{"title":"通过建设埃因霍温学校的思考","authors":"S. M. Figueiredo","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In December 1988, the exhibition “The Eindhoven School: The Modern Past” opened at deSingel in Antwerp. Presenting the work of twenty-three architecture graduates from TU Eindhoven (TU/e), this exhibition signaled the emergence of a new type of architecture in the Netherlands. However, unlike the Chicago or the Amsterdam School, the Eindhoven School was not presented on the basis of formal similarities. Instead, it was described as “a constellation of diverse attitudes which range[d] from Han Westerlaken’s high tech to the refinement of Jo Coenen and the intellectualism of [Wiel] Arets and [Wim] Van den Bergh,” but also included the work of John Körmeling, Sjoerd Soeters, René van Zuuk, Martien Jansen, Gert-Jan Willemse, Johan Kappetein, Jos van Eldonk, and Bert Dirrix.1","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"133 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Thinking through Building The Eindhoven School\",\"authors\":\"S. M. Figueiredo\",\"doi\":\"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In December 1988, the exhibition “The Eindhoven School: The Modern Past” opened at deSingel in Antwerp. Presenting the work of twenty-three architecture graduates from TU Eindhoven (TU/e), this exhibition signaled the emergence of a new type of architecture in the Netherlands. However, unlike the Chicago or the Amsterdam School, the Eindhoven School was not presented on the basis of formal similarities. Instead, it was described as “a constellation of diverse attitudes which range[d] from Han Westerlaken’s high tech to the refinement of Jo Coenen and the intellectualism of [Wiel] Arets and [Wim] Van den Bergh,” but also included the work of John Körmeling, Sjoerd Soeters, René van Zuuk, Martien Jansen, Gert-Jan Willemse, Johan Kappetein, Jos van Eldonk, and Bert Dirrix.1\",\"PeriodicalId\":216118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch\",\"volume\":\"133 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
1988年12月,“埃因霍温学派:现代的过去”展览在安特卫普的德辛格尔开幕。本次展览展示了来自埃因霍温工业大学(TU/e)的23名建筑专业毕业生的作品,标志着荷兰新型建筑的出现。然而,与芝加哥学派或阿姆斯特丹学派不同,埃因霍温学派并不是基于形式上的相似性而提出的。相反,它被描述为“各种态度的集合,范围从Han Westerlaken的高科技到Jo Coenen的精致和Wiel Arets和Wim Van den Bergh的理智主义”,但也包括John Körmeling, Sjoerd Soeters, ren Van Zuuk, Martien Jansen, Gert-Jan Willemse, Johan Kappetein, Jos Van Eldonk和Bert dirrix的作品
In December 1988, the exhibition “The Eindhoven School: The Modern Past” opened at deSingel in Antwerp. Presenting the work of twenty-three architecture graduates from TU Eindhoven (TU/e), this exhibition signaled the emergence of a new type of architecture in the Netherlands. However, unlike the Chicago or the Amsterdam School, the Eindhoven School was not presented on the basis of formal similarities. Instead, it was described as “a constellation of diverse attitudes which range[d] from Han Westerlaken’s high tech to the refinement of Jo Coenen and the intellectualism of [Wiel] Arets and [Wim] Van den Bergh,” but also included the work of John Körmeling, Sjoerd Soeters, René van Zuuk, Martien Jansen, Gert-Jan Willemse, Johan Kappetein, Jos van Eldonk, and Bert Dirrix.1