by Roberto Dulio

Erich Mendelsohn 1887-1953, A cura di Regina Stephan Electa, Milano 2004 (pp. 312, € 88,00)

Knowledge of Erich Mendelsohn’s work is essentially tied (in Italy) to the name of Bruno Zevi, the historian from Rome who started bringing the German master’s architectural role into discussion in the 1950’s. Zevi revisited Mendelsohn’s intellectual and creative itinerary beyond its then prevalent historiographic categorisation as functionalism, rationalism and “International Style” – categories that were used to justify contemporary architecture. What Zevi accomplished was a true break with the past.

He is known for recognising Frank Lloyd Wright’s preeminent role in institutionalising the overcoming of orthodox modernism, and he most certainly found in Mendelsohn an equally valid paradigmatic example. In the same way that Wright could not be relegated to the mere role of “pioneer”, Mendelsohn could not be justly described as a “sidekick” of the Gropius-Mies-Le Corbusier triad. The particularity of Mendelsohn’s architecture and his experience of so-called expressionism, according to Zevi, allow him to be positioned at centre stage in architecture’s ethic and linguistic renewal. Zevi’s historiographic design is obvious in writings such as Storia dell’architettura moderna (Turin, 1950); in the groundbreaking article he wrote for Metron entitled “Erich Mendelsohn 1887-1953” (issue 49-50, 1954); in a series of issues of L’architettura: cronache e storia that featured Mendelsohn’s drawings (issues 79-108, 1962-64); in the same journal’s monograph “Erich Mendelsohn: un ismo per un uomo” (issue 95, 1963); and finally, in the book Erich Mendelsohn Collected Works (Milan, 1970 – Turin, 1997).

Zevi freed Mendelsohn from the sanctioned image of modernity that marginalised his role, and placed him inside a customised story constructed on the basis of his “otherness” and his Hebrew culture. This exalted aspects of his figure as an architect that had been neglected up until then, but positioned him in another, equally idealistic, critical vision from the opposite viewpoint. Despite the fact that Zevi had gathered documentary material on the works of the German architect first-hand (mainly catalogues, reproductions of his drawings and historical photographs of his work sent to him by Mendelsohn’s wife Luise and still preserved in Zevi’s archives), what he read into them was essentially based on a necessary but self-referential interpretive idea.

The book edited by Regina Stephan originally came out in German (Erich Mendelsohn. Gebautenwelten - Ostfildern-Ruit 1998), then in English (New York, 1999), and now has finally been published in Italian thanks to Electa’s translation. It represents the following essential step in the study of Mendelsohn. It is the fruit of a collective effort by a group of authors from different countries who sought to reconnect the different stages and many facets of the German architect’s work.

The book is based on careful exploration of the available sources and was accompanied by the parallel publication of two other collections of Mendelsohnean documentation co-edited by Stephan and Ita Heinze-Greenberg: Erich Mendelsohn. Gedankenwelten (Ostfildern-Ruit, 2000) and Luise und Erich Mendelsohn. Eine Partnerschaft für die Kunst (Ostfildern-Ruit, 2004). The oscillation departing from the predominance of an idealistic critical vision such as Zevi’s, and moving toward the need for in-depth documented study characterises the passage from “yesterday” to “today” in the studies of Mendelsohn’s person and work. But not only there.

It can be affirmed that the book furnishes food for thought on how the history of architecture is “made”, in the sense that its practice often brings one to the erroneous conclusion that documents “speak for themselves”. As with all sources, documentation is interpretable; it needs to be filtered. Above all, it is a misconception to think that documentation is objective, especially testimonials that were directed by the protagonists. The danger (from which this book on Mendelsohn largely escapes, in the end) lies in thinking that history flows forth naturally from the compilation of data and the putting in order of papers, which remain indispensable in order to avoid superficiality.

Historical criticism without a directional approach becomes a mere list of dates and facts. It is the balance between the two elements (critical idea and documentary substance) that produces historical perspective. Careful observation of Zevi’s historiographic workroom, referring to Mendelsohn’s critical destiny in Italy and beyond, might have uncovered such mechanisms even in the collection of essays that this book contains. They brush off Zevi’s contributions in a few citations (that happen to be instrumental in their descriptive judgement of several works) and some footnotes.

Besides this, the writings that succeed each other on the pages of the book (by Stephan, Heinze-Greenberg, Charlotte Benton, Kathleen James and Hans R. Morgenthaler) are illustrated by accurate reproductions of historical photographs of Mendelsohn’s work. The essays explore (from different viewpoints and with different research methods) the architect’s training, his travels, the circumstances surrounding the building of his famous Potsdam Tower in Berlin (1918-21) and other important projects, and his work after moving to England, Palestine and the United States.

A series of appendixes (biography, bibliography and index of names) appears at the end of the book, which can surely be considered the most updated and accurate contribution available on Mendelsohn today.

Roberto Dulio Architect