News

Pierre Jeanneret: The Transformation and the Classification of His Work

2025 | 12 | 17

Pierre Jeanneret (1896–1967) is among the most influential—though often underestimated—figures of modern architecture and furniture design of the 20th century. As the office partner and cousin of Le Corbusier, he shaped the development of modern architecture over more than three decades and created furniture designs that are now regarded as icons of 20th-century design. His late work in Chandigarh, the purpose-built capital of the Indian state of Punjab, represents a culmination of his career and documents with particular clarity his approach to linking modernism with local context and climatic conditions.

Early Years and Education
Pierre Jeanneret was born on 22 March 1896 in Geneva, into a family already rooted in architectural traditions. His cousin Charles-Édouard Jeanneret, later known as Le Corbusier, was thirteen years older and would exert a decisive influence on Pierre’s professional trajectory. Pierre completed his education at the École des Beaux-Arts in Geneva. In January 1920 he left Switzerland and moved to Paris, where from 1921 to 1922 he worked in the office of the Perret brothers. This experience under Auguste Perret, a pioneer of reinforced concrete construction, proved formative for his later work.
> more

The Partnership with Le Corbusier (1921–1940)
In 1921 he began a partnership with Le Corbusier while still employed by the Perret brothers. In 1922 they founded an office together. This collaboration proved exceptionally productive and led to the realization of some of the most significant buildings of classical modernism. Although Le Corbusier was often perceived as the sole author of their joint projects, Pierre Jeanneret was in fact an equal partner, contributing both conceptually and practically to the development and execution of the designs. The two shared research interests and design principles within a deep and lifelong professional relationship. Together they developed the “Five Points of a New Architecture” (Cinq points de l’architecture moderne, 1927), which became cornerstones of the modern movement: pilotis, the roof terrace, the free plan, the horizontal window, and the free façade.

During the eighteen years of their partnership they realized numerous pioneering projects that became icons of modern architecture. Among the most notable joint works are:
– Villa Le Lac (1923–1924) – a compact house with a refined interior.
– Maisons La Roche-Jeanneret, Paris (1923–1925) – a masterpiece distinguished by its “promenade architecturale.”
– Ozenfant House, Paris (1922) – an experimental building type combining dwelling and studio in a compact structure.
– Pavillon de l’Esprit Nouveau (1925) – a counter-proposal to the dominant Art Deco, presented at the Exposition Internationale des Arts Décoratifs.
– Weissenhof Estate, Stuttgart (1927) – two model houses exemplifying their architectural principles.
– Maison Cook, Boulogne-sur-Seine (1926) – an innovative urban house with characteristic pilotis construction.
– Maison Guiette, Antwerp (1926) – an early example of their principles in Belgium.
– Villa Savoye, Poissy (1928–1931) – regarded as the consummate manifesto of modern architecture and the culmination of their purist phase.
– Villa Baizeau, Tunis (1929) – demonstrating the adaptation of modernist principles to a Mediterranean climate.

Further important projects included the Cité Frugès in Pessac near Bordeaux (1924–1927), an ambitious social housing project of around fifty houses, and the Fondation Suisse, a student residence (1931–1933). Their activities also extended to urban planning. They developed visionary schemes such as the Ville Contemporaine for three million inhabitants (1922) and the Plan Voisin for Paris (1925), which provoked controversial debates about the future of the city. In 1927 they participated in the competition for the Palace of the League of Nations in Geneva; although their design received the most jury votes, it was not realized for formal reasons. While Le Corbusier dominated the theoretical articulation and public presentation of their work, Pierre Jeanneret was integral to the entire design and realization process. His expertise in construction and detailing was as crucial as his formal contributions. This division of labor was characteristic of their collaboration and partly explains why Jeanneret’s role was long underestimated.

le-corbusier-and-jeanneret-villa-le-lac-interior

Left: Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret on the beach in Piquey, 1933; right: Villa Le Lac by Jeanneret and Corbusier-interior.

Furniture Design and the Collaboration with Charlotte Perriand
Another essential aspect of Pierre Jeanneret’s work is his contribution to furniture design. From 1927 onward, the office collaborated with designer Charlotte Perriand, resulting in a series of iconic furniture designs. Among the best known are the LC1 armchair (Basculant), the LC2 armchair (Grand Confort), and the LC4 chaise longue, now understood as joint projects by Le Corbusier, Pierre Jeanneret, and Charlotte Perriand.

These pieces represented a radical departure from traditional furnishing concepts. They employed modern materials such as chrome-plated tubular steel. The furniture was not conceived as decorative objects but as équipement de l’habitation—equipment for modern living—combining comfort with an industrial aesthetic.

The collaboration with Perriand was especially productive and led to a redefinition of modern furniture design. While Le Corbusier often set the conceptual direction, it was Jeanneret and Perriand who undertook the practical development and refinement of the designs. First presented in 1929 at the Salon d’Automne in Paris, the furniture provoked debate. It marked a turning point in European furniture design and influenced generations of designers.

perriand-le-corbusier-jeanneret-villa-la-roche

Left: Charlotte Perriand, Le Corbusier and Jeanneret; right: Maison La Roche and LC4 chaiselongue by Jeanneret and Perriand.

The Years in Grenoble and the BCC (1940–1950)
After the end of the partnership with Le Corbusier in 1940—partly due to personal differences and the changed circumstances of the Second World War—Pierre Jeanneret settled in Grenoble. As early as 1939, together with Charlotte Perriand, Jean Prouvé, and the journalist, sports manager, and entrepreneur Georges Blanchon, he had founded the Bureau Central de Construction (BCC), a company developing prefabricated, low-cost, and demountable building systems.

During the Second World War Jeanneret was actively involved in the French Resistance under the code name “Guidondevélo,” working alongside colleagues Georges Blanchon and Jean Prouvé. At the same time, BCC advanced pioneering projects in lightweight prefabrication and demountable housing—projects now regarded as among the most formative contributions to French postwar design. BCC was dissolved in 1952.

perriand-bookcase-prouve-greenoble-8-8-bcc

Left: Bookcase by Perriand and Jeanneret; right: Interior of a demountable 8x8 house by Prouvé and Jeanneret.

The Chandigarh Project from 1951
Another transformation in Pierre Jeanneret’s career came after 1950. Following the partition of India in 1947, the state of Punjab lost its capital Lahore, which became part of Pakistan. The Indian government under Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru decided to build a new capital, Chandigarh, as a symbol of a modern, independent India. In 1950 Le Corbusier was commissioned to design the city. He brought Pierre Jeanneret into the project—a decision that proved decisive for the success of this ambitious undertaking.

While Le Corbusier was primarily responsible for the monumental government buildings of the Capitol Complex and traveled to Chandigarh only occasionally, Pierre Jeanneret assumed the day-to-day leadership of the project on site. From 1951 to 1965 he lived and worked in Chandigarh, dedicating himself to the implementation of the urban plan. His buildings responded more directly to local needs and conditions and were more pragmatic than those of Le Corbusier. He was responsible for the design of numerous public buildings, including schools, hospitals, administrative buildings, and housing complexes.

His designs were marked by an intelligent adaptation of modernist principles to the humid subtropical climate of northern India. He developed innovative solutions for sun protection, natural ventilation, and heat dissipation, making the buildings more habitable and functional. He created various housing types for different population groups and income levels that were both affordable and architecturally complex. These designs took Indian living habits and family structures into account, integrated traditional elements such as verandas, and consistently combined them with modernist principles. The buildings used local materials, especially brick and concrete, and were conceived so they could be executed by local craftsmen.

jeanneret-on-a-bicycle-chandigarh-secretariat-building

jeanneret-on-a-bicycle-chandigarh-secretariat-building

Left: Jeanneret visiting the Secretariat building construction site in Chandigarh; right: Palace of the Assembly in Chandigarh.

The Chandigarh Furniture
A) Experimental Phase
Parallel to his architectural work, Pierre Jeanneret developed extensive furniture for Chandigarh’s public buildings and for specific housing projects. This furniture constitutes an independent contribution to the design canon of the 20th century. It differs both from his earlier work and from other tendencies of regionalist modernism. The early objects, particularly the seating furniture up to 1955 (now catalogued as PJ-SI-011 to PJ-SI-12), display a wild, almost childlike experimental spirit. Chairs were constructed from bamboo, rope, metal frameworks, cane, or chains; they were demountable and deliberately ignored the aesthetic principles of modernism. It appears as though Jeanneret created a liberated experimental field in which he cast aside dogma, professionalism, and the stylistic imperatives of modernism.

A particularly striking example is the chair PJ-SI-07-A, whose seat hangs from the armrests by chains. Many of these objects were easy to produce—bamboo lashed together with a few ropes or other improvised constructions. The furniture exhibits a pragmatic, architectural formal language: frameworks support light seat and back surfaces. The contrast between load-bearing and load-borne elements emphasizes constructive logic and lends the objects a raw, almost sculptural quality. Yet these early designs were often too fragile for everyday use; they remained prototypes documenting Jeanneret’s unrestrained creative drive.

pj-si-01-c-and-pj-si-04-a-bamboo-chairs-jeanneret

pj-si-01-c-and-pj-si-04-a-bamboo-chairs-jeanneret

Left: PJ-SI-01-C armchair by Jeanneret; right: PJ-SI-04-C armchair by Jeanneret.

B) Archetypal Design
A more unified formal language and logic soon crystallized. This made it possible to furnish an entire city with furniture types that local craftsmen could produce using available materials. Teak or sissoo beams, assembled into A-, X-, Z-, or bridge-like forms, constitute the structural framework and grammar of most pieces. Western formal clarity meets Indian nonchalance, resulting in a liberating directness without excessive formalism. Did Pierre Jeanneret recognize in non-design the highest form of design—a form in which the poetry of the everyday takes precedence over ambitious formal compulsion? Simple, clear forms generate an almost banal simplicity. Were it not for the small refinements: certain edges rounded, beams tapering toward their ends, fixings cleverly concealed, and particular attention paid to proportions.

India was a liberation for Pierre Jeanneret. Proximity to life and its beauty became more decisive. The same tendency appears simultaneously in Le Corbusier’s work. Archaic and primitive furniture types came into focus. In 1952 he developed a stool for his Cabanon that was nothing more than a box, and in 1953 a stool for his projects in Ahmedabad consisting of a steel tube and a banal seat.

Although functional and pragmatic aspects always played a role in Pierre Jeanneret’s Chandigarh project, this should not be described as functional design. The underlying intention was to create the essential with everyday means. Both Pierre Jeanneret and Le Corbusier sought the essential, with the poetic always forming part of it. In Jeanneret’s case this was more pragmatic and closer to people; in Le Corbusier’s work an additional spiritual and visionary dimension emerged.

lc-14-a-stool-and-pj-si-58-a-metal-legged-stool

lc-14-a-stool-and-pj-si-58-a-metal-legged-stool

Left: LC-14 stool by Le Corbusier; right: PJ-SI-58-A stool by Jeanneret.

Pierre Jeanneret returned to Switzerland in 1965 after fourteen years and died on 4 December 1967 in Geneva.

© Canadian Centre for Architecture, © FLC/ADAGP, © Sotheby's, © Galerie Patrick Seguin, © Olivier Martin Gambier.

[:en]New gallery opened with art and design[:]

Pierre Jeanneret chaise

2025 | 08 | 17

sofa de Pierre Jeanneret. Des objet d' une grande beauté. La Galerie P! à Zurich travaille avec des objets comme ça.

(suite…)

Pierre Jeanneret de Chandigarh par P! Galerie

2025 | 08 | 17

Pierre Jeanneret et Charlotte Perriand. Ils ont fait des meuble pour Chandigarh. La P! GALERIE offre des objets d' art de grand valeur. Nous sommes à Paris, Genève et Zurich.

Glasshouse 2 | additional 300m2 showroom

2025 | 08 | 15

In 2018, we finally added our third showroom and closed our gallery in the city centre. Glasshouse I and II are now ready to welcome you. We now have around 450m2 surface area, with a capacity to have even two exhibitions simultaneously and to hold some events. We have kept the industrial character of the glasshouses, matching the raw artefacts that we have.

In 2019, we will continue with an additional alteration of glasshouse I. Solving technical problems. Then I'll be happy to connect glasshouse I and II and activate the exterior space as well. We are looking forward to a great party season. Champagne, Cognac, and Gin are waiting for you. We are looking forward to seeing you here (by appointment only).

Non-Conformist Swiss Design in Muscat | CH-DSGN

2025 | 08 | 15

On 1 February 2023, P! GALERIE presented the exhibition of Swiss design at the National Museum of Oman, following an invitation from H.E. Jamal al-Moosawi, the Secretary General. The museum, located directly opposite the Royal Palace in Muscat, hosted the show in its central exhibition hall. The exhibition was officially opened by Sayyid Bilarab bin Haitham Al Said, the son of the Sultan. What followed was not a conventional design show, but a conceptual statement. No scenography. No event-like spectacle. Just objects on the floor.

Instead of repeating the usual narratives about “Swiss precision”, “rational intelligence” or “functionality as virtue”, the show focused on non-conformism, rawness and doubt in design. Important objects by Pierre Jeanneret and Le Corbusier from UNESCO World Heritage sites, or by Tom Strala, were placed directly on the museum floor – no plinths, no glass boxes. The exhibition ground itself became a conceptual element: a chalk-drawn layout of a virtual building – no more, no less – ephemeral and fragile. A method borrowed from Brecht’s epic theatre and later seen in Lars von Trier’s Dogville. Not projected emotions, thoughts or morality – rather a void that allows everyone to create their own perception. Because the objects stood directly on the ground, visitors were allowed to touch them. Chairs were not isolated as art objects – they remained physical, usable things. The show rejected both object fetishism and educational authority. Visitors could engage freely, without being reduced to passive observers or admirers. They were invited to question, reflect, connect.

This format avoided all decorative distraction. It was a gesture of reduction – but not minimalist in the marketable sense. It insisted on essential presence, on the sculptural truth of each object. Nothing was hidden, nothing polished. “Design is not polite,” said Pedja Hadži-Manović, who curated the exhibition. “It must be radical. It must resist the culture of compromise.”

In this spirit, the show embraced a set of works usually neglected in the Swiss canon: experimental, imperfect furniture – humble, primitive, almost childlike. A side of Swiss design that had long been ignored was made visible here. But it was precisely this aesthetic of the humble and playful that resonated with the Omani visitors, a culture where restraint and simplicity still carry meaning. Rather than preaching sustainability or morality, the exhibition created a space for reflection: on value, fragility, and the unexpected common ground between distant cultures. The layout – chalk lines slowly fading – became a silent metaphor for impermanence. What remained was clarity.

This was not a compromise.
It was a radical curatorial decision.
A non-conformist stage for objects that don’t obey.

Pierre Jeanneret et Chandigarh

2016 | 07 | 23

Le design comme clone de l'âme (Autotranslation)

Cette interview explore le caractère métaphysique de design de Chandigarh plutôt que de son contexte ou des faits historiques. Nous sommes habitués à employer nos esprits - nos facultés de la raison et de l'intelligence - si nous comprenons facilement le sens et la valeur d'une œuvre d'art; mais l'art est aussi métaphysique et émotionnelle dans la nature et nous oblige à utiliser notre inconscient aussi bien, surtout quand un travail est complexe et profonde. Art et le design est plus qu'une simple décoration, il agit également comme un miroir de notre propre être.

Qu'est-ce que vous aimez à propos de la conception de Chandigarh?
J'adore Le Corbusier et son cousin Pierre Jeanneret , qui ont tous deux nous a laissé des bâtiments fantastiques. Il doit y avoir une raison pour laquelle nous les considérons parmi les architectes les plus importants du 20e siècle (rires). La plupart des théoriciens de l'architecture respectent leur travail parce qu'il a poussé le concept de modernité, mais ce qui rend leur opus si riche est les questions existentielles qu'il soulève, qui donnent leurs conceptions une dimension spirituelle. Le philosophe Walter Benjamin a souligné l'aspect rituel de l'art, le fait qu'il agit comme une passerelle vers notre subconscient, avec ses peurs, de convoitises et d'autres émotions. Ceci est où l'art et le design deviennent intenses.

Mais ils ont conçu pour une société moderne et de promouvoir un rationalisme scientifique. Cela contredit votre point de vue.
Bien sûr, et Chandigarh est une ville qui visait à créer un idéal d'une façon moderne et rationnelle de la vie. Mais, pour être honnête, leurs bâtiments étaient souvent compliqués et pas très fonctionnels (rires). Mais ils étaient aussi en mesure d'investir leur idéologie rationnelle avec un aspect irrationnel et métaphysique. Le Corbusier, une fois défini l'architecture comme au service de la bête, le cœur et l'esprit. (SERVIR à la bête, et au coeurs, et à l'esprit). C'est tout à fait anti-rationnel, et souligne l'aspect bestial de la perception. Derrière la façade, il existe une couche plus profonde, celle qui touche notre âme.

Est-ce que la clé de la compréhension de leurs objets et l'architecture?
Je pense que oui, mais je voudrais éviter le mot compréhension. L'art est un moyen qui fonctionne avec des images et crée beaucoup de différentes impressions sensorielles. Certains semblent illogique et ne sont pas toujours clairement compréhensibles même - si l'art agit plus comme un oracle. Par l'art, nous obtenons une vision du sens de l'éternité, la vie, la mort, la liberté, la grandeur, le jeu ou la banalité. La nature abstraite de l'art nous encourage à poser des questions, qui peuvent être tout à fait existentielle. Enfin, nous nous soucions moins sur l'œuvre d'art elle-même et plus sur sa capacité à exprimer des émotions ou des idées spirituelles, qui sont plus profondes que la pensée rationnelle.

une simple table peut vraiment contenir une telle complexité?
Bien sûr, sinon il ne serait pas nous toucher. Par exemple, la table de library1 de Jeanneret ressemble vraiment banal, et les proportions sont clumsy.1 Mais cette rugosité exprime aussi une radicalité, provoquant des questions essentielles au sujet d'être. Ce tableau représente la pureté, comme si tout le superflu a été effacé. Nous devenons curieux de l'existentiel ou intacte. Ici l'art et le design nous incitent à réfléchir sur nous-mêmes et notre être intérieur.

Vous pensez donc que le tableau montre une vérité plus profonde?
D'une certaine façon, oui, mais pas comme vous le pensez. Tout dans la conception de Pierre Jeanneret apparaît pragmatique et honnête, mais la vérité dans l'art est toujours une illusion. Il y a cette contradiction fascinante à essayer de paraître vrai, que Pierre Jeanneret compris et joué avec. Donc, pour la table de bibliothèque il a conçu un haut épais, donnant l'impression d'un seul morceau massif. Mais quand on regarde sous le sommet, nous pouvons voir que juste la frontière est épaisse et le reste est mince. Vérité et illusion sont à la fois présents et montrent une vue spécifique du monde.

Il est donc la complexité de l'être humain que vous essayez de trouver dans ces objets?
Voilà ce qui me touche le plus. Ces pièces sont des outils pour nous comprendre, qui sont sujets éternels et toujours pertinents. Je ne me soucie pas de zeitgeist et maniéristes questions, je dois profondeur pour devenir stimulée. Mais je pense que chaque personne est touchée par ces objets d'une manière différente: par leur simplicité formelle, l'informalité, le caractère rugueux, et riche patine, qui apportent chaque morceau vivant, et par l'incroyable histoire de ces belles pièces, qui ont été jetés dans les années 1990 comme poubelle. Il y a tellement de couches dans ses objets et à chaque fois que vous voyez un nouveau.

Pourquoi ces pièces de design sont au prix si élevé aujourd'hui?
Le sujet de la valeur est tout à fait différente de celle de la qualité. OK, ces objets sont chers parce que le duo d'architectes le plus important du 20e siècle les a conçus. Chaque pièce a des dimensions différentes et est unique, ce qui est tout à fait différente de la production de masse industrialisé de quelqu'un comme Eames, Mies van der Rohe ou Kjaerholm. Chandigarh est enfin devenu un site du patrimoine mondial et attire maintenant beaucoup plus d'attention. En outre, les pièces ont une patine incroyable, ce qui montre leur histoire et est assez rare pour un mobilier moderne. En termes économiques, la valeur reflète la façon rare et importante est une oeuvre - des questions qui sont essentielles pour moi en tant que propriétaire de la galerie. Mais si vous voulez aborder ces objets plus profondément, vous devez avoir votre propre réponse et éviter les préjugés.

Vous ne pensez pas qu'il est pervers que cette conception pour les pauvres est devenu si cher?
Le Corbusier et Pierre Jeanneret fait des dessins pour les riches et les pauvres de la même manière. Ils étaient à la recherche d'un langage qui convient l'homme mais pas un pour une catégorie sociale spécifique.

Mais maintenant, les gens paient 100.000 $ pour une table de Pierre Jeanneret - est-ce pas fou?
Il est probablement fou si vous avez pas d'argent. Si vous pouvez vous le permettre, alors votre budget est plus élevé et il semble différent. Imaginez que vous êtes très riche et vous pouvez choisir entre une bonne table de 1000 $ et mon fantastique tableau de 100.000 $. Si vous n'avez pas à vous soucier de l'argent, pourquoi voudriez-vous acheter un pas cher? Ma table est magique, regardez, il est un artefact primitive - la rugosité ascétique, la forme archétypale, son generousity. De plus, cette pièce est l'un des tableaux les plus importants du 20ème siècle. Telle est la beauté de l'argent (rires), vous pouvez l'échanger pour quelque chose de spirituel, comme ce morceau de conception. Oui, peut-être il est pervers de payer 100.000 $ pour une table, mais je le fais aussi. Je ne suis pas peur de faire des choses comme ça.