Page 119 - Libro Max Cetto

Juan Manuel Heredia

Cetto and the Historical Constants of Mexican Architecture

All this rich theoretic discussion by Cetto corresponded to the introductory part of his book,
in which he aimed to situate the modern architecture of Mexico in an international context.
On the one hand, Cetto praised the precocious ingenuity and independence of Mexi-
33
can architects, celebrating that “without direct influence from the outside” and without
great local pioneers, they had, “within a generation…become fluent in the idiom of our
33
34
age.” Cetto also mentioned the praise they had received from foreign critics, but warned
that such praise should not lead to triumphalism and recommended that they consider the
35
criticisms made by other, equally important figures. In a characteristically conciliatory
way, Cetto stated that modern architecture in Mexico has “both the virtues and the vices
of international architecture” and called for “a sober appraisal of the situation and a careful
stock-taking” to “asses our ability to withstand the test of time.” This “sober appraisal,” that
“careful stock-taking,” that assessment of the “ability to withstand the test of time” was pre-
cisely the disciplinary statement presented by his book.
After this introduction, Cetto provided an overview of the history of Mexican archi-
tecture through its various eras –pre-Columbian, colonial, independent and contemporary–
again expounding his ideas on architecture and the discipline. His assessment of
pre-Columbian architecture was very positive. Illustrating his text with works from the
central plateau, Oaxaca and the Maya region, Cetto highlighted the unity of ceremonial
sites and the harmony of their proportions and resonance (Zusammenklang) with the land-
scape. He argued that this was not mere mimesis, as the pre-Columbian architect “left the
geometrical stamp of his spirit” wherever he built. Cetto also highlighted the ornamenta-
tion of these complexes, retroactively calling it “plastic integration” and associating it with
a certain life force and innate sense of horror vacui among Mexicans. He also observed and
praised the fact that the taste for ornamentation was not subject to the technical capabili-
ties of its architects, but was intentionally prioritized over them. Quoting the archaeologists
Ignacio Marquina and Salvador Toscano, he highlighted the technical-constructive limita-
tions of pre-Columbian architecture (especially its small interiors) but came to justify this
in relation to the prevailing ideas, which for the Mexican population, were the relationship
with the sky and life outside.
Cetto observed, on the other hand, that large interior spaces arrived in Mexico for the
first time with colonial architecture. He primarily credited the mendicant friars, the most
active builders in the stage immediately following the conquest. However, he acknowledged
that there was no real sense of space in colonial Mexico, contrasting the country’s baroque
and churrigueresque with the “spatial creations” of contemporary buildings in Italy and Ger-
many. He argued that the most characteristic and therefore valuable aspects of the Mexi-
can Baroque resided not in “architectural essentials” but in “the decorative pose, the over-
excited gestures,” relating these to the pre-Columbian horror vacui. Instead, the colony’s

33 Max L. Cetto, Modern Architecture in Mexico, 9-10. Figures of the stature of Antonio Gaudí, August Perret, Henri Van
de Velde or Frank Lloyd Wright, or European “talents” as the ones that arrived to the U.S.: Walter Gropius, Alvar Aalto,
William Lescaze, Richard Neutra, Antonin Raymond, Eliel and Eero Saarinen, Marcel Breuer, Josep Lluís Sert or the
Kahn brothers.
34 Like Richard Neutra, Alberto Sartoris, John McAndrew and Henry-Russell Hitchcock. Cetto alluded to the following
writings: I. E. Myers, Mexico’s Modern Architecture (New York: Architectural Book Publishing, 1952), 20-2; Alberto Sartoris,
Encyclopedia of New Architecture, Vol. 3: “American Order and Climate” (Milano: Ulrico Hoepli, 1954); John McAndrew,
“Good Buildings by Good Neighbors,” in Art News (January 1956), 41-3, 62-4; and Henry-Russell Hitchcock, Latin
American Architecture Since 1945 (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1955).
35 Here he meant Bruno Zevi, Sybil Moholy-Nagy and Max Frisch and alluded to the following texts: Bruno Zevi, “Gro-
tesque Mexican,” in The Espresso (December 29, 1957), translated into Spanish in Arquitectura-Mexico (June 1959), 111-2;
Sybil Moholy-Nagy, “Mexican Critique,” in Progressive Architecture, November 1953, 109, 170, 173, 175; and Max Frisch,
“Cum Grano Salis. Eine kleine Glosse zur Schweizerischen Architektur” (1953) and “Der Laie und die Architektur. Ein
Funkgespräch” (1954), in Gesammelte Werke in zeitlicher Folge 1945-1956, vol. 3.1 (Frankfurt A.M.: Suhrkamp, 1976), 230.

119