4.
THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
4.1.3 Zoo Landscapes and the Construction of Nature
chrIstIna KatharIna May
Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany
ABSTRACT
since the 1950s zoos have taken up the mission to make their audience
aware of conservational issues. the ideological shift towards conservational
goals as well as public concerns about living conditions of captive wild ani-
mals influenced the concepts of zoo design. Zoos had to integrate popular
imaginations about naturalness and scientific research on ecological issues,
an ambivalent mixture between science and aesthetics.
during the 1950s and the beginning 1960s planners have worked on a new
master plan for the Zoological garden of basel in switzerland. the old buildings
of the nineteenth-century’s city zoo were demolished and replaced with animal
houses styled according to post-war modernism. veterinary and behavioural
research as well as new materials like concrete, glass and tiles supported the
conditions for conservational tasks like health and fertility. nevertheless, the
zoo’s environment should appear as a surrogate of nature to enhance the
public’s awareness of conservational concerns and ecological relations.
the artist Kurt brägger modelled illusionistic natural habitats with the help
of a semiotic program, which transferred geomorphological structures of
the regional landscape of basel into the zoo. a dramaturgy of sight-lines
and lightning effects led the visitors through the park to immerse the recipi-
ents into a coherent landscape experience. the new landscape design and
the souterrain buildings of the 1960s relied on contemporary theoretical
studies about walking experiences and phenomenological space. conser-
vational claims and ecological rhetorics were closely related to behavioural
research on the relational space of territory and social behaviour. all these
ideas influenced the design of nature for both kind of users, for visitors and
animals. the represention of zoological research contrasted the immersive
effects of the popular themed exhibition space. hence, the built environ-
ment of the zoo condensed and combined contradictory ideas of progress,
conservation and reassurance.
KEYWORDS
Zoological garden, architecture, environmentalism, landscape,
sustainability
640
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
HYGIENIC EXHIBITION SPACES
‘bathroom style’ is the general description for zoo architecture of the 1950s.
today’s zoos invest high amounts of money to get rid of these tiled animal
houses, which contrast the promised illusion of entering nature.1 back in
the 1950s, these buildings corresponded to veterinary standards for arti-
ficial environments. but design concepts of zoos also depended on person-
nel constellations, local conditions and social processes. thus, designs of
zoological gardens in Western europe differed in interpreting nature and in
methods of transferring natural habitats into architectural space. the Zoo-
logical garden of basel is an ideal example to describe the transition of the
spatial environmental concepts and the understanding of nature in terms
of science and aesthetics. the personnel constellations, the cooperation
between biologists, architects and an artist, resulted in the unique design
for the Zoological garden of basel.
the renovation project for basel Zoo started on favourable terms in 1949:
the city of basel and private donations financed the planned building proj-
ects because the zoo was well accepted as a part of the identity of basel.
Furthermore, economic growth in Western europe led to profound changes
in the swiss economy and social life. the swiss practised sustainable ag-
riculture combined with a long tradition of sustainable forestry until the
beginning of the 1950’s when mass production changed consumption traits
and accelerated industrial impacts on the regional environment.2 like many
other city zoos that were founded in the nineteenth century, basel Zoo was
located close to the city’s ring road. residential areas of the expanding city
surrounded the site and restricted scope for site expansion. the number of
zoo visitors rose especially after the second World War, which is why the
architects and the zoo director had to plan improvements for visitor circula-
tion. rising visitor attendance made the zoo provide for aesthetic standards
accommodating to places of recreation of the 1950s. the main goal of the
re-design was obviously expressed in the first general plan of 1949 by the
architect Willi Kehlstadt: providing hygienic conditions to meet the biologi-
cal needs for breeding animals as well as the aesthetic needs for visitors’
relaxation. the new general plan promoted an easily obtainable overview for
visitors whom could circulate along clear patterns and never be confronted
with litter or especially zoo animal faeces. hygienic animal-abode conditions
seemed to guarantee breeding success and reduced risks involved in keep-
ing lesser-known species such as okapis. expensive exotic animals created
a demand for expensive buildings to provide adequate housing conditions
representative of the scientific value of the animal exhibited. Zoos were ex-
pected to serve as scientific and cultural institutions. Fisher comprehended
the most important functions of modernist zoo architecture:
641
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
Many innovations in zoo architecture stem from an increasingly hu-
mane approach to the management of captive animals. only in the
twentieth century did zoos really face that […] the care of animals
involves financial, hygienic, nutritional and psychological obligations
similar to those involved in the care of children.3
the ‘humane approach’ implied respect for the physical and psychological
needs of the animals. Zoologist adolf Portmann stressed that the new design
of basel Zoo was based on new animal psychology and health care insights.4
conceiving spaces based on the animal’s perception caused the design of new
spatial systems which corresponded to behaviour and movement patterns
of the animals. Portmann suggested banning visual analogies of picturesque
landscape scenes based on ‘romantic’ anthropomorphism, and artificial rock-
work from the zoo because this décor betrayed the visitors and subverted the
serious ambitions of the institution5. Instead, moats and glass were used to
replace grills to provide barrier-free views for the visitors.
Implementing the plan, several architects from basel built modernist ani-
mal houses and aviaries, which worked as role-models for other european
animal houses.6 but in terms of conservation and environment, landscape
architecture became more important. the animal houses for rhinos, pygmy
hippopotamuses and carnivores designed by rasser and vadi were modern
viewing structures with indirect lighting from sky-lights and floor-to-ceiling
windows. the windows offered views into garden spaces and outdoor enclo-
sures. this spatial arrangement clearly defined interior spaces and linked
them with the landscape garden. the buildings paralleled exhibition pavilions
and the windows, matched local residential buildings designed by rasser
and vadi. natural components like soil, wood and plants were considered
as dangerous however, because they supported the spread of bacteria and
parasites. In addition, wooden planks absorbed faeces, so that the smell
in the houses was extremely unpleasant for the visitors. Instead, abstract
concrete forms substituted the spatial components of the original habitat of
the species. the imported Indian rhinos initiated a breeding approach for
threatened species. the rhino house and the carnivore house reflect the
ideological turn of zoological gardens towards being institutions of conserva-
tion management.
the umbrella organisation of zoological parks the International union of Zoo
directors joined the International union of Preservation of nature in 1949
(IuPn).7 the IuPn changed its name into International union of conserva-
tion in 1956, marking the conceptual transition from passive preservation
to active conservation management.8 Zoos started taking on an active role
in conservation by enhancing breeding activities. In addition, breeding was
642
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
necessary because zoological institutions strove to become independent
from animal imports because animal supplies were at risk, which was due
to decolonisation of african states.9 Zoo architecture provided an environ-
ment that was prepared to control animal behaviour and physiology and was
therefore, essential for optimising the production of offspring.
to sum up, the conception of animal-houses not only adopted human hous-
ing forms and exhibition architecture but also followed ideas of economic
growth and mass production of the 1950s.
LANDSCAPES IN BETWEEN
although basel Zoos’ modernist buildings met the needs of breeding ani-
mals and presented them to the public, it was still expected to serve as a
place for an encounter with nature. thus, the architect arthur dürig, who
had advised the building projects since 1951, abandoned the general plan
of 1949.10 dürig believed building these massive architectural structures
would have destroyed the park as a refuge for the citizens of basel. alter-
natively, conserving and reactivating the landscape garden were cheap and
an effective means to present the zoo as a coherent ensemble. landscape
architectural measures changed the appearance of the zoo and set it apart
from many other zoo designs of the 1950s and 1960s.
dürig commissioned the artist Kurt brägger in 1952 to model the outdoor
enclosure of the elephant house. brägger’s design was publicly appraised
and he therefore continued working for the zoo and interrupted the mod-
ernist designs by integrating naturalistic scenes. In 1961, brägger served
as the zoo’s head designer and laid out a new general plan. the sculp-
tor disregarded conventions of gardening and combined plants selected for
their visual characteristics. these combinations followed a kind of semiotic
program connoting physiognomic landscape characteristics of humidity or
dryness. trees, shrubs and slopes obstructed what were previously unspec-
tacular views of the enclosures screening the exhibits from the visitors who
would then solely focus on sounds and smells. Moats separated the visi-
tor space from elevated enclosures which created the impression that the
animals were on a stage. apart from infrequent pruning, traces of artificial
plant care were diminished. the garden was designed to grow self-suffi-
ciently and appear as a natural landscape. brägger imitated conglomerate
rocks made of concrete and modelled landscape scenes according to the
morphology of regional river shores.11
however, lilian Pfaff links brägger’s work to the ethological studies of the
zoo director heini hediger, who promoted that zoos should become more
natural.12 hediger coined the zoos` mission as ‘emergency exits to nature’,
643
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
and defined the zoo as a place for social hygiene or for recreation in na-
ture.13 comparing hediger’s sober interpretation of nature with brägger’s
aesthetic interpretation, I argue, reveals how contemporary swiss design
principles developed differently during the 1950s. the concepts of social
biology and also of landscape architecture that hediger promoted in Zurich,
differed much from those of basel Zoo. the landscape of Zurich Zoo was
conceived as second nature with symbolic references to the original habitats
of the exhibits’ inhabitants in african or asian regions. hediger based ‘trans-
position of nature’ on a rather abstract, topological concept of territory, not
on visual imitation. nevertheless, hediger’s research on behaviour achieved
breakthrough innovations for husbandry. the veterinarian ernst lang, hedi-
ger’s successor as director of basel Zoo, propagated hygienic and nutrition-
al optimisation, that us american zoo managers also mainly practised and
propagated.14 Whereas the systematic layout of the new stables built in the
1950s followed these rationalised practises of husbandry, basel Zoo con-
sisted of spaces that appeared to be natural with illusionary atmospheres.
For the animals, small improvements were implemented by structuring the
enclosures more complexly. building naturalistic landscape sceneries aimed
at taking the visitors to another, timeless place, which differed from the new
circulation patterns of the city. the landscape garden transferred the visi-
tors into a micro-world substituting the deficit of synaesthetic experiences
of urban spaces. the garden was not meant as a simulation of nature, but,
from the perspective of its designer, it enhanced the visitor’s capacity to
perceive natural surroundings.15 the visitors were supposed to accept the
place as a coherent landscape which belonged to the animals, instead of
feeling like they were visiting a zoo with captive animals.16
this visual model was similar to other models of preservation in the 1950s.
Preservationist concentrated on aesthetic values of nature, rather than on
its sustainable management. Preservationist had a static concept of nature:
preserving existing landscape in national parks often ignored the essential
transitional character of natural landscapes. the concept of preservation of
wild nature was not important for the design of an artificial landscape gar-
den. the planners knew they would be constructing places of nature on an
otherwise urban site. In addition, they preserved parts of the built environ-
ment of the zoo as cultural heritage.17
brägger only used local plants and geomorphology already familiar to the
visitors. buildings from previous building periods were preserved and re-
minded visitors of the zoos long tradition. thus, the landscape architecture
was definitely a soothing architecture, displaying familiar images of local
landscape formations. Preserving old buildings and garden views sustained
the zoo’s function as a comforting place of memories and identification.
644
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
brägger’s aim was that the recipients should not just stroll around the park
and houses, they were encouraged to get actively involved by focussing
on the influence of the landscape and especially on the appearances and
sounds of the animals. the garden was an artwork, which the visitors could
accept by ‘suspension of disbelieve’.18
brägger deduced from theories of landscape gardeners like Pückler-Muskau
or hirschfeld instructions for the design of naturalistic spaces. the design
concept was therefore rather traditional but also complex. the zoo, as a
scientific institution and a recreation area for leisure, followed a combination
of experimental and modern strategies. In contrast to the layout of modern-
ist structures, observations and manipulations of movement did not rely on
conditioning from subliminal effects. the manipulations aimed at reactivat-
ing visitors` memories of forms and moods of landscapes. condensed in a
park, the artistic simulation of landscape sceneries fostered a conscious,
synaesthetic perception.
the sociologist lucius burckhardt published articles about bräggers zoo
buildings in the architectural magazine Werk and underlined its status as an
artwork.19 later, burckhardt mentioned brägger`s garden design as a role
model for future landscape architecture. the unique design of the garden
corresponded to burckhardt`s studies on synaesthetic landscape perception.
according to burckhardt the recipient designed landscapes in his mind during
the process of walking.20
by including theories of landscape gardens, brägger’s design went beyond
the scopes of passive, contemplative visual perception. as in ‘experience Field
for the development of the senses’ that Kükelhaus presented at the german
Pavilion of the expo in Montréal in 1967, garden design was a pedagogic ap-
proach.21 hence, the didactic message of the zoo landscape aimed not mere-
ly on learning about animals but moreover learning about human senses.
this conservative approach of landscape design was a reaction towards
the growing swiss economy, clearly visible in the cities of basel and Zurich.
basel Zoo`s picturesque landscape design contrasted to scientific prepara-
tions of animal houses and the plans preparing the park for mass-consump-
tion. the audience and donors preferred environmental aesthetics in form
of visual congruency, as a transfer of landscape physiognomy and specific
moods, with which at least the educated public was acquainted.
LANDSCAPED BUILDINGS
brägger continued his design activities by producing layouts for the new ape
house and the vivarium, which contained several aquariums, terrariums
and a cooled exhibiting space for penguins. both designs were integral to
645
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
Figure 1. “ape house, Floor plan, Zoological garden of basel,” draft by Kurt brägger.
Source: archiv nachlass K. W. brägger, riehen
the new master plan that brägger drew-up in 1961. entering the build-
ings, the visitors were to experience the same spatial quality as during their
promenade through the landscape garden, including the circulation patterns
and sight-lines. the ape house followed the terraced slope of the northern
border of the zoo, whereas the vivarium, situated close to the main en-
trance, appeared like it was sunken in a pond. the small building sites made
it necessary that the projected buildings had to follow the morphology of the
terrain. large parts of the building structures were laid out as souterrain
spaces while the upper levels were camouflaged with slopes and vegetation.
the project of the ape house started in 1963 and the house opened in
1969 (Figure 2). the architect Frank sidler, who had worked for Frank lloyd
Wright’s office at taliesin West, improved brägger’s layouts because bräg-
ger’s artistry didn’t offer technical solutions. Whereas the modern buildings
on rectangular ground quickly guaranteed orientation, in the ape house,
the spatial structures followed polygonal patterns (Figure 1). Walls and cor-
ridors opened viewing axis and screened them also. the visitors changed
646
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
Figure 2. “ape house, gorilla enclosure,Zoological garden of basel,” photograph by anony-
mous. Source: archiv nachlass K.W. brägger, riehen
from one viewpoint to the next, usually an ape or monkey exhibit. the pro-
cess of movement changed view angles and offered sights of other exhibits.
although the arena-like shape of the ape house provided views for a large
amount of visitors, the viewpoints were individualised by leading the visitors
step by step along the walls. this manipulation of movement differed from
the way the modernist animal houses of the 1950s regulated the movement
of the public. Instead of pacing past exhibit galleries, the visitors to the ape
house would focus on one of the spaces brägger called chambers (Figure
2). Polygonal forms, interpreted by visitors as organic structures, lined the
movement along natural pathways and imitated a promenade through a
natural landscape. brägger sculpted climbing structures for the apes with
iron bars and hand-modelled concrete, with surfaces and structural forms
resembling tree trunks. the architectural structures and the furbishing en-
riched movement possibilities for both the apes and the visitors.22
More complex than the ape house was the construction of the vivarium. ar-
chitect Martin burckhardt realised the plans brägger drew in 1961. similar
to the ape house a polygonal one-way path led visitors through the vivarium
647
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES

4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES

rising slightly from the dim souterrain to surface-level of the outdoor pond,
and guide them to the exit on the first floor that released them into daylight.
brägger furnished the aquariums as organic appearing spaces, modelling
rocks out of epoxy.23 as a sculptor, however, brägger was not particularly in-
terested in living conditions of fish and therefore, gave them no hiding places
to escape the eyes of the spectators. contemporary architecture implying
organic structures as an abstract imitation of natural forms, were adapted to
brägger’s promenade patterns.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the analysis of the landscapes of the Zoological garden of ba- 1 lothar Philips and Peter dollinger, Un-
derstanding Animals and Protecting Them.
sel illustrates that the zoo was a site of scientific and artistic approaches of
About the World Zoo and Aquarium Con-
construction of environments. the example of basel Zoo shows the conflict servation Strategy (bern: WaZa 2006), 4.
between two different versions of designing and simulating natural space: on 2 christian Pfister, “the 1950s syndrome,”
the one hand, the model of environmental aesthetics, which is based on visual in Frank uekötter (ed.), Turning points in en-
compositions and which aims at the subjective perception of the visitor. on vironmental history. (Pittsburgh: university
of Pittsburgh Press 2010), 90-118.
the other hand, scientific principles interpret the environment in context of
3 james Fisher, Zoos of the World (gar-
methods of mass production and contemporary building types. at the begin- den city, ny: natural history Press 1967),
ning of the 1960s, with the construction of the high-buildings designed by an 181-2.
artist, both models, scientific and artistic, are combined at basel Zoo. the 4 adolf Portmann, “das halten von tieren
use of polygonal forms replaced the use of cubic structures, therefore, archi- in Zoologischen gärten,” Werk 11 (1956),
337-8.
tects could combine the abstract topological version of space with brägger’s
5 Ibidem, 337-8.
illusionist, atmospheric places. the artistic approach led to a zoological park 6 lilian Pfaff, “bühnen des sozialverhaltens.
which was recognised in the 1970s as the only zoo with a concise simula- die bauten von rasser + vadi im Zoo ba-
tion of environment. us-american zoo designers of the 1970s integrated sel,” Archithese 31 (2001), 36-9, here 37.
bio-systematic data to design parks according to environmentalist models.24 7 laura Penn and Markus gusset and ger-
ald dick, 77 Years: The History and Evolution
nevertheless, their aesthetics followed the same lines of eighteenth century
of the World Association of Zoos and Aquari-
landscape aesthetics. In the 1950s, the micro-cosmos of basel Zoo reflected ums 1935-2012 (gland: World association
social developments between mass production and co-occuring needs for of Zoos and aquariums, 2012), 63.
memorable places. the leading ideas on zoo design changed from modern 8 William M. adams, Against Extinction.
animal houses as installations, to landscape design which immersed the The Story of Conservation (london: earth-
scan, 2004), 49.
viewer and promoted polysensual spatial experiences of unique places. In
9 Ibidem, 51-3.
the design of basel Zoo, aesthetics of environmental preservation and con- 10 arthur dürig, “bauen im Zoo,” Werk 43
servational management were combined. this ambiguous combination well (1956), 39-40.
illustrates characteristics of environmental, holistic design theories of the 11 Werner blaser, Kurt Brägger Gartenge-
1960s, which, on the one hand, oscillate between environmental aesthetics, staltung/Landscape Design 1953-88 (ba-
sel: Friedrich reinhardt verlag 2002).
and, on the other hand, sustainable land use by technical innovation.25 the
12 Pfaff, lilian, “bühnen des sozialver-
complex tasks of zoo planners, such as providing latest methods of husbandry haltens. die bauten von rasser + vadi im
and regarding the visitors` demands for relaxation, forced the stakeholders Zoo basel,” Archithese 31 (2001), 36-9,
to combine theoretically conflicting ideas and led to experimental innovations. here 38.
13 heini hediger, Mensch und Tier im Zoo
(Zürich: albert Müller verlag, 1965), 74-5.
14 john seidensticker and james g.
doherty, “Integrating animal behaviour and
exhibit design,” in devra g. Kleiman (ed.),
Wild Animals in Captivity. Principles and
Techniques (chicago: university of chicago
Press 1996), 180-9, here 182.
15 Kurt brägger, “thoughts on Zoo de-
sign,” Anthos 10 (1971), 17-22.
16 blaser, Kurt Brägger.
17 designed wilderness and preserved
historical sites are often combined in eco-
logical design, for example in eric higgs,
Nature by Design (cambridge, Ma: MIt
Press), 265-89.
18 bob Mullan and garry Marvin, Zoo Cul-
ture (urbana and chicago: university of Il-
linois Press, 1999), 66.
19 For example, see lucius burckhardt,
“landschaftsgestaltung im basler Zoo,”
Werk 47 (1960), 233-35; and lucius
burckhardt, “umgestaltung im Zoologisch-
en garten basel,” Werk 52 (1965), 276.
20 lucius burckhardt, “gartenkunst
wohin?,” in burckhardt (ed.), Warum ist
Landschaft schön? Die Spaziergangswis-
senschaft (berlin: Martin schmitz 2006),
197-206, here 203-5.
21 anne luescher, “experience Field for the
senses: hugo Kükelhaus’ Phenomenology
of consciousness,” International Journal of
Art & Design Education 25 (2006), 67-73.
22 lucius burckhardt, “das neue affenhaus
im Zoologischen garten in basel: Planung
Kurt brägger,” Werk 56 (1969), 426-7.

648 649
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
23 lucius burckhardt, “das vivarium des
Zoologischen gartens basel, vollendet
1972,” Werk 59 (1972), 171-3.
24 christina May, “landscape habitat Im-
mersion. die Konstruktion immersiver
Zoolandschaften im Kontext des us-ameri-
kanischen environmentalism,” in Institut
650
für immersive Medien (ed.) Atmosphären:
Gestimmte Räume und sinnliche Wahrne-
hmung (Marburg: schüren 2013), 27-56.
25 For example, see Ian Mcharg, Design
with Nature (garden city, ny: natural his-
tory books 1969).
4. THEORETICAL AND CRITICAL ISSUES
4.1.4 Experiments on Thermal Comfort and Modern
Architecture: The Contributions of André Missenard
and Le Corbusier
IgnacIo reQuena ruIZ
École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture Nantes, France
danIel sIret
École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture Nantes, France
ABSTRACT
the early scientific researches into the thermo-regulative response of the
human body during the 1920s and the 1930s normalized thermal condi-
tions in working and educational environments to improve user’s perfor-
mance. the european and american contexts of housing promotion and
industrial development during post-war extended this approach to different
environments.
geographers, physiologists and engineers encouraged manufactured in-
door atmospheres that could overcome human shortcomings resulting
from environmental and biological conditions. climate, indoor atmospheres
and human body were interlinked to develop the ideal environment for mod-
ern society. Paradoxically, these original notions and researches have been
used to promote both bioclimatic and weatherized architectures along the
second half of the twentieth century.
the French engineer, researcher and industrialist andré Missenard was a
prominent contributor to the study on the thermo-physiology of comfort as
well as its experimental application to engineering and architecture. as a
collaborator of the architect le corbusier, his influence not only attempt-
ed technical fields, but to the whole notion of the ideal environment for
modern society. consequently, le corbusier’s works during the post-war
became a collective laboratory on hygro-thermal control, where passive
and active systems were constructs of what Missenard called ‘artificial
climates’.
based on an original research at the Foundation le corbusier archives
and the French national library, this communication presents the design
method of the grille climatique and the buildings for the Millowners as-
sociation (ahmadabad, India) and the house of brazil (Paris, France) as
study cases. as a result, the paper discusses the influence of physiology
and environmental technology in the early approaches to thermal environ-
651