Figure 1. Exhibition view, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1972. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
Figure 2. Exhibition view, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 2023. Photo: Peter Tijhuis. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
During a pivotal period in the 1970s when 19th-century architecture and design were fading from daily life, and theorists were reassessing opinions that echoed those of 19th-century contemporaries who critiqued design of the era, the Stedelijk Museum chose to address the issue of the design’s historical relevance.[8] Die verborgene Vernunft was taken over in its entirety with the purpose to reevaluate 19th-century design by rectifying the biased image created by contemporary critics.[9] Existing standpoints either considered 19th-century design as a mere mimicry of earlier aesthetics or deemed everything produced in this period as beautiful without distinction.[10] While the goal of both exhibitions appears similar, the Stedelijk sought to reshape 19th-century design discourse by adding objects originating in the Netherlands, highlighting Dutch ingenuity in design. Sponsored by the Instituut Industriële Vormgeving (Institute of Industrial Design), the curators attempted to broaden the exhibition’s vision.[11]
The presentation was intended to stimulate further research, serving as a parallel initiative to the exhibition Instrument 1971 at RAI Amsterdam and the establishment of the Coöperatieve Documentatie Nederlandse Bouwkunst (Cooperative Documentation Dutch Architecture), which focused on the 19th century. While Crommelin acknowledged the Dutch addition’s incompleteness, the curators intentionally sought to highlight the lack of a comprehensive history of Dutch industry and design.[12] This research-driven project involved reaching out to experts: Scholars, such as social economic history professor H. Baudet and Dr. J. M. Dirkzwager, specialized in naval architecture, were asked to contribute to the catalog and the panel discussion that was organized in relation to the exhibition and took place on March 10, 1972.[13]
In the Dutch catalog, Peeters criticized curators Wend Fischer and Klaus-Jürgen Sembach’s “subjective” approach to the exhibition in Munich, which showcased “modern” 19th-century inventions in design and architecture.[14] He argued against their division between “traditionalists” and “pioneers,” claiming no schism existed between designers working in historical and eclectic styles and those who highlighted the “naked truth of iron and steel.”[15] The Dutch poet and writer Rudy Kousbroek, whose text was projected at the Stedelijk’s exhibition as a slide, accused the Munich exhibition of presenting a distorted image of the 19th century, neglecting technical objects without “art value,” such as ships and steam engines.[16] However, the Stedelijk still demonstrated a comparable standpoint by loaning the exhibition’s objects and showcasing them in a similar manner—for example, furniture pieces were displayed on pedestals, small objects were exhibited in glass cases, and photographs were mounted on white walls. The exhibition texts were adopted from Die Neue Sammlung, continuing its emphasis on a divide between established and innovative designers.[17]
In an attempt to shift the discourse, the Dutch addition mainly focused on architecture, technical instruments, modes of transportation, and crockery, showing “actual” functionality. In contrast, objects from Die verborgene Vernunft were displayed solely for their aesthetics (figs. 3-6).[18] In total, the Stedelijk showed around four hundred objects from the German traveling exhibition, adding around 35 loans for the Dutch extension since the museum’s collection did not contain appropriate objects at the time. Although Crommelin acknowledged that these objects did not appear as “modern” given that the Netherlands’ industrial sector got a later start compared to other European countries, she argued that their relevance lay in their functional and ingenious character.[19] The Dutch catalog used quotations—not necessarily directly related to the objects—from contemporary theorists, designers, and architects expressing their faith in progress.[20] The archival photographs show labels and room titles, such as “Railways” and “Bridges,” lacking explanatory wall texts and suggesting a thematic arrangement. Consequently, the objects were presented with minimal contextualization within the “white cube” environment, emphasizing formal elements and comparison, neglecting the social context of the objects.[21]
Inside the exhibition, there was a division between the two presentations marked by two arrows (fig. 4). The Stedelijk’s distancing from the German exhibition was evident in the title change: Die verborgene Vernunft was relegated to a subtitle and replaced by a broader main title, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, allowing for visitor interpretation. As the museum sought to provoke, 19th-century ingenuity had never been “hidden” behind “uncreative historicism, characterless eclecticism, styleless masquerade of styles from all times”;[22] it just was not considered “art” at the time.[23]
Figure 3. Exhibition view, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1972. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
Figure 4. Exhibition view, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1972. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
Figure 5. Exhibition view, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1972. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
Figure 6. Exhibition view, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1972. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
In 2023 the Stedelijk Museum again reevaluated 19th-century design with the exhibition MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen. The curators offered a new perspective on modern artists and designers, who aspired to reach people beyond the elite.[24] By showcasing 19th-century objects, the exhibition demonstrated that geometric shapes central to 20th-century design language already existed in the preceding century, often in non-European community art.[25] The display of 19th-century furniture employing new materials and techniques proved a more linear progression toward 20th-century design (fig. 2).[26] Critiquing modernism as a “Western” phenomenon that focused on white European and North American men, the curators provided nuance to the canonical history of art and design by integrating female and non-European artists into the exhibition’s narrative. De Roode and Rummens did so by, for example, demonstrating the use of mechanical production—as seen in the headscarf produced by Creole Surinamese women—that enabled artists to cater to a broader audience (fig. 7).
The exhibition acknowledged some of the negative outcomes of 19th-century modernity, such as colonialism, poverty, and inequality.[27] Through transhistorical interventions— juxtaposing 19th-century design and industry objects with those created after 1940—the Stedelijk illustrated long historical lines and the effects of modernism and modernity.[28] The concept of “modern” was questioned, challenging the enduring belief in progress in art and the idea of genius artists who were “ahead of their time.”[29] Instead of adhering to art movements based on improvement, the exhibition portrayed modernism as a multifaceted entity, accommodating contradictions and parallel developments within its framework.[30] However, the subtitle gives off another impression, listing three white male artists established in the canonical history of modernism. This decision was not encouraged by the curators but was made by the marketing department and director to attract a broader audience.[31] The Stedelijk’s own collection served as the starting point for the exhibition, enabling an introspection of its own history and catalyzing further research into its 19th-century objects.[32] The curators collaborated with external specialists, including curators of the Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen (National Museum of World Cultures), who provided feedback on the wall texts, catalog, and object list.[33] The catalog underscored this research-driven character by offering additional academic articles.[34]
MODERN showcased over three hundred objects spanning various disciplines. The museum’s collection was complemented by loans from international museums and collections. The exhibition followed a thematic route, highlighting topics like “Different Perspectives on Modernity” (fig. 8) and “Modernist Utopia” (fig. 9). The exhibition design by Studio Harm Rensink reinforced the presentation’s message; with the exhibition aiming to add more nuance to the concept of modernism, the “white cube” environment, which had been the usual practice starting in 1938 at the Stedelijk Museum, was critiqued by the use of brushstrokes (fig. 7).[35] These resembled the removal of context in gallery spaces, alluding to changing perspectives on what modernity entails and how the Stedelijk adapted to these ideas overtime.[36] Multiple kinds of texts were used—apart from object labels—to provide additional context.[37] Interactive elements and an audio guide on specific works, for instance, provided more in-depth information.[38] All rooms had a quote from one of the artists on display to give an immediate impression of the room’s theme. Thus, the objects were exhibited with rich contextualization, placed within an environment that highlighted their social and cultural significance, rather than in a display focusing solely on their formal elements.
Figure 7. Exhibition view, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 2023. Photo: Peter Tijhuis. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
Figure 8. Exhibition view, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 2023. Photo: Peter Tijhuis. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
Figure 9. Exhibition view, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 2023. Photo: Peter Tijhuis. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
De Wilde served as the director of the Stedelijk Museum from 1963 to 1985, including during the 1972 exhibition Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw. De Wilde’s policy was focused on paintings; he did not include design when he talked about art. His budget prioritized paintings, neglecting funds reserved for design, leading the design department to operate independently from 1965 onward.[39] While this autonomy offered advantages, such as freedom, it also had drawbacks, affecting the department’s financial situation and risking the discipline’s isolation.[40] Nonetheless, design remained part of his exhibition agenda, since it was supported by the research department established in 1970.[41] However, rooted in De Wilde’s policy, historical exhibitions were only included based on their contemporary artistic relevance.[42]
At the beginning of his directorship, De Wilde aimed to fill gaps in the Stedelijk’s collection of art from the previous century. However, in 1967, his focus shifted to paintings from after 1960 due to the increased costs of older art.[43] Around 1965, an agreement with the Rijksmuseum outlined their respective acquisition boundaries regarding 19th-century design: The Stedelijk would refrain from purchasing Jugendstil objects—except from Nieuwe Kunst designers—and the Rijksmuseum would extend its acquisitions to include objects created until around 1920.[44] De Wilde’s acquisition policy was subjective, driven by his so-called “sense of quality.” He opposed collective decision-making, believing that minimal opposition in a democratic system would lead to compromises favoring works that nobody objects to and thus acquiring works without character.[45] He aimed to follow artistic personalities: In the design department, this meant focusing on individual designers, rather than on themes.[46] To acquire objects that cost under f.100,000, De Wilde needed to collaborate with his staff: Above this number, he himself decided whether an object would be acquired.[47]
In the early 1970s, the museum faced pressure from artists’ strikes, leading to a reduced focus on foreign works and an emphasis on Dutch art.[48] However, De Wilde consistently contextualized the works alongside internationally renowned names and traveling exhibitions to maintain the Stedelijk’s international status.[49] During this period, calls for democratization and political awareness in the field of art and design intensified.[50] De Wilde faced challenges in adapting to democratization, holding on to his ultimate beliefs of character and quality. Criticized for only acquiring elite art, he expressed in 1972 that he did not mind leading a “subjective” institution.[51] He believed the museum could not be an instrument to directly contribute to societal reform.[52] Thus, art was presented as an overly autonomous phenomenon, not dependent on its context.[53]
Under his directorship, the exhibition Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw was presented to show international ingenuity “where young and old wandered captivated in between,” as stated in the 1972 annual report.[54] Though the Stedelijk’s publications on its collection throughout this period were often not focused on design, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw was referenced multiple times. In the publication 80 jaar wonen in het Stedelijk, the exhibition was even mentioned as one of the most important historical design exhibitions between 1963 and 1980.[55] In 1974 Martin Ruyter touched upon the exhibition’s subject matter in De Volkskrant, stating that the presentation could be considered the harbinger of interest in industrial archaeology in the Netherlands.[56] Architecture historian Wilfred van Leeuwen even acknowledged the exhibition’s importance in an article about 40 years later, calling it one of the first exhibitions in the Netherlands to reevaluate 19th-century design.[57] The exhibition attracted a total of 66,649 visitors,[58] leading to an extension until Easter Monday, April 4, 1972.[59]
While the exhibition received mixed responses, author Mieke Menschaar-Konings observed about 30 years later that Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw sparked lively debate about the Industrial Revolution’s impact on modern design.[60] De Tijd’s Frans Duister commended the Stedelijk for its timely attention to 19th-century technical ingenuity, challenging previous prejudices.[61] Lambert Tegenbosch agreed on the significance of the museum participating in this trending discussion on functionalism in De Volkskrant, conquering the divide between art and utilitarian use.[62] Eindhovens Dagblad author Urias Nooteboom deemed the Dutch addition to the German traveling exhibition necessary for the Netherlands. While visitors may not have been aware of the curatorial disagreements between Peeters and Fischer, the core element of functionality was obvious, showcasing utensils rather than “traditional art.”[63] Trouw critic Ger Kruis praised the exhibition for its focus on functional simplicity, who considered it as particularly significant because of its showcasing at an art museum. Kruis further stated he was tired of continuously criticizing previous design styles, and recommended visiting the exhibition to start the reevaluation of 19th-century design.[64] Kousbroek, however, lamented the late timing of the exhibition, as much 19th-century architecture and design had already vanished.[65] Vrij Nederland’s G. S. Hoogewoud criticized the exhibition’s one-sided focus on “high points” in form and material. He stated that, although the Dutch addition had a broader orientation, it merely displayed sober designs, foreshadowing 20th-century forms, and the title emphasizing “hidden ingenuity” was misleading because the exhibition focused solely on iron and steam.[66] Cees Boekraad in De Groene critiqued both the Stedelijk and Die Neue Sammlung for “amateurism” in their arguments, suggesting that exploring deteriorating neighborhoods could provide a better understanding of the 19th century.[67]
None of the contemporary sources—except for De Volkskrant two years later—however, appear to criticize the lack of social context. In 1974 Ruyter observed that the exhibition presented history “objectively,” without delving into the meaning or context of the objects and buildings. He critiqued the fact that many museums did not pay attention to the social consequences of technical developments, including Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, which did not show either human misery or pleasure.[68]
Under the directorship of Rein Wolfs since December 2019, the Stedelijk Museum’s current policy contrasts De Wilde’s approach. The institution defines itself as a public space where contemporary relevance is explored, discussed, and experienced through art and design. The Stedelijk’s commitment to engaging with the public is reflected in its multivocal program of exhibitions, educational projects, lectures, and debates in collaboration with its partners.[69] The museum aspires to play a significant role in discussions on globalization, identity, and decolonization in artistic and museological practice, expressing a commitment to greater societal engagement.
Acknowledging the need for change and the dismantling of institutional racism, in 2020 the museum committed to allocating at least 50 percent of its acquisition budget to acquiring works by artists of color with non-Western backgrounds.[70] Additionally, efforts are underway to increase the representation of women artists and designers in the collection.[71] Though the Stedelijk has been an artist-driven museum for most of its history, as recognized in De Wilde’s policy, it now also aims to be a context- and audience-driven institution. The acquisition policy intentionally addresses gaps in the collection without striving to balance its entirety in line with contemporary perspectives. The Stedelijk intends to acquire pieces that make sharp shifts in the modern collection or to use specific expertise of external researchers and guest curators, connecting the collection with current developments in art, design, and society. With its commitment to use modern art and design to contextualize the contemporary, the museum deliberately structures its exhibition program to respond to diversity issues from a present-day perspective. Since the collection was built upon modernist approaches to art, exhibitions on modernism will showcase artists and designers from regions beyond Europe and North America, or with a migration background, who engage with modernist design language; this increased diversity in the collection will provide more nuance in the canonical narrative.[72] The museum’s collection, complemented by loans, will increasingly serve as the foundation for exhibitions, fostering a research-oriented approach.[73]
The Stedelijk has also articulated a commitment to highlighting the design department, having appointed two new design curators in 2020. Besides following contemporary designers, its focus expanded to historical modernism in design, women designers, and broadening “the canon.”[74] Recent acquisitions reflect the Stedelijk’s commitment to inclusivity, with makers of color responding to social issues like climate change and identity. These works were promptly incorporated into the renewed collection presentation—a collaborative effort by the entire curatorial team, completed on September 10, 2022—seamlessly blending art and design.[75] This collaborative approach to decision-making, with input from various stakeholders, contrasts De Wilde’s practices, following his own “sense of quality.” Acquisition proposals are collectively decided on to safeguard the formulated policy while sharing the entire budget.[76]
Under Wolf’s directorship, the MODERN exhibition was met with varied reactions. De Telegraaf’s Paula van der Velde regarded the exhibition as a provocative eye-opener, breaking the tradition of design being less frequently showcased as the precursor to art with a proverbial capital “A.”[77] Rutger Ponzen commended the exhibition for presenting a beautiful blend of perspectives in De Volkskrant, showing that the “revolutionary” 20th century actually had its roots in the 19th century.[78] In Kunst & Vermaak Joke van der Weij called MODERN an “ode” to innovative designs, emphasizing the ever-changing definition of “modern.”[79] However, NRC’s Bernhard Hulsman touched upon critiques mentioned in multiple articles: At times, the exhibition was confusing and presented unclearly. The absence of a linear development in art and design, as claimed by curators Rummens and De Roode, led to confusion in display combinations and transhistorical interventions. The title featuring widely known figures, along with the marketing line of the artists being “ahead of their time,” caused imbalance and confusion.[80]
In Het Parool Edo Dijksterhuis agreed there was a disparity between the title and the exhibition content, attributing it to the narrative focused on modernism’s detours and diversions. This approach, avoiding a parade of “isms” and aligning with the Stedelijk’s removal of its slogan “Meet the Icons of Modern Art,” conflicted with the exhibition’s name-dropping title and failed to incorporate its current postcolonial perspective consistently throughout the narrative.[81] Joke de Wolf agreed in Trouw it was easy to lose track of the storyline, because MODERN “let go of all time limits.” [82] De Groene Amsterdammer‘s Koen Kleijn criticized the exhibition’s discourse, claiming that the works were forced to fit into the art historical scheme of “isms,” because the Stedelijk’s website stated “as many as 20 movements” were included in the exhibition, and used the container term “modern.” Doubting whether the museum had captured a renewed appreciation for its collection, Kleijn suggested that the museum instead took a traditional and superficial standpoint by only searching for formal similarities and not paying any attention to the artists’ motives. [83]
Despite some critical reviews, the exhibition received significant positive attention, with feedback cards reflecting visitors’ appreciation for the contextualization of art and the “eye- and mind-opening” experiences. The attendance exceeded the projected number of visitors, with 203,316 compared to the expected 200,000.[84]
Even though MODERN was presented approximately 50 years after Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, the discourse analysis reveals continuities in the Stedelijk’s narratives on 19th-century design. Both exhibitions demonstrated that 20th-century design, characterized by a functional design language without ornamentation, had its roots in the 19th century. The two exhibitions emphasized the originality and functionality of 19th-century design, challenging prevailing stigmas. Although they articulated the same message that 19th-century design is “modern,” the works were contextualized with distinct objects, texts, and within contrasting environments, influencing their respective discourses.
Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw displayed 19th-century objects—primarily technical instruments and models—demonstrating “actual” functionality. In 2023 the Stedelijk’s approach with MODERN differed in that it underscored design’s functionality, aligning more with showcasing the “modern” aesthetic of 19th-century design with new materials and techniques, similar to Die verborgene Vernunft’s objects. It focused on demonstrating the functional design language starting in the 19th century, rather than displaying various instruments and models like Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw. For example, the Wedgwood’s crockery set Creme colour Queen’s Ware was shown in the German part of the 1972 exhibition for its functional aesthetic and hidden ingenuity, placed next to other sober objects without any text or context (fig. 10). The visitor was intended to evaluate the works solely on their formal aspects, consistent with the “white cube” environment in which they were displayed.[85] MODERN built on this formal approach by including social context, placing Wedgwood’s Black Basalt bowls together with mechanically produced objects, representing designers’ socially engaged motivations. These mass-produced objects, in contrast to the exclusive Wedgwood crockery, showed that the bowls’ aesthetic was available to a wider audience through mechanical production (fig. 7). Contextualizing objects with texts, wallpapers, and other objects was crucial to the exhibition’s narrative: shedding new light on 19th-century design by highlighting less familiar artists, makers of color, contemporary works, and pieces from different disciplines to showcase long historical lines. Instead of presenting the actual model of the locomotive De Leeuw in Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, which showcased its modernity through formal aspects without additional information (fig. 4), MODERN showed a photograph depicting the railways at the Tanggung Station in the former Dutch East Indies. This choice provided historical context on the negative outcomes of modernity, such as industrial inventions like transportation, which enabled European countries to tighten their grip on their colonies.[86]
Figure 10. Exhibition view, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1972. © Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.
While both research-focused exhibitions aimed to reevaluate stigmas attached to 19th-century design, relating the historical topic to contemporary issues, they were created from different perspectives and for different purposes. In 1972 the goal was to address negative prejudices and to initiate a reevaluation in the Netherlands of 19th-century design, since a lot of architecture and design was at risk of disappearing. The significance of the trending topic is underscored by the numerous locations the exhibition travelled to. Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw caused a lively discussion, with many people reassessing their opinions of 19th-century design, recognizing its modernity. Despite much information remaining hidden in the archives, the exhibition’s significance is highlighted by numerous reviews and the attention it received in the Stedelijk’s publications.[87] Essentially, the Dutch addition aimed to avoid a division between “pioneers,” who embraced a sober design language, and “traditionalists,” who employed eclectic styles, without displaying any context.[88] Despite its broader focus, sources like Vrij Nederland and De Groene rightly criticized its one-sided emphasis on the “high points” in form and material.[89]
Though MODERN also did not exclusively focus on showcasing pioneers, this was done with different intentions in 2023. The reevaluation of 19th-century design was done in light of adding nuance to the definition of “modern” and giving new insights into its collection. Diverging from the Stedelijk’s long-standing focus on white male artists with a European or North American background, and focusing on women and makers of color, was the exhibition’s starting point.[90] The curators highlighted modernism’s diversity and argued for a greater representation of women designers and artists of color, rather than adhering to canonical history. This approach was misinterpreted by Het Parool and De Groene Amsterdammer, which criticized the exhibition for its imbalance and vagueness. Although these sources believed MODERN lacked postcolonial critique throughout its discourse, the reality was quite the opposite. In nine different galleries, non-European art and design was shown as an integral part of the exhibition’s narrative, with the primary focus on the manufacturer’s intention with each object.[91] The Stedelijk sought to avoid comparisons solely based on formal aesthetics, as was often done in the 1950s, and not using the West’s own terms of “modern” or “contemporary” to describe these objects without “their” voices.[92] Instead of pushing the objects into the container term “modern,” the exhibition questioned its meaning.[93] In 2023 the Stedelijk thus also aimed to align with current museological turns, highlighting the lingering effects of modernity evident in colonialism and globalization. Visitors were even asked to reflect upon their own stance toward modernity, using interactive elements.[94]
The museum policies of the respective periods are embedded in the discourses of both exhibitions. In 1972 De Wilde’s acquisition policy did not prioritize 19th-century design, focusing instead on paintings and artworks from after 1960 in his autonomous directorship. Rather than aiming for completeness in the design department, the focus was on having a number of characteristic examples from specific individuals to represent a particular period.[95] His subjective preference, coupled with the arrangement with the Rijksmuseum regarding the boundaries of both collections, led to the absence of a significant 19th-century design collection at that time. This meant that all the objects for the Dutch addition needed to be borrowed.[96] The furniture pieces, showcased in both Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw and MODERN, were all purchased after the 1972 exhibition (fig. 1-2).[97] Moreover, the regular displaying of the Stedelijk’s own collection did not start until the 1980s.[98]
De Wilde’s acquisition and exhibition policy changed from 1970: showcasing more Dutch works, while still contextualizing them with foreign artists and internationally circulating exhibitions to assert their significance. This approach was exemplified by Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, which sought to prove the Netherlands also produced original and functional design.[99] Under De Wilde’s leadership, the department for academic research was established in 1970, indicating a growing emphasis on research within the institution.[100] This research-driven approach was implemented in Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, a collaboration between curator Crommelin and Professor Peeters. They invited critics to write in-depth articles for the catalog, organized a discussion afternoon, and expressed their commitment to stimulating further research.
The current museum policy is reflected in MODERN, emphasizing the museum’s social function. Its commitment to engaging with societal issues is expressed through active participation in discussions on topics such as globalization and decolonization. The Stedelijk is dedicated to acquiring and displaying works by women and makers of color, enriching its modern collection. Additionally, contemporary viewpoints are integrated to add nuance to the modernist views upon which this collection was originally built. The museum values showcasing non-European artists with a migration background who engaged with modernist design language, aspiring to be a context-driven institution.[101] This approach was executed in MODERN, adding nuance to the history of modernism by providing context from multiple perspectives. The 19th-century design objects demonstrated that 20th-century design was not as “modern” as previously emphasized, prompting a reflection on the definition of “modern.” By foregrounding women and non-European artists, the canonical narrative that centered on white, “Western” male artists was put into perspective. The social aspect was interwoven in the exhibition’s narrative, demonstrating that artists and designers were not solely concerned with working for the elite but aimed to create “true” and “good” works to favorably influence people and their environments. The exhibition illustrated both positive and negative social outcomes from 19th-century industrial society, including emancipation and social movements, contrasting poverty and colonialism.[102] Contemporary perspectives, such as transhistorical interventions, illustrated long historical lines and revealed the lingering effects of modernity to contextualize the collection, as formulated in their museum policy.[103]
The Stedelijk now aims to display its own collection more frequently, enhancing its research-focused approach.[104] According to the 2022 annual report, MODERN commenced with the museum’s collection, presenting highlights and introducing surprising combinations.[105] The Stedelijk endeavors to pay more attention to the design department, collaborating more closely within the curatorial team, and MODERN successfully achieved this goal. Industrial design curator De Roode collaborated with academic researcher Rummens, specialized in visual arts, to amalgamate various areas of expertise in a multidisciplinary exhibition.[106]
The Stedelijk’s exhibitions had similar aims: reevaluating 19th-century design based on research, connecting with current discussions, and not focusing solely on pioneers in their discourses. However, these aims were interpreted differently in their respective time periods, taking into account their museum policies. In 1972 the exhibition intended to revisit biased opinions of 19th-century design that were causing many examples to disappear from daily life. By displaying original and functional design resembling 20th-century aesthetics, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw initiated a discussion in the Netherlands on the modernity of 19th-century design. The Stedelijk attempted to distance itself from Die Neue Sammlung’s standpoint, which made a distinction between pioneers and traditionalists, by adding a Dutch contribution. While striving to modernize the perception on “hidden” ingenuity, the Stedelijk still displayed Die verborgene Vernunft’s objects and discourse. Director De Wilde’s preference for paintings, and the rising prices of older artworks, resulted in the absence of a 19th-century design collection to show in this exhibition. However, he encouraged contextualizing Dutch works within an internationally circulating exhibition to maintain the Stedelijk’s international status and highlight the significance of the Netherlands’ contributions to art and design. He emphasized that “art” should not intervene with societal issues, leading to the provision of minimal context for the objects in Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw.
De Wilde’s policy contrasts with the current museum policy articulated by Wolfs and his curatorial staff, as expressed in the 2023 exhibition MODERN. The reevaluation of 19th-century design was realized through providing social context, corresponding with the museum’s aim of taking a position in current debates on issues including diversity, globalization, and colonialism. The exhibition provided more nuance to the canonical history of modernism by showing that its roots are in the “modern” 19th century and by incorporating contemporary perspectives. By reconsidering the Stedelijk’s modern collection, MODERN stopped the parade of “isms” representing only a white, “Western” male perspective on art and design history. The museum showcased the contested image of 19th-century modernity that can still be felt today through the effects of globalization and colonialism.
To revisit the question posed by this article’s title about what “modern” is, a query implicitly addressed by Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw and directly explored by MODERN, there is no clear-cut answer. The ever-changing concept of “modern” is influenced by contemporary perceptions, affecting discourses on 19th-century design. Thus, to fully grasp the essence of “modern,” one must navigate the dynamic interplay of historical context and present-day interpretations, illuminating the fluidity of its meaning across different cultural and temporal landscapes, rather than attempting to impose a rigid definition of modernity in design.
Ginger van den Akker studied Media, Art, Design and Architecture at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam with a specialization in design, and the master’s program Curating Art and Cultures at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the University of Amsterdam. She was the curator-in-training at the design department of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam and has worked at the Royal Palace Amsterdam and Museum Het Schip.
[1] “MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen,” Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, accessed December 5, 2023. Unless otherwise stated, all translations are my own.
[2] “Stedelijk: Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art and Design,” Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, accessed December 5, 2023.
[3] “Slotstuk nieuwe collectiepresentatie van het Stedelijk: Yesterday Today. Collectie tot 1950,” Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, accessed December 5, 2023.
[4] “MODERN – Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen,” posted May 16, 2023, by Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 3:51, YouTube.
[5] Ingeborg de Roode and Maurice Rummens, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger and others (Boxtel: Drukkerij Tiel, 2023), 4.
[6] Gemeente Amsterdam, Pers-communiqué Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, February 4, 1972, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 1972], Knmap 27784, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[7] Stadsarchief Amsterdam, 1895–1979, Archief van het Stedelijk Museum, Folder 30041, Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief, Amsterdam.
[8] Rudy Kousbroek, “Tentoonstelling industriële vormgeving vorige eeuw in Stedelijk museum Amsterdam: 19e eeuw: verdwijnen, verdwenen,” NRC, February 19, 1972; H. Baudet and C. Peeters, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: Nederlandse bijdrage aan de tentoonstelling “Die verborgene Vernunft” (Hilversum: Koninklijke Drukkerij en Uitgeverij v/h/ C. De Boer Jr. n.v., 1972), 1.
[9] Liesbeth Crommelin, Letter to H. Baudet, August 20, 1971, Tentoonstelling Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft: industriele vormgeving, 1972, Folder 4712, Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief, Amsterdam.
[10] Gemeente Amsterdam, Pers-communiqué Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, February 4, 1972, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 1972], Knmap 27784, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[11] J.H.T.C. Schepman, “Ontwerpen uit de 19e eeuw in het ‘Stedelijk’ (zie ook PT-Aktueel van 1 maart 1972),” Literatuur Bulletin 5, no. 5 (1972): 5.
[12] Baudet and Peeters, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, cover.
[13] J. M. Dirkzwager, Letter to Liesbeth Crommelin, February 29, 1972, Tentoonstelling Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft: industriele vormgeving, 1972, Folder 4712, Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief, Amsterdam.
[14] Baudet and Peeters, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, cover.
[15] Baudet and Peeters, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, 1.
[16] Kousbroek, “Tentoonstelling industriële vormgeving vorige eeuw.”
[17] Klaus-Jürgen Sembach, Letter to Liesbeth Crommelin, December 15, 1971, Tentoonstelling Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft: industriele vormgeving, 1972, Folder 4712, Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief, Amsterdam.
[18] Baudet and Peeters, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, 13–31.
[19] Gemeente Amsterdam, Pers-communiqué Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, February 4, 1972, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 1972], Knmap 27784, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam; Baudet and Peeters, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, cover.
[20] Baudet and Peeters, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, 33–36.
[21] Gillian Rose, Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials (London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2016), 239–40.
[22] “unschöpferischer Historismus, charakterlos Eklektizismus, stilloses Maskenfest der Stile aller Zeiten.” Wend Fischer and Christian Beutler, Die verborgene Vernunft. Funktionale Gestaltung im 19. Jahrhundert (Munich: Die Neue Sammlung, 1971), 6.
[23] Urias Nooteboom, “Industriële revolutie nog lang niet voltooid: Structuren: een eerlijke zaak,” Eindhovens Dagblad, March 14, 1972; Lambert Tegenbosch, “Tekeningen van machines als vroege stillevens op verrukkelijke expositie, De Volkskrant, February 26, 1972.”
[24] De Roode and Rummens, MODERN, cover.
[25] “MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger, en anderen,” Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, accessed January 6, 2024.
[26] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Wall texts MODERN, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 2023], Knmap 29083, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[27] Edo Dijksterhuis, “Recensie: Stedelijk presenteert modernisme als een veelkoppig monster,” Het Parool, June 3, 2023.
[28] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Wall texts MODERN, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 2023], Knmap 29083, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[29] De Roode and Rummens, MODERN, 10; Bernhard Hulsman, “Niemand ontsnapt aan zijn of haar tijd,” NRC, June 7, 2023.
[30] Dijksterhuis, “Recensie: Stedelijk presenteert modernisme.”
[31] During my internship as a curator in training, I attended the meetings on the exhibition’s title.
[32] De Roode and Rummens, MODERN, 4.
[33] During my internship, I attended meetings with the curators from the Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen.
[34] De Roode and Rummens, MODERN, 4.
[35] Hulsman, “Niemand ontsnapt.”
[36] Simone Vos, “Modern hoeft niet altijd strak en wit te zijn, laat Harm Rensink zien,” AD, July 10, 2023, https://www.ad.nl/amsterdam/modern-hoeft-niet-strak-en-wit-te-zijn-laat-harm-rensink-zien-in-stedelijk-museum-amsterdam~acf586444/.
[37] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Wall texts MODERN, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 2023], Knmap 29083, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[38] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, SoundCloud, accessed January 6, 2024, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Wall texts MODERN, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 2023], Knmap 29083, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[39] Mieke Menschaar-Konings, “Edy de Wilde: kapitein en drenkeling: invloed BBK op aankoop- en tentoonstellingsbeleid Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 1963–1974” (master’s thesis, Open Universiteit Nederland, 2004), 14.
[40] Wil Bertheux et al., 80 jaar wonen in het Stedelijk (Amsterdam: Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1981), 26.
[41] Edo Dijksterhuis, “Museumvisionair met lange adem,” Financieel Dagblad, November 26, 2005; Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Nieuws Edy de Wilde overleden, November 25, 2005, Edy de Wilde [Knipselmap], Knmap 23238, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[42] Menschaar-Konings, “Edy de Wilde: kapitein en drenkeling,” 5; Karin Merx, Een feestelijke optocht van hoogtepunten: La Grande Parade als evaluatie van het museumbeleid van Edy de Wilde in het Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam (Delft: Eburon, 2013), 26.
[43] Edy de Wilde, De collectie van het Stedelijk Museum 1963–1973: aanwinsten schilder- en beeldhouwkunst (Amsterdam: Stadsdrukkerij, 1974), 86.
[44] Liesbeth Crommelin and Job Meihuizen, Keramiek in het Stedelijk (Amsterdam: Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1998), 23.
[45] De Wilde, De collectie van het Stedelijk Museum 1963–1973, 2.
[46] Merx, Een feestelijke optocht van hoogtepunten, 68; Liesbeth Crommelin, Interview with Liesbeth Crommelin, April 17, 1997, Liesbeth Crommelin [Knipselmap], Knmap 04236, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[47] Merx, Een feestelijke optocht van hoogtepunten, 68.
[48] Menschaar-Konings, “Edy de Wilde: kapitein en drenkeling,” 90.
[49] Merx, Een feestelijke optocht van hoogtepunten, 24.
[50] Menschaar-Konings, “Edy de Wilde: kapitein en drenkeling,” 79.
[51] Menschaar-Konings, “Edy de Wilde: kapitein en drenkeling,” 97; Merx, Een feestelijke optocht van hoogtepunten, 31.
[52] De Wilde, De collectie van het Stedelijk Museum 1963–1973, 1.
[53] René Pingen, “’Ik maak een museum voor nu, niet voor na de revolutie . . . ,’” Jong Holland 22, no. 1 (2006): 44.
[54] “waar jong en oud geboeid tussendoor dwaalde.” Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Stedelijk jaarverslag 1972, Jaarverslagen: kopij en correspondentie, 1936–1979, Folder 5803, Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief, Amsterdam.
[55] De Wilde, De collectie van het Stedelijk Museum 1963–1973, 106; Ad Petersen et al., ’60 ’80: attitudes / concepts / images, een keuze uit twintig jaar beeldende kunst (Amsterdam: Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 1982), 31; Bertheux et al., 80 jaar wonen in het Stedelijk, 32.
[56] Martin Ruyter, “Industriële Archeologie is meer dan het koesteren van een locomotief,” De Volkskrant, May 4, 1974.
[57] Wilfred van Leeuwen, “Een luchtspoor voor Amsterdam,” Binnenstad 270 (2015).
[58] Edy de Wilde, Letter to A. P. Bruigon, September 9, 1971, Tentoonstelling Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft: industriele vormgeving, 1972, Folder 4713, Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief, Amsterdam; Liesbeth Crommelin, Letter to W. Fischer, April 12, 1972, Tentoonstelling Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft: industriele vormgeving, 1972, Folder 4712, Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief, Amsterdam.
[59] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Newspaper clipping, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 1972], Knmap 27784, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[60] Menschaar-Konings, “Edy de Wilde: kapitein en drenkeling,” 73.
[61] Frans Duister, “Kijken naar de 19e eeuw: Expositie in het Stedelijk Museum,” De Tijd, March 4, 1972.
[62] Tegenbosch, “Tekeningen van machines als vroege stillevens.”
[63] Nooteboom, “Industriële revolutie nog lang niet voltooid.”
[64] Kruis, “Ontworpen in de negentiende eeuw.”
[65] Kousbroek, “Tentoonstelling industriële vormgeving vorige eeuw.”
[66] Hoogewoud, “Architectuur van de negentiende eeuw,” 19.
[67] Cees Boekraad, “De 19e eeuw door kunsthistorici ingelijfd,” De Groene, March 4, 1972.
[68] Ruyter, “Industriële Archeologie is meer dan het koesteren.”
[69] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Het Stedelijk: betrokken beweging, ondernemingsplan 2021–2024, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[70] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Collectieplan 2022–2023 breder en meer betrokken, August 2021, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[71] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Collectieplan 2020–2021 Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[72] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Collectieplan 2022–2023 breder en meer betrokken, August 2021, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[73] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Het Stedelijk: betrokken beweging, ondernemingsplan 2021–2024, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[74] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Collectieplan 2020–2021 Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[75] “Slotstuk nieuwe collectiepresentatie.”
[76] During my internship at the Stedelijk Museum as a curator in training, I attended multiple acquisition meetings.
[77] Paula van der Velde, “’Modern’ in het Stedelijk is een prikkelende eye-opener,” De Telegraaf, May 30, 2023.
[78] Rutger Ponzen, “Waarom ‘moraalridders en fatsoenrakkers’ in musea soms hard nodig zijn,” De Volkskrant, May 17, 2023.
[79] Joke van der Weij, “Hun tijd ver vooruit,” Kunst & Vermaak, May 1, 2023.
[80] Hulsman, “Niemand ontsnapt.”
[81] Dijksterhuis, “Recensie: Stedelijk presenteert modernisme.”
[82] Joke de Wolf, “De ‘parade van publiekslievelingen in het Stedelijk Museum mist een coherent verhaal,” Trouw, June 6, 2023.
[83] Koen Kleijn, “Parade,” De Groene Amsterdammer, July 5, 2023.
[84] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Eindreportage Modern Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[85] Rose, Visual Methodologies, 239–40.
[86] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Wall texts MODERN, MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen [knipselmap tentoonstelling Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 2023], Knmap 29083, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[87] Menschaar-Konings, “Edy de Wilde: kapitein en drenkeling,” 73.
[88] Baudet and Peeters, Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw, 1.
[89] Hoogewoud, “Architectuur van de negentiende eeuw,” 19; Boekraad, “De 19e eeuw door kunsthistorici ingelijfd.”
[90] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Collectieplan 2022–2023 breder en meer betrokken, August 2021, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam; Ingeborg de Roode and Maurice Rummens, Project idee, July 8, 2020, Digital archive MODERN: Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[91] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Eindreportage Modern Van Gogh, Rietveld, Léger en anderen, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[92] De Roode and Rummens, MODERN, 19.
[93] Kleijn, “Parade.”
[94] De Roode and Rummens, MODERN, 19.
[95] Bertheux et al., 80 jaar wonen in het Stedelijk, 27.
[96] Crommelin and Meihuizen, Keramiek in het Stedelijk, 23; Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Lijst t.b.v. de tentoonstelling in de Technische Hogeschool te Eindhoven afd. Bouwkunst—de hr van Veghel, Tentoonstelling Ontworpen in de 19e eeuw: verborgen vernuft: industriele vormgeving, 1972, Folder 4713, Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief, Amsterdam.
[97] The Thonets no. 1, 4, and 14 were bought in 1985. The Shaker workshop’s rocking chair was bought in 1976. Ingeborg de Roode, email to author, December 5, 2023.
[98] Crommelin and Meihuizen, Keramiek in het Stedelijk, 28.
[99] Merx, Een feestelijke optocht van hoogtepunten, 24.
[100] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Nieuws Edy de Wilde overleden, November 25, 2005, Edy de Wilde [Knipselmap], Knmap 23238, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam. It remains unclear whether the Stedelijk was offered the exhibition or they contacted Die Neue Sammlung to inquire about the possibility of taking over the exhibition. Crommelin did express that Die Neue Sammlung was of great importance for the applied arts in the 1960s. Liesbeth Crommelin, Interview with Liesbeth Crommelin, April 17, 1997, Liesbeth Crommelin [Knipselmap], Knmap 04236, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[101] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Collectieplan 2022–2023 breder en meer betrokken, August 2021, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[102] De Roode and Rummens, MODERN, 11.
[103] De Roode and Rummens, MODERN, 10–19.
[104] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Het Stedelijk: betrokken beweging, ondernemingsplan 2021–2024, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[105] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Jaarverslag 2022, March 24, 2023, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
[106] Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Collectieplan 2020–2021 Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Digital archive, Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
