Architecture in Iran: The Pahlavi Era

Residential buildings for the affluent classes gave rise to a "modern" style that represented an eclectic tendency to link past and present — a style that was not always architecturally successful. These buildings were built in the form of a "lost paradise," imitating nineteenth-century Qajar palaces, in gardens of various sizes.

The closest encounter most Iranians had with new aesthetic codes was through roads, bridges, and manufactured products such as automobiles, radios, refrigerators, telephones, and above all, through Hollywood films. The image and impression of the Western way of life, along with its associated technology, became established in the late 1950s as emulation of this lifestyle became commonplace in most urban settlements in Iran. Although Iranians lacked the resources to properly achieve this lifestyle, urban elites and the ruling system made every effort to overcome this apparent gap between goals and available means.

Second Period (1963–1973)

The first period, characterized by infrastructure and monuments reflecting the national need for a new sense of cultural identity, did not achieve any notable public buildings or interesting urban planning. At the same time, the country was entering a new era of prosperity. Iran's trade in oil for foreign goods and services was established, and tourism was expanding as a major industry. Both domestic and international tourism were increasing each year. Organizationally, the country had achieved an efficient bureaucracy. The Third Development Plan (1962–68) began satisfactory support for constructing health and educational facilities. During the Fourth Plan (1968–73), new urban settlements were built, existing urban settlements were expanded, new comprehensive plans and the construction of large public buildings formed an important part of government policy.

In the mid-1960s, the return of the first wave of specialist architects and engineers trained abroad had a direct impact on national planning and construction capabilities. Simultaneously, the dominant cultural force in architecture and engineering schools shifted from French influence to English-American tendencies, along with some Italian influences. Dariush Mirfendereski and Mehdi Kowsar, both Italian-trained Iranian architects, successively assumed the directorship of the Faculty of Fine Arts at the University of Tehran. At the same time, the Faculty of Architecture at the National University, also in Tehran, was founded.

Iranians with expertise — both those educated abroad and those recently trained in Iran — lacked necessary knowledge about their native architectural heritage and the traditional technical knowledge of construction. All existing incomplete knowledge had been produced by foreign researchers with all the inherent limitations of the Orientalist and mostly historical-archaeological approach. One important exception to this characteristic was the enduring work of A.U. Pope and P. Ackerman, whose Survey of Iranian Art, published in 1938, with its reprinting in the early 1960s, had a fresh influence. It was in response to this need that documentation of authentic cultural values and value systems was undertaken, and the metaphorical nature of Iranian expression in the visual, auditory, and literary arts was made manifest.

During this period, important works were carried out in major Iranian cities in traditional yellow brick — originally square, approximately 24 centimeters in dimensions and 4 centimeters in height, now replaced with the standard Western dimensions of 20×5×10 centimeters — which regained its rightful place among building materials. Arches, vaults, domes, and other traditional elements of architecture were used as appropriate to cover complete functions. Thus, the Iran Center for Management Studies, founded by H. Lajevardi and designed by N. Ardalan, was able to create a sense of stability in the traditional architectural language. It was called a "madrasa" and yet offered the new Harvard Business School management education program.

Among the notable construction achievements of this era were educational institutions and health services built in major cities and recreation and fitness centers such as the Tehran Sports Complex, built between 1968 and 1972 by Aziz Farmanfarmaian and Associates (designer: N. Ardalan) for the Ministry of Development and Housing. The Elamite ziggurat temple of Choqa Zanbil and the columns of Persepolis came to mind. This project converted 200 hectares of barren alluvial land into suitable green space for recreational activities. Using existing road-building technical knowledge, more than four million cubic meters of soil were moved and compacted to build an earthen stadium for one hundred thousand spectators, covered with yellow brick, which also functioned as a dam for retaining the artificial lake in the adjacent excavated pit. The lake was also intended as a water reservoir for irrigating 160 hectares of tree planting and for recreational boating, and was considered a focal point for many other sports and recreational facilities. This sports complex was the venue for the 1972 Asian Games.

In a renewed look at the comprehensive plans prepared for Tehran, we see the continuation of Western training and the motivations of the designers themselves and their government clients reflected in them. One matter of concern was the traditional patterns of urban settlements in this region — the proper adaptation to the environment and connection with the indigenous culture of the majority population — which was very rarely considered in the design of new cities.

Wide automobile streets cut through traditional settlement patterns and the dry, barren lands surrounding historic cities as decisive lines, with the goal of preparing the city for a population explosion. As a result, urban land prices around these routes increased approximately 250 percent between 1966 and 1971. Rather than yielding social or cultural benefits as the first important fruit of new comprehensive plans, land speculation followed. Before a comprehensive examination of the approximately formed urban planning patterns — leading to efficient social plans, transportation systems compatible with building types suited to culture and access to resources — had been considered, a dangerous period of construction boom began. In 1973, a shortage of materials and rapid price increases resulted in a six-month construction ban in Tehran. But this was only part of the problems that occurred in the third and final phase of Iran's modern architectural history.

Third Period (1973–1979)

In 1974, the second International Congress of Architects was held under the title "Towards Quality of Life." This gathering, chaired by Iranian architect Mohsen Foroughi, brought together major world architects and urban planners such as Buckminster Fuller and Jose Luis Sert from the United States, Kenzo Tange from Japan, and many others to examine Iran's progress in responding to the challenges it faced with rising oil prices. Participants in this congress (and the previous congress held under the title "Confrontation between Tradition and Technology" in 1970) prepared an environmental rights charter — drafted by Jose Luis Sert, Moshe Safdie, B. K. Doshi, George Candilis, and Nader Ardalan — for the Ministry of Development and Housing, and this book was presented by Iran at the United Nations Habitat Conference held in 1976 in Vancouver, Canada.

A number of international participants gathered again in 1977 to judge an international competition for the design of a new university campus. This competition had the largest number of domestic and international participants compared to any global competition.

As these events reflect, Iran was consciously utilizing the highest levels of global expertise and technology in the late 1970s. But despite all this attention (and perhaps because of it), the revolution of 1979 quickly reached its peak and fell even faster. Projects that had been prepared over several years as educational and cultural programs under the supervision of Iranian architects collaborating with groups of international experts — a number of important contracts were signed with leading international architects such as the Tehran Hotel (Kenzo Tange), renovation of the Glass and Ceramic Museum (Hans Hollein), and a museum in Shiraz.

In the field of urban planning, new large-scale development projects were prepared near most major Iranian cities. Shahestan (Abbas Abad Lands), by the international firm Llewelyn-Davies, directed by Jacqueline Robertson; "Pardisan Environmental Park" for the Environmental Protection Organization, directed by Eskandar Firouz, designed by the Mandala Group; and "Shushtar" by Kamran Diba.

New cities were designed and some construction operations on them also began. These included "New Town of Bandar Shahpour" by the Mandala Group and BCEOM, and "Nouran, City of Light" by the Mandala International Company, directed by Nader Ardalan.

Conservation and preservation activities continued to benefit from government support, and important conferences were held on the conservation of entire historical areas. The level of artistic and craft work among artisans and craftsmen such as plasterers, bricklayers, tile makers, carpenters, and metalworkers improved significantly, and the number of available artists increased.

Conclusion

If one looks at the history of architecture and urban planning in Iran after World War II, it is clear that multiple cultural achievements have been attained. The newly acquired awareness of Iran's past led to the restoration and conservation of numerous ancient monuments. Through this process, traditional arts were also preserved and revived. Of course, the achievements gained were not only focused on the past — aspects of self-knowledge and welcoming the future were also evident. Never before had so much knowledge about Iran's history, especially architectural history, been available to broad segments of the population. Valuable documents and records about Iran's history from the pre-Islamic past to the Islamic era today have been placed at people's disposal, contributing to attitudes toward traditions that are rapidly being transformed.

Some periods were noted in terms of style: the building facade of the Elamite ziggurat, Sasanian parabolic arches, Seljuk brickwork, Safavid glazed tiles, and especially the nineteenth-century Qajar architectural vocabulary were used by architects in post-World War II Iran. A secondary but steadier tendency also formed toward the more "vernacular-rural" mud-brick and brick architecture.

The specialists gained awareness of science and technology and its practical application in the construction process. By the late 1970s, Iranian specialists were counted among leading international architects and urban planners. The same group that sought traditional environmental modifiers such as wind-catchers and house-gardens also had scientific explanations provided.

Yet alongside these achievements, cultural losses could also be noted — the loss of "organic life" traditions specific to cities. Many residential neighborhoods in old Iranian cities bear witness to this claim. This affected the entire spectrum of income groups. Along with the loss of these traditions, an architectural loss also occurred on a larger scale — the loss of the central role of the mosque. The situation reflects a utilitarian attitude toward religious institutions and other traditional organizations. Furthermore, the loss of familiar human scale in the built environment. No new spatial order replaced the traditional order — which was the product of the technical knowledge of traditional buildings. Rapid industrialization caused urbanization and secularization — afflicting not only Iran but all traditional societies undergoing rapid transformation. Nevertheless, the lack of cultural and spatial continuity between the new urban environment of Iran and existing traditional patterns only fueled alienation and unrest.

From an ecological perspective, it could be noted as a loss affecting the form of Iranian human settlements and their inefficient new growth. Tehran, with its great population explosion in the 1970s, could not meet the needs of its citizens given its water and green space resources. Exhaust from vehicles, factories, and domestic heating appliances in temperature inversion conditions created a serious pollution problem. Other Iranian cities that had historically maintained their fragile environmental balance on the edge of vast deserts are now experiencing environmental problems similar to Tehran's due to population growth, urban sprawl, and pollution. On a micro scale, the indigenous architectural forms adapted to hot and dry climates — characterized by compact construction, materials with high thermal resistance, south-facing iwans, natural ventilation, and refreshing gardens — are being challenged by the dispersed and isolated forms, the "mechanical Parthenons" of other climate zones, which naturally are not compatible with the hot and dry environment.

Given these considerations, only modest achievements can be added to Iran's valuable architectural heritage. But important lessons from this era take the form of questions rather than answers: How can a traditional society modify its built forms and symbols so that while meeting its internal values and needs, it also keeps pace with the new realism of the twentieth century? What should energy consumption be to ensure the survival of human settlements? How can one, while confronting the problems of a global population explosion, overall decline of world resources, and increasing interdependence among nations, sustain and enhance the quality of life and human goals?