University of California Berkeley - Blue and Gold Yearbook (Berkeley, CA)

Page 26 text:

EH CO a B Q 03 a ,a oa PL, o a a co a 18

Page 25 text:

by the Board of Regents of the unconditional offer of Mrs. Phoebe A. Hearst in Octo- ber, 18%, to contribute the funds necessary to obtain by international competition, plans for the Utting architectural improvement of the University grounds at Berke- ley. The formulation of a practicable scheme or programme, setting forth the com- pleted idea and embodying the objects and terms of the Competition, as well as the requirements of the University, was left to a Board of Trustees, to whom the exe- cution of the project in its entirety was entrusted, and of which Regent J. B. Rein- stein and Professor William Carey Jones are the active members. To the wisdom of these far-sighted gentlemen, whose self-sacrificing zeal in behalf of the whole idea has been solely prompted by motives of genuine interest in the progress of California ' s State University, the results of the Competition are a testimony. Mr. Maybeck was sent to Europe in the interests of the scheme. He succeeded in interesting the foremost men in the architectural art throughout England, France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. Much information as to the best mode of pro- cedure was gathered by Mr. Maybeck. In conjunction with Monsieur Guadet, of Paris, he outlined a programme for the Competition. Many of those architects who were unable to enter the Competition enriched the idea with the benefit of their experience in similar competitions on lesser scales. The broad-minded policy inaugurated by Mrs. Hearst in providing for an Inter- national Competition, testifying to her love for the State for whose University the best plan in the world should be procured, was again followed in the personnel of the Jury, which was also made international. The universal approval of this innovation of foreign competitors and foreign jurors and later of a foreign prize-winner for an American prize, bespeaks a wholesome tolerance of the people of our State for all things that contribute toward the purely ideal in art a sign that the greed-for-gold spirit that entered California in 1849 no longer dominates our people. The members of the Jury were chosen on account of the pre-eminence each had attained in his respective country. Monsieur J. L. Pascal, of Paris, the greatest teacher of his art in France, was chosen especially on account of his unusual experi- ence as juror in architectural competitions. Herr Dr. Paul Wallot, of Dresden, has risen to the first place among the architects of Germany. His greatest work is the new Reichstag Building in Berlin, which is the chief architectural monument of Prussia. Mr. R. Norman Shaw, of London, is by common consent of all the authorities, the leading architect of England. Upon the illness of Mr. Shaw, he was ably represented on the Jury of the Final Competition by Mr. John Belcher, of London, a member of the Council and Fellow of the Royal Institute of British Architects, and Examiner in Architecture at South Kensington. He has written a notable work on The Late Renaissance in England. Mr. Walter Cook, the American architect on the Jury, is a graduate of Harvard, and studied six years in Europe, when he returned to New York where he has since been associated with one of the largest firms of that city. The layman of the Jury was Mr. J. B. Reinstein, representing at once the University, the Regents and the Trustees. His close identification with the scheme from the time of its inception, as well as his thorough knowledge of the needs of the University, made him especially qualified to act as a Juror. A double Competition was provided for, the Preliminary to be held in Antwerp, 17

Page 27 text:

Belgium, and the Final in San Francisco. One hundred and four sets of plans were submitted at the Antwerp Competition, by architects from every part of the globe, and from these plans eleven sets, by a process of successive elimination, were unani- mously selected by the Jury as especially meritorious, and entitling their authors to enter the Final Competition. These architects were liberally compensated, one-half the amounts, however, being retained until the submission of the final plans. The Competition was prepared and cared for by the officials of Antwerp, who used every diligence to make it a success, and who received and entertained Mrs. Hearst and the Jurors with genuine magnificence. Nine of the architects successful at Antwerp were able to avail themselves of the opportunity of visiting the University site at the invitation of Mrs. Hearst. Monsieur E. Benard and Herr Rudolph Dick alone presented plans at the Final Competition with- out first having inspected the grounds. This fact is perhaps an especial mark of the superiority of the genius of the first of these gentlemen, Monsieur Benard, to whom the first prize was awarded. The public exhibition of the plans in the Ferry Building will never be forgotten by the sixty thousand persons who viewed this most extraordinary sight, whose like had never been seen before in any land. The grand scale upon which the plans were produced, as well as the accuracy and finish of their execution, and the manner of their display, astounded the laymen and were a source of wonder and inspiration to the student of architecture. The general excellence of all the plans submitted is especially noted in the official report of the Jury. The noted architects who acted as Jurors were received and welcomed by their colleague, Regent Reinstein, and their visit to Berkeley on the same day will long be remembered by all those privileged to witness the introduction to our beloved Uni- versity of the men who were indirectly to determine her future form. Prior and sub- sequent to the judgment of the plans, they were the favored guests of Mrs. Hearst. Full liberty was allowed the competitors in solving the problem in hand, inasmuch as no limitations of time, space or cost were imposed. The problem was thus ideal- ized in order to give full sway to the best possible solution that each architect could suggest, and to give no competitor any undue advantage. A definite stipulation of years, acres and dollars would convey different conceptions to the minds of different men, and so give an unfair advantage to the one whose conception most nearly corre- sponded to that of him who made the rule. Even were it desired to prescribe the above limits, they would be most difficult to ascertain. The reduction of the problem to earthly dimensions and human possibilities was to come in turn. As a result the eleven schemes presented seem and really are idealized cities of learning of stu- pendous proportions. Accordingly, it has been said that a substantial annuity would be consumed to keep the Gymnasium, proposed by Monsieur Benard, clean and in re- pair, and furthermore, that such a building will never be erected. Exactly so! The Phoebe A. Hearst Architectural Competition enlisted the services of the architect best fitted to solve this great problem for this great State. It found the man, not the plan. The adoption of the plan as revised by the author is left to the Regents. And who is the man who is to mold to such a great extent the future of the University? Monsieur E. Benard is a Frenchman, and studied at the Ecole des Beaux 19