The competition for the expansion and renovation of Beit Lohamei Haghetaot (Ghetto Fighters’ Museum) at Kibbutz Lohamei Haghetaot has ended. Competition entries were to include design plans for the central exhibition area, the auditorium, lobby, shop and service areas, and to weigh the possibility of an additional visitors’ center within the museum complex. The designers were required to emphasize the uniqueness of the museum’s 1950s design by architect Shmuel (Milek) Bikeles. Proposals were to preserve the museum’s original exterior and spatial division through a dialogue with Bikeles’ design principles. It was emphasized that the competition was intended to select the architect, not his design entry.

 

            Seven architecture offices participated in the competition: Efrat-Kowalsky with Dror Aviram, Alex Grynbaum, Bracha and Michael Chyutin with Moshe Atzmon, Mansfeld-Keht, Peter Keinan, Schwartz–Besnosoff, and Allenby 19 Architects.

            The judges’ panel included Simcha Stein (Chair), Galia Bar-Or, Yona Fisher, Miri Keddem, Professor Siona Shimshi, and architects Batia Donner, Chilik Arad, and Shimon Shapira. Finalists were Mansfeld-Keht, Studio Allenby 19 and the winners, Efrat-Kowalsky with Dror Aviram.

            Competition participant Dr. Michael Chyutin explained the background and historical significance of Bikeles’ design at Beit Lohamei Haghetaot:

            The play Eitiel the Black - the first translation into Hebrew of Shakespeares Othello was published in Poland in the end of the 19th century. On the cover in Yiddish letters appeared the words 'Translated and Improved by Yitshak M. Zelkinson.' This literary abuse of Shakespeare crossed Chyutins mind when his office was invited to participate in the competition.

            'Seeking a contemporary solution for an architecturally unique building of such national importance naturally raised many questions. The first step was to try and understand Bikeles world outlook, and to identify the influences and motivators of his work.

            'Bikeles was born in Poland, the son of a Jewish doctor whose Socialist-Zionist education led him to immigrate to Israel and to join Kibbutz Tel Yosef. Bikeles was a painter, musician, philosopher and influenced by the Modernism and Neoclassic style of the Austro-Hungarian culture that dominated his architectural education. He strove to produce an ideal architecture for the utopian socialist society that was developing in Israel. These characteristics are expressed in all his works, especially in the design of the Holocaust and Resistance Heritage Museum at Beit Lohamei Haghetaot (Fig 1 on page 30).

            'Bikeles initial scheme for the cooperative settlements in Israel, and those of others such as  Richard Kaufmann, Alezander Baerwald, and Arieh Sharon, were influenced by Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City, and Bruno Tauts center-periphery approach (Figs 2,3). Taut stated that the city center – the crown – where all the cultural and social activities take place should be allocated at the sites topographical peak, with everything else at the periphery (Fig 4).

            'Bikeles admired Greek architecture and, envisioned the kibbutz as a polis or city state with a central ‘agora’ – the kibbutz dining room – as a secular meeting place, with a spiritual place, in this case the secular temple – the culture hall. Regarding the amphitheater a very important part of the 'agora', Bikeles  adapted it for his plan, giving it double function. One side faced the hall and the other the amphitheater. The  Western Galilee landscape reminded him of the green hills of Greece and Asia Minor. He also recognized the same topographic situation and accordingly allocated the ‘temple’ at the peak of the acropolis with the amphitheater on the slope below. The horizontal line of the Greek aqueduct emphasized the verticality and the historical importance of the temple (Figs 7-12).

            'The illusion that Jews can escape their Jewishness vanished after the Holocaust, and Bikeles could not ignore the Jewish experience in his design of Beit Lohamei Haghetaot. His work was inevitably influenced by the ‘fortress synagogues’ (Figs 11, 13, 14), the places of refuge that became a symbol of the Jews readiness to fight back. Bikeles applied this rebellious and protective spirit to his design of Beit Lohamei Haghetaot. Like a fortress synagogue, it is an opaque cube, reminiscent yet as opposed to the relatively open mantle of the Greek temple (Fig 11). However, Bikeles preserved the image of the Greek temple, placing the central structure on a podium with a 'gable' sustaining the weight of the roof.

            'Influenced by the utopian Expressionist German architecture, Bikeles developed a unique method of museum design using filtered natural light, which he employed in the museum at Ein Harod as well as at Beit Lohamei Haghetaot. Here, the play of light consists of what he termed 'light spaces' which are naturally lit spaces and 'dark spaces' which are artificially illuminated (Figs. 15, 16). While the roof of the entrance cavity with its starry skylight exemplifies a dark space, the exhibition area is naturally lit, recalling the strongly lit spaces of Taut (Fig. 17). Without the glorious space images of Hans Scharoun (Fig. 18), the remembrance hall is an artificially illuminated dark space which depicts the horror of the time (Figs. 19, 20).

             'Bikeles primary plans are his last will and as such they cannot be ignored. Adaptation of the original structure to todays changing needs could not be done without learning and understanding the architect’s mind and intentions. A thorough examination of the archive of Bikeles work at Yad Tabenkin reveals that he originally planned such an additional hall adjacent to the existing main building (Figs. 22-25). Unfortunately, the unrelated random extensions added to the museum so far show that the 'owners' act in the manner of the Shakespearean 'translator'.'

 

Editors note: Despite a number of ethical issues in the running of the competition, most entries did in fact refer to Bikeles in their proposals.

 

 

 

The design entries:

 

 

Efrat-Kowalsky, Dror Aviram

            The winning entry focused on the need to find a suitable replacement for the declining kibbutz members who have served as museum guides for almost sixty years.  Designed as a 'slowing down' place for contemplation, the the new hall, allocated in accordance with Bikeles unrealized original plans, attempts to serve this function. However, the new auditorium will be built upon the randomly added eastern wing, in synchronization with the visitors route.

 

Alex Grynbaum Architects, with Michal Grynbaum and Ronit Sharabi

            Grynbaum described his entry as a collection of new materials in a discourse between the museum, its immediate surroundings, and the distant view. 'A discourse of the state of Jewish existence from the Holocaust to settlement in Israel.' Allowing visitors to peek outside at the marvelous view of the Western Galilee, his proposed addition is made of a transparent glass cube breaking out of an opaque box placed above the central unit, allowing natural light to penetrate. A green boulevard of trees connects the parking lots and symbolizes the rebirth of the Jews after the Holocaust.

Mansfeld-Keht Architects

            In the center of this entry is a unique exhibition area, a melancholy space, dramatic and impressive in its presence, symbolically expressing the void left after the Holocaust. Natural light penetrates via a hollowed chimney into the remembrance hall below. Located above the eastern wing of the museum, the auditorium connects the exhibition halls with the main touring path.

 

Schwartz-Besnosoff

            This rather daring proposal locates the auditorium on top of the central exhibition hall, with a floating roof that allows natural light to flow into the museum beneath. Here, a new entrance was planned as a massive element that fits the image of the existing structure. Defined as problematic, the layout was reorganized around the central hall.

 

Allenby 19 Architects

            This design is based on creating an imaginary movement axis which passes through the identifying elements of the site – the Yad Layeled museum, artist Moshe Kupfermans studio, the Roman aqueduct, the amphitheater and Beit Lohamei Haghetaot. Redefining the relationship between the museum and the kibbutz, the plan calls for reallocating the new entrance at the amphitheater level. The exhibition room is the first station that visitors reach, and the remembrance hall refers to Bikeles 'secret' principle, using light as a design tool.

 

Chyutin – Atzmon

            The focal point of this entry was 'to preserve the physical representations of the remembrance legacy of Beit Lohamei Haghetaot, by conducting a direct dialogue with Bikeles design principles.' Here, the auditorium is allocated at the exact spot Bikeles planned, and the new exhibition area is designed as a 'light space' – an open cube defined by a steel and glass structure. It is disconnected from the courtyard and protrudes from the roof level, using similar proportions to Bikeles original plan. The support system and showrooms are designed as one double story building, forming the entrance patio at ground level.

 

Peter Keinan

            This entry expresses the deafening call for remembrance. Keinan sees the renovation as occasion 'a critical turning point in which the establishing generation makes way for its offspring.' Taking advantage of the existing components, Keinan guides the visitor through 'a gradual move from the contemporary Israel outside the museums walls to contend with the memory of the Holocaust.' The path begins at the aqueduct and opens to the Mediterranean courtyard that connects to the visitors center, in which the auditorium is designed as a memorial tent. The exhibition halls lead to the open statue garden, via Kupfermans studio and to the Yad Layeled museum.