4 unités LC - Architecture Insights

and the CIAM (Congrès International d’Architecture Modern). The
destruction of this building was widely reported all over the world, and the
event led to the subsequent explosion of several other similar housing
developments.
Also, in Coleman, Alice, Utopia on Trial, Vision and Reality in Planned
Housing, Hilary Shipman Ltd., London, 1985, pp. 7-8, the influence of Le
Corbusier’s housing designs (albeit purely superficial) on council housing
blocks in the United Kingdom is discussed. Coleman refers to “the tenement
block with its disastrous record in places such as the Gorbals, the most
notorious slum in Glascow. “…decked up in the language of Radiant City –
‘the tower block glittering above the greenery’”.
8 The ‘Unité’ in Briey did in fact suffer from a period comparable to that of
these other HLMs, “– no better, in fact than any immigrant’s ghetto” (Von
Moos, Stanislaus, Le Corbusier: Elements of a Synthesis, The MIT Press,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, (English Ed.) 1980, p. 163). This period is
recorded in greater detail in pp. 163-69 of this thesis.
9 See pp. 103-04 of this thesis, where the reactions of the media and various
French organisations are noted. See also, Von Moos, Stanislaus, Le Corbusier:
Elements of a Synthesis, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, (English
Ed.) 1980, p. 158, “Opposition to this project was violent.” – Von Moos
stating the protests during the building’s construction, notably from the
SADG (Société des Architectes Diplômés par le Gouvernement), the Conseil
supérieur de l’hygiène, and the Société pour l’Esthétique de France; also
Boesiger, W. text by Le Corbusier, Le Corbusier: Les Dernières Œuvres,
Artemis, Zurich, 3rd Ed., 1977, p. 173, where Le Corbusier quotes reactions
of others to his Unité in Marseille as “’Hovels where people can bang their
heads against walls…’ And…’A hatchery for mental disease’”.
10 In Jencks, Charles, Modern Movements in Architecture, Penguin Books
Ltd., England, 1986,p. 14, Jencks notes that the ‘Unité’ in Marseille
“remains a prime object of architectural pilgrimage whether by students or
practising architects”. But the ‘Unité’ in Marseille also attracts a wider
audience, featuring in the Dorling Kindersley Travel Guides: France, Dorling
Kindersley Ltd., London, (Ed. Rosemary Bailey), 7th Ed., 2000, p. 502, as
one of the city’s most notable landmarks.
11 The lower status of the other ‘Unités’ as far as tourism is concerned, has
meant greater restrictions on finance for renovation, but a certain amount of
19 20
national money has provided some restoration work, and the preservation of
the buildings is carefully guarded over by their regional tourist associations.
12 Le Corbusier et Pierre Jeanneret: Œuvre Complète de 1929 – 1934,
Volume 2, compiled by W. Boesiger, text by Le Corbusier, Les Editions
d’Architectures (Edition Girsberger), Zurich, Switzerland, 7th Ed., 1964, p.18.
13 See Brooks, H. Allen (Ed.), Le Corbusier, Princeton University Press, New
Jersey, 1987, essay by Reyner Banham entitled ‘La Maison des hommes and
La Misère des villes: Le Corbusier and the Architecture of Mass Housing’, in
which Reyner states that the ‘Unité’ in Marseille was “an urbanistic and
social disappointment because the rest of the cluster was not built” (p. 114.).
In another chapter of this book, ‘Machine et mémoire: The City in the Work
of Le Corbusier’, Manfredo Tafuri (trans. Stephen Sartarelli) states that the
‘Unité’ of Marseille is “a fragment, a slice, isolated, of the linear system that
once confronted nature and brought it back to itself in Le Corbusier’s urban
dreams for Algiers and South America.” (p. 212).
14 See again Brooks, H. Allen (Ed.), Le Corbusier, Princeton University Press,
New Jersey, 1987, essay by Reyner Banham entitled ‘La Maison des hommes
and La Misère des villes: Le Corbusier and the Architecture of Mass Housing’,
Reyner refers to present state of the ‘Unité’ in Marseille as being a “mess”
(p. 114). He also quotes the response of André Lurçat to Le Corbusier’s claim
that the ‘Unité’ was a building that he had “wanted to build for 25 years,” –
“So you insult the people by offering them a dwelling which is a quartercentury
out of date” (p. 113).
Also in this book, in the essay ‘Le Corbusier, 1922-1965’, by Vincent Scully,
the ‘Unité’ in Nantes is described (from the view of a photograph) as “The
giant, harsh, savagely painted vessel plunges into, wipes out, the town.” (p.
53).
Von Moos, Stanislaus, Le Corbusier: Elements of a Synthesis, The MIT Press,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, (English Ed.) 1980, p. 162, notes that “so many
visitors to Marseille speak of failure” (although he himself disagrees with their
views to a certain extent).
In Hughes, Robert, The Shock of the New – Art and the Century of Change,
Thames and Hudson Ltd., London, 1992, pp. 188-190, Hughes offers a
highly critical view of the ‘Unité’ in Marseille, describing it as isolated in its
location, decrepit and neglected in its state, and cramped in its individual
apartment size. Also consequently stating that “Le Corbusier failed as a
sociological architect” (p. 190). Hughes view of the ‘Unité’ backs up Von
Moos’ claim.