| ACAArchitecture | On tangent in irreverence | ||
|
SERVICES PUBLICATIONS OTHER |
By Anthony C.Antoniades , AIA Former Professor of Architecture UTA
Museu de Arte Contemporânea, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro state, 1991–96.
The book “Oscar Niemeyer: Curves of
irreverence” by Styliane Philippou, just published by Yale University
Press, is great on many accounts. I respect and admire it, not only for
its superb scholarly solidity, but over and above I like the author’s
intuitively synthetic approach, considering the vast research material
she had to manipulate. The overall product is monumental with excellent
graphics and photography. It is a book of insights, opening new roads for
research and new interpretations on the broader context of Niemeyer’s
architecture, both Brazilian and global. Following a revealing
introduction for anyone not acquainted with Brazilian art and movements,
with a most intriguing for the western ears that of “Anthropofagia”(an
art movement of an all-inclusive permissiveness of the Indigenous,
the European the African and what not, in
early twentieth century Brazil), the rest of the book is a detailed
pirouette in the cook pot of cultural, anthropological and racial
ingredients that eventually lead to the formulation of a unique and
authentic Brazilian Modernism for the State’s architecture and symbolic
national pride. The chapter on the Lucio Costa-Le Corbusier-Oscar Niemeyer
and the Ministry of Education building background and outcome, is an
account in the making not only of one building but of the ideological,
political and overall architectural and finally “patriotic”
infrastructure of Brazilian modernity through “Anthropofagy”. The book is
a treasure for anyone who might attempt further study in the Brazilian
matters. Some of the pictures that adorn this part, are stunning, huge
palm trees, just as Niemeyer had admired and sketched when young in the
countryside and the botanical gardens. National
Congress in Brasília, seen through a grove of buriti palms. For anyone who knows not the place, the picture of Niemeyer’s office, the inflated two-breasted ,ten- story modernist high-rise knick-named appropriately Mae West, is a revelation ; the first visual hint of the author’s justification of the unifying theme of “sex” and the subtitle “..irreverence”! I would only ask, why irreverence, perhaps Curves of Life might have been perhaps much better, actually much better to “… Curves of Time” the architect had decided to call his own memoirs a decade or so earlier. In any event, Styliane’s book on Niemeyer’s curves, follows a rhythmic sequence of chapters developed on intuitive conceptual headings, making it pleasantly thematic rather than pedantically historiographic. And this is excellent! On another level now, she keeps on safe scholarly distance from her subject throughout. This though doesn’t help us understand the extent of her personal association with her still “living” subject (at least during the years of her research and visits in Brazil) and to what extent this might have had some effect on the author, consciously or subconsciously. As one who believes that “objective” or “scholarly” criticism may be handicapped by “friendship” or personal acquaintance with the architect, I feel I ought to be told a lot more by the author, even in the first person of speech-something that would further humanize the text, before I could say that this is still the ultimate critical evaluation on Niemeyer. I feel something ought to have been said, on perhaps some Aspulnd influences (i.e interior of the Brazilian Pavilion at the 1939 New York World’s fair and interior of the Asplund Stockholm Exposition Pavilion and particularly the Paradise restaurant that preceded it / 1930). But although I applaud the author’s effort and polite manner to interweave into her commentary reference to works by Mendelshon and Alvar Aalto, particularly the Baker House, thus covering in a way the issue of “Derivative” in Niemeyer’s architecture. In some instances, I would have been absolutely blunt ! Less lines, fewer words! “Let’s not graft plastic forms” said Le Corbusier (as Styliane , reminds us), “Let’s not copy” I ‘d state myself. On the other hand, I’d avoid completely references I was not sure about with regard the influence of Niemeyer on others, such as in the case of Vuokseniska Church, which I suspect the author tries to tell us had some influence by Pampulha, by citing in footnote the grouping of all the crosses , of thieves and Christ together. If she thought Vuokseniska was derivative of Pampulha she ought to have said it directly. “Diplomatic” scholarly mannerism always bothered me, and I consider this to be something from which this book suffers. The author tries very carefully to protect herself, either going “round about” on occasion, in an “English diplomatic manner”, or doing it via an obscure footnote, or stating clearly that the future is to give the definitive answer. On her last course I agree, as only future search in the papers and the correspondence of other people and his contemporaries with him might reveal the full account to absolutely “subject- free” historians. Le Corbusier was not the epitome of everything in the twentieth century, and Niemeyer, a truly “anthropofagos”, cleverly obscures his work up to the Pampulha projects, which in his memoirs he considers his first out of his five periods. Very cleverly he arrases all his projects prior to Pampulha. In this sense, the poker of credit may change, and objectivity would require from now on to ask if the Ronchamp is not derivative of Pampulha, not the other way around. Historic, scholastic detail you might say ! I have seen the Ronchamp, never Pampulha; For me, the Ronchamp and Corbu are definitely closer to God ! No one could argue there was no influence by Le Corbusier or Mies on Niemeyer, if one sees just the architectural documentation of both architects’ projects and considers them simply chronologically. There are many Niemeyer buildings, types and details whose precedents were buildings by Le Corbusier (i.e. ramps, functional organization of linear buildings, etc. slanted roofs), while there are others that are clearly “Mies”. Let us not forget that Niemeyer had first studied graphics and that typesetting was his father’s business, both of which go well with the language of “Basic Design”, usually taught to freshmen and second year architecture students, which both Mies and Le Corbusier followed in their compositions (alignments, balance, care for proportions in elevations, overall composition,…where to break the rules comes much later). And there is no doubt for instance, that Niemeyer’s Brazilian Pavilion in the 1939 worlds fair in New York, may very well be considered precedent to Le Corbusier’s Millowners’ Association Building in India, and the Carpenter Center at Harvard some twenty years later (1954 and 1961 respectively).
Some of the best, effortless and memorable writing free of scholastic up-tightness with numbers , dimensions of spaces and detailed information, comes toward the end of the book in the presentation and commentary of the magnificent Niteroi Museum and the Novo Museu. One could perhaps say, that when architecture towards the later stages of the life of the architect settles down to “what one wants” to actually do, the period when he knows when and where to break “the rules”, where the metaphor and the pragmatic, get to the maximum level of inclusiveness in the statement of the work, it is perhaps that period that finally speaks “clearly” to all , and the critic actually understands like a simple human being, not as a “scientist”(Historian etc.) who tries to prove this and that, who tries to defend himself from misunderstanding and future potential problems , or accusations for critical injustices. I believe this last section, is the best , where metaphor, curves, the masculine and the feminine, along with elements of composition, spatial and experience and overall ambiance, along with “fitting” or dialogue with nature and the landscape, all under the scrutiny of social dimensions of architecture, even the concept of “equal rights”, themes and issues that apparently troubled the architect for life, it is at that tangential point between architectural work and architectural criticism , that we have understanding and tangential “creativity”. This book is excellent, a proof that the critic and its subject have reached that tangential point…the climax of “irreverence”! ….The book is also very beautiful to look at, but I don’t understand why publishers want to produce such “heavy in weight” and difficult to handle formats. Given the great photographs of curves (i.e. from pp.48-50), one could have produced perhaps four or five covers, of smaller books. Before closing, I should say that the overwhelmingly all- rounded scholastic documentation throughout the progress of the book, is pleasantly soothed by the anecdotal information and critical remarks of renown architects upon their visits to Niemeyer’s projects. This and the intriguing stunning photography by the author add rhythm , admiration and humanity throughout; The extraordinary feeling of serenity evoked by architecture and nature through the picture of the Cavanelas house(p.207) and the
Edmundo Cavanelas House, Pedro do Rio, Rio de Janeiro state, 1954. extraordinary abstractions of the red-carpeted ramps of the Auditorio Ibirapuera Park, are among my favorite pictures (p. 175); Personally biased by the weakness of Niemeyer’s Eshkol 30storey administrative tower I have seen at the University of Haifa, the only Niemeyer building I have visited, I’d feel much better had the author completely eliminated some of the architect’s late in life production, while in exile in Paris and Algeria. I believe these projects have nothing to do with the architect’s best. I would have leaved them out. In conclusion, the book done by an architect/historian, who had personal experience and saw the projects, is to be recommended and praised, as it is something “synthetically and intellectually unique”, beyond the books of “library/historiographic-productivity”, whose authors (and I know several of them-some renown) never go see and experience personally the buildings they write for, just waiting to receive pictures and drawings from the architects about whom they write. It is a lively and intuitive book, by a compassionate architect-artist/scholar. I definitely recommend it to anyone….By the way, don’t forget to read Niemeyer’s own account in his memoirs ; the two books ought to go together; CONGRATULATIONS to both “comrades” …! Thanks etc. Anthony C. Antoniades, AIA
2 "Οι αλλοι Ολυμπιονίκες" (επιστολή του Α.Κ.Αντωνιάδη στην εφημερίδα "Η Καθημερινή" αμέσως μετά το πέρας των Ολυμπιακών αγώνων του Πεκίνου - 2008
|
.jpg)
