Three modern campuses in Nagoya, Japan
Emergence in the 1960s, regeneration in the Twenty-First Century
p. 421-442
Texte intégral
1Nagoya features some of the most important examples of campus architecture in Japan, located on three university campuses. Nagoya University’s Higashiyama Campus is distinguished for its symbolic axis, capped off by Toyoda Memorial Hall, which was completed in 1960 as Fumihiko Maki’s first work in Japan. Nanzan University’s campus was designed by Czech-born American architect Antonin Raymond and was completed in 1964 with the appearance of an academic hill town. The campus of Aichi Prefectural University of Fine Arts and Music (PUFAM), designed by Junzo Yoshimura and opened in 19661, is a fine example of a built environment that reflects its purpose.
2This article demonstrates the efficacy of architectural comparison studies2, even when focusing on a short period and a single metropolitan area. Here, the comparison provides us with three tools to evaluate the historic value of campuses that emerged in the midst of the modern movement and to clarify the issues related to their preservation.
3The first evaluative tool, extensiveness, describes the significance of spatial products recognized extensively over the domains of architectural and urban history. This criterion is particular useful when evaluating campus architecture. When using this tool, it is important to evaluate cases with a wider scope while ensuring that each case is analyzed individually as an urban artifact. Nagoya’s extension planning is an outstanding example of the introduction of modern planning theories to Japan, and all of the campus examples can be evaluated by their extensiveness in employing fundamental urban planning concepts in their own designs.
4The second evaluative tool, representativeness, is used to investigate whether the type, scale, affiliations, and ideological backgrounds of educational institutions properly represent societal development. The representativeness of educational institutions is a reflection of a nation’s or city’s historical background and social structure. Nagoya’s campuses demonstrate this in a variety of ways. Three universities complementarily represent all types of institutional attributions in Japan: Nagoya University is a major Japanese national institution, Nanzan University is a Catholic-affiliated private institution, and PUFAM is a local public institution. By evaluating these cases, we can capably overview how these university campuses have been formulated, while also investigating how different foundations and ideological backgrounds are reflected in the campus designs. Additionally, representativeness is required to investigate how today’s circumstances –namely shifts in social structure and the government’s reform policy– have affected Japanese universities and their campuses.
5The third evaluative tool, consecutiveness, serves as evidence of the modern movement’s progress. Consecutiveness is not synonymous with “continuity” –on the contrary, progress sometimes involves “discontinuity”. Large-scale projects like campuses are usually overseen by an established architect, meaning that each project’s result could be regarded as an accumulation of the head architect’s lifetime of experience. Hence, campuses can serve as compilations of an architect’s theory and methodology, and a distinct constituent of the consecutiveness of the modern movement. When young architects are given the opportunity to design campuses, challenging outputs that demonstrate “discontinuity” might emerge as landmarks of the modern movement.
6Interestingly, the three architects who designed the three campuses that will be discussed in this paper were born at intervals of 20 years: first Antonin Raymond (1888-1976), then Junzo Yoshimura (1908-1997), and finally Fumihiko Maki (1928-). Raymond, the oldest, belongs to the founding generation of CIAM. Yoshimura, a professor of architecture who taught at Tokyo University of the Arts, was well established in the society, similarly to Kenzo Tange (1913-2005)3. Maki, the youngest, was later known as a Metabolist and has remained close with Team X members. The differences in the above architects’ age may account for the variety present in their theoretical and methodological approaches to campus design.
THE CAMPUS AS URBAN PLANNING HERITAGE
The Value of Representing Extensiveness
7Japan’s relatively recent evolution into a modern nation has meant that its institutionalized higher education system was not “homegrown”; it had to be introduced. The physical representation of this system –namely, university campuses– also had to be intentionally planted.
8Tokyo’s modern institutions were integrated into the spatial legacy of Edo (Tokyo’s former name), just like the Edo castle was transformed into the new imperial palace. Almost all higher education institutions are located on the former sites of Daimyo (feudal lord) palaces. The best-known example is the main campus of the University of Tokyo, incorporated in 1877, which occupies the former estate of the Maeda family (the feudal lords of Kaga Province). Non-national institutions also occupy the remains of the old regime. Accordingly, Tokyo’s higher education institutions remained inside of the city boundaries until the turn of the century. The relocation of the imperial palace out of Kyoto led to the founding of higher education institutions in the spatial leftovers of the old capital. Generally, such urban transformations –successions and conversions– provided the foundations for higher education institutions in historic metropolises.
9However, in newer urban locales, like the port cities of Yokohama and Kobe (established in the mid-nineteenth century) and the industrial city of Nagoya (which has expanded since the turn of the twentieth century), campuses were developed in new suburban areas. In these cities, urban planning was essential in selecting campus locations, and it also influenced campus designs. Private sector developers, such as railroad companies, provided campus sites along the inter-city lines of Yokohama and Kobe4. In Nagoya, however, it was the public sector –led by progressive bureaucrats– who drew up the urban extension plans and promoted the campuses’ development.
10In the city of Nagoya, manufacturing industries based on traditional craftworks, such as cotton spinning and ceramics, expanded after the Meiji Restoration (1868). In the 1890s, the machine industry –led by Sakichi Toyoda (1867-1930), founder of the Toyota Group– also expanded. By the 1920s, the city had become a major center of mechanical industry, primarily represented by the aircraft industry.
11Since the turn of the twentieth century, the population has increased substantially. In 1918, the Tokyo Urban Area Improvement Ordinance (Toukyou Shiku Kaisei Jourei) of 1880 was applied to five major cities: Osaka, Kyoto, Yokohama, Kobe, and Nagoya. In 1919, it was replaced with the City Planning Act (Toshi Keikaku Hou), Japan’s first general planning law. Under the Act of 1919, bureaucrats implemented experimental urban design principles when planning Nagoya’s extension. Hideaki Ishikawa (1893-1955), a pioneer planner, used a land re-adjustment (tochi kukaku seiri) method modeled after the “Lex Adickes” (1912) of Frankfurt am Main. This method, somewhat unexpectedly, worked well. Ishikawa cleverly used this success to encourage local landowners to make “promotions” by attracting public facilities to the competitive real estate market. In this context, a large campus site for Nagoya Imperial University (Nagoya University’s former name) was donated in 1939 by local landowners, who were affected by the extended concept of public interest under the 1938 National Mobilization Law (Kokka Soudouin Hou) wartime constitution.
12Ryotaro Kurotani (1874-1945)5, another bureaucrat concerned with Nagoya, wrote letters to the planning associations of Western nations in search of helpful advice. In response, England’s Raymond Unwin (1863-1940) sent Korotani some materials on planning and introduced him to Reginald Dann (1883-1939), a town planning officer in Madras, India. Kurotani continuously corresponded with Unwin about the Garden City design theory and even framed his own alternative concept, “Forest City”6. Kurotani’s concept seemed appropriate for the geographical features of Japan, especially for Nagoya’s eastern hills. He instructed landscape architect Tsutomu Kano (1892-1934), who designed a distinctive road network composed of access roads with short slopes and a “ring road” running parallel to a contoured line. This was a result of careful adjustments to geographic features and “existing footpaths”7. Kano also introduced a specific design standard for subdivisions “to leave large lots on the hilltops and scenic places” in order to preserve the natural forest. In 1939, the eastern hilltop of the development area was designated as a Scenic District (Fuuchi Chiku), in accordance with the Act of 1919, to preserve its greenery. [ill. 1]
13Planning advisors Yoshikazu Uchida (architect, 1885-1972) and Seiroku Honda (landscape architect, 1866-1952) participated in the first stage of Nagoya Imperial University’s campus planning. Under the advisors’ instruction, a campus plan was drafted that featured winding streets and preserved hilltop forestry, which demonstrated the advisors’ respect for Kano’s landscape design principles. Interestingly, the plan determined the location of the projected “Main Hall” as well as its features: a front central axis with a preserved green hill in the background. This early design set a strong foundation for the later design of Toyoda Memorial Hall.
14Raymond visited the Nanzan University site in 1961 and noted: “The path following the ridge took my particular attention”8. Raymond set this path as the main axis of the new campus and positioned the campus buildings to conform to the site’s geographic features. In fact, “the path” was one of the access roads that Kano had originally arranged.
15The case of PUFAM, which is located in an eastern suburb outside the municipal boundary of Nagoya, is also worth considering as a matter of regional planning. The Prefectural Governor, Mikine Kuwabara (1895-1991), founded PUFAM and launched the pioneering Aichi Prefecture Regional Plan (Aichi-Ken Chihou Keikaku) in 1958. According to the concept of this plan, PUFAM was founded and the campus legitimately occupied a section of the prefectural reservation, while the rest of the reservation was allotted to a regional recreation park in 1970.
REGIONALISM, NATIONALISM, AND INTERNATIONALISM
Architects’ Commission as a Representation of Institutions’ Ideological Backgrounds
16No educational institution is free of political, social, or religious ideologies. To simplify the discussion here, I would like to draw a datum line along regional, national, and global spatial orientations so that the ideological keys can be rendered as regionalism, nationalism, and internationalism. These keys effectively capture institutional characteristics and their transformations. Yet, university administrations still appear very complex because these ideologies are simultaneously antagonistic and cooperative. Even so, these ideologies affect the selection of architects, who have their own experiences with, and ideas about, campus design.

ill. 1 - 1926 Plan for Nagoya (left: Courtesy of Nagoya Urban Institute) and 1932 Land Re-Adjustment Plan for Yagoto District (left: Courtesy of Nagoya City Archives).
The Last Imperial University and Maki’s Post-War Commission
17In 1939, Nagoya University was incorporated as the last Imperial University in Japan. As such, its initial purpose was closely connected to the national policy of Japanese Imperialism. The burgeoning industrial city of Nagoya was beginning to show potential as a place for excellent science and engineering research –especially mechanical and aeronautical engineering– that met military demands. Furthermore, the citizens of Nagoya longed for a full-scale university in addition to the existing medical college.
18Postwar educational reforms placed Nagoya University within the new education system in 1949. The new university was made up of several schools –including other educational institutions established under the old system– and continued to expand into a comprehensive university that is now regarded as a “Center of Excellence” by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT). Nagoya University’s current mission –to conduct advanced scientific research that meets international standards– has overtaken its aforementioned original purpose as a typical national university.
19Maki was given the opportunity to design Toyoda Memorial Hall in 1958, when he was 31 years old. He temporarily returned to Japan from the United States –where he had finished studying at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design and had begun teaching at Washington University in St. Louis– and spent the next two years undertaking research travel with the support of a Graham Foundation Fellowship. The Toyota Motor Corporation entrusted the Takenaka Corporation, a major Japanese construction company, with the task of building Toyoda Memorial Hall. Touemon Takenaka, the corporation’s president and Maki’s maternal grandfather, selected Maki to be the designer. Maki completed the design during his research travel. Toyoda Memorial Hall was thus designed in a literally international context9.
20Maki’s years as a travelling researcher were instrumental in forming his design principle, demonstrated in his publication Investigations in Collective Form10. Maki travelled during a time when currency values and restrictions placed almost insuperable obstacles in the path of most Japanese nationals11. Toyoda Memorial Hall was an absolute exception, but not merely an accident, representing the forefront of Japanese national university postwar reform, while its architecture represented the reopening of Japan’s modern movement to the international paradigm.
Antonin Raymond’s Commission for a Catholic University
21The ideological background of Nanzan University is contrary to that of Nagoya University. Founded as the second Catholic university in Japan by the Society of the Divine Word (Societas Verbi Divini: SVD), Nanzan has always been inherently under foreign (namely, Vatican) control. Nanzan began as a linguistic school of secondary education and became an accredited university in 1948. Linguistic study was necessary to meet the demands of a postwar globalized society, which suggests that Nanzan was a strategic resolution between the SVD and the Vatican.
22In 1949, Father Alois Pache (1903-1969), Nanzan University’s first president, commissioned W. M. Vories and Company Architects, led by William Merrell Vories (1880-1964 –an American evangelist– to complete the layout planning. In 1960, Father Gerhard Schreiber (1911-1972) restarted the project and invited Raymond to design it. Raymond explained that he and Schreiber were sympathetic with each other. Schreiber had taught at Fu Jen Catholic University in Beijing, China, and obtained a PhD in Chinese history in the United States12. According to Raymond, Schreiber’s work on Monumenta Serica: Journal of Oriental Studies gave Schreiber “a knowledge of the Oriental peoples and [a] sympathetic understanding of the meaning of absolute values”13. This “intellectual sympathy” with Westerners, derived through an understanding of Oriental culture and tradition, was the key to Raymond’s successful career. According to Raymond, Schreiber was “willing to give me almost unlimited freedom in the design of the S.V.D. University in Nagoya, within a very limited budget”. Indeed, Kurt Helfrich stated that “Raymond developed his more personal interpretation of the country and its culture by seeking to move beyond the exoticism... he relied on the rationalization techniques of the newly emerging discipline of ethnography that sought to explain primitive cultures in terms of universal scientific principles, in tandem with an architectural shift in reference making use of Le Corbusier’s growing interest in the concept of regionalism”14.
23Raymond’s appointment to Nanzan University resulted in its regionally oriented design, and could be regarded as a representation of the West’s transforming attitude toward the traditional culture and architecture of Japan and Asia.
Entrusting Another University of the Arts to Junzo Yoshimura
24Regional economic prosperity, brought about by industrial revitalization, manifested as a tax increase and brought about the foundation of a new university supported by the prefectural government. At the first stage, the prefectural government retained the option to create comprehensive universities, but soon afterward, Governor Kuwabara focused on creating a “School of Industrial Design” that would meet industrial demands15.
25Kuwabara’s 1958 Aichi Prefectural Regional Plan was quite aggressive. He did not limit his plan to prefectural or regional boundaries, but applied it on a national scale. He invited major heavy industries to participate and developed the region as a leading national industrial center. The formation of PUFAM is connected to his concept. Kuwabara recognized the region’s lack of cultural appearance and decided to build an Arts University with a broad, nationwide scope. At the same time, Kuwabara appreciated the region’s cultural inheritances and sought to use PUFAM to affix those traditions to modern industry.
26In 1965, the PUFAM Preparation Committee was organized and a framework for the new university, consisting of a School of Fine Arts and a School of Music, was drafted. Faculty members were summoned from Tokyo University of the Arts, and Junzo Yoshimura was selected as the campus designer. His position as a professor at Tokyo University of the Arts and his reputation as a master of both traditional and modern synthetic design, which met PUFAM’s needs, meant that Yoshimura was the most suitable candidate for realizing Kuwabara’s concept of an Arts University in this developing region.
DISCONTINUITY AND CONTINUITY
The Significance of Campus Design in the Consecution of the Modern Movement
27The fact that the three campuses in Nagoya were completed in the 1960s is notable, as the 1960s was a remarkable period in the history of modern architecture for two reasons. The first is related to the urban design movement led by Team X’s challenge to the CIAM doctrine in the mid-1950s, which led to the Japanese Metabolism movement’s futuristic proposals. The second is related to regionalism: authors like Sigfried Giedion and Lewis Mumford encouraged resistance to hegemonic, universal, and/or standardizing structures, while Alvar Aalto proposed alternatives based on regionally determined methods16.
28In such contexts, universities in Nagoya provided challenging projects at an appropriate moment. The difference between the three architects’ ages accounted for their varying approaches; consequently, their output represented both the “continuity” and “discontinuity” of the modern movement.
Toyoda Memorial Hall: An Outgrowth of Maki’s Objectivism

ill. 2 - Toyoda Memorial Hall, Nagoya University (photo by Junne Kikata, 2014).
29Maki’s Toyoda Memorial Hall design won the Architectural Institute of Japan Prize in 1962. The jury evaluated Maki’s design as “a demonstration of an effective design for its function and also for the campus environment”17 [ill. 2]. Based on this evaluation, the significance of Toyoda Memorial Hall can be captured in the following points18.
A frame as a “mega-structure”. The Hall’s large concrete roof slab is held by massive U-shaped anti-seismic buttresses, while slender pillars bear the vertical load of the roof. This “gate” mega-structure mediates the vast scale of the central axis and the human scale for public amenities.
Landscape design that incorporates “micro-topography”. With a delicate design operation on the ground level, the given environmental context is interpreted through form.
Asymmetrical composition. Within the mega-frame, architectural masses (the auditorium, clock tower, and presidential quarters) formulate an asymmetrical composition.
Exposed concrete finish. This is a new aspect associated with New Brutalism, which attempts to shift the expression of exposed concrete from the Japanese manner to the international manner.
30Maki’s design was certainly remarkable: in a single building, he effectively determined the total quality of the campus’s future environment [ill. 3]. Maki wrote that the “current issue of urbanism or city beautiful can be solved only by the practice of single architecture”19. The aforementioned outcome of Maki’s design, as well as his declaration, is reminiscent of a sentence in the preface to his 1964 Investigations in Collective Form, in which he states, “Our concern here is not, then, a master plan, but a master program, since the latter term includes a time dimension”20.
31Toyoda Memorial Hall has not only garnered praise, but has also been somewhat controversial. In 1972, Maki himself criticized Toyoda Memorial Hall by saying, “I never want to create a space like that”21. According to Maki’s explanation, the reason was that he “might have [...] felt a sense of original sin” as an architect who had to put an object on a site that should have been preserved as it was22. Maki recently commented on Toyoda Memorial Hall in a persuasive manner:
“When I designed Toyoda Memorial Hall, I was interested in a structural approach and in designing a certain kind of architecture. I was also interested in other approaches, so I proposed three paradigms of Collective Form, of the individual and the whole. [...] At that time, I never intended to discuss which was better –structural approach or collective form– rather, I hoped to demonstrate the characteristics of each. [...] Collective Form is an objective statement, not a manifesto”23.
32The objectivism that Maki expressed here stems from experiences that occurred before and during the commission of Toyoda Memorial Hall –namely, his academic experience in the United States and in the global field as a travelling researcher. Additionally, his objectivism formulates a design methodology, super-imposition, which is particularly effective in campus design and is easily recognized in his recent works. It is evident that Maki superimposed multiple design approaches on different scales from the very beginning of his career; thus, Toyoda Memorial Hall could be likened to an outgrowth of Maki’s objectivism, guarded by the husk of a concrete mega-structure. It marked the beginning of the modern movement’s newly globalized circumstances, which proceeded in a discontinuous manner from the Japanese postwar subjective phase of the movement.
Nanzan University: Raymond’s Platform for Perfection and Integration

ill. 3 - Toyoda Memorial Hall, original plan (Gendai Nihon Kenchikuka Zenshu, Vol. 19), section, and West elevation (Shin-kenchiku, August 1960).

ill. 4 - Nanzan University, original aerial view (top), interior view of dining hall (middle: Courtesy of Nanzan University Archives), and fresco at the class-room building (bottom: photo by Junne Kikata, 2005).
33Raymond’s design for Nanzan University won the Architectural Institute of Japan Prize in 1964. The evaluators praised Raymond’s design, stating that “it must be highly appreciated that Raymond created a new, unprecedented spatial order for a campus, without depending on the magnificence of materials or on the trick of an acrobatic structure, but on harmony with the given natural environment and the functional connection of school buildings”24 [ill. 4]. The points of significance of this design can be summarized as follows:
Site planning based on azimuth orientation and topography. The central axis runs along the ridgeway in a north-south direction. The buildings face south, maintaining an “ideal orientation” in the Japanese climate.
Three-dimensional composition and organic impression as an integrated unit. The buildings are integrated into a unit, while remaining functionally articulated.
Simple concrete structures with tectonic artifices. All of the buildings are constructed with simple Rahmen frames. Bare concrete posts and beams are exposed on a similar scale and exterior walls are painted red, creating a sense of unification. Roof shells with vaults and cupolas add variety to the buildings’ appearance.
Craft works. Frescoes, furniture, floor patterns, and detail work lend brilliance to the inside of the buildings. These are the products of collaboration between Raymond and his wife Noémi, a designer and craftsperson.
Preservation of vegetation. Existing trees are preserved along the main axis and on the slope. The campus expresses an organic integration of natural and man-made landscapes.
34Raymond has consciously valued Japanese tradition25. Raymond himself had an international background –he was born in Bohemia, educated in Prague, apprenticed in the United States under Cass Gilbert (1859-1934) and Frank Lloyd Wright (1867-1959), and practiced globally. As Helfrich suggested, Raymond took an ethnographic approach to understanding and translating Japanese traditional culture into a universal value.26 Through his investigation of folk houses and his collaboration with talented Japanese pupils –one of whom was Junzo Yoshimura– Raymond established himself as an alternative player in architectural regionalism27. In 1949, he organized the principles of good design into three main themes: “honesty”, “simplicity”, and “directness”28. These principles appear fluid when put into practice. This fluidity is evident in comments he made concerning Nanzan University, where “functional” and “economical” elements appear to replace “honesty” and reinforce the notions of “simplicity” and “directness”29.
35Raymond’s principles came about under the influence of Louis Sullivan, Frank Lloyd Wright, and the nineteenth-century Arts and Crafts movement. Still, Raymond’s designs needed to become “humanized” in order to avoid the Bauhaus-style abstract architecture that seemed to embody many of the design conceptions that rivaled his own30. In 1960, Raymond reflected on his designs, stating, “A mere functionalism is not sufficient to create a good architecture. Beauty will only result if the designer is an artist with a powerful aesthetic conception”31. This notion resulted in his collaboration with his wife, Noémi, and the presence of rich craftworks and interior design in Raymond’s work.
36This also explains Raymond’s tectonic treatments of concrete structures – a technique that he mastered under the influence of Gilbert, Wright, and Auguste Perret (1874-1954). In the 1950s, Raymond used folded-plate reinforced concrete and exploited the concrete’s sculptural aspects. Next to the Nanzan campus, Raymond erected the Divine Word Seminary (1962-1965), demonstrating the plastic capacity of concrete. The seminary’s chapel is placed at the highest point on the site: radiating concrete barrel vaults with thin shells cover the fan-shaped nave, while two interlocking concrete shells form the bell tower. This hilltop chapel gives the whole complex the appearance of a hill town. Nanzan University is considered the prime example of Raymond’s work on structural makeup and the finer points of design32.
37Raymond noted that “the extremely attractive landscape and vegetation had to be conserved as much as possible”, so he decided to design his structures so that they would appear to be “seemingly growing out of it like vegetation, attached to the ground [...] by roots”. Investigating Raymond’s approach to nature, Sakai presented the insight that Raymond set up the Nanzan campus buildings and vegetation as analogical counterpoints. He asserted that, while Raymond tried to preserve existing vegetation in relation to the buildings, Raymond “planted” the lowrise buildings so as to imitate indigenous plants. Sakai concluded that such an approach is a chiasmus of modern architecture and nature, unlike Western design concepts that subordinate nature as a part of art and Japanese design concepts that merge architecture into nature33 [ill. 5].
38Nanzan University’s campus demonstrates the accomplishment of Raymond’s half-century search for modern architecture, while representing the development process (i.e., continuity and expansion) of the modern movement.
PUFAM: Junzo Yoshimura’s Comprehensive Work for the Creative Life

ill. 5 - Nanzan University, original site plan (An Autobiography) and West elevation (Shin-Kenchiku, September 1964).
39In 2010, representatives of Docomomo Japan summarized the significance of the PUFAM campus in the following points34 [ill. 6].
Composition of the campus and its buildings. A campus plan with rectangular coordinates provides order, while the courtyards, likened to the ma (open space) of Japanese traditional architecture, provide a cozy atmosphere.
Variety of exposed concrete structures. There exist direct and varied expressions of exposed concrete structures through “the elimination of the superfluous”. Linear classroom wings are lifted from the ground by pilotis, while a concert hall is formed by a thin folded-plate structure.
The campus as a platform for creativity. Spatial diversity facilitates the creative activities that take place at the university. This is regarded as an ideal circumstance in which to study the subjects of Fine Arts and Music.
40In his design of PUFAM, Yoshimura took opposite approaches to those that his mentor, Raymond, took at Nanzan. Instead of integrating the campus’s buildings, Yoshimura maintained distance between them to create various open spaces. Interestingly, he also tied them together with “axial spaces” consisting of corridors and pilotis. Yoshimura also attempted to express the variety of characteristics of each building instead of creating a unified scale and implementing a standardized finish and color [ill. 7]. These choices seem to suggest that Yoshimura was more confident and earnest about his performance than his predecessors, which is unsurprising considering that he designed PUFAM during the period of his maturity, between the completion of his masterpieces –Mountain Lodge at Karuizawa (1962) and a residence at Pocantico Hill built for John D. Rockefeller III (1974).

ill. 6 - Aichi Prefectural University of Fine Arts and Music (PUFAM), original aerial view (top), class room wing (middle), and open corridor (bottom: Space Design. Special Issue, No. 1, May 1971).

ill. 7 - Faculty Buildings of PUFAM: Atelier for the Oil Paintings (top), Drawing Studio for the Designs (middle), and Music Studios (bottom: ibid.).
41Despite Raymond’s direct influence on Yoshimura during the latter’s apprenticeship, there is a difference between their individual approaches that can be explained by Yoshimura’s embodiment of classic Japanese architecture, which would prove to be rather influential on Raymond35. Hisao Kohyama described Yoshimura as “the sole classicist”36. Kohyama explained the essential meaning of classicism as “a way of making an architectural form and the way in which this form is fitted to any kind of activity”. Kohyama went on to identify the two reasons why he classified Yoshimura as a classicist: first, “his architecture comprises autonomous forms, and these forms have the power to generate multiple variations”. Second, “for him [Yoshimura], architecture is the art of producing a way of living for people, and he believed that the necessity of doing this provided the greatest pleasure in making architecture”. Yoshimura himself aptly stated, “As an architect, I am overjoyed when I see a building of my design lifted up and filled with a happy gathering of people”37.
42Yoshimura’s design of the PUFAM campus is a unique artifact of the Japanese modern movement. It shows us that Japanese modern architecture acquired temporal autonomy before full-scale globalization was achieved –at which point Maki had already come onto the scene– but after the half-century struggle of Raymond and others like him.
ISSUES OF CAMPUS PRESERVATION
43As we can see, the three campuses in Nagoya have a historic value that is a clear testimony to the post-war expansion of higher education in Japan, which coincided with the city’s increasing prosperity. In the history of design, these three campuses serve as tangible evidence of the fertilization of the Japanese modern movement. In this sense, it is important to recognize that the value of these campuses is found in their serial heritage: they complement one another, as each one represents, in its own way, a distinctive chapter in the history of Japanese modern architecture.
44The Docomomo selection38 was an effective way to recognize the importance of each of these three campuses at a time when there was no criterion with which to designate and preserve modern architecture. In 2011, after its renovation, Toyoda Memorial Hall was registered as a National Tangible Cultural Property. This registration was notable because it increased public awareness regarding the value of modern campus architecture and provided stakeholders with the opportunity to consider the possibility of preserving it as a living heritage. However, the case of Toyoda Memorial Hall –a single structure provided with generous financial support from the Toyota Motor Company– was an exception. Other universities that lack the budget to implement drastic measures throughout their campuses are now facing several challenges in preservation.
45The main issue facing architecture in Japan is its structural features: reinforced concrete structures with exposed surfaces ought to be earthquake-resistant, but the neutralization of exposed concrete surfaces harms their reinforcing rods, so eventually the whole structural system could become defective. The possibility of earthquakes is a serious threat. Major disasters evoke public awareness of prevention, and it has been widely noticed that Nagoya is located in one of the most hazardous seismic areas. National standards for earthquake proofing are becoming increasingly strict, and most of the existing structures from the 1960s are expected to be considered “not qualified”.
46Other important issues are based on several significant shifts in the circumstances of higher education in Japan. The first is a demographic shift39. As a result of a decline in the birthrate in the 1980s, the population of eighteen-year-olds has dramatically declined from 2.0 million in 1994 to 1.2 million in 2010. Nevertheless, a hierarchy among institutions still remains in terms of selectivity. Except for a small group of prestigious institutions, many universities have had to reposition themselves to survive in this age of insufficient demand.
47Another shift is the marketization of the public sector, which occurred under the ideological tide of “neoliberalism”. It is argued that many social services provided directly by state or local governments should be shifted to the realm of the market for the sake of efficiency. This argument can be directly applied to higher education.
48Additionally, competition over technical innovation has caused research and development to become critically important for success in the global market. In the 1990s, “excellence in research and education” became a political catchphrase, and in 2001, MEXT proposed the designation of thirty leading research universities as Japanese centers of excellence by international standards. In 2012, MEXT drafted the University Reform Action Plan40 and set an implementation period of five years. Thus, the upcoming tempest of drastic reform will involve all kinds of institutions, and will surely affect their “physical assets” –namely, campuses and their architecture.
A Continuing Search: Maki’s Regeneration Project
49Maki undertook a major renovation of Toyoda Memorial Hall from 2006 to 2007, 47 years after its initial completion [ill. 8]. Maki proudly wrote of it and Washington University’s Steinberg Hall, “The first two buildings of my career, completed in Japan and the US almost a half a century ago, are now renovated. This proves their lasting legacy to their respective campuses”41. The aims of the project were preservation and functional improvement. The first challenge for Toyoda Memorial Hall was to restore the deteriorating concrete structure without harming its appearance. Three centimeters of concrete were removed from the surface of the façade and a new layer of concrete measuring 5.5 centimeters thick was added. The second challenge was a functional improvement. “In order to allow for all graduates to attend graduation”, the foyer was expanded into an open court between the original hall and a later addition that had been built in 1992. At the same time, the upper part of the pilotis was incorporated into the interior space42.
50The renovation was a successful project, and several factors formed the backdrop of this success. First, the initiative of President Shin-ichi Hirano, who attended his own graduation ceremony in the original hall when it was brand-new, should be recognized. Hirano was aware of the importance of Toyoda Memorial Hall in maintaining the university’s corporate identity –the capability of the “collective unconscious”43 among its alumni/ae. Second, the advancement of understanding through research activities and publications is significant. Toyoda Memorial Hall was regenerated as a result of Maki’s continuing search for architectural excellence. With its integrity secured by the original architect’s actions, Toyoda Memorial Hall once again marked an epoch.
Achieving Integration Without Disintegration: Restructuring Nanzan University
51Raymond’s later influence on Nanzan University was less prominent than Maki’s on Toyoda Memorial Hall, not only because the renovation occurred 37 years after his death, but also because of his isolation as a free, foreign, and somewhat mystical architect. However, Raymond’s involvement caused a flurry of research activities –on both the architect and the campus– that would prove valuable to advancing knowledge, even though Raymond’s direct influence was no longer present.

ill. 8 - Toyoda Memorial Hall, Renovation (Fumihiko Maki).

ill. 9 - Nanzan University Campus, current condition (photo by Junne Kikata, 2014).
52Nanzan University’s campus has become dense with high-rises since its 1980s expansion, which occurred at a time when design was still under the control of the Raymond Architectural Design Office. he visual codes of red concrete walls and brise-soleil have helped to maintain the campus’s unified image, but the opening of a subway station in the university’s eastern neighborhood disarranged Raymond’s master plan, which centered on the ridgeway running from south to north. In 2006, in order to connect the campus to the eastern street, the possibility of demolishing the seminary complex was considered, but objective evaluations (from Docomomo Japan, for example) impressed the seminary members, who eventually decided to preserve and renovate the seminary44.
53The university has been in the process of restructuring since 200745. In 2009, the dining hall –one of the most distinctive buildings on the original campus– was demolished and replaced by a massive complex, which was completed in 2011 and designed by the Construction Design Division of the Shimizu Corporation, a company engaged in all construction projects on campus since the original phase. In September 2013, the discontinuance of a second campus in an outer region was announced, foreseeing the population decline. At the same time, the university administration declared a redevelopment policy concerning the main campus46. The construction of a 20,000 square-meter floor area is expected to be completed by February 2015 on the extension site in the valley between the campus and the SVD seminary. Plans to renovate classrooms and research facilities have also been drafted, with an anticipated completion date of February 2017 [ill. 9].
54Now, the challenge is how to harmonize such construction plans with Raymond’s concept of low-rise buildings “attached to the ground [...] by roots”. Without some special solutions, it seems inevitable that the new construction will undermine the aesthetics of the green hills and the skyline of the hilltop campus. It must be emphasized that the visual codes of the red concrete walls and brise-soleil are not the only characteristics of Raymond’s original campus. Its significance must be understood from many angles, and the issue is more profound than scholars who have investigated Raymond have suggested. For example, identifying the significance of the collaborative work of Antonin and Noémi Raymond is especially important in maintaining the integrity of the campus. At this point, the importance of the fact that Nanzan University’s archives and office staff have begun investigating this topic is readily apparent47.
55It is important to “maintain integrity by understanding significance before any intervention”48 under the present circumstances of Nanzan University, which have been characterized by the absence of responsible architects who can undertake constant management, as well as the reality of the future outsourcing of campus planning.
Beyond Authenticity: Regeneration with Conversion at PUFAM
56The original buildings of PUFAM have been used for approximately 40 years without any major alterations. Most of its artists have been content with their workplaces, despite the lack of overall maintenance that Yoshimura’s original structure demands. In 2006, the prefectural government instituted an improvement policy, causing an argument that divided faculty members and citizens regarding whether to rebuild or to preserve the existing structure. The Department of Music eagerly desired new, better-equipped facilities, and in 2008, the prefectural government decided to outsource the inefficient student dormitories and faculty residences.
57The active preservation campaign conducted by Yoshimura’s original partner, Akio Okumura –as well as others, including Yoshimura’s pupils– saved the campus from possible demolition. However, the visiting professors’ residence was demolished and a new music facility was built on the site. Although the new building, designed by Nikken Sekkei, preserves the topographical setting and follows the spatial framework of the original campus, an irreplaceable part of Yoshimura’s masterpiece has nevertheless been demolished. In 2012, a comprehensive master plan49 was finally established by a committee that was comprised of external professors and architects, as well as faculty members and prefectural officers. The plan contains the following three kinds of operations [ill. 10].
The continued use of the original structure with anti-seismic reinforcement. Seismic diagnosis is currently under way.
Additional construction. The regeneration plan assumes that the rectangular coordinates of the original site plan help to maintain a continuous order. Operations will be successful if they follow Article 6 of the Madrid Document and “ensure a respectful approach to additions and interventions”50.
The interdisciplinary conversion of some departments’ facilities into others. For example, design studios will be converted to classrooms, ateliers for Japanese paintings will be turned into ateliers for oil paintings, the museum will become a library, and music studios will be converted to student halls.

ill. 10 - 2011 Comprehension Plan for PUFAM (http://www2.aichi-fam-u.ac.jp/5_disclosure/03_canpasuseibi/Aichi_CampusMP_2011_ver13final_120330.pdf).
58This plan will not be able to be undertaken without facing challenges. The first challenge concerns how to secure earthquake-resistant performance while preserving the transparency of the “axial space” of the pilotis, along with the appearance of Yoshimura’s original structure, which was founded on the premise of “elimination of the superfluous”. Another, more conceptual, challenge concerns how to interpret the original relationship between space and creative activity in the conversion work. Since Yoshimura gave a “variety of characteristics” to the original buildings in relation to their original artistic disciplines, the discussion necessarily goes beyond the conventional preservation philosophy based on notions of authenticity. As such, it will be a difficult, but exciting, challenge to find a new relationship between architecture and artistic activity across time and space without diminishing the significance of Yoshimura’s architecture.
Bibliographie
Canizaro, 2007: V.B. Canizaro eds., Architectural Regionalism, Collected Writings on Place, Identity, Modernity, and Tradition, New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007.
Frampton, 2009: K. Frampton, “The Work of Fumihiko Maki”, Fumihiko Maki, Phaidon, p. 55.
Ito, 2014: S. Ito, “On the Furniture Design in Nanzan University”, Archeia, Documents, Information and History, no 8 (March, 2014).
Helfrich, 1997: K. G. F. Helfrich, “Building the Contemporary House: Modernity, Regionalism and the Ideal of Japan in Antonin Raymond’s Residential Designs. 1921-1952”, PhD Dissertation, University of Virginia, 1997, p. 16.
Hotta, Kikata, 2001: Y. Hotta, “Toyoda Koudou to Maki Fumihiko (Toyoda Memorial Hall and Fumihiko Maki)”, Y. Hotta and J. Kikata, Toyoda Koudou to Furukawa Toshokan, Nagoya: the Nagoya University Archive, 2001, p. 27.
Kaneko, 2004: M. Kaneko, “Japanese Higher Education –Contemporary Reform and the Influence of Tradition”, Philip G. Altbach and Toru Umakoshi eds., Asian Universities –Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Challenges, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004, p. 129-142.
Kano, 1932: T. Kano, “Kyuryou Chitai No Kukaku Seiri Sekkei Ni Tuite (On the Land Readjustment Planning on the Hills)”, Dai Nagoya No Kukaku Seiri (Land Readjustments in Greater Nagoya), Nagoya: Nagoya Kukaku Seiri Kyokai, 1932, p. 37-43.
Kawazoe, 1960: Noboru Kawazoe ed., Metabolism/1960 –the Proposals for New Urbanism, Tokyo: Bijsutu Shuppan Sha, 1960.
Kikata, 2010: J. Kikata, Daigaku-machi Shutugen (The Emergence of College Town), Tokyo: Kawade Shobo Shin-sha, 2010.
Kohyama, 2005: H. Kohyama, “Junzo Yoshimura –the Sole Classicist of Modern Japan”, the Japan Architect, vol. 59 (Autumn 2005), p. 6.
Kurotani, 1928: R. Kurotani, Forest City, Tokyo: Kodaisha, 1928.
Maki, 1964: F. Maki, Investigations in Collective Form, A Special Publication no 2, St. Louis: The School of Architecture, Washington University, 1964.
Maki, 1972: F. Maki “Gen-Taiken No Kuukan –Awazu Tei No Opun Hausu Nite (A Space of Formative Experience –Awazu Residence Open House–)”, Shin-Kenchiku (September, 1972).
Maki, 1999: F. Maki, “How the Architecture Realizes the Collective Unconscious”, Tokyo: N Probe, 1999.
Nishizawa, 2010: Y. Nishizawa, “An opinion on the buildings of Aichi Prefectural University of Fine Arts and Music”, An attached material to a letter concerning the preservation by Hiroyuki Suzuki, President of Docomomo Japan (January 2010).
Oshima, 2006: K. T. Oshima, “Characters of Concrete”, Helfrich and Whitaker eds., Crafting A Modern World, p. 74.
Raymond, 1949: A. Raymond, “Lasting Values in Design –draft of speech given at Syracuse University’s Sehgal of Architecture on 20 May 1949”, translated in Japanese by Ryuichi Hamaguchi and published in Kokusai-Kenchiku, vol. 22, no 3 (March, 1953), p. 2-6.
Raymond, 1960: A. Raymond, “First Period of Residence”, 1960, 1. Raymond Collection, Architectural Archives, University of Pennsylva, Philadelphia (qtd., ibid. 41).
Raymond, 1964: A. Raymond, “Nanzan University –Nagoya”, Kenchiku (the Architecture), vol. 24 (September 1964), p. 42.
Raymond, 1973: A. Raymond, An Autobiography, Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Company, 1973, p. 277.
Sakai, 2013: S. Sakai, “La Nature qu’a vue l’architecte Antonin Raymond: une étude ethnographique sur la transformation d’un paysage (summarized in French)”, Archeia: documents, information and history, Nanzan University Archives, no 7 (March, 2013), p. 116.
Stewart, 2009: D. Stewart, “A Journey to the West”, Fumihiko Maki, London: Phaidon, 2009, p. 267.
Taniguchi, 2013: G. Taniguchi, “In Participating in the Conversion Project of SVD Seminary”, JIA Tokai Branch, Architect, no 298 (July, 2013), p. 18-19.
Toyokawa, 2013: S. Toyokawa ed., Tange Kenzo and Kenzo Tange, Tokyo: Ohm-sha, 2013, p. 127-128.
Vendradi-Auzanneau, 2006: C. Vendradi-Auzanneau, “Antonin Raymond and the Modern Movement: A Czech Perspective”, K. Helfrich and W. Whitaker eds., Crafting A Modern World –the Architecture and Design of Antonin Raymond and Noémi Raymond, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 2006, p. 40-41.
Yoshimura, 1965: J. Yoshimura, “Architecture and Design –Why I Decided to Withdraw from the New Imperial Palace Project–”, the Asahi Journal (July 1965).
Notes de bas de page
1 The full completion of the campus was achieved in 1971.
2 Section 1.5, Madrid Document 2011, International Conference Intervention Approaches for 20th Century Architectural Heritage, International Scientific Committee on Twentieth Century Heritage/ICOMOS, June 2011, http://icomos-isc20c.org/id13.html (accessed February 28, 2014).
3 Yoshimura became a professor in 1962, while Tange became a professor at the University of Tokyo in 1963.
4 On the history of campus developments in Japan, see Kikata, 2010.
5 Regarding Kurotani and his work, see Hotta, 2012.
6 Kurotani, 1928.
7 Kano, 1932, p. 37-43.
8 Raymond, 1964, p. 42.
9 Hotta and Kikata, 2001, p. 27.
10 Maki, 1964.
11 Stewart, 2009, 267.
12 Nanzan Gakuen Souritsu 75-Shunen Kinenshi Hensan Iinkai, Hominis Dignitati - Nanzan Gakuen Souritsu 75-Shunen Kinenshi (Commemoratibe Publication of 75th Anniversaty of Nanzan Foundation), Nagoya: Nanzan Gakuen, 2007, 130.
13 Raymond, 1973, p. 277.
14 Helfrich, 1997, p. 16.
15 Aichi Kenritsu Geijyutu Daigaku Souritu 40 Shunen Kinenshi Hensyu Iinkai, Aichi Kenritsu Geijyutu Daigaku Souritu 40 Shunen Kinenshi (Commemoratibe Publication of 40th Anniversaty of PUFAM), Nagakute: PUFAM, 2006, 32.
16 Canizaro, 2007, p. 31.
17 “Report on the selection of Architectural Institution of Japan Prizes in 1962”, Kenchiku Zasshi, vol. 78, no 929 (August 1963), 489.
18 Yoshihiro Hotta, “Toyoda Koudou to Maki Fumihiko”, 14-26.
19 Maki, 1960, p. 21.
20 Maki, Investigations in Collective Form, 4.
21 Maki, 1972, p. 197.
22 Ibid.
23 Toyokawa, 2013, p. 127-128.
24 “Report on the selection of Architectural Institution of Japan Prizes in 1964”, Kenchiku Zasshi, vol. 80, no 957 (August 1965), 555.
25 Raymond, 1964, p. 42.
26 Helfrich, 1997, p. 16.
27 Ibid., 18.
28 Raymond, 1949, p. 2-6.
29 Raymond, Nanzan University: Nagoya, 42.
30 Vendradi-Auzanneau, 2006, p. 40-41.
31 Raymond, 1960, p. 41
32 Ken Tadashi Oshima, “Characters of Concrete”, Helfrich and Whitaker, eds., Crafting A Modern World, 74.
33 Sakai, 2013, p. 116.
34 Nishizawa, 2010
35 Raymond particularly valued Yoshimura’s knowledge of traditional Japanese design. Helfrich, 1997, p. 174.
36 Kohyama, 2005, p. 6.
37 Yoshimura, 1965, p. 90-94.
38 Toyoda Memorial Hall and Nanzan University were included in the 100 selections in 2003, and PUFAM was included in the 125 selections in 2006.
39 Kaneko, 2004, p. 129-142.
40 Higher Education Policy Planning Division, Higher Education Bureau, University Reform Action Plan, MEXT, 2012.
41 Fumihiko Maki, Fumihiko Maki, 20.
42 Technical reports on the renovation project by Maki and Associates and the Takanaka Corporation can be viewed at: http://web-honbu.jimu.nagoya-u.ac.jp/fmd/3sseibika/syoukai-kai/toyoko/maki.pdf and http://web-honbu.jimu.nagoya-u.ac.jp/fmd/3sseibika/syoukai-kai/toyoko/takenaka.pdf.
43 Maki, 1999.
44 Taniguchi, 2013, p. 18-19.
45 Nanzan University, The Nanzan Grand Design, 2007, http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/English/about/grand-design/index.html (accessed February 28, 2014).
46 http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/Menu/news/2013/pdf/130927_campus.pdf (accessed February 28, 2014).
47 Ito, 2014, p. 86-89.
48 Section 2-1, Article 2, Madrid Document.
49 http://www2.aichi-fam-u.ac.jp/5_disclosure/03_canpasuseibi/Aichi_CampusMP_2011_ver13final_120330.pdf (accessed February 28, 2014).
50 Ibid., Madrid Document.
Auteur
-
Junne Kikata
Professor, Department of Architecture, Kagoshima University (Japan)
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Conservation-restauration de l’architecture du mouvement moderne
Catherine Compain-Gajac (dir.)
2012
Iconographie funéraire romaine et société
Corpus antique, approches nouvelles ?
Martin Galinier et François Baratte (dir.)
2013
Vierges à l’Enfant médiévales de Catalogne
Mises en perspectives. Suivi du Corpus des Vierges à l'Enfant (xiie-xve s.) des Pyrénées-Orientales
Marie-Pasquine Subes et Jean-Bernard Mathon (dir.)
2013
Les campus universitaires
Architecture et urbanisme, histoire et sociologie, état des lieux et perspectives
Catherine Compain-Gajac (dir.)
2014
Rotte mediterranee della pittura
Artisti e committenti tra Sardegna e Catalogna nella prima età moderna
Mauro Salis
2015
L’invention d’une Méditerranée
Patrimoine, création, identité en Roussillon de la fin du xviiie siècle à l’entre-deux-guerres
Marie-Hélène Solère-Sangla
2016
Les échanges artistiques entre la France et l’Espagne, xve-fin xixe siècles
Julien Lugand (dir.)
2012
Circulations artistiques dans la Couronne d'Aragon
Le rôle des chapitres cathédraux, xvie-xviiie siècles
Julien Lugand (dir.)
2014
Passió col·leccionista
El museu-biblioteca de mossèn Pere Valls i Vilà (1848-1925)
Gabriel Alcade Gurt et Francesc Miralpeix Vilamala (dir.)
2014
