocusesonthehistoryofarchitectureexhibitionsandpostmodernismandshewillsoonpublishExhibitingthePostmodern:1980VeniceArchitectureBiennale(2016).In2014shepresentedherresearchproject,‘Effimero,orthePostmodernItalianCondition’atthe14thVeniceArchitectureBiennale.

MarioTedeschini-Lalliisajournalistandscholarwhoselongjournalismcareerincludes40yearsasareporterandeditor,mostlyonforeignaffairs;helaterservedaseditorforvariousdigitalandmultimedianewsoutlets,primarilywiththeGruppoEditorialeL’Espresso,ofwhichheisnowdeputydirectorforinnovationanddevelopment.HisscholarlypublicationsincludeessaysonthehistoryoftheMiddleEast,Italyandthemedia.HisfurtherresearchonSteinberg’sarchitecturalandinteriordesignworkwillbepublishedinaforthcomingissueofTerritorio,thejournaloftheschoolofarchitectureatthePolitecnicodiMilano.

Contributors