GERRIT RIETVELD’S SHOP DESIGNS IN THE NETHERLANDS FROM 1922 TO 1962 AR2A011 Architectural History Thesis (2020/21 Q3) MSc Architecture, Delft University of Technology

Nguyen Binh Minh 5039711

14-04-2021 Jean-Paul Baeten

ABSTRACT

This essay investigates the shops as well as commercial buildings designed by Gerrit Rietveld in the Netherlands from 1922 to 1962, focusing on the relation between the interior and the exterior in each project. Gaining insight into his contribution to the history of shop designs. This research has been conducted through a combination of literature study, and the archive of Gerrit Rietveld in the Het Nieuwe Instituut in Rotterdam, and provides elaboration on themes as the designs of the shop front, the interior, and the connection between them. These themes are addressed through observation of the images, and drawings in the archive and other resources. The essay also provides a critical view for the role of those shops in history, and their influences on subsequent shop designs after that.

Keywords: Netherlands, Gerrit Rietveld, shop designs, shopping street, shop front, interior design.

INTRODUCTION

Since the major projects of Gerrit Rietveld in the Netherlands, such as the Van Gogh Museum or Schroder House, were mentioned many times in books and journal articles, his commercial designs in the twentieth century (such as retail shops, commercial exhibitions or pavilions) have not been paid much attention in the academic field, as no researches about them were taken before. In the book Dutch Design: A History (2008), Mienke Thomas mentioned that the period, from 1920 to 1970 in the Netherlands, had witnessed a number of large shops and departments stores, which had played an exceptional role in educating the general public on good and bad taste and in promoting interest in modern design1. Therefore, this essay will investigate an amount of commercial projects, which were designed by Gerrit Rietveld, from 1922 to 1962 in the Netherlands, based on the main data collected in the Het Nieuwe Instituut in Rotterdam.

This article will attempt to interpret how the role of the commercial projects of Rietveld could be, in the historical context, or in other words, to elaborate what the principles of the shop designs that he took from the past, and what improvements of Rietveld for this type of building. The context of this study will be focused on the area of the Netherlands, and some other countries in Europe in the early twentieth century. In this period, the Dutch local shopping streets are simultaneously a site of social, economic, and cultural exchange. Unlike the standardized architectural designs and transnational ownerships that people often

1 Simon Thomas, M. (2008). Dutch Design: A History. United Kingdom: Reaktion Books. See chapter 3: Good Design, 1925-65.

1

see in both central shopping streets and suburban malls, they provide a “face” of local social and cultural identity2.

Although there have been not yet researchers working with these commercial projects of Gerrit Rietveld before, a number of studies has been done regarding the commercial field and architectural trends in the Netherlands as well as in Europe during the similar period, which will support significantly as a historical context regarding the society, the economy, and the culture. Particularly in the economic field, the period 1813- 1940 in Amsterdam is marked by economic recovery and, from 1870 onwards, by expansion, which led to an increasing number of shops in this city3. Regarding the trend of designs, between 1890 and 1910, Art Nouveau – the most well-known architectural style in France, has become popular in the Netherlands, led to a trendy appearance of those shops, with modern materials such as glass and steel, to create an openness and make unusual forms. These appearances might be a precursor of the trend toward transparency of the shops, with large glass windows in the shop-front, which supported efficiency in displaying goods4. And later from 1910 to 1930, this trend was replaced by Amsterdam School, a style of design that made the shop front look quite closer and brought an intimate atmosphere, with local materials, such as bricks and stained glass. Besides the architectural trends, the competition about appearances among these shops required investors to find their unique signature, especially in the center of Amsterdam, which has been known as a capital of culture5. The cultural aspect was more interested in the shops. In the article The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street (2012), Sharon Zukin mentioned that local shops in the Netherlands are not only sites of economic transactions, they are also social spaces where cultural identities are formed, learned, and reproduced6. These shops, which include a function of cultural images, acted as the external manifestation of a successful business. Therefore, the shop design, at all levels of the market, established the business identity7. This can be seen as a business strategy of the shop owners, when they hired Gerrit Rietveld, one of the well-known architects in the De Stijl group, which was related and represented for the Dutch culture8, in order to create a cultural identity for their shops. This issue will be explored more particularly in the second chapter of the essay.

The essay will compare the designs of Rietveld with the commercial buildings in the similar period, in order to find out how the cultural and social value of his projects could be in the history of the shop’s design. Or in other words, it will show the development of the shop design as a task of the architect. Particularly, the essay

2 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002. See page 282. 3 Bonsignori, C., Post, J., & Roders, A. P. (2008). Re-architecture of Industrial Heritage. In 17th CIB World Building Congress, May 14-17, 2007, Cape Town, South Africa (pp. 1665-1673). In-house publishing. See page 1669. 4 Walsh, C. (1995). Shop design and the display of goods in eighteenth-century London. Journal of Design History, 8(3), 157-176. See pages 158-160. 5 Griffiths, R. (2006). City/culture discourses: Evidence from the competition to select the European Capital of Culture 2008. European planning studies, 14(4), 415-430. See chapter 11. 6 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002. See page 282. 7 Walsh, C. (1995). Shop design and the display of goods in eighteenth-century London. Journal of Design History, 8(3), 157-176. See page 171. 8 Jaffé, H. L. (1956). De Stijl 1917-1931. The Dutch Contribution to modern art, Amsterdam. See page 15.

2

will start with a sort of introduction, where the main definitions were clarified, based on literatures: Gerrit Rietveld, De Stijl, and his shop designs. Then the historical context, as well as traditional and prevalent trends of the shops in the Netherlands, especially the shop front design, will be elaborated. After that, the Gerrit Rietveld’s shops will be analyzed, based on the continuity between the shop front and the interior design, as observations of the archive and several literature research. Afterward these aspects will be compared with the previous traditional shops mentioned above, in order to find out how his projects would contribute in the historical context.

Figure 1: the sketch of the essay’s structure (own image)

As the illustration above, in the main content of the essay, the first section seeks to identify the current background of commercial designs in the late nineteenth century, and the early twentieth century. The second section, which uses primary evidence drawn from resources, such as photos, drawings of the architect, elaborates the appearance of commercial projects of Rietveld, in the aspect of spatial continuity between the shop front and the interior. Then it also interprets how these designs fit into the historical context.

DEFINITIONS – GERRIT RIETVELD AND HIS COMMERCIAL PROJECTS

Gerrit Rietveld (1888-1964) or Rietveld, through the book of the same name published in 2010, was introduced by Ida van Zijl, as one of the protagonists of the avant-garde movement of the De Stijl group9, along with Piet Mondriaan and Theo Van Doesburg . According to the article De Stijl 1917-1931 - The Dutch Contribution to modern art, Amsterdam, the main characteristics of De Stijl are the elementary means of plastic expression in painting: vertical and horizontal lines, and primary colours: yellow, blue, red, and no-colours: white, black and grey10. Later these characteristics were considered as a composition of vertical and horizontal lines and volumes in terms of architecture. Related to De Stijl, Gerrit Rietveld’s experimental and unconventional works covers many fields, such as architectural design, interior and furniture design, which included the Red-Blue Chair (1917), the Schröder House (1924), and the Zigzag

9 Rietveld, G. T., Küper, M., & van Zijl, I. (1992). Gerrit Th. Rietveld, 1888-1964: the complete works. Princeton Architectural Press.

10 Jaffé, H. L. (1956). De Stijl 1917-1931. The Dutch Contribution to modern art, Amsterdam. See page 4.

3

Chair (1934). According to the author, his simple and, at the same time, dynamic style has greatly influenced interior design on an international level, not only inspiring entire generations of architects and creatives but also making a significant contribution to the history of architecture.

During his career, Gerrit Rietveld has completed an amount of shops that were applied his tireless aptitude for experimentation in a plurality of applications that, without ever repeating themselves identically 11. These shops were a part, or all areas in the ground floor of a Dutch traditional row house in the central shopping streets, which was run by popular brands in the Netherlands in the early 1900s, such as Metz and Co, and Gold and Silversmith Company.

Figure 2: the Shop Gold and Silver Smith Company, Kalverstraat 107, Amsterdam, 1922. Source: RIET Rietveld, G.Th. (Gerrit Thomas) / Archief (hetnieuweinstituut.nl)

Mentioning the shop and commercial retails in the Netherlands, most of them had been located in a ground floor of a Dutch row house in the traditional street, during the late 19th century. These shops will be elaborated in the next chapter. Compared with other cities in Europe at the same time, this kind of commercial shops was in contrast to the metropolitan tradition of London, Paris or Berlin, with their large scale shopping areas, such as boulevards or department stores (as the figure below), which started much later in the Netherlands.

11 Rietveld, G. T., Küper, M., & van Zijl, I. (1992). Gerrit Th. Rietveld, 1888-1964: the complete works. Princeton Architectural Press.

4

Figure 3: The boulevard des Italiens, Paris, 1858. Source: 007- Paris- Boulevard de los Italianos 1858 | Cesar Ojeda | Flickr

Figure 4: The department store Le Bon Marché,Paris, 1900. Source: Image of The Department Store Le Bon Marché. Paris, 1900. Full Credit: Roger-Viollet / Granger -- All Rights Reserved. From Granger - Historical Picture Archive

FIRST CHAPTER – HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF SHOPS

The Dutch condition of economy

1,300 neighborhood shops currently exist in Amsterdam12. This number is a result of an economic development in the Netherlands in the late nineteenth century. In the book The Economic History of The Netherlands 1914-1995, Jan L. van Zanden stated that there was the growth of modern industry, as a result of the second industrial revolution of the 1880s13, was a catalyst for increasing industrialization and mass

12 Ariese, P. Good shopping at the Amsterdam Museum. See page 5. 13 Van Zanden, J. L. (2005). The economic history of the Netherlands 1914-1995: A small open economy in the'long' twentieth century (Vol. 1). Routledge. See page 2.

5

production of goods. This development led to the rise of Dutch multinational companies, which were created in the relatively short period and then explained quickly. Also regarding this issue, in History of Amsterdam, they mentioned that the period 1813-1940 in the Netherlands is marked by economic recovery and, from 1870 onwards, by expansion14. This moment was considered as the beginning of consumer society, when a large amount of design shops and innovative brasserie-style restaurants were opened, attracting young shoppers in the Netherlands15.

The Dutch traditional houses and streets

Before the commercial shops became popular in Amsterdam, this city had been featured by its small street lanes, with two rows of traditional houses on either side. According to statistics from Parallel16, these row houses had been built between the 17th and 19th century, which have an average height of 3-5 floors, with original functions only for living. Similarly with the upper floors, the ground floor was used for residential rooms. The front façade of these floors was characterized by a surface of bricks, with vertical windows, and had only one narrow entrance way on the ground floor, with a solid door. As the illustrations made by Gerrit Lamberts below, the façade of the traditional houses seemed not too opened, in order to keep the privacy for residents inside.

Figure 5: Drawing of the house 'De Steenen Roelant', Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 52, Amsterdam, 1774. The drawing manufactured by Gerrit Lamberts. Source: Beeldbank (archief.amsterdam)

14 Bonsignori, C., Post, J., & Roders, A. P. (2008). Re-architecture of Industrial Heritage. In 17th CIB World Building Congress, May 14-17, 2007, Cape Town, South Africa (pp. 1665-1673). In-house publishing. See page 1669. 15 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002. See page 286. 16 Parallel. (n.d.). Building ages in the Netherlands. Retrieved 25 March 2021, from https://parallel.co.uk/netherlands/#13.8/52.365/4.9/0/40

6

Figure 6: Dutch traditional street in Handboogstraat 6-24, Amsterdam, 1815. The drawing was manufactured by Gerrit Lamberts. In this ancient street, with a small walking lane, with two rows of traditional houses are on either side. Source: Beeldbank (archief.amsterdam)

In the late 19th century and the early 20th century in the Netherlands, the commercial shops appeared and became popular, and most of them were located in the traditional streets of the city center. Typically in Amsterdam, business owners tend to place their representative store in the central old town, where

7 pedestrians can also access the shop (as the figure below). As the trend of commercial stores emerged in Amsterdam, the ground floors of these traditional houses have been transformed into commercial spaces of families, or leased to private businesses to open stores. Therefore, the facade of the existing house at this time was divided into two parts: the commercial store and the residential. In order to display the goods inside to the outside, the shop front on the ground floor at that time seemed to become more open. Instead of solid walls and small windows, there was more transparent glass that was adapted to the façade of the ground floor.

Figure 7: Kalverstraat 239, near the Spui, 1906. Street is only accessible to pedestrians. Copyright: Peter Scherpenisse. Source: Beeldbank (archief.amsterdam)

8

Figure 8: Dutch traditional street, Kalverstraat 1-39, Amsterdam, 1848. Source: Beeldbank (archief.amsterdam)

In the shop front on the ground floor, it can be seen that in addition to the area for the store, with entrances, billboards, display areas, there is also a small area for residents to go up. This entrance, if not segregated, would usually be designed in a 'disguised' way, to become part of the commercial store, as illustrated by the drawings below.

9

Figure 9: Design and presentation drawing for the construction of the shop and house Herenstraat 16, architect IJ. Bijvoets Gzn, 1870. As can be seen from the plan and the façade, the entrance to the store and the entrance to the apartment were designed symmetrically through the large glass window of the store's merchandise display area. Source: Beeldbank (archief.amsterdam)

In the overall façade of the house, while the ancient appearance of the upper façade (residential area) barely changed during the operation, the lower facade (shop area) usually has the change and improvement are quite frequent. One of the reasons for this change is due to the replacement of shop owners, when an old business leaves, another business comes to rent, and at the same time brings a new appearance that seems more suitable for their store. Another reason is to compete on the image of businesses. As the number of stores in the city center increases, stores tend to be concentrated either in pedestrian shopping streets and shopping districts17. This partly helps customers to have more choices conveniently when shopping, but also stimulates competition among shop owners. Therefore, the shop design, especially the façade, plays as a key form of marketing, promoting both the shop and its wares18.

17 Koster, H. R., Pasidis, I., & van Ommeren, J. (2019). Shopping externalities and retail concentration: Evidence from dutch shopping streets. Journal of Urban Economics, 114, 103194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2019.103194. See page 1. 18 Walsh, C. (1995). Shop design and the display of goods in eighteenth-century London. Journal of Design History, 8(3), 157-176. See page 157.

10

The decisive factors in the design of the commercial store, especially for the facade, are the brand identity of the business, and the prevailing design trends in the locality. The first factor, brand identity of a business, is often expressed through the design of the signboard, the way of displaying the goods, the way to lead the customer to experience, etc. This factor is directly influenced by the architect and the business owner. Meanwhile, the second factor, the prevailing style, is often not influenced by the architect or shop owner, but comes from the trend of society, as well as from consumers. In Amsterdam in the early 20th century, the popular styles commonly applied in shop designs were Neuwe Kunst (or Art Nouveau) and Amsterdam School (or Art Deco).

Nieuwe Kunst (Art Nouveau) shops with large glass windows

Nieuwe Kunst (Art Nouveau), as was defined by Khaled Dewidar in his article in 2018, is an international style of architecture, applied art, and especially the decorative arts, and it was a well-known trend between 1890 and 1910 in Europe19. According to the author, this movement originated from artists, designers, and architects, aimed at opposing the previous trend in the late 19th century, when industrialization was popular. Nieuwe Kunst included a set of architectural styles of the twentieth century, for which there is a decisive restoration of forms, constructions, and materials, a rejection of styles of the past, and a rational approach to solving the problems of internal spaces20 .

The characteristic of this architectural style is using steel and other modern materials, to create new vocabularies featuring arched and cantilevered forms21. In the Netherlands at that moment, Nieuwe Kunst stores were recognized for their impressive display of goods on the facade, which was made of light, thin steel frames, and oversized glass panels. Compared with the façade of traditional houses before, with a relatively closed appearance because of the only function for living, this shop facade has a maximum openness, more visually liberal appearance. On the one hand, it truly reflects the desire that "art should be incorporated back into everyday life"22 of pioneering architects in Art Nouveau. On the other hand, when combined with the internal display arrangement, it also helps the store to maximize exposing their products to the outside in the most effective way, in order to attract the attention of customers who were walking on the street. Several illustrations of these shops can be shown as below.

19 Dewidar, Khaled. (2018). Art Nouveau Style. See page 1. 20 Romaniuk, N. (2019). Art nouveau ukrainian architecture in a global context. Kyiv-Mohyla Humanities Journal, (6), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.18523/kmhj189056.2019-6.137-148 21 Dewidar, Khaled. (2018). Art Nouveau Style. See page 7. 22 Dewidar, Khaled. (2018). Art Nouveau Style. See page 2.

11

Figure 10: Advertisement for the shop of tailor N. Jörgensen, Kalverstraat 32, Amsterdam, 1852. Source: Beeldbank (archief.amsterdam)

Figure 11: Shop Chapellerie van W. van Mastwijk, Ceintuurbaan 93, Amsterdam, 1910. Source: Beeldbank (archief.amsterdam)

12

Amsterdam School

Amsterdam School (or Art Deco), was a design trend that became popular in the period from 1918 to 1931, through the magazine Wendingen in the Netherlands. It was not a movement with a clear philosophy laid down explicitly in a manifesto23. Working with this style, several architects, such as J.F. Staal, C.J. Blaauw, and J.F. La Croix, with their assignments, means of design and expressive forms evoled an artistic temperament encouraged by comparable beliefs, which in turn generated a specific, recognizable identity24. This made the face of the city to change radically and unforgettably 25. Several features of this trend that can be found in the book Contemporary Explorations in the Culture of the Low Countries, which are the use of handmade bricks, with different types of masonry connections and jointing, for the building’s facade, and the combination of iron decorations (for instance, fencing) and stained glass (for windows and the interior ceiling), for the shops26. In the shop front, the windows of these often have striking shapes, such as shield-shaped or the shape of a trapezium (as the image below), and much attention is paid to details, also in the form of decorations by means of sculptures.

23 Casciato, M. (1996). The Amsterdam School. Netherlands: 010 Publishers. See page 8. 24 Casciato, M. (1996). The Amsterdam School. Netherlands: 010 Publishers. See page 8. 25 Casciato, M. (1996). The Amsterdam School. Netherlands: 010 Publishers. See page 8. 26 Van der Cruysse-Van Antwerpen, I. (1996). Contemporary Explorations in the Culture of the Low Countries. United Kingdom: University Press of America. See pages 171-176.

13

Figure 12: A special shop building in the Amsterdamse Heiligeweg, by architects G.F.La Croix, and A. Jacot, 1915. The part designed by La Croix concerns only the façade of the ground floor and the first floor. It is a carefully detailed set of mahogany, stained glass, zinc and lead. The upper part consists of a wide wooden frieze with decorative moldings and decorative use of lead batter. Below it is a strip of ten purple-mounted and angled stained glass windows. The windows end in a point shape and are encased in decorated woodwork. Wooden posts with ornaments are located on both sides. (Radboud van Beekum, G.F. la Croix 1877-1923. Amsterdamse School architect, 2008). Source: Winkel Heiligeweg 37, Amsterdam | Wendingen ~ Platform voor de Amsterdamse School (amsterdamse-school.nl)

14

Figure 13: Wooden posts with ornament in a shop building, Amsterdamse Heiligeweg, by architects G.F.La Croix, A. Jacot, 1915. Source: Winkel Heiligeweg 37, Amsterdam | Wendingen ~ Platform voor de Amsterdamse School (amsterdamse-school.nl)

Figure 14: A large stained glass is installed in the ceiling in the shop building, Amsterdamse Heiligeweg, by architects G.F.La Croix, A. Jacot, 1915. Source: Winkel Heiligeweg 37, Amsterdam | Wendingen ~ Platform voor de Amsterdamse School (amsterdamse-school.nl)

15

Figure 15: the shop for the company Helmo, which trades in parquet floors, in Paleisstraat 17, Amsterdam, 1923. The façade is made of a somewhat unusual material: rusted iron, which was scrubbed in the wax. Only the light boxes with stained glass above the shop window (with a wavy frame) and the porch are illuminated. Stained glass is located in front of and under light boxes (located above the shop window and the store's porch) in a variety of patterns in the colors yellow, white and dark blue/purple colors. If the (yellowish) LED lighting behind it is on, that dark blue is more like brown and the white surfaces turn yellow. Entrance was not on the same surface with the glass panel, but was inserted into the inside, forming a part of the store's lobby. Source: Winkelpui Paleisstraat 17, Amsterdam | Wendingen ~ Platform for the Amsterdam School (amsterdamse-school.nl)

16

Figure 16: In front of the shop C.A.P. Ivens & Co. in photo articles, cameras and supplies, at Kalverstraat 115, Amsterdam, 1916. The shop was designed by architect J.F. Staal (1879-1940). Source: Beeldbank (archief.amsterdam)

Compared to previous Art Nouveau-style stores, Amsterdam School shops still used large glass panels to maximize the display of goods outward, while attracting and directing the vision of pedestrians from outside to inside the store. However, the difference is that in addition to glass, Amsterdam School shops also use other materials such as stained glass, wood, or rusted iron. These materials made the shop look closet, more plentiful, and included an intimate atmosphere. In additional, if Art Nouveau shop fronts are identified with a flat of steel and glass (or two dimensions), in Amsterdam School, the shop fronts seemed to become a three dimensions combination of display spaces with large glass panels, billboards, and the entrance, which served as a store lobby, as the figures above.

17

The cultural aspect of the shops

Amsterdam has been known as the multicultural ‘capital of culture’27, which was reflected in the typical architectural works in the city. Commercial shops, which were mentioned above, were located in the heartland of the capital, and were part of the historic tube houses. So the cultural aspect of these shops was also worth considering. Sharon Zukin, in his study about identity on an Amsterdam shopping street in 2012, has mentioned that the shopping street also stores collective memory. As with aesthetics, the production of cultural heritage through collective memory depends on both spatial and social continuity28. Additionally, the social space of the shopping street is a crucible of cultural heritage where both longtime residents and new migrants belong, a malleable space of situated attachment29. Therefore, the appearance of each store itself was required to contain in it a certain cultural value, along with other criteria, such as reflecting the brand's image, or keeping up with the design trends.

These practical requirements partly led corporations and brand owners to turn to well-known local architects, for designs that optimize commercial value and cultural value to their shops.

The most obvious proof of this is the images collected from the Het Nieuwe Instituut, which show the Metz and Co brand and Gerrit Rietveld's partnership on many projects in the Netherlands. In 1930, the famous furniture designs of Gerrit Rietveld were produced and sold by Metz and Co, such as the Red and Blue chair, or zig-zag chair. Three years later, the famous shops of this brand in the Netherlands, designed by this architect, appeared one after another, in different locations and contexts. Each of them has its own characteristic.

SECOND CHAPTER – SHOP DESIGNS OF GERRIT RIETVELD

Overall, witnessing Gerit Rietveld's design collections, it can be seen that within a limit of about six meters of the ground floor façade in a traditional Dutch house, Gerrit Rietveld had a chance conducts a series of experiments on commercial store design, none of which overlap in appearance, even if they belong to the same owner. There were stores with a very minimalistic appearance, like the Metz and Co store in Amsterdam in 1938. But in the same brand, there were also shops with relatively intricate designs, like the Metz and Co store in The Hague in 1934. These designs showed the potential of Gerrit Rietveld with modern architecture to solve the complex problems of society30.

This chapter will clarify Gerrit Rietveld's developments in store design based on the historical context of store design presented above. The facade of the shop in the building showed the inherited characteristics from Amsterdam School and Nieuwe Kunst, and also Gerit Rietveld's innovation based on these tradition. These projects will be viewed from the façade structure, to the interior spaces, as well as the relationship between them. In each project, it will be seen that the continuity between the shop front and the interior space played a significant role in the shop designs.

27 Anheier, H. K., & Isar, Y. R. (Eds.). (2012). Cultures and globalization: cities, cultural policy and governance. Sage. See page 145. 28 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002. See page 286. 29 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002. See page 282. 30 Küper, M., & van Zijl, I. (1992). Gerrit Th. Rietveld, 1888-1964: the complete works. Princeton Architectural Press.

18

One of the first commercial shops designed by Gerrit Rietveld, is the Gold and Silver Smith Company boutique. This project was completed in 1922 in Amsterdam.

Figure 17: Gold and Silver Smith Company, Kalverstraat 107, Amsterdam, 1922. A photo of the Gold and Silver shop (Amsterdam). In this image, a De Stijl facade could be realized, with a composition of blocks that contains different functions (displaying gold groceries, the name board, the logo and the entrance door). These elements also shows a transition from outdoor to the indoor space. Source: RIET Rietveld, G.Th. (Gerrit Thomas) / Archief (hetnieuweinstituut.nl)

In the shop front, it can be seen that the characteristics of traditional shops in the previous eras were clearly inherited and improved by Rietveld. The evidence for this is large glass panels with steel frames on the shop front, which was to maximize the display of the jewelry of the shop, could be found in Nieuwe Kunst stores in the Netherlands. Besides, the shop also included two other aspects of design that related to Amsterdam School, which were the arrangement of the entrance inward, that created a three dimensions shop front, and the use of solid materials in some elements, that covered parts of the shop front and made it not too open to the outside.

Particularly, a part of the façade is the main display space, the other is the entrance of the store, which was set back inside. Although using transparent materials, the facade was not completely open like the Nieuwe Kunst shops, because the display space needs a sealed inside to manipulate, at the same time,

19 it also limited visibility into the inside, and open only appeared in the aisles and the glass door. Thus, it can be seen that this design of Rietveld, although carrying contemporary materials with glass and steel, however has a more visual closedness, causing a sense of curiosity about the space inside, as well as shop’s items.

The development of this project, in comparison with Nieuwe Kunst or Amsterdam School stores, is that along with the entrance and the displaying area for jewelry, other elements of the shop front such as the nameboard and the logo, also played an important role in the design. Each of them were put in a glass block, with different dimensions and different positions. These blocks were studied to be combined together and created an interesting composition of vertical and horizontal lines and volumes, that was often seen as the De Stijl composition.

Figure 18: An object of Gold and Silversmith Company, in Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, manufactured by Gerrit Rietveld during 1921-1923. Source: Goud en Zilversmid's Compagnie - Gerrit Rietveld (stedelijk.nl)

20

Figure 19: Interior view of the G.Z.C. Jewelry Store, Amsterdam, 1922. Source: Palimpsesto 03 2 Elena Fernández.pdf (upc.edu)

Mentioning the interior space, the De Stijl ambience was adapted, based on the architectural elements and items of furniture. For architectural elements, walls and the ceiling in this shop, which had some highlighted parts of different materials or painted colors, acted as a two dimension background of De Stijl. So it can be seen that the intervention was applied not only to new elements, but also on the existing elements like the ceiling and walls. For the furniture, light and simple cabinets, with different dimensions but similar rectangular form, thin frames and transparent surface, played as three dimension objects that were arranged intentionally in the De Stijl background of architectural elements.

The design of the interior and the exterior had shown a continuity in both visual and physical way. In terms of the visual connection, the glass surface of elements in the shop front partly allowed people from the outside to see what kinds of goods were sold inside the shop. About the physical connection, it can be seen that the De Stijl composition was adapted along the depth of the shop. While it was a combination of glass blocks in the facade, it also was seen in the decoration of the ceiling and walls, and the arrangement of items of furniture in the interior space. The continuity was realized clearly, when the light structure of elements on the façade had a similar appearance with the thin frames of furniture inside the shop. Additionally, the continuity was also shown in the common object of the exterior and the interior, which was the cabinet that displayed jewelry. Located in between two different spaces, it seemed to serve both the shop front, as the displaying area, and the interior, as a cabinet or a cover that created intimacy for the space.

21

Figure 20: View of the shop front of Lederwarenwinkel E. Wessels and Zn, Oudkerkhof 15-17, Utrecht, 1925. Source: rietveld-wessels.jpg (535×374) (wordpress.com)

In 1924, in Utrecht, Gerrit Rietveld renovated a boutique of the leather brand Wessels & Zoon. This is a project to combine the ground floors of two traditional tube houses, into one commercial shop. Compared to other shops that normally located in a tube house, this one had an advantage with its larger area. However, it also required a challenge with the existing structure that had been located in-between two houses, which acted as an unnecessary division inside the shop. This challenge had been solved by Gerrit Rietveld as a proposal of the new façade, which created a contrast between it and the new intervention. While the facades of these houses were separated, and constructed by traditional bricks, the shop front below them was combined into one, and made by modern materials, such as glass and steel.

Particularly, his solution was a De Stijl composition of elements in the shop front, including a glass box that displayed goods, the existing structure, ceiling-mounted glass windows and the shop’s entrance. In comparison with the Gold and Silver Smith shop, where the role of elements in the shop front seemed to be homogeneous in terms of the appearance, there was a development in this project, where different elements had a different design as well as a different role in the composition. The wide glass box, which was two meters high and eight meters long, was stretched across the long façade and partially covering the structure, making the two separate spaces of the two houses become one. Being displayed in this glass box were store's leather items. This displaying area was located on the left side of the shop front, leaving the remaining space for the entrance and the window that seemed to be moved back inside, and thus functioned as a skylight for the displaying area. Besides these new elements, the old structure of two existing houses, also contributed to create the new appearance for the shop. In the image, it can be seen

22 that the concrete beam was designed to jut out from the existing house, separated the glass box from the existing façade above, and it also played an aesthetic role in the combination with other elements.

Along with new developments, characteristics from the traditional shops also were considered by Rietveld in this project, which were the large glass façade and steel frames of Nieuwe Kunst stores, and the entrance that was arranged inwards, as one of the Amsterdam School features.

The continuity between the shop front and the interior in this project is most clearly displayed in the existing beam that is mentioned above. In other words, the existing beam, which seemed to come from the shop façade to the inside space, acted as a physical link between the exterior and the interior. This link was also highlighted more when objects surrounding the beam were totally transparent, which allowed this beam to be visualized totally from the outside. In the interior space, it is clear that there was no ceiling covering the beam, so it could be visualized from both outside and inside areas, supporting efficiently the transition between the indoor and outdoor spaces. Compared with the previous shop of Rietveld, in this project, the concept of continuity was highlighted more based on the expression of the structure that came from the inside to the outside area.

Figure 21: Record Shoes, Lange Elisabethstraat 5, 1927, Utrecht. Source: Afbeelding van winkel Record, volle étalage met kinderen links - Het Geheugen (delpher.nl)

In 1927, another shop that Gerrit Rietveld had completed was in Lange Elisabethstraat, Utrecht. It was a store of Record that sold shoes and sport items. Being a part of a house that was located in a corner of the street, this store had its own benefits to attract the attention of clients on the street. This meant the shop front was not only limited on the main façade, but also can be extended to the side one. This advantage had been taken and developed in the proposal of Rietveld.

23

Figure 22: Renovation shop and shoemaker workshop Record, façade and ground floor, 1927, Utrecht. Source: Verbouwing winkel en schoenmakerswerkplaats Record - Het Geheugen (delpher.nl)

24

Highlighted in this design are a composition of signboards, and an interesting displaying area that was made three-dimensional towards the street. Regarding the sign board, a broad connection had been made, between the name board of the company on the main façade, and a long advertising board on the side one. This advertisement also was designed to stretch out of the existing façade, forming a stylized combination of signboards. Thus, from the corner of the street, it can be seen that appearing in the shop front, from the left to the right, representatively were the name of the company, and a featured message of this brand, as an order of an advertisement. Mentioning the displaying area, as a light triangular space expanded from the old facade, was created by a part of the side facade with the front one. This area was designed with full-height large glass panels, as often seen in Nieuwe Kunst shops, maximizing the view of the clients inside the shop. While the displaying area seemed to be large, impressive fo rm and transparent, the entrance was designed with smaller area, simple design, non-transparent materials. This entrance was also arranged inward the shop, as a characteristic of Amsterdam School shops that was taken by Rietveld.

Along with the shop front, worth mentioning points in his design were also displayed in the interior. It can be seen that the interior space was designed based on three main areas: the entrance or the displaying area, the reception and the storage. Each area was defined by its own furniture that had different forms. The displaying area that played as a main object in the front façade, also acted as a cabinet that displayed sport items inside the shop. The displaying area was characterized by a big cabinet that had a polygonal shape and full-height glass walls. After experiencing the displaying items, clients can access the reception area, which was designed with a large curved desk that formed this space. These two main areas were combined with each other to create an interesting space that included unique forms of furniture. The storage, which was located in the end of the shop, was formed functionally as a serviced space, by rectangular cabinets.

The continuity of outside and inside spaces in this project was shown in both physical and visual ways. Besides the full-height glass panel that allowed people from outside to see through, the two main areas of the shop, as the displaying and the reception area, showed the continuity of unique objects from the shop front to the inside. This continuity not only created an exciting interior space but also attracted visitors from the outside to come in and experience. Additionally, the continuity was also displayed in the multifunctional furniture that served both the shop front and the interior. Located in the boundary between inside and outside spaces, the big glass cabinet was designed to form the exterior and the interior space. This area displayed goods to the outside, and was also used as furniture on the inside. By this way, the shop front not only played its existing role, but also could be considered as a part of the interior, that was extended to the outside.

25

Figure 23: the Metz and Co store on Hoogstraat in The Hague, 1934. A photo was taken from the front facade of the shop Metz & Co Hoogstraat (The Hague), which shows us the continuity of the space, the zig-zag walking pathway, and also the method of displaying goods, from the exterior to the interior. Source: Winkel Metz en Co Hoogstraat (Den Haag) (hetnieuweinstituut.nl)

During the career of Gerrit Rietveld, Metz and Co was known as one of the popular clients that he had collaborated with, which can be shown in a number of stores they had made in the Netherlands. The noticeable one is a store in The Hague, which was completed in 1934.

26

Figure 24: the Metz and Co store on Hoogstraat in The Hague, 1934. Source: Gerrit Rietveld (June 24, 1888 — June 24, 1964), Dutch architect, designer | World Biographical Encyclopedia (prabook.com)

It can be seen from the image that the main façade of this shop was a combination of different elements, such as a space for displaying goods, an entrance, and a signboard. This combination is not only adapted on the flat façade's surface, but is also shown in three dimensions. Looking at the overall facade, it can be seen that these shapes have made the shop become more prominent on a normal flat facade of the

27 existing building. From an economic point of view, this prominence had supported the store to achieve its important goal, which was to attract people's attention. From a cultural point of view, a continuation of this store can be seen from the styles of Amsterdam School presented above. This was represented in the volume aggregation on the facade, or in other words, transforming the facade's two dimensions into three dimensions. One side of the store was a display space, the other side was used as an entrance, which had been taken deep in, creating a lobby for the shop. The difference in this combination, compared to designs from the Amsterdam School period, was the openness of glass and steel materials, which was often seen in Nieuwe Kunst stores. Another difference was the design of the awning. Gerit Rietveld did not let the element align with the facade, as a characteristic of the Amsterdam School, but put it overhang, with the highlight of a crooked shape incorporating the brand's nameplate. The height of the eaves was also brought down, compared to the space displayed next to it. In addition to the aesthetics of the space, it also created an intimate atmosphere for the guests when entering. Another element in the façade design was the display space. It can be seen that this space was something that had been followed by Rietveld from the previous Nieuwe Kunst style, with large glass panels and steel frames. This made the display space from the inside become more open to the outside, and at the same time, it helped customers from outside to have easy access to the items of the shop.

From the outside perspective, it is clear that design characteristics were not only shown on the façade, but were continued into the interior, which was represented by two main elements: the aisle and spaces for displaying goods. Regarding spaces for displaying goods, the open and thorough concepts of the Nieuwe Kunst movement had been exploited to the maximum by Rietveld through the visual openness. Thanks to this aspect, Metz and Co's items of furniture, which had been deliberately arranged and covered by large glass panels, combined with artificial lighting and created different domestic scenarios, which led the clients to experience in a zig-zag way from the outside to the inside.

The interior was emphasized significantly by the aisle element, or the zig-zag way. While the displaying areas were characterized by a bright ambience, with white and transparent materials but lots of lighting, and full-height transparent panels that covered different scenarios of arranged furniture; the walking pathway was designed with a similar zig-zag shape of the displaying areas, but in a contrast appearance. It had fewer lightings, non-transparent materials and colors, with a narrow lane and a lower ceiling, which made an intimate ambience for visitors while walking inside the shop. These two spaces are contrasting in terms of appearance but similar in terms of connection, supporting the store's interior as well as the selling items to be shown efficiently to their clients.

The continuity from the exterior to the interior was highlighted in the displaying areas, with their transparent materials, and the walking pathway, that had a similar level with the outdoor pavement. This continuity was formed as a zig-zag promenade that oriented people from the street to the inside in a natural way. The impact of this design is it almost blurred the clear boundary between the interior and the exterior that was often seen in the previous shops. These glass blocks can be considered as a part of the exterior, or even an urban public space, when the entrance acted as a part of the street, and at the same time, it also worked as items of furniture in the interior space, when people walked inside.

28

Figure 25: Metz & Co, shop for furniture and fabrics, Keizersgracht 449, Amsterdam, 1938. Source: Afbeelding van winkelpui Metz & Co, ca.1960 - Het Geheugen (delpher.nl)

Another Metz and Co store designed by Gerrit Rietveld was located in Amsterdam. Completed in 1938, this work belonged to a 5-storey old house in the city. In the previous project of Metz and Co in The Hague, which was set in a contemporary house with a minimalistic appearance, Rietveld's solution was a design with a relatively complex shop front, in contrast to the existing façade. However in the context of this project, in a typical traditional Amsterdam house, with featured ornaments on the façade that reflected the historical eras, the architect's proposal tended to be simple, and was almost contextualized in the existing building.

This contextualization can be seen in the design of the shop front, which included a glass surface and a name board. The store's glass facade had shown a continuation of Rietveld from the Nieuwe Kunst style. But instead of using a large glass panel, like his previous shop in The Hague, Rietveld divided it into twenty-four small panes, with elegant steel frames. The ratio of these glass panes was similar to that of the old windows on the upper floor. In addition, the name board, was also arranged with the flat surface of the existing house. If this shop in Amsterdam had followed the similar style with the one in The Hague, with the complex appearance, it would have undoubtedly created an uncoordinated correlation between a historical facade and a new intervention. Therefore, as evident, this project showed that in a culturally historical context like Amsterdam, besides inheriting from the strengths of previous shop designs, Rietveld also considered to make his new renovation embedded with the local context.

29

Figure 26: Renovation of Shop Metz & Co, façade and interior in perspective behind it, 1938. The shop front and interior spaces were designed based on the principle of the ‘enfilade room’. Source: Verbouwing Winkel Metz & Co (reclamepagina Metz & Co) - Het Geheugen (delpher.nl)

Another noteworthy issue in this design is the design of the interior space. This can be seen in the drawing of interior design in the Figure below, where the inner spaces of the shop were organized based on the ‘enfilade rooms’ principle, along the depth of the house. Particularly, inside of the shop Metz and Co,

30 furniture in each space was set as a scenario in a living area, such as the living room, the dining room, the garden, etc. The division between these scenarios was the transparent layers of glass, which were arranged from the outer façade to the inner spaces. Even though interior spaces were divided by these layers, they still allowed people to see through them. So these layers of glass not only divided spaces physically, but also connected them visually.

The concept of the continuity in this project was mostly in the visual way, instead of a strong physical connection as the shop in The Hague for the same owner. This continuity can be seen in the layers of glass. Each of them had a unique design, which played different roles with its asymptotic spaces. The glass exterior, with its uniform glass panes as mentioned above, acted as a link between the new store and the old context. The second layer of glass, with smaller glass panes, combined with wooden molds and doors, created a cozy ambience for the display space, and made it become more suitable with the furniture in terms of materials. The third layer was entirely glass, which maximized the view for clients to the inner garden. Therefore, from outside to the inside, clients might have various experiments with different spaces and their unique ambiences. In this project, the connection between inside and outside had been shown a cohesion and diverse ways, which were reflected in the enfilade room arrangement.

Figure 27: Interior and furniture for shoe store Ket in Leeuwarden, 1956. A colors drawing of interior and furniture designs for Ket shoe store (Leeuwarden). Based on the layout, the walking / visiting way for customers was oriented / designed from the main entrance (which also includes a public bench next to the door), to the organized furnitures and also the transition of materials. Source: https://zoeken.hetnieuweinstituut.nl/en/archives/scans/RIET/1.1.2.62.1/limit/25

31

In 1956, Gerrit Rietveld completed a design for a Ket shoes store in Leeuwarden. In the drawings of this project, it can be seen that this shop was characterized by a simple façade and a complex arrangement of the interior.

Mentioning the shop front, it showed both the inheriting from traditional stores and the new development of Rietveld. The openness of Nieuwe Kunst stores was used in this area, with a large glass panel. Also worth mentioning in this panel was its bottom part, which was designed to be higher than the normal level of the previous shops. This brought more closeness for the inside space, as a characteristic of Amsterdam School stores. Additionally, the drawing of the plan showed that the entrance in the shop front was opened towards the outside, creating the shop front three dimensional, as can be seen in several designs of Rietveld before. A part of the entrance seemed to be extruded out of the façade and thus opened a vertical window on the side façade. This solution, besides creating a form that attracts people, also suggested more views to the inside for clients, and additionally, it also brought more lighting to come side the shop.

Regarding the interior design, a cozy ambience was created inside the shop with different elements and items of furniture. Generally, each element had its own function, and materials. Some evidence can be shown in the drawing, such as gray patterns were used for walls, and the mental with copper color was used for the door frames. Similar principles of design were also adapted to furniture, while each of them had different functions and its own characteristic materials. Particularly, the black color was for cabinets, the blue color was for armchairs, the dark wood was for walls cladding and the reception desk. Besides the ambience, a noticeable highlight in this project is the main entrance. While other spaces were designed with horizontal and vertical lines, this entrance was formed by two diagonal lines on the plan, which was two pieces of furniture (a reception desk and another table for clients or a cabinet that displayed shoes). Combining with the position of the entrance on the façade, they made a reasonable arrangement of the diagonal route and the door that was extended in the corner, which suggested people coming inside in a natural way.

The aspect of the continuity between the shop front and the interior was shown in the heights of elements and furniture, and the way materials were used. From the shop front to the inside space, materials were used in a strict principle for elements that had similar functions, as was analyzed above. The noticeable one is the door element in the back of the shop, which had a copper surface, similarly with the window frame of the shop front. Regarding the heights, in the section drawings, it is clear that there were two main high levels of the design, which were about +0.9m, for the level of the desk, the table and the wood cladding, and approximately +2.5m, for the level of the shop front, doors and tall cabinets.

32

Figure 28: Front view of the building Oudegracht 119 (office bookshop Mado) in Utrecht, 1962. Source: Beeldbank (Het Utrechts Archief ) - Het Utrechts Archief

In the latter years of his career, Gerrit Rietveld completed a design for a bookshop, which was named Mado, and located in an old house in the corner of a street, in Utrecht. Having a similar context with the Record shoes store mentioned above, this bookshop was adapted two similar design solutions with that project. The first one is the link between two name boards of the front and the side facades, as a benefit of a building in the street corner. But different from the Record store, these name boards were combin ed in a simple way, which highlighted the complex design of the shop front below them. One noticeable point is the position of the bookshop’s name. It was not in the middle of the façade, but right above the entrance, which seems to mark the main doorway of the shop and also to play as an element in the composition below it. The second design solution that was similar with the Record shoes store is the extension of the glass surface, from the front façade to the side one. This solution made the boundaries of the shop front become broader, as another advantage of a building in the street corner.

33

Within an enlarged façade, different elements that displayed books and accessories were arranged as a De Stijl three dimensions composition. All of them were made from large and full-height glass panels with small steel frames, which could be seen in Nieuwe Kunst stores. The most impressive element in the facade was the front one, which can be viewed from the inside and outside. Having a lower level than other glass windows and allowing the natural light to come through, it seemed to be hung on two steel bars in front of the entrance. In the image, this element was used as a display cabinet that possibly catched the attention of pedestrians, before they came inside. To access the main door, clients had to walk around this element and then pass through the entrance, which had been moved inward, even was hidden by a displaying area. By this way, the visitor had to experience the goods before accessing the shop. Compared with the existing house, a contrast regarding forms and materials was created between the old façade and the new complex design of the shop front. While the old façade seemed to be a stable big block made from bricks, the new shop design was a collection of small blocks that were made from glass and steel, and were arranged in a contemporary composition.

The continuity between the shop front and the interior in this project was developed significantly, in comparison with previous shops of Gerrit Rietveld. While this aspect in previous shops seemed to be limited in the area of the shop front and the inside, the continuity in this project was considered from the outside of the shop front. It can be seen in the flow of the De Stijl composition of glass elements, from inside to the outside, and especially the significant role of the existing electric cabin on the street in this composition. Along with the new elements, the small electric cabin that had existed on the shop front also was considered as an element of the facade. Rietveld not only kept it as it was, but also designed the new shop front with the participation of it in the appearance, made a small volume become an important part of the De Stijl composition. Instead of communicating with old or ancient buildings like previous shops, this design of Rietveld showed its connection with an infrastructure item, which seemed to belong to the urban space. This design caused the boundary between interior and exterior to be blurred. It even made glass blocks and the electric cabin seem like a part of the urban area, where people often walked through in a natural way.

CONCLUSION – THE HISTORICAL ROLE OF GERRIT RIETVELD’S SHOP DESIGNS

The essay has shown a historical view about the design development of Dutch shops, from the traditional store to those revolutions of Gerrit Rietveld, describing how he developed a shop design as a task of an architect. It can be summarized briefly from the 17th century, when almost the façade of those houses seemed to be closed visually, and served private functions only. Then as a result of the Dutch economic growth, the trend of opening a shop in the ground floor of the tube house, which seemed to be open and to respond to the public and commercial needs, became gradually popular. This trend led to a new appearance on the old house’s façade, which included two parts: the shop front and the residentials. The period between 1890 and 1930 has shown Nieuwe Kunst and Amsterdam School, as two main well-known design styles that were adapted to shop fronts. While Nieuwe Kunst shops had a maximum openness through a large glass window on a flat façade, Amsterdam School stores tended to be quite closer with a combination of different local materials (such as wood, bricks and stained glass) on a three dimensions shop front. These characteristics of these traditional stores had been inherited and continued by Gerrit Rietveld in a number of shop designs during his career, from 1922 to 1962. Along with that, these stores also showed his new development, such as the De Stijl appearance in the shop front and interior designs, as well as the continuity between them.

34

Throughout Rietveld’s shop designs, it can be seen that the shop front, the interior and the continuity of them had been shown in different ways in each project. To sum up these aspects of Gerrit Rietveld’s shops, a table can be created as below.

Projects (and years) 1922 – Golden 1925 – Wessels 1927 - Record 1934 – Metz and 1934 – Metz and 1956 – Ket shoes 1962 – Mado and Silver Smith and Zoon store, Shoes store, Co store, The Co store, store, bookshop, Utre store, Utrecht Utrecht Hague Amsterdam Leeuwarden cht Amsterdam

Images

Shop front Improving - Nieuwe Kunst: - Nieuwe Kunst: - Nieuwe Kunst: - Nieuwe Kunst: - Nieuwe Kunst: - Nieuwe Kunst: - Nieuwe Kunst: design from the past large glass large glass large glass large glass panels a two dimension a large glass large glass panels and steel panels and steel panels for the and steel frames, façade with glass panel. panels and frames for all frames for all new area that for displaying panels and tiny steel frames for elements. elements. displayed goods. areas and the steel frames. all elements. entrance way. - Amsterdam School: The - Amsterdam - Amsterdam - Amsterdam bottom part of the - Amsterdam School: some School: the School: - Amsterdam glass panel was School: the elements were entrance was set entrances of the School: the higher than entrance was covered by a back inside, shop and entrance was set normal high level moved inward, solid surface, creating a three apartments back inside, of previous even was which made the dimensions above were set creating a three shops, which hidden by a façade closer. design of the back inside, dimensions design brought more displaying area. The entrance shop front. creating a three of the shop front. closeness for the was set back dimensions interior. The inside, creating design for the entrance of the a three shop front. shop was dimensions extended to the design of the outside, creating shop front. a three dimensions design for the shop front.

New - De Stijl - The two ground - The triangular - The zig-zag - Small pieces of - A part of the - De Stijl development combination of floors had been shape was shape was glass were used, entrance seemed combination of different connected into adapted to the adapted to the instead of only a to be extruded different elements. one space. displaying area. entrance as well large one. out of the façade elements. as the name board and thus opened of the shop. a vertical window - Each element - De Stijl - Advantages of a on the side - Taking (the logo, the composition of ‘corner building’ façade. advantages of a name board, the different were taken, as - An interesting ‘corner entrance, and elements. an impressive composition was building’. the displaying shape for the created by the area) played the displaying area contrast between similar role in - Each element and the the displaying area - The entrance the composition. (the entrance, the composition of and the entrance. was a hidden displaying area, the shop’s walking way, the windows and advertisement. where the the existing - While the visitor had to structure) plays displaying area experience the different roles in seemed to be goods before the composition. large and accessing the transparent, the shop. entrance was designed with smaller lanes, and - The name non-transparent board, was not materials. in the middle of the façade, but right above the entrance way.

35

Interior design - De Stijl (being not - The interior - Interior spaces of - Different - A cozy and (being not ambience was mentioned in the space was the shop was scenarios of ambience with mentioned in adapted, based images) designed with arranged into two furniture with many items of the images) on the three main areas: main areas: the different furniture with architectural the entrance, the displaying areas functions were different elements and reception and the and the walking set up inside the materials. furniture of the storage. pathway shop, following shop. the principle of the ‘enfilade - The entrance - Each area was - The displaying room’. was designed as defined by its areas: a bright a highlight on the furniture that had ambience, with plan. a different form. white and - These enfilade transparent rooms were materials, lots of differentiated by lighting. several glass facades that were arranged - The walking from the shop pathway: fewer front to the lightings, non- inside. Each transparent glass wall had its materials and own appearance colors, with a to contribute narrow lane and a functionally for lower ceiling. these spaces

The continuity Visual - The glass - The glass - The full-height - The full-height - The concept of - The large glass - The glass from the shop connection surface of façade brought glass panel glass panels of the continuity in panel could show surface of front to the elements partly an openness for allowed people displaying areas this project was its interior as well blocks that interior allowed people the shop where from outside to allowed people mostly in the as items of the displayed items from the outside the client can see see inside the from outside to see visual way, shops to the of the shop to see what the interior from shop. inside the shop, instead of a outside. allowed people kinds of goods the outside, along even seeing strong physical to see the were displayed with the displayed through different connection as the interior from the inside the shop. goods. - The two main scenarios. shop in The outside. areas of the shop Hague. This (the displaying design also and the reception showed a respect area) showed the of the architect continuity of for the historical unique objects building in from the shop Amsterdam, front to the when the inside. connection between spaces as well as the impact of the new intervention is reasonably limited.

Physical - The ‘displaying - The beam in- - The - The displaying - The relation - The continuity connection cabinet’, between two multifunctional areas with their between the of the De Stijl seemed to serve houses came furniture that transparent shop front and composition of both the shop from the shop served both the materials, and the the interior was glass elements, front (as the front to the inside shop front and walking pathway shown in the from inside to displaying area) spaces. the interior. This that had a similar height levels, and the outside, and and the interior area displayed level with the the way materials especially the (as a cabinet). goods to the outdoor pavement were used. significant role - Compared with outside, and was were designed as of the existing the previous shop also used as a zig-zag cabin on the - The light of Rietveld, in this furniture in the promenade that - Materials were street in this structure of project, the inside space. oriented people used in a similar composition. elements on the concept of from the street to way for elements façade has a continuity was the inside in a that had similar similar highlighted more - The shop front, natural way. functions. - Compositions appearance with based on the not only played it of glass blocks the thin frames expression of the existing role, but and the electric of furniture. structure that also could be - It blurred the - In the section, it cabin seemed came from the considered as a clear boundary is clear that there to become a inside to the part of the between the were two main part of the - In this design, outside area. interior, that was interior and the high levels of the urban area. although there extended to the exterior. design. The first were several outside. one were links between adapted to the the shop front - Glass blocks can level of the and the interior, be considered as a cabinets and the they still were part of the exterior, doorway; the seen as two or even an urban second one were detached public space, when the level of other spaces. the entrance acted small furniture as a part of the such as chairs or street. tables.

36

Relation of the Visual relation (being not - A contrast - A contrast - A contrast in - Simple (being not - A contrast new design mentioned in the between the new regarding forms appearance was appearance of mentioned in the regarding forms and the images) intervention and and materials created between the shop front images) and materials existing the two old between the new the new complex showed the between the context houses. complex design design of the shop balance between new complex of the shop front, front, and the the new design design of the and the old simple flat and and the historical shop front, and - The facades of facade of the white surface of context. the old facade these houses: existing house. the existing house. of the existing were separated While the old house. completely, made façade was flat - Proportion of from traditional and made from new 24 glass bricks. The shop bricks, the new panels was - The old front: was one had a designed to façade: a stable combined into polygonal shape become similar big block made one façade, made and was made with existing from bricks. from glass and from modern windows. The new shop steel. materials, such design: a as glass and collection of steel. small blocks made from glass and steel.

Physical (being not - The existing (being not - The existing relation mentioned in the structure of the mentioned in the electric cabin images) two existing images) that had existed houses was taken on the shop as advantages for front also was the new design in considered as an interesting an element of way. the facade. Rietveld not only kept it as it was, but also designed the new shop front with the participation of it in the appearance, made a small volume becom e an important part of the De Stijl composition.

Table 1: Gerrit Rietveld’s shop designs in the Netherlands, from 1922 to 1962 (own data).

Based on the table, there were three main kinds of the shop front design. The first one is a De Stijl composition (as the light blue note on the table), which was adapted to the Golden and Silver Smith store, the Wessels and Zoon store, and the Mado bookshop. The second type of the shop front is a diagonal shape (as the medium blue note) that can be seen in the Record Shoes store, the Metz and Co store in The Hague, and the Ket shoes store. The third type is a simple glass façade (as the bold blue note) of the Metz and Co store in Amsterdam. Each kind of goods were displayed in different ways on the façade. While in the third type of shop front, there were no clear boundaries between the entrance and the displaying area of goods, in two other types, these spaces seemed to be detached clearly.

Regarding the interior of those shops, three main types of interior space were shown. The first type is only one inner space that included a composition of multiple items of furniture (as the light yellow note on the table), which was for the Golden and Silver Smith store, the Record Shoes store, and the Ket shoes shop. The second one is a chain of different small spaces or different scenarios (as the medium orange note on the table) that can be shown in the enfilade rooms of Metz and Co shop in Amsterdam. The third one is a combination of two main detached spaces: the walking pathway and the displaying area of goods (as the bold orange note on the table) that was adapted to the Metz and Co shop in The Hague.

37

Mentioning the continuity between the shop front and the interior, as the elaboration of those shops above and the data on the table, it is clear that since the appearance of the openness in Nieuwe Kunst stores, the relation between the outdoor and indoor space had been considered as an important aspect of a shop design. This aspect, which was shown in every shop of Gerrit Rietveld, not only brought an openness to attract customers visually from the outside, but also showed a physical transition from the outside to the inside, which partly suggested people to interact with the shop in a natural way. On the table, there were two main design ways for a continuity between the interior and the exterior. The first one is the continuity of a composition of different objects from the shop front to the interior (as the light red note on the table), which was shown in the Golden and Silver Smith store, the Record Shoes store, the Metz and Co shop in Amsterdam, the Ket shoes store, and the Mado bookshop. The other kind of the relation is the continuity of a significant object from the shop front to the interior (as the bold red note), which can be seen in the structure of Wessels and Zoon store, and the walking route in the Metz and Co shop in The Hague.

Although a commercial shop in a traditional tube house might not be a large area to design an iconic building, those aspects of design above have proved an enduring effort of Gerrit Rietveld, with a series of remarkable store designs, none of which overlap in appearance. Each of them not only contained a continuation from previous traditional shops, but also showed new developments from the architect, which partly enhanced the local street in the Netherlands a significant cultural and identical value. This cultural value, which in many ways, is the timeless “business” of cities31, has proved that those projects of Gerrit Rietveld have played an important part in the history of shop designs.

31 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002. See page 281.

38

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books and Articles

1 Simon Thomas, M. (2008). Dutch Design: A History. United Kingdom: Reaktion Page 1 Books. See chapter 3: Good Design, 1925-1965.

2 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and Page 2 ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002.

3 Bonsignori, C., Post, J., & Roders, A. P. (2008). Re-architecture of Industrial Page 2 Heritage. In 17th CIB World Building Congress, May 14-17, 2007, Cape Town, South Africa (pp. 1665-1673). In-house publishing.

4 Walsh, C. (1995). Shop design and the display of goods in eighteenth-century Page 2 London. Journal of Design History, 8(3), 157-176.

5 Griffiths, R. (2006). City/culture discourses: Evidence from the competition to Page 2 select the European Capital of Culture 2008. European planning studies, 14(4), 415-430.

6 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and Page 2 ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002.

7 Walsh, C. (1995). Shop design and the display of goods in eighteenth-century Page 2 London. Journal of Design History, 8(3), 157-176.

8 Jaffé, H. L. (1956). De Stijl 1917-1931. The Dutch Contribution to modern art, Page 2 Amsterdam.

9 Rietveld, G. T., Küper, M., & van Zijl, I. (1992). Gerrit Th. Rietveld, 1888-1964: Page 3 the complete works. Princeton Architectural Press.

10 Jaffé, H. L. (1956). De Stijl 1917-1931. The Dutch Contribution to modern art, Page 3 Amsterdam.

11 Rietveld, G. T., Küper, M., & van Zijl, I. (1992). Gerrit Th. Rietveld, 1888-1964: Page 4 the complete works. Princeton Architectural Press.

12 Ariese, P. Good shopping at the Amsterdam Museum. Page 5

13 Van Zanden, J. L. (2005). The economic history of the Netherlands 1914-1995: Page 5 A small open economy in the'long' twentieth century (Vol. 1). Routledge.

14 Bonsignori, C., Post, J., & Roders, A. P. (2008). Re-architecture of Industrial Page 6 Heritage. In 17th CIB World Building Congress, May 14-17, 2007, Cape Town, South Africa (pp. 1665-1673). In-house publishing.

15 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and Page 6 ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002.

39

16 Parallel. (n.d.). Building ages in the Netherlands. Retrieved 25 March 2021, from Page 6 https://parallel.co.uk/netherlands/#13.8/52.365/4.9/0/40

17 Koster, H. R., Pasidis, I., & van Ommeren, J. (2019). Shopping externalities and Page 10 retail concentration: Evidence from dutch shopping streets. Journal of Urban Economics, 114, 103194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2019.103194.

18 Walsh, C. (1995). Shop design and the display of goods in eighteenth-century Page 10 London. Journal of Design History, 8(3), 157-176. See

19 Dewidar, Khaled. (2018). Art Nouveau Style. Page 11

20 Romaniuk, N. (2019). Art nouveau ukrainian architecture in a global context. Page 11 Kyiv-Mohyla Humanities Journal, (6), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.18523/kmhj189056.2019-6.137-148.

21 Dewidar, Khaled. (2018). Art Nouveau Style. Page 11

22 Dewidar, Khaled. (2018). Art Nouveau Style. Page 11

23 Casciato, M. (1996). The Amsterdam School. Netherlands: 010 Publishers. Page 13

24 Casciato, M. (1996). The Amsterdam School. Netherlands: 010 Publishers. Page 13

25 Casciato, M. (1996). The Amsterdam School. Netherlands: 010 Publishers. Page 13

26 Van der Cruysse-Van Antwerpen, I. (1996). Contemporary Explorations in the Page 13 Culture of the Low Countries. United Kingdom: University Press of America.

27 Anheier, H. K., & Isar, Y. R. (Eds.). (2012). Cultures and globalization: cities, Page 18 cultural policy and governance. Sage.

28 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and Page 18 ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002.

29 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and Page 18 ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002.

30 Küper, M., & van Zijl, I. (1992). Gerrit Th. Rietveld, 1888-1964: the complete Page 18 works. Princeton Architectural Press.

31 Zukin, S. (2012). The social production of urban cultural heritage: Identity and Page 38 ecosystem on an Amsterdam shopping street. City, Culture and Society, 3(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2012.10.002.

Figures - Images and Illustrations

40

1 The structure of the essay (own image) Page 3

2 Page 4 Het Nieuwe Instituut, Rotterdam, Rietveld, G.Th. (Gerrit Thomas) / Archief (RIET), inv.nr. 426

3 The boulevard des Italiens, Paris, 1858. (2009). [Illustration]. Page 5 https://www.flickr.com/photos/odisea2008/3196000327/

4 Page 5 The department store Le Bon Marché,Paris, 1900. (1900). [Illustration]. https://www.granger.com/results.asp?inline=true&image=0902866&wwwflag= 1&itemx=7

5 Lamberts, G. (1774). Drawing of the house ‘De Steenen Roelant’, Nieuwezijds Page 6 Voorburgwal 52, Amsterdam, 1774 [Illustration]. https://archief.amsterdam/beeldbank/detail/a841b424-b7d5-2cfe-736a- b75b14b67df0

6 Page 7 Lamberts, G. (1815). Dutch traditional street in Handboogstraat 6–24, Amsterdam, 1815. [Illustratioin]. https://archief.amsterdam/beeldbank/detail/ca5c6c45-47a9-8a11-bd39- eed6963cf288

7 Scherpenisse, P. (1906). Kalverstraat 239, near the Spui, 1906. Street is only Page 8 accessible to pedestrians. [Photo]. https://archief.amsterdam/beeldbank/detail/79c14f87-fd84-fed8-0f34- e03b3ae169be

8 Springer, C. (1848). Dutch traditional street, Kalverstraat 1–39, Amsterdam, 1848 Page 9 [Illustration]. https://archief.amsterdam/beeldbank/detail/6890e53e-709f-fb81- c572-0c8c3c0dd087

9 Design and presentation drawing for the construction of the shop and house Page 10 Herenstraat 16, architect IJ. Bijvoets Gzn, 1870. (1870). [Illustration]. https://archief.amsterdam/beeldbank/detail/5ea0b6c9-6d98-3b6a-c7f3- a71407d909f5

10 Advertisement for the shop of tailor N. Jörgensen, Kalverstraat 32, Page 12 Amsterdam, 1852. (1852). [Illustration]. https://archief.amsterdam/beeldbank/detail/a04170c5-4069-035a-6ea0- 6e262ff9af62

11 Shop Chapellerie van W. van Mastwijk, Ceintuurbaan 93, Amsterdam, 1910. Page 12 (1910). [Photo]. https://archief.amsterdam/beeldbank/detail/32ff5240-fa35-5d65- e1d0-c1fd2e27e6cd/media/ed6f363d-347e-d29c-af24- d12a4b806d6a?mode=detail&view=horizontal&q=van%20Mastwijk,%201910.&ro ws=1&page=1

41

12 A special shop building in the Amsterdamse Heiligeweg, by architects G.F.La Page 14 Croix, and A. Jacot, 1915. (1915). [Photo]. https://amsterdamse- school.nl/objecten/gebouwen/winkel-heiligeweg-37,-amsterdam/#

13 Page 15 A special shop building in the Amsterdamse Heiligeweg, by architects G.F.La Croix, and A. Jacot, 1915. (1915). [Photo]. https://amsterdamse- school.nl/objecten/gebouwen/winkel-heiligeweg-37,-amsterdam/#

14 A special shop building in the Amsterdamse Heiligeweg, by architects G.F.La Page 15 Croix, and A. Jacot, 1915. (1915). [Photo]. https://amsterdamse- school.nl/objecten/gebouwen/winkel-heiligeweg-37,-amsterdam/#

15 The shop for the company Helmo, which trades in parquet floors, in Page 16 Paleisstraat 17, Amsterdam, 1923. (1923). [Photo]. https://amsterdamse- school.nl/objecten/gebouwen/winkelpui-paleisstraat-17,-amsterdam/

16 In front of the shop C.A.P. Ivens & Co. in photo articles, cameras and Page 17 supplies, at Kalverstraat 115, Amsterdam, 1916. (1916). [Photo]. https://archief.amsterdam/beeldbank/detail/3e797251-e35d-de57-f8a1- d42eecea421d

17 Het Nieuwe Instituut, Rotterdam, Rietveld, G.Th. (Gerrit Thomas) / Archief Page 19 (RIET), inv.nr. 426

18 Rietveld, G. (1921). An object of Gold and Silversmith Company, in Stedelijk Page 20 Museum Amsterdam, manufactured by Gerrit Rietveld during 1921–1923. [Photo]. https://www.stedelijk.nl/en/collection/36390-gerrit-rietveld-goud-en- zilversmid%27s-compagnie

19 Interior view of the G.Z.C. Jewelry Store, Amsterdam, 1922. (1922). [Photo]. Page 21 https://upcommons.upc.edu/bitstream/handle/2099/13190/Palimpsesto%2003 %202%20Elena%20Ferna%CC%81ndez.pdf

20 View of the shop front of Lederwarenwinkel E. Wessels and Zn, Oudkerkhof Page 22 15–17, Utrecht, 1925. (1925). [Photo]. https://oranjeflamingo.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/rietveld-wessels.jpg

21 Central Museum. (1927). Record Shoes, Lange Elisabethstraat 5, 1927, Page 23 Utrecht. [Photo]. https://geheugen.delpher.nl/nl/geheugen/view?coll=ngvn&maxperpage=36&pa ge=2&query=rietveld+winkel&identifier=CM02%3A116F005

22 Renovation shop and shoemaker workshop Record, façade and ground floor, Page 24 1927, Utrecht. (n.d.). [Illustration]. https://geheugen.delpher.nl/nl/geheugen/view/verbouwing-winkel- schoenmakerswerkplaats- record?coll=ngvn&maxperpage=36&page=2&query=rietveld+winkel&identifier =CM02%3A005A001

42

23 The Metz and Co store on Hoogstraat in The Hague, 1934. (n.d.). [Photo]. Page 26 https://zoeken.hetnieuweinstituut.nl/en/objects/detail/?q=winkel%20rietveld&p age=1

24 The Metz and Co store on Hoogstraat in The Hague, 1934. (n.d.). [Photo]. Page 27 https://prabook.com/web/gerrit.rietveld/731512#works

25 Metz & Co, shop for furniture and fabrics, Keizersgracht 449, Amsterdam, Page 29 1938. (1938). [Photo]. https://geheugen.delpher.nl/nl/geheugen/view?coll=ngvn&identifier=CM02%3 A278F001

26 Rietveld, G. (1938). Renovation of Shop Metz & Co, façade and interior in Page 30 perspective behind it, 1938. [Illustration]. https://geheugen.delpher.nl/nl/geheugen/view/verbouwing-winkel-metz-amp- co-reclamepagina-metz-amp- co?coll=ngvn&maxperpage=36&page=2&query=rietveld+winkel&identifier=CM 02%3A721A002

27 Rietveld, G. (1956). Interior and furniture for shoe store Ket in Leeuwarden, Page 31 1956 [Illustration]. https://zoeken.hetnieuweinstituut.nl/en/archives/scans/RIET/1.1.2.62.1/limit/2 5

28 Front view of the building Oudegracht 119 (office bookshop Mado) in Utrecht, Page 33 1962. (1990). [Photo]. https://hetutrechtsarchief.nl/component/maisinternet/?mivast=39&miadt=39& mizig=287&miview=gal&milang=nl&micols=1&mizk_alle=Mado

Online Archives

1 Het Nieuwe Instituut, Rotterdam, Rietveld, Van Dillen & Van Tricht / Archive, access number RIEZ.

2 Het Nieuwe Instituut, Rotterdam, Rietveld, G.Th. (Gerrit Thomas) / Archive, access number RIET

43