charlotte perriandHere, a personal anecdote might be
relevant. When I interviewed Perriand in
1997 and mentioned the photograph of
her reclining on the chaise lounge with
her head turned away from the camera,
she responded angrily to a question about
Beatriz Colomina’s reading of the image as
representing Le Corbusier’s denial of her
authorship and creative vision.(2) Perriand
told me that she herself had set up the
shot, that Pierre Jeanneret took the photo,
and that Le Corbusier played no role in its
conception and in fact was not there at the
time. She insisted that it was her choice to
turn her head in order to emphasize the
chaise rather than its occupant, and that it
was also her choice to use that image in
her photomontage of the model apartment
that she designed with Le Corbusier and
Jeanneret for the 1929 Salon d’Automne
apartment building. Nor was she troubled
by the fact that the pivoting chair that she
designed and displayed on her own was at-
tributed jointly to Le Corbusier-Jean-
neret-Perriand when Thonet began
producing the partnership’s furniture in
1930. Perriand saw this as an opportunity
to have the chair manufactured and con-
cluded that it would have more impact as
part of the atelier’s line of tubular-steel
furniture: attaining individual recognition
as a designer was less important than hav-
ing the chair regarded as part of a collec-
tive vision of modern living. She saw
herself as an equal participant with consid-
erable choice and control in her collabora-
tion with Le Corbusier and Jeanneret.
A second issue to consider is the rela-
tionship between Modern architecture and
the entry of women into the profession.
Although Le Corbusier was no feminist
hero, his atelier seems to have been a
place where several women designers
chose to work, including Perriand and
Stanislavia Nowicki before World War II
and Edith Schreiber, Blanche Limco, and
Maria Fenyo immediately afterward. To
what extent did the culture of the Modern
Movement, and in particular Le Cor-
busier’s commitment to new attitudes and
social mores, help foster women’s partici-
pation in the profession? Did the adven-
ture of creating something new, the
Modern Movement’s commitment to col-
lective values, and its emphasis on collabo-
ration (however paradoxical, given Le
Corbusier’s self-proclaimed role as artist-
genius) prove especially conducive to
strong, independent women? Judging
from Perriand’s descriptions, not only did
she consider herself the equal of the male
employees, but she also enjoyed their
warmth, camaraderie, and respect. The at-
elier provided an environment in which
she and her colleagues, male and female,
could grow and develop professionally.
Third, her salon exhibitions of the late
1920s call into question the stereotypical
characterization of Modernism as instru-
mental rationalism and therefore male.
What is evident in her 1928 dining room
and the 1929 model apartment, as well a
in the broader movement for domestic re-
form during that decade, was that scientif-
ic planning and functionalism were not
simply male concerns but were also signif-
icant components of women’s vision of do-
mestic liberation. Much feminist scholar-
ship has been devoted to the demystifica-
tion of hierarchical distinctions between
attributes such as rationality, functional-
ism, and structure (traditionally associated
with male truth) and characteristics such
as decoration, superfluity, and fantasy (as-
sociated with a more feminine subjective
sensibility) and to disputing the subordi-
nation of the latter. But what becomes
clear when one examines the interwar dis-
cussions about “scientific” house- hold
management is that such a dichotomy is
much too simplistic. The domestic reform
movement contributed to the feminization
of rationality, just as women (and society
at large) increasingly perceived rationality
as fundamental to their own identities.
The idea that housework could be ration-
alized and made “scientific” meant that all
women—even homemakers—could see
themselves, and be seen, as rational and
scientific. Though rarely acknowledged in
such terms, the functionalism and rational
planning of Modern domestic architecture
were similarly connected to women’s iden-
tities. To repeat: Perriand’s salon exhibits
in 1928 and 1929 challenge characteriza-
tions of both Modernism and rationality as
exclusively male.
more CP info here from the '05 pompidou center exhibition. use babelfish for easy (but non-linkable) page translation.
|
- bill 4-08-2007 6:16 pm
more CP info here from the '05 pompidou center exhibition. use babelfish for easy (but non-linkable) page translation.
- bill 4-08-2007 6:28 pm [add a comment]