Dylan Impink : Proposal for the 2016 Linda and Turan Duda Traveling Fellowship
MEXICO CITY’S EMIGRE-ARCHITECTS: EXCHANGE IN CULTURES OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE INTRODUCTION The years surrounding the Second World War saw an unprecedented migration of artists and intellectuals out of Europe’s totalitarian states. Common historiography focuses on the United States as the destination for that movement, especially for architects. However, Latin America was no less appealing: South American intellectuals kept in close contact with their European colleagues, Le Corbusier travelled to Uruguay long before North America, and a map of Esprit Nouveau readership shows as much circulation in Latin America as the United States.¹ Latin America was as – if not more – fertile for realizing a modern architecture. Mexico City in particular emerged as a significant center for Latin American architecture because of its population of emigre-architects and for the extent to which those architects contributed to and reexported Mexico’s modernity. This travel study proposes to investigate the ‘alternative modernism’ of Mexico City’s architecture and urbanity through a group of those emigres: Hannes Meyer, Max Cetto, and Mathias Goeritz of Germany; Félix Candela of Spain; and Clara Porset of Cuba. The Linda and Turan Duda Travel Fellowship offers the opportunity to trace the paths of the architectural cultures which these actors carried to Mexico and then, in a reciprocal way, projected abroad again. This is a proposal for a travel study organized around the idea of architects’ journeys. ALTERNATIVE MODERNISM, TRAVEL, AND EXILE Latin American architects in the early half of the twentieth century were well in-touch with developments in the profession abroad, and they largely accepted the rhetorical modernism of Le Corbusier and his European peers. The rapid industrialization and urbanization of many Latin American cities – Mexico City inclusive – explains the relevance of such architectural theories which account for modernity’s new social problems. However, this acceptance was never uncritical. Latin American architects, being aware of their cultural reliance on European models, consciously adapted and synthesized an ‘alternative modernism.’ Specifically, Latin American architects were able to reinvigorate modern architecture by acknowledging its social implications in contrast to the ‘International Style’ paradigm in the United States, which was socially ambivalent. In Mexico City, the confluence of emigre-architects was necessarily engaged in that project.² The particular condition of being emigres disposed these architects to contribute to the creation of Mexico’s own alternative modernism. While definitions vary on the characteristics which differentiate emigres from exiles from expatriates, the five architects share two prerequisites: Their departures were politically motivated and they retained some control in the means of their departure. The very nature of these architects’ emigration makes them inherently political characters and thus disposed to applying the social
conscientiousness which defines alternative modernism. Furthermore, the cultural detachment of being a foreigner was one which – for all five – enabled them to experiment outside of traditions while culturally observing Mexico with fewer assumptions. They were thus able to create a more synthetic Mexican architecture, drawing on past, foreign influences and their own keen observations.³ In that regard, these emigrearchitects were in a position to contribute to the adaptive aspect of Mexico’s alternative modernism. PROPOSITION I propose to study the architecture and urbanism of Mexico City through the widened geography which its emigre-architects present. By visiting key nodes on these architects’ paths to Mexico, I will observe the architectural cultures which they brought with them. And, because that exchange of ideas was reciprocal, I can search for how Mexico’s alternative modernism was projected back to those nodes. In these cities, I will visit and document projects realized by the architects, projects which influenced the architects, and related institutions and schools. I will also choose one project by each architect – to be determined by accessibility – to document in detail through photography and drawing perspectives, plans, and sections. This way, I can have set-piece projects to organize my overall exploration. While my focus will be on those five actors, others will get necessarily drawn into my investigation. Luis Barragán and Juan O’Gorman, for example, were Mexican architects active in the creation of an alternative modernism and who frequently associated with the five emigres. Upon my return, I will prepare a print publication as a travel portfolio in addition to a public lecture at the College of Design. This travel study proposal comes after several semesters of related seminar research. In the spring of 2015, Prof. Burak Erdim’s Rebel Cities course introduced themes in the exchange of architectural cultures which I have used as a framework. In the fall of 2015, Prof. Patricia Morgado’s seminar on Luis Barragán introduced Mexico City’s modern architecture to me in depth. And, in an independent study with Prof. Erdim this semester, I have been performing research and developing a bibliography specifically in preparation for this proposal. I have a personal, long-term aspiration to work in Mexico City, so this travel would precipitate an eventual move. But, my simple aspiration from this travel is to enrich myself as an architect by witnessing the work of these architects, tracing their journeys, and experiencing Mexico City in an expanded way. The following map describes my suggested travel plan and is annotated with explanations of potential activities and sites in each city.
1. Colomina, Beatriz. “Toward a Global Architect,” in Architects’ Journeys: Building, Traveling, Thinking edited by Craig Buckley and Pollyanna Rhee. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2011. 2. Fraser, Valerie. Building the New World: Studies in the Modern Architecture of Latin America 1930-1960. New York: Verso, 2000. 3. Carranza, Luis E. and Fernando Luiz Lara. Modern Architecture in Latin America: Art, Technology, and Utopia. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2014.
Preliminary Budget
$225.00
$100.00
$3,947.00
$150.00
$40.00
$60.00
$80.00
$950.00
$7,462.00
Estimated Rail Fare
Gasoline
Lodging/ Daily Expenses
Admissions/ Tickets
Drawing Supplies
Other Supplies
Overseas Data
Contingency
Total Expenditure Total Minimum Minimum Expenditure
EQUIRECTANGULAR PROJECTION
CUERNAVACA (1 night) -Get critical distance from Mexico City to broaden my travels in Mexico. Cuernavaca was a popular destination for American leftists who fled political persecution in the United States during the ‘50s. The FBI even kept tabs on Esther McCoy when she traveled to Mexico for that very reason. -See Candela’s Lomas de Cuernavaca Chapel (1959) and Fan Plaza (1958).
MEXICO CITY (21 days) -Visit the built works of Candela, Cetto, and Goeritz, important examples include: Satelite City Towers (Goeritz, 1958), House in El Pedregal (Cetto,1951), and the Manantiales Restaurant (Candela,1958). -Visit the archives of Clara Porset and Max Cetto, and the Polytechnic School which hosted Meyer’s Town Planning Institute. -Meet contacts at Universidad Nacional Autonomo de Mexico’s Architecture School who can speak to the theme of emigre-architects’ impact on the city. -Visit works of contemporaries like Luis Barragán and Juan O’Gorman who were influenced by their emigre friends. -Go to major building projects in the city like the Ciudad Universitaria, the Jardines El Pedregal, and the Tlatelolco Housing Project which speak to Mexico’s alternative modernism.
$25.00
$25.00
Stuttgart Frankfurt
$40.00
$25.00
Dessau
Berlin
$35.00
$25.00
Granada Venice
$22.00
Madrid
$20.00
$0.00
Los Angeles Mexico City
$40.00
Lodging
Asheville
City
Daily Expense Breakdown
RDU - LAX 8/14 $246 American Air
LAX - MEX 8/20 $259 Aeromexico
LOS ANGELES (6 days) -Cetto worked for Richard Neutra - himself an immigrant - for half a year in 1939. I propose to visit projects by Neutra and his contemporaries which show the regional take on modernism that Cetto took South to Mexico and Barragán. Examples include the Strathmore Apartments (Neutra, 1938), Lovell Health House (Neutra, 1929), Lovell Beach House (Schindler, 1926), and Raymond House (Gill, 1916). -Julius Shulman was a frequent photographer of Mexican architecture and collaborated with Esther McCoy to sell Porset’s furniture in California. Visiting his archives at the Getty Research Institute, I can study how he exported Mexican ideas to Los Angeles postwar. -Ricardo Legorreta, Mexican architect and Barragán collaborator, realized projects in Los Angeles, notably the design for Pershing Square which takes ideas of Goeritz to California. -Visit the Watts tower where McCoy took Juan O’Gorman after seeing the later’s mosaic cave-house in Mexico City.
$1,910.00
Estimated Airfare
Preliminary Budget
54
Total
$3,947.00
$210.00
$210.00
$190.00
$525.00
$240.00
$210.00
$432.00
$840.00
$540.00
$130.00
Total Est.
ASHEVILLE (2 days) -In 1934, Porset had wanted to attend the Bauhaus, but upon contact was advised to study at the Black Mountain College instead. Porset enrolled, studied, and became friends with Josef and Anni Albers. After returning home, she would emigrate to Mexico City as the political situation in Cuba worsened under the right-wing coup of Fulgencio Batista. Porset would eventually bring the Albers to Mexico where their work in color theory would influence Barragán. I propose to visit the Black Mountain College Museum and Archives in Asheville to look for evidence of Porset’s presence and influence.
GRANADA (3 days) -Goeritz moved to Granada in 1945 and was heavily influenced by Andalusian and Moorish architecture (he had lived in Morocco for several years prior) with a view of the Alhambra from his house in the Albaicín district. He exhibited his first work while in Granada. Visiting the Alhambra and observing the city’s urbanity in general would show the influences he synthesizes in Mexico. Barragán also traveled to Andalusia and was heavily influenced by the spatial arrangements of the Alhambra.
MADRID (6 days) -Candela studied in Madrid before fleeing the Franco government. I could visit the Escuela Superior de Arquitectura where he studied. And, I could visit extant concrete-shell projects by engineer Eduardo Torrojas who was a major influence on Candela: Hipódromo de la Zarzuela and La Nave Boetticher. -Candela also realized projects in Madrid later in life, when his politics mellowed. Visiting these could demonstrate how the concrete shell ouvere he developed in Mexico could be translated back to Spain. Prof. Coll-Barreu is willing to put me in touch with the owners of Candela’s Spanish projects. -Goertiz also lived in Madrid for a time before moving to Mexico. It would be possible to visit the work of his associates, like Ángel Ferrant, in museums there.
MEX - MAD 9/9 & FRA - RDU 10/6 $1170 British Airways
3
3
2
7
3
3
6
21
6
2
Days Planned
$45.00
$45.00
$45.00
$50.00
$45.00
$45.00
$50.00
$40.00
$90.00
$45.00
Food, Transport, Other
VENICE (3 days) Alejandro Aravenas, a champion of Latin American architecture, is the director of the 2016 Architecture Biennale. In a travel study which focuses on the international exchange of architectural cultures, it seems imperative to attend the Biennale while in Europe. The title of the Mexican exhibition is “Deployments and Ensembles.”
GRX - VCE 9/19 $133 Vueling
VCE - TGF 9/22 $102 Alitalia
FRANKFURT (3 days) -Cetto worked for Ernst May in Frankfurt from 1926-1933. I could visit projects which Cetto realized independently - park pavilions, electric plants, and more - as well as housing estates by May and his contemporaries which would have affected Cetto: Romerstadt, Bruchfeldstrasse, Praunheim. -Visit the Deutsches Architekturmuseum
STUTTGART (3 days) -Weissenhof Siedlung was one of the paradigmatic modernist projects of Weimar Germany. It almost certainly impacted Meyer, Goertiz, and Cetto.Seeing this estate would inform the German architecture culture which these actors brought to and modified in Mexico.
DESSAU (2 days) -Meyer was the last director of the Bauhaus from 1928-30 and certainly brought his curriculum with him when he emigrated to Mexico to found his Town Planning Institute. I propose to visit the Bauhaus to observe that lineage.
BERLIN (7 days) -Cetto studied under Hans Poelzig in Berlin. His mentor has extant projects in the city like the Haus des Rundfunk and Kino Babylon which are open to the public. -When Meyer studied in Berlin, he apprenticed under Adolf Frölich and Emil Schaudt whose works can be visited today, like the Warschauer Straße factory. -Visit Meyer’s Federal Trade Union school nearby in Bernau. -Visit major projects from the ‘20 and ‘30s which would have influenced Cetto, Meyer, and Goeritz: Mossehaus (Mendelsohn, 1923), Oncle Toms Hütte (Tuat, 1932), etc. -Visit the Bauhaus Archive to find information on Meyer’s time in Mexico. -Meet with Susanne Dussel Peters who is Cetto’s principal biographer and expert on German-Mexican architects.
PROPOSED TRAVEL PLAN