by Roberto Dulio

I mobili di Carlo Mollino, Fulvio Ferrari, Napoleone Ferrari Phaidon Press, London 2006 (pp. 240, € 75,00)

Carlo Mollino Photographs 1956-1962, Fulvio Ferrari, Napoleone Ferrari Museo Casa Mollino, Torino 2006 (pp. 336, s.i.p.)

In the late 19th century Giovanni Morelli theorised a method for attributing paintings based on analysing and comparing the anatomical details – fingers, toes, ear lobes, nails – of the painted subjects. With his system, Morelli threw the catalogues of some leading European museums into disarray; official critics accused him of restricting his knowledge to secondary factors and ignoring substantial cultural issues affecting the works of art and the artists. Positivism and idealistic criticism were to have further clashes not only in the history of art, but also in the field of architecture. This occurred with Gustavo Giovannoni’s review (Palladio, no. 3, 1938) of the book L’architettura del Cinquecento (Milan 1938) in the monumental Storia dell’Arte Italiana work by Adolfo Venturi. It reappeared in 1984 with the story of the heads presumably sculpted by Amedeo Modigliani, and witnessed a clash between Federico Zeri and Giulio Carlo Argan.

Minute investigation of a work and its details, right down to the most technical of components, does add to the knowledge of it by challenging doubtful attributions and re-discussing trite clichés. But totally detached from broader considerations the historical work is reduced to a mere list of episodes and procedures. On the other hand, critical speculation on the work of certain artists and architects – such as Carlo Mollino (1905-1973), who was so reluctant to respect disciplinary boundaries – runs the risk of legitimising tempting but arbitrary and superficial images, not only of the subject being examined but also of the broader themes of deliberation.

The work conducted by Fulvio and Napoleone Ferrari on the production of the Turin architect should largely be linked to the former of the two critical approaches. For years – in perfect workshop tradition – father and son have delved into Mollino’s activities as a designer and photographer with eager and fetish-like furore. As well as their activities as recorders and commentators, their many achievements include the renovation and safeguarding of the Mollino apartment in Via Napione (1959-66) in Turin. Brought to light in Domus, no. 703, 1989, the Turinese architect’s last refuge of the many he designed for himself has now been turned into the Museo Casa Mollino thanks to the Ferraris.

The books I mobili di Carlo Mollino and Carlo Mollino Photographs 1956-1962 are the driving force behind two exhibitions of the same name, curated by the authors at the Galleria Civica d’Arte Moderna e Contemporanea di Torino and at the Castello di Rivoli Museo d’Arte Contemporanea, running from 20 September 2006 to 7 January 2007. The books painstakingly explore the relations between Mollino and his clients, his models, the craftsmen who made his furnishings and his photographer friends; they analyse the techniques adopted to produce the furniture and the photographs, right down to the identification of the various combinations of processes and materials, and the cameras used, as well as certifying the authenticity criteria of the pieces.

The Ferraris come from the world of art collectors. As internationally recognised experts on Mollino furnishings and photographs, their knowledge is crucial know-how for a market where the oak and crystal table designed by the architect for the Orengo House (1948) was sold at auction for nearly 4 million dollars, doubling the world record for a 20th-century piece of furniture. In this sense, the two books - with different subjects but a similar critical approach - fully live up to the expectations. Two drawbacks emerge if they are judged with a historian’s eye. This is of course a different disciplinary and publishing segment, but the authors’ treatment belies a failure to probe certain themes. Once you set aside the historiographic conventions of Surrealism and Rationalism they are worthy of greater attention, especially as regards the mechanism by which Mollino acquired and manipulated their ideologies, imageries and expressive tensions. Secondly, and this is related to the former point, greater elucidations as to archive sources and a more comprehensive bibliography would have made these two works exemplary, although they certainly constitute new pages in that rich and piercing atlas of research into Mollino’s work undertaken by the Ferraris.

Roberto Dulio Architect