Modernism in a suburb of Budapest

Budapest’s city bus number 5 goes from Blaha Lujza Square in central Pest to Pasareti Square in the suburb of Pasaret, which is northwest of the historic heart of Buda. The bus route terminates at a circular piazza – Pasareti Square – and parks next to a curved, single-storey bus station which occupies the northwest quadrant of this circular area. The elegantly simple, clean lined bus station looks as if it were built only a few years ago, but it was not. Designed by Gyula Rimanóczy (1903-1958), it was built in 1937, and it is one of several Modernist buildings that can be viewed in the leafy suburb of Pasaret.

Close to the bus station on the northeast quadrant of the circular piazza, there is another building designed by Gyula Rimanóczy. Constructed between 1931 and 1934, it is Pasaret’s parish church of St Anthony of Padua. When we were in Budapest, many churches were locked closed except on Sundays. Luckily for us, on the Saturday morning we visited Pasaret, the church was open, and we were able to enter. We were amazed by the beauty of its interior, which is kept in immaculate condition. Although it was constructed over 90 years ago, this church is one of the best twentieth century churches I have visited, comparing very favourably with the reconstructed Coventry Cathedral and Le Corbusier’s church at Ronchamp.

The spacious, tall, well-lit church is filled with details designed by Rimanóczy, and works of art created by his contemporaries. These are summarised in a Hungarian Wikipedia article (https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasar%C3%A9ti_t%C3%A9ri_templom), which provides a good idea of the richness of the building’s decorative features, and is translated as follows:

“The stained glass windows are the work of Lili Árkayné Sztehlo (1934). The pulpit (with the symbols of the four evangelists) and the original altar reliefs are the work of Béla Ohmann (1934). The Heart of Jesus altar (1934), the Saint Joseph altar (1939) and the Stations of the Cross reliefs (1939 ) were created by Éva Lőte. The wood-carved reliefs of the Virgin Mary altar and the Saint Francis chapel, together with the marble altar, are the work of István Karle Bicskei (1935). The altar of St. Teresa dates from 1942 (created by Jenő Zoltán Hallgass), and was donated by Rimanóczy. Gyula Rimanóczy designed even the smallest details, such as all the light fixtures (the text of the eight beatitudes described in the New Testament can be read in the middle of the “wall sconces” on the eight columns, which are still visible today), the holy water tank, the candlesticks, and the communion chalices. The goldsmiths István Iván and Jenő Hadina made the goldsmiths ‘ works of art. The statue of Christ Falling to the Ground in front of the tower was donated to the Franciscan order in 1931 by the sculptor Sári Somló before the church was built . The four bells of the church date from 1935 (from the Budapest workshop of László Szlezák) …”

Despite the wealth of artwork and decorative detail, the church feels uncluttered and airy. It is a gentle modern structure, not a brutal one. It feels wonderfully peaceful and calming being within it. It is a church that unlike many gothic and baroque edifices does not feel oppressive; it is a place in which to contemplate peacefully.

Pasareti utca, the main road of the suburb, continues northwest from the church and the bus station, reaching a bifurcation after just over 500 yards. A small road, Napraforgo utca, begins at the bifurcation. All the 22 houses along this short thoroughfare were built between 1930 and 1931 in the Modernist style. This estate was inspired by those modern model housing estates already built in countries including Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Switzerland. When looking at the houses in Naproforgo utca, it is not difficult to detect the influence of leading design institutions such as the Bauhaus, which functioned in Germany from 1919 until 1933.

The history of the Naproforgo utca estate is concisely related in a website (https://www.offbeatbudapest.com/features/how-the-bauhaus-shaped-architecture-in-budapest/) from which I have extracted the following:

“The most interesting large-scale housing development of the early 1930s was in Napraforgó utca, a leafy suburb on the outskirts of Budapest. The private developers, Fejér & Dános, hired a motley crew of 18 leading architects that included both the radically modern Molnár and the notoriously conservative university professor, Gyula Wälder, to build 22 small houses for middle class families.

The project was a success and all houses were sold soon after its completion in 1931. The charming side street was flanked by two-story, flat-roofed family homes, each slightly different but fitting into a modern aesthetic. The houses were sun-filled and came with fully equipped kitchens and bathrooms. Unfortunately, some of them have since been neglected, parceled up, or unrecognizably rebuilt. In recent years, locals have started to appreciate the legacy of Napraforgó utca – there are many walking tours, for example – and made a conscious effort to protect its buildings.”

The architects of the buildings in the street are listed at https://modernism-in-architecture.org/buildings/napraforgo-street/, which also includes brief summaries of their biographies. One of those who oversaw the planning of the estate was Farkas Molnar (1897-1945), who had been a member of Germany’s Bauhaus in the 1920s. However, as an article (https://www.artmagazin.hu/articles/archivum/napraforgo_utca) translated from a Hungarian website revealed, though Modernist, some conventionality was retained in the design of the buildings on the estate:

“The model estate thus shows the diversity that is typical of Budapest’s modern architecture in general. The floor plans of the buildings corresponded to the basic type of European family houses of the time, with the service rooms and living room on the ground floor, the bathroom and several bedrooms on the first floor – in terms of spatial connections and spatial organization, the houses showed little of the functionalist character of modern architecture. Most of the facades were not strictly modern in style or inspired by Bauhaus, many used brick cladding, art deco or historicizing formal elements (such as house number 9 by Róbert K. Kertész, house number 16 by the Tauszig and Róth designers, or house number 22 by Béla Baráth and Ede Novák). At the same time, the construction created an opportunity to demonstrate new building materials, structures (sliding windows, built-in wardrobes), and less common mechanical solutions (such as air heating), since the houses of the model estate were opened to visitors – just like in the case of the Werkbundsiedlungs [experimental modernist housing estates built in Central Europe]. This form of communication with potential buyers and the idea of ​​the “model estate” continued in practice in the 1960s, for example in the Óbuda Experimental Housing Estate. Despite the different perceptions of the architects, the image of the street consisting of nineteen buildings became harmonious; on the similar-sized plots (with one exception), single-storey, smaller-than-usual family houses were built, mostly with carefully matured proportions, consisting of cubist masses, mostly with flat roofs, and without traditional decoration. In addition to the uniform fence and street lamps, the sight of the geometric gardens consisting of square plant islands designed by the gardener László Solty also contributed to the uniform image of the street.”

Despite these observations, I felt that the edifices on Naproforgos utca have a distinctly Modernist appearance or ‘flavour’.

We walked along the street, viewing the buildings, each of which has a label outside it giving the name of its architect. Most of them seemed to be in good condition, but a couple looked as if they need considerable care and attention.  Each of the two-storey dwellings still look contemporary although they were built more than 90 years ago, and I would be happy to live in any of them. Halfway along the street, there is a small, rectangular public garden. At one end of this, there is a memorial bearing the date ‘1932’ and a list of the architects involved in the designing of the buildings on the estate.

During visits made to Budapest prior to our latest in September 2026, I have often visited the Pasaret district, mainly to visit elderly friends, one of whom is now aged 104, who lived on the main road leading to Pasareti Square, and also once to view the house where the composer Bela Bartok lived between 1932 and 1940. However, it was only during our latest trip to Budapest that I spotted in a guidebook published in 2001 that Pasaret is the home of some interesting, attractive 1930s Modernist architecture.

 

 

Art and architecture in the middle of Middlesbrough

NEW YORK CITY has its MOMA, and Middlesbrough in northeast England’s has its MIMA, which stands for Middlesbrough Institute of Modern Art.  Standing proudly in the heart of the town, these building housing MIMA is a superb piece of modern architecture.

 

MIMA in the background and sculpture by Oldenburg and Van Bruggen

Completed in 2007, this adventurous edifice was designed by a Dutch firm: Erick van Egeraat Associated Architects. The building alone is a fine work of art, most fitting for housing artworks and events connected with them.

 

During our visit on 21 April 2026, we saw several items on display, including many fascinating ceramic objects and some images relating to Middlesbrough past and present. Also, we refreshed ourselves with good coffee served in MIMA’s attractive café/restaurant. Outside the buildings, there is a large sculpture by Claes Oldenburg and Coosje van Bruggen called “Bottle of Notes”. Created in 1993, it the only work by these artists made in the UK. 

 

Even if there is no special exhibition being shown at MIMA, it is worth visiting the place to savour its architecture.

Artists and architecture at a gallery in south London

ARCHITECTURE, GOOD OR BAD, is one of the arts, and a practical one at that. Until 12 April 2026, the South London Gallery (part of the former Camberwell School of Art) is holding an exhibition of artworks created because of the artists’ reaction to architecture, real and imagined. Theire interpretations include references to intact buildings, as well as ruins and monuments.

By William Braithwaite

The works I liked best in the exhibition were a series of vertical sculptures made by William Braithwaite using timber and concrete. In his personal website (www.williambraithwaite.com/) he explained:

“I aim to create a dialogue between the two disciplines, considering how they inform and complement each other … While my work may reference architectural forms, it remains rooted in visual and conceptual exploration rather than function. The materials, scale, and context of my sculptures serve as tools to examine the aesthetic and spatial qualities of architecture.”

And this he does very effectively as can be seen when viewing the works on display at the South London Gallery. The sculptures are concrete pillars, square in cross-section, with staircases carved in the concrete of the pillars. These steps spiral up the pillars, and above each flight of steps, one can see what one imagines to be the undersides of other flights.

The other artworks on display were interesting but not as arresting as the sculptures by Braithwaite. Of these, I liked a trompe-l’oeil by Ally Fallon, and a larger than life set of sewing tools (needles, pins, and safety pin), whose connection with architecture was not obvious to me.

There are only a couple of days left before this exhibition ends, and I am glad I was able to see it.  Exhibitions held at the South London Gallery rarely, if ever, disappoint. So, if you have missed the one described above, try to see whatever they show in the future (see: www.southlondongallery.org/).

Art Deco in London’s Kensington

Winchester Court

I AM ENTHUSIASTIC about the Art Deco style of architecture that flourished mainly between the two World Wars, but has not been entirely abandoned today.

Bombay, which I visit often, is rich in Art Deco buildings,  but in London, there are fewer examples. In Kensington, Winchester Court is a fine example. Built in 1935 on the site of a demolished orphanage,  it is not far from two other Art Deco edifices on High Street Kensington, both built as department stores: the former Barkers and its neighbour, Derry and Thoms.

Those interested in Art Deco will find interesting examples dotted around the London’s suburbs that developed during the inter-war years.

Architecture as art at a gallery in Bombay

OUR FRIEND GEETHA Mehra has her art gallery on 2nd Pasta Lane, near Colaba Causeway in Bombay. On one of our visits in November 2025, she had organised an exhibition, “Behind the Façade”, which consisted of works by the contemporary artist Teja Gavankar. The artefacts on display were almost architectural, some using brickwork and others containing other materials, As the gallery’s website explained:

“Gavankar is interested in dual states, in forms that appear rigid, where solidity gives way to softness and movement. A dialogue between natural and built environments unfolds, stemming from the artist’s experience of living in Mumbai’s suburbs. Gavankar observes the contours of the city during her commute, seeing organic forms emerge in its industrial undertones.”

Whereas architects make structures which are functional, Gavanka created architectural structures that were artworks designed to challenge the viewers perceptions of space. Seeing the brickwork sculptures and the patterned brick façade she designed for the gallery reminded me of the brick workshop we saw in progress at the Chitrakala Parishad in Bangalore a few days earlier (see: https://adam-yamey-writes.com/2025/11/20/bricks-and-design-at-an-art-school-in-bangalore-bengaluru/).

A fine facade in the heart of Ahmedabad

ALTHOUGH WE HAVE visited Ahmedabad (in Gujarat) at least 4 times, we had never been to the hectically busy Manek Chowk area in daylight, which is why we had never noticed a fine building until today, when we went to the area in the morning. After dark, the area is so busy that one needs to be wary of the numerous autorickshaws and motorised two-wheelers whizzing around to notice the architecture of the buildings overlooking the frenetic bazaar.

 

The building we noticed this morning (1 December 2025) has a facade with some neo-classical detailing and jharokhas (projecting windows). Overall, this edifice, which is far more elegant than its neighbours,  has a European appearance. Above its main entrance, you can see the following words (in English): “The Ahmedabad Share and Stock Brokers Association”.

 

According to a website (https://www.knocksense.com/ahmedabad/exploring-the-history-of-ahmedabad-stock-exchange-a-symbol-of-entrepreneurship-since-1894), until 1996 :

“… Ahmedabad Stock Exchange functioned in a building constructed in 1919 when the Bombay Share and Stock Brokers association collaborated with the Ahmedabad Share and Stock Brokers association. And that heritage style building served as ASE’s home before it was shifted to Kamdhenu complex in 1996.”

The Kamdhenu Complex is in the outskirts of Ahmedabad.

 

Following the establishment of the Bombay Stock Exchange in 1875, the Ahmedabad Stock Exchange (‘ASE’) was set up in 1894. At that time and until well after Independence,  Gujarat was part of the former Bombay Presidency. According to an article in Wikipedia, at first:

“… stock exchange functioned under the framework of the Bombay Securities Contracts Act, 1925. Following the passage of The Securities Contract Regulations Act, 1956 the Gujarat Share & Stock Exchange, Indian Share and General Exchange Association and Bombay Share and Stock Exchange, Share and Stock Brokers Association merged with the Ahmedabad Share and Stock Brokers Association and gave rise to ASE.”

 

The ASE was India’s second oldest stock exchange, the oldest being in Bombay. As already noted, the ASE functioned in the elegant, now disused edifice we saw at Manek Chowk today.

Bricks and design at an art school in Bangalore (Bengaluru)

THE HUMBLE BRICK is a much used material in the construction of many kinds of building. It can be used unimaginatively, as it often is, or imaginatively to create visually intriguing textures.

 

During a visit to one of Bangalore’s art schools,  the Chitrakala Parishath,  we watched architecture students participating in an outdoor “brick techtonics” workshop. This was being supervised by the noted Indonesian architect Andy Rahman.

 

We watched small groups of students arranging bricks so as to make interesting patterns, following plans drawn up by Andy Rahman. As they worked, Mr Rahman moved from group to group, discussing with them what they were doing.

 

All around the area where the workshop was taking place, labourers were working noisily on a construction site where new buildings were being built for the art school. Thus, the architects working on realising theoretical bricklaying design ideas were surrounded by real life applications of established building practices.

 

I hope that when the budding architecture students begin designing ‘for real’ that they will recall the interesting brickwork creativity that Mr Rahman was introducing to them. For he was showing them that even the humble brick can become a component in a visually fascinating design.

Art Deco in a north London Suburb

EXAMPLES OF THE ART DECO style that was popular during the era between the two World Wars can be found all over London. In the newer part of Hampstead Garden Suburb (north London), there are a few examples of this style.

Kingsley Close, which leads west from Kingsley Way, contains only houses built in the Art Deco style.

You can read more about these and other examples of this style in Hampstead Garden Suburb in my book about the Suburb, which is available from Amazon: https://www.amazon.co.uk/GOLDERS-GREEN-HAMPSTEAD-GARDEN-SUBURB/dp/B0BHG873FB/