[JLCIntrolaoistorieaarhitecturiisecolului20npregtire,Phaidon]

00.Architecturesexpandedfield
WilliamMorrissNewsfromNowhereandH.G.WellssWhentheSleeperWakes,
publishedin1890and1899respectively,depictafuturesocietyasocialistutopiain
theformercase,acapitalistdystopiainthelatterencounteredbythenovels
protagonistafteralongperiodofsleep.Ifthecontemporaryinhabitantsoftheplanet
hadawakenedintheearlytwentyfirstcentury,theywouldhavebeenatalossto
recognizenotjustthecitiesconstellatingtheworldssurface,butalsothebuildings
makingthemup.Bothcitiesandbuildingshaveundergonefundamental
transformations,moresothanatanytimeinthepast.Likewise,thequantityof
buildingstockproducedsince1900hassurpassedthesumtotalofthatwhichexisted
inallprevioushumanhistory.
Notonlydidthepopulationofurbanareasexceedthatofthecountrysidefor
thefirsttimeshortlyaftertheyear2000,buttheveryformsofhumanpresenceonthe
faceoftheearthreflectedthoroughgoingchanges.Inthenineteenthcentury,thetrain
stationanddepartmentstorejoinedthehouse,palace,andtempleintheexisting
inventoryofbuildingtypes.Inthetwentiethcenturyofficeandapartmenttowers,
largehousingdevelopments,vasthangarsenclosingfactoriesandshoppingcenters,
andawidevarietyofinfrastructuresrangingfromdamstoairportsfollowed.
ContradictingtheBritishhistorianNikolausPevsner,whofamouslywrotethata
bicycleshedisabuilding;LincolnCathedralisapieceofarchitecture,1themost
prosaicprogramscametobeconsideredobjectsworthyofaestheticattention.This
unprecedentedsurgeinconstructionwasmeagercompensationforapreviously
unimaginablelevelofdestructionofnaturalresourcesandculturaltreasures,the
effectsofindustrialization,urbanization,andwar.
Architecturesmutationswerenotlimitedtotheinventionofprograms
respondingtothenewdemandsofproductionandconsumption.Thefieldalso
expandedwiththeriseofnewtypesandclassesofusers.Architectureceasedtobea
disciplineexclusivelyintheserviceofthewealthyandbegantoaddressbroader

constituencies,includingmunicipalities,cooperatives,andawiderangeofinstitutions
andsocialgroups.2Italsorespondedtothebreakingdownofclassicalcodes,the
rejectionofhistoricalimitation,andtheintroductionofnewmaterials.Itsnew
relationstotechnology,thearts,andthecitywereaffectedbyexternalconditionsas
wellasbyinternalones.Attimesithadrecoursetosourcesoutsidethediscipline,
adoptingmetaphorsbasedonbiologicalorganisms,machines,orlanguage;atother
timesitfoundinspirationwithinitsowndisciplinarytraditions.3Inviewofallthese
transformations,ithasbeenimpossibletolimitarchitecturesdefinitioninthisbook
torealizedconstructions.Unbuiltdesigns,aswellasbooks,journals,andpublic
manifestationsembodyingthecultureofarchitectureinitsbroadestsensehavealso
beentakenintoaccount.Indeed,realizedbuildingsarealwaysinformedbyideas,
narratives,andrepressedmemoriesofpastprojects.
Twothresholdsintime
Theverydelimitationtwentiethcenturyisopentodebate.Rejectingastrictly
chronologicaldefinition,thepresentnarrativebeginswiththeperiodfrom1880to
1914.ItfindsitstemporalbracketsbetweentheshortcenturythattheBritish
historianEricHobsbawmcondensedintotheyearsfrom1914to19914andalonger
spanthatplacesthetwentiethcenturysoriginswithinacontinuumthatgoesasfar
backastheEnlightenment,Thisinitialmomentischaracterizedbytheconvergence
ofindustrialization,urbanization,theriseofSocialDemocracythroughoutEurope,
theemergenceofthesocialsciencesasdisciplinaryspecializations,andthe
disseminationofthethoughtofimportantphilosophersfromFriedrichNietzscheto
HenriBergson.Italsocoincideswiththeriseofrevolutionaryartmovementssuchas
Symbolisminpoetryandthearts,thenCubisminpainting.WhiletheEuropean
powerswerefightingawarforworlddominationandorchestratingthetriumphof
imperialism,designers,andtheimagesoftheirwork,alsobegantomakeinroads
aroundtheglobe,thankstotheunprecedentedaccelerationofmodesoftransportand
newnetworksofprintedinformation,whichdisseminatedtheculturalnormsofthe
leadingnations.

Apairofalmostcontemporaneouseventswerecrucialtothisbeginning:the
UniversalExpositioninParisof1889andtheWorldsColumbianExpositionin
Chicagoof1893.TheParisfaircoincidedwiththeclimacticmomentofEuropean
colonialism,whiletheChicagofairsignaledtheemergenceoftheNewWorldonthe
internationalscene.Botheventscalledtheverydefinitionofarchitectureinto
question,initspurposeasitsaddresseesbecamemuchbroadersocialgroupsas
wellasitsforms.Massproduction,ofwhichFordismbecamethemostsignificant
systemoforganization,ledtothecreationofaworldwidemarketandencouragedthe
mostradicalarchitectstosearchfornewformsconsonantwiththemachineaesthetic.
Atthesametime,traditionalists,whowereoftennolessengagedsocially,soughtto
perpetuatethemorecomfortingarchetypesofthepastbyadjustingthemtonew
demands.
Almostonecenturylaterafterdecolonization,whichculminatedwith
NelsonMandelasreleasefromprisonin1990,andtheendoftheColdWar,which
wasmarkedbytheWeststriumphovertheSovietblocin1989thewindingdown
ofthesecondmillenniumappearedtosignalthenextradicalbreakinthecultureof
architecture.Itisthismomentthatprovidestheclosingbracketforthisbook.The
automationofprocessesinadigitalagehadtheeffectofmodifyingthedivisionof
professionallaboraswellastherelationshipbetweenthedesignstudioandthe
buildingsite.TheGuggenheimMuseuminBilbao,Spain,completedbyFrankGehry
in1997,wasahighlyvisibleexemplarofthesenewpracticeswhilealso
demonstratingthepotentialimportanceofarchitectureinurbanplanningandpublic
policy;togetherwithdozensofothersurprisingbuildings,Gehrysmuseumcalled
intoquestionthetraditionaldefinitionofthearchitecturalobject.Witharchitecture
firms,clients,andculturalorganizationsenjoyingunprecedentedmobility,theriseof
agenerationofdesignershypedbytheinternationalmedia,butinitiallyengagedin
theoreticalandcriticalactivityandopentoutopiandiscourse,coincidedwithacrisis
inthesocialpoliciesthathaddevelopedoverthecourseofthetwentiethcentury.
Comingontheheelsofseveralgenerationsofarchitectswhohadnurturedhigh
aspirationstosocialtransformation,designersattheendofthetwentiethcentury
3

oftenrelinquishedtodevelopersandpoliticianstoolsthattheymighthaveusedto
achievesubstantivereforms.
Thespanfrom1889to2000doesnotdivideeasilyintotidy,selfcontained
segments.Rather,itisnecessarytotakeintoaccountmultiple,overlapping
temporalitiesthroughoutthecentury,assuggestedbythehistorianFernandBraudel
inhishistoricalinterpretationoftheMediterraneanworld.5Braudelusedthe
architecturalmetaphorofmultidimensionalplanestodescribethesemultiple
temporalities.Intwentiethcenturyarchitecturetheyincludestatepoliciesandtheir
highlyvolatileconfigurations;lifecyclesofinstitutionsandorganizationsaswellas
citiesandregions,whichundergoslowprocessesofgrowthanddecline;andmost
simply,theconstructionofmajorbuildingsandthelivesofarchitects,critics,clients,
andhistorians.Morefleetingtemporalities,inwhichconceptsandidealsappearand
disappearonlytoresurfaceafewdecadeslater,alsoplaytheirpart.Theproblemof
writingahistoryoftwentiethcenturyarchitectureispreciselythatofrelatingthese
differentialratesoftemporalchangetospecificdesignsandbuiltobjects.
Giventhisframework,Ihaveresistedthetemptationtowriteahistoryofwhat
hasbeenknownastheModernMovementeversinceNikolausPevsnermadea
ratherpartisanidentificationofitspioneersin1936,celebratingWalterGropiusas
itsmajorfigurehead.6IhavealsoavoidedperpetuatingtherubricoftheInternational
Style,asthiswasformulatedin1932inNewYork,7preferringinsteadtoshapea
broaderdefinitionofmodernitythatcannotbereducedtothefetishofnovitas,ofthe
newfornewnessssake.Fromthispointofview,itwasessentialnottodisregard
architecturalinterpretationsofmodernitybasedonconservativeortraditionalist
concepts,eveniftheywerefrequentlyrejectedorridiculedbymilitantcriticsacting,
asisoftenthecase,onbehalfoftheleadingarchitects.Resurgencesofclassicismand
theoccasionalsubversiveeruptionofthevernaculararepartofthisbiggerpicture.
Indeed,farfrombeingarigidcategory,andevenlessasterileone,traditionthough
sometimeswhollyfabricatedhasconsistentlyservedasanintellectualstimulant.8
Anexplorationoftheshiftingboundariesbetweenarchitectureandtherelated
fieldsofart,urbanplanning,andtechnologyalsoprovedindispensablefor
understandingthechangingmethodsofformgiving.Theelevatedidealswithwhich
4

radicalarchitectshaveoftenidentifiedthemselvessuchasthemachineaestheticor
organicismneededtobetakenintoaccount,alongwiththeeffectsoftheapparently
mostabstractmanifestoes,whichhavesometimesexertedtheirinfluenceatadistance
ofseveraldecades.Anattempthasbeenmadethroughoutthebooktoidentifythe
visualdocumentsallowingtheclearestunderstandingoftheseresonancesand
reverberations.Togetherwithimagesofcompletedbuildings,sometimeswithintheir
urbancontext,pagesofmagazines,bookcovers,andarchitectsportraitshelpto
reconstructthecomplexityofcontinuouslychangingnetworksofsignsandforms.
Thedanceofhegemonies
Inthefollowingpages,thedifferentnationalscenesofarchitecturehavebeen
treatedasporoustointernationalstrategiesanddebatesascontextsinwhichthe
latterweresubjectedtodiscussion,modification,andadaptionratherthanas
territorieswithimpermeableborders.Thehistoryoftwentiethcenturyarchitecture
couldbewrittenbyfollowingthethreadorrather,untanglingtheknotof
consecutivesystemsofhegemonyimposedonnationalandregionalcultures.9The
periodunderconsiderationwascharacterizedincrucialwaysbyrecurrenteconomic
andpoliticalconflictsbetweendominantstates,includingtheirmilitary
consequences.Theseconflictshadtremendousimpactonculture.In1941themedia
tycoonHenryLucecoulddeclarethatthetwentiethcenturywasdestinedtobethe
AmericanCentury,followingcenturiesimplicitlyperceivedasFrenchandthen
English.10ThereisnodoubtthattheUnitedStatesexercisedconsiderableinfluence
onarchitectureasonmanyotherfieldsofcultureevenbeforethemassive
increaseinitspowerfollowingvictoryovertheAxisforcesin1945andasecond
triumphalmomentattheendoftheColdWar.11Thevocabularyofarchitecture
faithfullyreflectedtheseshifts.After1945Americanterminologysupplementedthe
ItalianlanguageofarchitecturethathademergedduringtheRenaissanceandthen
wassupplementedbyFrenchandBritishtermsintheeighteenthandnineteenth
centuriesandbyGermantermsintheearlytwentiethcentury.12
Butthehegemonyofthisrelativelynewcivilizationwasnottheonlyoneto
haveanimpactonglobalarchitecture.Consideringeachnationalsceneasaporous
5

ratherthanclosedrealmrevealssystemsofdominationofvaryingtypes,intensity,
andduration,fromindustrialmodesofproductiontopatternsofleisure.National
sceneshaveremainedopendespiterecurrentattemptsbyauthoritarianorxenophobic
regimestoshoreuptheirborders.Farfromgivingwaytoahomogenizing
internationalism,nationalsystemshaveconstantlyredefinedthemselves,shapedby
theinterplayofinternalandexternalforces.Longbeforetheadventofairtraveland
newinformationtechnologies,theglobalcirculationofideasandimagesbywayof
thesteamship,thetelegraph,andthemechanicalreproductionofpicturesall
nineteenthcenturyinventionsshapedeverylocalscene.
Thesepatternsmayalsobedetectedwithincolonialempires,whichboth
reachedtheirapogeeandunderwenttheirfinalcollapseinthetwentiethcentury,then
werepartiallyperpetuatedunderpostcolonialconditionsafter1945.Butthe
relationshipofthecolonizertothecolonizedwasneverunidirectional,andthe
hybridizationthatcharacterizedurbanplanningandarchitectureinmanycolonies,
wherelocalthemeswereassimilatedintoconstructionsbuiltbythedominantpower,
alsooperatedbetweencolonizingnations.13ThegeneralplanofChandigarh,capital
ofthePunjabinitiallyentrustedtotheAmericanarchitectAlbertMayer,thento
ParisbasedLeCorbusierwasrootedintownplanningprinciplesthathadbeen
perfectedbytheBritish.ThearchitectureoftheMoroccancityofCasablancawas
definedinrelationnotjusttoParisbutalsotoBerlinandLosAngeles,whileBuenos
AirescontainedechoesofMadrid,Budapest,Milan,NewYork,andParis.
Thecontinuityoftypes
Oneachnationalscene,thegroupscompetingfordominanceinarchitectureattimes
indulgedinexaggeratedpolemicsinordertoconsolidatetheirownsymbolic
capital,inPierreBourdieussenseoftheterm.14Itwasthereforeimpossibletolimit
ahistoryoftherelationshipsstructuringtwentiethcenturyarchitecturetoalistof
aestheticinfluencesatermIhaveconsciouslyavoided.Instead,followingHans
RobertJauss,Ifounditessentialtoanalyzethereceptionmetbyworksandideas,as
thisoftenredefinedtheprofessionalidentityofarchitects,eventhoseworkingata

considerabledistancefromthebuildingstheywereinterpretingandsometimes
emulating.15
Thepresentbookproposestomaptherelationshipsestablishedamong
theoreticalsystems,seminalconcepts,urbanplans,paperprojects,andcompleted
buildings.Thislast,however,alongwithindividualarchitects,remainsthecentral
focus,although,onceagain,withtheirlocalandinternationalreceptiontakeninto
account.Theconnectionbetweenimaginedspacesandbuiltoneswasparticularly
stronginthetwentiethcentury,giventhattheprincipaltypesofstructureswereoften
developedinakindofleapfromtheshelfoftheidealprojectlibrary,asidentified
byBrunoFortier,16totherealityoftheconstructionsite.
TheglasstowersimaginedbyLudwigMiesvanderRohein1921,for
example,wereonlybuiltinthe1950s.Theythenbecameatiresomeclichaneasy
targetforcriticsadvocatingpostmodernismbeforebeingrebornattheendofthe
centurythankstonewtechnologicaladvances.Likewise,theimmeublevillas
conceivedbyLeCorbusierin1922,acollectivedwellingwithindividualliving
spaces,hascontinuedtoinspireprojectsinthethirdmillennium.Themachine
buildingthatAntonioSantEliaenvisionedjustbeforeWorldWarIwouldappearina
modifiedformintheCentrePompidouinParis,whilethecontorted,biomorphic
structuresdreamedofbytheExpressionistshavefinallybecomefeasibletodayinan
agewhendigitalmodelinghasmadeitpossibletobreakdowncomplexshapesinto
componentsthatcanbecalculatedandindustriallyproduced.
Historiansversusarchitects,ortheproblemofinclusion
Untilthe1970sthehistoriesbySigfriedGiedion,BrunoZevi,HenryRussell
Hitchcock,andLeonardoBenevoloperpetuatedaviewofmodernarchitecturethat
gaveprioritytotheradicalcharacterofitsinnovations.Eachnarrativecarrieditsown
particularbiases.17Asearlyas1929Giedionwasinterestedinobservingnational
constants.18By1941hespokeofthecreationofanewtradition,anotion
Hitchcockhadproposedin1929.19In1951ZevirespondedtoGiedionby
highlightingthehistoricalrelationshipofarchitecturalculturetopolitics,and
surveyedavastarrayofbuildings.20In1958Hitchcockdescribedthereintegration

oftheartsoftheengineerandthearchitect;healsopreferredtowriteaboutbuildings
thathehadactuallyhadtheopportunitytovisit.21AsforBenevolo,heplacedthe
developmentofmodernarchitecturewithinanoptimisticpictureoftheencounter
betweenformalandtechnologicalinventionandsocialadvances.22Twentyyears
later,butinasimilarvein,KennethFramptonproposedacriticalhistoryofthe
ModernMovement,seekingtoprolongitsincompleteproject.23Soonafter,William
Curtistookintoaccounttheglobalexpansionofmodernarchitecture,aperspective
rootedinhisownexperiencesinAsiaandLatinAmerica.24In2002,AlanColquhoun
publishedaconcisesurveynolesscommittedtothecelebrationofmodernismthan
Framptons.25
ReynerBanham,whoasearlyas1960couldseerootsofmodernarchitectural
strategiesinbothItalianFuturismandFrenchClassicism,wasamongthoseto
proposeamoresubversivereading.26ManfredoTafuriandFrancescoDalCoalso
analyzedtherelationshipofaestheticsandpoliticsintwentiethcenturyarchitecture,
underliningtheideologicalforcesthatshapedthefield,whichTafurihadaddressed
previouslyinhisenigmaticbutmagisterialArchitectureandUtopia.27
Severalgenerationsofbiographicaldictionariesandencyclopediashave
allowedreadingsparalleltothoseofferedbythesehistoricalnarratives,andrecently
AdrianFortyhasattempted,inWordsandBuildings(2000),todefinethesemantic
fieldofmodernarchitecturebyidentifyingsomeofitskeyterms.28Yetfewofthese
workshaveattemptedtorevealthecontinuitiesthatcharacterizemodernarchitecture
anoftenbrokenthread,butonethatrunsthroughouttheepisodesdiscussedinthis
book.
FromGiediontoTafuriandFrampton,thesediscoursesofarchitectural
historyhavealsorevealedthefactthatthesupposedautonomyorobjectivityofthe
authorisaquasifiction.Manyofthesebooksoriginatedfromacommissionbya
particulararchitectinGiedionscase,byLeCorbusierandWalterGropiusor
reflectedanintellectualpositiondevelopedinclosecontactwitharchitectsin
Tafuriscase,withAldoRossiandVittorioGregotti.Throughsuchrelationships,
architectshaveundeniablyshapedhistoriansthinkingandwritingandattimesbiased
theirinterpretations.
8

Thefollowingpagestrytoplacelessemphasisonthecreativityof
incontestablemasterslikeFrankLloydWright,LeCorbusier,andMiesvander
Rohe29thanonthesometimesunfairlyneglectedworkofarchitectswhohadless
heroiccareersbuthavebeenrediscoveredthroughthepublicationofaplethoraof
monographsduringthelasttwodecades.Theimportanceofthemastersofmodern
architectureneedstobeassessedasmuchthroughacarefulreconsiderationoftheir
ascendancyandperiodofdominationasthroughacelebrationoftheirwork.From
thispointofviewandunlikemanyofthevolumesnamedabovetheeffortinthe
presentbookhasbeentobeasinclusiveaspossible,withinthelimitsofitsformat
andattheriskofoccasionallyoversimplifyingcomplextrajectories.Ihavealso
frequentlydevotedmoreattentiontotheexperimentalbeginningsofarchitects
careersthantolateperiods,whentheirworkoftenregressedorwassimplyfrozenin
placebysuccessandrepetition.
Inordertoavoidreproducingthekindofepicnarrativewithwhichmany
previoushistorieshaveinterpretedthetheoriesanddesignsofthemostinnovative
architectsofthenineteenthcenturyreducingtheirimmediatepredecessorstothe
dubiousstatusofpioneersIhavealsotakenabroadviewoftheunfoldingof
architecturalmodernity.Thecontinuitybetweentheidealsandreformstrategies
forgedduringthefirstdecadesoftheIndustrialRevolutionandthoseofthemature
modernismofthe1920scannotbedenied.Indeed,adefinitionofmodernitylimited
totheaestheticanddesignpreceptsofhighmodernismappearsallthemoreobsolete
thirtyyearsaftertheeruptionofthelastofseveralshortlivedpostmodernisms.
Withoutgoingsofarastoextendthedefinitionofthemodernconditiontothevast
configurationsofscientificandpoliticalthoughtexploredbyBrunoLatour,30for
example,Ihaveventuredbeyondthelimitsofthemovementsliterallyproclaiming
theirownmodernitytoconsiderchangesbroughtaboutbytheconvergenceofthe
Enlightenment,theIndustrialRevolution,andtheriseofthenationstate.The
adjustmentofconservativebuildingcodestothefunctionalrequirementsof
modernizationtheobjectiveprocessofthematerialtransformationofsociety
belongstothischronicleasmuchasdoinnovationsinbuildingtypologyandform,
9

eveniftheformerrespondmoretothemandatesofstatepowerandcapitalthanto
idealsofsocialreform.
Itisdifficultandperhapsimpossibletocommunicateinasinglenarrativea
spectrumofexperiencesthatthousandsofmonographs,exhibitioncatalogs,doctoral
theses,andthematicstudieshavenotyetexhausted.Yetbyalternatingwide
brushstrokeswithspecificdetails,Ihaveendeavoredtoevokealandscapeof
recurrentthemesandattimestorevealdifferentwaysofthinkingaboutthepast.
Amongtheserecurrentthemesisthepassionatesearchbymodernarchitectsforan
architectureconsideredtoberationalatermthathasenjoyedmuchsuccessover
manydecadesorinanycasetobejustifiedbyarationalerelatedtoconstruction,
function,oreconomy.Thissearchledinextremecasestoareductionofthe
conceptionofrationalbuildingtolittlemorethantheimplementationofprinciples
liketheprovisionofoptimalventilationoranalignmentguaranteeingmaximum
sunlight.Anotherrecurrentthemeintwentiethcenturyarchitecturehasbeenthe
relationshipofarchitecturalprogramstotheneedsofdisadvantagedsocialclassesa
subjecttakenintoconsiderationbyprofessionalarchitectsforthefirsttimeinhistory
duringthisperiod.Throughoutthetwentiethcentury,diversepopulistmovements
constantlyaddressedthissubject,whetherstructurally,forexampleintermsofsocial
housing,oraesthetically,bydrawingonvernacularratherthanpedigreedforms.
Alongsidethedazzlingaccomplishmentsofthemastersandtheir
trailblazingexperimentsthatclaimedtofreearchitecturefromtheweightofhistory,I
havealsoaspiredtotraceprojectsmorereflectiveoftheslow,cumulative,and
irresistibleprocessofmodernization.DuringthegoldenageofHollywoodcinema,
themajorstudiosandleadingproducerscategorizedtheirmoviesasA,B,orC
accordingtotheirbudget.Thisvolume,thoughmostoftenfocusedonAbuildings,
wasinitiallywrittenwiththeintentionnottoneglecttherelationshipbetweenthe
majorarchitectureofthemostspectacularworksandtheminorarchitectureof
massproduction,whichconstitutedtheurbanbackdropforthemonumentalprojects.
Thephysicallimitationsofasinglevolumehaveconstrainedthisambition.Butifthe
pagesthatfollowcannotunravelallthemysteriesoftwentiethcenturyarchitecture,

10

theyaimfirstandforemosttobeaninvitationtodiscovery,andtosuggesta
frameworkwithinwhichtounderstanditsmostcharacteristicfeatures.

11

12

Endnotes

SourcesareusuallycitedinboththeoriginallanguageofpublicationandinEnglishtranslation,

whereexisting.Wherenoted,translationshavebeenmodifiedforaccuracyorclarity.Quotations
fromuntranslatedsourceshavebeenrenderedinEnglishbytheauthor.
Introduction
NikolausPevsner,AnOutlineofEuropeanArchitecture(Harmondsworth:PenguinBooks,1963),
15.
2

IamalludingheretoRosalindKrausssseminalessaySculptureintheExpandedField,October
8(Spring1979):3044.
3

AdrianForty,OfCars,ClothesandCarpets:DesignMetaphorsinArchitecturalThought,
JournalofDesignHistory2,no.1(1989):114.
EricHobsbawm,TheAgeofExtremes:AHistoryoftheWorld,19141991(NewYork:Pantheon

Books,1994).
FernandBraudel,PrefacetoLamditerraneetlemondemditerranenlpoquedePhilippeII

(Paris:ArmandColin,1949),14;English:TheMediterraneanandtheMediterraneanWorldinthe
AgeofPhilipII,trans.SinReynolds(NewYork:Harper&Row,1972),21.
6

NikolausPevsner,PioneersoftheModernMovementfromWilliamMorristoWalterGropius
(London:Faber&Faber,1936).
7

HenryRussellHitchcockandPhilipJohnson,TheInternationalStyle:Architecturesince1922
(NewYork:W.W.Norton&Co.,1932).
8

SeeEricHobsbawmandTerenceRanger,eds.,TheInventionofTradition(Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress,1983).
9

IuseherethetermhegemonyaccordingtothemeaninggivenbyAntonioGramsci,i.e.,asa
systemofattitudes,beliefs,andvaluesallowingdomination:AntonioGramsci,PrisonNotebooks,
vols.IandII.,ed.andtrans.JosephA.Buttigieg(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,199296);
seealsoChantalMouffe,HegemonyandIdeologyinGramsci,ResearchinPoliticalEconomy2
(1979),131.
10

HenryLuce,TheAmericanCentury,Lifemagazine,February7,1941.
11

SeeJeanLouisCohen,ScenesoftheWorldtoCome:EuropeanArchitectureandtheAmerican
Challenge,18931960(Paris:Flammarion;Montreal:CanadianCentreforArchitecture,1995).

SeeJeanLouisCohen,Leculturedellamodernizzazione:ilballettodelleegemonie,inMaria

12

LuisaScalviniandFabioMangone,eds.,Immaginietemi,thematicvolumeofDizionario
dellarchitetturadelXXsecolo(Rome:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaitaliana,2004),2131.
13

SeeAnthonyD.King,ColonialUrbanDevelopment:Culture,SocialPower,andEnvironment
(London:Routledge&Paul,1976);andMercedesVolaitandJoeNasr,eds.,Urbanism:Imported
orExported?(WestSussex:WileyAcademy,2003).
14

PierreBourdieu,Lesenspratique(Paris:ditionsdeMinuit,1980);English:TheLogicof
Practice,trans.RichardNice(Cambridge:Polity,1990).
15

HansRobertJauss,TowardanAestheticofReception,trans.TimothyBahti(Minneapolis:
UniversityofMinnesotaPress,1982).Inthearchitecturalfield,seeJeanYvesAndrieuxand
FabienneChevalier,Larceptiondelarchitecturedumouvementmoderne:image,usage,hritage
(Sainttienne:PublicationsdelUniversitdeSainttienne),2002.
16

BrunoFortier,Lamourdesvilles(Lige:Mardaga;Paris:Institutfranaisdarchitecture,1994).
SeeMariaLuisaScalviniandMariaLuisaSandri,Limmaginestoriograficadellarchitettura

17

modernadaPlatzaGiedion(Rome:Officinaedizioni,1984);PanayotisTournikiotis,The
HistoriographyofModernArchitecture(Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress,1999);andAnthonyVidler,
HistoriesoftheImmediatePresent:InventingArchitecturalModernism(Cambridge,Mass.:MIT
Press,2008).
18

SigfriedGiedion,Nationalittskonstante,inBaueninFrankreich,BaueninEisen,Bauenin
Eisenbeton(Leipzig:Klinkhardt&Biermann,1928),68;English:BuildinginFrance,Buildingin
Iron,BuildinginFerroconcrete,trans.J.DuncanBerry(SantaMonica:GettyCenterfortheHistory
ofArtandtheHumanities,1995),152.
19

SigfriedGiedion,Space,TimeandArchitecture:TheGrowthofaNewTradition(Cambridge,
Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress,1941),18;HenryRussellHitchcock,ModernArchitecture:
RomanticismandReintegration(NewYork:PaysonandClarke,1929),77149.
20

BrunoZevi,Storiadellarchitetturamoderna(Turin:Einaudi,1951).
21

HenryRussellHitchcock,Architecture:NineteenthandTwentiethCenturies(Harmondsworth,
Middlesex:PenguinBooks,1958).
22

LeonardoBenevolo,Storiadellarchitetturamoderna(Bari:Laterza,1960);English:Historyof
ModernArchitecture,trans.H.J.Landry(Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress,1966).

23

KennethFrampton,ModernArchitecture:ACriticalHistory(London:Thames&Hudson,1980;
4thed.,2007).
24

WilliamJ.R.Curtis,ModernArchitecturesince1900(London:Phaidon,1982;3rded.,1996).
25

AlanColquhoun,ModernArchitecture(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2002).
26

ReynerBanham,TheoryandDesignintheFirstMachineAge(London:ArchitecturalPress,1960).
27

ManfredoTafuriandFrancescoDalCo,Storiadellarchitetturacontemporanea(Milan:Electa,
1976).English,withasomewhatmisleadingtitle:ModernArchitecture,trans.RobertErichWolf
(NewYork:Rizzoli,1986).
AdrianForty,WordsandBuildings:AVocabularyofModernArchitecture(London:Thames&

28

Hudson,2000).
Cf.PeterBlake,TheMasterBuilders(NewYork:Knopf,1960).

29

BrunoLatour,Nousnavonsjamaistmodernes.Essaidanthropologiesymtrique(Paris:La

30

Dcouverte,1991);English:WeHaveNeverBeenModern,trans.CatherinePorter(Cambridge,
Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress,1993).