Page 22 - Studio International - February 1965

1
Jdlewild. 1964
2
Relief. 1 964
3
La Pierre iclatee. 1963 1
such a scale that his particular qualities cannot make an
overall appearance in the buildings under commission.
The complexity of technical and administrative problems
involve him in questions that are without any stimulus
to his vocation as an artist. In addition. the permanent
collaboration of a sculptor. in my opinion. would be just
as important as that of an engineer. the intention. of
course. being different. Only a few architects have
begun to realize this; I myself have been consulted on
several occasions by architects perplexed by certain
problems. In such cases. it is difficult to do anything
more than elucidate a critical standpoint. A new, more
adequate or more inventive solution would possibly
involve the risk of upsetting a long job. Mere tampering
with details. though of some value. demands too much
and brings little profit. The basic spirit of a work should
be treated in common. whilst taking into account the
technical and economic requirements. An ephemeral
collaboration or simple exchange of ideas could not lead
far. In the present state of crisis that affects urban
planning and architecture. a renewing of fundamental
solutions is called for. Some young architects confuse
daring graphic effects with the adequate and human
solutions which remain to be discovered. Those large­
scale expert proposals for the life of the future are still
without the necessary solid bases which would enable
one to take them seriously. Their extreme systematical
approach is the exact antithesis of the anarchical world
with which we are certainly dissatisfied. Amongst the
disorder. mediocrity and daring of the solutions pro­
posed. it remains to discover simpler answers which will
allow men to feel at their ease in a world that is at once
various. harmonious and organized.
While waiting for this concerted process of research to
develop and to devote itself to the most pressing
themes. the isolated and individual sculptor can never­
theless attack certain problems.
For my own part. I have placed great emphasis on the
elaboration of a vocabulary of simple plastic elements.
which. by virtue of their variety of dimensional
geometry, allow for industrialization of construction
work. Large-scale prefabrication relegated to the
individual initiative of certain firms has given us the most
hideous buildings of the century. Industry should not
interfere in architecture, except to carry out and
materially, the solutions proposed by qualified architects
or by plastic artists. The suggestions that I have made
already show that it is possible to arrive at the achieve­
ment of extreme variety in architectural expression on
the basis of identical elements. Naturally, the collabora­
tion of constructional firms in the realization of systems
of this type is absolutely necessary. A research centre
with the appropriate means should form the liaison body
between architects and artists on the one hand. and
between the industrialists or firms on the other hand.
The best solution; it is called for as soon as possible.
There are still many other occasions on whieh
sculptors would have reason to participate. Ar;,,y building
should be conceived so as not to disturb its environ­
ment and should, rather, tend to enrich the urban
setting. Administrative regulations are generally opposed
to the search for the best possible solution. Solidarity
between architects and artists could prove an obstacle
to the most stupid regulations. Sculptors could also
devote themselves to the most delicate problems of
dimensional research. and advise industrial concerns
about altering their products-on new bases. Finally. in
the complexities of modern life. they could facilitate the
54