Lexington Books
Pages: 168
•
Trim: 6¼ x 9½
978-0-7391-9161-3 • Hardback • March 2016 • $108.00 • (£83.00)
978-0-7391-9162-0 • eBook • March 2016 • $102.50 • (£79.00)
Diana Dolev teaches at the School of Design at the Holon Institute of Technology.
Chapter 1: Jerusalem and the Mount Scopus Site
Chapter 2: Patrick Geddes and Frank Mears: The First Master-Plan, 1919–1920
Chapter 3: Fritz Kornberg: Necessary Necessary Beginnings, 1923–1925
Chapter 4: Frank Mears and Benjamin Chaikin: First Three New Buildings, 1926–1929
Chapter 5: Julian Clarence Levi: The Donor’s Vision for the Jewish Studies Building, 1929
Chapter 6: Benjamin Chaikin: The Neoclassic Open-Air Theater, 1933
Chapter 7: Erich Mendelsohn: Secular Spirituality, 1934–1941
Chapter 8: Carl Rubin and Jacob Jawicz: The Museum of Jewish Antiquities, 1941
Chapter 9: Joseph Douglas Weiss: The Completion of the Jewish Studies Building, 1936–1940
Chapter 10: Richard Kauffmann: The University City, 1944–1948
The Planning and Building of the Hebrew University, 1919–1948: Facing the Temple Mount traces, for the first time, the history of the construction of this highly significant Zionist enterprise. . . The book also reveals comparatively unknown architects and their contribution to the campus.
— Israel Book Review
From Mount Scopus, just outside Jerusalem, the Hebrew University was intended to overlook Temple Mount and the Dome of the Rock. There could hardly be a more resonant setting for a university campus as this ‘Third Temple.’ And there could hardly be a richer cast of planners and architects involved in the first three decades of the university’s life as idea and built form: from Patrick Geddes and Frank Mears to Erich Mendelsohn and Richard Kaufmann. The story of the university and its buildings, from its first glimmerings in Zionist ideology through its manifold contradictions and paradoxes over the next three decades, is finely told in Diana Dolev’s book The Planning and Building of the Hebrew University, 1919–1948: Facing the Temple Mount. This fascinating account is scrupulously researched and well-detailed. It offers a curious parallel history—of mythological forms and new visions—to that of Palestine in the first half of the twentieth century.
— Mark Crinson, University of Manchester