:format(webp):quality(75))
SCH: Timmy, what originally brought you to Burckhardt?
TN: When I was an assistant to Heinrich Bernhard Hoesli, I received a letter from Martin Burckhardt, in which he wrote, «We’re thinking about expanding the management of the office and we’re in the process of getting in touch with a number of architects.» Back then, I was employed by a very small office in Zurich and felt honored to be asked. I then joined Burckhardt in 1969.
CI: What was special about working at Burckhardt?
TN: One of my personal highlights was being able to further my education in the area of local, regional and national planning, which helped me enormously, especially at the end of the 1970s. And I was also able to travel all over the world. For example, I once went to Tehran with British architect James Stirling for the programming of a biochemical research center, or to the United Arab Emirates for an organoleptic analysis laboratory, as well as to Libya with Zweifel Strickler. They needed our knowledge and expertise in industrial construction and chemistry over there. That one assignment took me to Tehran over twenty times. It was always a bit of an adventure and when there were no available rooms at the hotel, I just slept in the sauna.
For this particular commission, we were told that we could only do the programming, but not the actual building. I attempted to negotiate, and they then agreed that I could participate in the project on condition that I collaborated either with two or three Iranian architects or with a renowned international architect. I had to decide on the spot, without any time to think about it, and chose the latter option. However, the very next day I had to specify which international architect I wanted to work with. So I replied: «With James Stirling». And as luck would have it, right at the same time they were working with him on another project, a small museum. Everything was quickly arranged, and James Stirling was told that a gentleman from Switzerland by the name of Timmy Nissen would be coming to his office the next day to work with him. We developed the preliminary project, but then the revolution began, the Shah was ousted, our client was killed and the project manager fled. It was all terribly chaotic.
I was responsible for Burckhardt’s international activities in the Middle East and did a lot of programming. There were times when I probably knew how a lab worked better than the on site lab expert, simply because I found it interesting.
When we were abroad people didn’t introduce us by saying «These are our architects», but very proudly with «these are our Swiss architects». Swissness still has positive connotations. And if you were able to present large buildings, such as the ones we’d built for the pharmaceutical industry, it really made a good impression.
CI: What milestones did you witness during your time at Burckhardt?
TN: One major milestone for me, as far as construction goes, was the Vivarium at Basel Zoo. I thought it a brilliant idea – and still do – that you’re guided through the Vivarium along this corridor that takes you under the surface of the water, resulting in that you can only focus on one exhibit, which can be viewed anytime, and you are never able to see everything at once.
CI: In retrospect, which projects – realized or not – were/are the most important for the further development of Burckhardt?
TN: All buildings for the chemical industry that came about through Samuel Koechlin’s relationship with J.R. Geigy AG. The global master plans are skillfully planned and look very promising in the long term, too. The office building on the Schorenareal site in Basel was a daring and pioneering project, being one of the first open-plan offices in Switzerland.
CI: Which projects epitomize your time personally at Burckhardt?
TN: One would be the Geigy high-rise with its «wings»; it was the tallest building in the city at the time and caused an uproar because of the necessary building permits. But Martin Burckhardt was always able to get his way, because he could come across quite forcefully at times. I remember once when the Sandoz CEO confronted him with the idea of opening up the network of architectural offices for future projects, meaning that he’d like to bring in additional offices to get their ideas. Martin replied, «I’ve ‹sacrificed› 15–20 years of my life for Sandoz and now this?» (imitates Martin Burckhardt’s indignation). We got up and left, but when we were outside, Martin looked at me and asked mischievously, «Did I overdo it?»
CI: Finish this sentence for us: «Martin Heinrich Burckhardt was...»
TN: «... outstanding.» If I had to choose one word to describe him, it would definitely be «outstanding». He was one of the select few who had the ability to plan for the long term and was able to identify unknown needs for change – something that today might be described as flexible, agile, and adaptable. He was also able to spot phenomenal ideas early on, and he had a great sense of humor. He was definitely an original, but also a difficult person. There was always the question of expenses on projects and the relationship between expenditure and income. Martin always had an ambivalent relationship to money: He had a lot of it, but it also made him nervous. We always had big discussions about how much to charge for a project.
And of course he could draw incredibly well – like God, but also like the devil.
CI: What are you proud of?
TN: The Weiherweg Retirement Center project. There’s a story about that too, I collaborated with Steffi Bader on that project. Martin Burckhardt once came by and commented that it was «terrible and a total disaster» and marched straight to the then head of the Building Commission, George Gruner, to prevent the project from proceeding along the same lines. Of course, he didn’t respond. We were able to successfully complete the project.
SCH: Was it incidents like that part of the reason for your departure from Burckhardt, or what happened back then which made you and Edi Bürgin decide to leave?
TN: Once I was having dinner with my wife Catherine on a Sunday evening and she asked me why I was in such a bad mood again. I replied that the upcoming office restructuring was causing me quite a headache. She then asked why I just didn’t leave Burckhardt, as work seemed to be getting me down more and more. That’s what set the ball rolling. After consulting with my four children, who enthusiastically supported the idea, I went to Edi’s (Bürgin) office on Monday and announced, «Edi, it’s decided, I’m leaving Burckhardt.» He just replied, «Me too.» He didn’t even say that he was coming with me, just «Me too.»
In September 1981, we went together to see Martin Burckhardt and tell him our decision to leave. He asked how long we would be staying, because as partners we actually had to give six months’ notice. Towards the end of that next year, we left and founded our own office, «Bürgin Nissen», it was 1982, and we had no clients and no work.
SCH: What was your relationship like afterwards?
TN: A large administrative building for Tchibo in Germany was still in planning at Burckhardt before we left and Tchibo wanted to realize this primarily with Edi Bürgin, but Martin insisted that he should be the partner in charge of this project. As a result, he lost the contract, because Tchibo only wanted to complete the project with Bürgin Nissen. There was another story when the director of the PTT (the Swiss Postal, Telegraph and Telephone agency) told me that he had received a letter from Martin Burckhardt regarding one of our big upcoming projects for the PTT. It stated that the project was destined to be one big disaster – from the point of view of design, technicalities, scheduling and finances. The director replied to Martin Burckhardt simply that he was convinced that we were not making a single mistake and that we would no doubt be able to manage the project perfectly to the end. Martin was a bad loser, but at the same time had respect for us. But obviously, the relationship wasn’t particularly good after our departure.
One thing that has always characterized Burckhardt is no doubt the diversity of people.
Timothy O. Nissen
CI: What is Burckhardt’s DNA?
TN: One thing that has always characterized Burckhardt is no doubt the diversity of people. The versatility generates not only availability, but also flexibility.
CI: What was/is the significance of the terms team spirit and partnership?
TN: That you can rely on each other 100 percent. Each of the partners at Burckhardt had their strengths and weaknesses – but also things in common and specializations. As a result, we always complemented each other well. We were able to collectively look at the big picture and carry it forward together – we really did complement each other in this and had respect for each other. Martin Burckhardt’s strengths included his humanism and his knowledge of the city and the Basel region. He was also known to suddenly refer to Aristotle in a discussion, for example.
All in all, I always had inspiring and interesting people around me at Burckhardt, especially Steffi Bader. He was a stubborn kind of guy and never let himself be intimidated. I once asked him, «How do you cope working here, with the hierarchy that runs through every department?» He looked at me with a beaming smile and replied, «I simply work my way through the gaps in your organization.» I’ll never forget that.
For me, architecture is the concretization of societal and social needs. Its focus is on people.
Timothy O. Nissen
CI: What importance does architecture have for you?
TN: For me, architecture is the concretization of societal and social needs. Its focus is on people. I like it when something is built and it takes into account the needs and expectations of the people who are going to use it or spend time in it. I believe that this creates a sure path to success and is what makes projects successful.
SCH: One of Burckhardt’s guiding principles was always the idea of responsibility towards society. Was that something that specifically came from Martin Burckhardt?
TN: I don’t think so, but there is certainly also the other extreme, where only the formal aspects take center stage and are the objective of the architecture – but then again that wasn’t Burckhardt either. Such buildings can undoubtedly be beautiful, but if you haven’t understood their purpose, then a building is still not really successful.
CI: What are your most important insights and what is the most valuable knowledge you’ve gained from your work?
TN: Of course, the bigger something gets, the better everything has to be organized. You can’t simply transfer the attitude you shared as a two-man team to an office with 40 people. Everything has to grow organically, and you have to make sure that organization remains a supportive tool and doesn’t become a management tool.
I’ve always thought it would be good to have a proper apprenticeship program at Burckhardt, because I think that an office of this size also has a responsibility to run one. This ensures that there is always a good mix of young and old, and prevents an office of «growing old».
CI: What advice would you give to a young person starting out in this profession?
TN: I would suggest starting off at a smaller office and not at one of the big ones, where you would be one among hundreds of others. This would give you the opportunity to learn more and benefit from this.
CI: What issues are you involved with today; is architecture one of them?
TN: The list is long and includes some aspects that are perhaps all too common today, but are nevertheless important: Sustainability, new materials, circular planning etc.
As far as urban planning is concerned, I like to quote Vittorio Lampugnani’s insightful statement: «If we take the environmental threat posed by construction seriously, it’s not enough to build with wood and green our façades. We need to make forced mobility unnecessary, stop the senseless demolition of usable building materials, and put a stop to excessive land consumption. We have to pursue urban development.»
CI: What do you wish for the future (of Burckhardt)?
TN: For Burckhardt, I’d like to see things continuing the way they developed with Samuel Schultze. And by the way, I think it would be exciting to implement the concept you suggested, Sämi, and have different juries judge the same projects. This would be hard to achieve, of course, but it would definitely be exciting, because it would show to what extent the composition of the jury actually influences the decision – or not.
back to Overview
:format(webp):quality(75))
:format(webp):quality(75))
:format(webp):quality(75))