Fountainhead

An Un-Dutch Housing Experiment

Abstract

The extended 1990s, the period from 1989 to 2001, was not only an important period of growth for Dutch architecture but also a key moment for the Dutch in reflecting on their identity. Crucial to that reflection, according to critic Bart Lootsma, was the publication in 1987 of a book by British-American historian Simon Schama on the culture and mentality of the Dutch golden age: The Embarrassment of Riches.1 Schama argues in his book that Dutch culture since the golden age has been characterized by a collective fear that inflated egos would turn prosperity into adversity. Therefore, the great social dilemma in the Republic, according to Schama, was how to reconcile wealth and morals. With the help of Calvin and Erasmus, the Dutch chose to renounce outward show and pompous behaviour as much as possible.

The topicality of this history lies in the fact that the present Dutch consultation model – the polder model – and a mentality of ‘if you act normal, that’s already crazy enough’ could very possibly have its roots in this moral dilemma. It is likely that the problematic position of the concept of luxury in Dutch architecture and design is also related to this. According to Bart Lootsma in his book SuperDutch: New Architecture in the Netherlands, the Dutch spend the least money on clothing of all Europeans. Building costs are many times lower than in the rest of Europe. And just as the wealthy burgers of the golden age built their mansions in the countryside and played down their size and opulence when they were in town, today’s owners of some of the most important country homes commissioned over the past years – the Dutch House by OMA and the Moebius House by Van Berkel & Bos – prefer to remain anonymous and keep their addresses secret.