The Value of the Finished Project: Architectural Education from the École des Beaux-Arts, the Bauhaus, and Black Mountain College

During more than three centuries of formal architectural pedagogy in the West, the criteria of merit and the time invested in studies has changed drastically. The tradition of architectural schooling began in 17th century France, with gatherings happening only twice a week.ⁱ On those days, François Blondel would give lectures and hold discussions that were open to the public. Almost a century later, another Blondel, Jacques-Francois, would establish a strict 8am-9pm schedule of lessons at his École des Artes.ⁱⁱ This pedagogical modification became what remains the essence of architectural education, now with more than three centuries of tradition—investment of significant time and effort to achieve substantive results.

Upon inspection, there is a striking similarity in the organization of structural divisions within architectural schools on the timeline of pedagogical history. Three remarkable examples of design pedagogy at three different schools are worth consideration: the École des Beaux-Arts, the Bauhaus, and Black Mountain College. In spite of differences in historical context, geographies and agendas, these three institutions developed and promoted qualities of architectural schooling that have helped ensure the continuum of the pedagogical tradition. This continuity reveals itself where evident connections may be traced.

OBLIGATION AND PRIVILEGE
Though absent from architectural education today, the titles of élève de l’École des Beaux-Arts, the Bauhaus Journeyman, or student of the Black Mountain college once held large importance. All three titles were signifiers of a very particular vision and skill. Despite contrasting approaches to education, each school produced projects of the highest artistic, design, and architectural merit. Each school cultivated a distinct approach to pedagogy intended to elevate the profession and ensure their institutional legacy.

Enrolling in these schools in no way obliged a prospective student to commit to finishing the course of education if decided otherwise. Two of the schools, École des Beaux-Arts and Black Mountain College, required submission of a portfolio prior to acceptance, while the Bauhaus made selections upon the completion of trial period of a preliminary course. The educational process was generally built around the gradual immersion of the student into the project of design. Each level was formed to provoke and challenge skills and ideas by moving the student one step further. To find oneself in this immersive environment held the status of both privilege and obligation.

The title of architect is hard-won. Already in 18th century France, when architectural education was still in its nascency, buildings of major importance were designed only by those with the title architecte-du-roi— architect of the king.ⁱⁱⁱ Carrying this title was a sign of an unwavering commitment to the profession. Architects were obliged to attend regular meetings at the Academie Royale d’Architecture and reside in Paris. Peer nominations established the title of architecte-du-roi. In later years of educational establishment, commitment was rewarded with other titles of privilege.

It was a high honor to carry the status of élève de l’École des Beaux-Arts, as it implied two years of sacrifice dedicated to achieving this first distinction. The title was also a reward for the first deep investment of time and effort into architectural learning. A young aspirant, even prior to being an élève, was already participating in the schooling—he was allowed to help other students in the Academie with their projects, use the library, and attend most lectures. These privileges were informed his introduction to the culture of learning within the school. This preliminary phase was there to ensure that entrance exams would be passed successfully. Even the title of élève de l’École des Beaux-Arts was the first sign of inclusion into a privileged club within architectural circles.

While the Bauhaus did not require any particular evaluation of skills prior to entering its preliminary course, strict attendance of workshops was enforced once the student was ready to step further. Initial training under the supervision of Form Masters and Craft Masters during introductory courses lasted for half a year. According to Gropius’ Bauhaus Manifesto (1919)^iv, the aim of the school was to unite the arts through design education, and then fabricate their work. The status of the Bauhaus-geseller^v or Bauhaus Journeyman signaled the successful attainment of the goal and ensured the mission and continuance of the Bauhaus pedagogical structure. The Journeyman’s diploma was awarded once the student received full training in the workshops.^vi Workshops were central to supporting research, while the introductory courses sought to free the imagination, dig into the subconscious, and ensure the progressive start of schooling. The regular course in architecture was only introduced at the Bauhaus in 1927, and only the most talented students were admitted.^vii Successful completion of the architectural course was awarded with the Bauhaus Diploma. After 1927 it was certainly considered a great achievement to carry one.

Between the strict and time-consuming Beaux-Arts system of admission in France and the comparatively accessible entry into preliminary courses at the Bauhaus in Germany was Black Mountain College in the United States, founded in North Carolina by John Andrew Rice in 1933. Black Mountain College was open for admission at any time of the year, but also required some evidence of interest towards the arts. This had to be demonstrated by the student in the form of a portfolio or work samples. There were two compulsory documents required, along with an interview: a high school diploma, and samples of candidate’s own work—be it a poem, art work or any other evidence of artistic activity.^viii Though the admissions process was perhaps less rigorous, student life once in the school was filled with competition, and an intensity that required deep commitment of thought and passion.

TIMESPAN
In considering the duration and structure of the introductory courses at the three schools, one may again trace similarities (as well as stark differences) in pedagogical approaches.

After spending about two years in the role of aspirant, students were admitted to the Ecole des Beaux-Arts upon completion of entry exams. As an élève de l’École des Beaux-Arts, another two to four years of continuous participation in courses of the Second Class would be required to enter the First Class. During the sequence of First Class, students were to spend another six months to complete a series of concours in order to be able to compete for the Grand Prix de Rome, which consisted of a research fellowship of four to five years at the French Academy in Rome. Seven to ten years of a student’s life were dedicated to the course of architectural study in 19th century France.

The German model was more efficient. The Bauhaus allowed students three-and-a-half years to complete general courses, and to receive the Journeyman certificate. The curriculum began with a six-month immersion course that prepared students for more specialized studies. Continuous hands-on practice tested students’ stamina before the possibility of nomination into the final phase. The architectural course was the peak of studies at the Bauhaus and admitted students on the basis of nomination only. Gropius’ famous diagram of the Bauhaus curriculum with der Bau placed at the center does not outline how long it would take for a student to complete this course, though as with the École des Beaux-Arts, students were to climb the educational ladder at their own pace to reach completion. Students were actively participating in decision making in all three divisions of the diagram and were able to collaborate with their masters on real projects.

Black Mountain College was very different to the other two schools in terms of educational timeline. Founded on the principle of academic freedom and bolstered by many Bauhaus-trained faculty who had fled to North Carolina during the 1930s, Black Mountain had a strong bent toward democratic and self-determined education, and away from authoritarianism. No marks or grades were assigned, and students were allowed to take as long as they wished to complete their courses. There was no obligation to ever graduate.^ix

However, there were restrictions of time still in place. These were determined by the flow of life outside the school rather than the school itself. Many of the instructors at the school were guest professors, which meant that they were available for a limited time. Therefore, students, too, had only a limited amount of time to engage with the course of study. This approach of inviting guest artists as faculty marked a unique pedagogical system that proved to be successful.

FROM SKETCH TO FINISHED PROJECT
The Bauhaus and Black Mountain College incorporated the model of workshops as their core pedagogical approaches. The École des Beaux-Arts had used a contrasting model by utilizing a culture of concours d’emulation, or emulation competitions.^x Each concours was open to all students in the program; however, to receive credit in every concours, the student had to commit to production of work in a very specific manner and the initial idea had to remain present in the finished project. Despite the difference in pedagogical model, this continuity is nevertheless the very same backbone in pedagogy at the Black Mountain College and at the Bauhaus.

École des Beaux-Arts had inherited this model from French schooling practices of the 18th century, Paris as codified by Jacques-Francois Blondel. Already then, in the Academie Royale d'Architecture, a student was expected to submit a preliminary proposal, which then had to be followed by developed drawings.^xii Successful completion of the course was contingent upon adherence to the initial idea. The École des Beaux-Arts followed this example. By the year 1900, the majority of concours had been well-established and remained intact until 1968. The procedure of entering the concours was quite unusually convolute and time-consuming. It required both the registration of a student as well as the “guard” who would ensure registration of the submission later. Once given a program, the student was allowed to study it within the walls of the Academy and then draft the initial sketch within a designated cubicle. To finally enter the concours, the student would leave the sketch with the guard, register the submission, and take the tracing of the sketch back home to develop it further in their own time. The student was given twelve hours to draft a primary sketch which, once the initial idea was developed into final drawings and was ready to be presented, would then be brought back to École des Beaux-Arts to be finalized.^xiii The decision of the jury was based upon the comparative analysis of both the preliminary sketch and the final drawings. If the idea in both pieces didn’t match, the student would get no credit. The purpose of these competitions was to bring out the unique quality that future architects were expected to have— the creative capacity to quickly conceive an idea with merit and to have the skill to develop this initial idea into something worth presenting for discussion.

The same approach was practiced within the walls of the Bauhaus, yet in a slightly different manner. The preliminary course was set to accommodate the initial research, where the interest of the student would reveal itself. This interest was then continually developed through subsequent workshops. Walter Gropius considered the workshops to play a crucial pedagogical role and made it the core of the program. Gropius also believed that to train responsibility into the students and to elevate the final design laid in implementation of the system of pay for the Bauhaus Journeymen. Students were paid for the production of work if their pieces were finished in a timely manner and were of good quality. Gropius and the other Masters were concerned with preventing students from using the Bauhaus as a cheap source of tools and materials without bringing work to completion, which necessitated implementing gradation of pay. In 1920, Gropius proposed the following conditions: for each of the sold objects of design, 50 percent of the profit was to be given to the students and the other 50 paid to the school.^xiv Pricing was to be formed from the expenses on materials, partial wage of the Masters, and finally utility costs. This was a strategic move. With the help of the workshops, Gropius aspired to sustain the school financially, as well as bring motivation to both the students and the Masters. To ensure the required market-level of prototypes, every product produced in the workshop was evaluated by select committees of Masters of Crafts and Form. The works were judged on several levels: the merit of form and idea, the level of the skill, and the time taken for production.

These produced objects would carry out the values of the Bauhaus into the world, and hence the judgment was to decide the fate of the prototype. For the products that were not selected students were paid 25 percent of its worth in labor and the object would be destroyed or recycled for raw materials. If the object was blemished or of poor quality, students were to reimburse Bauhaus for the raw materials. These were the crucial measures to avoid dilettantism and to ensure the elevation of quality. In 1924, the system of pay was altered, and students were also paid for repeated sales. Both financial motivation and competitive evaluation were pedagogical decisions.

Black Mountain College somewhat adapted Beaux-Arts class sections along with the Bauhaus workshop system. Summers were mostly given to workshops lead by artists and scholars in residency. The core studies during the regular school term were divided in two separate divisions - Junior Division and Senior Division. Students had to pass both divisions to successfully graduate from the college. Similar to the preliminary course in the Bauhaus, the Junior Division was to reveal the initial interest of the student, and their chosen direction would then be developed during the course of the Senior Division. While in the Junior Division the student was allowed to pick any subject he or she wished without committing to just one field, Senior Division was much more restrictive. In order to enter the Senior Division, students would have to specify a particular focus for their research based on the one they have picked in the Junior Division, one of the conditions for the transfer from one section to the other being the submission of a detailed plan of research. The research would then undergo evaluation by the potential instructor and commission. If successfully admitted, the transfer was allowed. However, once the plan was approved, the student had to stick to the draft without departing from the initial proposal. With the final step being graduation, once again the student had to prove that the final project of the Senior division was conducted according to the initial plan.

Along with the prescribed creative skills, students of the school would inevitably pick up the essential quality of the architectural discipline, as the directors saw it: an ability to chart a course through interconnected and interdisciplinary material to realize a long-term goal.

CONTINUITY OF TRADITION: THE SYSTEM OF REWARDS

Although all three schools were accepting admissions at any time and there was no obligation to commit to graduation, what was essential was adherence to the plan. The spirit of determination in a competitive environment, and the aspiration to achieve tangible results grew stronger through every step of these academic journeys. What brought continuity of pedagogical tradition in architectural schools throughout the last three centuries reveals itself in the system of benefits offered to the most persistent and hardworking students, with each progression bringing the student closer to the long-awaited reward. The privilege was to carry the honor of representing the school’s name out in the world, be it through the awarded prize, exhibition of student work or being granted a paid research fellowship. All of these rewards functioned as motivational tools for student achievement and proved to be systems that worked. As early as in 1701, students of the Academie Royale d'Architecture were preparing their submissions for prize competitions.

Bauhaus also desired for students to aspire to represent the school in the world, however with a slightly different profile. The first chance for such was given during the Bauhaus Exhibition in Weimar in 1923. It was the school’s first exhibition and marked the tradition of showcasing the most successful student works, with aspirations to establish links with the industry and market. Four Bauhaus workshops, in pottery, metalwork, weaving, and furniture design, demonstrated the achievements of the Bauhaus Journeymen for the first time. Gropius viewed the best products of the workshops as prototypes and certainly was eager for the industry to discover them. Exhibitions were seen as the most effective way. Given the opportunity, the most determined Journeymen had the privilege of presenting their best prototypes of modern living that suggested new aesthetics to a curious community outside the walls of the school. The first exhibition was one of trial and error,^xv but certainly informed the way in which Bauhaus grew its reputation as one of the most influential architectural schools in history.

For the Black Mountain College, the biggest award for the student was the chance to affiliate with an instructor. This unique symbiosis came from the close proximity of curriculum and extracurricular activities that were signature to Black Mountain College. From the very beginning of studies students could foresee the potential of becoming a potential collaborator or colleague of the Master they aspired to learn from. Just as in Bauhaus Master Houses project,^xvi students were involved in the design of the buildings on their campus. Students were invited to co-direct, co-organize and take part in a number of events, theatrical plays and interdisciplinary festivals.

The history of the Black Mountain College proved its pedagogical excellence with the number of accomplished figures who were once students of the school. Kenneth Snelson was a mentee of Buckminster Fuller and invented a series of “floating compression” structures only a year after his departure from the school. Remarkable painters such Kenneth Noland, Robert Rauschenberg and Cy Twombly were also once students of Willem de Kooning at the school. John Cage at different points of history was both a student and a faculty member.^xvii Joseph Albers, the founder of the Black Mountain College, was a student of the Bauhaus in Weimar, who then became the Master in Dessau, created his own pedagogical model that was both informed by previous tradition in architectural pedagogy and that offered the world its vision anew.

An education in architecture is a long journey. At times it may seem awkward, convolute, or rushed, but it is a path of both personal and professional growth. Many students find the journey to be as painful as it is rewarding. For some, this may manifest as a disinclination to continue the course of study, while others relish the total (if temporary) subsumption to the immersion process. The latter group often comes to flourish and to eventually enrich the architectural pedagogy with new approaches and visions of their own, becoming practitioners, academicians, and professors in their own right. As they do so, the legacy of architectural education continues to evolve. The formative pedagogical examples of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, the Bauhaus and Black Mountain College suggest one of the most precious qualities of architectural education: the continuum of experience.

Image Legend:

Igneous typology

Legend:

[1] Élève de l'Ecole de Beaux-Arts

[2] Diplome

[a] Candidates

[b] Second Class

[c] First Class

[d] Concours

[e] Atelier / Apprenticeship

[F] Grand Prix de RomeImage Legend:

Igneous typology

Legend:

[1] Élève de l'Ecole de Beaux-Arts

[2] Diplome

[a] Candidates

[b] Second Class

[c] First Class

[d] Concours

[e] Atelier / Apprenticeship

[F] Grand Prix de Rome

Sedimentary typology

Legend:

[1] Journeyman

[a] Preliminary Course

[b,c] Workshop Training / Apprenticeship

[d] Architectural Course

[e] Exhibitions, Trade Shows

[F] Diploma of the Chamber of Crafts

[G] Architectural Buro/ Practice

[2] Architectural Diploma / Bauhaus Diploma

[F] Industry and mass market

Metamorphic typology

Legend:

[1] Junior Division

[a,b,c] Workshops and classes with visiting Instructors

[2] Senior Division

[d,e,f] Collaborations between Instructors, collaborations between students and Instructors outside of Black Mountain College / Apprenticeship

[3] Graduation

[E] Affiliation with Black Mountain College

---

ⁱ Alexander Tzonis and Liane Lefaivre, “The Mechanical Body versus the Divine Body: The Rise of Modern Design Theory,” JAE 29, no.1 (September 1975), 4.
ⁱⁱPeter Collins, “The Eighteenth Century Origins of Our System of Full-Time Architectural Schooling,” JAE 33, no. 2 (November 1979), 3.
ⁱⁱⁱPeter Collins, “The Eighteenth Century Origins of Our System of Full-Time Architectural Schooling,” JAE 33, no. 2 (November 1979), 3.
^iv“Walter Gropius, “Bauhaus Manifesto and Program” (1919),” Modern Museum of Art, accessed December 17, 2018, https://www.moma.org/documents/moma_catalogue_2735_300190238.pdf.
^vAnna Rowland, “Business Management at the Weimar Bauhaus,” Journal of Design History 1, no. 3:4 (1988), 5.
^vi“Bauhaus,” Britannica, accessed December 17, 2018, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bauhaus
^viiIbid.
^viiiJoseph Albers, “Black Mountain College,” Bulletin 2, 1934, 38.
^ixJoseph Albers, “Black Mountain College, ”Bulletin 2, 1934, 41.
^xArthur Drexler and Richard Chafee, The Architecture of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1977), 25.
^xiPeter Collins, “The Eighteenth Century Origins of Our System of Full-Time Architectural Schooling,” JAE 33, no. 2 (November 1979),4.
^xiiArthur Drexler and Richard Chafee, The Architecture of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1977), 26.
^xiiiIbid., 26.
^xivAnna Rowland, “Business Management at the Weimar Bauhaus,” Journal of Design History 1, no. 3:4 (1988), 156.
^xvAnna Rowland, “Business Management at the Weimar Bauhaus,” Journal of Design History 1, no. 3:4 (1988), 153.
^xvi“Masters’ Houses by Walter Gropius (1925-26),” Bauhaus Dessau, accessed December 17, 2018, https://www.bauhaus-dessau.de/en/architecture/bauhaus-buildings-in-dessau/masters-houses.html.
^xviiiRobert S. Mattison and Loretta Howard, “Black Mountain College and Its Legacy,” New York: Loretta Howard Gallery (2011), 17.

---

Lena Pozdnyakova is an alumna of the Design Theory and Pedagogy program at the Southern California Institute of Architecture in Los Angeles. She earned a Bachelor in Architecture Degree from Sheffield University and a Masters in Architecture from DIA University of Applied Sciences. She currently holds a position of Project Coordinator and Researcher at xLAB think thank at A.UD UCLA.

Lena has previously worked in UrbanDATA Bureau (Shanghai) and in 3Gatti (Shanghai). Since 2014, she has exhibited works at Bauhausfest, Unsound, CTM and Soundpedro Festivals. In 2014, she received Robert Oxman Prize, and in 2016 as part of the2vvo, Independent Projects Award by CEC Artslink.

Most recent publication and editorial work: Offramp 16: Trauma (Offramp is an academic journal published at SCI-Arc) https://offramp.sciarc.edu/articles/normalization-of-emancipatory-life-like-art-practices

www.the2vvo.com