ABSTRACT
This recognition, however, did not include much appreciation of his views on architecture, which were sometimes rejected outright. But neither did this imply a split, or conflict, between two parties. On the contrary, there was a wide variety of views on architecture - which, as one Rotterdam architect interpreted it, was merely a reflection of the spirit of the times: ‘A period such as we are living in, one of transition and conflict over material matters, and which in every part of society is characterized by turbulence, friction and opposition, cannot but manifest itself as turbulent in architecture too.’ 1 Architectural criticism reflected this same diversity. The literary journal De Portefeuille (The Portfolio), in an article called ‘Art and criticism’, stated in 1889: ‘among architects themselves, there are opposing views on the direction in which architecture is going. Furthermore, we must recognize that it is very difficult, when so many are involved, to achieve general acceptance of one set of opinions regarding their art.’2 Indeed, it was only in the small circle around Cuypers that the pursuit of uniform views was cultivated.
