The first hidden.

Ever since realizing, while in France over a decade ago during my rather uneventful period of "study," that Le Corbusier is one of the few masters of modern architecture, I have been wanting to see more of his buildings- which is no easy feat as I had returned from Europe and only one of his works is in the United States, namely that of the Carpenter Center at Harvard, and perhaps another if one accepts the idea that the United Nations scheme was initially conceived by him (and, which I can imagine, to some extent, if by looking at earlier drawings).  When going to Japan, I was able to see his National Museum of Western Art, but that was really a collaboration of sorts with Japanese architects- where the master's hand was only seen and felt in the main exhibition space and in none of the other cookie cutter areas.  So, the recent visit to Paris allowed me to take in some of his work, places that I had not seen before because I had not yet fallen under his spell.

I will say that the reason that most work seemed attractive to me at the time- and this was many many years ago, so you must indeed forgive me my youthful trespasses- that I was entirely enamored of photographic representation.  That is to say, the photograph when taken well was the ultimate magic- trickery of the worst sort, in fact, to draw one's attention from the reality of the thing itself.  In such a fashion, I and my friends, classmates at the time, were lulled into believing in the false god of photography and by assuring ourselves (amongst ourselves, of course) that the great architects of the moment (or, of the contemporary, which is a more accurate and damning twist of phrase) were almost all (with the exception of Peter Zumthor) merely charlatans of form.  I would have to say that going to Vitra, which was a collection of at the time famous "architects," set the wheels in motion for a re-evaluation of what I had held to be true.

So, it is no wonder, then, that Le Corbusier was not served well by the cause of photography.  Some of his work looks dated in the bad sense of being so, while others were outright boring.  A glance at his plans revealed nothing.  Alas, as in my visit to La Tourette- the one defining work in my memory of architecture (not "buildings"), I saw that only a visit to the work, and of Le Corbusier in specific, could offer up what was so well hidden, and often in plain sight.

No description follows- only some photographs, of Villa La Roche.