In the spring of 1914, a few months before the cataclysm of the First World War, Europe’s metropolises were not only glittering with extravagantly lit department-store window displays and redolent with the scent of roses in the light, spacious salons of bourgeois apartments. The cities of this period also stank of dank, dark, overcrowded rooms in which poverty, disease and lack of any hope of change condemned their inhabitants to the misery of vegetation. The war that was already looming was to change all this, however. The salons were reduced to straightened circumstances, but serious thinking about reform was picking up speed. Eventually, the idea of building cheap but comfortable flats on a mass scale that was born at the turn of 20th century, after 1920, began to be put into practice, above all in German-speaking lands and Czechoslovakia, but also in Poland. One of the organisations that promoted them, at housing exhibitions it staged itself, was the German Werkbund (Deutscher Werkbund), founded in Munich in 1907. But behind its first exhibition of model houses and flats, the “Weissenhofsiedlung”, held in Stuttgart in 1927, was a more than century-long tradition of hard graft in the cause of reform.
The housing situation in Europe’s cities had been deteriorating since the very earliest period of industrialisation and the vast influxes of people from the countryside this brought. The new suburbs rapidly stratified into “better” and “worse” areas, while the standard of tenement accommodation varied greatly, from large apartments with salons and comfortable bedrooms, to hovels that could scarcely answer to the name of “homes”, in dark basements and cramped outbuildings.
In the mid-19th century the dire standard of much of the living accommodation rapidly came to the attention of doctors, who were the only professionals acutely familiar with the lot of the poorest patients. Next to take note were journalists and social activists, who drew the gaze of public opinion to the grimmest corners of large cities through the press, pamphlets of various types, flyers, and eventually serious analyses. A vast role in building awareness of the living conditions of the poor was played by writers, in particular English authors, and above all Charles Dickens. London, in those days Europe’s largest metropolis, provided all too much material for social and political analysis. A pioneering work in this field was Friedrich Engels’ 1845 book The condition of the working class in England, which contained graphic descriptions of London’s slums. Illustrated books, such as Blanchard Jernold’s London. A Pilgrimage, published in 1872 and featuring 180 prints by Gustave Doré depicting the acute poverty in the suburbs of the British capital, and in later periods photography, also helped to develop society’s sensitivity to this problem.
Ideas for decent homes for workers had been mooted in England and France as early as in the first half of the 19th century, but not until the end of that century did architects and urban planners, under the influence of public health experts, social reformers and philanthropists, start to produce properly designed, complex solutions. Once again the English were the pioneers: in 1898 Ebenezer Howard published his book To-morrow – A Peaceful Path to Real Reform, better known from its second edition in 1902, retitled Garden Cities of To-morrow. This watershed publication proposed surrounding metropolises with a belt of satellite towns designed for populations of around 32,000. This, he believed, would prevent the mushrooming property speculation in large cities and the emergence of slum districts. The houses in these new towns were to be modelled on the typical British terraced house. The ideal unit was a modest bungalow or at most a two-storey house with a pitched roof, and a small garden for growing the vegetables and keeping the animals needed to support a modest household. These towns were to be divided into zones by function, with residential areas separated from industrial zones by green belts – hence the name “garden cities”. Cheap land, cooperative ownership and good administration were to be the secrets of the success of these garden cities as an alternative to urban slums. The idea of a small house with a garden in suburbia instead of a flat in a tenement house or apartment block became instantly popular, and has remained so to this day. Before long, however, it transpired that this was still too expensive a solution to reach the very poorest. This was one of the impulses for the exhibitions at which a range of housing types were presented in an attempt to come up with cheap, functional design and furnishing solutions for both single-family houses and multi-unit properties.
Letchworth, England’s first garden city, founded in 1903, was the venue for the first such housing show, The Cheap Cottages Exhibition, held in 1905 on the initiative of John St. Loe Strachey, the publisher of the venerable paper The Spectator, and the proprietor of The Country Gentleman and Land and Water Magazine. The main purpose of these exhibitions was to propose solutions for cheap homes costing no more than £150 to build. A site was set apart for the construction of 130 fully furnished units of all types, from the cheapest, for just £100, to dearer ones aimed at a wealthier clientele. There were bungalows and two-storey houses, built in a variety of materials from traditional brick, through wood and combinations of the two (half-timbered), to breeze blocks and prefabricated sections, a groundbreaking concept at the time. The buildings referenced the vernacular style above all, in accordance with the tenets of the Arts and Crafts Movement. They were designed to offer proof that it was possible to build cheap, yet attractive and comfortable homes, the most basic and cheapest of which were within workers’ means. Thus, the exhibition gave hope for fulfilment of the postulates of the social and housing reformers.
The exhibition attracted a huge amount of interest for the times. It was visited by 60,000 people, and hundreds of journalists reviewed it for both the British and foreign press. The houses themselves proved an inspired investment for the initiators of the garden city idea, because they were incorporated into the estate there and occupied at once. Of the original 130 houses, 124 are still lived in today. The success of the first exhibition gave rise to a second, organised two years later, but on a smaller scale, with only a few of the units from that event having been preserved. The local museum in Letchworth has information and displays on both projects. Subsequent similar events were held in London in 1908, 1910, 1912 and 1913.
These latter shows were sponsored by the Daily Mail, the main spiritus movens behind the idea. The mandate of these Ideal Home Exhibitions broadened out from simply presenting solutions for cheap housing, to showcasing designs for ideal living, including furnishings – and not only for the poorest. Thus, it represented a significant departure from the concept presented in Letchworth, and had little to offer the working-class poor. Doubtless under the influence of the Arts and Crafts Movement, the Ideal Home Exhibition was designed as a forum for presenting a new life style, and as such to influence the development of a new model of family life, and in a wider sense, to remodel the structure of society.
In the context of these exhibitions in England we might also recall the first Polish home exhibition, the centenary of which was commemorated with the recent exhibition Za-mieszkanie 2012 in the Krakow branch of the National Museum. In the period around 1910–1912 interest in British architecture and urban planning was running particularly high in Krakow in the wake of the decision by the Austrian government to abolish Krakow Fortress and do away with the ring of fortifications around the city. This decision offered hope for the construction of new districts and the implementation of Howard’s garden city idea. The urban planning competition announced in 1910 for the design for a Greater Krakow was one of many similar projects underway across Europe during the same period, in cities including London and Berlin. In these spreading cities, architects and municipal authorities planned to incorporate healthy districts full of fresh air, sunlight and greenery, with the aim of the competitions being to attract new ideas and concepts.
In light of the emerging prospect of designing plans for a modern Krakow, Ebenezer Howard himself was invited to visit the city, and in July 1912 gave a lecture on his own ideas in Esperanto (sic!). An article in Architekt, the leading Polish architecture journal published in Krakow, reported: “The visit of E. Howard, he who from the matchless designs of progressive dreamers of sunshine and happiness for our declining humanity has fashioned a reality that is close and accessible to all, could be of rather momentous significance to us here in Krakow. Not because this man has told us anything new from the field of the principles behind the ‘Garden City’ idea – for all that he included in his paper is relatively familiar even to the wider public here, and relevant lectures and pamphlets have been produced in possibly even more exhaustive form for our society. But this is not the essence here. For it is not hard to explain to even the most backward that it is pleasant to live in a nice little house of one’s own, with a private little garden of one’s own, with a magnificent park a few steps away, and not to have to smell the smoke of thundering factories. But the less backward will say: Give me this nice little house and garden for the price of my dear daily life. And it is this that E. Howard has shown us, and in conditions far harsher than those in which we find ourselves.”
Howard’s time in Krakow coincided with a homes and gardens exhibition called Exhibition of architecture and interiors in garden settings. Above all, this was the brainchild of the architects and artists in the Delegation of Polish Architects and the Polish Applied Art Society, and its purpose, as written above, was to raise the artistic standard of everyday life. “Born out of reminiscences of the Polish cottage and reinforced by a knowledge of the movement abroad, it puts into practice dreams that, until recently still considered utopian, have today found widespread application. England is leading by example in this respect.”
The overture to the exhibition itself was an architecture competition announced in 1911 for designs for single-family and multi-family houses; these plans and scale models were displayed in a separate pavilion. The four best entries were also erected on a 1:1 scale; these were a town house in the style of a “Polish manor”, a house for a craftsman (carpenter), a house for a worker, and a farmhouse and farm. All were fully furnished, showcasing the potential of the country’s industry. Another pavilion housed various types of construction materials produced in the Polish lands under all three partitions. The exhibition was viewed by thousands, and although it made a loss, it was the first Polish show of model homes and contemporary furnishings. The buildings were never used as homes, however, and burned down during the First World War, in 1915. Nevertheless, the Krakow exhibition, like the London show and similar events in other European cities, aroused widespread interest in modern types of houses and flats, which was of immense significance for exhibitions held after the war. Foremost among these, as instruments propagating avant-garde architectural thought, were the six shows organised by the Werkbund in Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Czechoslovakia during 1925–1932.
The Werkbund was one of the leading associations in Europe bringing together architects, artists and industrialists with a common goal: to ennoble industrial design by departing from historical forms and manufacturing simple, cheap goods. The artistic ideals behind the organisation were, as I have mentioned above, similar to those of the English Arts and Crafts Movement, but brought even greater pragmatism and matter-of-factness to design. The idea was to replace plushes, heavy drapes and knick-knacks constantly requiring dusting with simple, unpretentious implements, designed with artistic flair, but cheap and widely available. The change in the home interior was to go hand in hand with a shift in the model of family life. Particular emphasis was placed on the role of the woman, who was to have a well-planned kitchen and practical furniture, thus saving her time, including time for herself. That said, housewives were extremely critical of some of the more innovative ideas – two sides to modern design.
In 1918 the Werkbund issued a manifesto in which it called for the unity of art and the people: “Art should not be a luxury for a chosen few, but happiness and life for the masses.” This was the source of its members’ profound conviction of the need for education through art. High art must no longer be the privilege of the upper strata, they declared; children in elementary schools should be given some form of artistic instruction. Beautiful, modern, practically designed school buildings themselves would help to develop good taste in the young. Thus shaped, the “new citizen”, ideal and happy, would have the potential to contribute to creating a more beautiful, more perfect world. These idealistic, even utopian views were at the heart of the home exhibitions organised by the Werkbund.
The models proposed at the exhibition Die Wohnung (The Home), held in conservative Stuttgart in 1927, were showcased in advance on the posters designed for the event. The question “How to live?”, printed over a photograph of a typical 19th-century salon slashed through in bold red strokes, was answered on another poster which used the collage technique, depicting a photograph of the Weissenhofsiedlung fair site under construction, along with details of modern homes and interiors. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, one of the pre-eminent European architects of the day and a member of the artistic avant-garde group Neues Bauen (New Building), formulated a conception of this estate as a sculpture sited in a picturesque hillside location. This complex of 29 buildings, ranged asymmetrically, comprised several different types of homes: 13 single-family houses, 8 terraced houses, 2 semi-detached houses, and 36 flats in multi-family buildings. They were designed by a hand-picked team of 16 internationally famous architects and leading interior designers. Le Corbusier was also invited, although the town authorities would not give their consent to the participation of a “Swiss from a French canton”, as tantamount to a “Frenchman, and as such an enemy”.
All the houses had flat roofs and unadorned white, plastered walls, and were designed on the “inside out” principle. Thus they were asymmetrical and irregular in shape, reflecting the functions of the various sections of the house. They also had large, sunny verandas. This architectural concept was repeated in all the subsequent exhibitions. Its critics, of which there were many, ironically dubbed the estate “the Arab village”, complaining that the houses were more reminiscent of Jerusalem than of Germany, where they were “culturally alien”. As in Letchworth, here too there were experiments with structures and materials. Steel or concrete skeleton structures familiar from industrial and commercial construction, facilitated a vast variety of variations on the ways in which dividing walls could be installed: as retractable, folding, or curtain walls. This meant that the same elevation could be used to show several spatial solutions. The houses featured a new type of furniture, such as practical built-in wardrobes comprising fold-away beds and dressing tables, as well as easy-to-move items made from steel tubing. The modern home was not to be cluttered: there was to be the minimum of furniture, and certainly no complete suites such as “bedrooms” or “dining rooms”; as the programmatically fundamental question “How to live?” was directed at urban dwellers who were mobile, single or with a small family, who tended to sleep rather than live in these avant-garde rooms. A particularly extensive range of variants was proposed by Mies van der Rohe in his three-storey multi-family house with sun terrace.
This architecture was to be standardised and prefabricated, offering cheap, quick-build homes that nonetheless were to be well constructed and beautiful according to the canon of the new aesthetic ideals. Thus the Weissenhof Estate in Stuttgart may be said to have aspired to two ideals: a social utopia linked to the creation of the “new man”, and an extreme crispness of architecture combined with advanced building technologies. These were the guiding principles behind all of the Werkbund’s exhibitions, although they were not implemented in all areas.
The Stuttgart exhibition sparked a quest for new forms of residential architecture as well as ways to present them in Werkbund architectural exhibitions outside Germany. Just a year later, the Czechoslovak Werkbund (Svaz československého díla), founded in 1920, held a small show in Brno comprising 16 different types of houses (Brno-Žabovřesky, Nový Dům colony). This was a private initiative rather than a municipal one, as the Stuttgart event had been, and was not international in scope. Nevertheless, although only ten architects took part (one from Prague, the others from Brno), they were members of the Czech avant-garde elite, among them Bohuslav Fuchs and Jiří Kroha. The aims of the exhibition were similar to those in Stuttgart: among them to create a prototype for a house suitable for mass production, and to test various types of materials.
A return to the Stuttgart idea came in 1929 in Breslau [now Wrocław, Poland] (Breslau Grüneiche, Wohnung und Werkraumausstellung – Breslau Green Oak Street. Home and workplace, popularly known as the abbreviation WuWa). Adolf Rading and Heinrich Lauterbach, the godfathers of the event, were members of the Silesian branch of the Werkbund, and the whole exhibition was staged using local labour. As the title Home and workplace suggested, the aim here was to showcase not only living space but also appropriately designed workplace solutions. A separate pavilion housed offices for professionals including a doctor, a lawyer, a merchant and an engineer, as well as model artisan workshops and a farm and farmhouse. There was even a model commercial street. The Breslau exhibition had a broader range of accompanying displays than any of the other shows, with over a dozen sections. There were displays showing the process of planning and designing a house, and showcasing various types of construction materials, colour schemes, and furnishings. There was a section showcasing the work of the Bauhaus from Dessau, including projects by artists including Josef Albers, Paul Klee and Wassily Kandinsky. There were several information boards extolling Breslau’s modern residential estates and presenting urban development plans. This exhibition offered the widest variety of types of buildings, including a kindergarten designed to offer early education based on the philosophies of Friedrich Fröbl and Maria Montessori, and a small sanatorium for consumptive children.
In all, 32 buildings were constructed, comprising a total of 132 residential units. In addition to detached, semi-detached, terraced and apartment houses, there was also a “house for singles and childless couples”, designed by Hans Scharoun, and an apartment building by Adolf Rading originally designed as a 10-storey tower block. These were representative of the boarding house idea so popular with the Werkbund. Both of the latter were highly original in their architectural form: Scharoun, who was fascinated by transatlantic liners, lent his “Ledigenheim” (house for singles) the form of a ship, while Rading created a beautiful shape reminiscent of a sculpture. Rading’s building was a response to the idea of the “new man”, who was young, dynamic and mobile, and put down no roots. Its skeleton structure meant that each of these small apartments (57 m²) could be designed individually, while common rooms were included to cater to the need for a social life. Of all the homes on show at the six exhibitions, the designs by Scharoun and Rading were by far the most interesting and most suitable for replication in our own times – indeed, they cry out for a revival! The Breslau exhibition had a fairly interesting, original spatial layout, thanks in part to its site being adjacent to the city’s biggest park. It proved too modern for Breslau’s conservative citizens, however, and, like the post-exhibition site in Zurich, it became an artists’ colony. Among those who moved in there were architects and lecturers at the city’s academy of fine arts, including Oskar Schlemmer of the Bauhaus. Interestingly, the Polish press devoted an unusual amount of reportage to the Breslau exhibition, which undoubtedly influenced the character of the Na Kole exhibition in Warsaw in 1935.
The 1931 exhibition in Zurich (Siedlung Neubühl in Zürich Wollishofen – Neubühl Estate in the Wollishofen district of Zurich) was conceived entirely differently. The pragmatic Swiss had no pretensions to an “architectural manifesto”. Instead, this was a relatively homogeneous complex of 121 terraced houses and multi-family buildings owned by a housing cooperative. In view of the situation of this estate, on a slope overlooking Lake Zurich, the rather long buildings were constructed in stepped sections, which created the ultimate effect of variety and attractiveness in spite of the fairly monotonous parallel spatial layout of the rows of houses and their repetitive elevations. Neither did this housing exhibition have any experimental dimension. Its picturesque location ensured that the houses rapidly found tenants: artists, musicians, writers, and among others also the well-known architecture historian Sigfried Giedion. Today, it is home to a sizable immigrant community.
The last two estates built on the initiative of the Austrian and Czech Werkbund in Vienna and Prague departed significantly from the organisation’s original principles. The plan in Vienna was to build 64 small single-family homes in a range of configurations – detached, terraced and semi-detached, while the sole theme in Prague was detached villas. The Vienna exhibition (in the Lainz district of Vienna in 1932), designed by the leading Austrian avant-garde architect Josef Frank and staged with the participation of both Austrian and foreign artists, including Richard J. Neutra, boasted the most interesting layout of all the Werkbund’s shows, betraying echoes of the urban planning theories of another famous Viennese, Camillo Sitte. The pretty inner street, which broadened out into irregular little squares, offered the potential for effective positioning of the houses as both foreground and background elements of the vista, while the gardens were a salient element of the urban interiors. In the other exhibitions, the gardens (and greenery in general) had tended to be a “necessary add-on” rather than an equal component of the whole with the architecture. In fact, this element of the space, which had really not played a significant role in any of the other exhibitions, was actually the greatest value of the Vienna event, which was designed to purvey not only architectural proposals but also ideas for something more fundamental, although immanently connected: beautiful space.
The problems finding residents for the Brno residential development forced a different form on the Czech Werkbund’s next initiative – a home exhibition in Prague. Its organiser, the leading avant-gardist Pavel Janák, managed to procure a highly desirable site with a view of the Old Town and the Vltava. In terms of its setting, then, the Prague event was able to compete on equal terms with those in Stuttgart and Zurich. Výstavní kolonie na Babě, or Sídliště Na Babě (Baba Exhibition Colony, Praha – Dejvice) had been in the planning since 1928, but financial problems arose that ultimately postponed the construction of this exclusive villa quarter, with 33 houses, until 1931. While it was certainly avant-garde architecture in the “international” style, there was nothing on offer for the less wealthy. Specific (rich) buyers selected plans that were right for them. At this exhibition there were no homes designed by Adolf Loos, Jiři Kroha or Bohuslav Fuchs – their proposals simply did not find clients. The small size of the plots and lack of originality in the street layouts are the main negatives of this show. The Baba Estate highlighted the potential threats to non-standard ideas: without the support of enlightened municipal authorities and secure financing, larger-scale architectural projects have no chance of being built. This Prague district is also at odds with the idea that was at the heart of the English exhibitions: developing varied types of buildings and homes for different social strata. What was created in the Czech capital was an elite quarter that has retained this attribute even today.
The global economic crisis at the turn of the 1920s and 1930s cast a shadow over the idea of the exhibitions, bringing problems letting and selling the houses (the exception was the Swiss project). After 1932 the idea of the Werkbund exhibitions, so closely linked to promotion of modernism and the Neues Bauen movement, died a death. In Germany, Hitler’s rise to power was followed by the removal of avant-garde architects from commissions, or their emigration. The same pattern was repeated in Austria. In Czechoslovakia, on the other hand, the architectural projects faced such formidable financial problems, that no more were organised.
But the Werkbund idea of these home and living shows did find continuation in Poland, above all in the 1935 Na Kole home exhibition in Warsaw. The organiser on this occasion was neither a daily newspaper nor a municipal council, but Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego (the Bank for the Domestic Economy), whose remits included financing residential construction. The site of the fair was populated with 20 fully furnished houses and eight more designed to showcase various stages of the construction process, which was a new concept in relation to the Werkbund exhibitions. The houses fell into two stylistic groups: conservative (with pitched roofs) and modernist (with flat roofs). This fair continued to grow in subsequent years, and is still held today.
The houses built for these home exhibitions were let or sold, and in time they began to be altered, extended and repainted. After 1945 they saw hard times; things were difficult in Vienna and Stuttgart, and both projects had suffered serious damage during the Second World War. Nonetheless, in 1956 Weissenhofsiedlung was inscribed on the list of protected buildings, but it was not until the 1970s and 1980s that Germany, Austria and Switzerland really began to appreciate prewar modernism and the fundamental significance of the Werkbund housing exhibitions for the development of architecture even after the war. The first renovation work was begun at this time, but not until the early 21st century were some of the houses properly reconstructed and others given a thorough facelift. In 2006 the house designed by Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret in Stuttgart, and recently painstakingly restored (including the furniture), was opened at the Weissenhofmuseum, dedicated to the exhibition, while in Vienna general renovation of almost all the houses was begun in 2010. On the 80th anniversary of the opening of the Werkbundsiedlung a superb exhibition was held in the Museum der Stadt Wien, accompanied by an excellent catalogue. The project in Zurich has been consistently preserved virtually unchanged.
The estates in the post-communist countries, those in Wrocław (the former Breslau), Brno and Prague, look mediocre by comparison, as socialism did not favour the care of recent architecture, particularly prewar, “bourgeois” architecture. These houses were altered extensively, sometimes beyond recognition (such as the house by Lauterbach and the apartment block by Rading in Wrocław, and the house designed by Josef Štěpánek in Brno). One exception is the building designed by Scharoun in Wrocław, which was painstakingly renovated (although unfortunately the original windows were replaced with PVC ones), down to the original colour scheme in the interior, the two separate flats it comprised, and even some of its furnishings. It was not until after the expansion of the European Union in 2004, however, that all six Werkbund exhibitions began to be treated as parts of a whole. In 2010 a group of art historians from Wrocław together with the Bavarian branch of the Werkbund had the idea of proposing all six together as an entry on the UNESCO World Cultural and Natural Heritage List. At present, efforts are underway to have the European Heritage Label awarded to the Wrocław and Stuttgart exhibition sites.
The Werkbund exhibitions have contributed to a tradition of housing and living shows that was already over a century long, initiated with the noble goal of improving living standards and comfort in overcrowded cities. There was undoubtedly an element of social utopia about them, but in practical terms they contributed to the development of prototypes of a variety of forms of housing that are still in use today. They were also among the salient manifestos of modernism, and were created with the involvement of leading representatives of the architectural avant-garde. They inspired other housing exhibitions in both the East and West, and were at the forefront of a broad reform movement that promoted healthy, cheap, functional and attractive homes. The impact of the architectural solutions employed and the ideas developed, some of which today seem at least obvious, has been crucial to the architectural history of our continent. The six Werkbund exhibitions are undeniably a significant element of our European cultural heritage, and should be perceived – and protected – as a whole. Recently, the cities that hosted these architectural exhibitions have launched a joint initiative to have the European Heritage label awarded to these complexes.
Anna Hanaka, “Wystawa budowlano-mieszkaniowa Banku Gospodarstwa Krajowego na Kole w Warszawie w 1935 roku – ku poprawie budownictwa mieszkaniowego”, Kwartalnik Architektury i Urbanistyki, 2012, no. 3 (npn).
Karin Kisch, The Weissenhofsiedlung. Experimental Housing built for the Deutscher Werkbund Stuttgart 1927, Stuttgart 1992.
Ueli Marbach, Arthur Rüegg: Werkbundsiedlung Neubühl in Zürich–Wollishofen 1928–1932. Ihre Entstehung und Erneuerung, Zürich 1990.
O nové Brno. Brněnská architektura 1919–1939, ed. Zdeněk Kudělka, Brno 2000.
100 Jahre Deutscher Werkbund 1907/2007, ed. Winfried Nerdinger, München 2007.
Andrzej Szczerski, Wzorce tożsamości. Recepcja sztuki brytyjskiej w Europie Środkowej około roku 1900, Kraków 2002.
Stephan Templ, Die Werkbundsiedlung Prag 1932 / The Werkbund Housing Estate Prague, Basel – Berlin – Boston 1999.
Manfred Ulmer, Jörg Kurz, Die Weissenhofsiedlung. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Stuttgart 2006.
Jadwiga Urbanik, WUWA 1929 –2009. Wrocławska wystawa Werkbundu, Wrocław 2009.
Werkbundsiedlung Wien 1932. Ein Manifest des Neuen Wohnens, ed. Andreas Nierhaus, Eva-Maria Orosz, Wien 2012.
Maria Zientara, “Wystawa architektury i wnętrz w otoczeniu ogrodowym w Krakowie w 1912 r.”, Krzysztofory. Zeszyty Naukowe Muzeum Historycznego Miasta Krakowa, 1991, no. 18, pp. 100–110.
 “Miasta-ogrody”, Architekt, Y:13, 1912, bk 8, pp. 82, 83.
 R.P., “Wystawa Architektury i wnętrz w otoczeniu ogrodowem w r. 1912”, Architekt, Y:13, 1912, bk 6 –7, p. 61.
 100 Jahre Deutscher Werkbund 1907/2007, exh. cat., ed. Winfried Nerdinger, München 2007, p. 135.
 Karin Kisch, The Weissenhofsiedlung. Experimental Housing built for the Deutscher Werkbund Stuttgart 1927, Stuttgart 1992, p. 11.
Copyright © Herito 2020