Le Corbusier

Home > Other > Le Corbusier > Page 2
Le Corbusier Page 2

by Nicholas Fox Weber


  16. Sketch in a letter to his mother and Albert, August 31, 1955. Fondation Le Corbusier

  17. Entrance facade of the Millowners’ Building (1951–1956), Ahmedabad. Photo by Anriet Denis

  18. Ronchamp, interior, view from the altar. Fondation Le Corbusier

  19. Ronchamp, interior, wall of painted glass windows. Fondation Le Corbusier

  20. Interior of chapel at La Tourette. Fondation Le Corbusier

  21. The light cannons at La Tourette as seen from above. Photo by Anriet Denis

  22. The Assembly Building in Chandigarh, late 1950s. Fondation Le Corbusier

  23. Josephine Baker, watercolor, 1929. Fondation Le Corbusier

  24. Josephine Baker, watercolor. Fondation Le Corbusier

  25. Josephine Baker, watercolor. Fondation Le Corbusier

  26. Sketch of Yvonne’s tomb in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin, in a letter to his mother, June 17, 1958. Fondation Le Corbusier

  PREFACE

  Cézanne at the Lefèvre

  But these…qualities (of “varied and inimitable” colour and his handling) do not account for the look of hard and unrelenting authenticity that distinguishes his work from that of lesser men. It is Cézanne’s peculiar determination to pin down his sensation, and the exactness and intensity of notation resulting from this, that made Cézanne pre-eminent…. In a Cézanne there can be no question of juggling with the elements of design, no possibility of glossing over difficulties, no equivocation. With Cézanne integrity was the thing, and integrity never allowed him to become fixed at any one point in his development, but sent him onward toward new discoveries of technique, new realisations of the motive.

  —Graham Bell, The New Statesman and Nation

  I note the above both for itself and because it adds to subject and manner the thing that is incessantly overlooked: the artist, the presence of the determining personality. Without that reality no amount of other things matters much.

  —WALLACE STEVENS

  Until now, there has been no substantial biography of Le Corbusier. There are nearly four hundred monographs devoted to his work, among them detailed accounts of his early years and some excellent books on specific aspects of his career. There are fascinating volumes on his architecture, several written by people who had the good fortune to know Le Corbusier and had considerable insight into his character. But no single book has given primary focus to Le Corbusier as a human being and provided a comprehensive account of his entire life.

  While I subscribe to Mark Twain’s dictum that a person’s “real life is led in his head, and is known to none but himself,”1 I have made it my goal to understand and reveal what this extraordinary architect was like inside, as well as in the eyes of others. In my attempt to gain access to the feelings and desires of Charles-Edouard Jeanneret, our subject’s name before he recreated himself as Le Corbusier, I have benefited from access to his copious correspondence with his mentor and confidant, William Ritter. He wrote to Ritter about his fluctuating humors and about everything he saw and did. Jeanneret freely focused on his own sexual obsessions; at about the age of thirty, he directly associated the vigor of his erections (mostly had in solitude) with creative power and the ability to build. Ritter was an intensely passionate novelist and music critic. Overtly homosexual, devoutly Catholic, he lived outside the strictures of Jeanneret’s Swiss background. Ritter exemplified the courage to seek extremes, the independence from Calvinism that Jeanneret craved, which is why Jeanneret opened himself up to him.

  I have been even more fortunate in having unprecedented access to the letters Jeanneret wrote to his parents and, following his father’s death, to his mother alone. Marie Charlotte Amélie Jeanneret-Perret lived to the age of one hundred—or so Le Corbusier, with his passion for round numbers, made it seem to journalists and the public by moving her birth date back a full year. She was alive for all but the last five years of Le Corbusier’s life, and he revealed himself to her more truthfully than to anyone else, as if he were confiding in a private diary more than to a person with emotions or reactions. The intimacy with which Le Corbusier wrote to her about his taste in women is extraordinary. The intensity of his program to change the world, the leaps and plunges of his spirit, the rapidity of his mood swings, and the relentlessness of his emotional needs and professional ambition: all these emerge unmasked.

  I have, in addition, enjoyed the rare opportunity to read letters between Le Corbusier and his wife and have been allowed to see documents—usually off-limits—that recount a love affair of thirty years’ duration between the architect and an American woman. That epistolary narrative, while touching and charmingly erotic, is evidence both of Le Corbusier’s tenderness, a trait he generally concealed, and of his relentless solitude. By compulsively charting the workings of his mind—with an astounding absence of screening, exposing thoughts that most people would keep within—Le Corbusier came close in these various letters to revealing Twain’s “real life.” In public, he propagated his myths, but in private he knew himself well.

  Marie Charlotte Amélie Jeanneret-Perret, Le Corbusier’s mother, at about the age of ninety-eight

  WITH HIS PERPETUAL AWARENESS of the elemental—both in his individual being and in every aspect of the universe—Le Corbusier consciously credited his mother for his existence. He never fully separated from her; nor did he ever have what he wanted from her. He fought, relentlessly and unsuccessfully, to garner the approval she gave mainly to his older brother.

  At Ronchamp—the masterful country church of 1955 with which Le Corbusier burst the boundaries of architecture by composing with light and color and by animating a small space so that it is a vessel of both ceaseless motion and ineffable calm—he dedicated one of the three side chapels to the woman who bore him. While Ronchamp is officially a shrine to the Holy Virgin, the brilliant stained-glass window that bears, in exuberant script, the message “Marie shining like the sun” closely echoes the way Le Corbusier often flattered his mother, then in her nineties, in that time period. A triumphant work of pure sculpture, a celebration of red and yellow and blue and white so vibrant as to become audible, a shelter as protective as Noah’s ark and as modern and functional as a spaceship, Ronchamp is a temple to femininity in general and, very specifically, to the person who created him, much as he created it. Le Corbusier revered the sun as the source of all life; Marie was the origin of his Ronchamp, with its womblike hidden chambers, so rich and nurturing, and its organic form and pulsating surfaces. It was, even more than a fabulous homage to the Holy Mother of Christianity, a hymn to the more universal idea of women as givers of life—and to Marie Charlotte Amélie Jeanneret-Perret. It is not surprising to discover, half a century after its completion, that its essentially secretive and private maker poured out his soul to his inspiration.

  IT IS LE CORBUSIER in his own voice who has been my primary quarry. With that objective, I have visited almost every extant building he designed. I have also drawn on testimony from anyone I could find whose path the architect crossed—the waitress at a seafood restaurant in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin who remembered him from frequent encounters in her childhood, the architects who served in his office, his doctor, his banker’s daughter.

  Le Corbusier said that his biography could be written only after his death. He would have been dismayed to have it written by an American. At sixty-three, when he felt burned by events concerning the design of the new United Nations headquarters in New York and betrayed by the architect Wallace Harrison, he declared to Marie Jeanneret—in surprising words to address to a ninety-year-old Calvinist lady—

  No head

  No heart = Harrison

  No balls = American2

  He considered the United States “a titanic machine out of control: a runaway horse. Dangerous.”3 I will show why he came to feel that way—while demonstrating, I hope, that not all Americans were or are against him.

  OFTEN ANGUISHED or furious, Le Corbusier was equally given to ecstasy. When he was not despondent, he
had an unequivocal confidence that he knew solutions to some of the gravest issues of human existence. He felt he could serve mankind even in its most dire moments—and that through architecture he could counter all evil.

  In March 1942, when freedom itself was at the brink of extinction in Europe, Le Corbusier wrote his mother from Vichy that she must share his joy because, having navigated within the cabinet of Maréchal Pétain, he had finally triumphed after twenty years of battle. Seemingly impervious to the realities of current events, he believed that with that alliance he would solve all the problems of Paris—the place he alternately loved and loathed, both paradise and inferno, the center of his universe—and, then, of every other city in France. While free France was shrinking, Le Corbusier was mentally rebuilding the entire empire from his new power base in a hotel room in the former spa town where Pétain’s government held its seat. He had no qualms about being there—so long as he would succeed in “focusing the problem of Paris, the city, and its region. To study, to make propositions, to outline the possibility of major operations under the aegis of the president of the Municipal Council (who is a firm ally) and of the director of the Maréchal’s Cabinet (who has become a great partisan). From Paris our mission will fan out over the other cities and the countryside of France and over the empire.”4

  Photo taken by Robert Doisneau in 1944

  During the previous world war, he had likened neutral Switzerland to a eunuch. He left it to start a factory for concrete blocks in a Paris suburb while the center of the city was being regularly bombed. In the thirties, he allied himself with the Soviet authorities and built in Moscow. He also tried to work with Mussolini, and with two American presidents. His goal was to build—no matter what.

  What concerned him was design: of our surroundings—whether the immediate room or the larger city—and of gardens and paintings, the sights of which would penetrate our psyches. Nothing else counted. But if we agree, as Bertrand Russell observed, that “fanatics are seldom genuinely humane, and those who sincerely dread cruelty will be slow to adopt a fanatical creed,”5 we need to ask if Le Corbusier was primarily fanatical or humane—or if he was the rare person who could combine both traits.

  Le Corbusier took a definitive stance about every person, street corner, plant specimen, and idea. He readily unleashed his wrath. He could also express, although less frequently and rarely in public, immense warmth and sweetness. When he let down his guard to verbalize the depths of joy that are so gloriously manifest in the colors and angles and textures of his architecture, he was capable of a subsuming generosity of spirit. Nothing was in half measures: his lust for voluptuous women or his miserable loneliness; his passion for great paintings or his rage at public blindness; his admiration for honest naïve art or his disgust with the academies. When he was not elated, he was pulverized by a sense of failure.

  Compassionate, arrogant, generous, selfish, Calvinist, hedonistic, proud, enraged, ecstatic, sad, Le Corbusier the man was as provocative, and unique, as the buildings with which he changed the visible world.

  LE CORBUSIER

  I

  If personality is an unbroken series of successful gestures, then there was something gorgeous about him, some heightened sensitivity to the promises of life, as if he were related to one of those intricate machines that registers earthquakes ten thousand miles away. The responsiveness had nothing to do with that flabby impressionability which is dignified under the name of the “creative temperament”—it was an extraordinary gift for hope, a romantic readiness such as I have never found in any other person and which it is not likely I shall ever find again.

  —F. SCOTT FITZGERALD, The Great Gatsby

  1

  SEPTEMBER 2, 1965

  How ironic that the funeral of the man who had purified architecture and erased history from building facades should take place at the Cour Carrée du Louvre. Le Corbusier had constructed brazen forms of rough concrete in lieu of the fluted columns and ornate medallions that now surrounded his casket, draped with the French flag. He prized boulders and beach pebbles, not pomp.

  But the setting fit. Le Corbusier had always sought entry to the palace, even when its ruler was a despot. He had worked with many of the most powerful leaders of the twentieth century, regardless of their values or politics, so long as he might build their monuments. He mocked them, but craved their complicity—provided that they served his purpose. He would have scoffed at the spectacle with which a society that had often attacked him and thwarted his dreams now bade him a lavish public farewell, but it fulfilled his ambitions.

  The ceremony was high theatre. The weather helped make it so. A strong wind was buffeting fluffy cumulus clouds that late-summer evening. Their rapid flight beyond the roof balustrades and pediments was illuminated by powerful beams from two light projectors below. More than three thousand people braved the unseasonable cold as they waited for the arrival of Le Corbusier’s remains. Then, at 7:40 p.m., all heads turned. Carried on the shoulders of a retinue of undertakers, the coffin slowly penetrated the crowd. A detachment of twenty young soldiers, “in bright-colored uniforms bearing torches, surrounded it.” To the lugubrious beat of Beethoven’s Funeral March, the convoy passed “in front of the four squadrons of the Republican Guard presenting arms.” As the clouds began to give way to a clear and starry sky, the coffin was placed on trestles “at the top of a huge inclined plane” covered with grass. “In the rear, six guards in full-dress uniform with drawn swords were silhouetted against a background of columns.”1 A couple of minutes later, the wind lifted the covering off the casket, but no act of nature could deflect the order and majesty of the precisely orchestrated proceedings. Often accused of wanting to destroy Paris, Le Corbusier was now being honored with the ultimate symbols of the tradition he had threatened.

  THE BUILDING WITH which Le Corbusier had liberated the idea of home—much as Coco Chanel had freed women by letting them wear pants—contained, on a modest scale, a space similar to this vast paved garden within the Louvre. His 1929 Villa Savoye also encased raw nature within man-made walls. Its forms were clear and spartan in contrast to all this Baroque excess, but it, too, showed the wish to worship, and to tame, the elements of the universe. Like the architects who at the bidding of Henri II, Richelieu, Louis XIV, and Napoleon had made the Cour Carrée, Le Corbusier had framed the sky and exercised quiet control over the outdoors, rather than submit to them. The result was a staged ambience that steadies the breath.

  Military honor guard at Le Corbusier’s funeral service in the Cour Carrée du Louvre, September 2, 1965

  Le Corbusier knew that well-placed walls could alter our mental states, that through measure and proportion one might bring calm to the human soul. The style of the Villa Savoye was as restrained as the Louvre was lavish, but a consciousness of visual effects was everywhere. Human beings must cultivate their environment to the fullest extent possible.

  IN THIS COURTYARD where the kings of France had once strolled with minions vying for their attention, the assembled coterie now consisted mainly of government officials, young architects, and Le Corbusier’s work associates. There were few relatives or friends among the hordes who had just returned to Paris from their summer vacations.

  Le Corbusier, too, had been on holiday. Four days earlier, his body had been spotted floating about fifty meters from the shore at Roquebrune-Cap-Martin on the Côte d’Azur. Since the tenth of August, he had been staying alone in his small, square cabanon, nestled into a rocky slope overlooking the Mediterranean. Accessible only by a foot path, the cabanon was surrounded by a panoply of cacti, lilacs, honeysuckles, and lemon and orange trees. The only sounds were the constant lapping of the Mediterranean surf on the shore below and the rumbling of the occasional local train on the tracks just behind the uphill wall. The rugged simplicity of the one-room house was strident next to the neighbors’ Italianate villas and the high style of Monte Carlo, within walking distance along the coast.

  Sheathed in rough pi
ne logs, this modest dwelling was like the Alpine mountain huts of Le Corbusier’s childhood. The bare-bones furniture comprised a single table, a couple of simple wooden stools, and the bunk bed that had been his wife’s. Before her death seven years earlier, Le Corbusier had slept on the floor; since then, his mattress was where hers had been. There was a small, train-style industrial sink near the table. The conspicuous toilet—separated from the headboard of the bunk bed by only a flimsy curtain—testified to Le Corbusier’s belief that a water closet was the most beautiful thing in the world.

  The sparse and minimal cabanon had its aesthetic distinction. Its measurements of 3.66 by 3.66 meters, and 2.26 meters for the height, were inspired by his “Modulor” device, the invention with which he made human scale the determining factor of his architecture. The multipurposed table, constructed from handsomely grained blocks of olive wood, was angled under the one picture window so that the plane of its top penetrated the tiny space with a strong beat. Le Corbusier had painted vibrant, sexy murals on the wooden window shutters and the entrance wall. These erotic celebrations counteracted the austerity of the rest. The hardworking man who rose at six every morning to do his gymnastics and start his day’s work loved physical pleasure unabashedly.

  AMONG THE FEW PEOPLE who had seen the architect since he had arrived in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin were the Rebutato family, the proprietors of the small restaurant that abutted the cabanon. Their lives were entwined with his. The Rebutatos’ “police dog” was waiting for Le Corbusier on the corrugated iron roof of the cabanon during his final swim and was falsely assumed to be the architect’s own pet when its photo appeared in the Parisian newspapers in the following days.

 

‹ Prev