I. DWELLINGS

Singling out dwellings from other works of architecure, and outlining their evolution is justified by a number of elements that set them apart as a distinct area in modern Romanian architecture. They are:

• The wide scope and diversity of housing construction in the urban or natural environment;
• The very important share of this theme within the activity of most of the architects of the time;
• The conceptual unity shown in the works of many architects;
• The direct social impact of the program;
• The most valuable achievements in this area;
• Internationally, this subject was a basic preoccupation of the approach to formal and functional transformation in works of architecture, and it was apparent also in the position of Romanian architects;
• The spectific character of the solutions as compared with what the international Modern Movement had launched;
• Their influence on the city by moulding the urban environment;
• The ground-breaking character of the dwellings at the beginning of the modernist current in Romania etc. The solution of the habitation-related problems in inter-bellum Romania was only too little influenced by the socialist ideology, of the European experience, in the sense of trying to satisfy the minimum requirements of comfort. There was a tendency of broad dissemination of comfortable dwellings, villas or collective dwellings with generous apartments, illustrating the economic capacity of Romanian society and also the open spirit, receptive to civilization and emancipation. The foreign traveler's eye caught and recorded the directions of the tendencies manifest in Romanian society, in psychological terms, regarding the degree of comfort, systems of habitation and ability ot adjust to the pace of modern life: "Le Roumanian tient beaucoup a l'elegance de sa maison (...) Moderne, Bucarest le sera tous les jours davantage grace a l'esprit meme du Roumain soucieux de vivre dans un cadre confortable et armonieux a la fois. Grace aussi aux architectes, jeunes et cultives souvent encourages bien que difficilement payes, dans une ville qui n'oppose aux tentatives de modernisation ni de trop grandes difficultes materialles, ni des prejuges et des traditions inderacinables".

In the period between the wars in Romania there were three brad categories of residential architecture:

1. Individual dwellings villas
2. Collective dwellings with apartments - "Blockhouses"
3. Cheap dwellings

This is the favourite dwelling of architects in which to develop their predilections at the explicit request of private investors. Villas benefited from a congenial urban context, between the two world wars. In the residential districts of the big cities, there were still important free plots which, once built on, would complete the built urban mileu.

The 1920s saw only a few attempts to put into practice the aesthetic requisites of modern architecture. Many daring projects of young architects remained on paper. They were presented in the current publications alongside the new theories. For instance, the "Mar Kisa" Villa, the "Severo" Villa, the "House for One Family" by architect L. Plamadeala of 1929.

The pioneers of modern Romanian architecture, Marcel Janco and Horia Creanga, designed some of the first individual dwellings that would account for an injection of newness. Marcel Janco remains the first architect in the history of Romanian architecture to have planned, starting the mid - 1920s, dwellings with an obvious renewing character, as proff of the intense theoretical, campaigning effort for the dissemination and development of the ideas of the Modern Movement in arts and architecture. For instance, dwelling, 55 Strada Trinitatii (Maximilian Popper), 1926; the Fuchs Villa, 33 Strada Negustori, 1927; the Chapier House, 1928, all in Bucharest. Horia Creanga's early buildings too, demonstrate a new logic of creation that preserves simplified decorative elements or volumes that bring to the fore the plastic expression of the big windowed surfaces. For instance, the Dr. Petru Groza Villa in Deva, 1927-1929, the Corneliu Medrea Villa in Bucharest, 1929. Another example of innovative contribution are the villas built by George Matei Cantacuzino at Eforie, between 1929 and 1931. Placed in a peculiar natural scenery, on the Black Sea Coast, they are part of the spa buildings that intervine in the values of the existing ladscape.

The true period of wide-scale modernist impetus started with the first years of he fourth decade. We can note at that time the existence of solutions ranging from modern innovation that remained at a formal level, overlapping an earlier functional distribution, taken over form the architecture of the past century, to dwellings whose faction essentially restructures the interior space and the volume composition. The latter shape the interior as a live, flexible space, and their presence changes the dimensions of the exterior space, of the composition at an urban level, creating in fact other formal and stylistic landmarks in the town's system. We should mention here the Engineer Miclescu Villa, 1930, the A. Bunescu Villa, the Dr. Constantinescu Villa, 1930, the A. Thomas Villa, 1932, the Dulfu Villa, 1933, the Elisabeta cantacuzino Villa, 1934, all of them in Bucharest, architect Horia Creanga; the Chihaescu Villa, 1930- 1931, the Wexler Villa, 1931, the house in Strada Caimatei, 1931, all of them in Bucharest, architect Marcel Janco; The Elisabeta Cusin Villa, Bucharest, 1931, architect Ion Bozianu; the V. Constantinescu Villa, Bucharest, 1931-1933, architect Alexandru Zamfiropol; the Villa in Strada Paris, Bucharest, 1931-1933, architect Arghir Culina; the Villa in Strada Londra, Bucharest, 1932, architect H. Delavrancea Gibory; the Villa in Strada Atena, Bucharest, Architect Ion Boceanu; the Cristinel Villa, Bucharest, 1934, architect Gabriel Cristinel etc.

Horia Creanga, Villa Dr. Petru Groza Deva, 1927-1929	Marcel Iancu, Villa Reich Bucharest, 1936-1937
Alexandru Zamfiropol, J. Constantinescu House Bucharest, 1931-1933	I.C. Rosu, Vila on Dr. Poloni st. Bucharest, 1935

There is an obvious evolution in time in point of form and function, closely corroborated with the selective affinity of the architects vis-a-vis the new current as well as in relation to their own ability to generate and develop new stylistic directions. The examples are numerous, their architecture standing between cubist influences and compositions in which the intervention of the curved surfaces is sometimes obsessive and purses an aesthetic demonstration. A special place is held by the dwellings the formal content of which reproduces in an original, stylized manner, the elements of classical architecture, and this makes the balance of assessment lean to a superior form of expressionism. One will trace here simplified plaster ornaments displayed on a dynamically composed volumetry.

In the complete freedom of expression which was opted for, we can trace the presence of elements with a constant character:

• Pure geometry, big, windowed surfaces, the subtle composition of horizontal and vertical elements that generates a dynamic architecture.
• The party too, evinces some common elements associated with the way of grouping the functions, their distribution and zoning, the intense experimenting of the duplex formula or the flexibility of the interior space.
• The organization of the dwelling takes account of the communication of the interior space with the exterior, resulting in space continuity and fluidity.
• Attention is paid to the optimal orientation in relation to the cardinal points and the surrounding landscape, mountain or sea, which leads to a judicious distribution of the functions.
• The constructive system employs new technologies and state of the art building materials.
• But the unitary, almost permanent feature, is the architectural detail conceived with materials of very high quality, elegance and refinement, conceived as a component of the whole.
• A special category consists of the villas built in the mountain or sea-side resorts. Their place is among the aesthetic values that obviously process data of the popular architecture, recalling the first stage of F.L.Wright's creation (for example, Villas in Balcic, architect H.Delavrancea - Gibory), up to a consistent architecture of directions of composition launched by the European Modern Movement, for example, Villa in Cumpatu-Sinaia, architect Duliu Marcu; villas in Eforie, architect G.M. Cantacuzino etc.

These dwellings, remain an important landmark in the evolution of housing Romania. They illustrate how Romanian architects synthesized their experience and their own artistic inclination with the acute need dor renewal and for catching up with 20th- century civilization by filling an obvious gap.

2. COLLECTIVE DWELLINGS - "BLOCK-HOUSES"

Placed in the modern urban landscape offered by the big boulevards of the capitol or other important arteries, with a height regime varying between three to four floors and seven to eleven floors, these large colective dwellings are an expression of an important section of the residential architecture in Romania after World War One. Giving a specific character to the city, they have the merit of having moulded the urban space with in precise composition limits for several decades. The debut marked by Horia Creanga with the project for the ARO building between 1929 and 1931 would be followed by an impressive wave of works on this theme, conceived in tune with the princples that soon became consecrated, decisive and well defined.

The design elements common to these dwellings can be easily distinguished:

• The plan of the apartments is developed around a central nucleus of generous dimensions, consisting of a living room in direct connection with the other rooms, this connection being the element of dwelling's flexibility.
• The principle of zoning night and day functions is often employed.
• Successive recesses on the top floors, especially in the tall buildings, are due primarily to town - planning legislation of street prospects, but they also have an important role in devising the volume of the buildings.
• The balconies, logias and recesses at the top floors participate in the communication of the interior space with the exterior.
• The emphasis on the horizontal elements in the composition of the facades.
• The superstructure made of reinforced concrete frames allows for flexibility in the apartments, as well as the different partitioning of the floors of a building, in keeping with the investors' order.
• The attentive desing and achievement of the details with materials of very high quality, selected with discernment, the interior design that includes in the secondary plane of the building the general idea of the design stand even today as a model of professionalism.

• Buildings inserted in an already existing lineal front, strictly established in terms of alignment and height regime by the urban legislation in force. Examples: the ASIT buildings in Strada Eminescu, architect Richard Bordenache; dwellings in Strada Armeneasca, architect Jean Monda; the house Radu Teodeorescu, architect Nicu Georgescu, all in Bucharest etc.
• Buildings places at a crossing of two or more arteries, favouring a more spectacular composition of volumes. The diversity of the solutions is surprising, traversing a very wide range of forms, starting preponderantly from the use of the rectangular elements, to the vertical accents of the corner valumes, developing in time toward a more romantic composition, that tries the effects of curved surfaces and confirming their role as "hinges" in the articulation of the included volumes. Examples: The ARO building, architect Horia Creanga; "Adriattica" building, architect Rudolf Fraenkel; dwellings in Strada Stirbei- Voda, architect Duliu Marcu; dwellings in Strada Maria Rosetti, architect Marcel Locar, all in Bucarest etc.
• Buildings with a reduced height regime, that can be in turn independent, placed in an extrant front, coupled or determined by neinghbourhood with blind walls or corner buildings. The variety of forms overlapping profoundly personal expressions generates matchless aesthetic effects. Collective dwellings dominated the inter-bellum urban space. They may be considered the most representative expressions of coutious modernism, free of the ostentation of a rebellious spirit, demonstrating a power of stability, of continuity however free of unjustified apprehension in the face of foreign influences. Their elegant tenure, with tendencies of "classicizing" the new aesthetic tenets, preserves elements of synthesis between the newness of the Modernist current and the indigenous cultural spirit.

Jean Monda, Apartment block, Property of eng. J. Berman, Bucharest	Alexandru Zamfiropol, Prof. Chiritescu Arva building, Parcul Domeniilor, Bucharest
Emil Nadejde, "Scala" apartment block, Boulevard Magheru, Bucharest, 1936-1937 (destroyed in the earthquake of 1977)	Alexandru Crivez, Apartment block, Boulevard Lascar Catargi, Bucharest

3. CHEAP DWELLINGS

This category of dwelling, at an international level among the main experiments in a bid to solve the critical housing issue, knows in Romania only isolated solutions, not very significant in terms of innovation or scope. Their reverberation in the architectural production was rather poor, with but few examples of plot apportioning to this end. These examples are to be found in free, specially systematized grounds, with coupled dwellings, developed on a ground floor or a ground floor and one-two more floors. Planned for a minimal comfort, they have reasonable partitionings, in which functions are efficiently distributed. Example: Residential area Vatra Luminoasa, architects H. Creanga or I. Hanciu.

Last update: 1999, September 8
Return to:	Home Page	Romania Home	Culture Home	Architecture Home			Romanian Language		Contact Info