El artista, como el Dios de la creaci\u00f3n, permanece dentro, o detr\u00e1s, o m\u00e1s all\u00e1, o por encima de su obra, trasfundido, evaporado de la existencia… indiferente… entrenetido en arreglarse las u\u00f1as.<\/p>\n Y me viene a la mente el gran artista que fue Luis Guti\u00e9rrez Soto<\/strong>. Con \u00e9l siempre da esa sensaci\u00f3n que dice Joyce, de un dios que contempla c\u00f3mo fluyen sus obras por s\u00ed mismas, sin mayores problemas existenciales.<\/p>\n No es que Don Luis no trabajara como un tit\u00e1n; es que parece como si no se interesara por el aspecto \u00abcultural\u00bb, \u00abtrascendente\u00bb de la arquitectura. Hac\u00eda las obras como churros, y cuando las vemos no podemos entender que fueran de una misma persona.<\/p>\n \u00bfQu\u00e9 tiene que ver esto:<\/p>\n con esto:<\/p>\n o con esto?<\/p>\n La vida de Luis Guti\u00e9rrez Soto es una larga cadena de \u00e9xitos. De joven, mientras estudiaba arquitectura, le gustaba el football<\/em>, y, naturalmente, jug\u00f3 en el Real Madrid (no en un filial, ni en un juvenil, ni nada de eso: en el primer equipo); y, naturalmente, era el m\u00e1ximo goleador. Tanto que le apodaban Pichichi<\/strong><\/a>, como al m\u00edtico delantero del Athletic que sigue dando su apodo y su trofeo cada a\u00f1o a los m\u00e1ximos goleadores de la liga.<\/p>\n Acab\u00f3 su carrera brillantemente en 1923, con un PFC que hoy nos hace sonrojar, pero era lo que hab\u00eda que hacer. Y sali\u00f3 a la calle, a construir, con un cacao mental de pron\u00f3stico.<\/p>\n Se pregunt\u00f3: \u00ab\u00bfqu\u00e9 estilo se lleva?\u00bb, y se fue repitiendo esa pregunta durante toda su vida. (Yo le pondr\u00eda esa frase como epitafio).<\/p>\n En los a\u00f1os treinta adopt\u00f3 un tipo de arquitectura moderna, racionalista, pero muy influida por el expresionismo de Mendelsohn<\/strong><\/a>, con una pl\u00e1stica deliciosa. (Este estilo tuvo mucho \u00e9xito, y se puede disfrutar en muchas ciudades espa\u00f1olas. A m\u00ed me parece especialmente bueno en las obras de Pedro de Ispizua<\/strong> y de Manuel Gal\u00edndez<\/strong> en Bilbao).<\/p>\n En la Guerra Civil se alist\u00f3 en el bando adecuado, y venci\u00f3. Los encargos se amontonaron. Hab\u00eda una naci\u00f3n por reconstruir, y \u00e9l se puso a la cabeza. Surgi\u00f3 entonces de nuevo la pregunta: \u00ab\u00bfqu\u00e9 estilo se lleva?\u00bb, y se respondi\u00f3 a s\u00ed mismo con una cosa rara: Entre moderno y castizo, entre racionalista y espiritual (entendiendo por espiritual el sentimiento cat\u00f3lico-espa\u00f1ol). \u00bfPero eso c\u00f3mo se concreta pl\u00e1sticamente?<\/p>\n Opt\u00f3 por reconstruir los barrios m\u00e1s ricos de Madrid (es lo que pasa cuando uno puede elegir). Su Barrio de Salamanca natal est\u00e1 hoy plagado de obras suyas. Y el de Chamber\u00ed, y el de Arg\u00fcelles…<\/p>\n Ese bloque madrile\u00f1o de pisos de ladrillo visto, con esquinas y\/o cornisas de piedra caliza, y terrazas, o miradores panzones… Vamos, el bloque de pisos t\u00edpico de Madrid, es en gran parte obra suya, y una cantidad ins\u00f3lita de ellos son directamente obras suyas. (Tambi\u00e9n los hizo en otras ciudades de Espa\u00f1a).<\/p>\n Este gran Pichichi de la arquitectura (\u00a1Dios, qu\u00e9 golazos!) hizo chal\u00e9s, cines, discotecas, bares, iglesias, ministerios, etc, etc.<\/p>\n Le llev\u00f3 dos versiones del Ministerio del Aire al general Vig\u00f3n, con y sin chapiteles, y el general eligi\u00f3 la de los chapiteles porque era \u00abm\u00e1s espa\u00f1ol\u00bb, como El Escorial.<\/p>\n Y muy pocos a\u00f1os despu\u00e9s hizo el edificio del Alto Estado Mayor con un estilo moderno ma non troppo<\/em>:<\/p>\n Constantemente se hac\u00eda la pregunta: \u00ab\u00bfqu\u00e9 estilo se lleva?\u00bb, o, en estos casos: \u00ab\u00bfqu\u00e9 estilo es el m\u00e1s adecuado para este cliente?\u00bb Y lo bueno es que los dominaba todos, y sab\u00eda hacer obras maestras en cada uno de ellos. Parece como si le diera igual.<\/p>\n Nos recuerda a Groucho Marx<\/strong><\/a>:<\/p>\n \u00abEstos son mis principios. Si no le gustan tengo otros\u00bb.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Hizo una de las mejores torres de viviendas de Madrid,<\/p>\n y una de las mejores torres de oficinas.<\/p>\n Curiosamente, despu\u00e9s de haber hecho de todo, cerca del fin de su vida dijo que la obra de la que se sent\u00eda m\u00e1s orgulloso era la del Palacio March, en Palma de Mallorca.<\/p>\n \u00bfEl estilo? \u00a1Qu\u00e9 m\u00e1s daba el estilo! Lo que importaba era la dificultad t\u00e9cnica, la proeza de construir. Fullaondo, con su eterna perspectiva cultural, intent\u00f3 llevarle a su terreno. Le habl\u00f3 del Bar Chicote para decirle que esta obra se instala \u00aben un nivel cultural, que trasciende bastante un enfoque tan esquem\u00e1ticamente moralista\u00bb. Guti\u00e9rrez Soto le contest\u00f3 que el Bar Chicote fue una obra muy lograda, pero no admit\u00eda que la valoraran como su mejor obra, porque las hab\u00eda hecho mucho m\u00e1s complejas, y en el fondo quienes dec\u00edan esto manifestaban mala intenci\u00f3n, desacreditando obras suyas muy superiores. Fullaondo le insisti\u00f3 que no se pod\u00eda hablar solo en t\u00e9rminos pr\u00e1cticos, que en las obras hay muchos niveles, incluso niveles po\u00e9ticos. Y Don Luis, ya bastante fastidiado, le contest\u00f3:<\/p>\n \u00abNo entiendo bien lo que quieres decir, con esta frasecita un tanto rebuscada de nivel cultural, yo creo que la arquitectura es buena o mala simplemente independientemente de ese nivel cultural del que hablas\u00bb,<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n y volvi\u00f3 a hablar de \u00absentido com\u00fan\u00bb, a rebajar el debate a niveles pr\u00e1cticos y estrictamente profesionales, y a cantar al arquitecto como servidor de la sociedad. Despu\u00e9s de esta parrafada, Fullaondo dice:<\/p>\n \u00abEst\u00e1 visto que no nos entendemos\u00bb.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Naturalmente, era imposible que se entendieran un te\u00f3rico que buscaba una trascendencia cultural y un s\u00faper profesional, hiperpr\u00e1ctico, que lo hab\u00eda construido todo, que lo sab\u00eda construir todo y en el estilo que fuera.<\/p>\n Muchos a\u00f1os despu\u00e9s le pregunt\u00e9 a Fullaondo por esta entrevista, y me dijo que, efectivamente, hab\u00eda sido una entrevista algo inc\u00f3moda, pero que qu\u00e9 bueno y qu\u00e9 grande era este arquitecto.<\/p>\n Lo dejaremos as\u00ed: El gran arquitecto que no quiso que su obra fuera trascendente, o a quien le daba mucha verg\u00fcenza que le se\u00f1alaran los aspectos trascendentales de su obra.<\/p>\n Jos\u00e9 Ram\u00f3n Hern\u00e1ndez Correa \u00b7 Doctor Arquitecto [:en]<\/p>\n I want to write too many things in the blog, and it does not curdle his any. In these times of uncertainty and of distress I would like to touch many matters, but I do not have the sufficient serenity as to structure them in a coherent speech. I shuffle several and do not decide on any, and say to myself that ojal\u00e1 had the writer’s sufficient trade as to refill an entry because yes, ado, with the pure professionalism and with the domain and the apparent disinterest of which Joyce<\/strong> speaks to us in the Portrait of the Adolescente Artist<\/em><\/em>.<\/p>\n The artist, as the God of the creation, remains inside, or behind, or beyond, or over his work, trasfundido, evaporated of the existence … indifferent … entrenetido in fixing the nails up.<\/p>\n And me there comes to the mind the great artist who was Luis Guti\u00e9rrez Soto<\/strong>. With him always it gives this sensation that Joyce says, of a god who contemplates how his works flow for yes same, without major existential problems.<\/p>\n It is not that Don Luis was not working as a titan; it is that it seems as if it was not interested for the \u00abcultural\u00bb, \u00abtranscendent\u00bb aspect of the architecture. It was doing the works as light doughnut rings, and when we see them we cannot understand that they belonged to the same person.<\/p>\n What has it to see this:<\/p>\n with this:<\/p>\n or with this?<\/p>\n Luis Guti\u00e9rrez Soto’s life is a long chain of successes. Of young woman, while he was studying architecture, he liked the football<\/em>, and, naturally, it played in Royal Madrid (not neither in subsidiary, nor in the juvenile one, nor nothing of it: in the first equipment); and, naturally, he was the maximum scorer. So much that were nicknaming\u00a0Pichichi<\/strong><\/a>, since to the mythical forward of the Athletic who continues giving his nickname and his trophy every year to the maximum scorers of the league.<\/p>\n It ended his career brilliantly in 1923, with a PFC that today makes us blush, but it was what it was necessary to do. And it went out to the street, to construct, with a mental cocoa of forecast.<\/p>\n He wondered: \u00abwhat style does it take to himself? \u00ab, and this question was repeating itself during all his life. (I would put this phrase as epitaph).<\/p>\n In the thirties he adopted a type of modern, racionalist architecture, but very influenced by Mendelsohn<\/strong><\/a>‘s expressionism, with a delicious plastic arts. (East I am used it was very much successful, and it is possible to enjoy in many Spanish cities. It seems to me to be specially good at the works of\u00a0 Pedro de Ispizua<\/strong> and of Manuel Gal\u00edndez<\/strong> in Bilbao).<\/p>\n In the Civil war it enlisted in the suitable decree, and won. The orders were accumulated. There was a nation for reconstructing, and he put to the head. The question arose then again: \u00bb what style does it take to himself? \u00ab, and it was answered to yes same by a rare thing: Between modern and pure, between racionalist and spiritual (understanding for spiritually the feeling Catholic – Spanish). But it how does it make concrete plastically?<\/p>\n It chose to reconstruct the richest neighborhoods of Madrid (it is what happens when it can choose one). His Neighborhood of natal Salamanca is today riddled with his works. And that of Chamber\u00ed, and that of Arg\u00fcelles…<\/p>\n This block of Madrid of floors of seen brick, with corners and \/ or cornices of limestone, and terraces, or viewing-points panzones… We go, the typical block of floors of Madrid, it is largely a his work, and an unusual quantity of them they are directly his works. (Also it did them in other cities of Spain).<\/p>\n This great Pichichi of the architecture (God, what golazos!) it did chalets, cinemas, discotheques, bars, churches, departments, etc, etc.<\/p>\n It took two versions of the Department of the Air to the general Vig\u00f3n, with and without capitals of a column, and the general chose that of the capitals of a column because it was \u00abmore Spanish\u00bb, as El Escorial.<\/p>\n And very a few years later odd ma did the building of the High Staff Officer with a modern\u00a0ma non troppo<\/em>:<\/p>\n Constant the question was done: \u00abwhat style does it take to himself? \u00ab, or, in these cases: \u00abwhat style is most adapted for this client?\u00bb And the good thing is that it was dominating all, and it could do masterpieces in each of them. It seems as if it was all the same to him.<\/p>\n He us resembles Groucho Marx<\/strong><\/a>: <\/em><\/p>\n \u00abThese are my beginning. If he does not like them I have others\u00bb.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n It did one of the best towers of housings of Madrid,<\/p>\n and one of the best towers of offices.<\/p>\n Curiously, after having done of everything, near the end of his life he said that the work of which he was feeling prouder was that of the Palace March, in Palma.<\/p>\n The style? What more was giving the style! What was mattering was the technical difficulty, the prowess of constructing.<\/p>\n Juan Daniel Fullaondo<\/strong>\u00a0did a curious interview to him for Nueva Forma<\/em><\/a>, \u00a0in which Guti\u00e9rrez Soto raised a curious ethical defense of his eclecticism, saying that the architect does not have to invent forms, since it is pride and petulance, but the forms already are there all, invented and available, and that what it has to do the architect is to solve the technical, functional and thematic problems. And to choose for it the forms that better are convenient for him.<\/p>\n ullaondo, with his eternal cultural perspective, tried to take him to his area. Strong boy spoke to him about the Bar to say to him that this work establishes itself \u00abin a cultural standard, that moralist comes out enough an approach so schematically\u00bb. Guti\u00e9rrez Grove answered him that the Bar Strong boy was a very successful work, but it was not admitting that they should value it as his better work, because it had made them much more complex, and in the bottom those who were saying this were demonstrating bad intention, becoming discredited his very top works. Fullaondo him insisted that it was not possible to speak only in practical terms, which in the works there are many levels, even poetical levels. And Don Luis, already enough bothered, answered him:<\/p>\n \u00abI do not understand well what you want to say, with this frasecita rather searched carefully of cultural standard, I believe that the architecture is good or bad simply independently of this cultural standard about which you speak\u00bb,<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n and it returned to speak about \u00abcommon sense\u00bb, to reduce the debate to practical and strictly professional levels, and to sing to the architect as servant of the company. After this chat, Fullaondo says:<\/p>\n \u00abEst\u00e1 visto que no nos entendemos\u00bb.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Naturally, it was impossible that there was understood the theoretical one that was looking for a cultural transcendency and super professionally, hyperpractically, that had constructed everything, who could construct everything and in the style that was.<\/p>\n Many years later I asked Fullaondo him about this interview, and he said to me that, really, it had been a slightly inconvinient interview, but that good what and what big one was this architect.<\/p>\n We will make it like that: The great architect who did not want that his work was transcendent, or to whom it was giving many shame that were indicating to him the transcendental aspects of his work.<\/p>\n Jos\u00e9 Ram\u00f3n Hern\u00e1ndez Correa \u00b7 Doctor Architect<\/p>\n Toledo \u00b7 setember 2010<\/p>\n [:gl]<\/p>\n \n \n […]<\/p>\n Quero escribir demasiadas cousas no blog, e non me calla ningunha. Nestes tempos de zozobra e de angustia gustar\u00edame tocar moitos asuntos, pero non te\u00f1o a suficiente serenidade como para estructurarlos nun discurso coherente. Barallo varios e non me decido por ning\u00fan, e d\u00edgome que oxal\u00e1 tivese o suficiente oficio de escritor como para reencher unha entrada porque si, sen m\u00e1is, coa pura profesionalidad e co dominio e o aparente desinterese do que nos fala Joyce<\/strong> no Retrato do Artista Adolescente.<\/em><\/p>\n O artista, como o Deus da creaci\u00f3n, permanece dentro, ou detr\u00e1s, ou m\u00e1is al\u00f3, ou por encima da s\u00faa obra, trasfundido, evaporado da existencia… indiferente… entrenetido en arranxarse as u\u00f1as.<\/p>\n E v\u00e9nme \u00e1 mente o gran artista que foi Lu\u00eds Guti\u00e9rrez Soto<\/strong>. Con el sempre d\u00e1 esa sensaci\u00f3n que di Joyce, dun deus que contempla como fl\u00faen as s\u00faas obras por si mesmas, sen maiores problemas existenciales.<\/p>\n Non \u00e9 que Don Luis non traballase como un tit\u00e1n; \u00e9 que parece coma se non se interesase polo aspecto \u00abcultural\u00bb, \u00abtranscendente\u00bb da arquitectura. Fac\u00eda as obras como churros, e cando as vemos non podemos entender que fosen dunha mesma persoa.<\/p>\n \u00bfQue ten que ver isto:<\/p>\n con isto:<\/p>\n ou con isto?<\/p>\n A vida de Luis Guti\u00e9rrez Soto \u00e9 unha longa cadea de \u00e9xitos. De mozo, mentres estudaba arquitectura, gust\u00e1balle o football<\/em>, e, naturalmente, xogou no Real Madrid (non nun filial, nin nun xuvenil, nin nada diso: no primeiro equipo); e, naturalmente, era o m\u00e1ximo goleador. Tanto que o alcumaban Pichichi<\/strong><\/a>, como ao m\u00edtico dianteiro do Athletic que segue dando o seu alcume e o seu trofeo cada ano aos m\u00e1ximos goleadores da liga.<\/p>\n Rematou a s\u00faa carreira brillantemente en 1923, cun PFC que hoxe nos fai ruborizar, pero era o que hab\u00eda que facer. E sa\u00edu \u00e1 r\u00faa, a constru\u00edr, cun cacao mental de progn\u00f3stico.<\/p>\n Preguntouse: \u00ab\u00bfque estilo se leva?\u00bb, e foise repetindo esa pregunta durante toda a s\u00faa vida. (Eu po\u00f1er\u00edalle esa frase como epitafio).<\/p>\n Nos anos trinta adoptou un tipo de arquitectura moderna, racionalista, pero moi influ\u00edda polo expresionismo de\u00a0Mendelsohn<\/strong><\/a>, cunha pl\u00e1stica deliciosa. (Este estilo tivo moito \u00e9xito, e p\u00f3dese gozar en moitas cidades espa\u00f1olas. A min par\u00e9ceme especialmente bo nas obras de Pedro de Ispizua<\/strong> e de Manuel Gal\u00edndez<\/strong> en Bilbao).<\/p>\n Na Guerra Civil alistouse no bando axeitado, e venceu. Os encargos amonto\u00e1ronse. Hab\u00eda unha naci\u00f3n por reconstru\u00edr, e el p\u00faxose \u00e1 cabeza. Xurdiu ent\u00f3n de novo a pregunta: \u00ab\u00bfque estilo se leva?\u00bb, e respondeuse a si mesmo cunha cousa rara: Entre moderno e castizo, entre racionalista e espiritual (entendendo por espiritual o sentimento cat\u00f3lico-espa\u00f1ol). \u00bfPero iso como se concreta plasticamente?<\/p>\n Optou por reconstru\u00edr os barrios m\u00e1is ricos de Madrid (\u00e9 o que pasa cando un pode elixir). O seu Barrio de Salamanca natal est\u00e1 hoxe enchido de obras s\u00faas. E o de Chamber\u00ed, e o de Arg\u00fcelles…<\/p>\n Ese bloque madrile\u00f1o de pisos de ladrillo visto, con esquinas e\/ou cornixas de pedra calcaria, e terrazas, ou miradoiros panzones… Imos, o bloque de pisos t\u00edpico de Madrid, \u00e9 en gran parte obra s\u00faa, e unha cantidade ins\u00f3lita deles son directamente obras s\u00faas. (Tam\u00e9n os fixo noutras cidades de Espa\u00f1a).<\/p>\n Este gran Pichichi da arquitectura (\u00a1Deus, que golazos!) fixo chal\u00e9s, cines, discotecas, bares, igrexas, ministerios, etc, etc.<\/p>\n Levoulle d\u00faas versi\u00f3ns do Ministerio do Aire ao xeneral Vig\u00f3n, con e sen chapiteles, e o xeneral elixiu a dos chapiteles porque era \u00abm\u00e1is espa\u00f1ol\u00bb, como El Escorial.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/veredes.es\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/06\/Luis-Guti\u00e9rrez-Soto-arquitectamoslocos.blogspot.com_.es_.jpg\" "\\"Luis")
<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>
Fig. 2 Aeropuerto de Madrid-Barajas, Restaurant y Bar. Lu\u00eds Guti\u00e9rrez Soto, 1931.<\/span>
Fig. 3. Cine Barcel\u00f3 en Madrid (Espa\u00f1a). Lu\u00eds Guti\u00e9rrez Soto, 1930.<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n
<\/a><\/a><\/a>
\nJuan Daniel Fullaondo<\/strong> le hizo una curiosa entrevista para Nueva Forma<\/em><\/a>, en la que Guti\u00e9rrez Soto plante\u00f3 una curiosa defensa \u00e9tica de su eclecticismo, diciendo que el arquitecto no tiene que inventar formas, pues eso es orgullo y petulancia, sino que las formas ya est\u00e1n ah\u00ed todas, inventadas y disponibles, y que lo que tiene que hacer el arquitecto es resolver los problemas t\u00e9cnicos, funcionales y tem\u00e1ticos. Y elegir para ello las formas que mejor le convengan.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\nToledo \u00b7 septiembre 2010<\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>
Fig. 2 Airport of Madrid You – quarrel, Restaurant and Bar. Lu\u00eds Guti\u00e9rrez Soto, 1931.
Fig. 3. Cinema Barcel\u00f3 in Madrid (Spain). Lu\u00eds Guti\u00e9rrez Soto, 1930.<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n
<\/a><\/a><\/a>\n
\n
<\/span><\/p>\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>
Fig. 2 Aeroporto de Madrid-Barajas, Restaurante e Bar. Lu\u00eds Guti\u00e9rrez Soto, 1931.<\/span>
Fig. 3. Cine Barcel\u00f3 en Madrid (Espa\u00f1a). Lu\u00eds Guti\u00e9rrez Soto, 1930.<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/a><\/a><\/a>
![](\"http:\/\/veredes.es\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/06\/lgs28.jpg\"){kind=link}