FERNAND LÉGER'S WORKS ON PAPER 'When I see a painting by Léger, I am truly happy'

(G. Apollinaire, Les Peintres cubistes, Paris, 1965, p. 86). This sense of
happiness, expressed in 1905 by the poet Guillaume Apollinaire, is still our own
sense of joy today when we look at Léger's paintings. Amongst the many artists who
irrevocably altered the landscape of painting at the beginning of the 20th Century
in France, Fernand Léger stands out, with Matisse, as a painter who, without
betraying his modernist convictions, could give joy through his art. This happiness
is mainly related to the fact that, when looking at Léger's canvases, we are
confronted by painting, and nothing else but painting. There are no delicate
feelings here, nor refined nuances. There are instead frank, intense colours, and
orderly but powerful forms. Unlike a number of his contemporaries who took part in
the radical movement of the avant-garde and tried to break with tradition by
rejecting conventions with irony or the force of despair, Léger never made use of
sarcasm. He was not a snob; having issued from the countryside, he was sincerely
fascinated by the city, its noisy and colourful spectacle, its dynamism and speed.
He spent his childwood in peaceful, rustic Normandy, where he developed very early
a taste of strong colours and bold contours. Yet, as brutally traced as these edges
might appear in his paintings, Léger's reading of reality and space was faithful to
what he saw. He never attempted to paint a world different than that into which he
lived and worked. He knew the war in 1914; he was gassed at the front in 1917. The
lessons that he took from this experience were not the negative emotions of
bitterness or disillusionment that many others felt. He forged instead a faith in
sharing, and resolved to never deceive. He met there, in those terrible
circumstances, real men, of the most humble kind as well as the proudest. He
observed them working incessantly at their day-to-day survival, inventing,
repairing, or re-adjusting their circumstances in order to escape the absurdities
of life and death. This experience would guide him throughout his life. It would
influence his aesthetic theories, which are imbued with a deep respect for man and
his labour. Following the trial of the war, Fernand Léger quickly regained his
taste for living. Mired for almost four years in the mud of the trenches, the
painter could finally and freely walk through Paris. He again became enthralled
with the noise of the street, and mesmerised by the gaudy array of countless
lights.
FERNAN LÉGER 的纸上作品 “当我看到 Léger 的一幅画时，我真的很开心”（G.
Apollinaire，Les Peintres cubistes，巴黎，1965 年，第 86 页）。这种由诗人纪尧姆·阿
波利奈尔 (Guillaume Apollinaire) 于 1905 年表达的幸福感，至今仍是我们欣赏莱热画作时
的愉悦感。在 20 世纪初不可逆转地改变了法国绘画面貌的众多艺术家中，费尔南德·莱热与
马蒂斯一样脱颖而出，作为一位画家，他在不背叛其现代主义信念的情况下，可以通过他的艺
术带来欢乐。这种快乐主要与这样一个事实有关：当我们看着莱热的画布时，我们面对的是绘
画，除了绘画之外别无他物。这里没有细腻的感觉，也没有精致的细微差别。取而代之的是坦
率、强烈的色彩和有序但有力的形式。与他同时代的许多参加先锋派激进运动并试图通过反讽
或绝望的力量拒绝传统来打破传统的人不同，莱热从不使用讽刺。他不是势利小人；来自农村
的他由衷地着迷于这座城市，它喧闹而多彩的景象，它的活力和速度。他在宁静、质朴的诺曼
底度过了他的童年时光，在那里他很早就对强烈的色彩和大胆的轮廓产生了兴趣。然而，尽管
这些边缘在他的画作中可能会被粗暴地描绘出来，但莱热对现实和空间的解读忠实于他所看到
的。他从未试图描绘一个不同于他生活和工作的世界。他知道 1914 年的战争； 1917 年，他
在前线被毒气炸死。他从这次经历中吸取的教训，并不是许多其他人所感受到的痛苦或幻灭等
负面情绪。相反，他树立了分享的信念，并决心永不欺骗。在那些可怕的情况下，他在那里遇
到了真正的男人，既有最谦虚的人，也有最骄傲的人。他观察到他们在日常生活中不停地工作，
发明、修复或重新调整他们的环境，以逃避生与死的荒谬。这段经历将指导他一生。这将影响
他的美学理论，这些理论充满了对人及其劳动的深深尊重。在经历了战争的考验后，费尔南
多·莱热很快恢复了对生活的品味。在战壕的泥泞中困了将近四年，这位画家终于可以自由自
在地穿过巴黎。他又一次被街上的喧嚣迷住了，被无数华而不实的灯光迷住了。

The machine and its mechanisms fascinated him; the clever display of advertising
posters enchanted him. The rhythms of passing automobiles and optical flashes
generated by this bounding spectacle suggested to him all sorts of audacities and
movements on canvas. He laid down his colours pure and flat, which he delineated
with emphatic contours. He suppressed the refinements of chiaroscuro; he cut away,
radically and aggressively, the passages between one object and the next. In this
context, mass and depth emerged from coloured contrasts, the juxtaposition of
shapes and their acute edges. The distillation of a letter traced au pochoir, the
perfect curve of an ellipse, the checkered pattern of facades, the cut-out
silhouette of a tree, or a passer-by, and the incessant intersection and
overlapping of these forms, all served to translate with matchless efficacy the
tremor and excitement of a bustling city. Léger did not deny his century, as did
many artists of his time. He immersed himself in it, easefully, without qualms or
reservations. Instead of escaping into the nostalgia of an ancient or fictive past,
he accepted the world as he found it, where he felt most alive, and he sought to
depict its new appearance, its objects and its architecture. He did not fear the
new measures imposed on modern man by the industrial revolution - he tried instead
to compete with them, and to wring from them the best possible advantage.

这台机器及其机制让他着迷。广告海报的巧妙展示让他着迷。汽车驶过的节奏和这种跳跃的景
象产生的闪光让他想到了画布上各种大胆的动作。他放下他的颜色纯净而平坦，他用强调的轮
廓勾勒出来。他压制了明暗对比的精致；他激进而激进地切断了一个物体与下一个物体之间的
通道。在这种情况下，质量和深度从颜色对比、形状及其尖锐边缘的并置中出现。字母的升华
描绘了 au pochoir，椭圆的完美曲线，立面的方格图案，树木或路人的剪影，以及这些形式不
断的交叉和重叠，都有助于以无与伦比的功效翻译繁华城市的震颤和兴奋。莱热并没有像他那
个时代的许多艺术家那样否认他的世纪。他沉浸其中，从容自在，毫无顾虑，毫无保留。他没
有逃避对古老或虚构的过去的怀旧，而是接受了他发现的世界，他觉得最有活力的地方，他试
图描绘它的新面貌、它的物体和它的建筑。他并不害怕工业革命强加给现代人的新措施——相
反，他试图与它们竞争，并从中榨取尽可能多的优势。
Thence, in his work, the great metropolis and its working-class universe have been
transcribed with the simplified means of a precise, tough, hard-edged calligraphy.
Armed with this simplified syntax, he approached the overly sophisticated, and
still extremely aestheticised world of painting. 'I intend to overcome the
conventions of taste, the grisailles, the dead surfaces of backgrounds', he said in
1919 to his dealer Léonce Rosenberg. 'My ambition is to get to the maximum of
pictorial rendition by every possible mean of contrasts. Forget decorum, taste,
known style; if there is any of this in my paintings, one will appreciate it later;
I create now' (letter to Léonce Rosenberg, in Valori Plastici, nos. 2-3, Rome,
February - March 1919). Léger, in his profound consciousess as an artist, knew all
too well that his role was not to slavishly portray an epoch defined by the
machine, but to find the fitting and positive response to the machine's
undisputable influence on this reality. He sought this answer within himself,
within and through his work.

因此，在他的作品中，伟大的大都市及其工人阶级的世界被用一种精确、坚韧、锋利的书法的
简化方式记录下来。凭借这种简化的语法，他接近了过于复杂，但仍然极度唯美的绘画世界。
1919 年，他对经销商莱昂斯·罗森博格 (Léonce Rosenberg) 说：“我打算克服品味的惯例、
灰色画布、死气沉沉的背景表面。” “我的志向是通过各种可能的对比手段来最大限度地再现
图像。忘记礼仪、品位、知名风格；如果我的画里有这样的东西，以后会有人欣赏；我现在就
创造”（写给 Léonce Rosenberg 的信，载于 Valori Plastici，第 2-3 期，罗马，1919 年
2 月至 3 月）。莱热作为一名艺术家，在他深刻的意识中，他非常清楚自己的角色不是盲目地
描绘一个由机器定义的时代，而是对机器对这个现实的无可争辩的影响找到合适的和积极的回
应。他在自己的内心、在他的作品中并通过他的作品寻找这个答案。

He subjected his passion for the new world surrounding him to the exigencies of his
work. The clean beauty of connecting rods, pistons and pullies, the whirling dance
of gears and propellers had to obey to the ferocious dictates of organisation that
the painter invented and brought to his canvas or sheet of paper. Nonetheless,
underlying his fascination with well-oiled mechanisms, the human figure and its
sublime stucture remained the absolute reference. Léger believed that the elements
in the picture must lead to a functional logic, the expression of an effective
articulation, even when his forms strayed as far as possible from familiar
figuration. This is why we always breath with full lungs in front of his works.
Although the artist found his inspiration in movement and the energy it liberates,
there is, paradoxically, no slower painting that that of Léger. The powerful
combination of force, effort and resistance that controls these canvases
translates, most of the time, into monumentality, a profound depth of expression -
not at all like the frenzied activity of the factory or the street. The agitation
of the machine, its noisy scansion, its crazy excesses, as in Charlie Chaplin's
Modern Times, seem governed in his painting by the rule of calm and regulated
intensity. Léger employed a superior regime of willfullness and order to tame
reality in his pictures. He is like the powerful tugboat which he admired and
frequently painted, guiding huge floating barges downriver with slow but steadily
applied force. It is for these reasons that as we stand in front of a painting or
drawing by Léger, we feel instinctively that 'it works'. The configurations of
pipes and turbines, the brutal contrasts of colour, and the solid black contours
outlining these forms, meet with the eye's acceptance before even suggesting the
modernity of 20th Century art. If the example of the machine had been beneficial to
Léger, this is seen primarily in the impeccable exactitude with which he rendered
the elements that compose his pictorial structures, and only to a much lesser
extent in the brashness of a new industrial and technical vocabulary that he
adapted for his use. In this context, resorting to drawing was vital for Léger.
Drawing allows the artist to better understand the general stucture of his
composition, to elucidate the essential idea of an object or a body, and to relate
it to a spatial context. Drawing aids in suggesting the distribution of colours on
the surface of the composition. Léger, who studied architecture as a young man, did
not hesitate to employ to the ruler, compass and square.
他将对周围新世界的热情置于工作的紧迫性之下。连杆、活塞和滑轮的简洁之美，齿轮和螺旋
桨的旋转舞动必须服从画家发明并带到他的画布或纸上的凶猛的组织指令。尽管如此，在他对
运转良好的机制着迷的基础上，人物形象及其崇高的结构仍然是绝对的参考。 Léger 认为画面
中的元素必须导致功能逻辑，即有效表达的表达，即使他的形式尽可能远离熟悉的形象。这就
是为什么我们总是在他的作品面前喘着粗气。尽管这位艺术家在运动及其释放的能量中找到了
灵感，但自相矛盾的是，没有比莱热更慢的绘画。控制这些画布的力量、努力和抵抗的强大结
合在大多数时候转化为纪念性、深刻的表达深度——完全不像工厂或街道的疯狂活动。机器的
搅动、嘈杂的扫描、疯狂的过度，就像查理·卓别林的摩登时代一样，在他的画作中似乎受到
平静和有规律的强度的支配。莱热在他的照片中采用了一种优越的意志和秩序来驯服现实。他
就像他欣赏并经常画的强大的拖船，缓慢而稳定地用力引导着巨大的漂浮驳船顺流而下。正是
由于这些原因，当我们站在莱热的一幅画或素描前时，我们本能地感到“它有效”。管道和涡
轮机的配置、色彩的鲜明对比以及勾勒出这些形状的纯黑色轮廓，在暗示 20 世纪艺术的现代
性之前就已经满足了人们的接受度。如果机器的例子对 Léger 有好处，这主要体现在他对构成
他的绘画结构的元素的无可挑剔的精确性，以及在一个新的工业和技术词汇的鲁莽程度中的程
度要小得多他适应了他的使用。在这种情况下，绘画对 Léger 来说至关重要。绘画使艺术家能
够更好地理解其构图的总体结构，阐明物体或身体的基本思想，并将其与空间背景联系起来。
绘图有助于暗示构图表面的颜色分布。年轻时学习建筑的 Léger 毫不犹豫地聘用了尺子、圆规
和方尺。

The pencil begins by isolating shapes, and then refines them carefully one by one.
The artist then examines their grouping, tests their initial configuration,
replacing, if necessary, elements which seem deficient, eliminating parts that
appear extraneous, all the while polishing and perfecting the image. There is an
astonishing pleasure of discovery in Léger's drawings, but this excitement is
always guided by a rigorous, discerning mind, whose extreme sensitivity finds
expression in the careful and delicate handling of the pencil, which always seeks
to clarify and refine the artist's conception. These qualities are everywhere
evident in the drawings and watercolours in this catalogue. Observe the artist's
sensitively graded application of pressure on the pencil in the subtle shading of
the figures and landscape elements in Paysage animé, Deux pêcheurs, and in
Personnage dans l'atelier. Léger wielded his brush with similarly accustomed
deftness to model the curving forms of the propeller blades and the cylindrical
smokestacks in Le remorqueur. Elsewhere Léger used watercolour to create free,
coloured shapes in space, where forms emerge in fluid curls and flag-like washes
(again in Le remorqueur and Nature morte. Weighty shapes, outlined in charcoal,
appear to dissolve in liquid nuances. In later drawings, the artist's pen, alert
but firm, draws precise contours overlaid with briskly applied hatching and
squiggles of line, as in Profil et feuille. Here he achieves an effect that is
solid and substantial, while retaining a freshly spontaneous aspect. The artist
obtained similar corporeality and structural integrity in his use of opaque
gouache, employing tones that range from delicately tinted hues to resonant blacks,
blues and greys, as in the masterly La gare, Projet de décor pur la Création du
monde, and the highly important Trois profils. In every stage of his oeuvre, Léger
used the sharpened point of the pencil or the nib of a pen to search out forms,
investigate their plastic potential, and set them down, with certitude, in the
measured field of his pictorial realities.
铅笔从孤立的形状开始，然后一个一个地仔细细化。然后艺术家检查它们的分组，测试它们的
初始配置，如有必要，更换看起来有缺陷的元素，删除看起来无关的部分，同时抛光和完善图
像。 Léger 的绘画中有一种令人惊讶的发现乐趣，但这种兴奋总是受到严谨、敏锐的头脑的引
导，其极端的敏感体现在对铅笔的谨慎和微妙的处理上，这总是试图澄清和提炼艺术家的概念。
这些品质在本目录的素描和水彩画中随处可见。在 Paysage animé、Deux pêcheurs 和
Personnage dans l'atelier 中，观察艺术家在人物和风景元素的微妙阴影中对铅笔的敏感分
级应用。 Léger 以同样熟练的技巧挥舞着他的画笔，在 Le remorqueur 中为螺旋桨叶片的弯
曲形式和圆柱形烟囱建模。在其他地方，Léger 使用水彩画在空间中创造出自由的彩色形状，
其中的形状以流动的卷曲和旗帜状的水洗形式出现（再次出现在 Le remorqueur 和 Nature
morte 中。用木炭勾勒出的沉重形状似乎溶解在液体的细微差别中。在后来的绘画中，艺术家
的笔，警觉但坚定，绘制出精确的轮廓，上面覆盖着轻快的阴影线和波浪线，如 Profil et
feuille。在这里，他实现了一种坚实而实质的效果，同时保留了新鲜自发的一面。艺术家获得
了类似的他在使用不透明水粉画时表现出肉体性和结构完整性，使用的色调范围从微妙的色调
到共鸣的黑色、蓝色和灰色，如精湛的 La gare、Projet de décor pur la Création du
monde 和非常重要的 Trois profils。在他作品的每个阶段，莱热都使用削尖的铅笔尖或钢笔
的笔尖来寻找形式，研究它们的可塑性潜力，并在他的绘画现实的测量领域中确定地把它们写
下来。

Elsewhere the brush runs, skips and jumps to cover the course of a sketch, urging
the subject toward further realisation in larger compositions on canvas. The
practice of drawing for Léger, while serving to facilitate the development of
creative ideas, was also a form of invigorating daily exercise. Indeed, we may
detect everywhere the pure pleasure that the artist took in the act of drawing, not
as means to an end, but as a joy in itself. In addition to many studies for major
paintings, there are numerous sheets that bear little or no relation to specific
projects. These occasional drawings are often simple reveries based on an object or
a coincidence of forms, or they are straightforward observations made in the
presence of the spectacle of nature Composition de mer; Silex sur fond jaune. In
these drawings, any emotion foreign to the plastic issues at hand appears to have
been banished, in order that the artist might locate and set free the pure beauty
of inherent form. A sweetly affecting lyricism often emanates from these drawings,
in which the artist was fond of postulating associations between sharply
contrasting objects and forms, like a leaf with a face or a set of house keys
(Profil et feuille and Composition aux clefs. Thanks to the extraordinary dexterity
of the artist's hand, these still-life objects spring forth in a lively dance, as
if liberated from the surface of the sheet, so that they float freely and lightly,
attracting our eye, and filling our imagination. Florian Rodari November 2005
PROPERTY FROM A PRIVATE COLLECTION
在其他地方，画笔运行、跳跃和跳跃以覆盖素描的过程，促使主题在画布上更大的构图中进一
步实现。 Léger 的绘画实践在促进创意的发展的同时，也是一种充满活力的日常锻炼形式。事
实上，我们可以随处发现艺术家在绘画中所获得的纯粹乐趣，这不是达到目的的手段，而是一
种乐趣本身。除了对主要绘画的许多研究之外，还有许多与特定项目关系不大或根本没有关系
的表格。这些偶然的绘画往往是基于一个物体或形式的巧合的简单遐想，或者它们是在自然奇
观存在的情况下进行的直接观察 Composition de mer； Silex sur fond jaune。在这些画作
中，任何与手头的塑料问题无关的情感似乎都已被消除，以便艺术家可以找到并释放内在形式
的纯粹美。这些图画常常散发出一种甜美动人的抒情主义，艺术家喜欢在这些图画中假设鲜明
对比的物体和形式之间的关联，比如一张有脸的叶子或一组房门钥匙（Profil et feuille 和
Composition aux clefs。感谢凭借艺术家非凡的灵巧之手，这些静物在生动的舞蹈中跃出，仿
佛从床单表面解放出来，自由轻盈地漂浮着，吸引着我们的眼球，充斥着我们的想象力。弗洛
里安·罗达里 2005 年 11 月私人收藏的财产

What if Le Corbusier is NOT also Jeanneret? — A Creative Investigation

Liz Zhuo

Liz Zhuo is a M.A. candidate in Modern Art: Critical and Curatorial Studies at
Columbia University Graduate School of Arts and Sciences with a focus in Post-war &
Contemporary Western Art & it’s theory. Liz received her B.A. in Art History from
Columbia University with an honor of Cum Laude in May 2020. She grew up in Beijing,
China and speaks Russian, French, Japanese, Mandarin and English. Liz has a keen
interest in Slavic and Francophone Cultures as well as Northern European Art, and
is also a classically trained pianist and painter.

The name "Le Corbusier" undoubtedly sounds a lot more familiar to the average
person than "Charles-Édouard Jeanneret," despite the fact that they are indeed the
two names of the same person. The two names also convey much different connotations
as to which creative genius one is referencing. "I signed my painting: Jeanneret;
my architecture: Le Corbusier," the artist-architect often explained. However, this
dichotomy is more than just a choice of signatures. The two names correspond to how
each day was spent in the life of this master—Jeanneret painted in the morning,
but he then became Le Corbusier as he stepped into his design studio in the
afternoon. Certain paradoxes were also raised by Le Corbusier himself, as he
famously renounced decoration within architecture, but yet continued to produce
paintings and murals— artistic mode related to the very decoration he despised. It
is thus understandable that scholars have attempted to propose possible
correlations between Jeanneret’s works as a plastic artist and Le Corbusier’s
works as an architect in thus far limited academic discourse on his duality of
identity. However, is there truly anything significant that can be seen that ties
Jeanneret to Le Corbusier? If so, what? If not, why do the architectural historians
assume that there was?

“Le Corbusier”这个名字对于普通人来说无疑比“Charles-Édouard Jeanneret”更耳熟，尽

管事实上他们确实是同一个人的两个名字。这两个名字也传达了很多不同的含义，即一个人所
指的是哪位创意天才。 “我在我的画作上签名：Jeanneret；在我的建筑上签名：Le
Corbusier，”这位艺术家兼建筑师经常解释道。然而，这种二分法不仅仅是签名的选择。这两
个名字对应着这位大师的每一天是如何度过的——早上让纳雷画画，下午走进他的设计工作室，
他就变成了勒·柯布西耶。勒柯布西耶本人也提出了某些悖论，因为他以放弃建筑内的装饰而
闻名，但仍继续创作绘画和壁画——与他所鄙视的装饰相关的艺术模式。因此，可以理解的是，
学者们试图提出让纳雷作为造型艺术家的作品与勒柯布西耶作为建筑师的作品之间可能存在的
关联，而迄今为止学术界对柯布西耶身份的双重性的讨论还很有限。然而，是否真的有什么重
要的东西可以看出将 Jeanneret 与 Le Corbusier 联系起来？如果是这样，什么？如果没有，
为什么建筑历史学家会假设存在？

In order to seek that answer, this effort employs a methodological principle that
prioritizes a logical simplicity over complexity. It is known as "Occam’s Razor."
First formulated by philosophers such as Aristotle, this parsimonious model favors
the simplest hypothetical explanations of a phenomenon, or one that requires the
least amount of assumptions. The application of such a specific logic to the issue
at hand here, namely whether a causal correlation existed between Le Corbusier’s
architectural and plastic oeuvres, would suggest an approach that tends to
discredit extant scholarly opinions that are largely built on only a priori
assumptions. Therefore, it is appropriate to examine herein a number of the
viewpoints put forward by established art and architectural historians and
scrutinize the validity of their arguments to reach a conclusion that is fully
independent of other preconceived judgments.
为了寻求这个答案，这项工作采用了一种方法论原则，该原则将逻辑简单性置于复杂性之上。
它被称为“奥卡姆剃刀”。这种简约模型首先由亚里士多德等哲学家提出，它支持对一种现象
进行最简单的假设解释，或者需要最少假设的解释。将这种特定逻辑应用于此处手头的问题，
即勒柯布西耶的建筑作品和塑料作品之间是否存在因果关系，将表明一种倾向于诋毁主要建立
在先验假设基础上的现存学术观点的方法。因此，有必要在此检验知名艺术和建筑历史学家提
出的一些观点，并仔细检查他们论点的有效性，以得出一个完全独立于其他先入为主的判断的
结论。
Figure 1. Le Corbusier, Nature morte pâle à la lanterne, 1922, oil on canvas.

Figure 2. Le Corbusier, Maison et Atelier Ozenfant, Paris, 1922-24.

The most in-depth, monographic study on the connections between Le Corbusier’s art
and architectural works appears to be a recent one. In her 2013 doctoral
dissertation at New York University, Ruth G. S. Hendricks proposed that
"connections between interior and exterior, display and articulation, and patterns
and spatial conceptions that oscillate between media" can be found through an
examination of Le Corbusier’s works. Hendricks further states that the changes
seen in Le Corbusier’s painterly works often "foreshadow" those in the development
of his architectural designs. The supports for her arguments consist primarily of a
formal analysis, wherein she claims that a recurrent lantern motif as well as its
formal similarities exist in Le Corbusier’s early paintings, such as Nature morte
pâle à la lanterne (Fig. 1), and also his architectural works, such as the studio
designed for Ozenfant in 1922 (Fig. 2). However, the fact that Le Corbusier painted
transparent glass boxes, which is anything but an uncommon subject for early
twentieth-century painters, is a rather inadequate explanation for his use of large
glass panels for a room, as is her observation that "from a certain angle, visual
similarities can be entertained between the spiral staircase leading to the main
entrance of the building, and the rounded shape of the glass [in the painting]."
Here, Hendrick’s mining of the strictly formal similarities between shapes painted
on canvas and a photo taken of the interior of a room seems rather forced. Her next
point focuses on the "contrast between ideation and experience," a notion first
perceived by Rosalind Krauss, which Le Corbusier also stresses in both his
compositions on canvases, which do have multiple viewpoints—not unlike those
pioneered by Cézanne and Picasso in their analytic Cubist paintings—and Le
Corbusier’s architectural designs, such as the Villa La Roche and Villa Savoye,
both of which demand a "bodily twisting movement" as one travels the floors of the
interior spaces. Hendricks draws on a number of scholarly discourses that are
centered on the notions of obstruction of sight, the deconstruction of frames, and
the disorientation of the audience. Each of these arguments that she borrows are
discussed here in the following paragraphs.
关于勒·柯布西耶的艺术与建筑作品之间联系的最深入的专题研究似乎是最近的一项研究。露
丝·亨德里克斯 (Ruth G. S. Hendricks) 在纽约大学 2013 年的博士论文中提出，通过对
勒·柯布西耶 (Le Corbusier) 作品的考察，可以发现“内部与外部、展示与表达之间的联系，
以及在媒体之间摇摆的模式与空间概念”。亨德里克斯进一步指出，在勒·柯布西耶的绘画作
品中看到的变化常常“预示”着他的建筑设计的发展。支持她论点的主要是形式分析，她声称
在勒·柯布西耶的早期绘画中存在一个反复出现的灯笼主题及其形式上的相似之处，例如
Nature morte pâle à la lanterne（图 1），以及他的建筑作品，例如 1922 年为 Ozenfant
设计的工作室（图 2）。然而，勒·柯布西耶画透明玻璃盒这一事实对于 20 世纪早期的画家
来说绝非罕见主题，这一事实不足以解释他在房间中使用大玻璃面板的原因，正如她的观察
“从从某个角度看，通往建筑正门的螺旋楼梯与[画中]的圆形玻璃之间具有视觉上的相似
性。”在这里，亨德里克对画在画布上的形状与拍摄的房间内部照片之间严格形式上的相似性
的挖掘似乎相当勉强。她的下一个重点是“思想与经验之间的对比”，这是罗莎琳德·克劳斯
首先意识到的一个概念，勒·柯布西耶在他的画布上的作品中也强调了这一点，这些作品确实
有多种观点——与塞尚和毕加索在他们的作品中率先提出的观点不同分析立体主义绘画和勒柯
布西耶的建筑设计，如拉罗什别墅和萨伏伊别墅，两者都需要在室内空间的地板上行走时进行
“身体扭曲运动”。亨德里克斯借鉴了许多以视线障碍、框架解构和观众迷失方向为中心的学
术论述。她借用的每一个论点都在以下段落中讨论。
Figure 3. László Moholy-Nagy, Composition La Sarraz, 1930, oil on canvas.

Figure 4. Fernand Léger, The Three Faces, 1926, oil on canvas.

Figure 5. Walter Gropius, the Bauhaus Building, Dessau, 1925-26.

Figure 6. Le Corbusier, Villa Stein, Vaucresson, 1927.

One of the main ideas Hendricks relies upon in her paper is one that was famously
proposed in Colin Rowe and Robert Slutzky’s 1963 essay entitled "Transparency:
Literary and Phenomenal," in which these authors propose two ways that the word
"transparency" can be interpreted and manifested in artworks as well as in
architecture. Rowe and Slutzky cite the definition of transparency as "a
simultaneous perception of different spatial locations." One is called literary
transparency, namely, the capability of a certain matter to be physically seen
through or the ease with which light may penetrate that form. The other definition
is called phenomenal transparency, which refers to the perceptibility of spatial
depth without explicit illustration and relies on the mental curiosity of the
viewer as well as indirect visual cues supplied to the viewer by the
artist/architect. To illustrate this point, Rowe and Slutzky compare László Moholy-
Nagy’s painting Composition La Sarraz (Fig. 3) to Fernand Léger’s The Three
Faces (Fig. 4), an important source of inspiration for Le Corbusier’s Purist
paintings, and then draw a distinction between the qualities demonstrated by the
forms on Moholy-Nagy’s canvas and those on Léger’s. What Moholy-Nagy demonstrates
in his efforts are primarily "literally transparent" shapes that resemble pieces of
glass that permit light to traverse freely without obstruction, or in Rowe and
Slutzky’s words, a "trompe l’oeil effect of a translucent object in a deep,
naturalistic space"9. Léger’s painting, which embodies the phenomenal
transparency, demonstrates essentially opaque blocks of color, through their
overlapping arrangement within the composition to suggest a sense of depth
perpendicular to the picture plane, the same effect that Renaissance paintings
achieve by using linear and atmospheric perspectives. Rowe and Slutzky then extend
this comparison to Gropius’s Bauhaus building (Fig. 5), Le Corbusier’s Villa
Stein (Fig. 6), and the Palace of the League of Nations (Fig. 7), a project that
was never actualized. They conclude that the Bauhaus building, with its large,
unobstructed glass panels, embodied a literal transparency like that in the
Composition La Sarraz, while the Villa Stein and the Palace, where the use of
glazing intrigues more than reveals, exhibited the more sophisticated quality of
phenomenal transparency as in The Three Faces. The spatial organization unique to
Le Corbusier’s artistic and architectural designs, therefore, can be characterized
as the tendency to conjure in the minds of the viewers a multiplicity of spatial
relationships, rather than just one.
亨德里克斯在她的论文中所依赖的主要思想之一是科林·罗和罗伯特·斯卢茨基 1963 年题为
“透明度：文学和现象”的论文中提出的著名观点，其中这些作者提出了两种可以解释“透明
度”一词的方法并体现在艺术品和建筑中。 Rowe 和 Slutzky 将透明度定义为“对不同空间位
置的同时感知”。一种称为文学透明度，即某种物质被物理透视的能力或光线穿透该形式的难
易程度。另一个定义称为现象透明度，指的是在没有明确说明的情况下空间深度的可感知性，
它依赖于观众的好奇心以及艺术家/建筑师提供给观众的间接视觉线索。为了说明这一点，Rowe
和 Slutzky 将 László Moholy-Nagy 的画作 Composition La Sarraz（图 3）与 Fernand
Léger 的三张面孔（图 4）进行了比较，后者是勒柯布西耶纯粹主义绘画的重要灵感来源，然
后做出区分 Moholy-Nagy 画布上的形式与 Léger 画布上的形式所展示的品质之间。 Moholy-
Nagy 在他的努力中展示的主要是类似于玻璃片的“字面透明”形状，允许光线不受阻碍地自由
穿过，或者用 Rowe 和 Slutzky 的话说，“半透明物体在深处的错视效果” , 自然主义空
间”9. Léger 的画作体现了非凡的透明度，展示了本质上不透明的色块，通过它们在构图中的
重叠排列，暗示出垂直于画面平面的深度感，与文艺复兴时期的绘画通过使用线性和大气透视
所达到的效果相同。 Rowe 和 Slutzky 随后将这种比较扩展到格罗皮乌斯的包豪斯建筑（图
5）、勒柯布西耶的斯坦因别墅（图 6）和国联宫（图 7），这些项目从未实现。他们得出的结
论是，包豪斯建筑拥有大而通畅的玻璃面板，体现了一种真正的透明度，就像 Composition La
Sarraz 中那样，而施泰因别墅和宫殿使用玻璃的阴谋多于揭示，展示了更复杂的品质像《三张
面孔》中那样具有惊人的透明度。因此，勒柯布西耶的艺术和建筑设计独有的空间组织可以被
描述为倾向于在观众的脑海中召唤出多种空间关系，而不仅仅是一种。

Figure 7. Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret, illustration for Palace of the League
of Nations, 1927.

Figure 8. Le Corbusier and Nikolai Kolli, Moscow, 1933.

Figure 9. Le Corbusier and Oscar Niemeyer, New York City, 1948.

The validity of this highly abstract notion of the parallelism between Le

Corbusier’s painterly and architectural compositions is somewhat dubious, however.
The possibility of more than one reading of any spatial relationships, as proposed
by these authors, is by no means applicable to the entire oeuvre of Le Corbusier.
By 1955, when their essay was published, Le Corbusier had already designed the
Building of the Tsentrosoyuz, the headquarters of Soviet trade unions in Moscow
(Fig. 8) and the headquarters of the United Nations in New York (Fig. 9), where the
intention of inviting spatial speculation from the onlookers is truly minimal.
Indeed, its large glass wall is in fact much more similar to Gropius’s Bauhaus
building rather it is to the Villa Stein. If one were to compare Gropius’s
residential designs to those of Le Corbusier’s, the phenomenal transparency is not
less evident in the former, as is the case with the Bauhaus Master’s House (Fig.
10). Further, the appearance of spatial ambiguity is not more highly manifested in
Le Corbusier’s High Court building (Fig. 11) than it is in the Parthenon (Fig.
12), for instance, where both these façades serve to disguise or hide what is
behind them. Le Corbusier’s later paintings in a similar fashion deviate away from
Purism and start to embrace the literary transparency of Moholy-Nagy’s works
instead, as demonstrated in his 1933 painting Baigneuse, barque et coquillage (Fig.
13). Although the distinction between literary and phenomenal transparencies does
hold true for the examples raised in Rowe and Slutzky’s essay, one cannot presume
to take the notion of phenomenal transparency as the key defining link between Le
Corbusier’s architectural work and his paintings.
然而，勒柯布西耶的绘画和建筑作品之间这种高度抽象的平行性概念的有效性有些可疑。这些
作者提出的对任何空间关系进行不止一种解读的可能性绝不适用于勒·柯布西耶的全部作品。
到 1955 年，当他们的文章发表时，勒·柯布西耶已经设计了 Tsentrosoyuz 大楼、苏联工会
在莫斯科的总部（图 8）和联合国在纽约的总部（图 9），在那里邀请旁观者进行空间推测的
意图确实很小。事实上，它的大玻璃墙实际上更像是格罗皮乌斯的包豪斯建筑，而不是斯坦因
别墅。如果将格罗皮乌斯的住宅设计与勒柯布西耶的住宅设计进行比较，前者的惊人透明度并
不逊色，包豪斯大师的住宅就是这种情况（图 10）。此外，勒柯布西耶的高等法院大楼（图
11）的空间模糊性并不比帕特农神庙（图 12）更明显，例如，这两个立面都用于掩饰或隐藏背
后的东西他们。勒·柯布西耶 (Le Corbusier) 后期的绘画以类似的方式偏离了纯粹主义，转
而开始拥抱莫霍利-纳吉作品的文学透明性，如他 1933 年的画作《Baigneuse, barque et
coquillage》（图 13）所示。尽管文学透明度和现象透明度之间的区别确实适用于 Rowe 和
Slutzky 的文章中提出的例子，但我们不能假定将现象透明度的概念视为勒柯布西耶的建筑作
品和他的绘画之间的关键定义联系。

Figure 10. Walter Gropius, Bauhaus Master’s House, Dessau, 1925-26.

Figure 11. Le Corbusier, The High Court in Chandigarh, Punjab, 1956.

Figure 12. Iktinos and Callicrates, Parthenon, Athens, ca. 447 BC.
Figure 13. Le Corbusier, Baigneuse, barque et coquillage, 1934-38, oil on canvas.
Figure 14. Le Corbusier, Icône (Woman with Candle), pastel on paper, ca. 1946.

Sigfred Giedion, on the other hand, takes into account the changeability of Le
Corbusier’s artistic and architectural styles, stating that this master "was able
to see the relation of the structures of a specific period to the periods’
contemporary life, both seen and unseen, openly expressed and striving for
expression.” According to both Hendricks and Giedion, Le Corbusier’s paintings
and architectures were tied together in a structural way, wherein they both
progressed simultaneously. It would be reasonable, therefore, to consider Le
Corbusier’s career as one that was divided into two halves around 1929, a year he
himself described as "the end of the first period of investigation" Indeed, 1928
witnessed his first painting in which the human figure became his main subject as
well as the abandonment of his given name in his paintings, while working in his
design studio. Aditionally, it is really not until this time period that Le
Corbusier’s famous philosophy of the "machine for living" is seriously put into
practice, such as in the Villa Savoye and the Villa at Carthage. Richard Ingersoll
describes Le Corbusier’s paintings in the 1940s as "explosive” and completely rid
of the tranquil qualities that his Purist still-life works exhibited. According to
Peter Serenyl, what happened during 1929 is that Le Corbusier’s "inorganic
architecture of the 1920s, based on geometry and numbers...is replaced by an
organic architecture based on a close relationship between house and site."
However, the fact that different parts of a creator’s oeuvre could indeed evolve
over time and simultaneously so does not guarantee a precise creative or time
correlation between these separate developments. Giedion also points out that Le
Corbusier deliberately chose "floating, transparent objects whose mass and outlines
flow into each other in a mariage des contours that leads us from Le Corbusier’s
pictures to his architecture." Here, quite differently from Rowe and Slutzky,
Giedion recognizes the literary transparency that exists in this painter-
architect’s works. This idea of a "marriage of contours" derives from Le Corbusier
and Amadée Ozenfant’s own words regarding their approach to painting, indeed one
where several objects morph into a cohesive, organic whole. According to Ingersoll,
this sharing of contour lines is cognate with Le Corbusier’s "desire for double
functionality in design" for his architecture.
另一方面，Sigfred Giedion 考虑到勒柯布西耶艺术和建筑风格的多变性，称这位大师“能够
看到特定时期的结构与该时期的当代生活之间的关系，无论是可见的还是不可见的，公开表达
并努力表达。” Hendricks 和 Giedion 都认为，Le Corbusier 的绘画和建筑在结构上是联系
在一起的，两者同时进行。因此，将 Le Corbusier 的职业生涯视为在 1929 年左右分为两半
的职业生涯是合理的，他自己形容这一年为“第一阶段调查的结束” 事实上，1928 年见证了
他的第一幅画，其中人物成为他的主要主题，同时在他的设计工作室工作时他的名字也被放弃
了. 另外，勒柯布西耶著名的“生活机器”哲学真正直到这个时期才真正付诸实践，例如萨伏
伊别墅和迦太基别墅。理查德英格索尔描述了勒柯布西耶在 1940 年代的画作作为“爆炸性”，
完全摆脱了他的纯粹主义静物作品所表现出的宁静品质。根据 Peter Serenyl 的说法，1929
年发生的事情是勒柯布西耶的“1920 年代基于几何和数字的无机建筑……被基于房屋与场地之
间密切关系的有机建筑所取代。”然而，创作者作品的不同部分确实可以随着时间的推移而同
时发展，这一事实并不能保证这些独立的发展之间存在精确的创意或时间相关性。 Giedion 还
指出，勒·柯布西耶特意选择了“漂浮、透明的物体，它们的质量和轮廓以一种轮廓的形式相
互融合，将我们从勒·柯布西耶的照片引向他的建筑。”在这里，与 Rowe 和 Slutzky 截然不
同的是，Giedion 认识到这位画家兼建筑师作品中存在的文学透明性。这种“轮廓结合”的想
法源自勒柯布西耶和阿玛德奥森方特自己关于绘画方法的说法，实际上是几个物体变成一个有
凝聚力的有机整体。根据英格索尔的说法，这种轮廓线的共享与勒柯布西耶对其建筑的“设计
双重功能的渴望”是同源的。

Interestingly, Ingersoll also proposes that the floor plans of Villa Savoye, when
superimposed over each other, "have an uncanny resemblance to the density of
contour lines in the art works," a vague and subjective comparison. At most,
Ingersoll’s second attempt to draw creative connections between Le Corbusier’s
paintings and his architecture is even more intriguing. He suggests that, in the
paintings that portrayed women following the 1928 break, "masculine lines penetrate
feminine color fields, manly right angles versus womanly curves." He then argues
that Le Corbusier’s obsessive pursuit of a certain female nude image (Fig. 14)
inspired his design for the chapel at Ronchamp (Fig. 15). Although the shape in the
architectural drawing does consist of upward curves that meet at a sharp point and
does resemble the roof design of Ronchamp viewed from a certain angle, the argument
offered to disregard a direct connection between the two is not compelling,
especially since Le Corbusier himself openly admitted that the form of the chapel
at Ronchamp was inspired by a crab shell he had collected. Ingersoll ends his essay
by quoting Le Corbusier’s 1924 comment that "beauty is not necessarily pleasant,"
which may also explain his paintings produced in the 1940s and 1950s that are much
less finished and feature expressively broad and rapid brushwork. However, this
analysis cannot be even remotely applied to his Brutalist architecture from that
time, such as the neatly orthogonal Unité d’Habitation (Fig. 16) and Villa Shodhan
(Fig. 17). Both are visually calculated and intended to function as pleasantly
habitable environments, the exact opposite of the increasingly unruly quality of
his plastic compositions, Taureau et femme enlacés (Fig. 18) and Trois femmes
debout (Fig. 19).
有趣的是，英格索尔还提出，萨伏伊别墅的平面图相互叠加时，“与艺术作品中轮廓线的密度
有着惊人的相似之处”，这是一种模糊和主观的比较。至多，英格索尔在勒柯布西耶的绘画和
他的建筑之间建立创造性联系的第二次尝试更加耐人寻味。他建议，在 1928 年中断后描绘女
性的绘画中，“男性化的线条渗透女性化的色彩领域，男性化的直角与女性化的曲线”。然后
他争辩说，勒·柯布西耶 (Le Corbusier) 对某个女性裸体形象的痴迷追求（图 14）激发了他
在朗香 (Ronchamp) 小教堂的设计（图 15）。尽管建筑图纸中的形状确实由在一个尖点处相交
的向上曲线组成，并且从某个角度看确实类似于 Ronchamp 的屋顶设计，但忽略两者之间直接
联系的论点并不令人信服，尤其是因为 Le 柯布西耶本人公开承认，朗香教堂的形式灵感来自
于他收集的蟹壳。英格索尔在文章结尾引用了勒·柯布西耶 (Le Corbusier) 1924 年的评论
“美不一定令人愉悦”，这也可以解释他在 1940 年代和 50 年代创作的画作，这些画作的完
成度要低得多，而且具有表现力广泛而快速的笔触。然而，这种分析甚至无法应用于他当时的
野兽派建筑，例如整齐正交的 Unité d’Habitation（图 16）和 Villa Shodhan（图 17）。
两者都经过视觉计算，旨在作为宜人的居住环境，这与他的塑料作品 Taureau et femme
enlacés（图 18）和 Trois femmes debout（图 19）的质量越来越不守规矩完全相反。

Figure 15. Le Corbusier, Chapelle Notre Dame du Haut, 1950, Ronchamp.

Figure 16. Le Corbusier. Unité d’Habitation, Marseille. 1952.

Figure 17. Le Corbusier, Villa Shodhan, Ahmedabad, 1951.

Figure 18. Le Corbusier, Taureau et femme enlacés, oil on canvas, 1944.

Uninterested in the formal similarities (or lack thereof) between this master’s
plastic and architectural works, Bruno Reichlin engaged in a different approach to
link Le Corbusier’s dual identities of artist and architect. He broke this
dichotomy down to a twofold point of view and discovered pictorial devices that
derived from "architectural gambits" in Le Corbusier's process of painting and a
similar painterly capacity in his process for manipulating reinforced concrete in
his architectural designs. For Reichlin, Le Corbusier had an "architectural
objective" in his earlier Purist paintings, as the multiplicity of vantage points
in his architecture proper indeed mirrors the condensation of a number of
viewpoints onto one single canvas, as seen in Still Life with Numerous Objects
(Fig. 20). Similarly in the Villa Stein, spacial ambiguity is achieved by his
condensing a number of architectural events into an orthogonal, boxed frame of a
mansion. The polycentric compositional strategies of his paintings (borrowed from
Cubists like Picasso and Cézanne, rather than invented by the Purists), combine
with the "marriage of contours" already discussed, to resonate with his ideas of an
"architectural promenade" and "enjambment" achieved by movement through the
building that allows for a number of different views and rooms that interpenetrate.
This correlation, as pointed out by Reichlin, is a reflection through Le Corbusier
of the impacts of Picasso, or Synthetic Cubism, on his architecture in general
rather than as a character pertaining to Le Corbusier, despite the fact that early
on, Le Corbusier and Ozenfant do refer to Picasso’s Cubist artworks as
"decorative/ornamental carpets."
Bruno Reichlin 对这位大师的塑料作品和建筑作品在形式上的相似性（或缺乏相似性）不感兴
趣，他采用了一种不同的方法来联系 Le Corbusier 的艺术家和建筑师的双重身份。他将这种
二分法分解为双重观点，并发现了源自勒柯布西耶绘画过程中的“建筑策略”的绘画技巧，以
及他在建筑设计中操纵钢筋混凝土的过程中类似的绘画能力。对于 Reichlin 来说，勒柯布西
耶在他早期的纯粹主义绘画中有一个“建筑目标”，因为他的建筑本身的多个有利位置确实反
映了将许多观点浓缩到一个单一的画布上，如《静物与众多物体》中所见（图 20)。同样，在
斯坦因别墅中，空间模糊性是通过将许多建筑事件浓缩成一个正交的、盒装的豪宅框架来实现
的。他的绘画的多中心构图策略（借鉴了毕加索和塞尚等立体派，而不是纯粹派发明的），结
合已经讨论过的“轮廓结合”，与他的“建筑长廊”和“enjambment”的想法产生共鸣通过穿
过建筑物的移动实现，允许许多不同的视图和房间相互渗透。正如 Reichlin 所指出的，这种
相关性反映了勒·柯布西耶对毕加索或综合立体主义的影响，对他的建筑的一般影响，而不是
作为一个属于勒·柯布西耶的角色，尽管事实上在早期，勒·柯布西耶和 Ozenfant 确实将毕
加索的立体主义艺术作品称为“装饰性/装饰性地毯”。

In a somewhat apathetic portrait of Le Corbusier’s self-image as the universal

creator, Christopher Pearson then writes:

Implicitly rejecting his earlier ideal of a strict conceptual separation

between art and architecture, Le Corbusier now undertook to persuade his
audience to find formal and methodological parallels between his painting,
sculpture, and buildings.

While Pearson fails to provide precise textural evidence for such a grand
observation, one may still wonder what Le Corbusier’s own stance was regarding his
complex and comprehensive oeuvre. In the later part of his career, Le Corbusier
strove to create connections between his artwork and his architectural efforts,
despite the fact that he early on almost denied his painting and any type of
decoration, indeed calling the decorative arts "the disease of the end of
civilization," and Rome "the cancer of French architecture." He was referring here
to the Baroque, European interiors with their Corinthian columns and undulating
vegetative motives, rather than decorative arts in general, which would certainly
include his own murals, sculptures and tapestries. Going back to his own words, Le
Corbusier later in 1929 would say that "the past centuries do not soil our hands;
on the contrary they replenish them." However, faced with what Giedion considers as
a dangerous critique from the society that architects must not concern themselves
too much with the plastic arts, Le Corbusier did not exhibit his painting artworks
until 1937, in order to show that he was indeed a serious architect.
克里斯托弗·皮尔森 (Christopher Pearson) 在描绘勒·柯布西耶 (Le Corbusier) 作为普世
创造者的自我形象时有些冷漠，他写道：
勒·柯布西耶含蓄地拒绝了他早先在艺术和建筑之间严格概念分离的理想，现在着手说服他的
观众在他的绘画、雕塑和建筑之间找到形式和方法上的相似之处。
尽管皮尔逊未能为如此宏大的观察提供精确的结构证据，但人们可能仍然想知道勒柯布西耶自
己对他复杂而全面的作品的立场是什么。在他职业生涯的后期，勒柯布西耶努力在他的艺术作
品和他的建筑努力之间建立联系，尽管事实上他早期几乎否认他的绘画和任何类型的装饰，实
际上称装饰艺术为“终结的疾病”文明”，罗马是“法国建筑的毒瘤”。他在这里指的是带有
科林斯式柱子和起伏的植物动机的巴洛克式欧洲室内装饰，而不是一般的装饰艺术，其中肯定
包括他自己的壁画、雕塑和挂毯。回到他自己的话，勒·柯布西耶 (Le Corbusier) 在 1929
年晚些时候会说：“过去的几个世纪并没有弄脏我们的手；相反，它们补充了我们的双手。”
然而，面对吉迪恩认为建筑师不能过多关注造型艺术的社会批评，勒柯布西耶直到 1937 年才展
出他的绘画作品，以表明他确实是一位严肃的建筑师。

Figure 19. Le Corbusier, Trois femmes debout, oil on canvas, 1956.

In his 1948 book entitled New World of Space, Le Corbusier, perhaps now much more
comfortable about openly admitting his identity as a serious painter, talks about
an inevitable synthesis of the major arts that he has been trying to deliver to the
world, which he calls a "plastic symphony." It is important to note here that Le
Corbusier does not attempt to draw any physical similarities between his
architectural and artistic creations, but only to demonstrate his personal desire
to bring these several disciplines into play. He asserts that, "He who deals with
architecture...must be an impeccable master of plastic form and a live and active
connoisseur of the arts," thus speaking to the importance of a purely aesthetic and
not completely utilitarian function of the architectural designer. Indeed, he
commented on this point before in Towards a New Architecture, wherein he stated
that the plan of the house is dictated "partly by the utilitarian demands of the
problem, and partly by imagination, i.e., plastic creation." It seems like, at
least for Le Corbusier, the painter’s eye is channeled by the architect through
the use of profile and contour, concepts that he emphasizes are the "touchstone of
the architect."

勒·柯布西耶 (Le Corbusier) 在他 1948 年出版的名为《空间的新世界》(New World of

Space) 的书中，也许现在更愿意公开承认自己作为一名严肃画家的身份，他谈到了他一直试图
向世界展示的主要艺术不可避免的综合，他称之为“塑料交响乐”。在此需要特别注意的是，
勒柯布西耶并没有试图在他的建筑和艺术创作之间画出任何物理上的相似之处，而只是为了展
示他个人希望将这几个学科发挥作用。他断言，“与建筑打交道的人……必须是无可挑剔的造
型大师和活跃而活跃的艺术鉴赏家”，因此谈到了建筑设计师纯粹审美而非完全功利主义功能
的重要性.事实上，他之前在《迈向新建筑》一书中评论过这一点，他说房子的计划“部分是由
问题的功利主义要求决定的，部分是由想象力决定的，即塑料创造”。似乎，至少对于勒柯布
西耶来说，画家的眼光被建筑师通过使用轮廓和轮廓来引导，他强调的概念是“建筑师的试金
石”。

Reichlin’s explication of Le Corbusier’s dual identities thus seems more

compelling than those of Hendricks, Rowe and Slutzky, and Ingersoll, in that only
Reichlin’s theory is supported by Le Corbusier’s own writings. In his books, Le
Corbusier asserts that he treats his canvases as three-dimensional spaces, while
treating his architectural works more or less like plastic compositions. Reichlin
simply pinpoints the architectural elements in the paintings and then the painterly
tendencies in the architecture, but without imposing any preconceived formal
overlaps. The conclusion, therefore, is that there is not necessarily any specific
set of images or forms that Le Corbusier utilized in his paintings and then was
unwilling to let go of in his architecture, or vice versa. Rather his genius lay in
that he discovered the permeability of human creativity across disciplines as being
central to every single type of art. As Le Corbusier clearly acknowledges, without
embodying the identity of a painter, he would not have had the inspirations that
lead to his masterly innovative designs; the painting studio served as a laboratory
for his aesthetic experiments. However, was he still borrowing elements from his
own painting works and taking them to his drafting desk, or in other words, perhaps
self-plagiarizing? Not as far as one can tell from his total oeuvre. What one can
certainly observe, however, is that his discourses on painting and architecture do
orient themselves toward a symbiosis of the two fields, and are not simply attempts
to use the same visual vocabulary in both of his creative processes. In a way, the
answer to our initial question here becomes an affirmative one; Le Corbusier is
undoubtedly Jeanneret, the painter, the lover of aesthetics, the experimental
genius. Similarly, Jeanneret is also Le Corbusier, the master of space, the defiant
rebel to the Wöfflinian aesthetics. However, it is still important to note the
independence of creative ingenuity that one finds in Le Corbusier and Jeanneret. It
is truly the ideological influence that he had on Western architecture, rather than
the pieces of canvas that he painted or the buildings that today stand in the
corners of the world, that instead made him one of the greatest architects and
artists of the twentieth century. We began our discussion here by noting an
Aristotelian concept, so it might be helpful to cap this paper with another—the
sum of the Le Corbusier’s achievements is greater than its individual parts.
因此，赖希林对勒柯布西耶双重身份的解释似乎比亨德里克斯、罗和斯卢茨基以及英格索尔的
解释更有说服力，因为只有赖希林的理论得到勒柯布西耶自己的著作的支持。勒柯布西耶在他
的书中声称，他将自己的画布视为三维空间，而将他的建筑作品或多或少地视为塑料作品。
Reichlin 只是指出了绘画中的建筑元素，然后是建筑中的绘画倾向，但没有强加任何先入为主
的形式重叠。因此，结论是，勒柯布西耶在他的绘画中使用了特定的一组图像或形式，然后又
不愿在他的建筑中放弃，反之亦然。相反，他的天才在于他发现人类创造力跨学科的渗透性是
每一种艺术的核心。正如勒·柯布西耶清楚地承认的那样，如果没有体现画家的身份，他就不
会拥有导致其精湛创新设计的灵感；绘画工作室是他进行美学实验的实验室。然而，他是否还
在从自己的绘画作品中借鉴元素，带到自己的绘图桌上，或者说，或许是在自我抄袭？从他的
全部作品中看不出有多远。然而，我们可以肯定地观察到，他关于绘画和建筑的论述确实将自
己定位于这两个领域的共生，而不是简单地试图在他的两个创作过程中使用相同的视觉词汇。
在某种程度上，这里对我们最初问题的回答是肯定的；勒柯布西耶无疑是让纳雷，画家，美学
爱好者，实验天才。同样，Jeanneret 也是 Le Corbusier，空间大师，Wöfflinian 美学的反
叛者。然而，仍然重要的是要注意人们在勒柯布西耶和让纳雷身上发现的创造性独创性的独立
性。真正使他成为二十世纪最伟大的建筑师和艺术家之一的是他对西方建筑的意识形态影响，
而不是他所画的画布或今天矗立在世界角落的建筑.我们在这里开始讨论时提到了一个亚里士多
德的概念，因此用另一个概念来结束这篇论文可能会有所帮助——勒柯布西耶成就的总和大于
其各个部分。

Figure 20. Le Corbusier, Still Life with Numerous Objects, oil on canvas, 1923.