Artikelen

• 

  Intentionele willekeur. Het ongeschreven verwervingsbeleid van Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser

  The Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser is a private heritage organization established in 1918, the same year that saw the founding of the Rijksbureau voor Monumentenzorg, the forerunner of today’s Rijksdienst voor Cultureel Erfgoed (Cultural Heritage Agency). The organization is dedicated to the preservation of historically valuable buildings in the Netherlands, which it does by purchasing and managing such properties. Hendrick de Keyser was not bound by government policy and
  went its own way in the matter of acquisition. Thus, an analysis of its acquisition strategies can supplement our knowledge of heritage protection and reveal to what extent private heritage protection developed in tandem with or separately from government policy. 
  Decisions on acquisitions were made by the board and since the association never formulated specific rules for this purpose, an analysis of acquisition practice is best done via a study of the properties and their descriptions in minutes, annual reports and anniversary publications. This article analyses the association’s properties from three perspectives: the grounds for acquisition as published in annual reports and board reports, the dating of the properties and the typology.
  No clear-cut periods in acquisitions policy emerge from this three-pronged analysis. Several elements do, however, stand out. A recurrent theme with respect to argumentation is the building’s importance in the townscape or its visually defining features.
  Around the time of the association’s founding, this was probably due to the frenzied demolition and redevelopment taking place around the country; after the Second World War to the consequences of the Wederopbouwwet (Reconstruction Act), which tore great holes in the fabric of the historical city centres. The analysis based on dating and typology leads to similar conclusions in relation to wider developments in heritage protection.
  In addition to an analysis of the properties themselves, it is necessary to take account of other likely influences on acquisition practice, such as the association’s financial situation. For example, Hendrick de Keyser does not buy on the open market; acquisitions have usually taken the form of private purchases supported by external financing from various funds, or of bequests and gifts. The influence of individual board members also needs to be considered: the presence on the board of prominent art/architecture historians and architects inevitably affected acquisition practice.
  Based on this information, comparisons were made with government policy. It transpires that Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser and other organizations generally developed side by side and many parallels can be drawn between the various parties. There is evidence of cross-fertilization and of contemporaneous but divergent developments, both of which influenced national heritage policy.

  The Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser is a private heritage organization established in 1918, the same year that saw the founding of the Rijksbureau voor Monumentenzorg, the forerunner of today’s Rijksdienst voor Cultureel Erfgoed (Cultural Heritage Agency). The organization is dedicated to the preservation of historically valuable buildings in the Netherlands, which it does by purchasing and managing such properties. Hendrick de Keyser was not bound by government policy and
  went its own way in the matter of acquisition. Thus, an analysis of its acquisition strategies can supplement our knowledge of heritage protection and reveal to what extent private heritage protection developed in tandem with or separately from government policy. 
  Decisions on acquisitions were made by the board and since the association never formulated specific rules for this purpose, an analysis of acquisition practice is...

  The Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser is a private heritage organization established in 1918, the same year that saw the founding of the Rijksbureau voor Monumentenzorg, the forerunner of today’s Rijksdienst voor Cultureel Erfgoed (Cultural Heritage Agency). The...

  Wouter van Elburg

  130-146

  • PDF
• 

  Zoektocht naar een restauratievisie. Honderd jaar restaureren door Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser

  The Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser was established in 1918 in response to a spate of demolition and injudicious renovation of historical buildings. Since its inception, the association has acquired 423 buildings in 109 locations in the Netherlands, nearly all of which have undergone one or more restorations of varying intensity. As such, the association has had an impact on the appearance of towns and villages across the Netherlands. But what principles did it apply in carrying out these restorations and how did they compare with the principles employed by the government? Although it was many years before the association laid down clear restoration guidelines, a study of the restorations reveals an evolving set of restoration principles.
  Restorations often gave rise to fierce debates among board members and between the board of Hendrick de Keyser and the government. Both extremes of restoration philosophy since the nineteenth century — restore to former glory versus do nothing — found adherents among the association’s architects. Whereas its ‘in-house architect’, A.A. Kok, initially adhered to the Grondbeginselen van de Nederlandsche Oudheidkundige Bond (Basic Principles of the Dutch Archeological Society, 1917) and took a cautious approach in his restoration work, architects employed by the government attempted to restore buildings to their original ‘historical’ appearance. From the 1930s onwards, both government and Hendrick de Keyser architects carried out ‘former glory’ restorations, although Hendrick de Keyser board members were divided in their opinions about these restorations. After the Second World War the government tended towards the view that restoration work should focus on preservation. This clashed with the views of the association, which continued to carry out many restorations well into the 1960s and 1970s.
  During this period, influenced by the 1961 Monumentenwet (Heritage Act), there was growing interest in the building in its surroundings. From the 1970s onwards the government and Hendrick de Keyser increasingly pursued the same principles. There was greater  interest in the preservation of authentic materials and the value of the heritage object as a source for scientific research. The visual quality was no longer paramount. Although there was generally more consideration for the historical layering of a heritage building, that did not apply to twentieth-century buildings, where the availability of adequate documentation usually worked in favour of restoration. In 2009 the Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser set about formulating its own restoration principles with reference to the Charter of Venice (1964) and the Uitgangspunten van de Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg (Principles of the Netherlands Department for the Preservation of Historic Buildings, 1991). The key tenets are ‘preservation through development’ and ‘preservation before renovation’. Over time, the association’s focus has shifted from the object in itself via the object in its surroundings to the story around the object, with the emphasis on nostalgic value. After almost one hundred years, the Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser finally has clearly formulated restoration principles — although it has yet to officially enshrine them in policy — in which the influence of the prevailing views at national and international level is clearly discernible.

  The Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser was established in 1918 in response to a spate of demolition and injudicious renovation of historical buildings. Since its inception, the association has acquired 423 buildings in 109 locations in the Netherlands, nearly all of which have undergone one or more restorations of varying intensity. As such, the association has had an impact on the appearance of towns and villages across the Netherlands. But what principles did it apply in carrying out these restorations and how did they compare with the principles employed by the government? Although it was many years before the association laid down clear restoration guidelines, a study of the restorations reveals an evolving set of restoration principles.
  Restorations often gave rise to fierce debates among board members and between the board of Hendrick de Keyser and the government. Both extremes of restoration philosophy since the nineteenth century — restore to former glory versus do...

  The Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser was established in 1918 in response to a spate of demolition and injudicious renovation of historical buildings. Since its inception, the association has acquired 423 buildings in 109 locations in the Netherlands, nearly all of which have undergone one or more...

  Lisanne van den Bulk

  147-166

  • PDF
• 

  Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser in oorlogstijd. Beleid en bestuur gedurende de Duitse bezetting 1940-1945

  During the German Occupation of the Netherlands between 1940 and 1945 it was not just government departments, forced to toe the German line, that were in jeopardy. Private organizations like Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser, whose core task involved the acquisition, restoration and leasing of historically important buildings, were also vulnerable. The difficulties and perils it faced included the commandeering of houses, diminishing funds for acquisitions and restorations, and divisions within the board on what attitude to adopt vis à vis the Germans.
  Differences of opinion among board members came to light quite early on, when the head of the occupying forces, Reichskommissar Seyss-Inquart, enquired about hiring the house at Herengracht 284 for a soirée. That request sparked a heated discussion among board members, which revealed that one member was pro-German (Frans Vermeulen), two were not ill-disposed towards the occupier (Jan Gratama and Jacobus Boelen) while the remaining members (G. van Lennep, Van der Feltz, Westermann) were vehemently anti-German. These differences in attitude were aired at length both before and after the soirée. Vermeulen claimed that his intention had been to get Seuss-Inquart interested in the association in the hope of attracting more funding. But it never came to that because the board maintained a discreet distance from the German occupying authorities.
  During this period, membership gradually declined, prompting the board to organize activities aimed at attracting new members. Board and the executive committee members were fairly successful in this and there was even a short film clip in 1943 that focused on the association’s 25^th anniversary, modestly celebrated on 4 January 1943 with a lecture by Frans Vermeulen and a reception.
  There is no evidence of any concerted effort to bar Jewish members and no question of Aryanization of the association. In addition, by keeping its distance from the German occupying authorities, the board was able to prevent its properties, which included many sixteenth- and seventeenth-century houses, from being misused for national-socialist cultural propaganda. Herengracht 170 was leased in autumn 1941 by the Bank für Westeuropaïsche Wirtschaft. Its director, Alfred Flesche, was also director of Lippmann, Rosenthal & Co, the bank notoriously used by the Germans to rob Jews of their possessions. It is unclear whether the board was aware of the dual role played by Flesche, who had moreover worked for the German Abwehr before the war. A bomb shelter was built in the garden of Herengracht 170 and, in defiance of the agreement, never removed. Permission was requested and given for a fireproof room, but of this no trace remains.
  By war’s end, six of the association’s buildings had suffered war damage. Its financial situation had deteriorated considerably and there was a sizeable backlog of restoration. After the liberation, Vermeulen and Gratama were arrested because of their pro-German stance; Boelen, the wartime chairman, died in 1946. Despite all the differences of opinion among board members and the difficult circumstances, the association had weathered the storm.

  During the German Occupation of the Netherlands between 1940 and 1945 it was not just government departments, forced to toe the German line, that were in jeopardy. Private organizations like Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser, whose core task involved the acquisition, restoration and leasing of historically important buildings, were also vulnerable. The difficulties and perils it faced included the commandeering of houses, diminishing funds for acquisitions and restorations, and divisions within the board on what attitude to adopt vis à vis the Germans.
  Differences of opinion among board members came to light quite early on, when the head of the occupying forces, Reichskommissar Seyss-Inquart, enquired about hiring the house at Herengracht 284 for a soirée. That request sparked a heated discussion among board members, which revealed that one member was pro-German (Frans Vermeulen), two were not ill-disposed towards the occupier (Jan Gratama and Jacobus Boelen) while the remaining...

  During the German Occupation of the Netherlands between 1940 and 1945 it was not just government departments, forced to toe the German line, that were in jeopardy. Private organizations like Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser, whose core task involved the acquisition, restoration and leasing of...

  Lex Bosman

  167-177

  • PDF