Page 114 - Libro Max Cetto

Max L. Cetto and the Territory of Architecture

Max Cetto (left) with two
other students at Hans Poelzig's atelier,
1924 © Max Cetto-Archiv, Deutsches
Architekturmuseum, Frankfurt.

the recognition of the architect’s sphere and limits of action, which had the most lasting
impact on Cetto. 5
Cetto’s work in Mexico could, in fact, be seen as a constant reassertion of the discipline
in the midst of positions or debates that often exceeded or did not even perceive it and, in
this sense, resembled that of the Italian architect Vittorio Gregotti, who always tried to
6
clarify “the territory” or the “interior” of architecture. The context to which Cetto arrived
and which he helped to transform and enrich was, it is true, very vigorous and of great po-
tential and worth, but at the same time extremely ideological in its modernizing, nationalist
and regionalist yearnings. In all cases, and regardless of the concrete results, what was often
evident was a great disorientation or even indifference regarding the elaboration of a prop-
erly architectural theoretical thought.

5 On Poelzig’s influence on his disciples, see Sonia Hildebrand, ‘I Really Don’t Know Why I Have Such a Bad Reputation,’
Egon Eiermann in Berlin – Foundations of a Postwar Career,” in Annemarie Jaeggi, ed., Egon Eiermann (1904-1970)
Architect and Designer: The Continuity of Modernism (Ostfildern-Ruit: Hatje Cantz, 2004), 30-9. Also, Thomas Katzke,
“Netzwerken in Berlin. Die ‘Gruppe Junger Architekten’ 1926-1933(Bauwelt 17, 2004), 12-3. From Sonia Hildebrand,
see also Egon Eiermann, Die Berliner Zeit. Das Architektonische Gesamtwerk bis 1945 (Braunschweig/Wiesbaden: Vieweg,
1999), 25-9. In Spanish, see Juan Manuel Heredia, “Poelzig y la disciplina” (Arquine-Blog, June 19, 2015), https://www.
arquine.com/poelzig-y-la-disciplina/.
6 See Gregotti’s two main books, El territorio de la arquitectura (Barcelona: Gustavo Gili, 1972) and Desde el interior de la
arquitectura: un ensayo de interpretación (Barcelona: Península, 1993).

114