Home | Introduction About Us Projects | Contact Us
				Coussan House (Maison des Cultures) Restoration
				Letter to President Ray P. Authement
				Vermilionville: History, Context & Description Vermilionville was conceived of by the Bayou Vermilion District (a quasi-governmental organization, charged with the maintenance and development of the vermilion River) in approximately 1985.(1) Steve Oubre, AIA, was the master planner and architect for several of the recreated programmatic elements such as the entry building and the performance center. The name“Vermilionville” comes from the first name given to what is now Lafayette in 1836. (2)
				Broussard House, 1790 (3)
				Entry Building (4)
				Vermilionville occupies twenty-three acres on the east side of Lafayette, a city of approximately 110,257 in Southwest Louisiana. (5) The sequence or procession through Vermilionville is roughly in reverse chronological order. It begins in 1893, with the recreated raised Acadian cottage visitor center and ends in the relocated and restored circa 1790, Broussard house. (6) There are approximately 17 structures at Vermilionville. Of these, 6 are original, relocated buildings.(7) (Now, there are eighteen total structures, including 7 originals which were moved to the site. The Coussan residence is the 18th structure.)
				Motives & Goals The visitor brochure begins, “Step into Vermilionville and step back into time.” (8) It continues, Vermilionville“authentically recreates life in the Acadiana area between 1765 and 1890.” (9) In fact, the words “recreate” and “create” are used three times in this short tri-fold brochure. The Interpretive Walking Tour brochure adds to the notion of authenticity: “Vermilionville is a living history museum, whose purpose is to preserve and interpret authentic elements of folk life and cultures of the Attakapas area between 1765 and 1890.” (10) According to Steve Oubre, AIA, the initial concept of Vermilionville was that of a “village” illustrating Acadian life from 1765-1893. (11) It quickly became apparent through research, however, that the Acadians did not live in “villages” per se’. They were rural people whose primary context was the agricultural land on which they farmed.
				Interior, Broussard House, 1790 (12)
				Interior, Broussard House, 1790 (13)
				The decision was made that Vermilionville could not be a “recreated village” because historically they did not exist. Therefore, Vermilionville inevitably became a museum exhibit- or living history museum. Although every attempt was made to create an historical context for the buildings, authenticity, is maintained primarily within the buildings, not in the spaces in between
				Fence separating the living-history section (14)
				The planning of Vermilionville has obviously focused on the maintenance of “authenticity.” For example, there is a fence which creates not only a physical divide but a cultural and “authentic” divide between the front half of Vermilionville which is the commercial and service-side of the facility and the back half, which is the living-history museum portion (or “heritage park” as the brochure says.) (15) Vermilionville, though its steering committee of respected Lafayette scholars, Cajun and Creole historians and curators, has set an ambitious course for itself. Although Acadian Village, also in Lafayette, has a similar mission of preserving Acadian Architecture, Vermilionville has a greater public responsibility to preserve and interpret. This is due in part to its proximity to the Jean Lafitte National Historic Park and Acadian Cultural Center. Whether fair or not, the perceived model for Vermilionville is Williamsburg, Virginia, the most well-respected living-history museum. Through focusing on a case study involving one particular structure, the Coussan house, and its historic reconstruction, I intend to highlight the dilemmas of “authenticity.”
				Coussan House, 1850 (16)
				Sign, Vermilionville (17)
				Coussan House Specifically, my focus as an architect is the issue of architectural authenticity and the value of“recreations.” Which seems particularity apropos in an architectural mirage setting, such as Las Vegas. My direct experience with historical authenticity is the restoration of an 1850’s home being currently being conducted by myself, Professor Edward J. Cazayoux, AIA and students from the University of Louisiana at Lafayette. Historians would say that the home is not a particularly important example of Acadian architecture; in fact it was more than likely a poor individual’s rural home, built with minimal means and independent of any historical precedents. But in a way, is this not why we appreciate it? It is direct and as such offers a possible glimpse of the average Acadian’s life instead of the exception (such as a plantation home.) The initial importance of this venture of restoration is the preservation aspect. Had the house not been donated to the university along with money from a separate donor, it would have been destroyed. Vermilionville became the logical choice for a transplanted existence for the home. Thus it quickly became once removed from any possible “authenticity” on its new site.
				Detail, collombage frame & bousillage (18)
				The Coussan house, circa 1850, is a colombage (timber-frame) and bousillage-infill (Spanish moss and mud) home. It has cypress framing, floors and siding. We believe its original roof was cypress shakes and subsequently it had corrugated metal roofing and now cedar shakes. It is a four room cottage with a front porch and a second floor garconniere (boy’s room,) although it was more than likely a relatively unfinished space.
				Kitchen wing which was removed (19)
				Roof and porch being dismantled (20)
				In the “restoration” or as I prefer, “reconstruction process,” the house was partially disassembled in order to move it. The front porch and entire second floor roof was removed. Within reasonable expectations, the material was cataloged for later reassembly. Also, what we believed to be a non-original kitchen addition was dismantled and the material salvaged.
				Concrete foundation at Vermilionville At the new site, students and faculty, as well as volunteers from various trades (excavator and concrete supplier) constructed a new foundation. Where the original house had no foundations per se (a pad of brick roughly one foot below grade,) the house in its new location has a modern concrete strip footing to eliminate differential settlement. We justified this by citing the fate of some of the other homes which were moved to the Vermilionville and placed back on piers placed on top of the ground. Many of these homes have subsequently experienced settlement. Our concrete foundation is below grade and thus out of view of “authenticity” hawks. Next, we made the decision to use wood block piers as were sometimes used in rural settings were brick was unavailable. However, cypress stumps which provide relatively rot-proof piers are largely unavailable today. So, we used treated pine 12x12’s, where visible and precast concrete piers, under the house. In our attempt to preserve the status quo of “authenticity,” we handchiseled and chain-sawed a rough-cut, tapered profile.
				Wood pier (21) Concrete pier (22)
				The reframing or reconstruction of the roof best illustrates the conflict we were having with the authenticity issue. The rough 2x4 rafters which originally framed the roof were deemed inadequate by today’s structural standards as well as their distressed condition. Therefore, new 2x6 pine rafters were used. In a strange combination (which is probably the most illustrative and illuminating), new framing material works in concert with rough round bracing timbers (still with bark on the surface!)
				“Topping-out” structure (23)
				Meeting of old and new (24)
In another meeting of old and new, oriented-strand board (OSB) decking sheaths the roof covered with 2 layers of 15# building felt, polypropylene “cedar-breather” netting and new hand-split cedar shake shingles.
Cedar shakes on roof (25)
In its current condition, the new cedar shingles, contrast the peeling, irregular and in some cases, water-damaged cypress siding and exposed boussillage/ timber structure. But, it is this jarring contrast which is again illuminating and instructive. Indeed, it is our quasi-historic or reasonably authentic structure which often gets the most attention by passer-bys and visitors to Vermilionville. The visible process of excavating the structure, and replacing elements with new materials highlights what is really there and what is not there! It seems to give them pause and forces the visitor to imagine how the structure might have actually been built, viewed and occupied originally. Contrary to what preservationists, historians and curators might say, I believe that by seeing nontraditional or non-authentic materials and modern construction practices, a visitor gains the impetus to question, investigate and understand. Based on Vermilionville’s stated goals and motive as well as the Coussan house, as a case study, what are the current realities?
Realities It can be said that Vermilionville has been largely successful in its mission: that of preserving and interpreting Acadian and Creole culture and architecture. Indeed, on any given day, the museum exhibits the ancient crafts of Acadian cooking, carpentry and blacksmithing. Historic homes which were slated for demolition were saved and are in the process of being restored. It is the claim and artifice of “recreation” and “authenticity” which must be challenged. It must be admitted that the “authentic” cannot be defined in concrete terms when it comes to describing how an enormous society of individuals lived and breathed, hundreds of years ago. There can be no one “official” story. There are many stories. There are many types of Acadian people just are there many types of Acadian architecture. The attempts to classify and clearly understand the actions of previous generation may be interesting but they also limit the visitor’s possible interpretations. As stated in the mission statement, the goal of “interpreting” culture is the problem. It is not the historian’s and planner’s responsibility to interpret Cajun culture; it is the visitor’s responsibility. Vermilionville tries to package Acadian culture for easy and quick consumption. One cannot blame them- they are competing with today’s pop culture for tourist dollars. But, it is my belief that Vermilionville should not claim authenticity or moral superiority over other tourist attractions which attempt to portray and sell Acadian culture. Is not a visit to Mulates, the renowned Cajun restaurant, just as valuable a means of interpreting Acadian culture as Vermilionville?
Reasonable Authenticity The issue of historic restoration and reconstruction is a questionable proposition. How can we, as residents of the 21st century, expect to build, reconstruct or restore 18th century architecture to its original condition in an “authentic” way? We can try, and this may be useful, especially in the context of a university design-build studio. In this way, students hopefully will learn, through observation and action, aspects of historic construction. It is a mistake, however, to assume or expect that we can or should be “authentic” in the methods, means and outcome of construction. The reality of Vermilionville’s authenticity goes only as far as the view or understanding when one“squints” their eyes. When “squinting” the visitor can gain an understanding of proportion and possibly historic materials. But what “squinting” accomplishes is to eliminate the “non-authentic”elements such as air-conditioning condensers, electrical panels, concrete foundations, electric lighting, trash cans, wheelchair lifts and the like. So ultimately, the “authenticity” of Vermilionville only lives-up to the “squint” test.
Wheelchair lift (26)
Mechanical Equipment (27)
There is nothing wrong with reasonable authenticity at Vermilionville. It does not make it any less enjoyable of an experience for the tourist from Nova Scotia or Athens, Georgia. Indeed, they will enjoy the visit and learn various aspects of Acadian and Creole culture regardless of the fact that these modern conveniences are visible or the living-history artisans sometimes smoke “Camel” cigarettes or wear Seiko watches. We cannot deny that we are here in the 21st century. Thus, my primary critique of Vermilionville is not that it is “non-authentic” or “authentic enough,” but instead that this inconsistency is constantly covered-up or worse yet, ignored. I am not arguing that authenticity is not a worthy goal to strive for. It is noble indeed. But lines need to be clearly draw and made visible to all involved: the historians, administration, architects and visitors. Where does reasonable authenticity end and poor substitutes begin? This question will continue in an analysis of a similar yet very different condition, that of a traditional neighborhood development
.
Summer 2002– Demolition
Fall 2002
Summer 2003
Summer 2003– Reframing of Walls, Porch & Ramp
Fall 2003
Spring 2005
Commemoration Ceremony
(1) Oubre, Steve, Interview. April 4, 2003. (2) An Interpretive Walking Tour, Vermilionville Historical Steering Committee (3) Photo, W. Geoff Gjertson (4) Ibid (5) Vermilionville Visitor Brochure and 2000 Census (6) Ibid (7) Vermilionville Visitor Brochure (8) Ibid (9) Ibid (10) An Interpretive Walking Tour, Vermilionville Historical Steering Committee (11) Oubre, Steve. Interview. March 14, 2003. (12) Photo, W. Geoff Gjertson (13) Ibid (14) Photo, W. Geoff Gjertson (15) Vermilionville Visitor Brochure (16) Photo W. Geoff Gjertson (17) Ibid (18) Ibid (19) Ibid (20) Ibid (21) Ibid (22) Ibid (23) Ibid (24) Ibid (25) Ibid (26) Ibid (27) Ibid

Document last revised Friday, April 28, 2006 12:44 PM

Copyright 2003 by the University of Louisiana at Lafayette
Building Institute, PO Box 43850, Lafayette LA 70504-3850
Phone: 337/482-5175 · E-Mail: gjertson@louisiana.edu