The Renaissance City by Giulio Argan, and: The Modern City: Planning in the 19th Century by François Choay, and: Le Corbusier: The Machine and the Grand Design by Norma Evanson, and: Toney Gamier: La Cité Industrielle by Dora Wiebenson (review)

Books-Livres 479 cuts, relief etching, sandpaper prints, stick printing and texture block prints. In all there are over 100 articles. They are clearly and concisely written, manage to get a great deal of quite accurate information into a small space and are usually detailed enough to give the reader a sufficiently good idea of the procedures---even of the more complicated ones like etching, lithography, egg tempera-to get him started working. There are even some gems to be mined here. Tucked away in the lithography article, for example, the author proposes hardboard (Masonite) as a cheap substitute for stone or zinc in making a lithograph. I have seen lithographs printed from hardboard and the results are quite good. He also suggests that some areas of the board can be cut away to obtain pure whites, which are otherwise unobtainable with this material. This combination of woodcutting and lithographic techniques on the same plate, which is not possible using the traditional materials, could lead to spectacular results. There are 16 line illustrations in the text and 24 half-tone plates, some in color, showing examples of many of the techniques described. An appendix lists materials and suppliers. Though the book is primarily directed towards art students and teachers , even experienced artists will be able to find something new with which to experiment and which may stimulate their imagination to amplify their style and methods. It can also serve historians, collectors and others who deal in art as a useful reference on the way different works of art are made. The Renaissance City. Giulio Argan. The Modem City: Planning in the 19th Century. Franc;ois Choay. Le Corbusier: The Machine and the Grand Design. Norma Evanson. Toney Gamier: La Cite Industrielle. Dora Wiebenson. All published by Studio Vista, London, 1969. 45s. each Reviewed by: Yona Friedman* This is a fine series about the architecture of the past. The books, by excellent art historians, are cleverly written and are rich in pictorial material. Analyses of the past are very interesting and they may even be a key to understanding contemporary trends (but are not present trends already a part of the past?). I cannot evade two questions that occur to me when considering these books, questions not related to the qualifications of either the authors or the publisher. Is it worthwhile to present to the general public books by eminent authors with illustrations ofworks ofthe past (some never built)? If it is admitted that there are people interested in the architecture of the past, should not the thoughts of the architects themselves be presented (several architects mentioned in these books have left numerous texts)? I am only half-joking (how can anyone be serious * 42 Bd. Pasteur, 75-Paris 15, France. when writing about architecture ?), for I believe the questions I raise apply to the four books. They are very intelligently written and respectable (they can be called 'scholarly' books) and they were written for the intelligent amateur (who can afford to buy them). Personally, I belive that we need a different kind of book for the layman, who is a 'user of architectural products' and a victim of the paternalism of architects and planners. We need clear and simple texts on the developing 'science ofurban behaviour' by those that are working in this field, prepared without the help of commentators. After all, the layman will be the one to be affected by 'futuristic' ideas and he should know what they are, for his own self-defense. New ideas can only be sensibly presented by those who invent them. A publisher, obviously, will answer that he is interested in selling books and the kind of books I propose would not be marketable. This may be true but it throws a cruel light on publications dealing with architecture. Are books and periodicals on this subject produced as decorations for bookshelves of those who are not interested in the errors of architects and planners or who consider architecture in purely aesthetic terms or who believe planning means a patronizing implementation of sociology (we know better the way you should live!)? I am sorry for these aggressive lines and I am probably treating unjustly...