FROM CUBISM TO PURISM: ART AND DWELLING IN LE CORBUSIERS LA ROCHE

HOUSE-GALLERY.
Vincenzo Tiziano Aglieri Rinella
Istituto di Arti - IULM University, Milan (Italy)
tiziano.aglieri@iulm.it
Between 1921 and 1923, during the auctions of the Kahnweiler collection, the Swiss
banker and art collector Raoul La Roche purchased a great deal of cubist works of art,
thanks to the consulting of Le Corbusier and Amde Ozenfant. As a consequence, his
collection, that held also purist paintings, became too large to be contained in La Roches
old apartment in Paris and Le Corbusier convinced him to build a new home with art
gallery, in order to display his new collection.
La Roche was a bachelor who lived in total independence. His only passion was
contemporary art, to which his great friend Le Corbusier had initiated him.
Before meeting Le Corbusier, La Roches old apartment was indeed decorated with
eighteenth-century engravings.
After visiting the first Purist exhibition at the Thomas Gallery in 1918, La Roche discovered
in Purism a mirror of his own aesthetic sense.
He completely agreed both on Le Corbusiers art and ideas. The neoplatonic idealism, the
formal rigour, the great admiration for the engineer and industry and the explicit reference
to a puritan lifestyle had a great appeal on this austere Swiss Protestant.
He immediately started collecting purist paintings, and became one of Le Corbusiers
major supporters. Soon after, La Roche was also one of the financing stakeholders for the
foundation of LEsprit Nouveau.
Thus, as La Roche himself affirmed, this gave to Le Corbusier maximum freedom in the
house design, allowing him to finally carry out some of his avant-garde ideas in
architecture.
Le Corbusier had also total freedom in purchasing the paintings at the Kahnweiler
auctions, carefully chosen according to the purist sensitivity.
The project for the house, therefore, arose from the fundamental purpose of exhibiting the
art collection. The work of art became the reference for an architectural space built around
it, in a mutual relation of valorization, as we can see from the first design sketches. In the
house, domestic and public spaces were parts of a single exhibition path articulated in
different levels of privacy and accessibility along an architectural promenade.
The program complexity was submitted to the need of sharing the living space with a
collection of works of art, even open to the public. Another issue was the conflict born
between La Roches request of a frame for a collection and Le Corbusiers aspiration to
make a poem in walls1, that concerned the balanced presence of an art collection inside
a pure work of architecture.
1

Unfortunately, today the art collection is no longer in the house, because La Roche
donated it to the Basel Kunstmuseum in 1962, before his withdrawal in Switzerland for
health reasons.
The didactic purpose of the exhibition prepared by Le Corbusier in 1926, after the
achievement of La Roche house, intended to demonstrate his personal thesis on art.
Indeed, the pictures hanging in 1926 were considered to show the artistic path leading
from the early works of the analytic period of Picassos and Braques Cubism, through the
crystal period, to the final purist synthesis of Le Corbusiers and Ozenfants painting.
This attempt was the logical consequence of Le Corbusiers ideas asserted in his book La
Peinture Moderne (1925) and in various articles issued in the Esprit Nouveau, that seem a
radical change of mind compared to what he had previously affirmed in Aprs le Cubisme
(1918).
Indeed, in Aprs le Cubisme Ozenfant and Jeanneret criticized Cubism harshly, doubting
its theoretical assumptions and asserting that it was unfit for modern times, while Purism
was presented as transcending Cubism and as the right art for modern epoch.
In La Peinture Moderne the tone changed completely: criticism was softened in the
separation among the different periods of Cubism, and the crystal period was intended
to be the link that connected Purism to the artistic experience of Cubism.
This change of route was not casual. Le Corbusier understood that, with the project for La
Roches house, he had the great opportunity to display his Purist paintings together with
the masterpieces of Cubism (La Roches collection included works of Picasso, Braque,
Gris, Lipschitz and Lger). Therefore, the whole exhibition path (as the entire house) was
designed in order to legitimate Purism and demonstrate his personal thesis.
According to Le Corbusier, geometrical research and synthetic clearness was the only
right direction pursued by Cubism. This was clearly expressed by some works of Picasso,
Braque and, particularly, Juan Gris. Purism arose from this idea of geometrical perfection
exemplified by crystals in nature.
The original display of La Roches collection may be seen on the photos taken by Fred
Boissonnas in 1926.
Starting from the beginning of the display path, a photo2 of the hall shows the hanging in
this space, that was the presentation of the general display meaning. Cubist and Purist
paintings are programmatically compared directly. On the left, there is Braques The
musician (1917-1918), on the right wall Lipchitzs crystal work Composition with guitar
(1920) and, in front of the visitor, Woman and child of Lger (1922). This last one, placed
off-center, seems to indicate the continuation path to the upper floor. Lger was
considered by Le Corbusier as a Purist, therefore this also represents, metaphorically, the
future path of painting.
To complete this cycle, in another Boissonnass photo3 we recognize on the right side wall
the large Purist still life The buffet (1925) of Amde Ozenfant, probably painted on
purpose to be exhibited here. Pursuing the path to the upper floor, the transition space
before the gallery presents a significant example of mutual interaction between art and
architecture: two Lipchitzs sculptures are carefully placed on different planes, in order to
be theatrically exposed to the dramatic crossing light of the two side windows.
Boissonnass photos of 1926 show the gallery as it was before the renovation works of
1928 that changed significantly this space, carried out in collaboration with Charlotte
Perriand.
2

In a picture4 we see Lipchitzs bas-relief Still Life with Musical Instruments (1918), over a
concrete shelf made on purpose to sustain it on the curved ramp inner wall. This work is
also clearly recognizable in the drawings of the gallery renovation of 1928.
Braques painting Pedestal table, (1911) leans against the same curved wall. This was one
of La Roches favorite paintings, so we find it in many photos, even in different positions.
Ozenfants Still Life of 1921 is placed at the beginning of the ramp, on the background
curved wall, as to indicate the pursuing of the promenade to the library. In the bottom wall
we distinguish Braques Still Life with jag, published on La Peinture Moderne.
In this picture the gallery is still lightened with a provisory system, made with some simple
incandescent lamps, hanged on electrical cables. Besides, La Roche was worried here
about the strong light coming from the large south-east window, that could damage his
paintings.
Le Corbusier found a solution for both problems in 1928, when he added the long brisesoleil, that worked also as an electrical indirect light source, projected on the ceiling.
In another photo5, next to Braques painting, the place of honour is reserved to Picassos
Bullfighter (1912). At its right, after an unidentifiable painting, there is probably Braques
Still Life harp and violin (1911/12) and the large canvas The white pot, painted on purpose
by Ozenfant in 1925 to be displayed in this gallery.
Comparing Boissonnas photos with the ones taken by other photographs sometime later6,
differences and invariants allow us to grasp the catalyzing properties of the spaces.
For instance, a picture taken upon Le Corbusiers request for the Almanach darchitecture
moderne7 shows, through a calculated shot, a futurist transparence that joins into a
dramatic visual relation the close-up Lipchitzs Composition with guitar (1920) with the
transatlantic-shaped canopy of the roof-garden.
Going back to Boissonnass photos the display path continues up the ramp, to the
mezzanine and the library. Before 1928, those spaces where in a closest relation because
of the absence of the glazing door, added with the renovation works.
In the mezzanine8, over the sofa we had Ozenfants Still Life with glass of red wine. On the
shelf we distinguish Picassos collage Pipe, Bottle and dice. The shelves of the
mezzanine, as we see from the picture, were used as casiers tableaux to store small
paintings. According to Le Corbusiers opinion, the paintings had to be used as books,
taking them out only for their contemplation.
The adjoining library9, hermitage of La Roches studies, seems a further approaching step
between Cubism and Purism. Here indeed, we identify Lgers Two women at the toilet
and Le Corbusiers Book, pipe and glass.
La Roches path from this meditation space, to his bedroom, in the evening, was long and
complex. He had to go back downstairs through the ramp, pass the bridge overlooking the
hall, then go up the staircase again. Here he found, finally in his bedroom, the eulogy of
Purism.
The famous chambre puriste10 indeed, conclusion of the exhibition path, was completely
dedicated to Purist painting, as already occurred in La Roches old apartment in rue
Costantine11.

Here, in this last episode, purist painting finally finds its celebration as the legitimate
successor of Cubism.
In this very simple room, with a monastic rarefied atmosphere, there were three paintings.
On the front wall, two Ozenfant: Jug, bottle, guitar in a cellar (1919) and a Still Life (192123). On the right, in the place of honor over the bed, there was Jeannerets Still Life with
white jug on blue bottom (1920). La Roche reserved this place, usually occupied by
religious icons in bourgeois houses, to his lay Purist prophet: Le Corbusier.
The role of paintings in this essential room was fundamental for the architecture
completeness, defining the space.
Even architectural polychromy played a fundamental role in the space characterization. Le
Corbusier mentioned, indeed, how his studies on the use of color in architecture came out
from his experience as a painter12.
La Roche however, was completely faithful to the aesthetic principles of Purism, and
patiently endured all the buildings faults.
He lived his exceptional house with stoicism and living comfort was often sacrificed to
nourish his spirituality.
Six months after moving in his new house there was not yet an efficient lighting in many
spaces. In several photos the only visible lighting source are just some small neon Chalier
or few incandescent lamps. The lighting levels in 1920s buildings were much lower than
today, and we can imagine Raoul La Roche at late evening, walking in the semi-darkness
like a devoted monk, throughout the long path from the library to his bedroom. There were
also many problems of thermal insulation, condensation, and even acoustic problems,
requiring the addition, in 1936, of some insulation panels in the gallery. This will lead La
Roche to affirm: my house is like a beautiful lady: capricious and expensive.13
Focusing on the concept of Le Corbusiers design for La Roche house, it is evident how
the main generating principle was the promenade architecturale, that coincided with the
display path.
The works of art played with the architecture a mutual interaction, qualifying the tension
of the space. Thus, the work of art had, in this architecture, quite a metaphysical role.
Le Corbusier stated: The painting will come, at the right moment and at the right place, to
bring meditative pleasures. In this house, where centres of gravity, of attraction, affirm
themselves, a painting will be, in these places, as the clear crossing of the perfect
accord..14
The presence of the works of art in many drawing details, led us to consider how some
spaces were designed on purpose to hold some works of art. It seems evident, as well,
that Le Corbusier and Ozenfant made some paintings on purpose to be displayed in that
house. Thus, La Roches house and its collection can be considered together as an
outstanding example of modern Gesamtkunstwerk.
For a long time, a remarkable contradiction in the La Roche house has been the
interruption of the promenade architecturale (the bedroom was not accessible to the
public from 1975 until November 2009) and the absence of the La Roche collection.
Recently, this masterpiece of Le Corbusiers domestic architecture was restored in its
physical body, but without taking into consideration the deep metaphysical relations
4

established with the works of art, so that today this architecture expresses a silent
incompleteness.
Nowadays, to recover these lost relations, besides having restored the promenade
architecturale it would be necessary to reinstate also the display path of 1926.
Unfortunately, the original works of art are today scattered among the Basel
Kunstmuseum, the Centre Pompidou and other private collections. We are aware,
therefore, of the great difficulty to recover them even just for a temporary exhibition. Such
a challenging task, nevertheless, could allow us to finally grasp La Roche houses lost
Aura.
In addition to this, a further essential and irreplaceable element, is definitely absent in the
house: its owner, Raoul La Roche.
Passionate art collector, with his radical Purist lifestyle, La Roche was the perfect dweller
for Le Corbusiers ideological building.
Alone, in his chapel consecrated to an Huguenot worship of beauty, he lived personally the
utopian Saint-Simonian project of a synergic collaboration among the elites of art, finance
and industry. In this manner, he emblematically personified the political and cultural
program of LEsprit Nouveau.

Illustrations

1) La Roche house, above: The entrance hall. Photo Fred Boissonnas, 1926, FLC L2(12)102; below:
Gallery access, Photo Fred Boissonnas, 1926, FLC

2) La Roche house, on the left: view of the roof canopy from the gallery (from Almanach dArchitecture
Moderne); on the right: Gallery view, with Lipschitzs bas-relief, Photo Fred Boissonnas, 1926, FLC
L2(12)144

3) La Roche house, above: Gallery view, Photo Fred Boissonnas, 1926, FLC L2(12)148; below: Gallery
view in a messy state after the renovation of 1928, Photo Fred Boissonnas, 1928, FLC L2(12)104

4) La Roche house, above: The mezzanine, Photo Fred Boissonnas, 1926, FLC L2(12)146; below: La
Roches bedroom, Photo Fred Boissonnas, 1926, FLC L2(12)145

Cf. Letter of La Roche to Le Corbusier, may 24th - FLC P5(1)209

FLC L2(12)102
3
FLC L2(12)81
4
FLC L2(12)144
5
FLC L2(12)148
2

Among them, some interesting photos, taken by Frank Yerbury probably in 1927, represent a more natural
site state.
7
Le Corbusier, Almanach darchitecture moderne, collection de l'Esprit Nouveau, Ed. Cres, Paris, 1926
8
FLC L2(12)146
9
FLC L2(12)109
10
FLC L2(12)145
11
I hanged your large painting in front of my bed, it is really remarkable and it gives me great delight. Purist
painting is concentrated in my bedroom, and it is a whole quite more perfect than the cubist paintings of the
living room. Letter of La Roche to Le Corbusier (FLC E 2-7 (129), may 1923.)
12
Le Corbusier Polychromie architecturale, in Arthur Ruegg, Polychromie architecturale, Birkhauser,
Basel, 1998
13
Quoted by Philip Speiser, in Villa La Rocca (Brochure), Bernard Artal Graphisme, Paris 2009, p.4
14
Le Corbusier, March 1926, Notes la suite in Cahier d'Art n.3, Editions A. Moranc