Niemeyers legacy : between conservation and author rights

Danilo Matoso Macedo

Elcio Gomes da Silva
Ddecember, 2012

The legacy of Brazilian architect Oscar Niemeyer (19072012) includes left behind him over five
hundred buildings and more than a thousand projects. He was oOne of the most influential
architects of the twentieth century, with works in manymore than six countries other than Brazil
- Italy included, h. His followers range from Gordon Bunshaft to Zaha Hadid, from Wallace
HarisonHarrison to lvaro Siza and Salvador Calatrava. AThe mere record relation of his oeuvre all
those works would take pages, a whole issue of an architectural magazine, let alone ato discussion
on their state of conservation of each one of them. However, iIts ist possible, however, to identify
some characteristic common elements and to number a few paradigmatic examples when it comes
to the preservation of his work. In fact, Niemeyers legacy as cultural heritage, to be listed and
preserved as such, comes from its roots.

Some Modern brazilian modern architectsmasters, speciallyespecially Lucio Costa (19021998),

but also and thus Niemeyer , were involved in the creation of the Servio do Patrimnio
Histrico e Artstico Nacional, the ( Brazilian National Heritage Institute, ) in the thirties. They
legitimated their own architecture through a historical Nnationalist speech that rooted modern
brazilianBrazilian contemporary architecture in the simplicity and lyricism of colonial tradition.
They also usedexercised their strong political influence to prematurely list as heritage some works
authored by themselves such as the Ministry of Education, inaugurated in 1944 and listed in
1948, or the church in Pampulha Church, inaugurated in 1946, and listed in 1947. Dealing with
Niemeyers architecture as cultural heritage involves acknowledging a work both as definitely
hisNiemeyers and as cultural heritage, and thus, defining correct authorship is paramount.

Niemeyer stated in 1958 that he considered as his own works only those to which he could give
regular attention, and present them as such in technical publications and magazines.1 However,
tThere are many buildings with that result of documented original drawingsesigns by himthe
brazilian master which were not published , and which are absent from the ldocumentationist of
works held by the Fundao Oscar Niemeyer the fFoundation, inin charge of his Niemeyers
proprietary author rights. Such is the case, for instance, of the small ERH residence in Belo
Horizonte designed in 1952, modified during its constructionbuilding, and recently demolished by
the owners when local authorities started deliberating about its listingfirst thought of listing and
preserving it as Niemeyers work. Even though Niemeyer never denied the authorship of some
works, the lack of public awareness, added to athe somewhat natural tendency of not considering
preserving recent architecture worthy of preservation, led to the destruction of fine pieces, such as
the 1943 Pedro Aleixo residence (1943), demolished in the early eighties to give place to a larger
building, or the Julia Kubitscheck Ppublic school School- a replica of another one built in
Diamantina in 1951 -, torn down in 1978 due to the opening of a new avenue construction. Even
works as important as to be published still in the design phase went through alterations suffered
from changes still while being designed or built as in the 1957 Hansaviertel Buildingblock
(1957) in Berlin, modified by the Ggerman developers; or in the 1995 State Library (1995) in Belo
Horizonte, only partially built.

The most common changes, as in any building, are due to the adaptation of uses not originally
foreseenmeant for it. As Such is the case of the 1940 Casa do Baile (1940) in Pampulha -
converted into a museum through a renewal process in 2003 , or the 1956 Brasilia Palace Hotel
1
Niemeyer, Oscar. Depoimento. Mdulo 9, (feb. 1958): 4. He continues: Even so, amongst such works I find some
which, perhaps, would be subject to inevitable modifications during execution, as they were to be the fruits of real
state speculation.
(1956), ruined by a fire in the late seventies and rebuilt from in a different fashion based on a new
Niemeyers design in the twenty-first century. In fact, the hiring of Niemeyers office for an
intervention in order to intention of ensureing author rights, and thus a building's authenticity, by
hiring Niemeyers office for an intervention almost never resulted inmeant its conservation, (and
even less its restoration) of the building. More It often, it meant a renewal operated by the man
himself years later. One of the most recent cases involved the polemical reform of the Planalto
Palace in 2010, when a staircase was added, upper floors were radically changed, and new
illumination and white blinds added a newness value to the transparent building, along with a
visible strip of green bulletproof glass on the presidents office. In some instancescases, the
modificationschanges were so radical that Niemeyer hasd been accused of deliberate destruction of
his ownearly work, as in his late National Museum and Library, in work in the Esplanade of
Ministries in Braslia , with newly designed National Museum and Library;2 or in the proposal of
the partial literal demolition of part of the 1950 Ibirapuera Park canopy (1950)Canopy, in So
Paulo, to accommodate athe new auditorium designed in 2005. A exemplary case is the polemical
reform of the Planalto Palace in 2010, when a external staircase was added, upper floors were
radically modified, and new illumination and white blinds added a newness value to the
transparent building, along with a visible strip of green bulletproof glass on the Presidents office.
Some buildings, of course, are in a state of decay mostly due to the incapacity of theirits owners or
managers economical incapacity to keep it. Such is the case of the 1950 Praa dos Esportes in
Diamantina, or the 1943 Golf Club (1943) in Belo Horizonte or the Sports Plaza (1950) in
Diamantina, in , which need of urgent restoration.

Many of Niemeyers buildingsworks, due to (or despite) some minor interventions, presently show
a good state of conservation, even when their function has been radically changed. Among them,
Such is the case of the Pampulha CassinoCasino, built in 1943 and converted into an art museum in
1947, or the Ibirapuera buildings, in So Paulo, designed in 1950 to hold the city four-hundredth
anniversary exhibition, and with a diversity of many uses today - including offices, museums and
the So Paulo's BienalBiennial pavilion. Some buildings arewere simply well conserved, without
major restorations, while fulfilling their original role, as in the case of the apartments 1954
residential block in the Praa da Liberdade Square (1954), named after the architect. As a rule,
however, well conserved buildings are the result of one or several restoration actions. Some of them
were very successful in bringing back the original lan of the buildings, while solving some original
constructive problems, as in the case of the 1956 Alvorada Palace (1956), in Braslia - which
undergone a large renewal between 2004 and 2006; or as in the case of the 1943 Pampulha Church
(1943), whose structural problems were finally solved in 2005 after at least four restorations. In
these instancescases, it should be we may highlighted that, the role of Niemeyers office was limited
to the approval of proposals a restoration developed by restoration offices specialized officeson the
subject.

As with in the cases of the legacy of other Mmodern masters, such as Le Corbusier, the confusion
between public and private interests when dealing with Niemeyers legacymodern heritage did not
contribute for the development of consensual principles. Arguably, some of his Niemeyer-renewed
works - such as the Planalto Palace will be even more problematic in the future, as an object
of systematic preservation. Should the original form from the fifties be pursued? Or should the
architects 2010 intervention be considered as authentic Niemeyer? If they were listed based only
on authorship, how can later and controversial modifications by the author himself be
disqualified? The foundation basis for the advancing maturation of those principles is, as always, is
well-documented historical research.

2
Cf. Ouroussoff, Nicolai. Even If His Own Work Isnt Broken, a Brazilian Architect Fixes It. New York Times,
dec. 26, 2007, sec. Architecture. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/arts/design/26niem.html?_r=1.
List of figures and captions
1. ERH residence Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 1952
Demolished in 2011

2. Pedro Aleixo residence

Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 1943 Demolished

3. Julia Kubitschek School

Belo Horizonte, Brazil, ca. 1950 Demolished in 1978

4. Hansaviertel Interbau Berlin, Germany, 1955

5. State Library
Praa da Liberdade, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 1955

6. Casa do Baile Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 1943

7. Brasilia Palace Hotel

Brasilia, Brazil, 1956
Destroyed in 1978 Renewal in 2006. Architect: Oscar Niemeyer

8. Planalto Palace
Brasilia, Brazil, 1957
Renewal in 2010. Architect: Oscar Niemeyer

9. Cultural Complex of the Republic : National Museum and Library

Brasilia, Brazil, 2004

10. Ibirapuera
So Paulo, Brazil, 1950 AutitoriumAuditorium, 2004. Architect: Oscar Niemeyer

11. Sports PlazaPraa dos Esportes

Diamantina, Brazil, 1950 State of conservation in 2002

12. Golf Club

Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 1943 State of conservation in 2002

13. Cassino
Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 1940 Restoration in 1994. Architects: Sculo 30 State of
conservation in 2002

14. Niemeyer Building

Praa da Liberdade, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 1954

15. Palcio da Alvorada Palace

Brasilia, Brazil, 1956
Restoration in 2004. Architect: Srgio Brasileiro

16. Pampulha Church

Brasilia, Brazil, 1943
Restoration in 2005 (by several institutions).
Authors
Danilo Matoso Macedo
Architect at the Chamber of Deputies, president of Docomomo Braslia Chapter

Elcio Gomes da Silva

Architect at the Chamber of Deputies, secretary of Docomomo Braslia Chapter