-
THE EDUCATION OF AN ARCHITECT 195
The Education of An Architect: 3 Points of ViewRowe,Hejduk and
Ferrari
FRANK WEINERSHELLEY MARTINVirginia Tech
INTRODUCTION: THE HISTORIAN, THE POETAND THE MAGICIAN
This paper will attempt to make a preliminary read-ing of the
main achievements and impacts of threeremarkable architectural
educators Colin Rowe,John Hejduk and Olivio Ferrari1. Each of
theseteachers passed within six years of each other in2000, 1999
and 1994 respectively. By placing thework of these three great
teachers in parallel theexpectation is that a larger understanding
aboutarchitectural education may emerge that may as-sist the
present generation of teachers to addresscurrent problems and find
future directions. Onecan begin to study the didactic life of these
teach-ers as one would enjoy walking through the roomsin good
building. It is our contention that the studyof teachers is as
valuable as the study of build-ings. Rowe spent the better part of
a long teachingcareer at Cornell, Hejduk at Cooper Union andFerrari
at Virginia Tech. Rowe gave us the vocabu-lary to teach, Hejduk the
poetry to see and Ferrarithe questions to proceed. Generations of
their stu-dents have gone on to make a considerable differ-ence in
both the practice and teaching ofarchitecture attesting to the
exponential impact ofthree extraordinary teachers.
SCIENCE AND ART IN RELATION TO THEEDUCATION OF AN ARCHITECT
The education of an architect resides between theregisters of
science and art between episteme andteche.2 How we chose to define
and interrelatescience and art in our time is one of the key
issuesfor the present generation of architectural educa-tors.
Whatever the definitions of science and art itis imperative that a
teacher of architecture be ca-
pable of artfully navigating between these two endconditions of
knowledge the metaphysical desireto know and the poetic desire to
make. One is anurge towards the conceptual the other an urge
to-wards the beautiful. At the highest levels scienceand art fold
into one unity. This is what Max Billtermed, after Van Doesburg,
Concrete Art wherethe logical and the beautiful occupy the same
placeand time. We may understand science and art notso much as
clearly demarcated disciplines butrather as two fundamental human
desires or ca-pacities. At one moment the human mind aspiresto the
cool exactitude of a logical net catching allinconsistencies, and
at another moment humanbeings act from the wellspring of the
interrelatedlife of the five senses.
The reason why the questions of science and artare so critical
to the education of architects is thatarchitectural education, like
the Renaissance, is atthe intersection of science and art. For
example,what part of the development of perspective is sci-ence and
what part is art? The thing that results inwhat we now so naturally
call perspective is in facta combination of two kinds of knowledge.
How-ever without the combined foundations of scien-tific thinking
and artistic making perspective wouldnot be possible. The same is
true for architecturaleducation. The possibility of architectural
educa-tion depends on the same shared foundation ofknowledge. An
architect is a individual that is con-sciously and deliberately not
a scientist or an art-ist yet must know much about both
sensibilities.The education of an architect is purposively
poisedbetween the scientific and the artistic - betweenthe
legitimate and constructive. These are the les-sons of Vitruvius
and Alberti.
-
196 THE ART OF ARCHITECTURE/THE SCIENCE OF ARCHITECTURE
Science, Art and Architecture in the University:
Architectural education simply could not survivealone and
perhaps this is why architectural educa-tion primarily exists today
within the framework ofa university setting despite the evolving
difficul-ties inherent in such a placement. When science isreduced
to information and art to the communica-tion of self-expression
architectural education suf-fers. Unfortunately this is the state
of science andart at many universities today.
This environment makes the necessity for study-ing great
teachers more apparent. Within this re-duction of science and art
the potential ofarchitectural education is significantly
diminished.
One has the sense that the three teachers selectedfor this
preliminary study had an implicit and ex-plicit didactic position
about architecture relativeto science and art that continues to be
relevanttoday. Therefore it is timely to put forth their di-dactic
content as both a remedy to the presentsituation and an inspiration
for the future.
Rowe the historian searched for the science in his-tory that was
germane to making architecture. Hedepended on the existence of a
science of historyfrom which to generate his observations and
for-mulations. His search opened up new vocabulariesof
understanding at both the scale of the buildingand the scale of the
city. He combined a typicallyBritish eloquence of language along
with the pen-etrating influence of Germanic thinkers such as
KarlPopper and Ernst Cassirer. With Rowe, history es-caped the
lecture room and found its way into thestudio. History went from a
slide projected on awall to the drawing on a desk.
Hejduk made a highly attuned physical and spiri-tual environment
at Cooper Union that protectedand fostered the narratives and myths
of the maker.He was a poet intensely dedicated to looking atthe
work of other poets or makers such asMondrian, Gris, Gide and
Proust. Hejduk employedwith great affect the idea of architectureas
paint-ing and architecture as literature. His method ofemploying
analogies gave a special breadth to theproblems he posed to his
students such as design-ing a house in the manner of Juan Gris.
Ferrari, a child of Ulm and the tutelage of Max Bill,had an
unrelenting belief in the philosophical im-
manence of form and the secret life of objects thatresides
within. Through his extensive knowledgeof philosophy he raised the
intellectual level of hisstudents and the work they produced.
Rather thanuse the philosophical term mind he preferred theword
brain but he meant mind. He focused not somuch on architecture but
rather on the architectas student. For Ferrari the cultivation of
the freesovereignty of individuals as they developed
theircapacities as makers was of the utmost impor-tance.3 He was
seeking an ethical equilibrium inhimself and his students.
COLIN ROWE: BUILDING WITH WORDS
Colin Rowe was a gifted observer of architecturewho through his
written and verbal eloquencemaintained the continuity of the
traditions of ar-chitectural culture across epochs and
challengedits future. He had a formidable ability in languageand
thought that overcame a lack of drawing skill.4
In a very real sense he was able to draw observa-tions and form
conclusions with words. There havebeen few teachers in architecture
like Rowe thathave mastered both the realms of the lecture roomand
the studio. Colin Rowe was able to navigate inthe space between
history and design - betweenwhat happened and what might happen. He
hadinsight into the connections between the actual andthe possible.
Rowe in some ways literally inventeda vocabulary with which to
teach architecture.Teachers of architecture often do not
acknowledgethe sources from which their teaching
vocabularyoriginates.5 How can one teach architecture with-out the
ideas of Plato and Aristotle and withoutthe words of Rowe and
Frampton? For examplewhen teachers discuss the idea of
transparencywith students then they owe a debt to Rowe. In asense
he offered an entire vocabulary with whichto capture the nuances of
architectural form andthe stories of architecture.
Rowe did not invent new words but he did inventnew ways of
understanding words in an architec-tural sense. The string of
articles and essays pub-lished by Rowe since 1947 have taken on
legendarystatus in schools of architecture well before
theircodification in the 3 volume collection entitled, AsI Was
Saying (1996). Some of the more well knownare The Mathematics of
the Ideal Villa, LaTourette, and Transparency: Literal and
Phenom-enal. Another essay by Rowe perhaps less famous
-
THE EDUCATION OF AN ARCHITECT 197
but no less important was Ideas, Talent, Poetics.Here Rowe was
at his best using Platonic and Aris-totelian thought to make a
comparative analysisof architects and their buildings.6 Rowe tells
us thatPalladio had Ideas, Borromini had Talent. Althoughthere is
no way to prove Rowes proposition in anabsolute sense this kind of
broad formulation hada ring of truth to it which bore itself out
upon closerinspection of the buildings and architects in ques-tion.
The article reads as a summation of many ofthe major themes Rowe
took up across his teach-ing and scholarly life. The
generalizations or ten-dencies that Rowe articulated allowed
students andfaculty to better understand specific differences
inarchitectural physiognomy. Like T. S. Eliots essayTradition and
the Individual Talent, Rowe pre-sented variations of the push of
history upon thetalent of an architect and the pull of an
individualstalent away from history.
In terms of reading the form of a building and itssetting like a
text the article La Tourette may bethe single best essay in the
last half century. Oneshould not visit La Tourette without knowing
whatRowe wrote. He made striking observations aboutthe long entry
approach that tangentially slips tothe side of the building rather
than meeting theform frontally. The floors were read as if they
wereelevations conceived vertically and rotated hori-zontally. One
cannot walk upon the floors of LaTourette without thinking that
they are walking ontop of elevations! As he often did Rowe visited
theplace and wrote down what his mind saw while ashe was
walking.7
Rowes thesis supervisor was Rudolf Wittkower whoevidently
thought that Rowes article The Math-ematics of the Ideal Villa was
rather loosely con-strued and lacked real historical grounding.8
Herethe teacher Wittkower is perhaps both correct andstubborn at
the same time. In his view Rowes es-say was lacking the necessary
Germanic art his-torical method and rigor to make it
legitimatescholarship. Rowe perhaps intuitively knew that inthe
setting of architectural education it was ap-propriate. The article
had the right balance betweenan analysis of the historical
development of thePalladian villas in relation to Corbusian villas
andoffered close visual observations that were justright for the
context of teaching architecture. Rowedid not kill the possibility
of architecture with his-tory, which often can happen, yet offered
a neces-
sary measure of historical erudition and imagina-tion that
provided students and teachers with his-torical context.
JOHN HEJDUK: THE ADVANCEMENT OFSCIENCE AND ART
Late in his life John Hejduk was invited to presenta lecture on
education where he briefly distilledwhat the work of Cooper Union
was about with hischaracteristic sense of understatement - We
makethings well and we like to fabricate parts and welike parts.9
This simple statement contains a num-ber of important ideas. First
the idea of making orpoiesis is the primary preoccupation. Cooper
is aschool that makes. The publications produced byCooper Union
over the years exemplify a commit-ment to making things well.
Students are encour-aged to become pragmatic poets in the Greek
senseof the words. The School linked action with mak-ing. The idea
of making things well qualifies theact of making to ensure the
activity ends in a thingwell made. This is a crucial point in that
the rea-son to make only exists if the standard of produc-tion is
set at a high enough level of achievement.This is how science and
art advance at Cooper through the thought that is put into the
affinity formaking. As in the idea ofhomo faber the notionof
fabrication was important as well as an interestin separate pieces.
Often the joints are more aboutthe abstraction of form abutting
form like in a paint-ing rather than a detailed adoration of craft
as isevident in the work of Kahn or Scarpa. Cooper attimes was more
a-tectonic than tectonic.
The now famous nine square problem10 is perhapsthe fundamental
example of the pedagogy ofHejduk. Here the eternal order of the
nine squaregrid of columns is introduced to the beginning stu-dent
who literally discovers the basic elements ofarchitecture and their
interrelationships. One cansense the presence of the ghost of
Palladio hidingin the depths of the nine square problem and giv-ing
it a hidden historical legitimacy.11 That this is aproblem and not
a project is an important distinc-tion. The term problem is a
scientific one suggest-ing serious study and physical research.
Likescientists the students were positing hypotheseson
architecture. The nine square problem tran-scends any possible
project. The problem was big-ger than any possible answer although
ultimatelyHejduk felt one student had finally resolved theproblem
to the point that it could be retired.12 In
-
198 THE ART OF ARCHITECTURE/THE SCIENCE OF ARCHITECTURE
what may appear at first glance to be an exceed-ingly abstract
problem one quickly realizes theconcrete nature of the task that is
broken downinto 17 specific operations that each student
goesthrough. Cooper under the guidance of Hejduk al-ways combined
the imagination of a dreamer withthe rigor of five semesters of
structures. It was anidyllic and hard-nosed place at the same time.
Oneimagines that this is exactly what Hejduk was af-ter. Hejduk was
a pragmatic poet that became theheart of a school.
The renovation of the school building itself is infact one of
the finest in the last 50 years reachingthe level of Scarpa at
Castelvecchio. Hejduk makesthe building into a thoughtful
articulation of thepedagogical questions of the nine square
problemand of the educational foundations of the schoolitself.
Hejduk was well aware of the history of hisinstitution and allowed
that history to inform hisdecisions. The renovation is didactic and
is under-taken like a problem in a studio. The round eleva-tor core
reads like a large column bearing theweight of the entire
structure. The space of thegreat lecture hall sitting literally
under the schoolis filled with the memory of Abraham Lincoln.
Thisis the solidity of space that Hejduk understood sowell. The
vast shop space occupies the top floor ofthe building like a
factory on top of a school. Theamazing photographs taken by Roberto
Schezenand Werner Kinkel published in Mask of Medusareveal the
private intimacy of the spaces amidstthe intensity of the Lower
East Side of Manhattan.The school became a private refuge holding
backthe forces of the city allowing the students to pushback
against the density of the city and the world.
OLIVIO FERRARI: THE ALLOWANCE FOREXCEPTIONS AND THE PREVENTION
OF THEAVERAGE
Olivio Ferrari, perhaps lesser known that both Roweand Hejduk
but whose career is no less compel-ling, taught architecture at
Virginia Tech from 1965-1994. He was originally invited to teach at
VirginiaTech by Charles Burchard the founding Dean ofthe College of
Architecture.13 Prior to coming toVirginia Tech Ferrari worked with
Max Bill at Ulmand Bernhard Hoesli at the ETH. Together Burchardand
Ferrari attracted a strong group of faculty andforged a remarkable
program of innovation andexperimentation in architectural education
that in2004 completed its 40th academic year. Beginning
in 1956 Ferrari took his initial training at theHochshule fr
Gestaltung located just outside thecity of Ulm, West Germany. At
the Hfg he workedclosely with Max Bill and was also influenced
bythe work of Josef Albers and the thought of MaxBense both of whom
were teachers at the Hfg.
In the late 1960s Ferrari was instrumental in de-veloping the
Foundation Studies Division at Vir-ginia Tech that still thrives
today. Ferrari hadpreviously served as an assistant to Bernhard
Hoesliwho developed the Grundkurs at the ETH. At Vir-ginia Tech
Ferrari played a decisive role in the for-mation of a Study Abroad
Program and late in hislife the formation of The Center for
European Stud-ies and Architecture located in Riva San
Vitale,Switzerland, just south of Lugano. He was also oneof the
driving forces in the formation of an Indus-trial Design program at
Virginia Tech.
Ferrari forged with the help of his wife Lucy Ferrari,a vital
Study Abroad program that extended thecampus in Blacksburg to
include many of the greatcities and small villages in Western and
EasternEurope. A didactic relationship was created betweenemerging
young Swiss architects and the school inBlacksburg. This
relationship connected Swiss ar-chitectural culture to the campus
of Virginia Techand with American architectural culture.
Ferrari believed that one could not teach architec-ture without
a philosophy.14 By this he may nothave meant knowledge of classical
philosophy (butthat could not hurt!) but rather that a teacher
mustdevelop a position that has a foundation. Oneshould in a sense
teach what they believe.15 Hebelieved in the idea of exceptions. He
tried throughthe magic of his teaching to prevent the averagefrom
happening. He was able to detect what wasimportant to an individual
student or colleague andheld them responsible for pursuing their
goals.16
He acted as a catalyst that intelligently interferedto develop
and promote the latent talent that re-sides in individuals.17 His
interest was to furtherdevelop and refine their individual
capacities inthought and action. Ferrari taught the person
ratherthan the subject.18 Here the education of an archi-tect took
precedence over teaching the academicsubject of architecture.
He was exceptionally well read in philosophy andarchitectural
theory across a number of languages(German, French, Italian,
English, Spanish and the
-
THE EDUCATION OF AN ARCHITECT 199
four official languages spoken in Switzerland). Hetraveled
extensively and continuously throughouthis professional life in
Europe, Asia, Africa and theAmericas. His teaching depended on a
cultivatedsense of history through direct contact with citiesand
buildings and the emerging contemporary ar-chitectural scene.
Ferrari brought together a highlydeveloped sense of the tradition
represented byEuropean architectural culture along with his
keenawareness of the special sense of freedom thatresided in an
American student.19
Olivio Ferrari received the ACSA Distinguished Pro-fessor Award
from the Association of CollegiateSchools of Architecture in 1990.
Kenneth Frampton,in assessing the influence and impact of
OlivioFerrari, wrote a perceptive and astute piece to markhis
passing that is quoted in part below:
Within the academy, the rarest of beingsare charismatic
teachers, for while teach-ers of all sorts abound, the ones that
aretruly charismatic are few and far between.Olivio Ferrari was
just such a teacheritwas hard not to catch, as it were, his
uniquecombination of wit and engagement, ofmodesty and
self-assertion, veering con-stantly towards the provocative in
orderto reveal to both the protagonist and him-self that flash of
insight that would enableone to proceed.
Homo faber by background, temperamentand formation, but a
teacher, a thinker anda raconteur, by default and vocation,
Ferrariwas open to the play of the mind whereverhe found it.
Above all else Ferrari was a catalyst, a manwho made things
happen, the one who in-spired students, who created schools,
whoforged improbable ties across seeminglyunbridgeable gulfs
He was when all is said and done, the verytectonic soul of VPI;
the school he createdde novo under the leadership of
CharlesBurchard. Star but not a star, known butunknown, a constant
source of energy, amyth; his will be a hard act to follow.20
This is indeed high praise for Ferrari from a distin-guished
teacher, historian and critic. Although itmay appear almost
improbable that a teacher couldbe that good, it is in fact a
strikingly accurate ac-count about Ferrari. The story of Ferrari
once ithas been told will place him in the first rank
ofarchitectural educators of the last 50 years togetherwith
teachers such as Rowe and Hejduk.
CONCLUSION: TEACHING TEACHERS AND THECURRENT REDUCTION OF
SCIENCE AND ART
No comprehensive study exists on the history ofgreat teachers of
architecture or the history of ar-chitectural education. These
histories indeed wouldbe difficult to assemble but by not doing it
we maybe slowly erasing an entire tradition. This paperhas made
preliminary comparative sketches ofthree brilliant teachers who
despite their passingcontinue to impact the teaching and practice
ofarchitecture in profound ways. They and others likethem were
really the teachers of teachers. Rowe,Hejduk and Ferrari used
science and art to formtheir didactic positions. The coherence and
depthof their pedagogical positions suggests that theywere keenly
aware of architectures place in thelarger world of knowledge and
making. How theinstitution of the university comes to
understandscience and art in the near future will to a largeextent
define the site of architectural education.The university as a
place of teaching has some-how allowed science to be reduced to the
mereflow of new information. This has dominated theagendas of many
universities in which architec-ture schools are a part. This flow
has been con-nected to the necessity of funding streams andgrants.
This is what Heidegger explained as thereduction of scholarly
pursuits to research agen-das.2121 Martin Heidegger, Off the Beaten
Track,edited by Julian Young and KennethHaynes,(London: Cambridge
University Press,2002),57-85. See in particular pages 64-5.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
We would like to express our sincere appreciationto Mrs. Lucy
Ferrari who assisted in assemblingthe biography of Olivio Ferrari,
her late husband.She offered us keen insights into a time period
ofgreat intensity and vitality. The educational con-tributions of
Mrs. Ferrari are significant in their ownright and worthy of their
own study. This essay is
-
200 THE ART OF ARCHITECTURE/THE SCIENCE OF ARCHITECTURE
respectfully dedicated to her longstanding and con-tinuing
commitment to architectural education.
Art has on many campuses become an added valueor amenity but not
an intrinsic part of the univer-sity. The future of the art of
teaching architectureis very much bound up with the re-definition
ofscience and art taking place on campuses today.There is a need to
restore the full scope of epistemeand poiesis in a time that seems
too busy to care.A commitment to excellent teaching may be theonly
way to reverse this trend. The education ofan architect as
conceived by Rowe, Hejduk andFerrari may provide us all a measure
of inspirationand energy to teach well.
APPENDIX
Colin Rowe
1920, Born, Rotherham, Yorkshire, England;1939-46, Liverpool
School of Architecture, LiverpoolUniversity (graduated in 1946
after war ser-vice),1945-47, studied Architectural History un-der
Rudolf Wittkower at Warburg and CourtauldInstitute; 1947, Published
The Mathematics of theIdeal Villa; 1952-53, Awarded a
Smith-Mundt/Fulbright Scholarship, Yale University, (studied
withHenry-Russell Hitchcock);1953-56, Lecturer, Uni-versity of
Texas at Austin;1955-56, PublishedTransparency: Literal and
Phenomenal (with Rob-ert Slutzky); 1957-58, Lecturer, Cornell
Univer-sity;1958-62, Lecturer, Cambridge University;1961, Published
La Tourette; 1962-85, Profes-sor of Architecture, Graduate School
of Architec-ture and Urban Design, Cornell University;1969,Founded
the Institute for Architecture and UrbanStudies (IAUS) New York,
(with Arthur Drexler);1970-72, Architectural Association, Taught
inSummer Sessions organized by Alvin Boyarsky;1984, Became a U.S.
Citizen; 1985, Recipient ofthe AIA/ACSA Topaz Medallion for
Excellence inArchitectural Education; 1985-90, Appointed An-drew
Dickenson Professor of Architecture (Emeri-tus), Cornell
University; 1989, Published Ideas,Talent, Poetics;1994, Published
The Architectureof Good Intentions; 1995, Awarded the Royal
GoldMetal of Architecture from Queen Elizabeth andthe Royal
Institute of British Architects;1996, Pub-lished As I Was Saying;
November 5, 1999, diedat age 79, Arlington, VA;2002, Published
posthu-mously Italian Architecture of the 16th Century (withLeon
Satkowski)
John Hejduk
1929, Born, New York City;1947-50, Student atCooper Union School
of Art and Architecture in NewYork City;1947-52, Worked at various
architec-tural offices in New York City, 1950-52, School
ofArchitecture, University of Cincinnati, B. Arch.;1952-53, Harvard
Graduate School of Design, M.Arch., Cambridge, Massachusetts; 1953,
U.S.State Department Fulbright Scholarship for Studyof Architecture
in Italy; 1954, University of Rome,School of Architecture, Rome,
Italy (FulbrightScholarship); 1954-56, Instructor in
ArchitecturalDesign, School of Architecture, University of
Texas,Austin; 1956-58, Worked in office of I.M. Pei andPartners,
New York City; 1958-60, Assistant Pro-fessor of Architecture,
School of Architecture,Cornell University, Ithaca, New York;
1961-64,Critic in Architectural Design, Yale Graduate Schoolof
Design, New Haven, Connecticut; 1964, Gra-ham Foundation Fellowship
for Studies in Archi-tecture, Architectural League Grant,
1964-2000,Professor of Architecture, School of Architecture,Copper
Union School of Art and Architecture, NewYork City; Private
Practice, New York City; 1972,National Endowment for the Arts
Award; 1975,Foundation Building Renovation and RestorationCooper
Union, Municipal Arts Society Award forCooper Union Foundation
Building Renovation, NewYork State Council on the Arts Award for
CooperUnion Foundation Building, August St. GaudensMedal;1975-2000,
Dean, Cooper Union School ofArt and Architecture; 1988, Recipient
of the AIA/ACSA Topaz Medallion for Excellence in Architec-tural
Education;July 3, 2000, died at age 71, NewYork City.
Olivio Ferrari
1931, Born, Langendorf, Switzerland; 1949, Di-ploma,
Professional School Solothurn, Switzerland;1956-1959, Diploma,
Graduate School of Design,Ulm, Germany (collaborated with J.
Albers, MaxBill, and K. Wachsman);1957-63, Worked in of-fice of Max
Bill, Architect, Zurich; 1961, AcademicFellow, University of St.
Paulo; 1961-63, Assis-tant to Professor Bernhard Hoesli, School of
Archi-tecture, Swiss Federal Institute, Zurich;1963-65,Assistant
Professor of Architecture, Auburn Uni-versity; 1965, Assistant
Professor of Architecture,College of Architecture, Virginia Tech;
1966, As-
-
THE EDUCATION OF AN ARCHITECT 201
sociate Professor of Architecture, College of Archi-tecture,
Virginia Tech;1966-70, Chairman, Foun-dation Unit, College of
Architecture, Virginia Tech,1968-1972, Director, Inner College For
Environ-mental Design, College of Architecture and UrbanStudies,
Virginia Tech,1968-94, Director, StudyAbroad Program, College or
Architecture and Ur-ban Studies, Virginia Tech, 1969-94, Professor
ofArchitecture, College of Architecture and UrbanStudies, Virginia
Tech; 1970-76, Assistant Dean,College of Architecture and Urban
Studies, Divi-sion of Architecture and Environmental
Design,Virginia Tech; 1982, Alumni Distinguished Profes-sor,
Virginia Tech; Toy accepted in the PermanentCollection of the
Museum of Modern Art, New York;1983, Excellent Design Award (Gutes
Spiel) forToy Design, West Germany; 1990, DistinguishedProfessor
Award, Association of Collegiate Schoolsof Architecture; 1993-94,
Director, Virginia TechCenter for European Studies and
Architecture, RivaSan Vitale, Switzerland; July 15, 1994, died
atage 63, Carona, Switzerlan
NOTES
1 Please refer to the Appendix that precedes the endnotesfor
brief biographical sketches of Rowe, Hejduk andFerrari.2 The term
science is used in a classical sense to meanepisteme or knowledge.
Invoking this ancient usage al-lows the term a greater scope and
far greater depth thanthe current usage of the term science as in
the phrasemodern science. The term art is used in a classical
senseto mean making or poetry. The Greek word techne maybe a better
word to use rather than art as the Greekshad no word for our modern
term art.3 For the idea of sovereignty in relation to education
see,Walker Percy, The Message in the Bottle, (New York:Farrar,
Straus and Giroux, 1975).4 Obiturary, Colin Rowe:1920-1999,
Architectural Re-search Quarterly vol.4, no.1,(2000): 9-14. See
page 11.4 Personal communication, Prof. Olivio Ferrari, undated.5
Rowe was constructing a ratio of Ideas with Platonictranscendence
and Talent with Aristotelian immanence.These analogies served to
explain the great tendenciesof architectural expression in history
either towards theseparable Idea or Entelechy made present in the
thingand the corresponding predispositions of the mind of
thearchitects.6 Obiturary, Colin Rowe:1920-1999, Architectural
Re-search Quarterly vol.4, no.1,(2000): 9-14.7 Obiturary, Colin
Rowe:1920-1999, Architectural Re-
search Quarterly vol.4, no.1,(2000): 9-14.8 Bart Goldhoorn,
editor, Schools of Architecture,(Rotterdam: Netherlands
Architecture Institute, 1996).The volume contains lectures given at
the 1996 Con-gress of the International Union of Architects in
Barcelona.The lecture by John Hejduk is on pages 7-22. The quoteis
from p.15. This lecture is a wonderful summation ofHejduks position
about teaching architecture developedafter 43 years of teaching.9
The Nine-Square Problem has been widely published.One of the early
publications is in Education of An Archi-tect: A Point of View. An
Exhibition by The Cooper UnionSchool of Art and Architecture at The
Museum of ModernArt, New York City, November, 1971. (New York:
TheCooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art,1971),
7-33.10 Rowe and Hejduks careers intersected first at Texas.The
sense of history that was latent in Hejduks worksuch as the Texas
Houses and student exercises such asthe nine square problem show
the influence of Roweshistorical constructs on Hejduk.11 Bart
Goldhoorn, editor, Schools of Architecture(Rotterdam: Netherlands
Architecture Institute, 1996), 15.12 Charles Burchard was a student
of Walter Gropius atHarvard and collaborated closely with Olivio
Ferrari atVirginia Tech. To paraphrase Frampton, Ferrari made
theschool under the leadership of Burchard. Charles
Burchardreceived the AIA/ACSA Topaz Medallion for Excellence
inArchitectural Education in 1983. The successful and
closecollaboration of Burchard and Ferrari is a model worthyof
further study in terms of the necessary collaborationbetween
enlightened administration and pedagogical tal-ent. This was
evidenced in a series of articles they workedon together published
in the late 60s and early 70s un-der Burchards name. See, Charles
Burchard, A Cur-riculum Geared to the Times, AIA Journal
(May1967):101-05 and Charles Burchard, The Next Horizon,AIA Journal
(October 1973):46-7. The diagrams madeby Ferrari distill almost an
entire pedagogical positioninto the language of architecture and
design.13 Personal Communication with Olivio Ferrari, undated.The
ambiguity of this statement was characteristic of Prof.Ferrari. His
original statement was You cannot teachanything without a
philosophy. Here the emphasis is onhaving a well developed position
that serves as the foun-dation for ones teaching.14 Personal
Communication with Prof. Olivio Ferrari, un-dated. Knowledge turned
into belief becomes the basisfor what one teaches.15 The extent to
which he was able to successfully achievethis in his students and
colleagues is demonstrated in,Ferrari: Portfolio (Blacksburg,
Virginia: College of Archi-tecture and Urban Studies, March 1996)
with an intro-ductory note by Professor Robert Dunay. This was
a
-
202 THE ART OF ARCHITECTURE/THE SCIENCE OF ARCHITECTURE
publication of remembrances from his former students,colleagues
and friends along with images of Ferraris ownwork. For additional
insight into Ferraris thoughts oneducation see, Interview, Dr.
Barbara Brown Schaer, TheUlmer Dialogue, Symposium Hfg, 25 Jahre
Danach,Lehre, Ideologie, Folgen, November 12-14, 1993.16 The idea
of intelligent interference should not be mis-construed. It simply
stands for the active and continu-ous involvement of a teacher in
the work and workingsof a student.18 This highly personalized
approach depended on estab-lishing an educational intimacy. Here
the initial readingthe teacher makes of a students interests,
predisposi-tions and innate capacities helps to fashion a
uniqueteaching approach for each student as well as a commu-nal
dialogue that is bigger than the person.17 Ferrari and Rowe shared
an awareness of the intersec-tion of old and new worlds in America.
For an interpreta-tion of Colin Rowes thoughts on this issue see
the obituarycited above in endnote 6.
18 These partial passages are quoted from, KennethFrampton,
Nachruf: For Olivio Ferrari, WerkBauen+Wohnen, nr.9 (9 September
1994);78.19 Martin Heidegger, Off the Beaten Track, edited by
JulianYoung and Kenneth Haynes,(London: Cambridge Univer-sity
Press, 2002),57-85. See in particular pages 64-5.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
We would like to express our sincere appreciation to Mrs.Lucy
Ferrari who assisted in assembling the biography ofOlivio Ferrari,
her late husband. She offered us keen in-sights into a time period
of great intensity and vitality.The educational contributions of
Mrs. Ferrari are signifi-cant in their own right and worthy of
their own study.This essay is respectfully dedicated to her
longstandingand continuing commitment to architectural
education.
