Negar Saboori; Amir Nasri
Abstract
Le Corbusier and Bataille -who was against architecture- seem to be two opposing figures. But there is a relation between the two. Building Ronchamp, le Corbusier was reading The Accursed Share of Bataille. ‘Le jeu or play’ is one of the common concepts in the theoretical framework of these ...
Read More
Le Corbusier and Bataille -who was against architecture- seem to be two opposing figures. But there is a relation between the two. Building Ronchamp, le Corbusier was reading The Accursed Share of Bataille. ‘Le jeu or play’ is one of the common concepts in the theoretical framework of these two, which can be slightly different. In this paper we will look for this relation considering le Corbusier’s Ronchamp chapel. In Ronchamp le Corbusier brings the contrast-based play to the beginning of architecture: What is architecture and not architecture at the same time. In Ronchamp Le Corbusier continued with the process of rotating axes which he had started in 1920s; the same measure which Bataille takes in ‘Acéphale’. The play in Ronchamp is ‘changing Thing into no-thing’ and ‘sacrificing’ architecture; concepts which are found in general economy and Bataille’s works. Ultimately Ronchamp plays with the common organization of architecture, both in reference and form. This is just what Bataille admires in works he considers as the cathedrals of the time or beyond: Manet’s works and Lascaux Cave Hall. In Le Corbusier’s not-well-understood concept of ‘machine of life’ the process of architecture is very close to the ‘formless’ process of Bataille: Playing of intensities that reaches to its acme in Ronchamp. By sacrificing what he loves, Le Corbusier, as he imagines, sits on the place of ‘Sovereign’ of Bataille.
