marcus miller
Pawley, design heroes, p. 133
Novelist Gabriel Roy summed up both the popular and the intellectual spirit of the era when she was asked to comment on the proceedings at the Montebello Conference in 1963 6 — ‘Firstly, one firm basis of accord was established: faith in progress’ 7 . It was as if the entire potential of the modernist enterprise; corrupted by the most sobering and horrific events in history, was given one final chance to express itself in a frenzy of fantastic architectural propositions, showcases of social and technological collaboration, and interactive multimedia exhibits. Expo was a cosmopolitan celebration of smoothed differences and global interdependence filtered through the triumphant terms of post-WWII American benevolence. It may be that Ile Nôtre Dame in 1967 was the last time and place it was possible to believe in the capacity of humankind to intentionally direct its own future. Roy’s faith, unshaken even after recent cataclysms, encapsulates the most telling difference between her generation of artists and intellectuals and the next. Expo might be characterized as the final gasp of Camelot before protest, alterity and subculture took over 8 .The seemingly naive assumption that architecture could be called on to offer real solutions to social, environmental, even ethical problems is striking. Not only were people looking to architects for visionary leader- ship, but also architects themselves typically accepted the mantle and self-consciously generated profundities.This was as much a function of Camelot’s optimistic zeitgeist as it was its reverence for authority. Nevertheless, the dome and Habitat both testify to a faith in man’s ability to design his way out of a mess and reassert mastery over himself and his world. Contrary to prevalent depictions of Modernism as reductive, homogenising, monolithic, even fascistic, Expo was a study in complexity and contradiction. Counterposed with extensive efforts to unify the look of the fair with integrated graphic design and street furniture 9 , the urban plan was deliberately provocative. Consider the sites chosen for national pavilions. Ontario was located across from Quebec, Britain from France, U.S.A. from the Soviet Union etc. Even the pavilions themselves were full of ellipses and inversions:
6 The theme of Terre des Hommes was taken from the title of a book by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (author of The Little Prince ), and emerged in 1962 at a meeting attended by Associ- ate Defence Minister Pierre Sevigny, who claims it was his and Mayor Drapeau’s brainchild.The follow- ing year a special conference of artists, scientists, and educators was held in Montebello, Québec to elaborate distinct aspects of the theme that would later be developed as the various thematic pavilions.These included: Man and Life, Man and The Oceans, Man the Explorer and Man the Producer among others. 7 Robert Fulford, Remember Expo , McClelland and Stewart, 1968, p. 12. 8 While it was known that John F. Kennedy enjoyed Camelot (the Broadway musical starring Richard Burton and Julie Andrews that opened shortly after he was elected President in 1960), it wasn’t until the media-savvy Jackie Kennedy quoted a line from the play in Life Magazine ’s eulogy (Theodore H. White, ‘For President Kennedy: An Epilogue’, Life Magazine , Dec. 6, 1963) that the mythic associa- tion was made between the idealized court of King Arthur and the Kennedy Administration. ‘Don’t let it be forgot, that once there was a spot, for one brief shining moment that was known as Camelot’. 9 Paul Arthur (former designer of Canadian Art , who actually coined the term ‘signage’) developed the universal pictographs for Expo’67, and Luis Villa designed the urban accessories including phone booths, park benches, waste cans and streetlights. 10 Robert Fulford, ibid . pp. 105-6.
The pavilions of the two richest Canadian provinces stood side by side, separated by only a few yards of water. Individually they were interesting, but together they made a fascinating study: Ontario robust and creative and perhaps a little awkward; Quebec, by contrast cool and restrained and sophisticated. It was as if the two provinces had for some reason decided to exchange identities 10 .
Designers and architects clearly coddled differences and encouraged ambiguity.
31
O n S ite review
W eight
I ssue 10 2003
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator