The story of the young Team X architects cannot be told without reflecting upon the special role that North Africa played within their ventures. After all, the architects working in Morocco and Algeria radically altered the course of CIAM at the ninth meeting in 1953 in AixenProvence and laid the foundation for what became Team X. As a result, and without exaggeration, it can be sustained that Team X emerged from the establishment of a meaningful relationship between the South and the North.
In particular, the presentations and debates related to the socalled CIAM
“Grid” or Grilleaccelerated the schism between older and younger members of CIAM. In 1946 Le Corbusier had introduced the system of the CIAM Grid – a large matrix composed according to fixed CIAM categories that allowed for the presentation of a modern urban project in a standard fashion.5Le Corbusier believed that the grid was one of the tools by which different modern design solutions could be compared and thus would offer the basis for finding universal solutions for the future city. However, instead of showing a hypermodern design for a new urban neighborhood as was normally done in CIAM Grids, the two representative North African groups at CIAM IX chose to focus on a completely different urban environment: the socalled bidonvilles or shanty towns in Casablanca and Algiers. These informal shack settlements that were
being constructed completely without the involvement of architects were, indeed, rising at a very fast pace in the peripheries of North African cities as a result of colonial modernization.
The CIAMMorocco group included about fifteen architects among whom were Pierre Mas, Michel Écochard, and Georges Candilis. It presented two grids:
Mas and Écochard’s GAMMA (Groupe d’Architectes Modernes Marocains) Grid on “Moroccan Housing,” and the ATBAT (Atelier des bâtisseurs)Afrique presentation “Habitat for the Greatest Number Grid,”6prepared by Candilis.
These grids represented investigations of the bidonville known as Carrières Centrales in the Moroccan city of Casablanca. It was composed of a large series of sketches, photographs, and collages that documented the living conditions in the old medina and in the bidonville as well as details about the renovation schemes presented by the Planning Department, including a study of the designs for collective housing based upon the patio system.7
The second group of North African architects, the CIAMAlgiers group under the leadership of architects Roland Simounet and Michel Emery, presented the socalled Bidonville Mahieddine Grid, that focused on the bidonville Mahieddine in the outskirts of Algiers. The grid showed a very detailed study of the reasons for the emergence of the area, the sanitary and health problems that it brought to the fore, photographic and graphic analyses of the way that the bidonville was used and lived in, as well as design proposals for new housing units that were to replace the shantytown (plate 49).
Alison Smithson, one of the participants to CIAM IX, noticed that both of the North African grids caused a lot of upheaval. The actual reason for this turmoil was according to Smithson not to be found in the composition of the grids, which virtually conformed to the standard Grille, but rather in their actual content.8In these grids there was no reference to pure forms, appealing aesthetics, and rich architectural traditions, but rather to the messy everyday urban environment – the bidonville – that emerges from poverty and necessity.
Presenting the ordinary and often despised reality of the bidonville as if it were a valuable urban environment was perceived by modern masters such as Le Corbusier and Gropius as the crossing of an important boundary. Indeed, some of the old guard CIAM architects perceived this presentation as a negative deviation from CIAM’s original goal that encompassed the delineation of radically modern and universal design solutions. To the contrary, for a whole group of other architects, like Alison and Peter Smithson, Aldo van Eyck and Jaap Bakema, Georges Candilis and Shadrach Woods, this “deviation”
represented the beginning of a new path for the modern movement.
The Bidonville as a Site of Negotiation
In the GAMMA/ATBATAfrique grids and the Bidonville Mahiedinne Grid, the shabby built environment of the bidonvilles in Casablanca and Algiers stands at the center of attention.9It is no coincidence that the French architects that were not just traveling and visiting, but working in the midst of the North African territory, primarily depicted the bidonville as the locus of daily struggles with dwelling, diseases, and sanitary conditions. Though many of these (often very young) French architects had moved to Morocco and Algeria in order to realize their architectural ambitions on the tabula rasa of the colonial territory, one cannot overlook the empathic perspective on the harsh reality of the bidonville that the GAMMA Grid and the Bidonville Mahiedinne Grid adopted.
6The Grid was composed of five parts: 1. Introduction et bidonvilleby Mas; 2. Planification et Urbanisme by Écochard; 3. L’ordre et construction by Godefroy and Mas; 4. La con centration horizontaleby Beraud and Godefroy; 5. La concentration verticaleby Bodiansky, Candilis, Kennedy, Piot, and Woods.
7For an introduction to the GAMMA Grid see JeanLouis Cohen and Monique Eleb, Casablanca. Colonial Myths and Architectural Ventures, New York, Monacelli Press, 2002.
8Alison Smithson, Team 10 Meetings, New York, Rizzoli, 1991, p. 19.
9For a discussion of the Bidonville Mahiedinne Grid see Zeynep Çelik,
“Learning from the Bidonville,” Har
vard Design Magazine, Spring/
Summer 2003, no. 18, pp. 70–74.
BETWEEN DOGON AND BIDONVILLE 253
12.2 (Overleaf) Georges Candilis and Shadrach Woods. Panels (selection) of the GAMMA Grid, presented at CIAM IX, AixenProvence, 1953.
Source: Ministère de l’habitat, photographic archives, Rabat.
10See for instance Bruno de Rotalier,
“Les yaouleds (enfants des rues) de Casablanca et leur participation aux émeutes de décembre 1951,” in Revue d’histoire de l’enfance irrégulière, no. 4, 2002, pp. 20–28.
11For this specific approach to rural areas see E. Mauret, “Problèmes de l’équipement rural dans l’aménagement du territoire,”
in L’Architecture d’aujourd’hui60, June 1955, pp. 42–45.
256 TOM AVERMAETE
Since the First World War, the bidonville or shantytown was an integral part of North African cities such as Casablanca and Algiers. The bidonville was the figure par excellence in which the colonial situation with its uneven development of urban areas (considered merely as points of fabrication and transportation of products) and rural areas (regarded as blank territories that offered raw materials) comes to the fore. It was an urban zone in which the newcomers from the countryside were absorbed and in which their daily struggles with dwelling literally became visible. From reports of the period we also know that the bidonville was often the initial locus of protest and action against the colonial power. In 1952, the year of the fortieth anniversary of the Moroccan Protectorate and the moment that the ATBATAfrique architects pursued their research initiatives, the bidonville of the Carrières Centrales (called “Karyan central”) was the center of riots against the colonial power.10
Against this background it should come as no surprise that young leftoriented and engaged architects such as Georges Candilis and Roland Simounet represented the bidonville as an urban environment that was remarkable because of the persistence and symbolic power of its dwelling and building practices. Dwelling practices of preparing meals, sleeping, gathering, and building practices of constructing shacks, as well as collective practices of gathering, going to the mosque, and selling goods and food, were all depicted in great detail. It was especially the persistence and adaptive capacity of traditional dwelling practices that struck the young European architects who commented on them in the texts of the panels.
In order to illustrate this particular perspective with regard to the socio
economic practices of the bidonville, the French architects relied upon a tradition of anthropological research that had been developed at among others the Service de l’Urbanisme(Planning Department) in Casablanca, Morocco.
After the Second World War, these urban services of the French Protectorate initiated large programs for the investigation of indigenous dwelling patterns in towns and villages. From 1947 onwards, theService de l’Urbanismeset up a research methodology that consisted primarily of a mobile unit or atelier ambulant– consisting of an engineer, an urban designer, a topographer, and two draftsmen – that literally traveled through the country to investigate dwelling culture in a truly ethnological manner.11
The atelier ambulantcan be considered as the exponent of a different attitude towards architectural and urban design. If in the prewar period the studio had been the point of departure for the “masterarchitect,” in the postwar period the everyday reality of the terrain was the field of initial action for the “architect
ethnologist.” The Service de l’Urbanismeintroduced an idea of architectural and urban design that took as its point of departure the thorough and detailed analysis of dwelling typologies, of their underlying logics and their uses. Besides the drawings, the Service de l’Urbanismeused the relatively new technique of aerial photography as a way to make an inventory of the characteristics of everyday environments.
The most interesting aspect of the investigations led by the young French architects is that they did not remain limited to the terrain of traditional rural environments. The everyday urban spaces of the bidonville of Casablanca or Algiers were investigated in a similar ethnological fashion through drawings and photo graphs. By using this approach the architects of GAMMA/ATBAT
Afrique and CIAMAlgiers were able to depict the bidonville as the substance of daily practices of dwelling and building, as the material through which inhabitants
12For an elaborate description see Monique Eleb, “An Alternative to Functionalist Universalism: Écochard, Candilis and ATBATAfrique,” in Sarah Williams Goldhagen (ed.), Anxious Modernisms: Experimentation in Post
war Architectural Culture, Cambridge, The MIT Press, 2001.
13Panel 208I, Grid elaborated by the Service de l’Urbanismefor CIAM IX, AixenProvence, 1953, in CIAM Collection at the gta/ETH.
14Bidonville Mahiedinne Grid, in CIAM Collection at the Fondation Le Corbusier, Paris.
BETWEEN DOGON AND BIDONVILLE 257
leave the most rudimentary symbolic and spatial traces in the built environment.
The bidonville was depicted as the locus of symbolic and spatial struggles.
Moreover, this particular mode of analysis portrayed the bidonville as a meeting point between a socalled “traditional culture” that was still part of everyday dwelling habits and the modern culture of cities like Algiers and Casablanca with their movie houses, cars, stores, and industries. The GAMMA Grid panels of the Moroccan architects also recognized certain ambivalent qualities of the bidonvilles.12For instance, the ATBATAfrique architects emphasized that the bidonvilles represented a radical departure from traditional rural dwelling conditions, as indicated in the panel with the subscript “Psychological causes of the movement towards towns – Desire of the individual to escape from rural patriarchy? – Town = Eldorado?”13Simultaneously, however, they underlined the enduring quality of traditional dwelling culture within the modern urban environment of the bidonville. They demonstrated how the courtyard typology of the shelters echoed the traditional courtyard houses in the Atlas Mountains, while their integration in a dense urban fabric functioned much as a modern urban environment. This contemporaneous presence of traditional and modern elements within the bidonville made Candilis and Woods believe that the dwelling environment could deal with the field of tensions between tradition and modernity that modernization created. It explains why one of the panels of the GAMMA Grid depicts the bidonvilles as interesting “new forms [that]
appear in industrial cities.”
The search for new forms that corresponded to a new way of living was at the center of the research by the GAMMA and the CIAMAlgiers groups. However, answers were not searched for within the rich and longstanding “grand vernacular tradition,” but rather in the transient and ordinary vernacular environment of the bidonville itself – specifically because of its capacity to negotiate between traditional and modern patterns of living. According to the architects the bidonville opened up perspectives to rethink future dwelling environments on colonial territories and beyond. In the Bidonville Mahiedinne Grid, the CIAMAlgiers formulated it as such:
Here, under the poverty of the used materials, the house is a spontaneous expression of life. It is molded on the human being, breathes with him and preserves, even in its rotting carcass, the dignity of living lines and proportions.
But contemporary life implies techniques which, for reasons of economy, lead to standardized structures based on Western conceptions (échelle occidentale de vie).
In an era when a mechanized civilization is permeating the whole world, will the Oriental be able to avoid being caught up in the machine and preserve unspoiled his primitive freshness?
It is up to us to provide the basic and indispensable structural elements, which can afford to these people the possibility to give new expression to their own traditional conceptions. And perhaps in that creative expression we too shall find ourselves again.14
Beyond the grid panels, the projects and realizations presented at CIAM IX were highly regarded as a “new way of thinking” about the city, its neighbor hoods, spaces, and typologies. The mix of individual patio houses (which were compared to the old houses of the medinas) and the three collective housings by ATBATAfrique, in contrast to the adjacent bidonvilles, were praised by Alison and Peter Smithson:
We regard these buildings in Morocco as the greatest achievement since Le Corbusier’s Unité d’habitation at Marseilles. Whereas the Unité was the summation of a technique of thinking about “habitat” which started forty years ago, the importance of the Moroccan buildings is that they are the first manifestations of a new way of thinking. For this reason they are presented as ideas; but it is their realization in built form that convinces us that here is a new universal.15
Even though they were not that well suited to the living conditions of Moroccan Muslims, the new “photogenic buildings of Carrières Centrale . . . denoted a paradigm shift between the universalist approach of modern architecture and an ambition to adapt to local cultures and identities that characterized the Team X generation.”16
The Sahara, the Dogon and the Rootedness of the Grand Vernacular In 1953, the year of the CIAM IX meeting, architect Aldo van Eyck (1918–99) published a memorable article in the Dutch Architectural periodicalForum.17 In this article under the title “Building in the Southern Oases” (Bouwen in de Zuidelijke Oasen), the Dutch architect presented a photographic report of the travels to different settlements in the oases of the Algerian Sahara that he made together with the Dutch COBRA artist Corneille and the archi tect Herman Haan in 1951 and 1952. Seven years later, van Eyck travelled to Mali to study and photograph the Dogon settlements that he had discovered in Marcel Griaule’s account in Le Minotaure (1931–1933). Van Eyck later described these traditional settlements as the reminders of a longlasting tradition that
do not differ that much from the situation five thousand years ago. These are the same laboriously formed stones . . . the same spaces around an interior court; the same embryonic intimacy; the same absolute transition of dark to light.18
Though van Eyck’s interest for this traditional architecture has often been explained as an interest in primal architectural forms, a central issue in his work at the time – and also the most important characteristic of his article – was his understanding of the settlements as material articulations of an
“intelligible tradition.” Van Eyck’s comments on the photographs depicted the building structures in the Sahara as the result of an ageold tradition of building that is rooted in knowledge about local materials and climate, and that touches upon basic human needs and results in primal forms of architecture.
For van Eyck the building tradition of the settlements in the oases was as intelligible as the other architectural traditions that he was confronted with in his education as a European architect. Moreover, he considered this intelligibility complementary to other traditions that Western architectural thinking had brought to the fore: the classical and the modern tradition. This became obvious in the presentation that van Eyck made at the last official CIAM congress in Otterlo (Netherlands) in 1959. In this meeting he presented a diagram, the Otterlo Circles. For van Eyck these two circles were a criticism of the modern avantgarde, who had:
been harping continually on what is different in our time to such an extent that it has lost touch with what is not different, with what is always essentially the same.19
15From Alison and Peter Smithson,
“Collective Housing in Morocco,” in Architectural Design25, no. 1, January 1955, p. 2. Quoted by JeanLouis Cohen and Monique Eleb, p. 332.
16Ibid., p. 339.
17On the work of Aldo van Eyck, see Francis Strauven, Aldo van Eyck:
The Shape of Relativity, Amsterdam, Architectura and Natura, 1998.
18Aldo van Eyck, “Dogon: mand
huisdorpwereld,” p. 53. Also see note 3 in this essay.
19Francis Strauven, Aldo van Eyck, p. 350.
258 TOM AVERMAETE
12.3 Aldo van Eyck. The Otterlo Circles, CIAM XI, 1959.
Source: NAI Collections and Archives, Rotterdam.
20Ibid., p. 351.
21Aldo van Eyck, “Dogon: mand
huisdorpwereld,” p. 53.
22Van Eyck’s primary sources to understand these villages was the wellknown work of Marcel Griaule, and in particular: Marcel Griaule, Dieu d’eau: Entretiens avec Ogotommêli, Paris, 1948 (In English: Conversations with Ogotommêli: An Introduction to Dogon Religious Ideas, London/New York, Oxford University Press, 1965);
M. Griaule and G. Dieterlin, “The Dogon,” in Daryll Forde (ed.), African Worlds, London, 1954, pp. 83–110;
as well as the contributions of Griaule to the surrealist magazine Minotaure.
Another source of inspiration was the work of the American anthro
pologist Ruth Benedict, Patterns of Culture, New York, HoughtonMifflin, 1934.
BETWEEN DOGON AND BIDONVILLE 259
In the left circle (“by us”) the Dutch architect represented three architectural traditions through three drawings: the Parthenon or the Acropolis of Athens, a construction by Van Doesburg, and a group of houses in the Aoulef villages in the Algerian Sahara. Later van Eyck would denote the different traditions respectively as “immutability and rest,” “change and movement,” and the
“vernacular of the heart.” The right circle (“for us”) showed a spirallike group of men and women. Commenting on the left circle he wrote:
I have been in love with all three for years, with the values divided between them. I can’t separate them any more. I simply can’t. They complement each other; they belong together. Add San Carlo alle Quatro Fontane, not just to avoid the trinity, and we can start reconciling them – the essence not the form – in an endless sequence of possibilities that really fit man.20 With his Otterlo Circles van Eyck wanted to suggest and illustrate that if contemporary architecture attempted to respond to the complete human identity, then it had to engage with the basic values that the different architectural traditions had brought to the fore throughout the ages. The Aoulef villages in the Sahara played a key role in this perspective. They were, according to van Eyck, the expression of an architecture that engaged directly with the symbolical aspirations and needs of the inhabitants. This concept of a
“vernacular of the heart” would be further developed in two articles in the periodicals Forumand Viain which the Dogon villages – built up from dirt and mud – were used as an example.21
In these articles van Eyck illustrated his fascination for the important role of mythology within the Dogon society. Inspired by the work of anthropologists like Marcel Griaule and Ruth Benedict, he explained how Dogon time and space are partitioned with a large variety of symbols.22The Dogon regards the world