Nature morte à la pile d’assiettes et au livre, 1920
Painting courtesy of '-46 The Paintings and Sculptures of Le Corbusier', Published Feb. 1988 in Architecture SA (Johannesburg)
Le Corbusier was at the forefront of the 'Purist' movement. The Purists proclaimed the potential and importance of geometric form. His painting (and that of other Purists) explored and even exploited everyday industrialized objects of early 20th century development. Many of his paintings are analytic dissections of basic instruments such as bottles, tools and other mass produced items of the day. There is clear objectification of formal, scale and functional qualities through an abstracted geometric analysis. It could be suggested that a profound intuition of formal manipulation, as observed in Le Corbusier's paintings, had tremendous influence on his designs as a practitioner of Architecture.
Why the significance of painting?
Today, there are a handful of architects who paint as exploratory component in their process as practitioners. This is an incredibly important thing in light of the trajectories in current digital practice as we see it unfolding now. The loss of tactile hands on work given way to the amorphous digital realm. To be certain, the possibilities and rigor of investigations through digital media can lead to exciting possibilities, but something remains missing; that highly personal investigation the artist brings in the physical actions of hands and at times intuitively free discovery.
History has shown it is commonly the artist at the forefront of idea, be it through chance or deliberation. Charles-Edouard Jeanneret as Painter is testament to this claim.
Recently, I've been reading about Charles-Edouard Jeannerets double life as Painter and Architect. In fact many disciples of Architecture might be surprised to know that Jeanneret was a painter foremost and throughout his illustrious career dedicated at least one day per week to painting. As a 'student' of the highly acclaimed painter Ozenfant, Charles-Edouard Jeanneret began his career as artist and writer critic. He completed hundreds of works of both brush stroke and then later sculptures of various mediums. His painting had a profound impact on his career as Architect and his split identity prompted him to adopt the name Le Corbusier (his Architect alias) while maintaining his birth and painter name, Charles-Edouard Jeanneret.
Le Corbusier was at the forefront of the 'Purist' movement. The Purists proclaimed the potential and importance of geometric form. His painting (and that of other Purists) explored and even exploited everyday industrialized objects of early 20th century development. Many of his paintings are analytic dissections of basic instruments such as bottles, tools and other mass produced items of the day. There is clear objectification of formal, scale and functional qualities through an abstracted geometric analysis. It could be suggested that a profound intuition of formal manipulation, as observed in Le Corbusier's paintings, had tremendous influence on his designs as a practitioner of Architecture.
Why the significance of painting?
Today, there are a handful of architects who paint as exploratory component in their process as practitioners. This is an incredibly important thing in light of the trajectories in current digital practice as we see it unfolding now. The loss of tactile hands on work given way to the amorphous digital realm. To be certain, the possibilities and rigor of investigations through digital media can lead to exciting possibilities, but something remains missing; that highly personal investigation the artist brings in the physical actions of hands and at times intuitively free discovery.
History has shown it is commonly the artist at the forefront of idea, be it through chance or deliberation. Charles-Edouard Jeanneret as Painter is testament to this claim.
1 comment:
I think the obsessions of any architect who is serious about the world around them become relevant when one considers their built work as extensions of those obsessions. I think particularly about Rem Koolhaas who, as a journalist in his previous life, has greatly expanded his critique of the world around him through building his ideas instead of simply writing about them. In that way, his architecture begins to make sense in terms of a critique rather than a building.
Post a Comment