"Sybold van Ravesteyn created some of the most beautiful as well as some of the ugliest buildings in the Netherlands. You can't look around them, they force you to take a stand." 1 Introduction In 1977, the Stichting Architectuur Museum in Amsterdam and the Centraal Museum in Utrecht hosted an exhibition on the work of the architect Sybold van Ravesteyn (1889-1983), who had hitherto been little discussed in architectural history literature.2 The architect himself had handed over archival material to the Stichting Architectuur Museum eleven years before his death,3 which made it possible to put together a comprehensive exhibition on his entire oeuvre during his lifetime. In connection with this important exhibition, a catalog was published by Erik de Jong and Hoos Blotkamp, which not only contains a complete oeuvre overview and biography, but in which the authors also place the oeuvre in national and international developments.4 After the publication of this book, known until today as a standard work, nothing new was published on Van Ravesteyn's architecture for a long time. However, Van Ravesteyn was mentioned in overviews of Dutch architecture and articles on some aspects and buildings appeared regularly in architectural magazines and newspapers. Especially the books published in the 1980s by Joh. de Vries on Blijdorp Zoo5 and by Kees Rouw on Schouwburg Kunstmin and the Holland office building of 1859, both in Dordrecht6, should be mentioned in this connection. A complete monograph on the extremely extensive and differentiated oeuvre of the generally under-discussed architect Van Ravesteyn has not yet appeared. In addition to the 4.8 m S. van Ravesteyn-Archive7 in the Netherlands Architecture Institute in Rotterdam, there are further archival materials in the Rotterdam Municipal Archives, the Algemeen Rijksarchief in The Hague and the Utrecht Archive. Drawings by Van Ravesteyn are not known and also drawings, which were made by his collaborators, are hardly preserved. Much of these important sources were destroyed by Van Ravesteyn himself and must be considered lost. Essentially, the archive at the NAI includes historic photographs of Van Ravesteyn's buildings taken by Hans Spies and Gerrit Burg, among others, letters and correspondence and magazine and newspaper articles collected in part by Van Ravesteyn himself. The model collection contains three models of buildings by Van Ravesteyn. The surviving sources, especially the photographs, are important documentation material, not least because not many of the buildings are still standing. Already during his lifetime, an extraordinary number of his buildings were demolished. In the literature Van Ravesteyn is rightly called "the most demolished architect in the Netherlands".8 Youth, education and early private commissions Sybold van Ravesteyn9 was born in Rotterdam on February 18, 1889.10 The only child of Adrianus Justinus Hendricus van Ravesteijn, wine merchant with the firm Van Straalen Monsieur and Erkelens, and Josephine Aletta Moens, he came from a well-to-do, liberal family. He grew up in Rotterdam on the Westerkade 29 and attended the HBS in the same city between 1901 and 1906.11 In an autobiographical article, Van Ravesteyn wrote about this time: "At the H.B.S. he had no difficulty at all with subject matter or fellow pupils, was as an only child quiet, independent, had many friends and already in H.B.S.interest in literature and painting; visited museums and galleries [...] and made trips abroad, alone or otherwise. "12 From his youth Van Ravesteyn undertook many trips abroad. His experiences mainly in Italy, Germany and England also influenced the development of his architecture. In 1906 he decided - in his own words based on the deep impression the Rotterdam harbor had made on him13 - to study "civil engineering" at the then TH in Delft. During his studies, he completed internships in 1911 in Holstein and Benrath near Düsseldorf.14 A year later, Van Ravesteyn completed his studies with the diploma of "civil engineer "15 and entered the service of the Maatschappij tot Exploitatie van Staatsspoorwegen in Utrecht, later Nederlandse Spoorwegen, that same year. For forty years, Van Ravesteyn then designed and built stations, signal boxes, freight offices and sheds and other service buildings throughout the Netherlands, first as an aspiring deputy engineer and later as an architect commissioned by Nederlandse Spoorwegen. Van Ravesteyn began his career as an engineer with the Maatschappij tot Exploitatie van Staatsspoorwegen in Utrecht. His interest in architecture and architectural design grew only through the influence of his first wife,16 the Rotterdam-born Dora Hintzen, whom he married in 1915.17 He owed to her, as he himself put it in 1977, "the opening up, the becoming aware of my giftedness, my artistry." Through Dora Hintzen, Van Ravesteyn came into contact with the art pedagogue and critic H.P. Bremmer, who at the time lectured on modern art and published the magazine "De Kroniek voor Beeldende Kunst," which Van Ravesteyn also read. Van Ravesteyn later spoke of this time as a "profound development [...] in the direction of art, of architecture, under the influence of the atmosphere of his Wife's family and of his Wife herself. "18 The first independent designs by Van Ravesteyn are furniture for family and friends: including a three-piece and a two-piece cabinet (1918), a writing desk with office chair for H.C. Hintzen (1919) and an office chair, executed in 1921 by Gerrit Rietveld.19 The aforementioned furniture is made of (oak) wood, the chairs are upholstered in leather. Characteristics of these early works are the plastic, geometric basic forms, rounded corners and the heavy and bulky appearance. The three-piece cabinet is additionally decorated with geometric ornaments. In these early furniture designs, Van Ravesteyn appears to have been influenced by the Amsterdam School, an influence that is short-lived compared to the entire development of his architecture. Architect at the Dutch Railways From 1912 to 1959 (20), Van Ravesteyn designed and built for the Dutch Railways.21 At the State Railways, he was initially concerned with designing yard extensions and a marshalling yard. Via the places of employment of Utrecht, Dordrecht and Breda, Van Ravesteyn returned to Utrecht in 1918 to direct the execution of the third administration building of the Dutch Railways, designed by G.W. van Heukelom, in the Moreelsepark. His knowledge of reinforced concrete, obtained through self-study, meant for Van Ravesteyn an actual beginning of his design activities. At his own request, he was given the opportunity to engage in architectural design. In the 1920s he became head of the architectural department of the southeastern region of the Netherlands of the Railways. Among the earliest works designed by Van Ravesteyn as an architect for the Dutch Railways are a service building in Elst (1922), a shed with water tower and a goods shed in Arnhem Broek (both 1924). The service building in Elst is a simple, brick building with a rectangular plan. The regular brick facades are punctuated by few, conspicuously small, rectangular windows and doorways offset from the center axis. The protruding flat roof is characteristic. The shed with water tower in Arnhemse Broek is also a brick building with a protruding flat roof. Especially the goods shed in Arnhemse Broek with its pyramid roof and brick facades is reminiscent of buildings by Frank Lloyd Wright - and especially his prairie houses. It is also worth noting that the interior of the goods shed was depicted next to Van Ravesteyn's signal boxes as early as 1927 by Ludwig Hilberseimer in his famous book "Internationale Neue Baukunst".22 Van Ravesteyn designed his first signal boxes in the 1920s: The signal box - a "building where the signals and points of a railroad network are operated "23 - is a building task, which occupied Van Ravesteyn as an architect with the Dutch Railways until the 1950s,24 and then became less and less important with the increasing automation of the railroads. With the exception of the signal box in Maastricht, all of the total of nearly 14 signal boxes by Van Ravesteyn were demolished for the reason mentioned. An impression of the signal boxes can only be given by historical photographs and, in a few cases, construction drawings. The signal box in Bergen op Zoom (1924-1926) consists of a supporting structure of four rectangular columns topped by a cubic building section with windows and a flat roof. The motif of the protruding roof already found in earlier buildings also characterizes the signal boxes in Susteren and Born, built in 1925, and in De Steeg and IJsselmonde, built in 1927. The latter signal boxes consist of concrete, have an extraordinarily high supporting structure and a working area with glass all around. The relatively massive substructures of the signal boxes in De Steeg and IJsselmonde contrast with the almost fragile columns of the signal box in Boxtel, built in 1928. Despite the few freedoms in designing an engineering building, Van Ravesteyn managed to design many variations of signal boxes. Differences can be found in the shape of the supporting structure, the increasing glazing and in the use of materials. Especially the early signal boxes are characterized by functionality and construction technique. Presumably, the water tower in Goes (1927) was also designed by Van Ravesteyn; however, there is no clear evidence for this. A comparison with the water towers in Breda (1927) and Roermond (1928), further the fact that the water tower in Goes was commissioned by the Dutch Railways and the fact that a photograph of the water tower in Goes was found in Van Ravesteyn's archive25, give rise to this suspicion. An important building from this period at the Dutch Railways is the freight office built in 1927 on the Wilhelminakade in Rotterdam-Feijenoord. This single-story, flat-roofed concrete building has an almost circular floor plan. It is not only a prominent example of functionalist concrete architecture but also a forerunner of the later modern office gardens. For the offices, grouped around the central hall and separated only by glass walls, Van Ravesteyn designed special tubular metal furniture. Van Ravesteyn was one of the first designers of metal tubular furniture in the Netherlands.26 From 1927 onward, he used only metal tubular as the material for his chairs, as, for example, in the M.R. Radermacher Schorer residence, the interior in Enschede, and the interior for Prof. Kaag of Tilburg. With the early works for the Railways presented in brief, Van Ravesteyn developed in the direction of the Nieuwe Bouwen, and especially with the design of the goods office in Rotterdam-Feijenoord, he built up the reputation of being a true New Business architect. The Utrecht artist milieu and De Gemeenschap 1925-1935 In 1919, Sybold van Ravesteyn moved to Utrecht, the city, where the practice of art flourished in the 1920s.27 Since the turn of the century, several artists came to live in Utrecht, who, stimulating each other, raised artistic production to a high level. Van Ravesteyn joined the Utrecht Art Circle in 1920 and soon came into contact with other artists. Among others, he got to know Gerrit Rietveld, in whose workshop he had his first designs executed. It was also at Rietveld that he met El Lissitzky and Kurt Schwitters. He also met Charley Toorop, who painted a portrait of Dora Hintzen-Ravesteyn and her three children in 1923, as well as Willem Maas and his later client and patron M.R. Radermacher Schorer. Through J.J.P. Oud he made national and international contacts, for example he met Piet Mondrian. 1931, a group of Utrecht artists put together an exhibition entitled "Utrecht Youth." In addition to Rietveld, Jo and Stef Uiterwaal, Leon Brom, W.A. Maas, P.J.C. Klaarhammer, D. van Luyn, J. Sjollema, F.H. Abbing, W. van Leusden and H. Ykelenstam, Van Ravesteyn also took part in this exhibition.28 Van Ravesteyn's works, which he executed as a private architect in the 1920s in addition to his work for the Dutch Railways, should be seen against this background. In 1923, Van Ravesteyn furnished his own home. The same year he had moved within Utrecht from Catharijnesingel to Admiraal van Gentstraat 3129 and designed several pieces of furniture and lamps for the new home. The living room interior included six armchairs, a table, a low cabinet and a lamp. Designed according to strict geometric principles, the furniture is painted black and white and shows the influence of De Stijl furniture by Gerrit Rietveld, for example. This influence can also be seen in the bedroom furniture for M.R. Radermacher Schorer from 1924. It is a bed with bedside table, two chairs, a wardrobe and a table-cabinet combination. The furniture is now in the collection of the Centraal Museum in Utrecht. They are painted black and white, are constructed according to strict geometric forms, partly they are rectangular blocks pushed together. Van Ravesteyn exhibited the interior for M.R. Radermacher Schorer - from then on an important client of his - 1925 at the Exposition des Arts Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes in Paris. For the most important representative of De Stijl, Theo van Doesburg, the aforementioned designs prompted him to refer to Van Ravesteyn as "an imitator. Through Albert Kuijk, Jan Engelman and Lou Lichtveld, Van Ravesteyn became involved with De Gemeenschap in 1925. De Gemeenschap (1925-1941)30 was a Utrecht circle of young, Catholic writers and artists, which published a magazine of the same name. Among them, besides the poet Jan Engelman and the writer Lou Lichtveld, who published under the pseudonym Albert Helman, were the architect Willem Maas and writer Louis Kuitenbrouwer. Their magazine featured the latest developments in visual art, architecture, literature, music and theater. Through this group, Van Ravesteyn was forever relieved of his aversion to all things Catholic. "The Community period 1925-1935 fertilized him greatly and established his understanding of Catholics for his life; he never converted, nor was any attempt ever made to do so, "31 Van Ravesteyn wrote of himself. Commissioned by De Gemeenschap, Van Ravesteyn designed various covers and typographies, wrote a large number of architectural reviews, and also designed the office interior for De Gemeenschap at Oude Gracht 55 in 1929. The covers designed by Van Ravesteyn for the magazine De Gemeenschap are characterized by a sleek design strongly oriented to constructivism. With the exception of the cover for De Gemeenschap no. 9 of 1926 - a collage consisting of cut-out photographs of famous architects - the covers show a combination of letters and an abstract interplay of lines, together forming a constructivist whole. The book cover for Albert Helman's "South-South-West" also has these characteristics. The constructivist influence is also easily recognized in an abstract Christ figure for a July 1925 supplement to De Gemeenschap. Vertical, horizontal and diagonal lines depict Christ hanging on the cross. Christ's suffering is evident through his head, a blue circle, shifted from the center axis to the right. The interior Van Ravesteyn designed for De Gemeenschap's office at 55 Oude Gracht is an early example of the architect's collaboration with visual artists, in this case with the painter Charles Eyck, who created a large mural. With the involvement with The Community began Van Ravesteyn's activity as a writer. During the ten years he was a member of the artists' circle, he wrote a large number of articles on architecture, expressing his opinions and attitudes toward recent developments, including Rietveld32, Oud33 and Le Corbusier34. Van Ravesteyn himself saw his involvement with De Gemeenschap, which lasted until 1935, as an "artistic adolescence. Piece by piece, the contacts with other artists had a far-reaching influence on his subsequent career. It was through De Gemeenschap in particular that Van Ravesteyn's interest in Catholicism emerged and with it his interest in Rome, which he first visited in 1936. Ever since his youth, Van Ravesteyn had undertaken many journeys. By traveling extensively - a passion he had inherited from home - Van Ravesteyn kept abreast of other international developments in architecture and got to know personally many of the then high-profile architects and artists. In 1927, for example, he visited the Weissenhofsiedlung in Stuttgart and the Bauhaus in Dessau. The architect, who traveled freely as an NS employee, mainly visited Italy, France and Germany on his numerous trips.35 His love for Italian culture and the enduring value of the decorative and aesthetic nature of (religious) art was great. Interiors from the 1920s and 1930s While early designs by Van Ravesteyn were mainly influenced by the Amsterdam School and De Stijl, a change toward a more personal style can be recognized from the late 1920s onward. This change in style can be seen in small private commissions from the second half of the 1920s. For the first time, Van Ravesteyn used the curved line as a form-defining element in experimental lamps from around 1926. In eight variations, he produced minimalist lamps made of steel and wood; notable for their simple, clear forms and almost sculptural appearance. Another early example for the partial use of round shapes are the furniture designed for the Vicomte de Noailles.36 In addition to a bed and a table, these include an armchair with a round seat and curved back. With the exception of the aforementioned chair, the bedroom furniture is primarily characterized by De Stijl elements and is similar to the 1924 bedroom furniture for M.R. Radermacher Schorer. The earlier work had seen the Vicomte de Noailles at the 1925 World's Fair in Paris and immediately commissioned Van Ravesteyn to design a similar interior for his villa in Hyères, France. Van Ravesteyn's breakthrough of his personal style succeeded with his interiors designed between 1927 and 1941, especially the interior for the residence at Wilhelminapark 12 in Utrecht. In this interior, designed in 1927 and executed again in 1928 for M.R. Radermacher Schorer, he opted for an elegant, rarefied design with slightly curved walls and ornate chairs upholstered in pastel-colored velvet. The floor is divided into living and dining rooms, separated by a narrow corridor. The dining room is opened by a large window to the garden and roughly semicircular terrace, reached by a curved staircase. The rooms are furnished with curved, tubular metal furniture. Through the use of luxurious materials for the furniture a through the bare walls the rooms of the M.R. Radermacher Schorer residence make an elegant, almost cool impression. Erik de Jong and Hoos Blotkamp speak of an Art Deco interior and further refer to influences from the Rococo period.37 During this time, the interior in Enschede (1927) and the interior for H.A. Kaag (1929) were also created. Van Ravesteyn also designed tubular metal furniture for these interiors. The deliberate pursuit of beauty also led to the use of curved lines in his own home on Prins Hendriklaan in Utrecht (1932). His own house, where he lived from 1934 until his death, is the first fully architectural expression of an increasingly urgent plea for individual freedom in the design process (the architect as artist). During the 1930s, Van Ravesteyn increasingly developed a need for a lyrical architecture. In his pursuit of a more expressive architecture, Van Ravesteyn is certainly not alone, but is the most talked-about. Joking reproaches such as "hairdressing salon architecture," architecture in the "konditorei style" or "a kind of Hollywood style "38 became his share. First stations commissioned by Dutch Railways As far as works for the NS were concerned, the time had not yet come. Van Ravesteyn limited himself for a few more years to a businesslike approach and continued his fame among his colleagues as a true new-business architect (the architect as a builder). His first railroad stations were built in the early 1930s: Lutterade (1931-1932), Kerkrade (1932) and Spekholzerheide (1932). While Lutterade station includes a freight shed, platform roof, service building (delivery goods office with space for the public and signal box), a building with waiting rooms 1st, 2nd and 3rd class, storage space, central heating and toilets, shunter's quarters and miners' waiting room, the stations in Kerkrade and Spekholzerheide are simple, rectangular buildings with overhanging eaves. Two signal boxes van Ravesteyn designed in the early 1930s: a signal box in Maastricht (1932) and one in Dordrecht (1933). The signal box in Maastricht is the only one still in existence by van Ravesteyn. On a minimal concrete leg structure rests a rather large concrete cube, overhanging the platforms, with a distinctive gabled roof. Despite the beautiful signal box being in the way, according to the NS, it has been retained unused as a protected National Monument. A new challenge for Van Ravesteyn was to design pedestrian tunnels on the one hand and substations for the electrification of the railroad lines on the other. Starting in 1934, he designed a large number of these structures throughout the Netherlands. Moreover, in 1934, in connection with the electrification of the Rotterdam-Dordrecht line, Van Ravesteyn was commissioned to rebuild the railroad stations Beurs and Delftsche Poort in Rotterdam. At Beurs station, called Blaak since about 1953 and demolished in 1974, the hall and platforms were rebuilt, also a new tunnel was built. During the renovation, some of the neo-classical, cast-iron columns were spared and elegantly incorporated between the stairs. The stairs naturally follow the direction of traffic. A simple gate separates departing and arriving passengers. The rebuilding of Delftsche Poort station - the station also no longer exists - consisted of the construction of a tunnel with two stores to the second platform, the construction of the access to it (from the existing entrance hall), rebuilding of the platforms, new checkpoints, book kiosk and waiting room restaurant buildings on the second platform. With the spatially clever renovations of the Beurs and Delftsche Poort stations in Rotterdam, the graceful use of modern materials and the curved line are also introduced in station construction. Masterpieces from the years 1936-1940 In 1936, Van Ravesteyn remodeled the offices of the Brandwaarborg Maatschappij 'Tiel-Utrecht' in Utrecht for the second time - he had carried out the first remodel in 1931. These interiors in Hollywood-like theater style, with their excessively curled furniture, wavy paneling and ornate banisters are the prelude to his most fascinating and also most criticized period. Despite the many commissions, Van Ravesteyn - who by now had received "dispensation" from the NS for the many private commissions - then became somewhat isolated artistically. In the short period 1936-1941, he realized a large number of works, which stand out for their dashing, almost frivolous and, above all, very personal formal language: the interior of the royal yacht 'Piet Hein' (1937), the Central Station in Utrecht (1936-1939), the Rotterdam zoo Blijdorp (1937-1940), in Dordrecht the office building for the Brandwaarborg Maatschappij 'Holland van 1859' (1937-1939) and the remodeling of schouwburg Kunstmin (1938-1940) and the signal box in Utrecht (1938). In these designs influences of late baroque and also neo-classicism are clearly visible. As mentioned, Van Ravesteyn's preference for scrolls and the gracefully curved line was first clearly expressed in the conversion of the Tiel-Utrecht office building (1936). However, there were some who did not share his preference, for example, his colleagues at the association De 8 en Opbouw, of which Van Ravesteyn had been a member since 1929. On January 30, 1937, the architects' association made an excursion to Utrecht, to see Rietveld's cinema 'Vreeburg' as well as the Tiel-Utrecht office building. The members of De 8 and Opbouw disagreed with Van Ravesteyn's changed ideas about aesthetics and decoration. The discussion meeting at Avegoor on June 5 and 6 in 1937, in response to Van Ravesteyn's insights, did not mean a rapprochement, on the contrary. By means of propositions, the problems concerning aesthetics, the designer's freedoms and the importance of functional requirements were explained by those present. Eventually the disagreements, started around the Tiel-Utrecht office building, led to Van Ravesteyn leaving the group in 1938. The second masterpiece from this period can be considered the royal yacht 'Piet Hein' (1937). For this national wedding gift for Princess Juliana and Prince Bernhard, Van Ravesteyn designed the upper deck interiors: salon, hall, wheelhouse and dining room. The overall design for the yacht, that is, the exterior and the layout of the floor plans, was made by a technical bureau. In his design, Van Ravesteyn had to take this into account: "Small difficulties he had with the designer of the yacht, when the architect found it absolutely necessary for the 'living room' to pull the three separate windows in the side wall [...] into one whole, with gossamer semicircular columns clad in white marble between them. "39 The tubular metal chairs, which Van Ravesteyn designed for the yacht in addition to tables, bench, paneling, etc., are almost identical to the chairs for the office interior for Tiel-Utrecht. Again, the curling movement of the tubes is striking. According to Blotkamp, the chairs "became ornaments in the interiors, like other architectural details. "40 He also speaks of the most "baroque" phase of Van Ravesteyn's architecture. Van Ravesteyn's renovation for Utrecht's Central Station (1935, 1938-1940) also shows characteristics of a distinct masterpiece, and it is all the more incomprehensible that Van Ravesteyn's station had to make way for an entirely new Hoog Catharijne station in 1975. In 1935, Van Ravesteyn was commissioned to remodel the first floor of the existing station. In 1938, shortly after the rebuilding was completed, a fire destroyed the upper floor and part of the first floor. Subsequently, Van Ravesteyn was also commissioned to build a new upper floor. In 1940, the entire station could finally be commissioned. Historical photographs show a longitudinal building with an undulating, arched façade with lots of glass, especially on the first floor. The silhouette is emphasized by the three sculptures by Mari Andriessen: Safety, Phoenix and Speed. Another sculpture by Charles Eyck stood in the hall of the station. Rietveld wrote to Van Ravesteyn about Central Station: "Dear Van Ravesteyn, for a moment I must let you know how surprised I was when I walked into the station early yesterday morning. The whole of Utrecht has been brightened up by it. [...] What a success also for the Railways! Kind regards. Sincerely, Rietveld." In 1937, Van Ravesteyn was commissioned to design a new zoo for Rotterdam. Van Ravesteyn himself not only called the Blijdorp Zoo his "most extensive "41 work of the 1930-1940 period, but considered the design and construction of the zoo his life's work.42 According to architectural history literature, the zoo "occupies a unique place in the history of Dutch architecture. "43 It is one of the first zoos designed by a single architect. The reason for the assessment as a masterpiece is also the linking of the principles of the Nieuwe Bouwen to Van Ravesteyn's highly personal architectural vision, which, according to Johan de Vries and later A. Devolder, is excellently expressed in the zoo. After the Rotterdamsche Diergaarde founded in 1855 and constructed in 1856 to the design of the garden architects J.D. and L.P. Zocher44 near the former Delftsche Poort station proved to be in the way of the expansion of the north-south and east-west traffic and, moreover, there was a considerable operating deficit and the zoo in the meantime no longer met the new standards, it was decided on July 17, 1937 to move the zoo to the Blijdorp district in the west of Rotterdam. In October of that year, S. van Ravesteyn was commissioned to draw up a sketch plan for the 13-hectare site. Construction began on May 1, 1939; the pre-opening of the northern section took place on July 13, the official opening in early December, and the construction work was completed in April 1941.45 On the thirteen-hectare site, the various animal enclosures and pastures are grouped along a main axis in a longitudinal direction. The main building, the Riviera Hall, was originally the enclosure for reptiles, thick skinned animals (elephants) and monkeys. Other buildings include the bear theater, giraffe enclosure, tea shop and predator enclosure. A large pond contains pools for polar bears and sea lions.46 Literally the highlight of the zoo was the 47-meter-high observation tower, which was demolished in 1972.47 The decoration of the buildings attempted to depict the animals' origins. As with many other buildings, Van Ravesteyn collaborated with various visual artists in the design of Blijdorp Zoo, including the sculptors Charles Eyck, Jo Uiterwaal, W. van Kuilenburg, L. Bolle, and the painters P. den Beesten, Agnes Canta, D. Elffers, and P. Worm.48 The curved line is also ubiquitous in the design of the zoo. Based on the connection of Van Ravesteyn's personal vision of architecture and the Nieuwe Bouwen movement, the style of the zoo is also called new business neo-baroque.49 In the 1980s and 1990s, several modifications and renovations were planned. In order to preserve Van Ravesteyn's original design for the time being, the zoo was included on the Rotterdam City Council's municipal monument list on 29-10-1991. With the very lavish office building for the Brandwaarborg Maatschappij 'Holland van 1859' in Dordrecht (1937-1939), Van Ravesteyn bid a final farewell to functionalism. The brief was to construct a new office building on a newly acquired site in Dordrecht, where essentially the entire office business could be conducted on one level. It was desired that the building should occupy an eye-catching position in relation to train traffic, so the main entrance was designed on the railroad embankment. To avoid the danger that the building with its - largely above ground - low basement would make too insubstantial an impression, a small floor was designed, containing a spacious commissary room, two consulting rooms and small toilets. For the same reason, the chimney was placed in the middle of the structure in order to promote the intended height effect of the whole. On the first floor, in front on either side of the main entrance are the four boardrooms with two consulting rooms, as well as the board toilets. The main entrance leads into the circular hall from which the various counters are located. Behind it, as a single space, is the office, which can accommodate 150 people. At the end, in the center is the vault. At the back of the large office space - separated by a glass wall - on the left side of the vault are the rooms of the typists, on the right side are the collation rooms and work rooms for senior officials. In the office, small workspaces for chiefs are separated by two-meter-high glass walls. Staff access is located in the basement at the rear. The basement includes checkrooms, staff toilets, archives, a canteen, and work and storage rooms. Two staircases, opening on either side of the vault on the first floor, connect the two levels. At the rear, flush with the first floor, the janitor's house is extended, whose entrance to the rear yard is located on the basement level, and which possesses indoor connection to the office building on both levels. A steamer on dry land, a bonbonnière, a hatbox with a pipe on it; these were some of the nicknames circulating among the people of Dordrecht for the new headquarters of the Brandwaarborg Maatschappij 'Holland van 1859' shortly after its opening in 1939. Curved lines and sculpture groups are abundant, as are circular and ball-shaped ornaments, both inside and out. However, due to the rigid main form of exterior and interior, the building also has neo-classical features. An important work in this series of masterpieces from the period 1936 to 1940 is the signal box in Dordrecht (1938), which Van Ravesteyn designed on behalf of Nederlandse Spoorwegen. The signal box clearly distinguishes itself from the other mainly functional rectangular signal boxes. Although Van Raevsteyn as in earlier signal boxes also in this signal box had to take into account the technical function of the building, he was also able to apply his own, very personal, neo-baroque style. The curved line is already present in the 1936 signal box for Rotterdam-Zuid, but only in the Utrecht signal box it is formative. The signal box, which was also nicknamed "dovecote," was demolished after standing empty for several years. With the renovation of the theater Kunstmin in Dordrecht (1938-1940), designed by the architect Verheul, Van Ravesteyn created a continuous play of curving, wavy and curling lines, decorated in numerous places with stucco ornaments. Fine woods and marble he had brought together with distinctly modern inventions such as neon lighting and chrome-plated steel tubing. Nothing was left of Verheul's interior, except for the remnants of the old ceiling. In place of the dilapidated auditorium with its gloomy annexes was a comfortable, somewhat decadent theater with adventurous corridors and staircases. Van Ravesteyn divided the original enormous hall in two: a theater hall with a rising floor and a ballroom with an ordinary floor, in which various activities could take place. To do this, he had to move the entrance to the side of the building, where he made a semicircular addition with an entrance hall and a foyer. Subsequently, the garden was also adapted to the new interior and exterior forms. A comparison of the floor plan and the cross-section of the theater hall shows that here, too, Van Ravesteyn was primarily concerned with a "movable interplay of lines" in the flat plane. Schouwburg Kunstmin is both the pinnacle of the refinement sought by Van Ravesteyn and the end point of the development outlined. After the war, there was no more room for dreams like Kunstmin and its traditionalism won out over its pre-war daring and panache. In schouwburg Kunstmin, functionality and ornament were brought together into a convincing whole. Van Ravesteyn realized this only too well and, with the necessary relativity, named Kunstmin as the first design through which he could be seen as unforgettable. During the war, Van Ravesteyn was not initially dismissive of the German occupiers. This attitude probably resulted from a kind of naiveté rather than from a political drive. His attitude at the beginning of the war is related to his predilection for the Baroque, his penchant for grandeur and monumentality, and the admiration he harbored for great statesmen such as Napoleon. His great attention to architecture, which arose during the reign of Mussolini, also makes him emerge as a man whose passions must often have contrasted sharply with those of his more Calvinist and, above all, socialist-minded colleagues of De 8 and Opbouw. Van Ravesteyn is clearly seen as the 'modern' architect, who, however, did not forget traditional values such as monumentality and decoration. Entirely in keeping with this nevertheless 'conformist' view, is the design he made during the war for the interior of a train car, intended as a meeting and working space for A. Seyss-Inquart. He had no trouble, for example, remaining a member of the BNA that resulted under the Kulturkammer. Still, he came to other views during the war. The fact that he spent some time in hiding and his 1945 design for a resistance monument in Benschop, which he had designed together with Jo Uiterwaal, testify to his resistance to the German occupation. Gas stations for Purfina (1935-1968) A new challenge besides his works for the Dutch Railways and private commissions before the war was for Van Ravesteyn to design gas stations commissioned by the oil company Purfina or Sinfina, later known as NV Petroleum Maatschappij Fina. Van Ravesteyn designed his first gas station as early as 1935 at Rijksweg 12 in Ede. Until 1968, some 24 service stations were built for Purfina, including in Reeuwijk, Schiphol, Sneek, Almelo, Sassenheim, Nijmegen, The Hague, Groningen, Enschede, Arnhem, Rotterdam, Tilburg and Leiden. In 1935, the gas station was a fairly new construction venture, which had come about with the advent of the automobile and increasing gasoline sales along the roads.50 In addition to Purfina, Shell, Caltex, Esso and BP were important and competing companies. Each company had its own colors and logos, which were an important element of the gas stations and which meant that the gas stations had to be easily recognizable to passing motorists. It was therefore obvious to choose one architect to build the gas stations, who would create a kind of corporate identity, which would later be the "coporate identity. In addition to technical and functional preconditions, aesthetic aspects also played an important role. The gas stations by Van Ravesteyn for Purfina are characterized by a striking front facade or a large front roof on which or to which the brand name Purfina or Sinfina appears in large, usually blue letters. Logos often appear on the front and side facades of the buildings. Apart from these "additions," the buildings are tightly geometric, functional buildings. However, the high quality of Van Ravesteyn's gas stations lies in their plastic, sometimes sculptural appearance. Examples include the gas stations at Apeldoornseweg 105 (N 50) in Arnhem (1955-57) and at Ringbaan West 7 in Tilburg (1959). The gas station in Arnhem is one of the few that has survived from Van Ravesteyn51 and at the same time one of the most imaginative and beautiful. It is a small building of about 45 m², containing a lodge, a storage room and toilets. The end facade of the little block slopes and is turned toward the road, so that a maximum front faces the road. This movement is reinforced by the - in two respects - sloping roof, on which, in a specific rhythm, 'Purfina' was initially written in large neon letters. These letters are placed on a jagged roof edge, which curiously and completely irregularly follows the typography of the letters. The dynamics of the building are further enhanced by the use of color - a bright contrast of yellow brick, blue tiling and white walls - and by the various window openings, including a round window and a wedge-shaped and triangular window running around the corner. An important element is also the shadow effect of the recessed and projecting eaves with neon letters. Compared to the gas station in Arnhem, the gas station at Ringbaan West 7 in Tilburg is quite large. In addition to the gas pumps and the usual kiosk, the gas station also contains a lubrication and washing area. Again, the modern design of the concrete building is striking. Especially the emphasis on the flat roof and the silhouette are examples of this. With his designs for gas stations, Van Ravesteyn picked up the thread of post-war functionalism, as propagated in the mid-1950s by Delft professors Van Eesteren, Van den Broek and Bakema. Through the buildings for Purfina (later Fina), with the gas station in Arnhem (1957) as the highlight, he succeeded in giving functional architecture another refreshing impulse. He also once again demonstrated his ability to choose the right style for each assignment. Postwar period at the Dutch Railways After the war, Van Ravesteyn received remarkably few private commissions. However, he did design a lot for the Dutch Railways, in addition to several stations also type houses. "When the war was over it became busy," Van Ravesteyn wrote about the postwar period at the Dutch Railways.52 In 1949 he made a mission trip to Italy to study the stations in Milan, Vicenza, Bologna, Palermo, Florence and Rome, among others.53 The Italian influence is clearly recognizable in his stations designed after 1949. These were built in an Italian kind of neo-classical style. Graceful movements gave way to emphatic symmetry; the floor plans took on a more static character. New in his postwar work is his great interest in the material brick. This can be traced back to a cautious admiration for the traditional, conservative architecture of the architect Granpré-Molière and his Delft School. Examples of this archaic style are the stations of Vlissingen (1949-1950) and Nijmegen (1954). The stations of Gouda (1945-1949) and 's-Hertogenbosch (1951-1952), now demolished, also testified to this new design conception. The station in Gouda was built as early as 1869 by J. Verloop. During World War II, the upper floor was destroyed and much of the first floor damaged. In 1945, Van Ravesteyn was commissioned to repair, rebuild and build a bus shelter next to the station. By connecting wings to the main building and continuing the walls, Van Ravesteyn created a coulisse-like enclosure of the station square. The symmetrical station square is in the tradition of Italian squares, for which Van Ravesteyn had great admiration. The classicist appearance of the station is emphasized by the cornice and the sculptures placed on it by Jo Uiterwaal, further by the imitation natural stone frames of doors, windows and corners. Next to this, the monumental entrance gate is an important feature, which is also found in later stations. Upon completion of the square in 1949, Van Ravesteyn was awarded the silver medal of honor of the Municipality of Gouda that same year, which was sent to him as a medal of appreciation on October 9, 1949.54 Of the station by Van Ravesteyn, only the bus shelter remains. When the old Vlissingen station was very badly damaged during the war years and the middle section completely destroyed, plans had to be made for the rebuilding of a new station. The new station - built between 1949 and 1950 - became much smaller and lower than the old one and contained a small hall, to which were counters, luggage room and a café-restaurant. The latter also served as a waiting room and was conveniently located to the ferry ferry. Against the façade was erected three statues by the sculptor Jo Uiterwaal. Van Ravesteyn first experimented with polychrome sculptures in this building: almost the entire sculpture was cream-colored, except for a few small attributes in well-chosen places in the composition of the sculpture, which were red, blue, yellow or gold. The building was almost identical to the 's-Hertogenbosch station, demolished in 1995. With its ornament of statues and its crass overhangs, the Bossche station was certainly the most plastic-oriented of all Van Ravesteyn's works. A kind of baroque, but without the smooth transitions of the historic baroque. The impression was given that individual elements were used as striking contrasts in an ever-changing and staggered rhythm. The station in 's-Hertogenbosch (1951-1952) was built after the old station by architect Eduard Cuypers from 1895 (or 1893) was so venield during the 1944 war that experts deemed demolition necessary. However, the riveted iron canopies on the first and second platforms, each 447 meters long, a footbridge, ramps and a signal box were retained. They were creations of the then 26-year-old ir G.W. van Heukelom. The canopies were built in the period 1895-96 by the Koninklijke machinefabriek formerly Machinefabriek Begeman in Helmond. The construction is probably the oldest in which liquid iron was used. The two platforms are connected by a footbridge, with a signal box above. Van Ravesteyn's post-war station building (almost identical to the one in Flushing) was in keeping with the old tradition and to that extent also met the wishes of the people of Den Bosch, who valued the preservation of a somewhat familiar cityscape. The monumental hall further accentuated this view in particular. Also in the Nijmegen train station from 1954 - a replacement of the neo-Gothic building from 1894 by C.H. Peters - the Italian influence is recognizable. The building consists of red brick and forms the western end of two squares, of which the southern square was intended for buses, the northern square (traffic circle) is used by traffic to and from the station. On the south side of the bus station is built a wall that is as high as the facade wall of the left part of the station, but has an openwork character with a fairly high parapet against which planting is placed. The Nijmegen station has an elongated facade - so characteristic of Van Ravesteyn - as an encompassing town square wall. A slender tower dominates the square enclosed by brick arches. Also characteristic are the pilasters and window frames made of French limestone. Blotkamp referred to the Via della Conciliazone in Rome as a possible example.55 Van Ravesteyn's last major designs are the Central Station in Rotterdam (1953-1957) and the station post office in Nijmegen (1956-1964). A first design for the Central Station in Rotterdam was made by Van Ravesteyn as early as 1941.56 This first design was a project grand style: a central hall accented by three pylons recessed backwards from the curved wings. A tall tower was to give the established height of 18 meters one more dimension in relation to the surrounding buildings. This design met with great criticism from the city commission of supervisors and the city development department. The receding hall would give the facade too low an aspect: representation would be better achieved by placing the hall forward. Through a 1950 "minimum" plan, a compromise was found in the form of the current station, built between 1954 and 1957. The curved facade defining the station was already present in the first design. The forward-facing hall (all activity takes place there on a horizontal level) masks the platform enclosures behind it. The front facade (the partition of the ticket office hall) consists of glass from bottom to top, where ornamental screens of a white-covered square aluminum profile were installed for enlivenment. The glass is bordered by a black frame that continues as a band along the wings at a low height above the street. This band passes through the two curved office wings canopied by the two gates on either side of the central hall, which give access to the side plazas on either side of the building. The two canopied thoroughfares are topped by very large, flat plaques, which close the station façade on the left and right as final chords. The Rotterdam station is generally regarded as "an important and image-defining element of the Reconstruction. "57 It is characterized by functionality. A possible example for the facade is the Termini in Rome. Although this is an acclaimed work by Van Ravesteyn and is also one of Van Raevsteyn's few preserved stations, there are plans to replace the entire station with new construction. Architectural firm Alsop and Störmer drew up a master plan for the station area; it is not yet entirely certain whether it will be implemented. The last work by Van Ravesteyn is the station post office in Nijmegen, designed in 1956. It is a block-like, concrete building characterized by functionality. At the age of seventy-five, Van Ravesteyn delivered his last design; the station post office in Nijmegen was executed between 1961 and 1964. The last decades of his life Sybold van Ravesteyn devoted mainly to writing articles and books. His first articles Van Ravesteyn had written from 1925 for the magazine "De Gemeenschap".58 Furthermore, he published articles mainly in "De 8 en Opbouw", "Spoor en Tramwegen", "Bouwkundig Weekblad Architectura" and "Bouw" on, for example, the modern architecture of the time, the design process and exhibitions and buildings visited by him (especially in Italy). Van Ravesteyn wrote books only in his last years of life, such as "Hören und Sehen in der Kunst "59, "De beeldende kunst in De Gemeenschap 1925-1935"60 on the occasion of a lecture held on May 13, 1975 at the Centraal Museum Utrecht, "Grepen uit de totstnadkoming[sic] van de Nederlandse Spoorwegen in de 19e Eeuw "61 and under the influence of his numerous trips to Italy the book "De één-wording van Italië. Il Risorgimento. 1792-1870".62 He also strove to preserve what he saw as his masterpieces, such as the interiors of the "Tiel-Utrecht" and of theater Kunstmin. In 1978, he received the Wolfert van Borselen medal from the municipality of Rotterdam in recognition of his great architectural achievements for the city.63 "The master of the curved line" died, at the age of 94, on November 23, 1983 in Laren. Max van Rooy concluded in his article in the Rotterdams Jaarboekje: "Thus, the self-willed ir Sybold van Ravesteyn continually amazed and puzzled friend and foe alike. A chameleonic builder, who did exactly what he felt like doing within the vast area between functional New Objectivity and festive Baroque. "64 1 Boonstra, Rom, "Decorator in Vicarage - Architect Sybold," in: Elseviers Magazine 3.9.1977, 82 2 The exhibition was on view at the Stichting Architectuur Museum in Amsterdam (January 6 to September 18, 1977) and at the Centraal Museum in Utrecht from November 19, 1977 to January 8, 1978. 3 Blotkamp, Hoos;Jong, Erik de et al, 'Dutch Architecture: S. van Ravesteyn', Amsterdam/Utrecht 1977, 1 4 Blotkamp/Jong 1977 5 Vries, Johan de, Ir S. van Ravesteyn: Blijdorp Zoo, Rotterdam 1986 6 Rouw, Kees, 'Sybold van Ravesteyn: architect of Kunstmin and the Holland', Rotterdam 1988 7 NAi/RAVE 8 Volkers, Kees, 'The most demolished architect in the Netherlands', in: De Ingenieur 108 (1996) 6, 34-36; see also 'ravesteyn's "holland" remains spared', in: Cobouw 8.2.1988: "Ravesteyn deserves the dubious honor of being the Dutch architect whose most designs have already been demolished during his lifetime." 9 Actually Sijbold van Ravesteijn, but known by the name Sybold van Ravesteyn (Timmer, Han, "Ravesteijn, Sijbold van (1889-1983)," in: Bosmans, J. et al. (ed.), Biographical Dictionary of the Netherlands 5, The Hague 2001, 407-410). 10 See subsequently: Mourning 1988, 13ff.; Vries 1986, 26-28; Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 16-18 11 Algemeen Rijksarchief The Hague/Archief TH Delft, student administration (3.12.08.04), student pedigrees 1905-1950 (Ram-Raz)(no.220), register exam results 1903-1922 (no.367). 12 Ravesteyn, Sybold van, "Life of Sybold van Ravesteyn. Autobiographical Notes (in virtually uncorrected original text), in: Renting, R.A.D., 'Inventory of the Archive of Ir S. van Ravesteyn 1754-1986', Rotterdam 1986, 4-19, here 4; Van Ravesteyn wrote his autobiographical article in he form. 13 Ravesteyn 1986, 4 14 Moreover, during his studies Van Ravesteyn traveled to Wales and Norway (Ravesteyn 1986, 5) 15 Algemeen Rijksarchief The Hague/Archief TH Delft, student administration (3.12.08.04), student registration cards 1905-1950 (Ram-Raz)(no.220), register of examination results 1903-1922 (no.367) 16 In 1931 Van Ravesteyn married Johanna van Geelkerken (Timmer, Han, 'Ravesteijn, Sijbold van (1889-1983)', in: Bosmans, J. et al. (ed.), Biographical Dictionary of the Netherlands 5, The Hague 2001, 408). 17 Three sons and a daughter were born from the marriage to Dora Hintzen, which lasted until 1931 (Timmer 2001, 407). 18 Ravesteyn 1986, 5 19 Since 1918, Van Ravesteyn had lived in Utrecht and had his furniture done by Gerrit Rietveld (Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 40). 20 Retired already in 1952, Van Ravesteyn built for the Dutch Railways, however, until 1959 (see also Ravesteyn 1986, 18). 21 See, for example, Douma, C, 'Stationsarchitectuur in Nederland 1838/1998', Zutphen 1998 22 Hilberseimer, Ludwig, 'Internationale Neue Baukunst', Stuttgart 1927, 10 23 Haslinghuis, E.J./Janse, H., 'Bouwkundige Termen - Verklarend dictionary of western architectural and building history', Leiden 2001, 414; Haslinghuis cites the signal box in Utrecht by Van Ravesteyn as an example. 24 His last signal box Van Ravesteyn designed for Rotterdam in 1958. 25 NAi/RAVE 162 26 Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 52-54 27 See Juffermans, Jan, 'Met Stille Trom', Utrecht 1976 28 Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 18 29 Ravesteyn 1986, 6 30 Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 17 31 Ravesteyn 1986, 6 32 Ravesteyn, S. van, 'Rietveld's houses in Utrecht', in: De Gemeenschap 7 (1931) 10, 446-449 33 Ravesteyn, S. van, 'Chronicle - Architecture - J.J.P. Oud', in: De Gemeenschap 8 (1932) 2 84-86 34 Ravesteyn, S. van, 'Le Corbusier', in: The Community 8 (1932) 3, 129-139 35 Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 19 36 See Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 43 37 Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 44-45 38 Cate, Gerda ten, 'Van Ravesteyn and the gracefully curved line', in: Construction 39 (1984) 1, 14-15. 39 Ravesteyn 1986, 9 40 Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 54 41 Ravesteyn 1986, 10 42 Timmer 2001, 409 43 Vries 1986, 12; see also Damen, H.;Devolder, A. et al. (ed.): Architecture Rotterdam 1890-1945, Rotterdam 1991, no. 209 44 While J.D. and L.P. Zocher designed the layout of the garden, the architects A.W. van Dam and H.J. de Haas were responsible for designing the buildings and animal quarters (Houwen, Paula van der, 'Stimulating development Foundation Promotion of Volkskrant 1923-1998 - The history of a Rotterdam private fund', Rotterdam 1998, 99). In 1876 the zoo was expanded to the design of the garden architect D. Wattez (Vries 1986, 13). 45 Vries 1986, 25-26, 92 46 The sea lion pool was destroyed by a bomb in 1943; an exhibition building now stands there (Vries 1986, 69). 47 The watchtower had to be demolished because the concrete mat around the steel frame began to crumble (Vries 1986, 26). Now a restaurant stands there. 48 See, for example, Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 86 49 Devolder, A. et al. (ed.): Architecture Rotterdam 1890-1945, Rotterdam 1991, no. 209 50 Bakker, H.B., 'Gas stations', in: Roads 27 (1953) 1, 4-8 51 Has been on the municipal monument list since 1990. 52 Ravesteyn 1986, 12 53 Ravesteyn 1986, 15-16 54 Now in archive NAi/RAVE 97 55 Blotkamp/Jong 1977, 37 56 Blotkamp/Jong 1977 57 Groenendijk, Paul, 'It is renewal for renewal's sake', in: Construction (2000) 11, 8-10, here 8 58 His earliest article appeared as early as 1919: Ravesteyn, S. van, 'An application of Tasmanian hardwood', in: De Ingenieur 34 (1919) 11, 197-204 59 Ravesteyn, S. van, 'Hören und Sehen in der Kunst', Utrecht 1975 60 Ravesteyn, S. van, 'De beeldende kunst in De Gemeenschap 1925-1935', Utrecht 1975 61 Ravesteyn, S. van, 'Grepen uit de totstnadkoming[sic] van de Nederlandse Spoorwegen in de 19th Eeuw', s.p.1978 62 Ravesteyn, S. van, 'The Unification of Italy. Il Risorgimento. 1792-1870', Utrecht 1978 63 Other prizes he had previously received were: the Médaille de Bronze for interior and furniture art and the Médaille de Bronze for book and printmaking and applied graphics at the Paris Exhibition 1925 and the silver medal of honor of the Municipality of Gouda in 1949. 64 Rooy, Max van, 'Architect Sybold van Ravesteyn', in: Rotterdams Jaarboekje 1984, 182 Education: HBS Rotterdam/1901-1906;TH Delft/1906-1912 Additional positions: Utrechtse Kunstkring/board member/1920;Film-liga Amsterdam/member/1926;De Gemeenschap/member/1925-1935;Committee of admission for the international exhibition of applied arts in Zurich/member/1926;De 8 and Opbouw/member/1929-1938;Academie voor Bouwkunst Amsterdam/teacher/1936-1948;Raadhuisprijsvraag Amsterdam/jurylid/1939;Rijkscommissie voor de Filmkeuring/lid/1945-1959;prijsvraag Provinciehuis Zuid-Holland, The Hague/jurylid/1951;BNA/lid/-1955;prijsvraag Raadhuis in Dordrecht/jurylid/1965 Honors: award Médaille de Bronze for interior and furniture art at the Paris Exhibition/1925;award Médaille de Bronze for book and printmaking and applied graphics at the Paris Exhibition/1925;award silver medal of honor of the Municipality of Gouda/1949;award Wolfert van Borselen-Penning/1978