Misao u arhitekturi : Velimir Neidhardt · Od projekta Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice, zgrada ‘INA-Trgovine’ ili ‘Croatia osiguranja’, do nedavno završenoga novog

Misao u arhitekturi

: Velimir Neidhardt

Zagreb, svibanj 2018.

Misao u

arhitekturi :Velimir

Neidhardt

Alen Žunić

NakladNici Sveučilište u Zagrebu –Arhitektonski fakultet UPi-2m PlUs

Za NakladNike Izv. prof. dr. sc. Krunoslav Šmit [dekan aF] Tomislav Dolenec [UPi-2m PlUs]

aUtor koNcePta kNjige i UredNikDr. sc. Alen Žunić

receNZeNti Akademik Mladen Obad ŠćitarociAkademik Andrija MutnjakovićIzv. prof. dr. sc. Zlatko Karač

lektUra Mirjana Ostoja [uvodni tekst, biografije, prilozi] — Autorski tekstovi Velimira Neidhardta preuzeti su prema rukopisnom izvorniku, odnosno prema prvotnoj objavi, bez naknadne lekture.

Prijevod Na eNgleskiGraham McMaster, PhD

korektUraMirjana Šah

PrijePisLjiljana Loina-Hohnjec

ilUstracije Preuzete su iz arhive Velimira Neidhardta, a izabrane su prema slikovnoj građi uvrštenoj u publikacijama prvotnih objava; iznimno oprema je urednička ukoliko tekst nije bio ilustriran.

graFičko oblikovaNje klasja&zita

tisak i UveZ Grafički Zavod Hrvatske

Knjigu je za objavu prihvatilo Povjerenstvo za nakladničku djelatnost aF na sjednici održanoj 13. 02. 2018.

Realizirana je uz financijsku potporu: Zaklade HaZUMinistarstva znanosti i obrazovanja rH

Udk 71/72 isbN 978-953-7703-26-4[UPi-2m PlUs] ciP zapis dostupan je u računalnom katalogu Nsk Zagreb pod brojem 000996000

© Velimir Neidhardt [autorski tekstovi i ilustracije]; Alen Žunić [koncepcija knjige, uvodna studija i prilozi]

Zagreb, svibanj 2018.

Predgovor | Preface [Alen Žunić]12 — 17

Teorijska misao u arhitekturi Velimira Neidhardta | Thinking Theory in the Architecture of Velimir Neidhardt [Alen Žunić]18 — 55

1.Arhitektura, urbanizam, prostor —Tekstovi Velimira Neidhardta

Urbanost i kUltUra prostora

Unapređenje životne okoline = unapređenje društva [1972.]60 — 63

Maksimalan angažman stvaralačkih snaga [1973.]64 — 65

Suradnja arhitekata i sociologa u stvaranju prostora Mjesne zajednice [1977.]66 — 69

Razvoj modela u znanstvenoj metodi urbanističkog planiranja [1978.]70 — 71

Stvaranje kompjutorskog jezika za potrebe urbanističkog i prostornog planiranja [1980.]72 — 81

Fenomen grada [1983.]82 — 85

Velika kuća na maloj parceli [1983./84.]86 — 89

Prilozi za problemsku strukturu projekta 'Hrvatska i hrvatski narod' [1991.]91 — 101

Impresije iz Atlante [1993.]102 — 103

Kevin Lynch i Maks Fabiani [1994.]104 — 109

Prema vizijama urbane budućnosti [1996.]110 — 113

Kulturologija obnove i globalno ozračje [1996.]114 — 117

O kulturi građenja i održivom razvoju u nas [2008.]118 — 121 rasprave o zagrebU

Odakle toliki prostorni defekti u Zagrebu? [1971.]124 — 125

O pješačkom i prostornom povezivanju povijesnih i novih dijelova središta Zagreba [1979.]126 — 127

Promet je dio oblikovnog koncepta grada [1980.]128 — 129

Studija 5 [1984.]130 — 135

Individualno u kolektivnom [1988.]136 — 139

O Banu na Trgu [1990.]140 — 141

Urbana rasprava ususret Zagrebu 21. stoljeća [1998.]142 — 151

Deset teza o Zagrebu [2000.]152 — 157

Restrukturacija zagrebačkog urbanog tkiva za 21. stoljeće [2008.]158 — 165

pogled U prošlost

Arhitektura sedamdesetih godina u Jugoslaviji [1981.]168 — 169

Sadržaj :

Arhitektura je izraz kulture [2017.]356 — 359

Majstori arhitektUre

Posjet Arati Isozakiju [1979.]362 — 363

Stanley Tigerman – Moj najdraži projekt – onaj slijedeći [1980.]364 — 373

Drago Galić [1907.–1992.] [1992./93.]374 — 379

Majstori pokretanja [2001.]380 — 383

In Memoriam – Miroslav Begović [2004.]384 — 387

Arhitekt Ante Vulin [2013.]388 — 393

Akademik Boris Magaš i HaZU [2016.]394 — 395

s riječi na djela

O arhitektonskom konceptu Nacionalne i sveučilišne biblioteke u Zagrebu [1979.]398 — 405

Prilog analizi procesa arhitektonske definicije [1981.]406 — 411

Robna kuća u Banja Luci [1982.]412 — 413

Arhitektonske lapidarnosti o ostvarenju nove zgrade Nsb u Zagrebu [1995.]414 — 417

Naša arhitektonska skulptura [1995.]418 — 423

Nova zgrada Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice [1995.]424 — 433

Informacija o Konferenciji arhitekata Jugoslavije i Danima arhitekture [1977.]320 — 321

Profesionalna arhitektonska praksa u sad [1978.]322 — 327

Arhitektura u demokratskom društvu [1994.]328 — 329

Mimo kodeksa komore [1995.]330 — 331

Samovolja u urbanizmu [1995.]332 — 333

Riječ Predsjednika Udruženja hrvatskih arhitekata [1996.]334 — 335

Strukovni principi [1997.]336 — 337

Strukovnost [1997.]338 — 339

Strukovni ispit [1997.]340 — 341

Da, ima nade za arhitekturu [1998.]342 — 343

Javni natječaj – temelj hrvatske arhitektonske kulture [1998.]344 — 345

Odnosi sa svijetom [1998.]346 — 347

Odnosi Udruženja i članova [1998.]348 — 349

Raspon strukovnog djelovanja [1998.]350 — 351

Arhitektura i politika [2000.] 352 — 353

Važnost osnivanja Akademijina Odbora za zaštitu dobara od nacionalnog interesa [2016.]354 — 355

Trideset godina Nagrade "Viktor Kovačić" [1989.]170 — 173

120. godišnjica UHa-e [1998.]174 — 177

Pojam Zagrebačke škole počiva na Iblerovom krugu [1999.]178 — 179

Najtužnije desetljeće zagrebačke arhitekture u 20. stoljeću [2000.]180 — 181

Europski kontekst hrvatske arhitekture 20. stoljeća [2009.]182 — 195

Idilični srednjoeuropski obrasci odrastanja [2015.]196 — 199

projektiranje i Metodološki aspekti

Knjižnica [1984.]202 — 225

Arhitektonsko projektiranje [1993.]226 — 235

Svjetski pokret za prevenciju i kontrolu ozljeda [1993.]236 — 237

Sjaj i bijeda redizajna [1994.]238 — 239

Arhitektonski aspekti sprječavanja ozljeda u stanovanju [1995.]240 — 245

Habitat ii [1996.]246 — 249

Čovjek u prostoru [1997.]250 — 261

teorijska Misao

Arhitekt i budućnost [1968/69.]264 — 273

Domet ili stagnacija [1980.]274 — 275

O karakteru današnje arhitekture [1988.]276 — 277

O zagrebačkoj arhitekturi [1988.]278 — 279

Gledanje na arhitektonska kretanja u svijetu [1988./89.]280 — 281

O odnosu moderno – postmoderno [1989.]282 — 283

Pristup u traganju za prostornim konceptom, arhitektonskim izrazom i oblikovanjem u urbanim tkivima kod sučeljavanja tradicionalnog i suvremenog graditeljstva [2010.]284 — 285

izložbe i knjige

Grad lijepog lica [1984.]288 — 291

Srce usred svijeta [1995.]292 — 293

Identitet i različitost [1996.]294 — 297

Iskaznica arhitektonske profesije [1997.]298 — 299

Grad – Manje estetike, više etike [2000.]300 — 301

Narativni osjećaj prostora [2001.]302 — 303

Zagreb, grad moderne arhitekture [2003.]304 — 305

Idealni grad [2012.]306 — 311

Susreti i sjećanja [2018.]312 — 315

proMišljanja o strUci

iv. kongres saj-a [1971.]318 — 319

bibliograFija [1968.–2018.]636 — 648

biograFija – veliMir neidhardt650 — 653

o aUtorU – alen žUniĆ654 — 655

Povratak palače [1990., Tomislav Premerl]570 — 573

U trbuhu hrvatske pameti [1992., Sineva Pasini]574 — 577

Palača Nsb [1996., Zlatko Jurić]578 — 581

Antroposocijalna teorija projektiranja [1997., Zlatko Karač]582 — 583

Europska kuća [1998., Andrija Mutnjaković]584 — 587

Majstor velikoga mjerila [2001., Krešimir Rogina]588 — 589

O urbanosti grada [2001., Feđa Vukić]590 — 595

Zgrada iNa-Trgovine [2002., Ivo Maroević]596 — 597

Čudesni volumeni u Miramarskoj [2004., Krešimir Galović]598 — 603

Staklena čarolija uMiramarskoj [2004., Katarina Butković]604 — 607

Iz antologije zagrebačke arhitekture [2012., Zlatko Karač i Alen Žunić]608 — 611

Graditeljski iskorak u 21. stoljeće [2015., Tanja Vrančić i Branko Nadilo]612 — 629

Arhitektonski portal Hrvatske [2017., Alen Žunić]630 — 635

Velimir Neidhardt [2011.]520 — 525

Arhitektonski dijalozi [2013.]526 — 531

Arhitekt koji je pobijedio najveće svjetske kolege [2015.]532 — 535

Graditelj aerodroma [2016.]536 — 541

Vizionari [2017.]542 — 545

3.Pogled izdrugog kuta —Tekstovi o Velimiru Neidhardtu[kritička recepcija struke]

Mlada generacija arhitekata – Velimir Neidhardt [1970., Antoaneta Pasinović]548 — 549 Narcis u Trnju [1978., Meri Štajduhar]550 — 553

Prijedlog vrijedan pažnje [1980., Antoaneta Pasinović]554 — 557

Osmišljavanje budućnosti [1985., Tomislav Premerl]558 — 559

Kocka za novo stoljeće [1986., Mirjana Jurišić]560 — 561

Arhitektura snage i moći [1988., Frano Gotovac]562 — 565

Upad u prekosavsku spavaonicu [1988., Mirjana Šigir]566 — 569

Priča o Nacionalnoj i sveučilišnoj knjižnici [1996.]434 — 435

Podsljemenska obiteljska kuća [2000.]436 — 439

Arhitektura Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice u Zagrebu [2007.]440 — 451

Terminal Zračne luke Zagreb [2008.]452 — 471

Croatia osiguranje Zagreb [2011.]472 — 473

Konstrukcija novog putničkog terminala zagrebačkog aerodroma [2012.]474 — 481

Novi putnički terminal Zračne luke Zagreb [2014.]482 — 483

2.Razgovori o arhitekturi —Intervjui

Arhitektura arhitektima [1995.]486 — 489

Potomak dinastije koja je gradila Zagreb [1996.]490 — 493

Ne smijemo bježati od teme monumentalnosti [1996.]494 — 509

Graditelj zagrebačke urbane osovine [1998.]510 — 513

Bez cesta za Europu Zagreb ostaje dijelom Balkana [2000.]514 — 519

Preface—Thinking Theory in the Architecture of Velimir Neidhardt — Alen Žunić

Predgovor—

Teorijska misao u arhitekturi

Velimira Neidhardta

12 13The architectural oeuvre of Academician Velimir Neidhardt, one of the key fig-ures in late Croatian architectural modernism, whose works are also marked by dignified reflections of post-modern, metabolic and high-tech idioms, has often been featured in publications and awarded prizes and commendations. Some of his built works are already counted among the classics of recent architecture in Croatia. From the designs for the National and University Library, the office buildings for iNa-Trgovina and Croatia Osiguranje to the recently completed new Zagreb International Airport Passenger Terminal, building upon his earlier experience as urban designer, Neidhardt has shown an unequalled art in creat-ing architecture on the grand scale. In parallel with his practical architectural work he has gradually built a theoretical oeuvre of his own, of architectural thinking that has developed through various published discussions, academic articles, critiques and reviews, professional manifestos and books. From his first published text (written in 1968) to the present day, during fifty years of work, theoretical discourse has become an essential part of Neidhardt’s cre-ative procedure. The idea of this book is to provide a complete critical insight into the extensive and fertile sphere of his written word. Many of the texts that have by this time become inaccessible, older or lost writings dispersed in periodicals, proceedings and monographs (partially in other countries too) have been gathered together in this book and offered for a new reading in a new context that seemed to me appropriate for the current state of affairs.

Neidhardt’s bibliography contains about a hundred and thirty separate pieces. However, the selection in the book consists of key works and ‘sound’ titles of lasting value. It has omitted some thematically similar contributions, reprints, short newspaper articles and the like, while because of the particular character of the medium, Web and interactive publications like the videoed lectures available on YouTube cannot be conveyed in printed form. Accord-ingly I have included in the book ninety original writings, a critically structured selection of the most important publications of Neidhardt (the selection be-ing inevitably subjective). For a grasp of the whole of the written oeuvre, an exhaustive introductory study has been prepared on the stratification of his theoretical and journalistic activity, worked out in terms of chronology, theme and genre, with appropriate analytical comments accompanying each text given. With this kind of chrestomathy from a prolific author, the intention of the

Preface

Arhitektonski opus akademika Velimira Neidhardta, jednog od ključnih protag-onista hrvatske kasne moderne, čija su djela obilježena i decentnim refleksija-ma na postmodernu, metabolistički i high-tech izričaj, često je nagrađivan i objavljivan, a neke od njegovih realizacija već danas su uvrštene u antologije naše novije arhitekture. Od projekta Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice, zgrada ‘INA-Trgovine’ ili ‘Croatia osiguranja’, do nedavno završenoga novog terminala Međunarodne zračne luke Zagreb, Neidhardt je na tragu svoga ranoga urban-ističkog iskustva pokazao nenadmašno umijeće kreiranja arhitekture velikog mjerila. Istovremeno s projektantskim djelovanjem postupno je gradio i vlastiti teorijski opus – arhitektonsku misao koja se razvijala kroz brojne objavljene diskusije, znanstvene članke, kritike i osvrte, strukovne manifeste i knjige... Od prvoga njegovog objavljenog teksta napisanog 1968. do danas, tijekom 50 godina djelovanja teorijski je diskurs postao neizostavan dio Neidhardtova stvaralačkog prosedea, a ideja ova knjige je pružiti cjeloviti kritički uvid u tu opsežnu i plodnu sferu njegove pisane riječi. Brojni danas već nedostupni, stariji ili zagubljeni tekstovi rasuti u periodičkim, zborničkim i monografijskim publikacijama (dijelom i u inozemstvu) u ovoj su knjizi objedinjeni i ponuđeni za novo čitavanje u novom sadržajnom kontekstu koji mi se činio prikladan za današnji trenutak.

Neidhardtova bibliografija broji oko 130 tekstova, no u knjizi je izbor sužen na ključne radove i ‘čvrste’ naslove trajne vrijednosti. Izostavljeni su, naime, neki tematski slični prilozi, pretisci, kraći novinski članci i sl., a zbog specifično-ga karaktera medija nisu mogle biti uvrštene ni objave na web-u te interak-tivne publikacije, poput autorovih video-predavanja objavljenih na YouTube platformi koje je nemoguće prenijeti u tiskanom obliku. Stoga sam u knjigu uvrstio 90 autorskih tekstova kao kritički strukturiranu selekciju najvažnijih Neidhardtovih objava (izbor je nužno subjektivan), a za uvid u cjelinu pisanog opusa pripremljena je iscrpna uvodna studija o stratifikaciji njegova teorijskog i publicističkog djelovanja elaborirana dijakronijski, tematski i žanrovski, da-kako s odgovarajućim analitičkim komentirama uz svaki navedeni tekst. Kroz svojevrsnu hrestomatiju jednoga plodnog autora knjigom se na posredni način želi dokumentirati stanje teorijske misli u našoj arhitektonskoj publicistici tije-kom proteklih nekoliko desetljeća u kojima je Neidhardt pišući i projektirajući bio aktivan sudionik, a često i pokretač naprednih, inovativnih ideja na našoj

Predgovor

14 15

Predgovor / Preface

book is in an indirect way to document the state of theoretical thinking in our architectural journalism during the last several decades, in which Neidhardt, writing and designing, was an active contributor to and very often the initiator of advanced and innovative ideas in the professional scene in this country. Information about the texts has been collected partially from the personal files of the author and published bio-bibiliographic data in encyclopaedias and similar editions, backed up with facts gleaned from bibliographic data-bases: the NUl digital catalogue, the crosbi data base, the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts Library and so on). In addition, professional periodicals have been systematically checked. Neidhardt’s texts have on the whole been solo performances, only a few having been jointly written, as has been the case with, for example, the presentation of co-authored designs (marked separately in the bibliography).

The partial reduction in the number of Neidhardt’s own texts in the struc-ture of the book has made room for a separate section that includes some ten interviews that in the leisurely interview form present the ideas and thoughts of Velimir Neidhardt in a lively and interesting manner closer to a wide circle of readers. This then rounds off to a hundred the collection of papers included in the book; in addition, there are a score of twenty selected pieces by distinguished critics and theorists who have written of Neidhardt’s works, so that through the ‘retrospective method’ (which needs no comment) the evaluative sequence of his positioning in Croatian architecture and urban design can be followed anew.

The central and biggest section of the book consists of Neidhardt’s own original texts, structured thematically into nine key units, which marked his professional and theoretical activities. The first two sections Urbanity and the culture of space and Discussions about Zagreb, which are mainly focused on urban design, originated from the period of Neidhardt’s many years of work in the Urbanistic Institute of Croatia. Units with architectural colouring – Look at the past, Architectural designing and methodological aspects and the complementary chapter Theoretical thinking – show the author’s skill in han-dling a broad spectrum of themes ranging from practical aspects of creative activity to historiographic and philosophical and theoretical investigations of architecture. In three more units, Exhibitions and books, Reflections about the profession and Masters of architecture, Neidhardt is inclined towards current ‘details’, events and phenomena in Croatian architecture, when in short forms he shows a committed stance towards the current condition in the profession, with several personal texts about the grand old men of architecture and about his own personal exemplars. And finally, the concluding section From words to works brings together a capacious set of texts in which Neidhardt directly, through authorial explication and analysis of his own designs, demonstrates the transition from theory into practice. A convincing theoretical discourse stems from the personal experience of a practicing architect, one that is both the ground and the consequence of his academic interpretations that as professor he has transferred to generations of Architecture Faculty students.

The pieces in each of the thematic sections are arranged in chronological order, the year of writing being given alongside the title, to enable the intel-

misao U arHitektUri: velimir NeidHardt

strukovnoj sceni. Podaci o tekstovima prikupljeni su dijelom iz osobne arhive autora i objavljenih bio-bibliografskih podataka u enciklopedijskim i drugim izdanjima, a upotpunjeni su prema faktografiji iz relevantnih bibliografskih baza (digitalnog kataloga NSK, baze CROSBI, Knjižnice HAZU i dr.), te sus-tavnim pregledom strukovne periodike. Neidhardtovi su tekstovi uglavnom samostalna pisana djela, a suautorski su tek u manjem dijelu, primjerice kada je riječ o prezentaciji zajedničkih projekata (što je u bibliografskom popisu posebno navedeno).

Djelomična redukcija broja autorskih tekstova u strukturi je knjige otvorila prostor da se u zasebnoj cjelini donese i deset intervjua koji s ležernijom, razgovornom formom ideje i misli Velimira Neidhardta prezentiraju na živ i zanimljivi način blizak širem krugu čitatelja. To ovu zbirku autorovih radova uvrštenih u knjigu u konačnici zaokružuje na sto, uz što je u publikaciju uključe-no i dvadeset izabranih tekstova uglednih kritičara i teoretičara koji su pisali o Neidhardtovim djelima, kako bi se ‘metodom retrospekcije’ (kojoj nije potreban komentar) iznova mogao pratiti valorizacijski slijed njegova pozicioniranja u hrvatskoj arhitekturi i urbanizmu.

Središnji i najveći blok knjige donosi Neidhardtove autorske tekstove tem-atski strukturirane u devet ključnih cjelina koje su obilježile njegovo strukovno i teorijsko djelovanje. Prve dvije dionice Urbanost i kultura prostora te Rasprave o Zagrebu s dominatno urbanističkim fokusom tekstova, svoje ishodište nalaze u razdoblju Neidhartova dugogodišnjeg djelovanja u Urbanističkom institutu Hrvatske. Arhitektonski obojene cjeline – Pogled u prošlost, zatim Projektiranje i metodološki aspekti te komplementarno poglavlje Teorijska misao – pokazuju autorovo vješto baratanje širokim spektrom tema u rasponu od praktičnih aspekata stvaralačkog djelovanja, do historiografskog i filozofsko-teorijskog propitivanja arhitekture. Potom u trima cjelinama – Izložbe i knjige, Promišljanja o struci i Majstori arhitekture – Neidhardt inklinira ka aktualnim ‘detaljima’, događanjima i pojavama u našoj arhitekturi, gdje kratkim formama pokazuje angažirani stav prema ‘stanju trenutka’ u struci, uz nekoliko intimnih tekstova o doajenima i vlastitim uzorima u arhitekturi. I na posljetku, zaključna dionica S riječi na djela, objedinjava opsežan set tekstova u kojima Neidhardt neposred-no, kroz autorske eksplikacije i analizu vlastitih projekata demonstrira prijelaz ‘iz teorije u praksu’, gdje se iz osobnog iskustva djelatnog arhitekta razvija uvjerljivi teorijski diskurs kao podloga (pa i posljedica!) njegovih akademskih tumačenja koja je kao profesor prenosio brojnim generacijama studenata Arhitektonskog fakulteta.

Radovi unutar svakog od navedenih tematskih blokova složeni su kronološki (s označenom godinom uz naslov) kako bi se pregledno mogla pratiti misaona geneza i razvoj Neidhardtovih znanstvenih i stručnih preokupacija u određenim etapama karijere. Svi su tekstovi dosljedno preuzeti prema izvorniku, kao doku-ment i trag vremena u kojem su nastali, bez naknadnog lektoriranja ili uredničk-og ujednačavanja tekstova, načina pisanja referenci (koji su raznoliki) i potpisa ilustracija. Radovi koji su prvotno bili objavljeni na engleskom ili njemačkom jeziku ovdje su donešeni na hrvatskom, kako bi se lakše pratio ukupan tijek misli kroz knjigu. Sam autor je tek minimalno neke tekstove osuvremenio, odnosno

16 17

misao u arhitekturi: velimir neidhardt

lectual genesis and development of Neidhardt’s academic and professional preoccupations in the given phases of his career to be the more easily followed. All texts have been taken directly from the original sources, as documents and traces of the time in which they were written, without any subsequent copy editing or standardisation of the writing, the manner of writing references (which is diverse) or the list of illustrations. Works originally published in English or German have been given in Croatian, for the easier following of the overall flow of thought through the book. The author himself has just minimally brought some of the texts up to date, and the editors have occasionally in the case of newspaper articles and interviews left out unnecessary parts of the journalistic apparatus in the form of subtitles, snippets and highlighted quotes. Most of the texts are accompanied by illustrations from the original sources (functional drawings, diagrams, documentary photographs), while just occasionally, replacement images of better quality have been used instead of the poor or absent illustrations of the originals. Because the book has a theoretical nature, the emphasis being primarily on the textual, sometimes the number of illustrations has had to be cut. For ease of reading, the texts are not overburdened with bibliographic data about original publication, but a bibliographic summation of the whole of the author’s written oeuvre is given at the end.

Finally it has to be stated that apart from republications of the essential or classic Neidhardt texts, the book also holds twenty new and previously unpublished works, which to a great extent gives the monograph a dimension of originality and first appearance, of a new work, and not only a compilation of existing flowers. This capacious volume is meant to appeal in its diversity of contributions not only to the architecture profession but to the general arts public interested in issues of architecture, urban planning and design and the culture of space; nevertheless, there will also be reading matter that students and PhD candidates will also recognise as useful, finding here inspiring topics and exemplary methodological assays – how to write about architecture and urban design and planning.

Predgovor / Preface

približio današnjem trenutku i mladim generacijama, a urednički su ponegdje kod novinskih članaka i intervjua izostavljeni nepotrebni dijelovi ‘žurnalističke’ opreme u podnaslovima, antrfileima i izdvojenim citatima. Većinu tekstova prate ilustracije iz izvornih objava (funkcionalni crteži, dijagrami, dokumen-tarne fotografije), dok su iznimno umjesto loših reprodukcija ili neilustriranih članaka ponegdje uvrštene nove i zamjenske kvalitetnije slike. Uzimajući u obzir teorijski karakter knjige gdje je naglasak primarno na tekstu, ponegdje je broj ilustracija morao biti reduciran. Tekstovi, zbog lakoće čitanja, nisu opterećeni bibliografskim podacima o prvotnim objavama, već je sumarna bibliografija cijelog autorovog pisanog opusa navedena na kraju knjige.

Na koncu valja istaknuti da je osim republikacije najbitnijih ‘klasičnih’ Nei-dhardtovih tekstova u ovu knjigu uvršteno i čak 20 novih, do sad neobjavljenih radova, što monografiji umnogome daje dimenziju izvornosti i nekih prvih objava – dakle novog djela, a ne samo zbornika hrestomatijskih atributa! Raznolikošću priloga ova opsežna knjiga ne obraća se samo struci, već i široj kulturnoj jav-nosti zainteresiranoj za probleme arhitekture, urbaniteta i kulture prostora, no korisno štivo u njoj će zasigurno prepoznati i studenti, osobito doktorandi koji će ovdje naći inspirativne teme i uzorne metodološke oglede – kako pisati o arhitekturi i urbanizmu.

18 19

Thinking Theory in the Architecture of Velimir Neidhardt

For selective biographies of Velimir Neidhardt, see: t. Pl. (1995), Neidhardt, Velimir, in: En-ciklopedija hrvatske umjetnosti [ed. domljaN, Ž.], 1: 626-627, lZ ‘Miroslav Krleža’, Zagreb; *** (1997), Velimir Neidhardt, in: Tko je tko u hrvatskoj arhitekturi [ed. rogiNa, k.]: 302–303, UHa: Biblioteka Psefizma, Zagreb. An updated biography is found in the Web edition of Hrvatska enciklopedija, Leksikografski zavod: http://www.enciklopedija.hr/Natuknica.aspx?ID=43284 [1. 1. 2018.]. Segmental depictions of Neidhardt’s work in the context of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Urbanistic Institute of Croatia, Architecture Faculty and his own architecture practice will be quoted in relevant places in the continuation of the article.In the Neidhardt student generation, in which he was intellectually and creatively formed, that from 1962 to 1967, as future architects, among the 86 graduates of 1967 there is a very reputable list of names that later on were prominent in the profession: Vladimir Bedenko, Slavko Dakić, Borislav Doklestić, Duško Dropulić, Marijan Hržić, Ivan Juras, Krešimir Kasanić, Ljerka Lulić, Marina Matulović (Dropulić), Boris Morsan, Jasna Nosso, Dražen Posavec, Jerko Rošin, Milan Šosterič, Igor Toš and others [Knjiga diplomanata Arhitektonskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, 1967.]. The many works mentioned in this introduction will not be cited in full in the notes, since the names and years quoted in the text can be linked with the summary bibliography in the appendix

1 –

2 –

3 –

On the international as on the Croatian architectural scene, Academician Velimir Neidhardt (Zagreb, 1943)1 has long been known as consummate architectural designer and creator of some of the most important Zagreb urban landmarks – keystones in the image of the city of the modern age. No sooner had he graduated from the Architecture Faculty (in 1967)2 than his creative potential was spotted by Drago Galić, with whom Neidhardt rounded off his professional and artistic training in the celebrated Master Workshop (1968–1970), in which he first started taking part in open architectural and planning competitions.

— Professional Reception and Positive Criticism

Some of the most prominent names in the architectural theory and professional criticism of this country have written of his work in architectural design. In an early, formative presentation, he was introduced by Antoaneta Pasinović in the article Younger Generation of Architects (1970)3 , referring to the importance of Galić’s influence and anticipating the successes of Neidhardt’s career – “Al-though this is an architecture and a creativity that are just beginning to give

Na hrvatskoj, ali i međunarodnoj arhitektonskoj sceni akademik Velimir Neid-hardt (Zagreb, 1943.)1 odavno se etablirao kao vrstan projektant i autor nekih od najznačajnijih zagrebačkih urbanih repera – ključnih dominanta u slici grada novoga doba. Već po završetku studija na Arhitektonskom fakultetu (1967.)2 njegov kreativni potencijal prepoznao je akademik Drago Galić, kod kojega se stručno i umjetnički usavršavao u znamenitoj Majstorskoj radionici (1968.-1970.), gdje Neidhardt i započinje svoja prva sudjelovanja na javnim urbanističko-arhitektonskim natječajima.

— Recepcija struke i afirmativna kritika

O vrijednosti njegova projektantskog djela pisala su neka od najistaknutijih imena naše arhitektonske teorije i strukovne kritike. Tako ga je već u ranim formativnim godinama predstavila Antoaneta Pasinović u tekstu Mlada gene-racija arhitekata (1970.)3 navodeći važnost Galićeva utjecaja i anticipirajući uspješnu Neidhardtovu karijeru: „Iako se radi o arhitekturi i stvaralaštvu koje tek oblikuje svoju izražajnu samostalnost, valja konstatirati da kroz suradništvo

Teorijska misao u arhitekturi Velimira Neidhardta

Selektivne biografije Velimira Neidhardta v.: T. PL. (1995.), Neidhardt, Velimir, u: Enciklopedija hrvatske umjetnosti [ur. domljaN, Ž.], 1: 626–627, lZ „Miroslav Krleža”, Zagreb; *** (1997.), Velimir Neidhardt, u: Tko je tko u hrvatskoj arhitekturi [ur. RogiNa, K.]: 302–303, UHa: Biblioteka Psefizma, Zagreb. Ažuriranu biografiju donosi web-izdanje Hrvatske enciklopedije Leksikografskog zavoda: http://www.enciklopedija.hr/Natuknica.aspx?id=43284 [1. 1. 2018.]. Segmentni prikazi Neidhardtova djelovanja u sklopu HaZU, Urbanističkog instituta Hrvatske, Arhitektonskog fakulteta ili vlastita projektantskog ureda publicirani su u opširnijim knjižnim publikacijama koje će biti citirane na odgovarajućim mjestima u nastavku teksta.U Neidhardtovoj studijskoj generaciji, u okruženju u kojem se intelektualno i kreativno formirao 1962.–1967. kao budući arhitekt, među 86 diplomanata 1967. nalazimo doista respektabilan popis imena poslije afirmiranih u struci, poput: Vladimira Bedenka, Slavka Dakića, Borislava Doklestića, Duška Dropulića, Marijana Hržića, Ivana Jurasa, Krešimira Kasanića, Ljerke Lulić, Marine Matulović (Dropulić), Borisa Morsana, Jasne Nosso, Dražena Posavca, Jerka Rošina, Milana Šosteriča, Igora Toša i dr. [Knjiga diplomanata Arhitektonskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, 1967.] Brojni radovi koji se spominju u ovome uvodniku neće se u bilješkama cjelovito citirati jer su naslovi i godine navedeni u tekstu dostatna poveznica sa sumarnom bibliografijom u prilogu knjige.

1 –

2 –

3 –

20 21

Teorijska misao u arhitekturi Velimira Neidhardta/ Thinking Theory in the Architecture of Velimir Neidhardt

shape to an expressive independence of their own, it has to be remarked that through involvement in the Master Workshop of Professor Galić, we can expect architects with very serious and thoroughgoing approaches to the analysis of the technological functioning of space. It is up to them to enlarge upon this seriousness and turn it into a formal and expressive quality, since it is actually the formal structures that materially express the value of the spatial dimension of both architecture and urban form”.

His very well received built structures were later written of by critical au-thorities like art historian Ivo Maroević and architectural theoretician Tomislav Premerl, who in the text Return of the Palace (1990) points out the great accom-plishments of the architect’s buildings – “Neidhardt’s building for iNa-Trgovina is a work for our new period of building, it is an interpreter of his many views of architectural creativity, but it is at the same time so much his own that it is likely to remain a striking sign of thought and of creative capacity, which means that in its very appearance, the summation of all of its values, it has taken a high-quality step forward in our recent architecture. In my opinion, it is worth highlighting this building as an intellectual and creative high point of our current architectural moment, for even today it is opening itself up to us as a possible future, as a work the values of which will endure”. In a very suggestive article entitled Architecture of Strength and Power (1998) prompted by the completion of the iNa-Trgovina building, architect Frano Gotovac without any hesitation attributed the quality of permanence to this production. In a conclusion, he particularly praised the architect’s handling of the façade: “With his façade on the theme of the strong ‘griddle’ that appears here as a marked architectural feature, [Neidhardt] achieves a remarkable fullness in the cube, subordinating even the character of the transparency of the glazed surface of the façade infills and of the specific superstructure of the roof to the service of this fullness. This fullness in fact gives the structure an unbeatable strength and homogeneity to which the impossibility of guessing how many floors there are (a ground floor and six storeys), either off-hand or by any kind of scrutiny from outside, draws attention to the transcendental features that accompany a true architecture stemming from talent and creative strength”. Later on, Academician Andrija Mutnjaković too was to publish an article about this highly valued building, Euro-pean House (1998) (Vladimir Nazor Prize for 1989), in which he links the origins of Neidhardt’s concepts with the ideas of the Ancient philosophers, Renaissance treatise-writers and contemporary theorists like Christian Norberg-Schulz. He writes a propos the New Zagreb building as follows: “Probably taking his cue from Plato, this lawyer who was wholeheartedly involved in architecture (Alberti) wrote that a house is a city in little. And the iNa building is also a city in little, a little Zagreb, which is why we take so much joy in it”.

An analysis of the numerous reviews and the positive reception of Neidhardt’s built works in the professional and in general in public media outlets reveals that most published are reviews of the building of the National and University Library, that complex which needed almost two decades to go from compe-tition design to built work, ultimately becoming the main accent on the tract of the central Zagreb axis (14th Zagreb Salon Prize for an architectural design, 1979; Vladimir Nazor Prize, 1995, for the built work). The press wrote of this

u Majstorskoj radionici profesora D. Galića, možemo očekivati arhitekte vrlo ozbiljna i temeljita pristupa analitici tehnološke funkcije prostora. Do njih je da ovu ozbiljnost protegnu u formalni i izražajni kvalitet, budući da su upravo formalne strukture one koje materijalno iskazuju vrijednost prostorne dimenzije kako arhitekture tako i urbanističkog oblika.”

Poslije su o njegovim zapaženim realizacijama pisali kritičarski autoriteti poput povjesničara umjetnosti Ive Maroevića i arhitektonskog teoretičara Tomislava Premerla, koji u tekstu Povratak palače (1990.) ističe visok doseg autorove realizirane misli: „Neidhardtova zgrada iNa-Trgovine djelo je za nas novog graditeljskog razdoblja, tumač je mnogih njegovih pogleda na arhitekton-sko stvaralaštvo, ali je u isto vrijeme toliko vlastito da će ostati markantan znak misli i stvaralačke mogućnosti, a to znači da je svojom pojavnošću, rezimirajući sve njene vrijednosti, učinila kvalitativan stvaralački pomak u našoj recentnoj arhitekturi. Po mom sudu ovu je zgradu vrijedno istaknuti kao misaoni i kreativni doseg našeg sadašnjeg arhitektonskog trenutka, jer nam se već danas otvara kao moguća budućnost, kao djelo čije vrijednosti ostaju trajne.” Povodom realizacije zgrade iNa-Trgovine arhitekt Frano Gotovac vrlo sugestivnim naslo-vom članka – Arhitektura snage i moći (1988.) – ovu je realizaciju nesumnjivo trajno atribuirao. U zaključku posebno hvali autorov tretman pročelja zgrade: „Svojom fasadnom temom čvrste „gradele”, što se ovdje javlja kao izrazita arhitektonska značajka, postiže on [Neidhardt] začudnu punoću kubusa, po-dređujući čak služenju ovoj punoći i karakter prozirnosti staklenih ploha bilo kao fasadnih ispuna ili specifičnog nadgrađa – krova. Ta punoća daje zapravo objektu neoborivu čvrstoću i homogenost, kojoj nemogućnost da se naprečac ili bilo kakvom posebnom pažnjom izvana odgonetne njegova katnost (prizemlje i šest katova!) – ukazuje na transcendentalnosti koje prate pravu arhitekturu koja proistječe iz talenta i stvaralačke snage.” O toj visokovaloriziranoj zgradi (nagrada Vladimir Nazor, 1989.) poslije će i akademik Andrija Mutnjaković objaviti tekst Europska kuća (1998.), gdje ishodišta Neidhardtova koncepta povezuje s idejama antičkih filozofa, renesansnih traktatista, pa i suvremenih teoretičara poput Christiana Norberga-Schulza, a o njegovoj novozagrebačkoj palači piše: „Povodeći se valjda za Platonom, onaj pravnik što se svesrdno bavio arhitekturom (Alberti) pisao je da je kuća mali grad. Tako je i kuća iNe mali grad, mali Zagreb, i stoga se njoj silno radujemo.”

Analizirajući brojne osvrte i afirmativni prijam Neidhardtovih realizacija u stručnim i općenito javnim glasilima, očito je da su ponajviše objavljivani prikazi o zgradi Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice, kompleksa koji je od natje-čajnog projekta do realizacije prošao gotovo dva desetljeća dug put, da bi u konačnici postao glavni akcent na potezu zagrebačke središnje osi (nagrade 14. Zagrebačkog salona za projekt 1979.; nagrada Vladimir Nazor, 1995., za izvedbu). O toj kapitalnoj izvedbi (koju uz Neidhardta potpisuju Marijan Hržić, Zvonimir Krznarić i Davor Mance) u tisku se pisalo kao o „ljepotici u Trnju” i „kocki za novo stoljeće”, a Zlatko Jurić u tematskom broju časopisa Arhitek-tura (1996.) posvećenom novoj knjižnici naglašava: „U vrijeme neodređenih zakonskih pravila i bez strukovnih komora u graditeljstvu koje prijeti da posve marginalizira profesiju arhitekta, dovršetak izgradnje palače Nsb-a ima izuzetan značaj. Ostvareno je nesumnjivo veliko umjetničko djelo koje označava pobjedu


22 23


Žunić, A.; Karač, Z. (2015.), Zagreb Architecture Guide – An Anthology of 100 Buildings: 174–175, Faculty of Architecture, University of Zagreb, UPi-2m Plus, ZagrebvUkić, F. (2001.), Velimir Neidhardt. Urban architecture/Arhitektura grada, Neidhardt arhitekti d.o.o., Meandar, Zagreb. This book provides the most complete insight to date into Neidhardt’s work, particularly into the richly documented architectural design oeuvre, but it does not contain more recent works, created in the meantime, like some big competition designs, and the built works for Croatia Osiguranje and the Zagreb’s Franjo Tuđman International Airport.

4 – 5 –

major piece of architecture (designed by Neidhardt in collaboration with Mar-ijan Hržić, Zvonimir Krznarić and Davor Mance) as “the beauty of Trnje” and a “cube for the new century” while Zlatko Jurić in a special number of Arhitektura devoted to the new library (1996) wrote that “[in] a time of uncertain statutory rules and without professional associations in the construction industry, which threatens to marginalise the architectural profession entirely, the completion of the construction of the NUl building is of huge importance. A work of art of undoubted greatness has been achieved, marking the victory of individuality in engagement in architecture as profession”, Jurić in the sequel pointing out the excellence in which the exceptionally extensive and complex brief of the library is mastered, and in particular the theme of its monumentality of appearance in the image of the city.

Other important productions of Velimir Neidhardt too were accompanied with prominent critical presentations in the daily press and in the professional journals. His Zagreb building for Croatia Osiguranje, for example, was dubbed “glass magic”, and, marking its completion, Krešimir Galović wrote one of the best of all articles about Neidhardt’s architecture – Magical Volumes in Mira-marska (2004), building up a well deserved tribute to what is probably the most important piece of high-tech architecture in Croatia, according to my own evaluation in an anthology of Zagreb architecture.4

Also often discussed in the press during design and completion phases was the recently finished mega-complex for the passenger terminal of Zagreb’s Franjo Tuđman International Airport, where, together with fellow designers Branko Kincl and Jure Radić (the latter being the creator of some of the boldest con-structional undertakings in Croatia) he achieved a work that is truly impressive – a complex of a unique synthesis of structural engineering, original architectural visuality and impeccable functionality as well as contextual planning, which with its impressive shape and capacious programme became a new point of reference in Croatian 21st century architecture.

Because of the demands made by and dimensions of all these designs of Neidhardt, Krešimir Rogina in one of his articles justly called him a “master of the grand scale”.

Because by the turn of the millennium Neidhardt had already had a remarkable career in architectural design and produced some of his major buildings, in 2001 Feđa Vukić published a retrospective monograph on the work to date in which in the very title, Urban Architecture 5, in a rephrasing of Aldo Rossi, he joined in this simultaneously conceived unit the two most important parts of Neidhardt’s activities. In the introduction to the book, Vukić, going on


osobnosti u bavljenju arhitekturom kao profesijom...”, pri čemu Jurić u nastavku ističe izvrsnost u svladavanju iznimno velikog i složenog programa knjižnice te osobito temu njezine monumentalne pojavnosti u slici grada.

I druge značajne realizacije Velimira Neidhardta popraćene su zapaženim kritičkim prezentacijama u dnevnom tisku i strukovnim glasilima pa će tako njegova zagrebačka zgrada „Croatia osiguranja” poetično biti prozvana „stakle-nom čarolijom”, a povodom njezina dovršetka Krešimir Galović će napisati jedan od najboljih tekstova o Neidhardtovoj arhitekturi uopće – Čudesni volumeni u Miramarskoj (2004.), gradeći zasluženi hommage vjerojatno najznačajnijem djelu high-tech arhitekture u Hrvatskoj, kako sam ga i sam valorizirao u anto-logijskom vodiču zagrebačke arhitekture4.

Često je, još u fazi projekta i izvedbe, publiciran i recentno dovršeni me-gasklop putničkog terminala Međunarodne zračne luke „Franjo Tuđman” u Zagrebu, gdje Neidhardt u suautorstvu s akademikom Brankom Kinclom i prof. Jurom Radićem (potonji je autor nekih od najsmjelijih konstruktorskih pothvata u Hrvatskoj) ostvaruje doista impresivno djelo – kompleks jedinstvene sinteze konstruktivnog inženjerstva, originalne arhitektonske likovnosti i besprijekorne funkcionalnosti te urbanističke kontekstualiziranosti, koji će svojom dojmljivom formom, ali i opsežnim programom postati novi reper hrvatske arhitekture 21. stoljeća.

Upravo zbog zahtjevnosti i dimenzija svih spomenutih Neidhardtovih pro-jekata, Krešimir Rogina će ga u jednom od svojih tekstova s pravom nazvati „majstorom velikog mjerila”.

S obzirom na to da je već do prijelomnice milenija Neidhardt ostvario za-vidnu projektantsku karijeru i realizirao neke od svojih kapitalnih zgrada, Feđa Vukić 2001. objavljuje retrospektivnu monografiju o njegovu dotadašnjem opusu, u kojoj već u naslovu Arhitektura grada5, parafrazirajući Alda Rossija, u simultano promišljanu cjelinu spaja dvije najvažnije sfere Neidhardtova djelo-vanja. U uvodu knjizi Vukić (nastavljajući Mutnjakovićevu misao o zgradi iNa-e) ispravno zaključuje: „U tom smislu isticanja urbanih ili čak urbanomorfnih kvaliteta trebalo bi pristupiti i arhitekturi Velimira Neidhardta, u kojoj je na osobit način, čak i doslovno, sintetizirano iskustvo različitih kultura i jedinstvena sklonost prema projektima bogatog programa i naglašene urbane dinamike. Kad kažem dinamike, mislim upravo na ono što njegove projekte čini „gradom u malom mjerilu”, a što se tijekom triju desetljeća iskazivalo djelovanjem na dva paralelna plana. Retrospekcija dosad izvedenih projekata, naime, ukazuje na dvije osnovne autorske preokupacije u Neidhardtovoj arhitekturi, na zamašne arhitektonsko-urbanističke zahvate i pojedinačne objekte u urbanoj matrici.”

Žunić, A.; karač, Z. (2015.), Zagreb Architecture Guide – An Anthology of 100 Buildings: 174–175, Faculty of Architecture University of Zagreb, UPi-2m Plus, ZagrebvUkić, F. (2001.), Velimir Neidhardt. Urban architecture / Arhitektura grada, Neidhardt arhitekti d.o.o., Meandar, Zagreb. Ova knjiga donosi dosad najcjelovitiji uvid u Neidhardtovo djelovanje, osobito u bogato dokumentiran projektantski opus, no ne sadrži novija, u među-vremenu nastala djela poput nekih velikih natječajnih projekata, realiziranih zgrada „Croatia osiguranja” i putničkog terminala Međunarodne zračne luke Zagreb.

4 – 5 –

24 25

Although the first Neidhardt text was published in ČIP in 1969, in the author’s own words, he wrote it while doing military service at the end of 1968, and it should be so dated. A complete biography of the written works of Velimir Neidhardt in the last fifty years is to be found at the end of this book, as a well as a list of select interviews and texts of other authors who have dealt with his work.

6 –

from Mutnjaković’s thoughts about the iNa building) justly concluded “From this point of view, of highlighting the urban, even the urbanomorphic qualities, one should address the architecture of Velimir Neidhardt, in which he has in a very distinct manner, literally even, synthesised the experience of different cultures and a unique fondness of designs rich in programme and of marked urban dynamics. When I say dynamics, I am thinking actually of what makes his designs “a city on a smaller scale”, which has been expressed over three decades by work on two parallel planes. A retrospective look at designs built so far, that is, indicates two basic creative preoccupations in Neidhardt’s archi-tecture – overarching architectural and urban design operations and individual structures in an urban network.”

— To the written word

But along with Neidhardt’s prolific activity as a designer, of which much has been published, and which is accordingly well known, his written word has remained in a discreet intellectual niche, his theoretical contribution to architecture and urban planning in his academic and specialised papers – more than a hundred of them published in domestic and foreign journals, proceedings and books since 1968.6 The degree of importance Neidhardt attaches to the interdependence of practice and theory in the deepest sense, in which one cannot exist without the other, was best described in the paper Devising the future (1985) by Tomislav Premerl: “Velimir Neidhardt is an architect and urban designer and planner who has often not been content only with the practice of designing and building, and who has analysed and studied his ideas, either independently or in teamwork, exploring the expressive resources that he wished to handle, proving them to himself with his own theory that he understood through active work”.

The theoretical works that Neidhardt continues to publish are diverse in genre and reveal his resourcefulness in a broad spectrum of textual involvement with architecture – interviews, short forms such as prefaces, articles about his own personal preoccupations in architecture and planning, reviews of books, exhibitions and the oeuvres of other architects, as well as serious specialised contributions, research studies and finally the essential reading of academic books about space and the methods of planning and designing.

The whole of Neidhardt’s work, both theoretical and journalistic, could be followed chronologically, in terms of decades, or fixed temporal phases, where in rough outlines it might be possible to identify the core features around which his versatility developed – for example, in his dealing with the themes of urban design, the culture of space, the planning of Zagreb, theoretical considerations and historical retrospectives about Croatian architecture, as well as committed articles about the organisation of and associations in the Croatian architectural


— K pisanoj riječi

Međutim, uz Neidhardtovo plodno projektantsko djelovanje, o kojem je mnogo toga objavljeno pa je stoga i dobro poznato, u diskretnoj je intelektualnoj „niši” ostala njegova pisana riječ, teorijski doprinos arhitekturi i urbanizmu u znan-stvenoistraživačkim i stručnim radovima – više od stotinu njih publiciranih u domaćim i inozemnim časopisima, zbornicima i knjigama od 1968. do danas.6 Koliku važnost za Neidhardta ima međuovisnost prakse i teorije u onome naj-dubljem smislu riječi, gdje jedno bez drugoga ne postoji, najbolje je u tekstu Osmišljavanje budućnosti (1985.) opisao Tomislav Premerl: „Velimir Neidhardt je arhitekt i urbanist kojem često nije bila dovoljna samo praksa projektiranja i izvođenja i koji svoje zamisli, bilo samostalno ili u timskom radu, analizira i studira istražujući izražajna sredstva kojima želi baratati, dokazujući ih sebi vlastitom teorijom koju aktivnim radom spoznaje.”

Teorijski radovi što ih kontinuirano objavljuje žanrovski su raznoliki i otkrivaju njegovu snalažljivost u širokom spektru tekstualnog bavljenja arhitekturom – od intervjua, kratkih formi predgovora, članaka o osobnim preokupacijama u arhitekturi ili urbanizmu, osvrta na knjige, izložbe i opuse drugih arhitekata, pa sve do serioznih stručnih priloga, istraživačkih studija i napokon do neza-obilazne znanstvene knjige o prostoru i metodama planiranja i projektiranja.

Cijeli Neidhardtov teorijsko-publicistički opus mogao bi se pratiti kronološ-ki, po desetljećima ili omeđenim vremenskim etapama, gdje se već u grubim konturama mogu prepoznati glavne okosnice njegove svestranosti – primjerice u bavljenju temama urbanosti, kulture prostora, urbanizma Zagreba, preko teorijskih promišljanja i povijesnih restrospektiva o hrvatskoj arhitekturi, pa do angažiranih članaka o organizaciji i udruženjima hrvatske arhitektonske struke. Međutim, ovaj uvodni tekst ipak će se vezati za drukčiji narativ. Umje-sto periodizacijskog ili žanrovskog kriterija, genezu Neidhardtove pisane misli promatrat ćemo i pratiti kroz pet važnih odrednica koje su neodvojivo vezane za njegovu osobnost, biografiju i karijerni put – boravak u sad-u i njegove posljedice, teme urbanizma i teorije grada, uporaba računala u projektiranju, pedagoški rad na fakultetu i posebice područje projektantskog djelovanja, simultano potkrijepljenog vlastitim teorijskim diskursom slikovito nazvanim „s riječi na djela”.

— Američko iskustvo kao poticaj razvoju struke

Netom nakon diplome, usporedno s praksom, Neidhardt počinje pisati, i to s ambicioznim pogledom prema naprijed. Već u prvome objavljenom radu Ar-hitekt i budućnost (1969.) razmišlja o borbi protiv ustaljenih ideja koje vladaju tadašnjim svijetom i koje bi mladi u novom vremenu trebali mijenjati. Osim

Iako je prvi Neidhardtov tekst objavljen u ČIP-u 1969., prema svjedočenju samog autora napisao ga je na odsluženju vojnog roka krajem 1968., pa ga tako valja i datirati. Cjelovita bibliografija pisanih radova Velimira Neidhardta nastalih u proteklih 50 godina priložena je na kraju ove knjige, kao i popis odabranih intervjua i tekstova drugih autora koji su se bavili njegovim djelom.

6 –


26 27


profession. But this introductory text will stick to a different narrative. Instead of using criteria of period or genre, we shall follow the genesis of Neidhardt’s written thinking through five important terms inseparably linked to his per-sonality, his biography and the orbit of his career – his period in the Usa, and the consequences of it, the themes of urban design and city theory, the use of the computer in architectural design, university teaching and in particular the area of his design work, backed up at the same time with his own theoretical discourse tellingly defined as “from word to work”.

— American experience as spur to the development of the profession

Just after his graduation, in concert with practical work in architectural design, Neidhardt started writing, with an ambitious forward-looking programme. In his first published work, The Architect and the Future (1969) he considers the fight against the entrenched ideas that then ruled the world that the young in the coming times ought to change. Apart from examples of such practice in other fields, like physics, where in these years the speed of light was being actively investigated, along with some accompanying postulates of Einstein (including string theory, which precisely in the 1960s started taking on discernible out-lines), Neidhardt in architecture too found the rare hero who was pushing back the borders, fastening particularly upon Buckminster Fuller: “This type of man the explorer, the thinker, and examples of other talented champions, propo-nents of advanced ideas, who with their personalities are powerfully tearing down the veils are the secret of the future into which humankind is moving ever more securely, should be an example to us of the work of the intellectual in the contemporary community. The very effort to work in this way would produce results, in the liberation of humanity from the settled, ordinary understandings and forms, and accordingly in the creation of a fertile field for the acceptance and consciously interested implementation of newer and better conceptions in the domain of the prosperity of humanity.” In this article Neidhardt gives a visionary analysis of the relation of the natural structures and development, drawing attention to the supremacy of fibrous natural structures in terms of height, anticipating the application of such patterns of tubes and bundled tubes, with which the highest tower buildings in the world were to be structurally de-fined, such as the Chicago Sears Tower of the constructor Fazlur Khan of som.

It is this desire for progress, to get out of the frame of convictions that bore the burden of the past, that pushed Velimir Neidhardt to America, to study in the world’s leading university, Harvard, where he went as a scholarship holder of what was then the Yugoslav Academy of Science and Arts and the Zlatko and Joyce Baloković Fund. He spent the whole of academic 1974/75 at a spe-cial course in gsd in Cambridge, where at that time Harvard architecture was much influenced by the head of the school, Maurice D. Kilbridge. As well as at Harvard, he spent a third of the programme studying in mit, in the Negroponte rooms, of what was called the Architecture Machine. Thus during this year, Neidhardt became part of an intense educational balloon filled with the world’s leading figures, including Kevin Lynch, Philip Johnson and Moshe Safdie, with


primjera takve prakse u drugim poljima, poput fizike gdje je tih godina bila aktivno propitivana brzina svjetlosti i neki prateći Einsteinovi postulati (pa i teorija struna koja je upravo kasnih 60-ih počela poprimati svoje okvire), Neidhardt i u arhitekturi nalazi rijetke junake koji pomiču granice, posebno ističući Buckminstera Fullera: „Ovakav tip čovjeka istraživača, mislioca, kao i primjeri drugih nadarenih pobornika, zastupnika naprednih ideja, koji svojom ličnošću snažno demaskiraju koprene su tajna budućnosti, u koju čovječanstvo sve sigurnije kroči, trebao bi nam služiti kao primjer djelovanja intelektualaca u suvremenoj zajednici. Sam pokušaj da se ovako djeluje donio bi rezultate u oslobađanju čovjeka od ustaljenih, uobičajenih shvaćanja i formi, a time do stvaranja plodnog tla za prihvaćanje i svjesno zainteresirano sprovođenje no-vih, boljih koncepcija u domeni prosperiteta čovječanstva.” Neidhardt u tome članku vizionarski analizira odnos prirodnih struktura i izgradnje ukazujući na visinsku supremaciju vlaknastih prirodnih struktura, anticipirajući primjenu takvih obrazaca cjevastih nosivih presjeka (tube i bundled tube), s kojima će se strukturalno definirati najviši svjetski neboderi, primjerice čikaški Sears Tower konstruktora Fazlura Khana iz som-a.

Upravo ta želja za napredovanjem, za izlaskom iz okvira vjerovanja koja nose teret prošlosti, Velimira Neidhardta gura u Ameriku prema studiju na najbo-ljemu svjetskom sveučilištu – Harvard University, gdje odlazi kao stipendist tadašnje Jugoslavenske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti, odnosno fonda Zlatko i Joyce Baloković. Cijelu akademsku godinu 1974./75. provodi na specijalnom studiju na gsd u Cambridgeu, gdje u to doba na harvardskoj arhitekturi kao ravnatelj škole djeluje Maurice D. Kilbridge. Paralelno s Harvardom, s trećinom programa sudjeluje i na m.i.t.-u u Negroponteovim prostorijama, tzv. The Archi-tecture Machine. Tako tijekom godine dana Neidhardt postaje dio intenzivnoga edukacijskog balona ispunjenog najboljim globalnim protagonistima – od Kevina Lyncha, Philipa Johnsona do Moshe Safdiea, te studentima iz cijeloga

Graduate School of

Design, Harvard

University, Cambridge (sad / Usa)

28 29

students from all over their world and with all their ideas, in which architecture was combined with the state of the art in science, technology, economics, medicine and law. This experimental setting was a source of later ideas that would enable Neidhardt, after his return to Croatia, to initiate changes in the profession with which the West had been long familiarised. In addition, the American environment and the international milieu of Harvard stirred him to write about the established architects of the time – about Arata Isozaki, for example, whom he visited in 1979, and about whom he said: “Isozaki is a typical exclusivist, seeking his own path. He has no wish to start off a new trend or idea about the direction of architecture; neither post-metabolism, nor eclec-ticism, nor imitation of tradition, nor skyscrapers. He agrees with nobody. He is looking for a path somewhere in the middle. Each morning he wakes up and wonders what it might be. If he knew, he would already have set the course...” A bit later, in 1980, he did an exclusive interview with Stanley Tigerman for ČIP; it would be for Neidhardt a career-defining moment particularly in the context of an immediate encounter with the postmodern that in this country had only just been adumbrated. Although postmodernism, as a new kind of approach in architecture, never became fully viable in Croatia, the stay in the Us and the contact with architects like Tigerman enabled Neidhardt to learn from the source of its origins. Afterwards, then, came the discussion On the relationship of modern and postmodern (1989); some of the elements of Neidhardt’s archi-tecture were in practice to balance on this fine line of division between two of the dominant lines of thinking and visuality in the architecture of the second half of the 20th century. Neidhardt’s mindset, combining critical consideration and analysis, must have stemmed out of the American theoretical tradition that he successfully mastered during his studies at Harvard, for on his return he wrote a series of theoretical pieces like Achievement or Stagnation (1980), a reflection on the architecture of the time of multiple truths, which is one of the definitions of postmodernism, where he tested out its ability to shift the borders of the profession: “...today’s situation of pluralism of approach and a general questing in architecture, does not in itself mark a stagnant situation. Exceptional creation is essential, irrespective of whether it comes from stylistic unity or pluralistic diversity. Indeed, a multiplicity of imaginative creative ap-proaches produces greater chances for achievement in architecture. However, the path to achievement is hard, and stumbles are frequent. This on the whole happens when creation does not use the maximum of constructive techniques, or when the shortage of social ambition stifles any explosion of inventiveness or when the choice of constructive techniques holds creativity and finally socially progressive vibrations back. The product is a mediocre architecture, one that has no achievement, stagnation, then.” Subsequently, at the end of the 1980s, he went on with a similar intellectual discourse in writings concerned with topical criticism of the moment – On the Character of Today’s Architecture (1988) and Looking at Architectural Trends in the World (1988/89) while in the mid-1990s he published an article on The Splendours and Miseries of Redesign (1994) in which he theoretically interrogates architectural interventions in the space and asks whether every design is also redesign, for it affects its own immediate context, which existed even before a new structure was put up.



svijeta i njihovim idejama, gdje se arhitektura kombinira s novim dostignućima u znanosti, tehnologiji, ekonomiji, medicini ili pravu. Takav eksperimentalni milje postat će izvor kasnijih ideja, što će po povratku u Hrvatsku Neidhardtu omogućiti da pokrene promjene u struci koje je Zapad već odavno poznavao. Usto, američko okruženje i internacionalna sredina Harvarda potaknut će ga na pisanje tekstova o onodobnim svjetski etabliranim arhitektima tadašnjice – Arati Isozakiju, kojega posjećuje 1979. i za kojega navodi: „Isozaki je tipični ekskluzivist i traži vlastiti put. Ne želi biti pokretač novog smjera ili ideje o smje-ru arhitekture; ni post-metabolizam, ni eklekticizam, ni oponašanje tradicije, ni neboderi. Ne slaže se ni s jednim. Traži put negdje u sredini. Svako jutro se budi i razmišlja, što bi to moglo biti. Da zna, već bi inicirao pravac...” Nešto kasnije, 1980., za čiP radi i ekskluzivni intervju sa Stanleyem Tigermanom, što će Neidhardtu biti jedan od važnih trenutaka u karijeri, posebno u kontekstu neposrednog susreta s kod nas tek naznačenom postmodernom. Iako pos-tmoderna kao nova vrsta pristupa u arhitekturi nikada nije u punini zaživjela na prostoru Hrvatske, Neidhardtu je boravak u sad-u i kontakt s arhitektima poput Tigermana omogućio učenje s „izvora” njezina nastanka. Tako poslije nastaje diskusija O odnosu moderno – postmoderno (1989.), a i neki će elementi Neidhardtove arhitekture u praksi balansirati na toj finoj granici između dvaju dominantnih smjerova razmišljanja i likovnosti u arhitekturi druge polovice 20. stoljeća. Neidhardtov mindset kritičnog promišljanja i analiziranja zasigurno je posljedica američke teorijske tradicije koju uspješno prisvaja tijekom studija na Harvardu i po povratku piše niz teorijskih tekstova, poput – Domet ili sta-gnacija (1980.) kao razmišljanje o tadašnjoj arhitekturi višestrukih istina, što je jedna od definicija postmoderne, gdje propituje njezinu sposobnost pomi-canja granica struke: „...današnja situacija pluralizma u pristupima i sveopćeg traženja u arhitekturi, sama po sebi, ne označava stagnantnu situaciju. Bitna je izuzetna kreacija bez obzira da li dolazi iz stilskog jedinstva ili pluralističke različitosti. Dapače, množina imaginativnih kreativnih pristupa stvara veće šanse za postizanje dometa u arhitekturi. Međutim, put do dometa je težak, a posrtaji česti. To se uglavnom događa kad kreacija ne iskoristi maksimum mogućnosti realizacijskih tehnika, ili kad nedostatak društvene ambicije za-tomi eksploziju inventivnosti, ili kad izbor realizacijskih tehnika koči kreaciju i napon društveno progresivnih vibracija. Produkt je osrednja arhitektura bez dometa, dakle stagnacija.” Poslije, krajem 1980-ih, nastavlja u sličnome mi-saonom diskursu tekstovima aktualne kritike trenutka – O karakteru današnje arhitekture (1988.) i Gledanje na arhitektonska kretanja u svijetu (1988./89.), a sredinom 1990-ih objavljuje i članak Sjaj i bijeda redizajna (1994.), u kojem teorijski propituje arhitektonske intervencije u prostoru i postavlja pitanje nije li svaki novi dizajn ujedno i redizajn jer utječe na svoj neposredni kontekst što je postojao i prije negoli je podignut novi objekt.

Neidhardtov povratak iz sad-a omogućio je domaćoj arhitektonskoj sceni nekoliko velikih promjena kojima će on biti jedan od začetnika. Prvo, u doba Jugoslavije nije bilo lako doći do aktualnih informacija o američkim arhitek-tonskim protagonistima, a posebice o urbanizmu njihovih gradova. Međutim, Neidhardt uz veliku izložbu o arhitekturi Chicaga, održanu u mUo, piše tekst koji već u samom naslovu odaje njegovu opčinjenost tim mjestom – Grad lije-

30 31

While he was at the head of the aca, in 1996, Neidhardt became an associate member of this American association – Associate AIA.

7 –

Neidhardt’s return from the Usa made possible for the local architectural scene a number of big changes, of which he was one of the essential origina-tors. Firstly, in the time of Yugoslavia, it was not easy to arrive at up-to-date information about the leaders of the architectural scene in America, particularly about the urban planning of cities. However, to accompany a great exhibition on the architecture of Chicago held in the Museum of Arts and Crafts, Neidhardt wrote a piece that in its very title revealed his fascination with the place – City of a Lovely Face (1984) – undoubtedly the consequence of his immediate expe-rience of and work and residence in this American town. Immediately after he finished at Harvard, Neidhardt stayed for further experience in the ‘Skidmore, Owings & Merrill’ practice in Chicago (1975/76), a firm that went on with the Mies tradition of the minimalistic rendering of office towers and was one of the prime operators in the era of big architectural practices that, in spite of the huge number of employees and the dangers of a hectic visual expression, kept its architecture recognisable (particularly with built structures in Chicago).

Such a setting let Neidhardt have an insight into the advantages of west-ern architectural practice as compared with our then still socialist manner of operating, and soon after his return he was to publish the instructive article Professional Architectural Practice in the USA (1978), in which he brought out the importance of the process of formation, the value of the term architect in the American tradition and its position in the in the building phase, particu-larly commenting on the “great role played by the aia, American Institute of Architects,7 which architects joined after taking their professional exams and acquiring the title of architect. The activities and appearances of an architect were closely followed, and the consequences of operating below the standards and interests of the Institute of Architects were very severe, both economically and morally.” This idea was to be the seed of the big changes that in the 1990s Neidhardt was to initiate on the domestic architectural scene. He identified the problem with the architectural profession after independence and transi-tion, saw that in spite of the newly created state, the status of architect was not changing: “After the Croatian democratic elections, the expected wave of post-socialist transformation and a kind of liberation of the architectural profession evaded social reality. Indeed, the ten-year curve of the decline of the level of organisation of the profession is continuing and growing stronger. The ever greater parts played by various intermediaries between architect and client, with a huge growth in material costs, devour the value of intellectual work on an increasingly constrained market. The consequences can be seen in the average inability to adjust to the new conditions, in the flight from ar-chitecture, in the departure of the young and resolute, in the vegetation of useful associations and institutions. Not even in the most recent Construction Law are the architect and the architect’s original work mentioned, let alone protected, although what are concerned are the most visible components of the history and culture of a nation in the space. Architects are not very much in


pog lica (1984.) – što je nesumnjiva posljedica njegova neposrednog iskustva, boravka i rada u tom američkom gradu. Naime, odmah po završetku Harvarda Neidhardt ostaje na usavršavanju u atelijeru „Skidmore, Owings & Merrill” u Chicagu (1975./76.), tvrtki koja nastavlja Miesovu tradiciju minimalistički obli-kovanih poslovnih tornjeva i jedna je od začetnica ere velikih arhitektonskih ureda koji su, unatoč golemom broju zaposlenika i opasnosti od hektičnosti likovnog izričaja, zadržali prepoznatljivost svoje arhitekture (posebno realiza-cijama u Chicagu).

Takva je sredina omogućila Neidhardtu uvid u prednosti zapadne arhitek-tonske prakse naspram našega, tada još socijalističkog načina poslovanja, pa ubrzo nakon povratka iz sad-a objavljuje instruktivni članak Profesionalna arhitektonska praksa u SAD (1978.), gdje ističe važnost procesa građenja, vri-jednost naziva arhitekt u američkoj tradiciji i njegovu poziciju u fazi realizacije građevine, pri čemu navodi kako „...veliku ulogu igra udruženje arhitekata aia (American Institute of Architects)7, u koje se arhitekti uključuju nakon polaganja stručnog ispita i stjecanja naziva – arhitekt. Djelovanje i istupanje arhitekata se budno prati, a posljedice djelovanja ispod standarda i interesa udruženja arhitekata vrlo su teške u moralnom i ekonomskom smislu”. Upravo ta misao postat će sjeme velikih promjena koje će 90-ih Neidhardt započeti na domaćoj arhitektonskoj sceni. On prepoznaje problem s arhitektonskom strukom nakon osamostaljenja i tranzicije društvenog sustava, uviđa kako se unatoč novostvo-renoj državi status arhitekta ne mijenja: „Nakon hrvatskih demokratskih izbo-ra, očekivani val postsocijalističke transformacije i svojevrsnog oslobađanja arhitektonske profesije izmakao je društvenoj zbilji. Štoviše, desetogodišnja krivulja pada razine organiziranosti struke nastavlja se i potencira. Sve veći udjeli raznih posrednika između arhitekta i investitora, uz zamašni rast materi-jalnih troškova, proždiru vrijednost intelektualnoga rada na sve ograničenijem tržištu. Posljedice su vidljive u prosječnoj nemoći prilagodbe novim uvjetima, u bijegu iz arhitekture, u odlasku mladih i odlučnih, u životarenju relevantnih asocijacija i institucija itd. Čak ni najnovijim Zakonom o građenju, arhitekt i njegovo autorsko djelo ne bivaju ni spomenuti, a kamoli zaštićeni, bez obzira što se tu radi o najvidljivijim sastavnicama povijesti i kulture nacije u prostoru. Arhitekti nisu značajnije zamijećeni ni u procesu obnove razrušene Hrvatske, iako bi njihova riječ trebala biti prisutna.” U nastavku tog teksta – Arhitektura u demokratskom društvu (1994.) – Neidhardt ujedno i podsjeća kako je sve još uvijek moguće promijeniti, ističe vjeru u arhitektonsku profesiju i poziva na prekid hrvatske arhitektonske šutnje: „Možda bi trebalo početi konsolidaciju osmišljavanjem izvornih odnosa. Vratiti se i ponovno otkriti svijest zadovoljenih aksioma struke koji su pod pedesetogodišnjim talogom nerazumijevanja izvrnuti do apsurdnih dimenzija. Počnimo rasvjetljavati dobre tradicije arhitektonskog poslovanja koje su prethodile ovom polustoljetnom lutanju.”

Budući da je konstanta Neidhardtova djelovanja neprestano isprepleta-nje pisane riječi i prakse, već sljedeće godine i sam poduzima mjere kako bi

U vrijeme dok je vodio UHa-u, Neidhardt je 1996. i sam postao pridruženi član toga prestižnog američkog udruženja – Associate AIA.

7 –


32 33

evidence in the process of the renovation of a ravaged Croatia, although their word should be present.” In the continuation of this text – Architecture in a Democratic Society (1994) – Neidhardt also recalled that everything could still be changed; he reiterated his faith in the profession of architect and called for an end to Croatian architectural silence: “Perhaps a start should be made on the consolidation by devising original relations. To go back and rediscover the awareness of the gratified axioms of the profession that have been distorted to absurd dimensions under a fifty-year-long deposit of misunderstandings. Let us start to throw light upon good traditions of architectural practice that preceded this half-a-century in the wilderness.”

Since a constant of Neidhardt’s work is an incessant interweaving of written word and practice, the following years he himself undertook measures in order to be actively involved in the changes. In May 1995 he was elected president of the Association of Croatian Architects and posed the founding of a Chamber of Architects to the profession as one of its fundamental missions. As well as being president (a post that he held for two terms, until 1999) he was active in writing, and in the aca periodical he published dozens of articles about profes-sional principles, a professional exam, the relationships between association and members, the range of professional operations and, most importantly, as early as these years (1998) wrote about the open competition as a foundation of Croatian architectural culture, something that in our milieu had a long but now practically discarded tradition, one that, however, would soon become an essential practice in the public work of architects, one of the most important forms of the democratisation of competitions with creative ideas. In that year too, 1998, after an exhausting personal battle for the founding of a chamber, he was to write the Communiqué for the Public in which he stated that the as-sociations of architects and engineers had from their assembly of professional associations sent a letter to the Croatian Parliament, to the government and the Ministry of Planning, Construction and Housing. “From the assembly of our professional associations, held on January 31, 1998, in the premises of the Croatian Engineering Association, we wish to convey to your our greetings and expressions of satisfaction with the launching of the procedure to adopt a Law on the Croatian Chamber of Architects and Civil Engineers. We are particularly glad that the revival of the work of the Chamber in Croatia will occur actually in the 120th jubilee of the Club of Engineers and Architects, founded on March 2, 1878, in Zagreb. Looking to the second reading of the Law, the professional associations have adjusted their additions and criticisms and woven them into the wording of the Bill on the Chamber. These supplements are necessary for the working of a chamber in line with contemporary professional practice and internationally adopted standards. By founding a chamber on the basis of a law so supplemented, the Croatian state and the competent ministries will obtain a credible professional partner, particularly in the process of defining laws and regulations, with the objective of an overall advance in architectural designing and building.”

At the same time that he ran the aca and worked on the foundation of the chamber, Velimir Neidhardt successfully represented architects in the Croa-tian Academy of Sciences and Arts, of which he had been elected an associate member in 1990, an extraordinary member in 1990 and a full fellow in 1991,


se aktivno uključio u promjene. U svibnju 1995. izabran je za predsjednika Udruženja hrvatskih arhitekata i kao jednu od osnovnih misija pred struku po-stavlja osnivanje Komore arhitekata. Uza svoju poziciju predsjednika (koju će obnašati puna dva mandata, do 1999.) aktivno piše i u glasilu UHa-e objavljuje desetke članaka o strukovnim principima, stručnom ispitu, odnosu udruženja i članova, rasponu strukovnog djelovanja i, najvažnije, već tih godina (1998.) piše o javnome natječaju kao temelju hrvatske arhitektonske kulture, nečemu što je u našoj sredini imalo dugu, no gotovo ugaslu tradiciju te što će doskora ponovno postati neizostavna praksa javnoga djelovanja arhitekata, jedan od najvažnijih oblika demokratizacije natjecanja kreativnim idejama. Iste te 1998., nakon iscrpljujuće osobne borbe za osnivanje Komore, napisat će i Priopćenje za javnost u kojem navodi kako su udruženja arhitekata i inženjera sa svojega Sabora strukovnih udruga uputile pismo Hrvatskomu državnom saboru, Vladi rH i Ministarstvu prostornog planiranja, graditeljstva i stanovanja: „Sa Sabora naših strukovnih udruga, koji je održan 31. siječnja 1998. u prostorijama Hrvat-skoga inženjerskog saveza, željeli bismo Vam prenijeti naše pozdrave i izraze zadovoljstva s pokretanjem postupka donošenja Zakona o hrvatskoj komori arhitekata i inženjera. Posebno nam je drago da će se obnova djelovanja Komore na tlu Hrvatske dogoditi upravo u jubilarnoj 120-oj obljetnici „Kluba inžinirah in arhitektah”, osnovanog 2. ožujka 1878. godine u Zagrebu. Ususret drugom čitanju Zakona, strukovne udruge su uskladile svoje dopune i primjedbe, te ih utkale u tekst Prijedloga zakona o Komori. Spomenute dopune nužne su za djelovanje Komore u skladu sa suvremenom strukovnom praksom i međuna-rodno usvojenim standardima. Osnivanjem Komore na temelju tako dopunje-nog Zakona, hrvatska država i nadležna ministarstva dobit će vjerodostojnoga stručnog partnera, naročito u procesima definiranja propisa i regulative, s ciljem svekolikog unapređivanja projektiranja i građenja.”

Istovremeno s vođenjem UHa-e i radom na osnivanju Komore arhitekata Ve-limir Neidhardt uspješno predstavlja arhitekte i u Hrvatskoj akademiji znanosti i umjetnosti, u koju je još 1980. izabran za člana suradnika, 1990. za izvanrednog člana, a od 1991. godine je redoviti član, pri čemu je u sva tri statusa biran kao najmlađi pristupnik među arhitektima članovima Akademije.8 Djelujući u HaZU, koje je potpredsjednik od 2011.9, i nadalje je usmjeren k poboljšanju statusa arhitektonske struke, što je vidljivo iz recentnog članka Arhitektura je izraz kulture (2017.). Zauzimajući se za očuvanje naše kulturne baštine, piše proglas Važnost osnivanja Akademijina Odbora za zaštitu dobara od nacionalnog in-teresa (2016.), a usto je glavni urednik Akademijine edicije Hrvatska prirodna bogatstva i kulturna dobra, koja je upravo u realizaciji. Zbog internacionalnoga istraživačkog i artističkog doprinosa arhitekturi Velimir Neidhardt je izabran i za dopisnoga člana Slovenske akademije znanosti in umetnosti (2015.).

O djelovanju u sklopu Akademije v.: *** (1991.), Arhitekti članovi JAZU [ur. Galić, D.], Rad HaZU knj. 437, Razred za likovne umjetnosti knj. Xiv: 174–179, Zagreb; http://info.hazu.hr/hr/clanovi_akademije/osobne_stranice/velimir_neidhardt [1.1. 2018.].Prije preuzimanja dužnosti potpredsjednika Akademije bio je voditelj Akademijina Kabineta za arhitekturu i urbanizam (dužnost koju i sada obavlja), a trenutačno vodi i Upravni odbor Zaklade HaZU, Odbor za zaštitu dobara od nacionalnog interesa i dr.

8 –

9 –


34 35


elected in all three ranks as the youngest ever fellow among architect members of the Academy.8 Working in the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, of which he was vice present from 20119, he was consistently oriented towards an improvement of the status of the profession, as is visible in the recent article Architecture is an Expression of Culture (2017). Advocating for the preserva-tion of our cultural heritage, he wrote the proclamation called Importance of Founding the Academy’s Committee for the Protection of Properties of National Interest (2016); additionally, he is editor in chief of the Academy’s publication Croatian Natural Resources and Cultural Properties, which is currently in the phase of completion. Because of his international investigative and artistic contributions to architecture, Velimir Neidhardt was elected a corresponding fellow of the Slovene Academy of Sciences and Arts in 2015.

— Research as foundation of thinking about urban planning and design

A few years after graduating and the subsequent further studies, in the particular form of Galić’s Master Workshop, the course in Harvard and mit and the profes-sional practice in Chicago’s som office, Neidhardt determined on a continuation of post-graduate education started at the Architecture Faculty at the master’s course Urbanism and spatial planning. He was often to put forward his interest in planning in interviews, and was to publish in committed articles in Vjesnik, Večernji list, Danas and čIP, where he wrote of the physical planning drawbacks in Zagreb, of improving the living environment and accordingly society too, while for the purpose of sensitising the public he published his first critical account of the low quality but relentless development going on in the Adriatic zone. As already mentioned, during the whole of his career, Neidhardt was to test out his thinking and theories in practice, and along with his preoccupations with the themes of the city and spatial culture, after his return from the States in 1976, he began to work in the Urbanistic Institute of Croatia (of which he was to be a part until 1994).10 Along with the dozens of plans on which he was to work and over the years to learn a practical understanding of an urbanistic approach to thinking the city, Neidhardt, supervised by Dr Ante Marinović-Uzelac, was at the same time to submit his master’s thesis The Development of Models in the Scientific Method of Town Planning (1978), the theoretical grounding of and some of the research for which derived from his stay in Harvard. In this study Neidhardt brought into our milieu fresh ideas from American planning schools, primarily through a survey of previous efforts in urban modelling (a case study

For his work in the Academy, see: *** (1991.), Arhitekti članovi JAZU [ed. galić, d.], Rad HaZU knj. 437, Razred za likovne umjetnosti knj. Xiv: 174–179, Zagreb; http://info.hazu.hr/hr/clanovi_akademije/osobne_stranice/velimir_neidhardt [1.1. 2018.].Before taking up the duty of vice-president of the Academy he was head of the Department for Architecture and Urbanism (current duties as well), and he is also head of the adminis-trative committee of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts Foundation, Committee for the Protection of Properties of National Interest, and other things. For his work in the Uic, see: *** (1988.), Urbanistički institut SR Hrvatske 1947–1987 [ed. salaj, m.], UiH, Zagreb

8 – 9 –

10 –


— Istraživanje kao temelj urbanističke misli

Nekoliko godina nakon diplome, potom i specifičnog usavršavanja u Galićevoj Majstorskoj radionici, obavljenog studija na Harvardu i M.I.T.-u, te profesio-nalne prakse u čikaškom „Skidmore, Owings & Merrill” - Neidhardt se odlučuje za nastavak poslijediplomske edukacije započete na Arhitektonskom fakultetu na magistarskom studiju Urbanizam i prostorno planiranje. Zanimanje za ur-banističke teme često će iznositi u intervjuima, ali i angažirano objavljivati u Vjesniku, Večernjem listu, Danasu i čiP-u, gdje piše o prostornim defektima u Zagrebu, unaprjeđenju životne okoline i time posljedično društva, dok u cilju senzibiliziranja javnosti objavljuje i svoje prve kritike o (ne)kvaliteti i nezau-stavljivoj izgradnji u jadranskome pojasu. Kako je spomenuto, svoje teorije i razmišljanja Neidhardt će tijekom cijele karijere težiti provjeriti i u praksi, pa uz preokupacije temama grada i kulture prostora, nakon povratka iz sad-a 1976., počinje djelovati u Urbanističkom institutu Hrvatske (gdje ostaje sve do 1994.)10. Uz desetke planova na kojima će raditi i tijekom godina učiti praktič-no razumijevanje urbanističkoga pristupa promišljanju grada, Neidhardt pod mentorstvom prof. dr. Ante Marinovića-Uzelca paralelno brani magistarski rad Razvoj modela u znanstvenoj metodi urbanističkog planiranja (1978.), za koji je teorijsku podlogu i dio istraživanja formulirao još tijekom boravka na Harvardu. Tim radom Neidhardt u našu sredinu donosi svježe ideje američkih urbanističkih škola, prvo kroz pregled dotadašnjih napora u urbanome mo-deliranju (case-study sjeveroistočnoga Wisconsina), zatim preko razrade triju najznačajnijih američkih pristupa modeliranju (Harrisov, Forresterov i Nber model), dok u zaključku iznosi stajališta o krucijalnim problemima urbane

O Neidhardtovu djelovanju u UiH v.: *** (1988.), Urbanistički institut SR Hrvatske 1947–1987 [ur. salaj, m.], UiH, Zagreb

10 –

Maclaurin Building,

Massachusetts Institute of

Technology, mit, Cambridge

(sad / Usa)

36 37

of Ne Wisconsin), then via an elaboration of three most important American approaches to modelling (the Harris, Forrester and Nber models), while in the conclusion he stated views of the crucial problems of urban analysis of the time and announced directions for future research into the phenomenon of urbanism by contemporary methods of town planning. In addition to this theoretical and scientific dealing with architecture (which continued to be a constant of his interests), in professional journals and other publications Neidhardt published a series of articles on urban design and planning topics, in which he advocated participative architecture as part of urban procedures in which “direct users would always be consulted in the process of architectural designing in which a sociologist too would be involved” (1977). He wrote of the pedestrian and spatial connection of the historical and the new parts of the centre of Zagreb (1979), stressed the importance of traffic as part of the formal concept of the city (1980) and published a study for the reconstruction of the Trnje neigh-bourhood and the organisation of the Sava riparian zone. He reflected critically on Zagreb architecture (1988) and the then current topic of Ban Jelačić on the main square (1990). Still, the most essential article in Neidhardt’s dealing with urban design and planning of the 70s and 80s was The City, the Cradle of the Future (1983), published in the renowned foreign journal Ekistics, in which he concluded his study with a view into the future: “Big cities with their metro-politan agglomerations will tend to the transformation of the rigid hierarchical structure of settlements into a network of generators of information. Each such unit will be specific and constitutively unique. Irrespective of their physical size, the presence of each of these units in the global network will differ according to the degree of the contribution to the creative promotion of human life and universal values. More and more, humanity will testify that the antagonistic perceptions of the opposition of city and region have become extinct forever. At the same time, the crystallising forces of the neo-urban consciousness will be directed towards new, still inconceivable forms of human spatial organisation”.

In the 1980s, Neidhardt started working systematically in academia and joined in the project Research into the Components of Spatial Planning in which the principal investigator of was Ante Marinović-Uzelac, the chairman of the planning department in the Architecture Faculty in Zagreb and an incon-testable authority in the area of physical planning. As part of the work on this project, Neidhardt prepared a section, elaborated in detail, called Research into the Impact of the Anthropo-Social Factor on the Process of Designing a Settlement, which with some extra elaboration he was to work up into a PhD thesis submitted to the Architecture Faculty of Zagreb University, now entitled The Anthropo-Social Factor in the Theoretical Approach to Architectural and Urban Design (1990). In the introduction to this thesis, the author succinctly specified the contributions made by the work: “The subject of this research is the theoretical structure that comes into being from the suffusion of archi-tecture, urban design and social sciences at the intersection of the anthro-po-social context of the user, the methodological context of designing and the physical-spatial context of the built environment. The emphasis is on the anthropo-social context, since it is brought latest into the body of contempo-rary science and the art of designing, and as compared with the other two has


analize toga doba i nagoviješta smjerove za buduća istraživanja fenomena urbanosti suvremenim metodama urbanističkoga planiranja. Uz teorijsko-znan-stveno bavljenje arhitekturom (koja je i nadalje konstanta njegovih interesa), Neidhardt u strukovnim glasilima i publikacijama objavljuje čitav niz članaka o urbanističkim temama, gdje se zalaže za participativnu arhitekturu kao dio urbanih procedura i gdje bi „...direktni korisnici uvijek bili konzultirani u pro-cesu arhitektonskog projektiranja u kojem bi sudjelovao i sociolog” (1977.), piše o pješačkom i prostornom povezivanju povijesnih i novih dijelova središta Zagreba (1979.), naglašava važnost prometa kao dijela oblikovnoga koncepta grada (1980.), publicira studiju o rekonstrukciji Trnja i organizaciji priobalja Save (1984.), te kritički promišlja o zagrebačkoj arhitekturi (1988.) i o tada aktualnoj temi Bana na Trgu (1990.). Ipak, neizostavan članak u Neidhardtovu bavljenju urbanizmom 1970-ih i 1980-ih jest The City, The Cradle of the Futu-re (1983.) objavljen u inozemnom, renomiranom časopisu Ekistics, u kojem elaboraciju zaključuje opet pogledom u budućnost: „Veliki gradovi sa svojim metropolskim aglomeracijama naginjat će transformaciji krute hijerarhijske strukture naselja u mrežu informacijskih generatora. Svaka takva jedinica bit će specifična i konstitutivno jedinstvena. Bez obzira na njihovu prostornu veličinu, prisustvo svake od jedinica u globalnoj mreži razlikovat će se prema stupnju prinosa kreativnoj promociji ljudskog života i njegovim univerzalnim vrijednostima. Sve više i više, čovječanstvo će svjedočiti da tisućljećima stare antagonističke percepcije suprotnosti grada i regije su izumrle zauvijek. Isto-vremeno, kristalizirajuće sile neourbane svijesti usmjerit će se prema novim, još nezamislivim oblicima ljudske prostorne organizacije.”

Tih 80-ih Neidhardt počinje sustavno djelovati na području znanosti i priklju-čuje se projektu Istraživanje komponenata prostornog uređenja pod vodstvom prof. Ante Marinovića-Uzelca, onodobnoga predstojnika urbanističke katedre na Arhitektonskom fakultetu u Zagrebu i neupitnog autoriteta na području pro-stornog planiranja. U sklopu rada na tom projektu priprema detaljno elaborirani prilog Istraživanje utjecaja antroposocijalnog faktora na proces projektiranja jednog naselja koji će dodatnim razradama razviti u doktorsku disertaciju, obranjenu na Arhitektonskom fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, pod nazivom Antroposocijalni faktor u teorijskom pristupu arhitektonskom i urbanističkom projektiranju (1990.). U uvodu doktorata autor sažeto specificira doprinos cijelog rada: „Predmet ovog istraživanja jest teorijska struktura koja nastaje prožimanjem arhitekture, urbanizma i društvenih znanosti na sjecištu antro-posocijalnog konteksta korisnika, metodologijskog konteksta projektiranja te fizičko-prostornog konteksta izgrađene okoline. Težište je na antroposocijalnom kontekstu, budući da je on uveden najkasnije u korpus suvremene znanosti i umijeća projektiranja, te u odnosu na preostala dva nije još sustavno izgrađen kao faktor teorijskog pristupa.”

Nakon obrane disertacije, sa zaokruženim znanstvenim iskustvom i svla-danim svim dionicama teorijsko-istraživačkog prosedea, Neidhardt u sklopu Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti s akademikom Dragom Galićem pokreće projekt Arhitektonski aspekti sprečavanja nesreća u stambenim objek-tima (1992.-1995.), a uspješno provedena razmatranja objavljuje u nekoliko studija, prvotno u informativnom obliku kao Svjetski pokret za prevenciju i


38 39


not yet been systematically developed as factor in the theoretical approach”. After this thesis was accepted, with a fully rounded scientific experience

and having mastered all parts of the theoretical and research procedure, under the aegis of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, together with Acade-mician Drago Galić, Neidhardt launched the project Architectural Aspects of the Prevention of Accidents in Housing Structures (1992-1995), publishing the successfully implemented considerations in a number of studies, first of all in informative guise as World Movement for Prevention and Control of Injuries (1993), related to an international conference in Atlanta, and then in full form as Architectural Aspects of Home Injuries Prevention (1995).

His innovative doctorate on the theme of urban design, his participation in to major research projects and his eighteen-year planning and designing practice in the Urbanistic Institute of Croatia provided Neidhardt with a consummate command of and professional authority in the investigation of the problems of contemporary cities. One of the first public pronouncements on behalf of the protection of urban design in Zagreb was in the articles Self-Will in Urban Design (1995) and Despite the Codes of the Chamber (1995), where, as president of the Association of Croatian Architects, together with the president of the Association of Architects of the City of Zagreb Nenad Fabijanić and the dean of the Architec-ture Faculty Ante Marinović-Uzelac he reacted critically to the “redevelopment” of Preradovićev trg [square], which, in their opinion, left a cold, ravaged and unattractive space in the heart of Zagreb. Neidhardt now emphasised once again that the root of the problem was “...in the lack of any regularly organised profession of architects, organised in a chamber with the backing of the law. Only a chamber organised in this way would have the authority to prevent this kind of work.” Also, as a kind of critical summing up of the profession in the war and post-war years he wrote the theoretical article Culturology of Reconstruction and the Global Atmosphere (1996), which he accompanied with an emblematic image of the water tower in Vukovar, the renovation of which, more than two decades after Neidhardt’s review and 26 years after its destruction, has only just recently been initiated. The same year he published the article Habitat II (1996) from the forum of the world’s national academies of science and engineering in Istanbul, at which 22 academies discussed the challenges of a future urban world, assuming that in the 21st century more than half the world’s population would live in cities, with the conclusion that Neidhardt gives in his article, that “...science and technology can offer many improvements to future generations on condition that there is synergy among scientific research, city planning and governance of settlements”.

Crucial, however, for Neidhardt’s theoretical urban design epoch, the 1990s, were two academic texts. The first article (published in the Architecture Faculty journal Prostor for 1994), along the lines of the best American theoretical con-siderations, juxtaposed two seemingly opposed approaches to consideration of the image of the city – the explicit definitions of Kevin Lynch who published his ideas in what was in its way a best-seller, The Image of the City and, on the other hand, the implicit proposals of the urban designer Maks Fabijani for the redevelopment of Ljubljana of the fin-de-siècle period, with Neidhardt ultimately being able to find a rapprochement between the two and a confirmation that


kontrolu ozljeda (1993.) vezano za međunarodnu konferenciji u Atlanti, a poslije u punom formatu kao Architectural aspects of home injuries prevention (1995.).

Inovativni doktorat na temu urbanističkog projektiranja, sudjelovanje na dvama velikim znanstvenim projektima te osamnaestogodišnja planerska i projektantska praksa u Urbanističkom institutu Neidhardtu su osigurali vrsne kompetencije i stručni autoritet u propitivanju problema suvremenih gradova. Jedan od prvih javnih istupa u prilog zaštiti urbanizma Zagreba jesu teksto-vi Samovolja u urbanizmu (1995.) i Mimo kodeksa komore (1995.), gdje kao predsjednik Udruženje hrvatskih arhitekata zajedno s predsjednikom Društva arhitekata grada Zagreba Nenadom Fabijanićem i dekanom Arhitektonsko-ga fakulteta Antom Marinovićem-Uzelcem kritički reagira na „preuređenje” Preradovićeva trga, koje je, prema njihovu mišljenju, u srcu Zagreba ostavilo opustošen, hladan i neprivlačan prostor. Tom prilikom Neidhardt još jednom naglašava kako je korijen problema „...u nepostojanju pravilno organizirane profesije arhitekata, organizirane u komoru koja bi imala podršku zakona. Samo tako organizirana komora mogla bi meritorno spriječiti takav način rada”. Ta-kođer, kao svojevrstan kritički saldo struke u ratnim i poslijeratnim godinama piše teorijski članak Kulturologija obnove i globalno ozračje (1996.), uz koji kao amblematsku sliku postavlja vukovarski vodotoranj, što tek ovih dana, više od dva desetljeća nakon Neidhardtova osvrta i 26 godina nakon razaranja, kreće u obnovu! Iste godine objavljuje i tekst Habitat II (1996.) s foruma svjetskih nacionalnih akademija znanosti i inženjerstva u Istanbulu, na kojem su 72 akademije diskutirale o izazovima budućega urbanog svijeta s pretpostavkom da će u 21. stoljeću više od polovice svjetskoga stanovništva živjeti u grado-vima i sa zaključkom koji Neidhardt u svome tekstu navodi: da „...znanost i tehnologija mogu pružiti mnoga poboljšanja budućim generacijama uz uvjet da postoji sinergija između znanstvenog istraživanja, urbanističkog planiranja i upravljanja naseljima”.

Ključnim će se ipak za Neidhardtovu urbanističko-teorijsku „epohu” 1990-ih pokazati dva znanstvena teksta. Prvi članak (objavljen u fakultetskom časopisu Prostor 1994.) na tragu ponajboljih američkih teorijskih razmatranja suprotstav-lja dva naizgled oprečna pristupa promatranja slike grada – eksplicitne defini-cije Kevina Lyncha koji je svoja razmišljanja objavio u svojedobnome bestseleru Slika grada i, s druge strane, implicitne prijedloge urbanista Maksa Fabijanija za regulaciju grada Ljubljane iz razdoblja fin de siecla – gdje u konačnici Neidhardt uspješno nalazi poveznicu između njih i potvrdu kako se ova dva prosedea – suvremeni Lynchev i povijesni Fabijanijev – međusobno potvrđuju kao valjani. Drugi tekst, zapravo kongresno priopćenje – Towards the visions of urban future: Croatia´s Prospects (1996.), analizira izglede Hrvatske u budućnosti, s obzirom na njezine potencijale da odgovori na glavne izazove 21. stoljeća i nadolazeću urbanizaciju. U tom pogledu Neidhardt kao ključni aspekt vidi zna-nost (i vodeću ulogu HaZU), ali uvijek u suradnji s drugim granama čovjekova djelovanja – „Tko može unaprijediti viziju budućnosti? Znanost, naravno, ali ne sama. Znanstvena metoda u kombinaciji s anticipativnim metodama dizajna, s umjetnošću i cjelokupnom kulturom u zajedničkim nastojanjima kreativnih snaga. Kako legitimirati ove proširene vrste istraživanja? Umjetnost, dizajn i znanost kreću se zajedno, integrirani u viziji urbane budućnosti. Potrebne su

40 41

the two procedures, the contemporary Lynch and the historical Fabijani, back each other up. The second text, actually a conference paper, Towards Visions of the Urban Future: Croatia’s Prospects (1996) analyses the chances of Croatia in the future, with respect to its ability to respond to the main challenges of the 21st century and the coming urbanisation. In this respect Neidhardt saw science (with a leading role for the Academy) as key aspect, although always in collaboration with other branches of human activity. “Who can advance the vision of the future? Knowledge, naturally, but not alone. The scientific method, in combination with anticipatory methods of design, with art and the whole of a culture in the common endeavours of creative forces. How are these expanded kinds of research to be made legitimate? Art, design and science move together, integrated in a vision of the urban future. Some forces able to synthesise are required, for example, a new role of architecture, which builds special places as theatres for the communication of creativity in the expression of individual and group identities in the global arena of diverse styles of life and culture”.

In 1997 Academician Velimir Neidhardt published the key outcome of his investigations at the point where urbanism and architecture touched, the book Man in Space, in which he inaugurated the anthropo-social method of designing based on a complementarity of science, art and humanities. Urban designer Zlatko Karač wrote of its theoretical postulates in an analytical review of the book in the journal Prostor (1997): “Neidhardt, in the architectural procedure… researches into the sphere of the scientific (the objectivised) and the artistic (subjective, intuitive, subject to the variability of social consciousness). In this set there is discussion of the methodological repercussions of Sullivan’s phrase ‘form follows function’ and of the relation of set function and expected formal expression in the understandings of Roth, Le Corbusier, Mies, Venturi, Jencks and Eisenman. In the application of the methodological model developed in architectural design, the author does not restrict himself to the verbal level, but uses the template to analyse his own works...”

— Looking to the future

Alongside the classic planning templates for dealing with the city, in Neidhardt’s oeuvre there has always been the future component. Although in practical architectural work it was only in the 1990s that he started actively to use 3d depictions as a new means of visual presentation of architectural models, Nei-dhardt actually theoretically anticipated the use of the computer much earlier, at the end of the 70s, as pioneer in the thinking of digital tools for designs. Long before Bernard Tschumi and Peter Eisenman started on the computer education of architects at Columbia and Yale, in co-authorship with the infor-mation scientist Damir Boras (today Zagreb University president) he wrote and applied the UrbaN programme, the first computer language for urban design and spatial planning in this country, which the authors announced together at a symposium in 1977, while Neidhardt wrote on his own a well received article in a thematic number of Arhitektura devoted to the phenomenon of the postmod-ern (1980). The avant-garde importance of such aspirations was recognised by theorist Tomislav Premerl who in the text Devising the Future (1985) stated that


neke sintetizirajuće sile, primjerice nova uloga arhitekture koja gradi posebna mjesta kao pozornice za komunikaciju kreativnosti u izražavanju individualnih i grupnih identiteta u globalnoj areni raznolikih stilova života i kultura.”

Kao ključnu rezultantu svojih istraživanja na crti dodira urbanizma i arhi-tekture Neidhardt 1997. objavljuje knjigu Čovjek u prostoru, kojom inaugurira antroposocijalnu metodu projektiranja temeljenu na komplementarnosti zna-nosti, umjetnosti i humanistike. O njenim teorijskim postulatima u analitičkom će osvrtu na knjigu, u časopisu Prostor (1997.), urbanist Zlatko Karač napisati: „Neidhardt u arhitektonskom prosedeu… istražuje sferu znanstvenoga (objekti-viziranog), i umjetničkoga (subjektivnog, intuitivnog, podložnog promjenjivosti društvene svijesti). U tom sklopu diskutira se o metodološkim reperkusijama Sullivanove sintagme „oblik slijedi funkciju”, te o odnosu zadane funkcije i očekivanoga oblikovnog izraza prema shvaćanju Rotha, Le Corbusiera, Miesa, Venturija, Jencksa, Eisenmana. U primjeni razvijenoga metodološkog modela u projektiranju, autor ne ostaje samo na verbalnoj razini, već po tome obrascu analizira vlastite radove...”

— Pogled u budućnost

Uz klasične urbanističke obrasce bavljenja gradom, u Neidhardtovu je opusu oduvijek prisutna i komponenta budućnosti. Iako u praktičnom bavljenju ar-hitekturom tek 1990-ih počinje aktivno koristiti 3d prikaze kao novo sredstvo virtualne prezentacije arhitektonskih modela, teorijski će uporabu kompjutora Neidhardt anticipirati znatno ranije, već krajem 70-ih, kao pionir u promišljanju projektantskih digitalnih alata. Mnogo prije no što će Bernard Tschumi i Peter Eisenman početi s kompjutorskom edukacijom arhitekata na Columbiji i Ya-leu, Neidhardt u koautorstvu s informatičarom Damirom Borasom (današnjim rektorom Sveučilišta u Zagrebu) stvara i primjenjuje UrbaN, prvi računalni jezik za potrebe urbanističkog i prostornog planiranja u nas, o čemu zajednički


Palača HaZU / Palace of the

Academy, Zagreb

42 43


For the work of Neidhardt in the faculty, see: *** (2000.), Sveučilište u Zagrebu – Arhitektonski fakultet, 1919./1920.–1999./2000. Osamdeset godina izobrazbe arhitekata u Hrvatskoj [ed. obad Šćitaroci, m.]: 208, Arhitektonski fakultet, Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Zagreb.

11 –

Neidhardt’s “...approach to research always in its origins had an affirmation of humaneness as key assumption of architectural creativity. And it was this urge, and creative curiosity, that led him to the questions and quandaries about the use of the computer in urban and architectural design, to exploration of the use of a computer language that might lend new values to the old methods of always lively creative imaginations”. Neidhardt himself, considerably later (1998), in one of his articles asked the question “Is architecture faced with the fate of the dinosaurs?” But he had a positive standpoint, stating that there was hope for architecture for “its development during history was always borne on the advances in techniques and technologies. In the matter of ‘adapt or die’ architecture has always adjusted to the new, or challenged the new. Neither today nor in the immediate future is there any Ersatz to take the place of a good architect in the creation of unique design in an urban and social setting with a completely defined cultural origin. New computer aids enable experimentation and the realisation of spatial relations, structures and constructions that were previously practically unattainable”.

— The theoretical component of the professorial mindset

The freshness of ideas always present, and the constant wish for improvement and keeping in step with current trends in world architectural thought and with knowledge about new approaches, techniques and technologies, are without a doubt the consequence of Neidhardt’s contacts with the young and upcoming generations of architects whom he taught for several decades at the Zagreb Faculty of Architecture.11 In his still dominantly urban design phase, he was first appointed part-time assistant at the urban design department for the subjects Urban planning 1–4 (1979–1983), and afterwards, when he was more vigorously involved in architecture, he got a position at the architectural design department as external assistant professor in finishing and integral works (1991) and then as part time (1993) and rapidly permanent (1994) associate professor in the subjects Buildings for work and commerce, Architectural design 8, Integral work and somewhat later also Final thesis. He was to develop these subjects, which he inherited from Academician Miroslav Begović, down to the end of his university career, going through the ranks of full professor (1999) and emeritus professor (2015). He also left a permanent mark on the doctoral course in Architecture and Urbanism, where he is still the supervisor of key research workshops.

Along with his teaching obligations, Neidhardt prepared the manuscript of a methodological nature, a synoptic study called Architectural Designing (1993), in which he was theoretically to explain the elements of which this complex pro-cess consisted, analysing it into sections, such as the function, form, aesthetics and expressiveness of architecture; then he described the difference between


objavljuju simpozijsku studiju (1977.), a Neidhardt samostalno piše i zapaženi članak u tematskom broju Arhitekture posvećenom fenomenu postmoderne (1980.). Avangardnu važnost takvih nastojanja prepoznao je teoretičar Tomislav Premerl koji u tekstu Osmišljavanje budućnosti (1985.) navodi kako Neidhar-dtov „...pristup istraživanju uvijek u začetku nosi afirmaciju humanosti kao ključnu pretpostavku arhitektonskom stvaralaštvu. I upravo su ga taj poriv, a i stvaralačka znatiželja doveli pred pitanja i zagonetke oko upotrebe kompjutora u urbanističkom i arhitektonskom projektiranju, te istraživanju uporabnog kompjutorskog jezika koji bi mogao donijeti nove vrijednosti starim metodama uvijek živih stvaralačkih imaginacija”. I sam Neidhardt mnogo kasnije (1998.) u jednom od svojih tekstova postavlja pitanje: „Prijeti li i arhitekturi sudbina dinosaura?” Ali s pozitivnim stajalištem iznosi da za arhitekturu ima nade jer „...njen je razvitak tijekom povijesti uvijek bio nošen napretkom tehnika i teh-nologija. U pitanju „adapt or die” arhitektura se uvijek prilagodila novom ili izazivala novo. Danas, pa ni u bližem izgledu nema Ersatza koji će zamijeniti dobrog arhitekta u stvaranju unikatnog projekta u urbano-socijalnom ambijentu posve određene kulturne provenijencije. Pritom nova računalska pomagala omogućuju eksperimentiranje i realizaciju ranije gotovo nedokučivih prostornih odnosa, struktura i konstrukcija”.

— Teorijska komponenta profesorskog habitusa

Uvjek prisutna svježina ideja i konstanta želja za napredovanjem i održavanjem koraka s aktualnostima svjetske arhitektonske misli te saznanjima o novim pristupima, tehnikama i tehnologijama zasigurno su i posljedica Neidhardtova kontakta s mladim, nadolazećim generacijama arhitekata koje je više desetljeća podučavao na Arhitektonskom fakultetu u Zagrebu.11 U svojoj još dominantno „urbanističkoj etapi” prvo je bio izabran za honorarnog asistenta na Katedri za urbanizam na predmetima Urbanističkog planiranja I-IV (1979.-1983.), a poslije, uz intenzivnije bavljenje arhitekturom, pozicionirat će se na Katedri za arhitektonsko projektiranje kao vanjski docent na završnim / integralnim rado-vima (1991.), te potom kao honorarni (1993.), ubrzo i stalni (1994.) izvanredni profesor na kolegijima Zgrade za rad i trgovinu, Arhitektonsko projektiranje VIII, Integralni rad, nešto kasnije i Diplomski rad. Te predmete koje je naslijedio od akademika Miroslava Begovića razvijat će do kraja svoje karijere, prošavši izbore u zvanja redovitog profesora (1999.) i professora emeritusa (2015.), a trajni je trag ostavio i na Doktorskom studiju Arhitektura i urbanizam gdje je još uvijek voditelj ključnih istraživačkih radionica.

Uz nastavničke obveze Neidhardt će kao svojevrstan inauguralni tekst me-todološkoga karaktera u rukopisu pripremiti sinteznu studiju – Arhitektonsko projektiranje (1993.), gdje će teorijski objasniti elemente od kojih se taj složeni

O fakultetskom dijelu Neidhardtove karijere v.: *** (2000.), Sveučilište u Zagrebu – Arhitektonski fakultet, 1919./1920.–1999./2000. Osamdeset godina izobrazbe arhitekata u Hrvatskoj [ur. obad Šćitaroci, m.]: 208, Arhitektonski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb, 2000.

11 –

44 45

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfpInxS1FNHJ490WfKsKcGQ video clips 1-29 [1.1.2018.]. 12 –

the concepts of design and architectural design (taking into consideration the lack of distinction in the terms in English) and at the end of the article in conclusion gave an interesting definition of the design procedure summed up in a single sentence: “Architectural designing is actual the spatial organisation of thinking about the function of a building”. And here then we come back to the main proposition of Neidhardt’s creative activity – the transfer of thinking onto paper, through written and drawn traces, is the main task of the architect.

He was also to leave several extensive historical or retrospective surveys that were useful in university teaching – for example, a discussion of the archi-tecture of the seventies in Yugoslavia (1981), a study about the development of the library as complex architectural typology published in the Technical Encyclopaedia (1984), a review in which he took a backwards look at the thirty years of the Viktor Kovačić Prize (1989) and a critical essay on the last decade of Zagreb 20th century architecture (2000). Particularly requiring mention here is an exhaustively elaborated symposium text about the European context of Croatian 20th century architecture (2009), where from ancient examples (Pharos and Diocletian’s Palace) he developed the theme in terms of historiography up to Austro-Hungary, and then with a clear sense of values analysed the works and personalities of modernism and later modernism in this country, referring to Kauzlarić, Planić, Požgaj, Galić and others, concluding the contacts between Croatia and the international milieu with names such as Venturi, Cedric Price and finally Frank Gehry, who with his ‘Bilbao effect’ had heralded the beginning of a ‘new architectural millennium’.

He also bequeathed to the discipline the extensively elaborated manu-script of a teaching manual Architecture of Working and Commercial Space (2015), which absolutely merits being issued by the faculty’s publishing wing. However, he also prepared a unique edition of 29 video lectures for the course Buildings for work and commerce, a particularly innovative genre of interactive teaching materials for students, presenting them through the contemporary and universally accessible medium of YouTube.12 This is in this country a pio-neering endeavour of total video-digitalisation of teaching material, with very engagingly presented architectural material prepared during the twenty years of university teaching – on the themes of the organisation and shaping of working spaces in office and government premises, industrial buildings and complexes, department stores, malls and multipurpose centres. The Internet medium is very close to the coming generations of architects and students, Neidhardt once again showing he is in touch with the time, in the sense of design as well as of education and theory.

— Exhibitions, books and other architects

Quite often Neidhardt has directed his intellectual inquiries to the study, eval-uation and endorsement of the works of key Croatian architects whose oeuvres have marked our architectural scene with a high level of building works and


proces sastoji, raščlaniti ga na dijelove, kao što su funkcija, oblik, estetika i izražajnost arhitekture, zatim opisati razliku između pojmova dizajn i arhi-tektonsko projektiranje (uzimajući u obzir nediferenciranu englesku leksiku pojma design), a pred kraj teksta u zaključku će dati zanimljivu definiciju pro-jektantskoga prosedea sažetu u samo jednoj rečenici: „Projektiranje je zapravo prostorna organizacija misli o funkciji zgrade”. I time se vraćamo na glavnu tezu Neidhardtova stvaralačkog djelovanja – prijenos misli na papir, kroz pisani ili narisani trag, glavna je zadaća arhitekta!

Usto, ostavit će i nekoliko opširnih povijesnih ili retrospektivnih pregleda vrlo iskoristivih u nastavi na Fakultetu – primjerice, diskusiju o arhitekturi se-damdesetih godina u onodobnoj Jugoslaviji (1981.), potom studiju o razvoju knjižnice kao složene arhitektonske tipologije objavljenu u Tehničkoj enciklo-pediji (1984.), osvrt u kojem retroaktivno sagledava trideset godina nagrade Viktor Kovačić (1989.), te kritički esej o posljednjem desetljeću zagrebačke arhitekture 20. stoljeća (2000.). Od posebne važnosti treba ovdje istaknuti Neidhardtov iscrpno elaborirani simpozijski tekst o europskom kontekstu hr-vatske arhitekture 20. stoljeća (2009.), gdje od antičkih primjera (Pharosa ili Dioklecijanove palače) temu historiografski razvija do razdoblja Austro-Ugarske, a potom s jasnim valorizacijskim stajalištem analizira djela i autorske osobnosti moderne i kasne moderne u nas, pozivajući se na Kauzlarića, Planića, Požgaja, Galića i druge, da bi dodir Hrvatske s internacionalnim miljeom završio imenima poput Venturija, Cedrica Pricea... i, naposljetku, Franka Gehryja koji je najavio početak „novoga arhitektonskog milenija” svojim Bilbao efektom.

U naslijeđe struci Velimir Neidhardt je kao profesor ostavio i opsežno razra-đena rukopisna skripta Arhitektura radnog i komercijalnog prostora (2015.), koja svakako zaslužuju skoro publiciranje u sklopu fakultetskih izdanja. Među-tim, kao osobito inovativan žanr nastavnih materijala za interaktivno je učenje studentima pripremio i jedinstvenu ediciju od 29 videopredavanja kolegija Zgrade za rad i trgovinu, prezentirajući ih kroz suvremeni i svima dostupni medij YouTube12. Riječ je o u nas pionirskom pothvatu potpune videodigi-talizacije nastavnog materijala s pregledno prezentiranom arhitektonskom građom pripremanom tijekom dvadesetak godina fakultetske nastave – o temama organizacije i oblikovanja radnih prostora u upravnim i administra-tivnim zgradama, industrijskim građevinama i kompleksima, robnim kućama, trgovačkim i višenamjenskim centrima... Internetski medij svakako je vrlo blizak novim generacijama studenata i mladih arhitekata, čime je Neidhardt još jednom pokazao kako djeluje ukorak s vremenom – i u projektantskom, i u teorijsko-edukativnom smislu.

— O izložbama, knjigama i drugim arhitektima...

Intelektualna znatiželja nerijetko je Neidhardta usmjeravala na studiranje, valorizaciju i afirmiranje radova ključnih hrvatskih arhitekata kojih su opusi našu arhitektonsku scenu obilježili visokom razinom realizacija ili teorijskih


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfpInxS1FNHJ490WfKsKcGQ video clips 1-29 [1.1.2018.] 12 –

46 47


theoretical publications – like Drago Galić, Miroslav Begović, Ante Vulin, Bo-ris Magaš, Andrija Mutjnaković and art historian Vera Horvat Pintarić. Worth mentioning is an article by Neidhardt in which he explains the levels of the importance of one more of the essential architects of Croatian modernism – Drago Ibler, in which he demonstrates that it is on just his circle of associates, colleagues and students that the still dubious attribution of the Zagreb school of architecture rests for its persuasiveness (1999). Among his own teachers, alongside the crucial Galić, whom Neidhardt often mentions as the key person in his professional formation, he writes with respect of a somewhat forgotten painter who not only taught students but cultivated in them the spirit of firm ethical postulates: “I enrolled in the Architecture Faculty of Zagreb University in September 1962. In the drawing classes of Kamilo Tompa I became part of an unforgettable manifesto about the need for the freedom of artistic creation. After the declarations of then President Tito about the need for art to be di-rected, Kamilo Tompa announced to the whole generation of students enrolled at that time his own disagreement with this statement, with the specific chain of reasoning that art required total freedom and that it was worth fighting for creative freedom” (2009).

On particular occasions, Neidhardt also wrote prefaces, analytical intro-ductions in fact, in some of the crucial books about Croatian architecture, like Premerl’s Zagreb, City of Modern Architecture (2003) or Rogina’s biographical compendium Who is Who in Croatian Architecture; the Neidhardt text at the beginning was interestingly entitled ID of the Architectural Profession (1997).

However, in this generic set, the main Neidhardt contributions are related to exhibitions that he either devised or selected. The first such well-received appearance as selector was at the Milan Triennial (1996), for which he composed a creatively constructed concept of Croatian architecture through an image of a gingerbread man described in the catalogue under the title Identity and Diversity. Each part of the gingerbread man’s body was one of the then living leading architects, and because of their contribution (and years of seniority in the profession) they acquired a clear explanation of why they were situated at precisely that position. And so the originating “person was the oldest architect Antun Ulrich, leader of the international style, which he cultivated and promoted in Zagreb between the wars. Metaphorically speaking, Antun Ulrich (1902) is the Nestor of the humanoid exhibition body that downwards towards the legs has increasingly younger generations of architects tacked on. At neck height we find Miroslav Begović (1925), the grand old man of Croatian architecture and one of the few remaining links between the tradition of Modernism and recent events. The left arm belongs to Nikola Filipović (1934), a unique creator of the modern procedure. The right arm is Andrija Mutnjaković (1929), working between two poles, researcher into the regional and visionary dreamer. The chest has archi-tects involved in big urban and architectural designs, like Branko Kincl (1938), and the architects of the new National and University Library in Zagreb Velimir Neidhardt (1943), Davor Mance (1938), Zvonimir Krznarić (1938) and Marijan Hržić (1944). In the centre is the particular artistic personality of Ivan Crnković (1941). The right hip goes to the sensitive aesthete Nenad Fabijanić (1951) while the left is meant for Dragomir-Maji Vlahović (1945), that subtle minimalist. The


objava – poput akademika Drage Galića, Miroslava Begovića, Ante Vulina, Borisa Magaša, Andrije Mutnjakovića i povjesničarke umjetnosti Vere Horvat Pintarić. Tu valja spomenuti i Neidhardtov tekst u kojem razjašnjava razine važnosti još jednoga nezaobilaznog arhitekta hrvatske moderne – Drage Iblera, gdje ustvrđuje kako upravo na njegovu krugu suradnika, kolega i učenika počiva još uvijek dvojbena „atribucija” zagrebačke škole arhitekture (1999.). Među svojim profesorima, uz nezaobilaznoga Galića kojega Neidhardt često ističe kao ključnu osobu u vlastitome stručnom profiliranju, on s poštovanjem piše i o jednomu pomalo zaboravljenom slikaru koji je studente ne samo podučavao već i odgajao u duhu čvrstih etičkih postulata: „Studij arhitekture upisao sam na agg fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu u rujnu 1962. godine. Na kolegiju vježbi iz predmeta Crtanje profesora Kamila Tompe bio sam dionik jednog nezaboravnog manifesta o potrebi slobode umjetničkog stvaralaštva. Naime, nakon izjava o usmjerivanju umjetnosti tadašnjeg predsjednika Tita, profesor Kamilo Tompa je pred cijelom populacijom tada upisanih studenata objavio svoje neslaganje s tom izjavom, uz osebujno obrazlaganje kako umjetnost zahtijeva potpunu slobodu i kako je vrijedna borba za slobodu stvaralaštva” (2009.).

U posebnim prigodama Neidhardt je pisao predgovore, zapravo analitičke uvodnike, u nekim neizostavnim knjigama o hrvatskoj arhitekturi, poput Pre-merlove Zagreb, grad moderne arhitekture (2003.) ili Roginina biografskog zbornika – Tko je tko u hrvatskoj arhitekturi, gdje je tekst na početku knjige Neidhardt zanimljivo naslovio Iskaznica arhitektonske profesije (1997.).

Međutim, u ovoj žanrovskoj skupini glavni Neidhardtovi doprinosi vezani su za izložbe kojima je bio autor ili izbornik. Prvi zapaženi selektorski nastup ostvario je na Triennale di Milano (1996.), za koji slaže kreativno konstruirani koncept o hrvatskoj arhitekturi ispričan kroz sliku čovjeka - paprenjaka opi-sanog u katalogu pod nazivom Identitet i različitost. Naime, svaki dio tijela paprenjaka predstavlja neke od tada živućih istaknutih arhitekata, a s obzirom na njihov doprinos (i godine u struci) dobili su jasno obrazloženje zašto su

Drago Galić i Velimir

Neidhardt, nakon obrane

doktorata / after PhD defense ,

1990.

48 49

legs are reserved for the youngest, for teams whose tread symbolises the path of Croatian architecture in the 21st century. The right shows Vinko Penezić and Krešimir Rogina (both born in 1959) and the left fits Bojan Radonić (1962) and Goran Rako (1952), researchers of cosmogenic waves in the shape of green ar-chitecture”. As can be seen from the names given, Neidhardt’s conception of the exhibition with architects selected from differing generations and architectural approaches offers a link that unites them into a common identity of Croatian architecture – through the metaphor of the gingerbread man’s body, which can functional properly only through the good coordination of all the parts.

A few years later, in a different exhibition format, Neidhardt went on with the story started in Milan, this time at the most prestigious architectural event in the world, the Venice Biennale. The exhibition section entitled City – Less Aesthetics, More Ethics, which was held precisely at the turn of the millennium, was supposed according to the author’s text to represent the architecture of the last decades of the 20th century, and as logical selection of the time he invited Penezić and Rogina, whom he considered best able to satisfy the basic theses of his exhibition concept: “...first, the exhibition should attest Croatia as an equal participant in world aspirations to the 21st century and second, the Venetian appearance had to be achieved with the most recent and best known Croatian architectural export products” (2000).

— Instead of a conclusion… – from words to works

Read attentively, Neidhardt’s theoretical articles, particularly if they are fairly long and analytical writings, will likely end with a final paragraph called “Instead of a Conclusion” – considerately relativising his own authorial viewpoint and allowing the reader space for his own understanding of what has been read. I would accordingly end this study of his theoretical oeuvre with the same phrase, Instead of…, leaving Neidhardt’s intellectual proving ground open to a new experience of reading, and drawing conclusions, and dedicating the last chapter to examples that throw light on the ideal of architectural activity that during his career Velimir Neidhardt has been able to achieve - the direct links between his theoretical thinking, his written words and works, both conceived and actually built.

Academician Neidhardt has received numerous plaudits for his design oeu-vre of some two hundred creative studies, plans and designs13– the mentioned annual Vladimir Nazor Prize for the best achievements in architecture and urban design (1989 and 1995), the aca Viktor Kovačić Prize (1979), two Zagreb Salon prizes (1979 and 1982), numerous prizes in competitions and awards and decorations for his outstanding contribution to Croatian architecture like the City of Zagreb Prize (2001) and the Order of Croatian Daystar (2009). Here

Since 1997 he has run his own practice, Neidhardt arhitekti d.o.o., on the Web site of which it is possible to find information about the key built works: http://www.neidhardt-architects.com [1. 1. 2018.].

13 –


smješteni na točno toj poziciji. Pa je tako ishodišna „...osoba najstariji arhitekt Antun Ulrich, protagonist internacionalnoga stila koji je njegovao i promicao u Zagrebu između dvaju svjetskih ratova. Metaforički, Antun Ulrich (1902.) sijeda je glava čovjekolikoga izložbenog tijela koje u smjeru svojih nogu pridijeva sve mlađe generacije arhitekata. U visini vrata nalazimo Miroslava Begovića (1925.), doajena hrvatske arhitekture i jednoga od nekolicine preostalih sveza između moderne tradicije i recentnih zbivanja. Lijeva ruka pripada Nikoli Filipoviću (1934.), jedinstvenom stvaraocu prosedea moderne. Desna ruka predstavlja Andriju Mutnjakovića (1929.), bipolarnog istraživača regionalnoga i vizijskoga sanjara. U prsištu se nalaze arhitekti uključeni u velike urbane i arhitektonske projekte, među njima je Branko Kincl (1938.) te arhitekti nove zgrade Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice u Zagrebu Velimir Neidhardt (1943.), Davor Mance (1938.), Zvonimir Krznarić (1938.) i Marijan Hržić (1944.). U središtu se izdvaja artistička osobnost Ivana Crnkovića (1941.). Desni kuk pripada osjećajnom estetu Nena-du Fabijaniću (1951.), a lijevi je namijenjen Dragomiru-Maji Vlahoviću (1945.), suptilnome minimalistu. Noge pripadaju najmlađima, tandemima kojih hod simbolizira put hrvatske arhitekture u 21. stoljeće. Desna noga pokazuje Vinka Penezića i Krešimira Roginu (oba 1959.), originalne interpretatore složenosti u pretapanju moderne i vernakularne tradicije. Lijeva noga pristaje Bojanu Ra-doniću (1962.) i Goranu Raki (1952.), istraživačima kozmogenih valova u obličju zelene arhitekture...” Kako se može vidjeti iz nabrojenih imena, Neidhardtov koncept izložbe s odabranim arhitektima različitih generacija i arhitektonskih pristupa nudi poveznicu koja ih objedinjuje u zajednički identitet hrvatske ar-hitekture – kroz metaforu tijela paprenjaka što jedino kroz dobru koordinaciju svih dijelova može uspješno funkcionirati.

Nekoliko godina poslije, iako u drugom formatu izlaganja, Neidhardt na-stavlja priču započetu u Milanu, ovaj put za najprestižniju arhitektonsku ma-nifestaciju u svijetu – Venecijanski bijenale. Izložbena dionica pod nazivom Grad – Manje estetike, više etike, koja se održavala točno na prijelazu tisućljeća, trebala je prema autorovu tekstu predstaviti arhitekturu posljednjih desetljeća 20. stoljeća, pa on kao logičan izbor toga doba poziva arhitekte Vinka Penezića i Krešimira Roginu, za koje smatra da najbolje mogu zadovoljiti dvije osnovne teze njegova izložbenog koncepta: „...prva, da izložba treba svjedočiti o Hrvat-skoj kao o ravnopravnom sudioniku svjetskih stremljenja prema XXi. stoljeću i, druga, da venecijanski nastup bude ostvaren s recentnim, najpoznatijim hrvatskim izvoznim arhitektonskim proizvodom” (2000.).

— Umjesto zaključka... – S riječi na djela

Pročitaju li se pomnjivo Neidhardtovi teorijski članci, gotovo uvijek kada je u pitanju dulji analitički tekst, on će ga završiti zadnjim pasusom naslovljenim – „Umjesto zaključka” – decentno relativizirajući svoje autorsko stajalište i otvarajući čitatelju prostor za vlastito shvaćanje pročitanoga. Stoga bih i ja ovu studiju njegova teorijskog opusa završio istom sintagmom „Umjesto...”, ostavljajući Neidhardtov misaoni poligon otvoren novom iskustvu čitanja (i zaključivanja), a zadnje poglavlje posvetio bih primjerima koji osvjetljavaju ideal arhitektonskog djelovanja što ga je Velimir Neidhardt tijekom svoje ka-


50 51

it is worth pointing out that all of Neidhardt’s well-received built works have been accompanied by his own textual presentations and by an interpretation of theoretical postulates important for the development of the concept (an approach that was consistently implemented by Boris Magaš as well), not only by way of interpretation of a building already put up but in the form of numerous original texts published during the long-lasting process of the development of a project and the building phase. Neidhardt has produced a number of important buildings: for example, the ‘Boska’ Department Store in Banja Luka from the early creative phase (the Viktor Kovačić Prize for 1979, with Lulić and Nosso), in which as early as 1973 in the first competition round came the theme of the floating metal envelope that was to shine forth 35 years later in the design for Zagreb Airport. Particularly important are the Croatian office buildings, for iNa Trgovina and Croatia Osiguranje, but for keeping track of the interdependence of theory and practice and their mutual supplementation two particularly complex projects, the largest in his oeuvre, are crucial.

Most has been written about in numerous media sources about the first – the National and University Library in Zagreb, which Neidhardt designed with Hržić, Krznarić and Mance, the authors themselves contributing numerous articles about the building the completion of which required a full seventeen years. At the competition (1978) the authorial team won the first prize hands down, and a year later, in Arhitektura, they published a big article dedicated to the idea of the building – The Architectural Concept of the National and University Library in Zagreb (1979). As the project was developed and completed, so some of Neidhardt’s professionally important interviews served as a working platform for the testing out of approaches, for theoretical discussions and reflections on the new library, and in some of his texts the author with a public and critical discourse returned to the fact of this major structure in the text What about the NUL? (1994), in which he considers the decision that according to the Tertiary Education Institutions Law the NUl should be placed under the aegis of Zagreb University. Elsewhere, Neidhardt gets into explanations of the important for the library for the profession, acquaints readers with the history of the old library of Rudolf Lubynski of 1913 and goes into a deeper analysis of the importance of the colours, materials and details of the construction, which came out partic-ularly in the work Architectural Lapidarity on the Accomplishment of the New Building of the NUL in Zagreb (1995). The basic premise of all the texts to follow was the desire to create a superlative library, originating in the 20th but com-petitive in the 21st century. Its success was confirmed by a synoptic Neidhardt piece written for the 400th anniversary of the NUl in Zagreb (2007), where he collated a remarkable bibliography of works published about the building itself, and from a distance in time commented on its first ten years of existence. In the final part of the communication (Instead of a Conclusion) the author was to observe that today more than ever it was possible to see the complementarity and supplementarity of the historical Lubynski building, an Art Nouveau Ges-amtkunstwerk masterpiece and the new NUl: “The old and the new National and University Libraries are as it were mirrors counterpointing the times of their origins. The first, harmonious architecture of the year 1913, located dignifiedly in the tract of parks, oriented hermetically to its cultural function with stained



rijere uspio ostvariti – neposrednoj vezi vlastite teorijske misli, pisane riječi i osmišljenih ili realiziranih djela.

Za svoj projektantski opus od dvjestotinjak kreativnih studija, planova i projekata13 akademik Neidhardt osvojio je brojna priznanja – od spomenutih godišnjih nagrada Vladimir Nazor za najbolja ostvarenja u arhitekturi i urbaniz-mu (1989. i 1995.), nagrade UHa-e Viktor Kovačić (1979.), dviju nagrada Zagre-bačkog salona (1979. i 1982.), brojnih nagrada na arhitektonskim natječajima, do javnih odlikovanja za izniman doprinos hrvatskoj arhitekturi, poput Nagrade Grada Zagreba (2001.) ili Reda Danice hrvatske s likom Marka Marulića (2009.). U tom kontekstu valja istaknuti da su sve zapažene Neidhardtove realizacije uvi-jek bile popraćene vlastitim tekstualnim prezentacijama i tumačenjem teorijskih postulata važnih za razvoj koncepta (pristup koji je dosljedno provodio i Boris Magaš), i to ne samo kao interpretacija već dovršene zgrade, nego su brojni autorovi tekstovi publicirani i tijekom dugotrajnih procesa razvoja projekata i izvedbe. Neidhardt je realizirao više značajnih zgrada, kao što je primjerice robna kuća „Boska” u Banjoj Luci iz ranije stvaralačke faze (godišnja nagrada Viktor Kovačić 1979., s Lj. Lulić i J. Nosso), gdje se već 1973. u prvome natje-čajnom krugu pojavljuje tema lebdeće metalne envelope koja će zablistati 35 godina poslije u projektu zagrebačke zračne luke. Od posebnog su značenja i zagrebačke poslovne zgrade iNa-Trgovine i „Croatia osiguranja”, ali za praćenje međuovisnosti teorije i prakse te njihovo nadopunjavanje ključna su dva osobito kompleksna projekta, ujedno i najveća u njegovu opusu.

O prvomu – Nacionalnoj i sveučilišnoj knjižnici u Zagrebu, koju Neidhardt projektira s M. Hržićem, Z. Krznarićem i D. Manceom, najviše se pisalo u brojnim medijima, a i sami autori objavili su brojne tekstove o zgradi koje je realizacija trajala punih sedamnaest godina! Na natječaju (1978.) autorski je tim superiorno osvojio prvu nagradu, a već godinu poslije u časopisu Arhitektura objavljuju velik članak posvećen ideji zgrade – O arhitektonskom konceptu Nacionalne i sveučilišne biblioteke u Zagrebu (1979.). Kako se projekt razvijao i dovršavao, tako su i neki Neidhardtovi stručno relevantni intervjui poslužili kao „radna platforma” za propitivanje rješenja, za teorijske diskusije i promišljanja o novoj knjižnici, a u nekim od svojih tekstova autor se i s javno-kritičkim diskursom vraća sudbini toga kapitalnog objekta, primjerice u tekstu Što s NSB? (1994.), gdje propituje odluku da se Zakonom o visokim učilištima Nacionalna i sveu-čilišna biblioteka preda pod pokroviteljstvo Zagrebačkog sveučilišta. Drugdje Neidhardt ulazi u pojašnjenja značenja knjižnice za struku, upoznaje čitatelja s poviješću stare sveučilišne knjižnice Rudolfa Lubynskoga iz 1913. i dublje analizira značenje boja, materijala i detalja konstrukcije, što je posebno došlo do izražaja u radu Arhitektonske lapidarnosti o ostvarenju nove zgrade NSB u Zagrebu (1995.). Osnovna premisa svih tekstova koji će uslijediti jest želja za stvaranjem vrhunske knjižnice nastale u 20. stoljeću, ali konkurentne i za razdoblje 21. stoljeća. Njezin će uspjeh potvrditi i sintezni Neidhardtov referat

Od 1997. vodi vlasititu tvrtku Neidhardt arhitekti d.o.o., na web-stranici koje mogu se pronaći podaci o ključnim autorovim realizacijama: http://www.neidhardt-architects.com [1. 1. 2018.].

13 –

52 53


Not long after its opening, the airport complex was presented extensively on prestigious Web portals such as ArchDaily, ArchitectMagazine, detail.de,… and was recently accorded the laurels of the American Architecture Prize 2017.

14 –

glass and the stereometric volumes of its inner spaces, was treated entirely from the point of view of the complete work of art. The second, opened in 1995, placed dominantly on the main axis of the city and linked through the green areas with the university tract to the west, defines the large area of the new centre of Zagreb. In its architectural space it has integrated and interwoven a unique panorama. The city vista has become the façade of the interior, while the medium of architecture is space defined in volumes, surfaces, reflections and textures of the selected building materials. All accessories are superfluous. The architecture reposes on the clarity of its concept, uttered in the composition and harmony of contemporary, simple forms, and the ultimate result or work is in essence architectural sculpture”.

The other big complex, which has had a very positive reception in interna-tional architectural press, is the new passenger terminal of Zagreb International Airport 14. It was impressively inaugurated on the domestic and international architectural scenes in the closing phase of the big international competition of 2008 to which 17 works were submitted, among them by world stars – as many as three Pritzker Prize winners (the architects’ ‘Nobel’) – Shigeru Ban (2nd prize), Norman Foster (3rd prize) and Zaha Hadid (5th prize). The Japanese team of Shigeru Ban was represented in an impressive construction in wood, material but seldom used for large-sized projects with stringent safety requirements like airports. English architect Foster (who has recently become a corresponding fellow of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts) interpreted the terminal as an uncommon glass forest, making sure at the same time that the building fitted into the surrounding natural context, as well as satisfying to the maxi-mum the requirement of sustainability in its use of energy. Zaha Hadid was, as usual, fascinating in her recognisable parametric form and futurist visions in movement through the airport. Ultimately, the international panel (in which the designers of Munich and Oslo airports took part, with a representative of the international architects association, together with domestic architects Jerko Rošin, Saša Begović, Veljko Oluić and Jadranka Veselić-Bruvo), assigned the first prize to the original vision of the Croatian team of Kincl, Neidhardt and Radić, which thus triumphed in competition with some of the world’s biggest names, their design being also selected for further elaboration and building.

From the very beginning, several times, Neidhardt published the design for the airport. An exemplary text that needs particularly highlighting is the unpublished Explanatory report – Zagreb Airport – New Passenger Terminal (2008) of the competition study, in which the conventional expression typical of technical descriptions is avoided, and the working text is turned into a su-premely theoretical interpretation that explains the designers’ premises and their key decisions in some of the parts of the preliminary design, as seen by the architects. The text elaborates in detail the urban design concept (planning


za 400. obljetnicu Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice u Zagrebu (2007.), gdje kolacionira zavidnu listu bibliografije radova objavljenih o samoj zgradi, a s vremenskom distancom komentira i njezinih prvih desetak godina postojanja. U završnom dijelu priopćenja (naslovljenom „Umjesto zaključka”) autor će primijetiti kako se danas još više očituje komplementarnost i nadopunjavanje povijesne palače Lubynskoga, remek-djela secesijskoga Gesamtkunstwerka, i nove Nsk: „Stara i nova zgrada Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice svojevrsna su ogledala u kontrapunktu vremena svojih nastajanja. Prva, harmonična arhitek-tura iz 1913. godine, dostojanstveno smještena u potezu parkova, orijentirana hermetički na svoju sadržajnu kulturnu funkciju s vitrajima i stereometrijskom voluminoznošću unutrašnjih prostora, obrađena je potpuno u smislu cjelovitoga umjetničkog djela. Druga, otvorena 1995. godine, dominantno smještena na glavnoj osovini grada i parkovno povezana sa sveučilišnim potezom na zapadu, definira veliko područje novoga središta Zagreba. U svojem arhitektonskom prostoru integrirala je i utkala jedinstvenu panoramu. Gradska veduta postala je pročelje unutrašnjosti, a medij arhitekture prostor definiran je volumenima, plohama, odsjajima i teksturama izabranih gradivih materijala. Svi dodaci su suvišni. Arhitektura počiva na jasnoći svojega koncepta koji je izrečen kom-pozicijom i harmonijom suvremenih jednostavnih oblika, a konačni rezultat, djelo, u biti arhitektonska je skulptura.”

Drugi veliki sklop koji je imao izrazito pozitivan odjek u internacionalnoj stručnoj publicistici jest novi putnički terminal Međunarodne zračne luke Za-greb.14 Projekt je na domaćoj i međunarodnoj arhitektonskoj sceni dojmljivo inauguriran u završnici velikoga internacionalnog natječaja 2008. godine kada je pristiglo 17 radova, među njima i oni svjetski etabliranih zvijezda – čak triju dobitnika Pritzkerove nagrade (tzv. „arhitektonskog Nobela”) – arhitekata Shigerua Bana (ii. nagrada), Sir Normana Fostera (iii. nagrada) i Zahe Hadid (V. nagrada). Japanski tim Shigerua Bana predstavio se slikovitom drvenom konstrukcijom, materijalom koji se rijetko odabire za projekte velikih dimenzija i ekstremnih sigurnosnih zahtjeva poput zračnih luka. Engleski arhitekt lord Foster (odnedavno dopisni član HaZU) terminal je interpretirao kao neobičnu „staklenu šumu”, istovremeno pazeći da se zgrada uklopi u okolni prirodni kontekst, ali i da maksimalno zadovolji koncept održivosti pri korištenju ener-gije. Zaha Hadid je, kao i uvijek, oduševila prepoznatljivom parametričkom formom i futurističkim vizurama pri kretanju kroz zračnu luku. U konačnici in-ternacionalni ocjenjivački sud (u kojem su sudjelovali i projektanti zračnih luka u Münchenu i Oslu te predstavnik međunarodnog udruženja arhitekata, a od domaćih su arhitekata žirirali Jerko Rošin, Saša Begović, Veljko Oluić i Jadranka Veselić-Bruvo), prvu je nagradu dodijelio originalnoj viziji hrvatskoga autorskog tima Kincl – Neidhardt – Radić, koji je tako pobijedio u konkurenciji najvećih svjetskih imena, a njihov projekt odabran je za daljnju razradu i realizaciju.

Nedugo nakon otvorenja aerodromski je sklop ekstenzivno prezentiran na prestižnim web-por-talima poput ArchDaily, ArchitectMagazine, detail.de,… a nedavno je ovjenčan i internacio-nalnom nagradom American Architecture Prize 2017.

14 –

54 55


experience always privileged over architecture), the sources of the inspiration for the appearance of the building, the idea of the sustainability and the Hvac system, and the ingenious load-bearing structure would be described in detail a few years later in the article Construction of the New Passenger Terminal of Zagreb Airport, a jointly authored work prepared for the journal Građevinar, just a year before the construction started (2012). All these texts about the airport and many other reviews, interviews and descriptions of the authors that are not mentioned were created during the nine-year-long process of working out the design, from competition to inauguration, which once again is proof that Velimir Neidhardt, even with the biggest projects in his career, has always been a champion of both practice and theory in the work of the architect.

—

He has shown it is possible to deal successfully with both, shattering the illusion of many architects that the profession can and should be divided into those who write and those who – only – design, for without one polarity the other cannot exist, and vice versa. Words and works together make up architecture, the philosophy of space, and of this the oeuvre and creative procedure of Velimir Neidhardt are the best possible proof.


Već od samog početka Neidhardt u nekoliko navrata publicira projekt zrač-ne luke, a kao uzorni standard struke posebno valja istaknuti neobjavljeni tekst iz natječajnog elaborata Explanatory report – Zagreb Airport – New Passenger Terminal (2008.) u kojem je izbjegnut uobičajen i konvencionalan izričaj svojstven tehničkim opisima te je od radnoga teksta stvorena teorijska interpretacija par excellence koja pojašnjava projektantske premise i ključne odluke u pojedinim dijelovima idejnog rješenja, kako ih vide autori. U tekstu se detaljno elaborira urbanistički koncept (planersko iskustvo uvijek progovara prije arhitekture!), ishodišta inspiracije za oblikovanje zgrade, ideju održivosti i energetskog bloka, a ingenioznu nosivu strukturu zgrade detaljno će opisati nekoliko godina poslije u znanstvenom članku Konstrukcija novog putničkog terminala zagrebačkog aerodroma, suautorski pripremljenom za časopis Gra-đevinar samo godinu prije početka izgradnje (2012.). Svi navedeni tekstovi o zračnoj luci i još brojni drugi autorovi osvrti, intervjui i opisi koji nisu spomenuti, nastajali su tijekom devetogodišnjega procesa razrade projekta od natječaja do otvorenja terminala, što iznova potvrđuje da je Velimir Neidhardt i kod najvećih projekata u svojoj dugoj karijeri bio ravnopravni zagovornik i prakse i teorije u arhitektonskome djelovanju.

—

Pokazao je kako je oboje moguće uspješno i simultano ostvariti, razbijajući tako iluziju mnogih arhitekata koji smatraju da se arhitektonska profesija može i smije dijeliti na one koji samo pišu i one koji isključivo projektiraju – jer bez jednoga polariteta nema drugoga, i vice versa. Riječi i djela zajedno čine ar-hitekturu, filozofiju prostora, a opus i stvaralački prosede akademika Velimira Neidhardta najbolji je dokaz tome.

Documents

Misao u arhitekturi : Velimir Neidhardt · Od projekta Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice, zgrada ‘INA-Trgovine’ ili ‘Croatia osiguranja’, do nedavno završenoga novog