The competition’s main purpose is to remove from the ignoramus the choice of the artists who are responsible for public works and to prevent that scheming does not usurp the work due to talent. Therefore, on the one hand artists should not be able to plot, and on the other, the ignoramuses must not be able to choose : but if artists judge, or appoint themselves as judges, then intrigue reappears, and if they do not judge themselves, or do not appoint their own judges, then we can see that ignorance influences the order of things again 7.
Fig. 3 The famous runner-up project by Le Corbusier for the Palais des Nations competition in 1927 (© Fondation Le Corbusier).
Fig. 4 Winning project for the Musée National des BeauxArts du Québec (Québec, 2009) by OMA/Provencher Roy et Associés, architectes.
014
Following this revolutionary origin, the history of the democratization of design competitions in the 19 th Century will somewhat be linked to the rise of both Beaux-Arts academicism and scientific positivism. The present introduction is not the appropriate place for a comprehensive historical survey but a specific competition, organized some 125 years later, should nevertheless be mentioned here in order to further investigate the paradoxes of this so-called “theatre of unpredictability” : the competition for the Palace of Nations in Geneva in 1927. Often regarded as the ultimate clash of neoclassicism and modern architecture, this regrettable competition falls under the category of historical errors in terms of a theory of architectural judgment, and even more so because this competition called for the design of a building symbolizing the union of all people after the First World War. The fact that the jury awarded the top prize to Nemot and Flegenheimer’s extremely conventional project — built but nevertheless absent from any of the 20 th Century historical surveys on architecture — is already a sign of major disciplinary controversy. Furthermore, because the jury was unable to realize a true convergence of ethics and aesthetics, it also resolutely overlooked the modern projects of Le Corbusier, Hannes Meyer and even Richard Neutra. It is now well known that Le Corbusier, in an opportunistic and ambitious move, turned his loss — and his project — into a symbol of modern architecture’s struggle against academicism. His has become a perfect example of “potential architecture” since it is a historical fact that the built laureate of the Palace of Nations remains in the shadow of Le Corbusier’s unbuilt proposal [Fig.3]. This competition was supposed to demonstrate exemplary global democracy, in keeping with the mission of the League of Nations (predecessor to the United Nations). Despite the fact that the jury was mainly composed of architects, it demonstrated both ignorance and conspiracy. It took forty years for the Swiss Society of Architects and Engineers to