The first festival of contemporary Netherlands architecture in Moscow presents its Russian audience with an extremely high professional culture of formation of the human habitat, a culture in which method always takes precedence over individual solutions proposed by particular architects. The profession of architect is extremely important in the Netherlands. Both the authorities and society understand that it is architects who play the key role in planning the collective future, and for this reason architects command the attention of the public and people are keen to enter into dialogue with them. For their part, Dutch architects stand out for their keenness to influence how social processes are organized; they are very much oriented on society.

The architecture of the Netherlands is a unique phenomenon in the international context. If the global mainstream, at least until re cently, tended to fetishize works of architecture as unique and expensive symbolic objects, the Dutch design ideology has never regarded form as an end in itself. Architectural design in the Netherlands has always stood out for its systematic approach to organizing living space. Form here appears as the result of a conceptual and analytical process and of a quest for an optimal solution, as the mould or «packaging» for a structure which takes shape progressively in the process of linking together all relevant parameters, including the cultural requirements of modern man. Each truly Dutch project is based on careful investigation of the object and on an idea whose practical importance for society is something that stands in no need of proof. If the latter does not hold true, then the project cannot be realized in the Netherlands. Of course,  Dutch architecture is extremely varie. Some parts of it are also susceptible to the global trend. For instance, the work of well-known architects such as van Berkel, Wiel Arets, and Lars Spuybroek today looks – from our point of view –«international» rather than «truly Dutch» precisely because of its orientation on the creation of exclusive structures, urban icons whose formal perfection elevates them above the surrounding context.

For the «uDUTCHnaya architecture» project [«uDUTCHnaya» is a play on the Russian word for «successful» - «udachnaya»] we have presented a cross-section of the professional activities of architects whose work indisputably possesses truly Dutch qualities, such as: a focus on prospects for development rather than on the design of specific buildings; orientation not so much on designing buildings as on organizing social processes; a heightened sense of professional responsibility for the harmonious and ‘intelligent’ development of the inhabited environment; and an approach that treats architectural design as an investigative process. For these architects architecture is not a means of self-expression or an instrument with which to construct a radically new world. What they are engaged in is a critical making sense of existing space and a quest for innovative ways of improving that space. When all these qualities are present at the same time, we may talk of a new level of development of the «Dutch school», a level that is linked in the most direct way with the work and personality of Rem Koolhaas.

There can be no doubt that it is Rem Koolhaas who was responsible for establishing in Holland the conceptual approach to architectural design – an approach in which investigation is the necessary basis and premise for the formation of the design concept. The generations of architects that have come after Koolhaas have taken this design method further. The way they practise architecture supposes increasingly broader cooperation not merely with related professions, but also with the widest circles within Dutch society. While designing architecture, these architects also publish books, release films and games, write articles, and are involved in open debates. All this transforms the «architectural project» into a social and cultural event, making it an integral part of the life and consciousness of the general public.

Many leaders of the «post-Koolhaas» generation have had experience of working for OMA-AMO and consider themselves pupils of Koolhaas. Others in one way or another compare what they do with the extremely high standard that Koolhaas has set. It is the work of this new generation that shapes the cross-section of modern Dutch architecture which is the focus of our attention and which we have indicated in calling this festival «uDUTCHnaya architecture» – meaning not just the extremely high professional quality of the design solutions, but also the ‘national’ characteristics that distinguish Dutch architecture in the international context.

For Russian cities that stand today at a historic crossroads the Dutch experience should serve as a stimulus for a critical appreciation of their own past, present, and future and as a source of inspiration for new long-term development strategies in which attention paid to specific aspects does not enter into conflict with unity of conception.

Irina Korobina