Le Corbusier's Exhibition Pavilion: the Heterogeneous Character of His - DocsLib

sign in sign up

<<

Home , Philips Pavilion

*56"];t7PM/Pt/PWFNCFSt 181-194 Le Corbusier’s exhibition pavilion: The heterogeneous character of his modernism between representation and functionalism

Efe DUYAN FGFEVZBO!NTHTVFEVUSt%FQBSUNFOUPG"SDIJUFDUVSF 'BDVMUZPG"SDIJUFDUVSF Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, Istanbul, Turkey

3FDFJWFE"QSJMt Final Acceptance: August 2017

Abstract This study investigates the exhibition spaces designed by Le Corbusier and their common features by describing and classifying them as the existing literature does not offer a full genealogy of his exhibition spaces with the intent to identify con- nections between them. The relationship of architecture and the exhibited object is the key concept in understanding of the exhibition spaces, including the pavilions, galleries, and some of his museums, which can be described in three main groups: in the first group, architecture becomes the representation itself as a nomadic ges- ture. In the second group, the structure separates itself from the materiality of the exhibition to create a dual existence and in the third group, the structure and the exhibition obtain singular yet connected and well-defined identities. The reading of exhibition spaces indicates a career-long search by Corbusier for the identity of architecture as a representation of the exhibition itself, which explains the emergence of a template in the late years. The development of exhibition spaces from 1924 to 1962, evidences the existence of a clear leitmotif, which connects Corbus- ier’s pavilions one another and represents his conception of exhibition space. All temporary exhibition spaces have a very specific shape, which can be described as a reverse double triangular at the roof or on the facade. The relation of this formal leitmotif as the common feature and the understanding of exhibition space reveals an example of Corbusier’s rationalism, which contains elements of symbolism, formalism, functionalism and structural innovation as a synthesis.

Keywords

doi: 10.5505/itujfa.2017.83702 doi: Le Corbusier, Exhibition Pavilions, Representation, Functionalism, Leitmotiv. 182

1. Introduction The exhibition areas preserve their semi This paper will focus on the rela- public, circulation-based character, but tionship of the exhibition pavilions Le the limitless shell structure of attached Corbusier has designed throughout units becomes a more formally defined his career. In addition to the analysis of roof with double pediments. The last formal features of the temporary exhibi- pavilions, namely the Philips Pavilion, tion spaces, how Le Corbusier conceives Ahrenberg Palace and Heidi Weber Pa- them will also be described. On the ba- vilion, the last realized project of the ar- sis of a classification and genealogy, the chitect, represent a maturity where the common features of pavilions will be expressionist character of the shell con- brought to spotlight in terms of symbol- tinues, whereas the exhibition spaces ism, formalism and functionalism. become less nomadic and more unique. In the first part, the first exhibition While Phillips Pavilion is rather an ex- pavilions will be studied. The L’ E s p r i t ception, combining architecture with Nouveau Pavilion /FTUMÏ 1BWJMJPO the exhibition space, the Heidi We- #BUB1BWJMJPOBOE/FX5JNFT1BWJMJPO ber museum embodies the separation can be considered as a group of exhibi- of shell of folded steel and exhibition tion spaces, where an experimental and space and they both have their own ar- light structure puts forward the exhibi- chitectural formal character. tion and acts predominantly as a face- In the fifth part, the leitmotif will less skin to transform the architecture be evaluated on the background of Le into the exhibition itself. The structure Corbusier’s architecture. It will be not- in its pure sense exposes various timid ed that a certain understanding of ex- triangular experimentations. hibition space reveals itself throughout In the second part, it will be fo- the development of exhibition pavil- cused on the two pavilions as a period ions and, thus, prints its stamp as a leit- of transition. The Water Pavilion and motiv, which is the reverse triangles. Synthesis of Major Arts Pavilion rep- Finally, it will be suggested that re- resent an intermediate tone where the verse triangels have representational, structure becomes more independent formal and structural connotations. As than the exhibition areas. Thus, as the a conclusion, it will be noted that the structure becomes less attached to the leitmotiv as reverse triangles in exhi- exhibition, it also becomes less repre- bition is an example of Le Corbusier’s sentative. The independent umbrellas rationalist attitude. exhibit wave-like rise and falls in obtuse angles. 2. Exhibition pavilions: From In the third part, some of the muse- Nestlé Pavilion to Water Pavilion um designs of Le Corbusier will be an- Exhibition Pavilions are signs, like alyzed in terms of their relation to the billboards, that have the intention to exhibition pavilions to emphasize the draw attention. As portable structures, role of the triangle leitmotif. The World an exhibition pavilion is expected to Museum of Mundaneum, the City and stand for something else. Le Corbusi- State Museum and the Knowledge Mu- er’s first pavilion in 1924, L’ E s p i r i t No u - seum in Chandigarh (are the atypical veau, was a pavilion showcasing the museums of Le Corbusier, which are in modern life and it’s style of designs. a formal dialogue with exhibition pa- The graphically designed letters on the vilions. They have a direct connection outer wall reminds us that it was not a with the archaic pyramidal shape that real modern villa, but a promotion of was first used in Mundaneum’s muse- it. It was standing in the place of mod- um. It will be shown that the pyramidal ern architecture itself. While L’ E s p i r i t reference obtains certain concrete and Nouveau is the starting point implying representational functions, whereas BNBJOEJSFDUJPO JUJTUIF/FTUMÏ1BWJM- the historical reference weakens after ion that should be considered as the the Mundaneum project. first exhibition space speaking entirely A fourth group of pavilions can be for something else. described as a template, which were /FTUMÏ 1BWJMJPO JT EFUBDIBCMF FY- EFTJHOFEJOTBOEQSPQPTFENBOZ hibition pavilion for the Paris fair in times as a part of a cultural complex. 1928, adopting a metal framework

*56"];t7PM/Pt/PWFNCFSt&%VZBO

graphic design, the pavilion helped to popularize the metal and glass structure and acted as a strategy of promotion of modern materials. (Panigy- SBLJT The colorful facade was painted like a billboard and had a basic composition of metal and glass. The interior was like a “collage painting into which UIFWJFXFSDPVMEXBMLw /BFHMF The first thing that attracts attention is how the street facade gradually passes from transparency at the bottom to opaqueness so that the wings on top- sides of main sign give an effect expan- sion. The butterfly shaped roof on the other facade is enhancing this effect. Two obtuse triangles are striking, as it is neither a gable roof nor the ter- race roof described by Le Corbusier in Figure 1. Ateliers d’Artistes, 1910. “Five Points”. Interestingly, Le Corbusi- er were going to use the same butterfly roof in a house design, M.A.S. Maison JO BQSFGBCSJDBUFEESZDPOTUSVD- tion of standardized units to tie his rare use of butterfly roof to prefabrication. As L’ E s p r i t No u v e a u pavilion was a turning point in the design of modern JOUFSJPSBTBIPVTF UIF/FTUMÏ1BWJMJPO rather quietly sets the standards for exhibition spaces of Le Corbusier - a system of light architecture consisted of a metallic framework with a folded roof and covered with sheet metal. So, it is the first time a double triangular shape appears on the roof of an exhibition pavilion. A decade later, architecture and exhibition unifies once again in Bat’a Figure 2. Mundaneum, Musée Mondial, Pavilion, an unrealized design exe- FLC 32114 (FLC/ ADAGP). DVUFEJOGPSUIF$[FDITIPFBOE BJSQMBOF NBOVGBDUVSFS #BUB /BFHF- MF *UXBTBDMPTFECPYXJUIPOF ceiling consisting of translucent glass with a map on it and another as a projection screen. All walls were covered with photographs and texts or simply painted. An airplane was suspended to intensify the inseparable character of representation from the space. Repre- sentation was becoming one with the space. It was a combination of artifacts in the size of a building to surround Figure 3. Musée de la ville et de l’etat, FLC the visitor completely with the objects, 28814 (FLC/ ADAGP). visual material and texts. Whereas the interior was designed a separate entity DPBUFEXJUITIFFUNFUBM%FNPVOUBCMF from the structure, it was inseparably and functional, paired with the use of from the represented objects.

Le Corbusier’s exhibition pavilion: The heterogeneous character of his modernism between representation and functionalism 184

On the entrance the letters Bat’a were part of the geometric composition like UIFi&wBOEi/wMFUUFSTJOL’ E s p i r i t No u - veau’sPVUFSXBMMPSi/FTUMÏwJO/FTUMÏ Pavilion. Still, there was a continuous circulation in this rather tiny building and one single space despite being partly divided. It was supposed to be a continuous space as a converted pic- tured book. Le Corbusier was trying to use steel’s potential and in Bat’a he used the truss system not only in columns but also in the roof. Except a ceremoni- ous shed roof no triangular dominated shape can be seen in this unrealized building. But the truss with a slight Figure 4. Musée de la Connaissance, Chandigarh, 1962 (Le angle can be noticed in the section. yet Corbusier - Oeuvre complète, Birkhäuser, 2006). the roof detail connects this pavilion to the former galleries. The space inside ture was a flexible cover construction is covered with documents; even the atop. Its lightness puts the emphasis on walls were proper for projection. It is the interior, which Le Corbusier de- not a void; it is a customized space for scribes as a “trial of museum of popular a particular group of artifacts. Le Cor- education”. It was like a book with pho- busier’s emphasizing on standard pro- tos and passages on the panels, where duction elements exists here as well. By one could walk inside. His interest in standardization, the construction be- the tent as a primary form was evoked comes easier to proceed and it gives his earlier, as his popular book Towards a designs the notion of reproductively. /FX"SDIJUFDUVSFTVHHFTUTćF1SJN- Another pavilion designed around JUJWF UFOU DBO CF DPNQBSFE UP /FX UIF TBNF UJNF JT UIF /FX 5JNFT 1B- Times Pavilion, “where he preferred to WJMJPO 1BWJMMPO EFT 5FNQT /PVWFBV keep the interior free of architecture, After the failures of three proposals for as the roof hangs in an inversion of the 1BSJT &YQPTJUJPO B GPVSUI POF WBVMUFEGPSNw 4BNVFM UIF1SPKFDU%XBTĕOBMMZBDDFQUFEćF /FX 5JNFT 1BWJMJPO XBT QMBOOFE BT 3. The transition period: The an immense tent, which could be dis- separation of exhibition and mantled and transported to other plac- structure es. With the pylons outside support- The last pavilion proposal before ing the tent, it is a huge space, which the Second World War was for an ex- surrounds the exhibition inside. The hibition for the history of water and its exhibition acted as anthology of mod- importance in civilization. In August ern urbanism and it was a result of the -F$PSCVTJFSXBTTVNNPOFEUP many years of work by the architects the committee of the Liège Exhibition and their CIAM colleagues who were and was asked to submit his idea on presenting their work to a large pub- the overall design of the exhibition. Le lic, to the professional community and Corbusier and Jeanneret came up with HPWFSONFOUPďDJBMT 4IVNLPW the idea of creating a total space with a The exhibition itself seems to be a flexible cover construction atop as they separate entity with its partition walls used the techniques of fabric covering and cubic character. The skin of the the steel structure in a large composi- pavilion lays an obvious emphasis on tion of parasols of welded sheet steel transportability as the roof was sewn BCPWFUIFQFEFTUSJBOSBNQT 1BQJMMBVU in one piece and unrolled all at once. A The continuous ramp in the middle structure of steel pylons and tensioning as the entrance and exit was supposed cables, “expressing forcefully the idea to gather the different pieces of the of a temporary event and nomadic oc- exhibition as an infinite nave. Le Cor- DVQBUJPOw 1BQJMMBVU &BTZUPCVJMEBOE busier reapplied the ideas that he used deconstruct, the pavilion’s main struc- JO/FX5JNFT1BWJMJPOBOE#BUB1BWJM-

*56"];t7PM/Pt/PWFNCFSt&%VZBO 185

looking up, the next looking down. A rhythmic rise and fall movement then, dominate the structure. The “infinite nave” remained unrealized but the wave movement of umbrellas reemerged as a motif right after the Second World War. Le Corbusier already made an appeal for a synthesis of the major arts in his essay for Figure 5. Pavillon L’Espirit Nouveau (FLC/ ADAGP). the journal Volonté in 1944. The theme then was taken up by CIAM and finally, a meeting was held in Paris to put in practice this introduction of the plastic arts into architecture in 1948. The concrete task, which Le Corbusier under- took was to create, the “architectural conditions” into which painting and sculpture might be introduced in the form of an exhibition at Porte Maillot, a ground which was provisionally loaned by the town of Paris. The selected artists was supposed to show their work to under “a series of shelters, umbrellas and parasols” placed along a circula- Figure 6. Pavillon Nestlé (Le Corbusier - Oeuvre complète, tion ramp to from “a succession of co- Birkhäuser, 2006). PSEJOBUFETFOTBUJPOTw -F$PSCVTJFS ion. The combination of steel-trussed The main aspect of the design is a poles and wires became horizontally double roof structure, covering inde- expandable double vaulted trusses. pendent units and the ramp for pub- Structurally more complex, it was de- lic exhibition. The double unit roof signed as a unit to be attached to each structure has its roots in the semi open other at all sides. Le Corbusier defined parasols of Water Pavilion. It creates a his building as ‘infinite nave’ remind- public space, independent of the exhi- ing his Museum of Infinite Growth of bition itself. The roof does not consist FTQFDJBMMZJOUFSNTPGUIFBTZN- of curved trusses but of angular sheet- metrical swastika of the ramps. But his steel units, which face opposite direc- exhibition space can be considered as tions -one heading down, the other up. a total flux in one axis instead of the It is not an infinite number of the roof spiral growth of the museum. A dou- unites, but only two, whereas the alter- ble bowstring truss above his build- nation effect is similar to Water Pavil- ing should give a ‘breath’ to the whole ion. This alternation of orientation of exhibition while the promenade en- the grand steel umbrellas implies the trance provides a sense of monumen- continuity as a possibility, expressing tality. Covering the main walkway, this a f dynamism at the same time. The arch-structure does literally not touch continuous sinus curves of the roof of the exhibition itself but it creats a semi- Water Pavilion became the recogniz- open space underneath. This aspect able alternating triangles of Synthesis XBT QSFNBUVSF JO /FX 5JNFT CVU JU of Major Arts Pavilion. was the Water Pavilion that completely Le Corbusier firmly believed that separated the structure from the ex- architecture itself was the synthesis of hibition. The double bowstring truss- arts and as he became more of a poet es are doing the job of the triangles of “right angel” then the prophet of as intermingled sinus curves moving machine age after the Second World ahead. A wave emerges from the two War, it was understandable he initiat- curves performing the exactly opposite ed an association and an majestic ex- NPWFNFOU ćF WBVMUFE UFOU PG /FX hibition to fortify architecture’s artis- Times Pavilion can be sensed here, too, tic value and his position as the most as umbrella units, while one vault is suitable delegate of it. At this stage, it

Le Corbusier’s exhibition pavilion: The heterogeneous character of his modernism between representation and functionalism 186 was obvious that the architecture has separated from the representation, it became the synthesis itself, sheltering the semi-public exhibition of painting and sculpture.

4. The pyramid and Le Corbusier’s museums Le Corbusier’s museums and exhibition pavilions together constitute the solution of exhibition problem in two compartments, permanent and temporary. They should be covered as a whole as many museum and pavilions were proposed next to each other on the same side as part of his cultural center baggage. Moreover some of his museums, which do not fit to the strictly ap- Figure 7. Pavillon Bat’a, FLC 17814 (FLC/ ADAGP). plied, trademark museum temples, the generic Museum of Infinite Growth, can rather be linked to exhibition pavilions. Le Corbusier’s exhibition pavilions VOUJM TIPXDBTFE B QSPDFTT GSPN the unity of exhibition and space towards the independence of structure. ćFJOUFOTFGVODUJPOBMJTNPGTBOE FBSMZTXBTSFQMBDFEXJUIBNPSF FYQSFTTJPOJTUDIBSBDUFSJOT"OE after years of experimentation Le Cor- busier envisioned a template gallery as a part of the cultural complex. At that point, the pavilions presented various Figure 8. Pavillon des Temps Nouveaux, (FLC/ ADAGP). ways of dynamic roof -from the butterfly to the triangular cross-section um- cient reference seems not being of great brellas. The main point was structural, importance. But as it is well document- though. The growing expressionist ef- ed, Le Corbusier, an admirer of Greek GFDUUPXBSETTDBOCFTFFOJOTPNF architecture, always stayed close, if not of the museums, as well. The pyramid loyal, to the mathematical formalism of and triangular facades in comparison guiding lines and basic shapes that he to the triangular cross-sections of pa- considered as fundamentals of ancient vilion roofs can be traced back to Le temples. Fittingly, a pyramid pops up Corbusier’s formative years. Le Cor- in the first pages of Oeuvre Complète, busier considered himself as an artist, the self-edited book of collected works as a poet in the age of the machines, so by Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanerette. it is no coincidence that the first proj- This project, maybe unconsciously, sets FDU B DPVQMF TLFUDIFT GSPN CF- the tone of art related projects in Le longs to an art school in La Chaud de Corbusier’s career. Fonds. It is actually a preliminary pro- Workshop of Artists was not an posal for the school where he studied exhibition center, but the pyramidal and worked as an instructor for a while form and the salle centrale de cours, before moving to Paris permanently. the central room, would resurface in A small pyramid in the middle is sur- the World museum of Mundaneum rounded by masses organized in a grid QSPKFDUJOMBUFT4IPSUMZBęFSUIF system, which quickly reminds an an- GPVOEBUJPOPG-FBHVFPG/BUJPOT BQSF- cient ziggurat. As Le Corbusier did not MJNJOBSZFOUFSQSJTFGPSUIFGVUVSF6/- break his visible ties with neo-classical ESCO was put on the agenda, following BSDIJUFDUVSF OPU VOUJM T UIF BO- the outline by Paul Otlet. Le Corbusier

*56"];t7PM/Pt/PWFNCFSt&%VZBO

in functionalist tone, but never denied the symbolic character of the building, representing the whole achievements of mankind. The City and State Museum, a com- QFUJUJPO QSPKFDU EBUJOH UP EPFT not follow the same path, yet its affin- ity to Mundaneum is all but faint due to the escalation effect of the ziggurat-verse steps. According to the competition program, the building was to house the state and city museums. Al- though praised by the jury for being an “extraordinary solution, original and worthwhile”, it was eliminated in the first round, for being not suitable Figure 9. Pavillon de la France à l’exposition JO UFSNT PG MJHIUOJOH 7BO EFS 4UFVS de l’Eau, FLC 00622 (FLC / ADAGP). Q *SPOJDBMMZ UIF NPTU QSPNJOFOU feature of the project was its light- and Pierre Jeanneret designed an ur- ning scheme as one of the aspects to ban complex as a meeting point of cul- justify the terraces. Le Corbusier and tures, called Mundaneum, which also +FBOOFSFU OPUFE JO UIF QSPKFDU included a World Museum. Although report published in the same jour- the timid modernity of its architecture nal, Musieon, that there was “no sin- was not approved in the final round of gle room, whatever its size, deprived the competition, it was the first muse- of direct sunlight”. The galleries were um project Le Corbusier worked on. arrayed like the branches of a tree to Mundaneum project is based on a provide immediate orientation. It was three-dimensional spiral, which forms aimed thar the visit takes place in an the exhibition naves, setting up an ob- unbroken circuit. The musum ramp scure main hall in the middle. The cir- leads the visitor from the bottom of culation, starting from early cultures, the building to the top “on a continu- brings the visitor to present which is ous promenade”. It was not a spiral as symbolized by the escalation of ramps. it was in Mundaneum’s museum, but The project was not built, but it played the uninterrupted circulation seems a subtle but an important role as an UP CF DSVDJBM 0#ZSOF 8IJMF QSPQ- early prototype for the museums and er lightning and fluency in movement exhibition centers throughout Le Cor- were the main functional aspects, the busier’s career. In 1929, right after the double building cannot be defined bet- publication of the plans, Karel Teige ter than its courtyards or its negative published a harsh criticism towards spaces. One side of the building creates Le Corbusier from the camp of func- a sliced pyramid, while the other side tionalist architecture. Teige, one of the creates another sliced pyramid on its most influential advocates of modern- top. On the facade, both sides clearly JTN JO T EFOPVODFE UIF QSPKFDU reveal the pyramidal outline, but in a for its archaic impression. In his article fragmented way. It can be argued that 5FJHF Q PO.VOEBOFVNQSPKFDU a similar formalist scheme was pro- in Czech magazine Stavba, he argued cessed in a modernist manner. that the museum building in the shape Le Corbusier’s museums soon found of a pyramid has no functional justifi- their archetype in Museum of Infinite cation and it “produces an effect of an Growth, leaving the pyramidal ref- old Egyptian, or rather old Mexican erences behind until the Knowledge atmosphere”. According to Teige, the Museum of Chandigarh, a project that symbolic character of a museum idea remained unrealized as one of the last GPS -FBHVF PG /BUJPOT MFBE UP NPOV- projects Le Corbusier presented to mentality and geometric proportions, the Indian authorities. It is a unique thus to a priori aesthetics. On the other building for two reasons. It is not or- hand, Le Corbusier explains his idea dered by the government and it is the

Le Corbusier’s exhibition pavilion: The heterogeneous character of his modernism between representation and functionalism 188 only building in Chandigarh for which Le Corbusier defined the whole pro- HSBNIJNTFMG .JMMFU &YQSFTTJOHUIBU he wanted to set up “an important in- strument, a language specialized in the JOGPSNBUJPO PG NBDIJOFT TP UIBU information can be gathered together”, the Knowledge Museum was signifi- cant for Le Corbusier. The collection of knowledge in a museum naturally re- Figure 10. Exposition “Synthèse des arts majeurs”, FLC 18154 minds the Mundaneum, which was ex- (FLC/ ADAGP). pected to act as a universal index. The symbolic meaning of the Knowledge ascendance represents the rigid circu- Museum in Chandigarh is similar to lation of permanent exhibition areas UIFPOFPG.VOEBOFVN/FWFSUIFMFTT and the flow of history as a compact it is not a well documented project, de- story with a firm beginning and an signed in the final years as a consultant end, or a course in a “good school”, in architect and never seemed to be fully UIFXPSETPG-F$PSCVTJFSJOi%FDPSB- supported due to its conceptual com- UJWF"SUT5PEBZw XIPXSPUFJO QMFYJUZBOECVEHFU .JMMFU glowing terms that he “acquired cer- The basic plan was in a rectangu- tainties without holes from museums”. lar form, the huge ramp breaking the Le Corbusier’s early education en- continual geometry of the prism dec- couraged him to think of architecture orated with awnings. The exterior in idealistic and metaphoric terms: ramp, which is identical to Secretariat architecture not as a building, but in Chandigarh, can be compared with as a representation. Schooled in the the vertical “tree trunk” transitions of neo-medieval beliefs of John Ruskin City and State Museum. Furthermore, and Owen Jones, and in the organic the sun shields placed on either facade style of art nouveau, he was convinced between all columns, differ along floor that art and industry, like art and craft in a rhythmic movement. The modules in former times, could naturally ally. including stairs to connect storeys ver- For Le Corbusier, a building was al- /BFHFMF TPNFUIJOH FMTF ڀtically have a more solid look and by ways like sliding them one step towards the middle on each floor, Le Corbusier creates The triangular cross-section roof of a triangle on one side and a reverse tri- /FTUMÏ 1BWJMJPO XBT BMTP EFTJHOFE JO angle on the other side. The building the same year as Mundaneum’s Muse- shows strange but obvious similarity to um, but there the structural necessi- the City and State Museum. It gives the ties and dynamic expression were on first impression as if Le Corbusier put IJT BHFOEB 4P VOUJM UIF FBSMZ T the terraced part of the City and State dynamism of triangular cross-section Museum on the top of the other side to structures of pavilions had a separate obtain a rectangular prism with a junc- development than the symbolic tri- tion mark on the triangle facade. angular facades of atypical museums. The City and State Museum and This, however, was going to change Knowledge Museum are derivations $VMUVSBM $PNQMFYFT BęFS NJET of Le Corbusier’s strictly followed when pavilions would also obtain a museum archetype manifested in the certain expressionist aspect. built Chandigarh museum, an ele- vated building without facade, with a 5. The gallery template in cultural swastika plan presenting multiple vis- complexes tas - a version of museum of unlimited The double steel umbrellas of the growth without the ability of growth. unrealized Synthesis of Major Arts The resemblance to pyramid or trian- exhibition became the starting point gular terraced organization may have and an ideal solution for pavilions for the archaic reference or its functional -F$PSCVTJFSJOT"WFSZTJNJMBS aspect, too, but it essentially reveals a design firstly reappears in Chandigarh representational attitude. The terraced under the name of Art Gallery along

*56"];t7PM/Pt/PWFNCFSt&%VZBO 189

ions as part of the cultural center for Tokyo in the same year, 1955. Both designs, for Chandigarh and Tokyo, remained unrealized, as only the versions of his Unlimited Growth Museum have been constructed, but his temporary exhibition pavilions have not. In 1962, Le Corbusier once again proposed his Figure 11. Centre Culturel, Chandigarh, FLC 04830 (FLC/ typical museum as a part of a cultural ADAGP). complex for Erlenbach International Art Center and along with it, his exhibition pavilion. The design directly GPMMPXTUIFTUVEJFTPGT4ZOUIFTJT of Major Arts Pavilion. In 1956 the name of the building type became the “Pavilion of Temporary and Traveling Exhibitions for the Synthesis of the Plastic Arts” and “the transition from cloth at Liege to sheet metal in Tokyo is made by way of folded cardboard [as UIFNPEFMUFTUJĕFT>w 1BQJMMBVU "UUIJT point, it can be seen that a template for Figure 12. Musée National des Beaux-Arts temporary exhibition pavilions was es- de l’Occident, Tokyo (Le Corbusier - Oeuvre tablished as well as a package contain- complète v7, Birkhäuser, 2006). ing the trademark designs of theatre and museum under the name of Cul- tural Center.

6. Towards a synthesis Last years of Le Corbusier’s career include two more exhibition galleries of the same template, albeit some dif- ferences implying a synthesis of various schemes in the past decades. The roof structure and exhibition spaces would reach a mature and balanced self-expression. The first example of Figure 13. Centre d’art international, that balance was designed in 1962. Erlenbach, 1962 , FLC 23422 (FLC/ ADAGP. The Ahrenberg Palace (Pavillon d’ex- QPTJUJPO 1BMBJT "ISFOCFSH XBT OPU with the Museum of Infinite Growth, designed as a nomadic structure but plus a “Spontaneous Theatre” and a accommodates a modifiable museum “Box of Miracles”. These trademark interior. The building was lifted from designs compose the ideal art complex the water on pilings and a bridge pro- for the last years of in Le Corbusier’s vided the entrance. The roof was sup- career. The first sketches of the Art ported by large portal frame, which Gallery date from March 1955 and it avoided the necessity of having bearing is today’s Architecture Museum, which structures inside the building, whereas was constructed, according to the the ramp system allowed a continuous plans of Le Corbusier, posthumously WJTJU 1BQJMMBVU ćFQSPKFDUXBTOUSF- by one of the architects’ disciples. The alized, again, and the frustrated archi- double square-plan building includes tect wrote that “one could believe that a U-shaped access ramp vertical to the God who created the world does net building’s main axis and the two pris- tolerate little man to be impassioned matic parasol roofs supported by flared with creation-even on his own small piers shelter the exhibition spaces. scale”. Shortly afterwards, Le Corbusier The proposal, this time, was not a proposed one of his exposition pavil- semi-open space; it was a single and

Le Corbusier’s exhibition pavilion: The heterogeneous character of his modernism between representation and functionalism closed building under the double umbrellas. This difference lies on the program, as Ahrenberg Palace was not part of a cultural complex, as second tier to the major museum building. In PUIFS WFSTJPOT TJODF UIF FYIJCJ- tion spaces were composed of either independent small buildings integrat- ed through ramps or walkways, or, at most, a semi-open single building. Ahrenberg Palace, on the contrary, has its own proper facade balanced with the roof structure. “Circulation has been designed in such a way, that vis- Figure 14. Pavillon Exhibition, Palais Ahrenberg, FLC 25048 itors are guided through a great variety (FLC/ ADAGP). of spaces: along an esplanade, through a two storied covered space, then lower spaces 2,26 m high, by a garden with monumental sculptures and over a ramp underneath the umbrellas” (Le $PSCVTJFS On the other hand, all exhibition pavilions, including the one for Stock- holm, had the twin parasols, two butterfly-shaped steel folds facing opposite directions. In the meantime, a deviation form the template can be seen in the famous experimental design of Philips pavilion. Yet, it also represents the expected dynamism of his exhibition spaces created again by triangular shapes, even if it is much more complicated. Figure 15. Pavillon Philips (FLC/ ADAGP). Philips Pavilion in Brussels fair in 1958 cannot be considered in the line of typical exhibition spaces with the pressed triangular trusses. The pavilion completely toys with some other structural opportunities. The structure is composed of hyperbolic-parabolic shells. But it is interesting to see the complex facade of various triangles. It is called an electronic poem, creating a space with possibilities of projection and sound. The architecture becomes one with representation, as in his early pavilions, but Philips Pavilion has its unique formal character. It is not a faceless structure to bring the exhibition area under the spotlight. The complex triangular three-dimensionality Figure 16. Pavillon d’exposition ZHLC (Maison de l’Homme), expresses lightness and dynamism as (FLC/ ADAGP). expected. Le Corbusier’s last pavilion and last and detached from, but still cover- realized design is located in Zurich ing, a rectilinear steel structure below ćFCVJMEJOHXBTEFTJHOFEڀ 0DITIPSO and based on his pavilion template containing an angular sheet-steel roof as a house for the gallery owner, Heidi cantilevered from a series of steel piers Weber in the template of Le Corbusi-

*56"];t7PM/Pt/PWFNCFSt&%VZBO 191 er’s pavilions and, ironically, convert- is there -the flying roof, tens of thou- ed into a gallery later. “More precise- sands of bolts and other parts whixh ly Mrs. Heidi Weber wanted a house/ were prefabricated and assembled in museum/house-exhibition hall able to the ground. It is conspicuous that fold- QSFTFOUUPUIFQVCMJDXPSLTPG -F ed steel sheets were placed behind two Corbusier”. The folded roof is built of triangles - one looking up, one looking thin welded sheet metal supported, as down, which can also be found at the before, by exterior piers, thereby open- sides of the building. And the concave ing up interior areas surrounded by and convex umbrellas are not sup- colored enamel. ported at the corners but at the cen- Although Heidi Weber contacted Le ter, which is a direct connection to the $PSCVTJFSJOGPSUIFĕSTUUJNF UIF /FTUMÏ1BWJMJPOPG final project was prepared only in 1962. One year before Le Corbusier’s death, 6. Revealing the leitmotiv the construction has started and it was 4UBSUJOHGSPNT VOUJMIJTEFBUI inaugurated as the Centre Le Corbus- Le Corbusier designed numerous exhi- JFSJOćFHFOFSBMPVUMJOFJTUIF bition pavilions. It is intriguing to no- same as Ahrenberg Palace, except the tice that all of them, albeit their vary- distance of the roof from the building. ing contexts, have a set of common The design of the roof is characteristic, features. His conception of temporary steel screens fitted together as brise- exhibition space can be defined as a soleil. It consists of two square parts single search guided by the dialogue of welded metal sheets that were lifted between architecture and audience. An and fixed on the pillars. With the frame anecdote related to the complaints by completed, walls, windows, ceilings La Roche of his house in Paris gives and floors were then screwed onto the an early example of this tension: “I steel frame. The building has two floors commissioned from you a ‘frame for connected by a concrete ramp, which my collection’. You provided me with is a mass itself, reminding the ramp a ‘poem of walls’. Which of us most of the Knowledge Museum (also the UP CMBNFw 8FCFS .PPT PODF 4FDSFUBSJBUPG$IBOEJHBSI FTTFOUJBMMZ noted that Le Corbusier “left no stone Heidi Weber Pavilion manifests the in- unturned in order to emphasize his an- dependent parts as self sustained archi- ti-utilitarian position within Modern- tectural entities. The roof structure has JTNw WPO.PPT Q the same expressionist character of the The problem of representational ar- template. But the spaces underneath chitecture naturally arises in the archi- are not walkways or scattered prisms; tecture of representation. His exhibi- but they constitute the building itself. tion spaces, therefore, reflects a shared The building has a balance between conception and can be evaluated in the roof structure and interior as two four groups. The first group, the early separate entities. Furthermore, today’s designs, brings architecture and the ex- Le Corbusier Center in Zurich is a rep- hibited object together, transforming resentation of Le Corbusier’s architec- architecture into the representation. ture itself. Painted panels in primary Surrounded by the exhibition, archi- colors dominate the facade, whereas tecture becomes an initial part of the the distances maintain the standard of spectacle. The house/exhibition L’ E s - Modulor, the 2.26 m height as a basic pirit Nouveau is a fine and first example unit. In a way, it is a return to the first PGUIJT BTUIFQBWJMJPOTPG/FTUMÏ #BUB pavilion structures of L’ E s p r i t No u v e a u BOE 5FNQT /PVWFBV BSF QBSU PG UIJT BOE/FTUMÏJOUIFXBZUIBUUIFBSDIJUFD- group of early buildings in the form of ture becomes the represented object demountable structures. The second at the same time. The main difference group, Liege and Port Maillot pavil- is that in Zurich the architecture is on ions, represents a transition from the the spotlight and it attracts the atten- billboard-like lightness to the floating tion with its own formal features. In umbrella. The structure is separated a way the architecture became more from the exhibition creating a semi- dominant to the temporary represen- open, boundless space underneath. tation space. Still the nomadic sense The structure acts as a sunshade in the

Le Corbusier’s exhibition pavilion: The heterogeneous character of his modernism between representation and functionalism 192 air, definitely apart from the exhibition +PFEJDLF 3BNQTQMBZBOJNQPSU- masses. It is not an integral part of it, ant role in Le Corbusier’s houses, espe- such that it floats in the air even with- DJBMMZ JO T WJMMBT iPČFSJOH QSPT- out touching it. The third group of ex- pects which are constantly changing hibition spaces includes the temporary and unexpected, even astonishing” (Le exhibition Pavilions of Chandigarh, $PSCVTJFSBOE1JFSSF+FBOOFSFU B Tokyo, Fort-Lamy, Erlenbach and Par- ćF SBNQT DSFBUF B UISFF EJNFO- is. Among all parts of the ideal cultural sional dramatic effect and adds a dura- center, the umbrella structure becomes tion aspect to the visitor’s perspective. a formally defined shell construction This leads us to the second feature, the with a more self-confident identity and nomadic character of pavilions, as ex- relation to the ground. The distance re- plicitly seen in the construction tech- mains, however, between the roof and niques and the semi-open exhibition exhibition space and the semi-open areas. Le Corbusier strictly emphasized and extendable exhibition area does the temporary character of his pavil- not cease to exist immediately. The ions, even for Heidi Weber pavilion, fluid character of the exhibition spac- which was never meant to be a tempo- es was obvious in cases whenever they rary structure. The demountable steel were placed next to a museum as part constructions, small structures around of the cultural complexes, providing the walkways, free installation of parti- the necessary rigidity for permanent tion wall created the nomadic impres- exhibitions. The exception is Philips sion in various examples. A third and a Pavilion, which represents a reunion most important feature can be defined of architecture and representation and as a proper Leitmotif /FJUIFS TUSJDUMZ where architecture has its own geo- functional, nor absolutely formalistic, metric language in contrast to the less the triangles continued to pop up in eye catching functional constructions each and every pavilion. Although the of the first pavilions. The last group triangles on the facades and roofs have also includes the pavilions the unbuilt different forms, they can be detected Palais Ahrenberg and another house/ like a signature for each exhibition de- gallery, the Heidi Weber Pavilion, be- sign. As it was pointed out, the three ing the mature final examples of the atypical museum designs of Le Cor- development. The well-defined shell busier have their triangular elevations remains without any change, so does themselves. the independent ramp, but the exhi- *O T BOE T UIF MFJUNPUJW bition spaces drop off their nomadic mainly emerges as a structural solu- character. The Heidi Weber Pavilion UJPO BTUIFCVUUFSĘZSPPGPG/FTUMÏ1B- expresses a balanced relationship be- vilion or the braced pylons of Temps tween independent roof and prismat- Nouveau. Mundaneum’s pyramid and ic exhibition space, so that it acquires the City and State Museum’s terraced their own architectural agenda. structures were functional solutions. While the development shows a va- Still, they all are very powerfully ex- riety of directions, certain common pressed. Le Corbusier abandoned the features can clearly be traced. First- obvious pyramid but kept the triangles ly, the free plan of the exhibition area at his facades in an alternating forma- and the ramps imply that the circulation. The wave-like umbrellas of de tion was of major importance. Rath- L’Eau Pavilion can be considered as a er than a total and empty space, Le clue, as the constant widening and nar- Corbusier designed the circulation rowing of the roof imply a horizontal scheme, even it was never an imposing flow. Another clue and the most for- orientation. On the contrary, he tried malist one of all can be found in Chan- creating ambiguous boundaries, tele- digarh’s Knowledge Museum. It simply scopic divisions and dramatic ramps. indicates a beginning and an ending “It was not merely the ramp as such on a facade decorated by repetitive that we discovered here but its special brise-soleils. It refers to temporariness formation as a path which is open to by being continuous like a wave, yet it the outside permitting the visitor to is obvious where it starts and finishes. look back to whence he has just come” In house of Heidi Weber, the double

*56"];t7PM/Pt/PWFNCFSt&%VZBO reverse pediments pinpoint the final Only Mies van der Rohe among major strokes of the leitmotiv’s evolution. figures of modernism was as consistant They create a balanced composition as Corbusier to apply trademark forms, between triangular pediments and the but he never went towards an expres- static prism on the ground. The obtuse sionist interpretation. Alvar Aalto or triangular cross-section of the double Hans Scharoun may have followed him umbrella roof has various roles, with in his poetic manners but they tried to strong implications as a reminder of avoid any kind formalism like most of the dynamic circulation and a classical their contemporaries. As Le Corbuis- yet well-hidden reference going back to er’s architecture does not only contain Ti%FĕOJOHUIFSPPGBTBOBVUPO- the functional and scientific standard- omous form, distinct from the volume ization of forms but also the subjec- underneath, represent an archaism. It tification of them by the creative ego JTUIF%PSJDUFNQMFPSUIF"MQJOFCBSO of the architect. It is no coincidence roof redefined. The goal is spatial dra- that Le Corbusier instantly took the NBUJ[BUJPOw 7PO.PPT opportunity given by the exhibition spaces to manifest his ideas and creat- 7. Conclusion ed a leitmotiv as part of his search for It can be argued that Le Corbusier’s a synthesis of his representational and exhibition pavilions and some of his functional perspectives of archicture. museums use the reverse triangles as Self-expression has always been one of a leitmotiv. The temporary exhibition the idiosynchratic aspects of Le Cor- space is represented by the dynamic busier’s persona. expression by their wave-like up and Le Corbusier was used to set up down movement. The evolution of the rules to promote his vision. It is a leit- pavilions into a representation of Le motiv, not a rule, which is standing Corbusier’s architecture assisted the in the center of a exhibition pavilion emergence of the roof as an indepen- template as a result of a long search. dent element. Thus an ideal solution It can be argued that his pavilions are was developed comprising a dynamic all interconnected as Le Corbusier was effect and a formalist geometry at the looking for a synthesis of symbolism same time, which is not only supported and the needs of nomadic structures but also well hidden by the structural for wide spans. The expressionist use of necessities. As Moos once underlined triangles as a leitmotiv combines rep- “the assumption that an elementa- resentational aspects of architectural ry geometry is inherent in the nature design with the functional aspets. On of mechanical design, and that ‘the the one hand the leitmotiv can be read wholesome spirit of the engineer’ will as an archaic reference or as a symbol quite automatically result in forms that of dynamic circulation, on the other possess the objective, immutable char- hand it is a functional solution and a BDUFSPGDMBTTJDCFBVUZw WPO.PPT structural convenience. Le Corbusier’s play with the forms While the leitmotiv of reverse-trian- has always been controversial, to say the gle in pavilions gave the opportunity to least. He extensively used formal com- knead the forms beyond their function, QPTJUJPOT PO IPVTF GBDBEFT JO T the border between representation and designed radical reconstruction urban function are quite complex in an exhi- plans, famously introduced a sculptural bition space as an exhibition space itself latitude of Béton brut after the Second do have the function of representation. World War or curiously practiced his The leitmotiv represents the nomadic meditation on proportions, the Modu- character, the anti-hierarchical instal- lor theory, on many occasions. Some- lation, free circulation, the separation times implicitly formalist, sometimes of container and contained, which are cavalierly lyrical, his architectural atti- the functional aspects of the pavilion ude never only fed from the function- template defining his ideal exhibition alist aesthetics of the industrial age. He space. What transforms the functional insisted in using highly individualized agenda into the representational form devices such as pilotis, architectural is Le Corbusier’s desire to highlight promenade or reverse triangular roofs. them to the user and render them as

Le Corbusier’s exhibition pavilion: The heterogeneous character of his modernism between representation and functionalism 194 specialities of the visitor’s experience. -F$PSCVTJFS1MBODIF ' They can be read in the spaces as a text Fondation Le Corbusier Archives. through the representational charac- .JMMFU . .VTÏFEFMB$PO- ter of the forms. Le Corbusier’s pavil- naissance, Chandigarh, Le Corbusier ion leitmotiv is respresentional of its Plans v1-16 Echelle-1 & FLC, Tokyo. functional raison d’etre, which means it /BFHFMF %+ #VJMEJOH#PPLT simply represents its own function. The Le Corbusier’s ‘Word-Image’ Pavilions, function is not only functioning but it an Architecture of Representation, Ar- also becomes evident to that extent that chitecture Conference Proceedings and the particular function separates the Presentations (91st ACSA Internation- building from other kinds of exhibi- BM$POGFSFODF1SPDFFEJOHT *PXB4UBUF tion spaces. It can be said that the rep- 6OJWFSTJUZ %JHJUBM 3FQPTJUPSZ Q resentational character of Le Corbusier 4BWPZF 4QBDF )BSWBSE pavilion has a deep connection to its %FTJHO.BHB[JOF 'BMM idiosynchratic function agenda. While 0#ZSOF $ .VTÏF EF MB the rationalist composition as a refer- 7JMMFFUEFM&UBU Le Corbusier Plans v1- ence to antiquity in disguise and the 16, Echelle-1 & FLC, Tokyo. representational aspect of architecture 0DITIPSO + 4UFFM JO find their place in the leitmotiv of re- UI$FOUVSZ"SDIJUFDUVSF Encyclope- verse triangles, the standardized mod- dia of Twentieth Century Architecture, ern techniques and the basic roofing FE 4FOOPUU 4 'SJU[ %FBSCPSO 1VC- function are also part of the same leit- MJTIFST /FX:PSL motiv. It is a synthesis to exemplify Le 1BOJHZSBLJT 1* .BQQJOH Corbusier’s contradictary inclanations. the Stylistic Affiliations of Le Corbus- As a conclusion, it can be said that the ier’s Work, Le Corbusier, 50 years later, leitmotivs of the exhibition pavilions 1PMZUFDIOJD6OJWFSTJUZPG7BMFODJB 7B- manifests the heterogeneous character lencia. of Le Corbusier’s modernism. 1BQJMMBVU 3 "SU (BMMFSZ Le Corbusier Plans v1-16, Echelle-1 & Abbrevations FLC, Tokyo. '-$ "%"(1 'POEBUJPO -F $PS- 4BNVFM ' -F $PSCVTJFS JO CVTJFS 4PDJÏUÏ EFT "VUFVST EBOT MFT %FUBJM "SDIJUFDUVSBM 1SFTT /FUIFS- Arts graphiques et plastiques. lands. 4IVNLPW * 1I% %JTTFSUB- References tion, Polytechnic University of Catalo- #PZFS .$ Le Corbusier, nia / Columbia University GSAPP. Homme de Lettres, Princeton Architec- 5FJHF , <> .VOEBOF- UVSBM1SFTT /FX:PSL um, Oppositions Reader: Selected Es- $VSUJT 8+3 Le Corbusier says 1973-1984. Princeton Architectur- Ideas and Forms, Phaidon, Hong Kong. BM1SFTT /FX:PSL +PFEJDLF + ćF3BNQBT"S- WBOEFS4UFVS -FT/PVWFBVY.VTFFT chitectonic Promenade in Le Corbus- d’Art a Paris, Mouseion: Revue interna- Q UJPOBMFEF.VTÏPHSBQIJF BJEBMVT%ڀ JFST8PSL -F$PSCVTJFS L’Art décoratif WPO.PPT 4 -F$PSCVTJFS d’aujourd’hui, Éditions Crès, Paris. Elements of a Synthesis,OBJ 3PUUFS- -F $PSCVTJFS 1SPKFDU 3F- dam. port, Mouseion: Revue internationale 8FCFS /' Le Corbusier: EF.VTÏPHSBQIJF Q A Life ,OPQG1VCMJTIJOH)PVTF /FX Le Corbusier - Oeuvre complète v1-8, York. #JSLIÊVTFS (FSNBOZ

*56"];t7PM/Pt/PWFNCFSt&%VZBO

Web Analytics