In the line is hidden the embryo of the house
We are talking with Jeanne Dekkers
 |
| Opening conference "FROM BRIEF TO URBAN LANDSCAPE" Interview with Jeanne Dekkers |
 |
Jeanne Dekkers: I would preface that I would look at the villa differently as a student than I do now as a practicing architect. What I mean is that my experience of such a house cannot be "virgin." Notably, I had just visited the Prague Loos villa shortly before…
So: I was certainly surprised by the entrance. Especially the semi-transparent glass, which gives the impression that the entrance hall is illuminated. The effect is also quite impressive when, after entering the house, you do not ascend upwards as is usual, but descend downwards. By the way - I was wondering if I would like to sleep near the entrance hall. I would probably feel a bit naked…
Nevertheless, the way Mies realized his considerations in the villa is excellent. You cannot help but notice the individual building elements: large walls, door elements, and below the sequences of spaces. The mystery of the house does not reveal itself at once. First, you descend, then you move into a large space, and then the view of the landscape opens before you.
You say you also visited the Müller Villa. Allow a digression: How do you perceive the thinking of Loos alongside Mies?
The Müller Villa represents to me the theme titled How to Build. Or How to Create a House: with traditional methods, with traditional materials and colors. From a broader perspective, Loos appears scenaristic to me. But still, somewhat "old-fashioned." In fact, he unfolds a film about living in a house before you. Or How to Live… Which does not mean openness; on the contrary, Loos says: living means only this and that, and certainly does not mean anything else…
Loos continues to teach you: what a dark ceiling is, what a colored or white ceiling is. He tells a lot about proportions and materials, how a corner is made, how stairs are made, what a space for a man looks like, and what a space for a woman looks like. Mies' house feels more open to me in this regard - and probably simpler. Of course, the most challenging thing is to design simple things.
Could we return to Loos's combination of spaces? You say that he seems scenaristic to you…
Precisely because of his instructive arrangement of spaces. Where you go from room to room and then to another and another… It somewhat resembles Islamic culture as well. For example, in the way space is divided into a male and female world, where a woman can look out onto the street only through curtains…
And if you compare both in terms of their legacy?
I think that - when one looks at the house from a distance in time - Mies is current even today due to his openness or due to his relationship with technology; I will recall, for example, the window lifting system… and due to his relationship to nature. I would rather say that he is even more relevant now. Notice: From the outside, the villa still feels closed, but at the same time, it offers a gateway to the natural scenery; while Loos's villa is truly closed.
Allow me, since you touched on the topic of Loos, to ask for your opinion on the "female" and "male" world of architecture.
I respect the interest of the dean of the faculty of architecture, who aims to inspire hope and motivation for both female students and yet unknown Czech female architects by inviting us - six architects from the Netherlands… But Zdeněk Zavřel and I both know well that architecture always represents both worlds in one sum. A good house is simply neither one nor the other. A good house is both.
ON THE PATH OF DRAWING
 |
Perhaps something like a way of thinking. And also a method of research. Through sketching, I try to analyze the relationships in the object. How people will sit, how they will move in the space; I also examine the construction or the relationships of small and large volumes to small spaces, etc.
Today, architects can solve projects using computers - very fast, probably faster than drawing. Allow the obligatory question: How do you view the rivalry between computer and pencil?
I'm afraid that if you can draw, you are faster. But it is not just about the pencil. In my opinion, architects today often worry more about creating a beautiful computer perspective than thinking about the space. Or about how the chosen material behaves… Whereas, when I think and draw, I can manipulate objects faster and easier. I also remember that when I was a student in Paris, I was drawing the Louvre. And suddenly I see that the left side of the Louvre has three arches - vaults, while the right side has four. But yet the whole appears perfectly symmetrical! I discovered this difference through drawing… And I realized that drawing taught me to see better. I also started to think that when something looks symmetrical, it is probably better not to design it symmetrically. However, I confess that I do not know how to work on a computer.
And how does it go in your office?
Of course, we work in both ways in the office. So when we make perspectives, I sit aside and just give advice. To help you understand me: I perceive that designing on a computer means mastering a very challenging technique. But it is also a lot of work instead of a lot of thinking.
Do you perceive drawing as an obligation?
I do not want to say that I advocate a law to draw by hand… What matters to me is that there must be a more thorough search and examination. The author should be free and not swept up by computer drawing. To go further and deeper. The advantage of the brain is its ability to combine many things. The computer can do that too, but first, you must insert the individual elements into it…
I understand. The brain is in fact also a computer, and the computer is a second computer… While the pencil is a direct link between the computer-brain and the hand.
And it is about the fact that with a pencil in hand, you can solve different floors at one moment… But drawing is actually even more.
Probably also joy.
I sketch as I walk around. Drawing also gives you room to dream. And to create something that did not exist before. Sketching must be filled with feeling but also with knowledge of space and mass. And urban development and architecture. That is what gives drawing its effect and why the line is charged with power. The power to guide and lead the design process. After all, you can already find the essence of the design here. The soul of the building and the vision of the place. Somewhere I write that in the line of drawing lies the embryo of the house.
AT THE ROOTS OF ARCHITECTURAL THINKING
 |
They should think about their role in the future. Today's three-dimensional sketch offers an image of pure reality. Perhaps that is why people today want to buy reality from the computer. They might not even want to build; they do not feel inclined to think about how to construct a house. Because they have the impression that the architect is there only to make pictures. The architect is simply something like a producer of images. And not a producer of houses…
Students should simply realize that the computer is today’s fashion. It is also fashionable to create beautiful houses. Houses beautiful from the outside. Simply as if printed from a computer printer… For me, however, architecture is also a way of construction. That is how the house is made. But when you sometimes look at such a beautiful house from the inside and observe how it is constructed, it can sometimes be a quite pitiful sight…
And what about the architectural concept? What do you consider typical or "trendy" in the current Dutch scene?
In a good way, the trend is probably transparency. Transparency of organization, transparency of life - openness in all houses. You come to school, and immediately you have an overview and can choose the lectures you want to attend and also the people you want to talk to.
It can be assumed that this tendency is a thankworthy media topic… What else do you discuss in the Netherlands?
If you ask about broader discussions at home, they focus, among other things, on the relationship between traditional versus modern. And also global versus local. In my opinion, the most challenging thing is to be able to think globally, while searching for local roots... Today, we also have an intense debate in the Netherlands about the tendencies of politicians who often demand a more "traditional" architecture to confirm their connection to "roots." To feel that "home," and so to connect their own life with the traditional life of the country. As a result, copies of past times emerge - often in brick or wood. Thus, they want a new "old" town hall clad in brick. And sometimes a concrete skeleton is born with a "traditional" facade…
Such a tendency probably refers much further - to the strong tradition of Dutch Protestantism… However, in Czech media, we still encounter the popular term: "trend." That is, not only in clothing… What do you think could, with all due respect, be "trendy" in contemporary architecture?
That is a question for me! A trend can be, for example, the passion for collecting all the trends and designs around you. Cities today want to have their own building from Zaha Hadid or from Frank Gehry. The sole goal is a total collection of houses from all the famous architects. And this gives rise to another theme: when you are Gehry, you must always build as Gehry.
 |
I consider the grave of the seven-spotted ladybug to be truly the most poetic response to an architectural assignment that I know of. My oldest daughter, when she was about six, once found a dead ladybug in the garden. She did not want to just throw the little beetle away. And so, with respect for the life and death of one creature, she kneaded a handful of soil over the dead body and then stuck a tiny, pink sun umbrella into it. Thus she created a grave. I spoke about it because this little grave brings us back to the roots of the profession. To the source of design. It reflects it primarily as thinking based on two processes. On the process of respect and on the process of creativity.
Thank you for the interview.
The English translation is powered by AI tool. Switch to Czech to view the original text source.
