The Confusion

Colin Rowe was architectural historian, and critic, during the twentieth Century. We are here looking  at two of his essays where he describes his impression of certain buildings by the Renaissance Architect Andrea Palladio and the Modern Architect Le Corbusier. In ‘The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa’, Rowe studies both Villa Capra, and Villa Foscari by Palaldio, and the Villa Savoye and the Villa Stein by Le Corbusier. Rowe’s essay on Le Corbusier’s La Tourette Monastery is specifically about the Sainte Marie de La Tourette Monastery, built near Lyon by Le Corbusier in 1960.

In both essays, I found Colin Rowe confusing, having to read them several times. You can sense that he is a fan of more traditional architecture, but seems on the other hand to have mixed feelings on modern architecture. You even possibly get the sense that he changed his mind about Le Corbusier’s work. Between ‘The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa’ published in 1940’s, and his other essay ‘Le Corbusier’s La Tourette Monastery’ written twenty years later , there seems to have been a shift in his opinion of Le Corbusier. Or maybe, he believes that it is Le Corbusier who has lost his touch? (But that just sounds ridiculous). 

To maybe understand this better let’s have a closer look at both essays, starting with the earlier one: ‘The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa, Palladio and Le Corbusier compared’. It starts with a definition taken from Sir Christopher Wren, who distinguishes between what is truly beautiful (natural or geometrical) and what becomes beautiful to the observer‏. Following the comparison, Rowe goes on to say that the Villa Capra by Andrea Palladio, is such a true example of geometrical order and beauty. Continuing the appraisal, he then compares the villa’s geometrical beauty- the structure and overall arrangement of the building, in contrast with the beauty natural of the site around it, the two complementing each other.

However the main of the text is actually the comparison of another of Palladio’s villas, Villa Foscari, built in the 1560, and the Villa Stein by Le Corbusier, built in 1927. Through his analysis of both buildings, Rowe creates a transposition of modern architecture to that of renaissance architecture, and states that even if there is a difference in period, the principles of both villas are very similar.

Through the text Rowe looks at both buildings through the use of mathematics. Specifically looking at the different ways geometry and proportions are used by the architect.  He also keeps in mind how the villas will be used and perceived by their true owners and visitors.

Looking at the structure of the villa’s I got a sense that the technology at the time of Palladio didn’t give him as much freedom as Le Corbusier in the arrangement of his villa: “Palladio’s structural system makes it almost necessary to repeat the same plan on every level of the building; and point support allows Corbusier a fairly flexible arrangement”. However both have a specific reason for the way they arrange their building: Palladio’s need for absolute symmetry (which you continue to see in his other villas - Villa Capra comes to mind), and Le Corbusier’s need for ‘free arangement’ and ‘asymetry’.

One of Rowe’s key points is the idea of proportions: “proportions are a reflection of the harmony of the universe, their basis, scientific and religious, was quite unassailable”. Both architects, in their own way, hold a high importance to proportions in their villas. For Le Corbusier, it is “exactness, precision, neatness that he seeks, the overall controlling shape; and within, not the unchallengeable clearness of Palladio’s volumes, but a sort of planned obscurity. Consequently, while in the Malcontenta geometry is diffused through the internal volumes of the building, at Garches it resides only in the total block and the disposition of its supports.” However Rowe believes that the pure theory of proportions, as geometrical beauty that existed in Palladio has been lost even before modern architecture existed.

 

 

Now for his second essay: ‘Le Corbusier’s La Tourette Monastery’. – Actually before I continue, I just want to point out that unfortunately I have never visited any of the buildings mentioned in these texts. With this statement I continue by saying (and most architects and critics , Rowe included, would probably agree) that without having experienced the building it is a lot harder to understand a description of it - even whilst also looking at plans and sections and images of the building. This is especially the case with La Tourette Monastery.

In this essay I feel that Rowe either completely missed the point of the building, or is refusing to understand the true beauty of it – maybe because it is not geometrical perfect enough for him?

When looking at the plans, sections, and the pictures of the internal and external space of the monastery, you can see that a key element of the building is LIGHT (what an innovative concept of a building- can’t think of any other Le Corbusier building that has a similar theme, …hum hum). You can see that the way in which Le Corbusier has designed his building has all been in aim to how the light reacts with the structure; it is the light that creates the space, the mood of the of each part of the monastery. In a monastery you can assume that there is little sound – monks usually quite quiet, but the ‘sound’ through the building this that of the light: you can practically hear it shine through the openings into the different rooms. The marriage between the structure and the natural light creates the perfect setting, the required level of spirituality, needed for a monetary (- the light could be interpreted as the ‘light’ or ‘voice’ of God).

However Colin Rowe seems to ignore of this, and even seems to ignore half the building in his analysis. This is to the point in which you ask yourself, maybe he reading it in the wrong way (a mistranslation between his Anglo origins and the French architecture? ), or maybe he like me didn’t visit the building? Or, maybe he went to the wrong building? The only thing for sure is that if you want a better understanding of Le Corbusier’s Sainte Marie de La Tourette Monastery, you should definitely not read this text.