1 Architectural Urbanism: Design the Urban at Harvard and Berkeley Atpresent,urbandesignrarelycomeswithinthelineofvisionofthetypical universitystudent;andfewgraduatesoftheplanningandarchitecturalschoolsever encountertheseproblems,letalonewrestlewiththem[However,]thereisno need to look for a scapegoat. The solution lies in our own backyard. (Lloyd Rodwin)1 Introduction: A Historical Review of Urban Design Urbandesignhaslongbeenanindistinctdomain,bothinacademiaandinpractice,for those who study or teach at professional institutes as well as research universities. However, its significanceisclearifwetraceitbacktothetimewhenarchitectsbegantopayattentionto designatanurbanscale.2 Inthethirtiesandforties,theGraduateSchoolofDesign(GSD)at HarvardUniversityandtheCollegeofEnvironmentalDesign(CED)attheUniversityof CaliforniaatBerkeleybothinitiatedacomprehensivedesignapproachtoenvironmental development, the application of humanistic criteria to solve social problems, and team efforts of allprofessions.Despitetheinevitabledifferenceinrhetoricandpedagogy,bothofthese universitieshavecontributedtothetrainingofarchitectssincethebeginningofthetwentieth 1 The First Urban Design Conference: A Condensed Report, Progressive Architecture, no. 8 (1956): 100. 2 Althoughurban design still exists as adisciplinewhosecontent is continuouslybeing redefined, itwas Team10, which ceased meeting in 1981, whose history has attracted the attention of scholars. See also:Eric Mumford, The EmergenceofUrbanDesignintheBreakupofCIAM,inUrbanDesign,eds.AlexKriegerandWilliamS. Saunders (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009), 15-37. 2 century,3 andevenmoreimportantly,theyboththroughjointappointmentsand interdisciplinary courseshave been devoted to educating urban-minded architects.4 For a more profound understanding of the historical scope of this issue, we must take a look attheagendaofaseriesofconferencesoftheCongrsInternationauxd'ArchitectureModerne (CIAM).Commencingearlyin1928,thisavant-gardeorganizationcreatedprimarilybyLe Corbusier specifically shifted their foci from buildings to cities as a result of their fourth meeting in1933,entitledTheFunctionalCity.TheofficialdocumenttheAthensCharterpublished subsequently by the congress committee became the handbook of the wider Modern Movement, breakingthecityintodiscreteproblemcategoriesdwelling,recreation,work,transportation, and large-scale planningand concluding with a call for a reform movement based on a total viewofthecity,inwhichtheideaoftotaldesignwastobeemanatedviatheemergenceof urban designer: Whileurbandesignisaphasefirstpopularizedduringthetwentiethcentury,cities have,ofcourse,beenthesubjectofdesigntheoryandactionforcenturies.Itisthe notionofurbandesignasanactivitydistinctfromarchitecture,planning,oreven military and civil engineering that is relatively newas is the label urban designer.5 TheCIAMapproachtourbanismunderwentasignificantchangewiththeimmigrationto theUnitedStatesbetween1937and1939ofmemberslikeWalterGropius, JosLuisSert,and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, among others.6 Once in the United States, however, their efforts to 3 1895 for Harvard, and 1903 for Berkeley. Seealso:AnthonyAlofsin,TheStrugglefor Modernism:Architecture, LandscapeArchitecture, and CityPlanning at Harvard.(New York: W.W. Norton, 2002);Elizabeth Byrne,Betsy Frederick-Rothwell,andWaverlyLowell,eds.DesignontheEdge:ACenturyofTeachingArchitectureatthe UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,1903-2003.(Berkeley,Calif.:CollegeofEnvironmentalDesign,Universityof California, Berkeley, 2009). 4 HereinIamreferringtotheurbandesignereducationassociatedwiththreedesigndisciplines:architecture, landscapearchitecture,andcityplanning.AtHarvard,HudnutfoundedGSDin1936,whichservedasthe indispensablefoundationforSertsUrbanDesignprogramtwodecadeslater;atBerkeley,Wursterproposedthe idea of CED in 1943, yet it was not until the retirement ofPerry in 1948 the proposal hadan opportunity to be put into practice. 5 Alex Krieger, Where and How Does Urban Design Happen? in Krieger and Saunders, Urban Design, 115. 6 Eric Mumford, Defining Urban Design: CIAM Architects and the Formation of a Discipline, 1937-69 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009), 20. 3 implementanewpedagogyunderthebroadrubricofdesignlaidthefoundationsformany subsequent modernist design approachesnot only in the United Statesincluding what would eventuallybetermedurbandesign.Inthedevelopmentofso-calledurbandesigninNorth AmericaculminatedinthefactthatSpanishmodernistJosLuisSertbothGSDdeanandits architecture department chairman from 1953 to 19697integrated pedagogy, teaching methods, andfacultyrespectivelyofthreedepartmentsarchitecture,landscapearchitecture,andcity planningintoonedegree-awardingprogramUrdanDesignin1956andconvenedthefirst international conference of urban design at the same time (Figure 1).8 Figure 1. Sert at the first Harvard Urban Design Conference, 1956.9 7 Sert came to GSD and stayed there for fifteen years. With urban-minded education at Harvard, Sert was attempting to retain values of CIAM for he also served as the president of the organization during the same period of time. See also: Josep M Rovira, Jose Luis Sert: 1902-1983, Trans. Leonora Saavedra (London: Phaidon Press, 2003). 8 TheparticipantsincludedCharlesAbrams,EdmundN.Bacon,JaneJacobs,GyorgyKepes,DavidL.Lawrence, LewisMumford,LloydRodwin,LadislasSegoe,Sert,andFrancisViolich.Seealso:TheFirstUrbanDesign Conference: A Condensed Report, 97-112. 9 Cuff, Urban Design, 410. 4 Serttookmostofthecreditforestablishinganunprecedentedurbandesignprogramat Harvard,butitwasJosephHudnut(Figure2),thefounderofGSD,who,in1936,brought architecture, landscape architecture, and city planning under the same roof. The prehistory of the Sertianepoch,duringwhichHudnutplayedavitalrole,mattersaccordingtoDanaCuff:10 Harvard endeavored to erase the boundaries among these three majors at the turn of the century, yet it would be another half century before urban design education was fully institutionalized and unified in North America through the groundbreaking program at GSD. The heated debate over theteachingmethodsbetweenHudnutandWalterGropiustheformerdirectorofthebrief-livedBauhausinpre-HitlerGermanyupontheHarvard-Bauhaus(19361956)wouldbe indispensable not only to heralding the urban design era in fifties, but also to understanding the dilemma between Beaux-Arts and Modernism of design education in the Western world. Figure 2. Hudnut in his GSD office, 1946.11 10 DanaCuff,Urban Design,inArchitectureSchool: Three Centuries of Educating Architects in North America, ed. Joan Ockman (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2012), 410. 11 JillPearlman,InventingAmericanmodernism:Hudnut,Gropius,andtheBauhauslegacyatHarvard. (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2007), 12. 5 JustasHudnutcreatedtheGSDaccommodatingcross-professionaltrainingatHarvard,so didCEDfounderWilliamWursterwhotaughtontheEastCoastbeforehisarrivalin Californiatransplanted the same collaborative model to Berkeley in 1959, housing architecture, landscape,andplanningtogetherunderoneacademicumbrellawhenheservedastheheadof schoolofarchitecture.Wurstersinterdisciplinaryagendaamodernistapproachand collaboration among design fieldsmay have stemmed from his close and ongoing contact with both Hudnut and Gropius at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) where he was dean before he went to Berkeley in 1948.12 Again, this was ahead of Serts program and conference at Harvard, as well as of an important part of the pre-history of GSD urban design. Indifferentways,afterGSDandCED,urbandesignspecializationsbegantoemerge, throughoutthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury,withinarchitecturalprogramsaswellas within planning ones. Progressive architects, cross the country, who had intellectual roots in the late-CIAM/early-Team1013 eraencouragedaproliferationofnewarchitecturally-based programsnot limited to urban designas universities expanded in the post-war United States: fromonearchitectureschoolofferingadegreespecialtyin1956totwenty-fourschoolsby 1996.14 During this time, Harvard remained a leader, whereas Berkeley was not an exception. In the1960sandthe1970s,heraldingsocialandculturalstudiesofarchitecturebasedonnon-architecturalapproaches,Berkeleyprovidedopportunitiesforurban-mindedprofessionalsfrom other fieldsincluding sociology, psychology, and philosophy (art historian James Ackerman is 12 Roger Montgomery with Peter Montgomery, Architecture on the (Cutting) Edge, in Byrne, Frederick-Rothwell, and Lowell, Design on the Edge, 108. 13 NamedaftertheCIAMcommitteeresponsibleforplanningthetenthcongressthattookplaceinDubrovnikin 1956,Team10wasagroupofarchitectswhocametogetherinthefirstplace,certainlybecauseofmutual realization of theinadequacies of theprocesses of architecturalthoughtwhich they had inherited from theModern Movement as a whole, but more importantly, each sensed that the other had already found same way towards a new beginning while preparing an new agenda: [n]o abstract Master Plan stands between [architects and what they have] to do, only the human facts and the logistics of the situation. Alison Smithson, ed., Team 10 Primer (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1968), 3; see also: Annie Pedret, Team 10: An Archival History (New York: Routledge, 2013). 14 Cuff, Urban Design, 411. 6 agoodexample)tojointhefaculty.Generallyspeaking,thisiswhatdistinguishesBerkeley from Harvard. Inthesixtiesandseventies,urbandesignhasbeenfurtherdevelopedasaresultofthe creativepracticeandseminalwritingsofseveralpostmodernisticonsincludingJaneJacobs, ChristopherAlexander,RobertVenturi,andDeniseScottBrown,whoseworkshavebeen summed up in the label postmodern urbanism that gained currency of nowadays. All of them, nottomentionSerthimself,oweadebttoHudnutaswellasWursterwhotookoffmuch earlierthanthesepostmodernurbanistsdidfromembracingregionalism,historicism, contextualism, and the mark of unpredictability in the cityscape. All in all, urban designs Janus-facedaspecthasappearedsincethestoriesofHarvardBauhaus(30s40s)aswellasof Environmental Design at Berkeley (50s 60s): on the one hand, urban design in the architectural academyisaretreatfrommodernisthegemony;ontheotherhand,itistherejectionofBeaux-Artsivorytower.Tothatend,urbandesignbecomesakindofcompromisebetweenthese ideological and formal factions at both GSD and CED. Harvard GSD: The Battle for Civic/Urban Design Inthemiddleoftwentiethcentury,thestudyofurbandesignwascodified,promoted, employed as the basis of a professional educational program at Harvard GSD by Sert, who first use the termurban designto describe this new discipline. He owed a debt not only to Gropius, whoserecommendationbroughthimtoGSD,butalsotoHudnut,whoofferedsuggestiveideas forahumanisticarchitectureandurbanism,aswellasarguedforabroadliberaland interdisciplinary education at its founding in 1936 (Figure 3). About this remarkable periodin which both Hudnut and Gropius were at HarvardJill Pearlman has written: 7 From the late 1930s to the early 1950s, the Harvard [GSD] played a critical part in shaping the course of [American] modern architecture and modern city. Architects, planners, teachers, and students from all over the world turned to the newly formed GSD, with its celebrated faculty and curriculum, for the path to modern design.15 Figure 3. Alumni tenure of principal architects, Harvard GSD, 1937-53.16 Many notable scholars, Eric Mumford in particular, have written about Sert,17 as well as his practiceofurbandesignstartinginthelate1950s.18 Thesignificanceofthatofthateraat 15 Pearlman, Inventing American modernism, 1. 16 KlausHerdeg,TheDecoratedDiagram:HarvardArchitectureandtheFailureoftheBauhausLegacy, Cambridge,Mass:MITPress,1983:4.Inthistable,wecanseebothGropiusandMarcelBreuer(aformer Bauhausler),yetnotHudnut,whonotonlybroughtbothGropiusandBreuertojointheGSDfaculty,butalso contributed to the school as a dean throughout this time span (1936 53). 17 EricMumford,HashimSarkis,andNeyranTuran,eds.JosepLluisSert:TheArchitectofUrbanDesign,1953-1969 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008). 18 Withurban design Sertwas attempting to retain themain values of CIAM. Mumford, Defining Urban Design, 103.Witha Team-10emphasis on human scale,however,Sert paid his heed to thepedestrian urban lifein lieuof thesuburbanandauto-basedenvironmentadvocatedbybothLeCorbusierinFranceandleft-leaningGerman 8 Harvardiswidelyrecognizedtoday,whileastudyofitspre-historyremainspiecemealsofar, scatteredinsurveysofarchitecturalhistory,educationalhistories,andinalumniandfaculty biographies. Interestingly, underlying these studies is a common argument: Gropius transformed Harvard's traditional Beaux-Arts training into a modern Harvard-Bauhaus education, a radically new school with a single outlook, that of its chairman, Gropius.19 AlthoughtheinfluenceofGropiusatHarvardwhichhasinlargepartdeterminedthe urban landscape in post-war America, even worldwideshould never be underestimated, GSDs program, from the late 1930s to the early 1950s, was far richer and more complex than the focus on Gropius and his Bauhaus objectives would suggest.20 To understand this, we have tolook at anoft-ignoredpieceinthepre-historyofurbandesignatHarvardand,consequently,ofthe history of modern architecture: Hudnut, who created the GSD in 1936before Gropius came to theschoolandservedasdeanuntil1953,theyearafterGropiusresigned.Fromthevery beginning,itwasHudnutwhorootedtheHarvardschoolinthelargerhumanistictraditionsof architectureandurbanismthoughwithoutsurrenderingtotheoldwaysoftheBeaux-Arts educational system, and he continued to oversee the curriculum and staffing of GSD for the next seventeen years. Yet Hudnut is nowadays remembered principally either for bringing Gropius to teach at Harvard in 1937, or for their long-lasting conflictwith using history or notover the preliminary course at GSD, in which Gropius got his way by the end. architects in the 1920s. See also: Eric Mumford, The CIAM Discourse on Urbanism, 1928-1960 (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press), 2000. 19 William Jordy, The Aftermath of the Bauhaus in America: Gropius, Mies,and Breuer, in eds. Donald Fleming andBernardBailyn,TheIntellectualMigration:EuropeandAmerica,1930-1960(Cambridge:BelknapPressof Harvard University Press, 1969),485-543;formorestudies thatdiscuss theHarvard-Bauhaus, see also:Herdeg, The Decorated Diagram. 20 WinfriedNerdinger,FromBauhaustoHarvard:GropiusandtheUseofHistory,inTheHistoryofHistoryin AmericanSchoolsofArchitecture,1865-1975,eds.Gwendolyn Wright and JanetParks(NewYork, N.Y.: Temple Hoyne Buell Center for the Study of American Architecture, 1990), 89-98. 9 HudnutstudiedarchitectureintheBeaux-ArtsprogramsatHarvard,theUniversityof Michigan and finally at Columbia in 1917, a pivotal year for him as he signed on as assistant of thewell-knownGermancityplanningtheoristandpractitioner,WernerHegemann.Hudnut worked off and on with Hegemann in Milwaukee for four years, until he returned to Germany in 1921.TheydidnotseeeachotheragainuntilHudnutservingasprofessorofarchitectural history at Columbia since 1926hired Hegemannwho came back to New York, once more as a political refugee, in the early 1930sto teach his Town Planning Studio, founded in 1935, that engaged students in planning projects oriented to post-Depression America. Figure 4. Hegemann, 1910.21 HegemannputforthhisownideasonAmericanurbanplanninginhis1922bookThe AmericanVitruvius:AnArchitectsHandbookofCivicArt22,writtenwithlandscapearchitect ElbertPeets,whileHudnutwasworkinginhisoffice.ThebookcelebratesVitruvianprinciples foracivilizedcity:beauty,commodity,longevityandtheideathatmadesuchanimpression onHudnut,thatthefundamentalunitofdesigninarchitectureisnottheseparatebuildingbut 21 Ibid, 24. 22 Hegemann,TheAmerican Vitruvius: An ArchitectsHandbookof CivicArt(New York: TheArchitectural Book Publishing Co., 1922). 10 the whole city.23 A primary purpose of the book, and later of Hudnuts efforts at Harvard, was to ensure that cities were shaped with this attitude, or as Hegemann had put it, to bring out the necessityofextendingthearchitectssphereofinfluence,inthecity.24 Underhismentoring, Hudnut originally wanted to establish an Institute of Urbanisma would-be transplanted model ofParissInstitutdurbanismesince191925atColumbiawhereresearchersfromarangeof disciplineswouldexplorethebuiltenvironmentintermsofphysical,design,administrative, political,socialandeconomiccontexts.Nevertheless,thisinnovativeschemeneverbecamea reality at Columbia. Evenso,itwasthereputationasamoderneducatorandpromoterofmodernarchitecture that brought Hudnut to Harvard albeit that he never promoted any particular brand of urbanism, norhadheeveralignedhimselfwithCIAM.Thereasonwhyhemovedabandoningthe deanshipawardedaftersevenyearsofteachingatColumbiatoCambridgeisclear:by1936, HudnutwasdeterminedtoestablishahumanisticmodernurbanismattheGSD.Given HegemannsantagonismtowardCIAMmodernism,Hudnuturgentlyviewedprofessional trainingasatoolforreshapingthemultipledisciplinesincludingarchitecture,landscape, planningintooneeducationaldirection,drawinguponamoreresponsivemodernismanda humanistic approach to design, what he called civic design: By 1936, Hudnut was betting his life on the new architecture, and Hegemann had alwaysbeenskepticalofmoderndesign.Ultimately,Hudnutwaslookingtofinda way for the Hegemann tradition of civic design to co-exist with modern architecture, tocreatecitiesandtownsthatexpressedincontemporarymaterialsandformsthe essentialqualitiesofthemodernworldclarity,precision,objectivity,movement, and a sense of evolution and continuity.26 23 Ibid, 2. 24 Ibid, 1. 25 ThiswasaninnovativeideaintheUnitedStatesatthattimeasthewordurbanismhadevennotyeteven enteredtheAnglo-Americanidiom(ThetermurbanismwasintroducedbyLouisWirthinhis1938sbook Urbanism as a Way of Life). See also: Pearlman, Inventing American modernism, 44. 26 Pearlman, Inventing American modernism, 91. 11 In1942,HudnutbegantoteachanewseriesofcoursesentitledHistoryofCivicDesign extrapolatedfromwhatHegemannhadimpartedincludingnotonlyarchitecturebutpainting, sculpture, literature, technological developments, social customs and politics. As an anti-Beaux-Arts figure, Hudnut did not avoid history; whileHudnuts humanistic views drew directly from Hegemanns,Hegemannwasnomodernist.ForfearofEuropeanmodernistsill-conceived designsandsocialremedies,shortlyafterthewarended,HudnutinauguratedtheGSDsnew preliminary course Planning I, the backbone of the curriculum, an indispensable prerequisite to allfurtherstudy,inwhichbeginningstudentsfromallthreedepartmentsgatheredtogetherto learn the strategies as well as skills needed to tackle problems of the built environment by which history is a centerpiece: Students first researched patterns of land use, traffic, recreation, commerce, housing and schools in the area,and then carefully designed each urban element. At the end of the year, they submitted a lengthy research report and a detailed collaborative plan, having learned that social, economic, aesthetic and technical factors are all parts of a single complexConsidering history an essential subject for future architects and planners,[Hudnut]believedthatstudyinghistorydevelopedonesintuition, excellence, artistry, judgment, and offered the crucial lesson that cities and places are not static things but are things in process, with a momentum generated by events that lie far back in time.27 Beyond this course, however, Hudnut was not an effective view in the school, but Gropius, who dramatically joined the GSD facultybased on Hudnuts recruitmentin 1937 and chaired thedepartmentofarchitecturesincethen.InspiteofthefactthatHudnutbroughtGropiusto Harvardandworkedcloselywithhimforseveralyears(Figure5),Hudnutultimatelytriedto prevent this Bauhaus master from dominating the GSD. Although the two had always differed in their ideas of the city, their differences did not surface until World War II reached its end. By the early1940s,Hudnuthadunderstoodthathisownideasofmodernarchitectureandurbanism 27 John Gaus, The Graduate School of Design and the Education of Planners: A Report (Cambridge: The Graduate School of Design, 1943): 35. 12 radicallydifferentfromGropiussone.WhileGropiuspromotedtheBauhausphilosophyatthe GSDespecially through the creation ofayear-longBasic Design preliminarycourse modeled on that of the German school28opposite directly to Planning I, Hudnut stood firmlyagainst it. Fromthatpointon,thecityanditsfuturebecamethesubjectofasimmeringfeudbetween Hudnut and Gropius, which eventually escalated into a raging battle. Figure 5. Hudnut and Gropius, 1942.29 Along with the practicum of Planning I, newly-enrolled students also studied the History of CivicDesigntostimulatetheirimaginationsandinterest.30 Ratherthanlearningfrompast successesinarchitectureorcivicdesign,however,Gropiuswantedstudentstolearnthe 28 Pearlman,InventingAmericanmodernism,3.ThemostcompellingreasonforGropiustocometoHarvardwas thathebelievedthattheGSDunderHudnutsharedthesamebasicprinciplesofeducationanddesignthathad governedtheBauhaus.GropiusfeltcertainthathecouldaccomplishinCambridgewhathehadbeenunabletoin Weimar or Dessau-to create the world's premier school for modern architects. 29 Alofsin,TheStruggleforModernism,138.HudnutandGropiusbeganbattlingforcontroloftheGSDandthe directionofmodernarchitectureandplanningintheUnitedStatesinthemid-1940s,andtheycontinuedtoclash throughout their years at Harvard GSD. 30 Gaus, The Graduate School of Design and the Education of Planners, 42. 13 fundamentalsofdesignsolelyfromtheirowninvestigationsandexperience.Hisalternative course, Basic Design, a course modeled directly on the Bauhaus: Emphasizing a working knowledge of the elements and concepts of design through a variety of exercises. Students explored the inherent qualities of materials by cutting, bending,scoring,orexpandingwood,paper,plaster,wire,andsheetmetal.To understandspacerelationships,theyorganizeddifferent-sizedplanesandspaces intounifiedschemesandmadeaseriesofmovingsculptures.Workingintwo dimensions,studentsfocusedonthetactile,structural,andspatialpropertiesof various surfaces. With a variety of mediacharcoal, crayon, water, or pastelsthey investigatedtheemotionalnatureofcolorandwaysofproducingwarmth,coldness orintensity.Bytheendoftheyear,studentshavediscoveredacommon denominator of design that would assure sound judgment in any problem they might encounter.31 Gropius had abolished history courses at the Bauhaus, and he obviously wanted to do the same at the GSD. Thefiercedebatestarted:PlanningIversusBasicDesign.Hudnutnotonlyabhorredthe formalisticnatureofGropiuscourse,herejectedtheideaofacommonlanguageofvisual communication. At the core of Hudnuts design philosophy was the idea that each art succeeds only when it draws from its own peculiar opportunities for expression. In his view, urban design dependeduponitsexpressiononthecitysownhistory,itsnaturalandbuiltsettings,andthe overarching pattern of idea from the people who lived there.32 In contrast, Gropius believed that historystifledindividualcreativityandinhibitedthemakingofamodernexpressionbecause history is particularly dangerous for beginning students for whom the awe of the masters of the past is so great, frustration may develop from timidity.33 HudnutfoughthardagainstBasicDesign,yetGropiuseventuallygothiswaythrough combiningtheintuitivemethodofthearts,thelogicoftheengineer,andthesystemofthe 31 Pearlman, Inventing American modernism, 220. 32 Hudnut, Architecture in a Mechanized World, The Octagon 10 (1938): 6. 33 Gropius,InSearchofBetterArchitecturalEducation,inADecadeofNewArchitecture,bySigfriedGiedion (Zurich: Girsberger, 1951), 43. 14 scientist in the class.34 To Hudnuts dismay, Basic Design proved tremendously popular (Figure 6).ShortlyafterGropiusoperatedhiscourse,severaluniversitiesaddedversionsofittotheir curricula. Hudnut saw his worst fears about Basic Design being confirmed in GSD student work and in projects built by adherents of the Bauhaus approach. In 1946, in order to hinder Gropius fromusinghisremarkablelobbyingskillstobringhisGermanprogramtoHarvard,Hudnut indeed took further steps to limit the influence of Bauhaus principles in the GSD design studios byhiringayoungAmericaninstructorGeorgeLeBoutelliertoteachTheoryandPracticeof Designthatintroducedstudentstothefundamentalconceptsofspace,form,andfunctionand thestructuralrelationshipsbywhichtheseareexpressedandcontrolled.35 Thedesigntheory coursewaslaterretitledasBasicDesignandfinallytookplaceofGropiussonebytheendof the 1940s. Figure 6. Gropius and his masters class students, 1946.36 34 Ibid, 41. 35 Pearlman, Inventing American modernism, 202. 36 Alofsin, The Struggle for Modernism, 210. 15 ThiswasthereasonofGropiussearlyresignationasaprotestofHudnutsdecisive removalofhisBasicDesign(renamedDesignFundamentalsin1950)formtheGSD curriculumin1952,37 yethisideasstillcarriedthedaysincealmosteveryarchitectureand planningschoolofthatperiodtaughtthesimilarcoursebasedonhisoriginalversion.38 ChallengingtheheroofBauhaus,withcertain,didlittletoendearHudnuttothemanywho reveredGropius.39 Hudnut,whowassupposedtoretirethatyear,remainedattheGSDforone moreyearattherequestofPresidentJamesB.Conant,whoneededmoretimetodesignatehis successor.40 In1956,hechooseSpanishmodernistSerttotakebothHudnutandGropius positions.41 We have to learn, nevertheless, had it not for Hudnuts persistent contribution to the GSD'spost-Beaux-Artscurriculum,SerttogetherwithGropiussBauhaus-likedesign approach42would not start his heyday of Urban Design at the worlds most renowned school of modern architecture and city planning. Berkeley CED: A Home Base for Social/Environmental Design Architecture education at Berkeley began as the twentieth century opened. In common with otherschoolssuchasHarvardofthetime,Berkeleyinitiallymimickedlong-established 37 Ibid, 76. 38 Shlomo Sha'ag, Architectural Education in America, Architectural Record 115 (1954): 9. 39 Years after his retirement, Gropius remained a heroic figure at the GSD, with celebrations, symposia, lectures, and exhibitions held in his honor there.40 Hudnut ended his association with the GSD abruptly after he retired. He taught his Civic Design courses at MIT until the early 1960s, held severalmajor advisory positions overseeing architectural and urban design projects, and continued publishing his critical essays in a range of journals, some of them are cited in this paper. After his wife's death in 1963, he led a mostly reclusive life. Pearlman, Inventing American modernism, 236. 41 ItwasGropius,ratherthanHudnut,whoplayedakeyroleinchoosinganewdeanfortheGSD.Onhis recommendation, Conant hired Sert as both GSD dean and chair of the architecture department actually in order to avoid the power struggle of the previous decade. Ibid, 47. 42 In a short time, Sert would give new life to Gropiuss preliminart course Design Fundamentals, and emphasize, as Gropiushad,theneedformodernarchitectsandplannerstomeetthesocialrequirementsofourtimes economically and with modern technology. Sert would also bring a number of Gropius'sclose allies to teach at the school,amongthemSigfriedGiedion,NaumGabo,SergeChermayeff,andReginaldIsaacs,Gropius'sformer student and future adulatory biographer. Ibid, 233. 16 EuropeaneducationtraditionsasembodiedintheAmericanversionsoftheFrenchRoyal Academy.43 JohnGalenHoward(Figure7),aneducatorinvolvedinAmericanRenaissance movement, founded the Department of Architecture in 1903, the first one on the West Coast, and insodoing,heneverdoubtthatclassicismwasentirelyappropriateforamoderncountry.44 However, interestingly, with the move to Berkeley after attending MIT and the cole des Beaux-ArtsinParis,hebegantodevelopanarchitecturalexpressionwhich,inspiteofafirmbasisof classicism,wasresponsivetotheclimatic,geographical,andculturalenvironmentof California.45 Figure 7. Howard, seated center, with Warren Perry on his right.46 43 Montgomery, Architecture on the (Cutting) Edge, 107. 44 JoanDraper,ThecoledesBeaux-ArtsandtheArchitecturalProfessionintheUnitedStates:theCaseof Howard,ined.SpiroKostof,TheArchitect:ChaptersintheHistoryoftheProfession(NewYork:Oxford University Press, 1977), 233. 45 Joan Draper, Howard, in Byrne, Frederick-Rothwell, and Lowell, Design on the Edge, 30. 46 Ibid, 29. 17 It would be tempting yet too easy to judge the similarity of urban design sensitivity between HowardandHegemannwasmoreorlessbasedonthereflectivityoftheirBeaux-Arts background,howeveranotherthingcouldbeconfirmedaccordinglyisthatHowardspupil Warren Perry (Figure 8) was different from Hegemanns successor Hudnut, who always dared to view education as a tool for reshaping the professions instead of, what Perry did, letting each of the schools operated independently, with its own students, faculty and discrete realm of interest, sharingonlyanallegiancetotheBeaux-Artspedagogicaltradition.Evenso,accordingto WilliamLittmann,Perryhadmoreinfluenceonarchitecturaleducationat[Berkeley]thanany other individual associated with the school.47 Like Hudnut, he is a forgotten figure in the history of modern architecture. Figure 8. Perry, Dean, School of Architecture.48 47 WilliamLittmann,TheFinalDaysoftheBeaux-Arts:PerryandtheStudentCampaignsforModernismat Berkeley, in Byrne, Frederick-Rothwell, and Lowell, Design on the Edge, 46. 48 Littmann, The Final Days of the Beaux-Arts, 46. 18 Perry had served as a teaching member since 1911 after finishing training of both Berkeley and then the cole. As a firm believer in Parisian school, he was roundly-criticizedafter taking overHowardsdeanshipin1927forhiscontinuingadherencetothemethodsoftheBeaux-Arts.49 Especiallyaftermanyleadingschools,suchasHarvard,embracedurban-minded modernismduringtheinter-andpost-wartimes,Perry,whorefusedtoacknowledgemodern designandteachingmethods,becameabulwarkagainstchange.Haditnotbeenforthe progressive students interested in politics as well as societal reform, I would doubt the coming of AreaE(socialandculturalstudiesinarchitectureandurbanism),50 letaloneoftheCollegeof Environmental Design, at Berkeley of nowadays. DuringtheheydayofBeaux-ArtsatnearlyeveryAmericanschoolofarchitectureinthe firstquarteroftwentiethcentury,studentsacceptedtheFrenchtraditionalpedagogiesmodelled afterParisscoledesBeaux-Artsinemphasizinguniversalprinciplesofdesign,architectural history, precedent, a formal classical vocabulary and draftsmanship.51 To prove their mastery of Beaux-Artsideals,studentsworkedcompetitivelyunderintensepressureforjuryawardsthat advancedthemintheschool.Yetthroughoutthe1930sand1940sthetimewhentheradical battlebetweenHudnutandGropiuswashappeningintheEastCoaststudentsbecamemore andmorewillingtoquestionthestudioprojectsassignedtothem.AsRobertW.Ratcliff,the chair of the student architectural association in the mid-1930s said: The principal thing that I was concerned about was that the architectural school was laggingbehindtherestoftheworldinrecognizingthattherehadbeensomebasic changesintheoutlookofpeopletowardmodernarchitecture,whatthenext generation had to offer. The curriculum was tied to the Beaux-Arts system, and they werenotfocusonmodernarchitectureatallIcanrememberbeingvery frustratedbecauseontheoutsideweheardandreadaboutGropiusandBreuerand 49 Ibid. 50 Clare Cooper Marcus, Social Factors in Architecture, in Byrne, Frederick-Rothwell, and Lowell, Design on the Edge, 141. 51 Pearlman, Inventing American Modernism, 142. 19 CorbusierandFrankLloydWright.Andallthesepeopleweretalkingabout contemporaryarchitecture.Whereasontheinsidetheguyswewerestudyingwith werenot.WhenwewereseniorsPerrygaveusaproject:Designapalaceinthe mannerofPeruzzi.PeruzziwasacontemporaryofMichelangelo!Thiswasatthe same time that the Bauhaus was going on, Mies van der Rohe. All these people were doing things in what I thought was a very exciting area. We werent exposed to this at all.52 Thecolesemphasisondraftsmanshipandtheartisticrepresentationofbuildingsremoved students from everyday experience, counter to what Hudnut was fighting for at Harvard. However, it was Gropius and his members of The Architects Collaborative (TAC), such as Marcel Breuer,53 who caught Berkeleys students full attention. In spite of Perrys intransigence, several progressive students even made summer sojourns to Bauhaus-influenced programs, like Ludwig Mies van der Rohds Illinois Institute of Technology and Lszl Moholy-Nagys School ofDesignandthenreportedontheirexperiencesinTheNewDesign(Figure9):54 asmall, unprofessional-lookingpublicationfoundedbystudentsin1937thatappearedepisodicallyfor twoyears,whichkeptstudentsatBerkeleyabreastofmodernistdevelopments.Takentogether with a note from Lewis Mumford in 1939, supporting the students demand for a break with the Beaux-Arts system at Berkeley,55 a breakthrough finally came true with the arrival of WursteranBayAreaarchitectwhopreviouslystudiedarchitectureunderHowardin1948with,even more importantly, his proposal of establishing the CED. 52 RobertW.Ratcliff,EvelynP.Ratcliff,SuzanneB.Riess,andHaroldC.Norton.TheRatcliffArchitects:in Berkeley since 1909 (Berkeley, Calif: University of California, 1990). 53 Pearlman, Inventing American modernism, 1. 54 Littmann, The Final Days of the Beaux-Arts, 52. 55 Ibid, 53. 20 Figure 9. The New Design, 1939.56 Because of the critical changes with urban concerns implemented at Harvard in the 1930s, togetherwithstudentsradicalactivismforamoderneducationatBerkeleyinthe1940s, universityadministratorsatlattereventuallybelievedthatstudentswouldwholeheartedly welcome formers innovative approach and embrace the transformation that it formulated for the design curriculum. Finally, Berkeley President Robert Sproul asked Perry hire modern architects, 56 Ibid, 51. 21 suchasErichMendelsohnin1947,tojointhefacultyaswellastoaddelectivesonmodern design.57 Next year, Perry, Wursteralso a Berkeley graduatecame from MIT to replace Perry andserveasthedeanoftheschoolofarchitecture.AsafellowatMITintheearly1940s, WursterwasinstrumentalinpersuadingMIT'sadministrationtorecognizetheSchoolof Architecture's city planning division as a full-fledged and equal department, with the new entity beingnamedtheSchoolofArchitectureandPlanning(SA+P).Basedonthisexperience,he lobbiedhisproposal,atBerkeley,ofCED:aprojectthatmergedtogetherdepartmentsof architecture, landscape architecture, and city planning into a single college: Wursterimaginedacollegethatstrengthenedeachdepartmentthroughjoint appointmentsandinterdisciplinarycourses,givingstudentstheopportunityto combinestudiesinthedifferentdepartmentswhilealsofocusingonachosencore area of study.58 CED has an idea stemmed from Wursters close and ongoing contact form his time spent on the east, with Hudnutwho has already created GSD at Harvard a decade agoas well as Gropius (Figure 10).59 Figure 10. Wurster (right) with Gropius, 1952.60 57 Ibid, 54. 58 College History. http://ced.berkeley.edu/about-ced/college-history/. 59 Richard Peters, W. W. Wurster, in in Byrne, Frederick-Rothwell, and Lowell, Design on the Edge, 62. 22 LikeHudnutsPlanningI,Wurstercreatedunprecedentedintroductoryclassesthat connected students withthe fields ofeconomics,business, administration, urban sociology, and engineering, etc.61 Most importantly, he recruited non-architect scholars, like art historian James Ackerman (who would later teach at Harvard), to join the faculty and provided unique coursesfocusingmainlyuponSociologyofSpaceconducivetothedevelopmentofcivic/urban designinthelightofHudnut:tonameafew,SocialandCulturalFactorsinArchitectural DesignbyW.RussellEills;ArchitecturalProgrammingbyRoslynLindheim;Socialand Psychological Factors in Housing Design by Clare Cooper Marcus.62 AtBerkeley,thiswasatimeofexperimentationnotonlyincoursecontent,butalsoin teaching and learning methods to develop the actual concept of environmental design, and then torefineitinacollegethatincludedallthreedesignandplanningdisciplines,integratingtheir knowledgeandcontributionsinawaythathelpstoshapethelargeenvironment63 underthe guidanceofWurster.ThisideawouldbechallengedbyGropius,yetdefinitelyagreedbyhis opponent Hudnut, who not only invisibly situated Serts to the niche in urban design program at HarvardGSDsince1956(Figure11),butalsoindirectlycatalyzedtheenvironmentaldesign education at Berkeley CED in the 1960s. 60 Montgomery, Architecture on the (Cutting) Edge, 108. 61 Kathleen James-Chakraborty, All Past Buildings Will be Deemed Worthy of Study: The Berkeley Ph.D Program and its Interdisciplinary Orientation, in Byrne, Frederick-Rothwell, and Lowell, Design on the Edge, 127. 62 Marcus, Social Factors in Architecture, 142. 63 College History. http://ced.berkeley.edu/about-ced/college-history/. 23 Figure 11. Student jury for the New City project, GSD Urban Design Studio, 1961.64 Conclusion: Urban Design as Unlikely Underpinning of Post-modernism HegemannandHoward,HudnutandPerry,SertandWurster:itwasthestrugglebetween Europeantraditionsandmodernismthatbroughttheseurbandesignfigurestogetherinthe UnitedStates,mostparticularlyatHarvardandBerkeley.EventhoughGropiushasthehighest repute,andhisconceptofmodernarchitectureandurbanismhaveflourishedinarchitecture schools across the country, but it had also been subject to careful scrutiny and criticism by the [HudnutorWurster-]likesofJaneJacobs,RobertVenturi,andothers,includinganumberof GSD [and CED] alumni.65 64 Mumford, Defining Urban Design, 163. Foreground, left to right, Sigfried Giedion,Sert, Louis Kahn, and Willo von Moltke. 65 Pearlman, Inventing American modernism, 237. 24 To end, I would like to put Hudnut forward as a precursor to the right kind of modernism, or even postmodernism, actually a term he used in an essay The Post-modern House in 1945.66 HeandWursterwerecriticswhospokeoutagainstthemodernistssingle-mindedpre-occupationwithtechnology,efficiency,economyandsocialexpediencyandtheirneglectof individualneeds,localcustomsandthespiritualqualitiesofformoftheBauhausdesign approachinthe1940sand1950s,bothofthemhadamoredifficulttaskthanthose postmoderniststwentyyearslater.ThelatterJacobs-andVenturi-likepostmodernurbanists attackedorthodoxmodernistsforwhattheyhaddonebymeansofscientificplanning, standardization,andtechnologytothepost-warurbanlandscape;HudnutandWurster, conversely, mostly challenged them for what they were about to do: the city built of universally valid forms, vigorous functionalism, and technological utopianism. TogetherwithhiswifeCatherineBauerWurster,anationallyknownhousingexpertand later professor of city and regional planning at Berkeley, Wurster deserved the main building of CEDnamedafterhimintodayscampus;forHudnut,inspiteofthefactthathelostthebattle with Gropius for the direction of GSD, when it comes the Urban Design epoch of Sert at Harvard, we should know that it was Hudnut who planted the seeds of a new post-modern urbanism that took root two decades later: Itappearsthenthatweneednotdespairofanarchitecture-of-cities.Weneednot despairofaprincipleofformasconsonanttoourindustrialdemocracyaswasthe Renaissanceprincipletotheeighteenthcentury.Wehavealreadydiscoveredand practiced some elements of that new architecture; we have created and strengthened the political tools which are necessary for its continued practice; and in all of this we are sustained by a public opinion increasingly enlightenedThe colors are ground. The canvas is taut. The brushes lie ready on the taboret. We await the master.67 66 Hudnut,ThePost-modernHouse,ArchitecturalRecord97(1945):70-75.ThoughHudnutdidnottryinthis essay, or ever, to advance a new post-modern movement, his appeal here for symbolic richness, the expression of inner-experiences, and for beauty unexplained by economic necessity or technical virtuosity, certainly anticipated the thrust of postmodernism thirty years later. 67 Hudnut, The Political Art of Planning, Architectural Record 94 (1943): 48. 25 Bibliography Alofsin, Anthony. The Struggle for Modernism: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and City Planning at Harvard. New York: W.W. Norton, 2002. Cuff, Dana. Urban Design. In Architecture School: Three Centuries of Educating Architects in North America, edited by Joan Ockman, 409-413. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2012. Draper, Joan. The Ecole des Beaux-Arts and the Architectural Profession in the United States: the Case of Howard. In The Architect: Chapters in the History of the Profession, edited by Spiro Kostof, 209-237. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977. Fleming,Donald,andBernardBailyn.TheIntellectualMigration:EuropeandAmerica,1930-1960. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1969. Gaus,John,TheGraduateSchoolofDesignandtheEducationofPlanners:AReport. Cambridge: The Graduate School of Design, 1943. Giedion, Sigfried. A Decade of New Architecture. Zurich: Girsberger, 1951. Hegemann, Werner. The American Vitruvius: An Architects Handbook of Civic Art. New York: The Architectural Book Publishing Co., 1922. Herdeg, Klaus. The Decorated Diagram: Harvard Architecture and theFailure of the Bauhaus Legacy. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1983. Hudnut, Joseph. Architecture in a Mechanized World, The Octagon 10 (1938): 3-6. Hudnut, Joseph. The Political Art of Planning, Architectural Record 94 (1943): 44-48. Hudnut, Joseph. The Post-modern House, Architectural Record 97 (1945): 70-75. Krieger,Alex,andWilliamS.Saunders,eds.UrbanDesign.Minneapolis:Universityof Minnesota Press, 2009. 26 Lowell,Waverly,ElizabethByrne,andBetsyFrederick-Rothwell,eds.DesignontheEdge:A CenturyofTeachingArchitectureattheUniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,1903-2003. Berkeley,Calif.:CollegeofEnvironmentalDesign,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley, 2009. Mumford, Eric, Hashim Sarkis, and Neyran Turan, eds. Josep Lluis Sert: The Architect of Urban Design, 1953-1969. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008. Mumford,Eric.DefiningUrbanDesign:CIAMArchitectsandtheFormationofaDiscipline, 1937-69. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009. Mumford,Eric.TheCIAMDiscourseonUrbanism,1928-1960.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress, 2000. Nerdinger,Winfried.FromBauhaustoHarvard:GropiusandtheUseofHistory.InThe HistoryofHistoryinAmericanSchoolsofArchitecture,1865-1975,editedbyGwendolyn Wright and Janet Parks, 89-98. New York, N.Y.: Temple Hoyne Buell Center for the Study of American Architecture, 1990. Pearlman,Jill.InventingAmericanmodernism:Hudnut,Gropius,andtheBauhauslegacyat Harvard. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2007. Pedret, Annie. Team 10: An Archival History. New York: Routledge, 2013. Ratcliff,RobertW.,EvelynP.Ratcliff,SuzanneB.Riess,andHaroldC.Norton.TheRatcliff Architects: in Berkeley since 1909. Berkeley, Calif: University of California, 1990. Rovira, Josep M. Jose Luis Sert: 1902-1983. Translated by Leonora Saavedra. London: Phaidon Press, 2003. Sha'ag, Shlomo, Architectural Education in America, Architectural Record 115 (1954): 9. Smithson, Alison, ed. Team 10 Primer. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1968.