ABSTRACT
The blending of instrumental and symbolic representation has been a prob-
lematic feature of twentieth-century architecture. Since the failure of the
postmodernist project, instrumental reason continues to dominate architec-
tural practice. This is usually to the exclusion of an authentic symbolic
representation such as is found in myth and poetry, and which can emerge
only from a creative interpretation of tradition. One of the most illuminating examples of this modern dilemma in the early twentieth century is the
work of Le Corbusier. His reductivist, Utopian urban visions are still justly
seen as a key impetus behind the urban planning policies which inflicted
such damage on our cities in the name of modern progress. Yet as a
counterpart to his urban work, Le Corbusier saw an urgent need for the
regeneration of the culture of dwelling.2 Through his intuitive creative
process, he addressed this problem more successfully than most others in
the modern period. When working at the scale of a single painting or a
house, he was often able to create a work of art meaningfully rooted in
deep archetypal undercurrents and able to sustain a vital world of meaning.
