197Bernardo Bernardi, Family Houses, KumrovecBernardo Bernardi, Obiteljske kuće, Kumrovec196 Family Houses, Kumrovec, Croatia, 1953-1955

About Prejudice, or Bernardi in Kumrovec, 1955

Bernardo Bernardi nije doslovce slijedio niti jedan od stvarnih tipo-loških i morfoloških predložaka, nego ih je slobodno reinterpretirao oblikujući i gradeći vlastitu inačicu zagorske ‘hiže’

Bernardo Bernardi did not literally follow any of the actual typological and morphological examples, but freely reinterpreted them, creating and building his version of a ‘hiža’, a house typical for this region

Borko Vukosav (bv)Arhiv Kabineta za suvremenu arhitekturu Arhitektonskog fakulteta u Zagrebu / Cabinet for Contemporary Architecture at the Faculty of Architecture Zagreb (afa)

fotografije photographs by

Obiteljske kuće, Kumrovec, Hrvatska, 1953.-1955.

O predrasudama ili Bernardi u Kumrovcu 1955. godine

¶ In the context of Croatian modern architecture, the work of Bernardo Bernardi, a member of the Exat 51 group, is primarily linked to top-quality furniture design and interior design in general. At the time, in the 1950s and 1960s, Bernardo Ber-nardi played an important role in Croatian (Yugoslav) archi-tecture in that area of architectural work because he was one of the authors who established a standard of modernly con-ceived, designed and furnished living space. Looking through the prism of his interiors – like the interiors of the Workers’ Public University in Zagreb or Hotel Maestral in Brela – the local, socialist, living space became compatible with and matched the value of the best examples in the world at the time. It is therefore interesting to see how Bernardi responded to the task set before him in 1955 of constructing two small family houses in the village of Kumrovec, the most important village in Yugoslavia, at a time when the state leadership was in favour of modern architecture as a sign of resistance to socialist realism that was an awkward reminder of the botched adventure with the Sov iet Union. ¶   L ike

¶ Unutar konteksta hrvatske moderne arhitekture autorski opus Bernarda Bernardija, člana grupe Exat 51, povezuje se ponajprije s vrhunskim dizajnom namještaja i općenito obli-kovanjem interijera. Tada, pedesetih i šezdesetih godina proš-log stoljeća, Bernardo Bernardi je upravo u tom području arhitektonske djelatnosti odigrao važnu ulogu u hrvatskoj (jugoslavenskoj) arhitekturi, jer je bio jedan od autora koji su uspostavili standard suvremeno koncipiranog, oblikovanog i opremljenog životnog prostora. Gledano kroz prizmu njegovih interijera – sjetimo se ovdje barem onih iz Radničkog i narod-nog sveučilišta u Zagrebu ili hotela Maestral u Brelima – domaći, socijalistički, životni prostor sukladan je i jednakovrije-dan tadašnjim vrhunskim svjetskim primjerima. Zanimljivo je stoga vidjeti na koji način Bernardo Bernardi odgovara na postavljeni zadatak da 1955. godine izgradi dvije manje obi-teljske kuće u Kumrovcu, dakle u najvažnijem selu u Jugoslaviji, u doba kada državni vrh podupire modernu arhitekturu kao znak opreke socrealizmu koji neugodno podsjeća na neuspjelu avanturu sa Sovjetskim Savezom. ¶ Poput svojih svjetskih

arhitekt architect

napisaowritten by

Tomislav Pavelić

Bernardo Bernardi

198 199Bernardo Bernardi, Family Houses, KumrovecBernardo Bernardi, Obiteljske kuće, Kumrovecoris, number 82, year 2013oris, broj 82, godina 2013

Primjeri seljačkih kuća iz regije Hrvatskog zagorja

Examples of rural houses from the Zagorje region

many of its counterparts around the world, mature modernist architecture in 1950s Croatia was mostly defined by a contra-diction towards historic building styles which it saw not only as (political) conservativeness, but also as a doubtless sign of absolute reaction. We could therefore say that the ideal of modern architecture (and society) lay in achieving a state out-side historical quality, one reached by means of progress. This tendency is most evident in authors who iconoclastically renounce, due to aesthetic and/or ideological reasons, any form of figuratively expressive ballast. At the same time, and probably because this is where you can feel the proximity of a constant source, most (great) modernist architects built their poeticism on vernacular and/or traditional architecture, more or less systematically and consciously. Of course, in modestly skilled authors, that link is casual and exhausted in appearance, but the masters integrate it into the very essence of the work’s structural principles, broadly speaking. As a doubtless master of the architectural design of space (the annual award of the national architects’ association for this segment of architectural activity was named after him), Ber-nardo Bernardi made an open connection with the local build-ing tradition when he designed the family houses in Kumrovec. The very first glance at the houses reveals their source, not only because of their appearance, but because of their char-acteristically elongated volume, the use of a simple gable roof and porch as their key design and disposition factors, and finally, because of the choice of local building materials based on structural, not decorative, issues. ¶ Since there is an eth-nological park today in the immediate vicinity of Bernardi’s houses in Kumrovec, with various yet congeneric examples of village houses from the Hrvatsko Zagorje region, we can undoubtedly say that Bernardo Bernardi did not literally follow any of the actual typological and morphological examples, but freely reinterpreted them, creating and building his version of a hiža, a house typical of that region. In that sense it is inter-esting to see the modifications that Bernardi made to the traditional construction elements and structural principles, but also to follow the mutation of expressive elements and composition principles of top-notch modern architecture that is achieved when it is housed in traditional, local conditions. ¶ Biographical coincidences are interesting. Whether we want to admit it or not, incidental circumstances shape our experi-ences as well as our prejudices. Of course, the reason for this is the inevitability of mixing the subjective and objective in every aspect, the feeling and understanding of things and phenomena. Architectural works are no exception here. ¶ I ‘met’ Bernardo Bernardi as a high school student, because his

srodnika, zrela modernistička arhitektura Hrvatske pedesetih godina prošlog stoljeća određuje se najčešće u opreci spram povijesnih stilova građenja koje doživljava ne samo kao (poli-tički) pasatizam nego općenito kao nedvojbeni znak svekoli-kog nazadnjaštva. Moglo bi se stoga reći da je ideal moderne arhitekture (i društva) dosizanje stanja izvan povijesnosti u koje će je (ih) odvesti progres. Takva tendencija najočitija je kod autora koji se ikonoklastički, iz estetskih i/ili ideoloških razloga, odriču svakog oblika figurativnog izražajnog balasta. Istodobno, vjerojatno zato što se upravo tu osjeća blizina stvarnog izvora, gotovo da nema (velikog) modernističkog arhitekta koji, više ili manje sustavno i osviješteno, ne gradi svoju poetiku na vernakularnoj i/ili tradicijskoj arhitekturi. Naravno, kod manje vještih autora ta je veza prigodna i iscr-pljuje se u pojavnosti, dok se kod majstora, najšire shvaćeno, ugrađuje u samu bit strukturalnih načela djela. Ne čudi stoga što se Bernardo Bernardi, kao nedvojbeni majstor arhitekton-skog oblikovanja prostora (štoviše, autor po kome je sukladna godišnja nagrada nacionalnog udruženja arhitekata i dobila ime), u projektiranju kumrovečkih obiteljskih kuća otvoreno povezuje s lokalnom graditeljskom tradicijom. Već prvi pogled na kuće očituje njihov izvor, ne samo izgledom, nego kroz nji-hov karakterističan izduljeni volumen, kroz uporabu najjedno-stavnijeg dvostrešnog krova i ‘ganjka’ kao njihovih ključnih oblikovnih i dispozicijskih faktora te konačno kroz struktu-ralnu, a ne dekoratersku uvjetovanost odabira lokalnih gra-đevnih materijala. ¶ Budući da se danas u neposrednoj blizini Bernardijevih kumrovečkih kuća nalazi etno park s različitim, ali istorodnim primjerima seljačkih kuća iz regije Hrvatskog zagorja, možemo nedvojbeno ustvrditi da Bernardo Bernardi nije doslovce slijedio niti jedan od stvarnih tipoloških i morfo-loških predložaka, nego ih je slobodno reinterpretirao obliku-jući i gradeći vlastitu inačicu zagorske ‘hiže’. Interesantno je u tom smislu na tim kućama pratiti modifikacije tradicijskih gradbenih elemenata i strukturalnih načela kojima se Bernardi koristio, no također i mutaciju izražajnih elemenata i kompo-zicijskih načela vrhunske moderne arhitekture do koje dolazi kad se ona udomljuje u tradicionalne, lokalne uvjete. ¶ Zani-mljive su biografske koincidencije. Htjeli mi to priznati ili ne, slučajne okolnosti oblikuju naše doživljaje, ali i predrasude. Naravno, razlog je taj što neizbježno dolazi do miješanja subjektivnog i objektivnog pri svakom viđenju, osjećanju i shvaćanju stvari i pojava. Arhitektonska autorska djela i opusi nisu u tome izuzetak. ¶ Bernarda Bernardija sam posredno ‘upoznao’ još kao srednjoškolac, jer mi je njegova supruga, gos-pođa Zdenka Bernardi, bila razrednica u 3. i 4. razredu i preda-vala Povijest civilizacija te držala izbornu nastavu o modernoj

arhitekturi. Važno je također reći kakva je bila ‘Bernardica’ – naime, tako smo je zvali. Tada, na samom početku osamdesetih godina prošlog stoljeća, kad smo mi, njeni učenici, intenzivno živjeli Novi val i mnoge druge istodobne i podjednako uzbud-ljive stvari ili pak bili dijelom omražene ‘amorfne mase’ štrebera u prva tri reda školskih klupa, ona je prvenstveno bila fina gos-pođa besprijekornog stila. Za njene zrele godine taj stil je bio taman toliko provokativan (samosvjesno, naravno) da uzburka žabokrečinu u zbornici našeg Obrazovnog centra za jezike. Kao razrednica, Bernardica je bila lagano i svisoka distancirana od naše životne realnosti, no također, kao nastavnica, iskreno pre-dana onome što je predavala pa je kod nas, svojih učenika, dis-tanciranih od svih i svega ‘dosadnog’, uspjela probuditi osobni respekt i interes za svoj nastavni predmet. Ukratko, bila je bjelosvjetska profesorica povijesti umjetnosti, riječju – šik. Znao sam to već tada, premda mi je bilo svejedno. ¶ Ipak, nije mi bilo svejedno što i kako Bernardica priča o modernoj arhi-tekturi, jer sam već tada intenzivno osjećao, a pomalo i shvaćao, koliko je arhitektura moćna kad oblikuje životne prostore.

wife, Mrs Zdenka Bernardi, was my class teacher in the 3rd and 4th grade, and was teaching the History of Civilizations and optional courses in modern architecture. It is important to mention what ‘Bernardica’ (i.e. ‘the Bernardi woman’), as we called her, was like. At the time, the very beginning of the 1980s, when we, her students, were either intensively experi-encing the New Wave movement and the other equally excit-ing things happening at the time, or were a part of the detested ‘shapeless mass’ of nerds sitting in the first three rows in school, she was most of all a fine lady with impeccable style. At her age, her style was just sufficiently provocative (self-consciously, of course) to stir the backwaters in the teacher’s lounge of our Language Education Centre. As a class teacher, Bernardica was slightly distanced from the reality of our lives, but at the same time sincerely devoted to the classes she was teaching. Consequently, she managed to stimulate in us, her students who were distanced from everything and everyone ‘boring’, a personal respect and interest for the sub-ject she was teaching. In short, she was a sophisticated

(bv)

(bv)

200 201Bernardo Bernardi, Family Houses, KumrovecBernardo Bernardi, Obiteljske kuće, Kumrovecoris, number 82, year 2013oris, broj 82, godina 2013

presjek section

professor of art history, or, in other words – chic. I knew that even at the time, but I didn’t care. ¶ However, I cared about what and how Bernardica was talking about modern architec-ture, because even then I intensely felt, and somewhat realized, how powerful architecture can be when it forms living spaces. In other words, with the help of Zdenka Bernardi, I intensely and unreservedly dived into the ocean of modern architecture. Once a week, in the dark of the basement demonstration room of visual arts, in an environment that was unbelievably laid-back for schools at that time because we, the students, lay on mats and multi-coloured pillows and Bernardica was sitting like a lady among us on the floor, slides from an over-head projector brought the works of the greats of modern architecture to us. These slides were, of course, from a private collection, not some impersonal teaching tools. That is why we had a chance to see not only magnificent architecture but some scenes that belonged more to the family album, as well. For example, we saw a slide of the Bernardis, standing among huge desert cacti in Taliesin, cordially hugging the Wrights. You might say that such information is trivial since it is not relevant for the understanding of architecture, but because of such slides modern global architecture stopped being just a lexicographic fact or a cryptic personal passion. It became tangible, reachable, because it was an integral part of other people’s reality of life that I had a chance to peek into. In their way, those family photos became a precursor of my own pho-tographs taken on the architectural pilgrimages I soon took. However, I have never had a chance to meet, let alone hug any

Dakle, posredstvom Zdenke Bernardi ja sam tada intenzivno i bezrezervno zaronio u ocean moderne arhitekture. Jedanput tjedno, u polumraku podrumskog kabineta likovnih umjetnosti, u nevjerojatno ležernim okolnostima za tadašnje škole jer smo mi, učenici, ležali po strunjačama i šarenim jastucima, a Ber-nardica je damski sjedila među nama na podu, na slajdovima projiciranim starinskim projektorom redala su se djela velikana moderne arhitekture. Ti slajdovi su, naravno, bili privatni, a ne tek neka impersonalna nastavna sredstva. Zbog toga smo, osim zanosne arhitekture, vidjeli i prizore koji više pripadaju obitelj-skom albumu. Primjerice, vidjeli smo slajd na kojem se u Talie-sinu, među golemim pustinjskim kaktusima, bračni par Bernardi srdačno grli s bračnim parom Wright. Moglo bi se reći da su takve informacije tričarije jer su nebitne za shvaćanje arhitek-ture, no posredstvom takvih slajdova moderna svjetska arhi-tektura je za mene prestala biti tek leksikografskom činjenicom i kriptičnom osobnom strašću. Postala je opipljiva, dohvatljiva, jer je bila sastavnim dijelom tuđe životne realnosti u koju sam imao priliku zaviriti. Na svoj način su te tuđe obiteljske slike postale najavom mojih vlastitih snimljenih tijekom skorih arhi-tektonskih hodočašća. Mada, priznajem da se nisam sreo ni grlio ni s kojim od svojih osobnih arhitektonskih heroja. ¶ Razredničinog supruga, arhitekta Bernarda Bernardija (koji je za nas tada bio tek ‘nekakav arhitekt’), vidio sam uživo samo jednom. Bilo je ljeto je, pripeka na zagrebačkom Glavnom kolodvoru. Čekali smo polazak vlakom na maturalac u Tisno na otoku Murteru. Razrednica, to jest Bernardica, čiji je stil i u tim ‘terenskim’ uvjetima bio besprijekoran, išla je niz peron prema

nama, zoološkom vrtu tinejdžera. Gledala nas je svisoka i pri-jekorno, svoje egzaltirane i prtljagom pretrpane đake, no bez komentara. Bila je odlučna svoju ulogu razrednice odraditi do kraja, besprijekorno, ništa je u tome nije moglo spriječiti. Korak iza nje išao je gospodin u svijetlom odijelu, očito muž. I on je bio šik, ako je to za muškarca sa stilom u kasnim srednjim godi-nama pristojno reći. Uz njega su išli talijanski hrtovi, sa svake strane po jedan. Poput pohlepne djece hrtovi su lizali svaki svoj sladoled s korneta koje za njih u ispruženim rukama držao on, Bernardo Bernardi. Očito je i on bio tu kako bi odigrao vlastitu ulogu pa za njega mi, đaci, nismo postojali. Zatečeni tim pri-zorom (koji je, priznajem, dostojan vrhunskog filmskog seta) i svjesni vlastite nevidljivosti poprilično neuvijeno smo kikotali i pogledavali se, unatoč svojoj ‘odraslosti’, ‘načitanosti’ i

of my personal architectural heroes. ¶ My class teacher’s hus-band, the architect Bernardo Bernardi (who was ‘some archi-tect’ for us pupils back then), I saw in person only once. It is the middle of summer, scorching hot at the main railway sta-tion in Zagreb. We are waiting for our train to take us on our graduation excursion. We are going to Tisno on the island of Murter. Our class teacher, Mrs Bernardi whose style is impec-cable even in these ‘field’ conditions, is coming down the plat-form towards us, the teenage zoo. Looking from above and reprovingly at us, her highly-strung and luggage-burdened students, she doesn’t make any comments. She is determined to play her role of class teacher to the very end impeccably, nothing can stop her from that. A gentleman in a light suit is walking one step behind her; it is obviously her husband. He is also chic, if it is appropriate to say such a thing about a styl-ish, middle-aged man. He is leading two Italian greyhounds, one on each side. Like greedy children, the hounds are licking ice creams from the cones held out for them by the man,

(bv)

tlocrt

plan

202 203Bernardo Bernardi, Family Houses, KumrovecBernardo Bernardi, Obiteljske kuće, Kumrovecoris, number 82, year 2013oris, broj 82, godina 2013

should build its meaning and significance on its own. However, it is apparent that we are all more or less powerless in freeing ourselves from the subjective part of the view (feeling) every time, so we breed our own prejudices, at least until we become aware of them and make an effort to reject them since we have outgrown them. ¶ Fortunately, for quite a long time, I saw the scene in which I ‘met’ architect Bernardi much differ-ently than I did back then, in 1982. Today, I understand that the beasts, i.e. the pedigree dogs, must have been overheating. So, since they had to play their role in that scene from Fellini’s

(afa)

(afa) crtež: Bernardo Bernardi

drawing by Bernardo Bernardi

sklonosti prema ‘izuzetnom’. ¶ Mada su uistinu marginalne, jer su posljedica osobnih perceptivnih i kognitivnih predispozicija pri doživljavanju ili su naprosto slučajnosti, biografske koinci-dencije bitno utječu na način na koji se uobličavaju naši doživ-ljaji svega, pa tako i arhitektonskih djela. Zbog tog latentno negativnog preduvjeta koji je posve proizvoljno jednom ogra-ničavajući, a drugi put oslobađajući, svi naši pogledi, osjeti, osjećaji i shvaćanja rezultat su složenog međudjelovanja svih čimbenika uključenih u formiranje shvaćanja, a shvaćanja se međusobno razlikuju, poput nas. Zato jedan subjektivan

Bernardo Bernardi. He is obviously here to play his own role, so we, the students, don’t exist in his eyes. Surprised by the scene (admittedly, worthy of a high-class movie set) and con-scious of our own invisibility, we rather openly giggle and exchange glances, despite all our ‘maturity’, ‘being well-read’ and tendency towards the ‘exceptional’. ¶ Although truly mar-ginal, since they are either a result of personal perceptive and cognitive predispositions in experience or are simply random, biographical coincidences have a significant effect on the for-mation of our experiences of everything, works of architecture included. Due to this latently negative precondition, which is completely random in once limiting and once liberating, all our views, sensations, feelings and realizations are a result of a complex interaction of all the factors involved in the creation of understanding, understandings being different just as peo-ple are. That is why the teenager’s subjective view of an archi-tect, i.e. the exterior of his persona, can influence a teenager’s view of the architect’s work, despite the fact that he already knows it should be relieved of the ballast of personality, at least if he wants to make it an objective view. A work should have a life of its own, it shouldn’t be a mere ‘hostage’ of its creator and/or whoever encounters it. In other words, a work

204 205Bernardo Bernardi, Family Houses, KumrovecBernardo Bernardi, Obiteljske kuće, Kumrovecoris, number 82, year 2013oris, broj 82, godina 2013

(AFA)

La Dolce Vita as well, resolving the dogs’ problems with ice cream was funny, and not (just) snobbish. I understand also that the role of Bernardo Bernardi then and there was primar-ily marital, only incidentally architectural as well, because everyone plays multiple roles in their life, depending on the complexity of their own personality. I did not understand that at the time, so the worm of doubt started gnawing at me and made a crack that for a long time and rather relentlessly sepa-rated the architect from the architect’s personal style. In other words, motivated by teenage exclusivity, at that moment I started feeling a permanent antagonism towards ‘noble’ archi-tects who condescendingly and reprovingly look at the ‘imma-turity’ of the reality around them. Although I have to admit that the scene involving Mr and Mrs Bernardi at Zagreb’s main station in the summer heat was a masterful ‘piece’ on its own, it caused me to keep asking myself why architects feel the need, or even obligation, to reaffirm their professional com-petence with their own personal style. ¶ We know what it meant for any architect back in 1955 to be given the chance to build anything in Kumrovec, the birthplace of Marshal Josip Broz, Comrade Tito. Bernardo Bernardi was not building something unimportant. He was building model family houses for the ‘hard-working people of socialist labour working in villages’, i.e. for officials of the nearby elementary school that was being built at the same time based on a design by Neven Šegvić. It was an issue of professional prestige to build then and there, an opportunity to offer, or even impose, a model house for the entire country. Probably, Bernardi’s houses in Kumrovec might have been ultimately modern, they might have been a sign of uncompromising progress that did not forget the villages. They might have been, but the author decided to make modest hiže seen only by the experts as con-temporary answers to a timeless topic. That is why those houses not only look ‘ordinary’, that is what they are. They can be like that because their author, Bernardo Bernardi, did eve-rything he could to make the transition from ‘Krleža’s mud’ to the ‘sunny landscapes of progress’ as natural as possible, meaning as little self-sufficient and self-satisfied as possible. ¶ There is no need to point out that the personal, but also professional, style of Bernardo Bernardi and the lifestyle of the tenants of his houses in Kumrovec were very different. They couldn’t have been the same, or even similar, because their respective starting points were completely different. Still, the end result of that design and construction symbiosis indi-cates that it was just the opposite. It indicates that my former prejudice towards the professional competence of Bernardo Bernardi was based on an imperfect, albeit not necessarily

pogled tinejdžera na arhitekta, to jest na vanjštinu njegove osobnosti, može bitno utjecati na tinejdžerovo viđenje arhi-tektovog djela, mada i on već tada zna da bi ono trebalo biti oslobođeno balasta osobnog, barem ako ima ambiciju biti objektivnim viđenjem. Djelo bi trebalo imati vlastiti život, a ne biti tek ‘taocem’ stvaratelja i/ili onoga tko se s njim susreće. Trebalo bi samo za sebe graditi vlastito značenje i značaj. No očito smo svi više ili manje nemoćni baš uvijek osloboditi se subjektivnog dijela pogleda (osjeta), zato uzgajamo svoje pre-drasude, barem dok ih ne osvijestimo, pa se potrudimo odbaciti ih jer smo ih nadrasli. ¶ Srećom, scenu u kojoj sam ‘upoznao’ arhitekta Bernardija odavno vidim različito nego tada, 1982. godine. Danas shvaćam da je beštijama, to jest plemenitim psima, bilo vruće. Zato je, kad su već i oni morali odigrati svoju ulogu u tom prizoru iz Fellinijevog Slatkog života, rješavanje psećeg problema sladoledima bilo duhovito, a ne (samo) sno-bovsko rješenje. Shvaćam također i da je uloga Bernarda Ber-nardija tada i tamo bila prvenstveno bračna, a tek usputno i arhitektonska, jer svatko u životu igra bezbrojne uloge, već prema kompleksnosti vlastite osobnosti. Tada to nisam shva-ćao pa se u mene uvukao crv sumnje i napravio pukotinu koja je zadugo i nepomirljivo razdvajala arhitekturu od osobnog stila arhitekta. Drugim riječima, potaknuta tinejdžerskom isključi-vošću u meni se tada probudila trajna odbojnost prema ‘finim’ arhitektima koji svisoka i prijekorno gledaju na ‘nedoraslost’ realnosti oko sebe. Premda bi se moralo priznati da je prizor Bernardijevih na zagrebačkom Glavnom kolodvoru za ljetne pripeke sâm po sebi bio vrhunsko ‘autorsko djelo’, ta je scena učinila da se trajno pitam zbog čega arhitekti i arhitektice osje-ćaju potrebu, čak obvezu, da osobnim stilom potvrđuju svoju profesionalnu kompetenciju. ¶ Znamo što je tada, davne 1955. godine u Kumrovcu, rodnom selu maršala Josipa Broza, druga Tita, za bilo kojeg arhitekta značilo dobiti priliku da gradi bilo što. Bernardo Bernardi nije radio bilo što, već ogledne obiteljske kuće za ‘pregaoce socijalističkog rada na zadatku u selu’, to jest za rukovoditelje obližnje osnovne škole koju je istodobno gra-dio Neven Šegvić. Graditi tada i tamo bilo je pitanje profesio-nalnog prestiža, mogućnost da se ponudi ili čak nametne model za sukladne kuće bilo gdje diljem zemlje. Mogla je, vjerojatno, Bernardijeva kumrovečka kuća biti i ultimativno moderna, to jest mogla je biti znakom beskompromisnog progresa koji ne zaobilazi ni selo. Mogla je, a ipak je autor odlučio da bude skro-mna zagorska ‘hiža’ koju tek znalci nedvojbeno prepoznaju kao suvremen odgovor na bezvremenu temu. Zbog toga ta kuća ne izgleda ‘obično’, nego uistinu jest takva. A može biti takva jer je njen autor, Bernardo Bernardi, učinio sve što je mogao da prijelaz iz ‘krležijanskog blata’ u ‘sunčane krajolike progresa’

učini najprirodnijim, a to znači najmanje što može samodos-tatnim i samozadovoljnim. ¶ Nema potrebe isticati da su se osobni, ali i autorski stil Bernarda Bernardija i životni stil kori-snika njegovih kumrovečkih kuća bitno razlikovali. Oni nisu mogli biti isti, čak niti slični, jer je baš sve u njihovim polazišnim pozicijama različito. A ipak, izgrađeni rezultat te projektantske i graditeljske simbioze pokazuje suprotno. Pokazuje da je moja nekadašnja predrasuda prema profesionalnoj kompetenciji Bernarda Bernardija bila temeljena na manjkavoj, premda ne nužno i krivoj pretpostavci. ‘Bijelo odijelo’ kakvo je on najvje-rojatnije nosio i te 1955. godine očito nije bilo prepreka da duboko pojmi istinsku bit konteksta (i fizičkog i mentalnog) u kojem je dobio priliku djelovati. Osobni stil je pritom ostao ono što jest i što treba biti – očitovanje drugima vlastitog viđenja sebe, a ne prepreka da se vidi različitost drugog, kori-snika svog autorskog djela. Takva sposobnost odmaka od par-tikularne pozicije osobne uvjetovanosti svjedoči ljudsku i autorsku veličinu Bernarda Bernardija. Zbog toga smatram da te kumrovečke kuće nisu samo njegove najbolje samostalne građevine, nego su, a to je za nas prvenstveno ovdje važno, mogući putokaz primjerenog djelovanja u zatečenom kontek-stu na svim razinama. ¶ Iz današnje perspektive koju određuje gotovo apsolutna dominacija neoliberalnog tržišnog modela koji podnosi samo jednoznačnost brenda, uspješnost arhitekta (autorska, društvena, financijska…) mjeri se prečesto stupnjem sukladnosti njegovih arhitektonskih rješenja s njegovim osob-nim stilom. Zbog toga je odveć često nužan preduvjet za (nadahnuto) djelo poklapanje ili tek sukladnost osobnog stila arhitekta s korisnikovim (naručiteljevim). Teško je stoga zami-sliti da današnji autori, s pretenzijom podjednakoj onoj Ber-narda Bernardija, mogu pristupiti svim projektnim zadacima u tolikoj mjeri otvoreno, a to znači samozatajno u svim stva-rima koje ih se izravno, prema profesionalnoj odgovornosti, ne tiču, to jest kakve sami ne koriste. Upravo na takvoj sposob-nosti odmaka koji se osniva na stvarnom osjećanju drugog, svejedno je li ono urođeno ili naučeno zbog vjere da i taj drugi, korisnik, ima pravo ustrajati na svojoj različitosti neovisno od toga je li ‘primitivan’ ili ‘napredan’, ‘neuk’ ili ‘načitan’, i tako dalje, počiva veličina Bernardijeve kumrovečke intervencije i njega kao autora te, posredno, i njega kao osobe.

faulty, presumption. The ‘white suit’, which he most probably wore in 1955 as well, obviously did not stop him from deeply understanding the essence of the context (both physical and mental) in which he was given a chance to operate. In doing so, his personal style remained what it needed to be – a mani-festation to other people of how he saw himself, and not an obstacle stopping him from seeing the diversity of others, the actual users of his work. Such an ability to detach himself from the particular position of personal determination bears wit-ness to the human and professional greatness of Bernardo Bernardi. That is why I think these houses in Kumrovec are not only his best standalone buildings, but also, and this is of great importance to us here, a possible waypoint of appropriate action in the found context, on all levels. ¶ From today’s per-spective, defined by the almost absolute domination of the

neoliberal market model that tolerates only the uniformity of the brand, the success of an architect (professional, social, financial…) is too often measured by the grade of compatibility of his architectural solutions with his personal style. That is why it is too often a necessary precondition to have a match, or just compatibility, between the architect’s and user’s per-sonal styles in order to create an (inspired) work. It is therefore hard to imagine that today’s authors, with a pretence similar to that of Bernardo Bernardi, can approach all projects with the same openness, being humble in all things that don’t con-cern them directly, because of their professional responsibility, or things they don’t use themselves. It is this ability to make such detachment, based on a real feeling for others, regardless of whether it is inherent or learned due to faith that the other, an actual user, has the right to insist on his own diversity, no matter if he is ‘primitive’ or ‘advanced’, ‘ignorant’ or ‘well-read’ and so on, that constitutes the greatness of Bernardi’s inter-vention in Kumrovec and of himself as an author, and indirectly as a person.