Commenting on an exhibition of contemporary Mexican architecture in Rome in 1957,
the polemic and highly influential Italian architectural critic and historian, Bruno
Zevi, ridiculed Mexican modernism for combining Pre-Columbian motifs with modern architecture.
He referred to it as ‘Mexican Grotesque’. Inherent in Zevi’s comments were an attitude
towards modern architecture that defined it in primarily material terms; its principle
role being one of “spatial and programmatic function”. Despite the weight of this
Modernist tendency in the architectural circles of Post-Revolutionary Mexico, we suggest
in this paper that Mexican modernism cannot be reduced to such “material” definitions.
In the highly charged political context of Mexico in the first half of the 20th Century,
modern architecture was perhaps above all else, a tool for propaganda.In this political atmosphere it was undesirable, indeed it was seen as impossible,
to separate art, architecture and politics in a way that would be a direct reflection
of Modern architecture’s European manifestations. Form was to follow function, but
that function was to be communicative as well as spatial and programmatic. One consequence
of this “political communicative function” in Mexico was the combination of the “mural
tradition” with contemporary architectural design; what Zevi defined as “Mexican Grotesque”.
In this paper, we will examine the political context of Post-Revolutionary Mexico
and discuss what may be defined as its most iconic building; the Central Library at
the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico. In direct counterpoint to Zevi, we will suggest that it was far from grotesque,
but rather was one of the most committed political statements made by the Modern Movement
throughout the Twentieth Century. It was propaganda, it was political. It was utopian.