guglielmo ulrich

With an Essay by Daniel Sherer

MILANESE DESIGN BETWEEN CLASSIC ISM AND MODERNISM

MILANESE DESIGN BETWEEN CLASSIC ISM AND MODERNISM

Published on the occasion of the exhibition

GUGLIELMO ULRICHMILANESE DESIGN BETWEEN CLASSICISM AND MODERNISM

May 21 - July 9 2004

Doris Leslie Blau, Ltd.Decorative Arts, The Fuller Building41 East 57th Street, 3rd floorNew York, NY 10022T: 212 586 5511F: 212 586 6632www.dorisleslieblau.com

Publication © 2004 Doris Leslie Blau, Ltd.

Doris Leslie Blau, Ltd. would like to thank Giancorrado Ulrich.

Edited by Vera Alemani, Markus Winter

Curated by Markus Winter, Brian Kish

Essay by Daniel Sherer

Design by Piotr Bondarczyk

Printed by Selegrafica 80, Rome

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without prior written permission from the copyright holders.

ISBN 0-9755237-0-8

The descendant of an 18th century Danish noble family whosettled in Italy, Guglielmo Ulrich (1904-1977) possessed asensibility as singular as his unusual confluence of culturalorigins. After five decades of searching inquiry, Ulrich leftbehind a complex and multifaceted body of work whoserenown in Milanese design circles continues unabated,though it is still largely unknown in the United States. DorisLeslie Blau's exhibition, co-curated by Markus Winter andBrian Kish of Brian Kish Gallery, is the first to be devoted tothis architect/designer on this side of the Atlantic. Its pri-mary aim is to explain Ulrich's importance by revealing theroots of his originality in Milanese and European designfrom the late 1920's to the early 1960's. Imbued with a highdegree of formal elegance, a keen historical awareness, anda strong commitment to craft – qualities manifest chiefly inhis furniture and interior design, but informing his architec-ture as well – Ulrich's achievement defies acceptedschemes of classification. Moving with ease, and with aviewpoint all his own, between the values of tectonicintegrity, an unusual refinement in the choice of materials,

and a potent sense of organic structure, his worksynthesizes and renews disparate, even incom-patible codes. Avoiding the extremes of avant-garde eclat and bourgeois conventionality, Ulrichfused modernist sobriety with a profound under-standing of the historical stratification of modesof design, providing new solutions to the problem

of variation within the classical tradition.

Throughout his career, Ulrich catered to a haut-bourgeoisMilanese clientele, making the most of his extensive socialconnections to overcome barriers between modernism andclassicism. Except for a brief foray into mass production atthe end of his life, he relentlessly pursued the path of theexception, producing "one-offs" and meticulously craftedobjects marked as much by extreme finesse as by artisanalsimplicity. A graduate of both the Brera Academy of Art(where he studied painting and figure drawing) and themore forward-looking Politecnico (where he took his degreein architecture in 1927), he was equally well-versed in thepractice, theory and history of design, art, and architecture.Au courant with the latest Italian developments rangingfrom Muzio's Novecento, through the organicist Modernismof Albini, to the Rationalism of Terragni and Figini and Pollini– see, for a fine example of Ulrich's monumental transfor-mation of the Rationalist approach, the Lombarda FinanziariaBuilding of 1944, designed with Piero Bottoni (Fig. 1) – Ulrich

Fig. 1

placed these antithetical tendencies within a broadEuropean perspective. One might even say that his peculiarcontribution lies in his highly original appropriation of diversecurrents of Viennese modern design, especially Adolf Looson the one hand, and Josef Hofmann on the other, which hecombined ingeniously with the legacies of classicism fromall periods, including ancient and Hellenistic Egypt, ImperialRome, the Roman and Milanese Baroque, and the StyleEmpire. That he managed to do this without lapsing into pre-ciosity, provincialism or the banal reiteration of familiarthemes testifies to the consistency of his vision.1

Although one must be wary of rigid schematizations,Ulrich's career can be divided into three stylistic phases.Throughout the late 20’s and 30’s, his work is heavily indebt-ed to Novecento concepts in its studied interplay of massand profile, idiosyncratic adaptation of classical motifs andparadoxical articulation of structural forces balancingweighty volume on tapering supports. Evident from thebeginning is a characteristically refined use of recherche andluxurious materials, employed in unexpected, often unortho-dox ways. Egyptian marble, parchment, animal skins, andrare woods are deployed simply and without ostentation.The effect is generally one of spare magnificence (though insome of the boudoir pieces of this period a certain tenden-cy to full-blown luxury is undeniable). Imaginative, yetrestrained solutions elaborate a new type of design poisedprecariously, yet always with great skill, between modernreduction and classical dignity.

The oak and giallo di Sahara marble console of 1932, withfluted sides, tapering angled wedge supports and a marblefloor slab parallel to a top made of the same material andthe centerpiece of the show, is an excellent example of thismoment in Ulrich's development: its rarefied modern classi-cism merits comparison with Loos, especially the "Hellenic"Loos of the Villa Karma (Plate I). However, it is also true thatat this point some of his most effective responses werecalled forth by contemporary French models: see, forinstance, the wooden chest of drawers covered with parch-ment dating to the late 30’s, whose movable portions dis-play a surface articulation of bent glass recalling Art Decoprecedents (Plate XXV), or the parchment vanity table of theearly 1930’s (Plate XVI), whose distinctive combination oflinear simplicity and precious materials betrays a familiaritywith the work of Jean-Michel Frank (many of Ulrich's subse-quent boudoir productions of the same period recall the

1 On Ulrich's reception of Viennese design, and Loosin particular, see G. Alfarano, "Stile senza dottrina," inGuglielmo Ulrich: Gli oggetti fatti ad arte, ed. U. LaPietra (Milan: Electa, 1994), 16.

French ebenistes, and Emile-Jacques Ruhlmann in particu-lar).2 In the same vein, English Regency precedents areevoked in a rosewood dining room suite of the 1940’swhose supports are set off by strip inlays of gilded bronze,a piece that is significant in that it reflects a strategy typicalof Ulrich aimed at integrating new works in the context ofolder pieces owned by the client by consciously adaptingsimilar forms and materials (Fig. 2, Plates III, IV).

Concurrently, Byzantine, Islamic, and even Chinese motifsinflect some of the more unusual explorations of the mid-1930’s, revealing an openness to different cultures andanticipating the subsequent formal inquiries of figures asdiverse as Scarpa and Caccia Dominioni. One good exampleof this tendency is a wall table of 1936 upholstered intranslucent parchment whose points of intersectionbetween vertical and horizontal planes are marked byfaceted crystal inlays (Fig. 3); another is provided by a lowwood table f the 1930’s which forms part of an overallensemble of objects drawing on Eastern and Western tradi-

tions (Fig. 4). Yet from the outset Ulrich's ethoswas resolutely classical, persisting in an adher-ence to monumental responses despite self-imposed restrictions of scale: to verify this obser-vation it is enough to recall the massive forms ofthe cherry-wood desk of 1940, whose sliding toponly serves to enhance the refined effect

obtained by attenuated legs (Fig. 5, Plate XXIII). Here, aselsewhere, Ulrich maximized the expressive and tectonicpotentials inherent in everyday functional objects by fusingneoclassical lines with hieratic solidity. This strategy, evidentin his work for the furniture company L'Arca, founded by thedesign entrepreneurs Attilio Scaglia and Wild in the early30’s, endows fixed, monumental forms with an energeticstructural impulse without parallel in Italian design culture ofthe period.

In the second phase, from the mid-40s on, Ulrich began toexperiment with skeletal forms invested with a unique tec-tonic dynamism. If the best example of this is the etherealTrobis chair of 1945 (Fig. 6), whose fusion of the globularand the spindly resembles an anatomical dissection translat-ed into abstract form, eloquent solutions of this kind arealso found at the most diverse scales, and in a wide varietyof contexts. On the small end of the spectrum, there is theflame-like profile of the wall lamp for the Dazza residence of1942 (Fig. 7); on the more ample end, the same tendency is

Fig. 5Fig. 4Fig. 3Fig. 2

2 Alfarano, "Tipologia dei Mobili e degli Oggetti", in LaPietra, ed. Guglielmo Ulrich, cit., 131.

evident in the horizontal articulations of mass and supportmanifest in a console made between 1939 and 1942 (PlateII). At first glance these works read like attenuated, lesseccentric versions of Carlo Mollino's production from thesame period. Closer scrutiny suggests, however, that Ulrich,who surely knew Mollino's pathbreaking innovations, gaveas much to the Torinese master as he received. One mighteven say that Ulrich's output in the 40’s, with its richwoods, spindly forms, and energized, organic line, is amuted, less outre reduction of a vocabulary Mollino himselfwould make famous.

In the 1950’s, Ulrich moved definitively in the direction of theModern Movement, and his works attain a restrained ele-gance associated with Rationalism in its more curvilinearand heterodox variants, presenting points of contact withfigures as diverse as Albini, Ponti, and Levi Montalcini. HereAlbini stands out as a privileged interlocutor if only becauseof Ulrich's fusion of minimalist codes with traditional idealsof artisanal production. And like Albini some of Ulrich's mostcharacteristic work from this period takes theform of design ensembles for the interiors offashionable shops, boites a miracles for a haut-bourgeois public. This is most evident in theGaltrucco textile store of 1950, where refinedscenographies set the tone for what is, in thefinal analysis, the aesthetic consecration of luxu-ry commerce. Here, in a capacious rectilinear space, rhyth-mic juxtapositions of polished surfaces and the flame-likeinvolutions of Fausto Melotti's sculptures frame a complexbalance of the streamlined and the informe (Fig. 8). On theother end of the spectrum, one must situate the RadaelliFlorist shop, where rustic forms and pan-Mediterraneanaccents are deployed within a miniaturized series of concen-tric circular ranges reminscent of a classical ampitheater(Fig. 9).

Near the end of his career, partly in response to Ponti'sremarkable success with the Superleggera chair of 1957,Ulrich moved into the area of standardized industrial produc-tion with the Fiera di Trieste chair of 1961 (Fig. 10, Plates XX,XXI). In its refined combination of stained nutwoods and apared-down, minimalist profile, this project paradoxicallyunderscores Ulrich's dual response to the Bauhaus ideal ofstandardization and to the typically Milanese attachment towhat Ponti called the "necessity of luxury". In this respect, ifLoos provided the ideal model of classical/modernist syn-

Fig. 9Fig. 8Fig. 7Fig. 6

thesis at the beginning of his career, one might say that, atits end, Ulrich comes closest, perhaps without even beingaware of it, to the spirit (though certainly not to the forms orto the aesthetic claims) of a modernist luxury epitomized bythe early furniture and interiors of Mies van der Rohe (theBarcelona Pavilion and Tugendhat House).

In this sense, Ulrich pursued what his son calls "amore perla manualitá, la costruzione dei modelli, la comprensioneinterna degli oggetti, del come sono fatti.'"(A love of manualactivity, for the building of models, the internal comprehen-sion of objects and how they are made).3 Like Ponti, Ulrichhas sometimes been regarded as an inveterate eclectic; yet,also like Ponti, his multifaceted approach resists this simplis-tic characterization by virtue of its internal understanding ofdesign as a complex formal act and its predilection for sty-listic synthesis. More specifically one can say that Ulrich's"will to synthesis" resides in a comprehensive inversion offormal and material values: where doctrinaire modernistsrejected luxury in favor of the demand for standardized prod-

ucts and poor materials, and utilized formalinquiry chiefly for functionalist, ideological, or pro-grammatic ends, Ulrich experimented with thedifferentiation of material properties, using out-ofthe-way materials to realize expressive and struc-tural potentials. As a result, his best work tran-scends the bourgeois milieux to which it respond-

ed and which established its initial conditions of production,reception and diffusion. Treating materials with the sameexperimental attitude that other designers approacheddiverse problems of form or better, approaching formal andmaterial considerations as two aspects of the same prob-lem, Ulrich imbued inherited craft traditions with a sense ofradical modernist inquiry. In this he is more like Loos thanany other protagonist on the Milanese scene, simultaneous-ly progressive and historicizing. Indeed, it is only by empha-sizing Ulrich's uncanny ability to extrapolate modernity fromtradition, to find solutions to contemporary problems byconceiving of them as integral parts of a history advancinginto the future, that it becomes possible to understand thespecific place he occupies in the universe of European archi-tecture and design.

Daniel Sherer, Columbia Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation

3 Giancorrado Ulrich, "Breve ricordo di mio padre conmatita," in La Pietra, ed. Guglielmo Ulrich, cit., 27.

Fig. 10

Decorative Arts | The Fuller Building | 41 East 57th Street, 3rd Floor New York, NY 10022 | T. 212 7527623 | F. 212752 1004

ITavolo da muro in marmo giallo di Sahara

Console table, c. 1936Carved and sanded oak and giallo di Sahara marble

32 in. high, 50 in. wide, 20 ½ in. deep

I c

Two tiered table, 1933For Sig. Palambe, Rome

I a

Console table, 1939, in giallo Siena marble, mahogany, brassFor Cav. Cirillo, Naples

I b

Console table, 1937For Sig. Magnaghi, Milan

IITavolo da muro in mogano

Console table, 1939 - 1942Mahogany, glass and brass

59 in. high, 34 in. wide, 13 ½ in. deepMary Stowell collection

II d

Console table, 1941For Agosti, Milan

II a

Console table, 1942For Casa Mondadori, Milan

II b

Console table, 1939 - 1942For Sig. Volpi

II c

Dining table, 1941For Agosti, Milan

IIICoppia di tavoli da muro in palissandro

Pair of console tables, 1940'sRosewood with brass inlay

31 in. high, 32 ½ in. wide, 12 in. deep

III a

Interior, 1940For Casa Cirillo, Naples

IVTavolo da pranzo in palissandro

Dining table, 1940'sRosewood with brass inlay

31 in. high, 71 in. wide, 35 in. deep

IV a

Sofa table, 1940'sCherry wood

IV b

Coffee table, c. 1940

IV c

Dining table, 1940's

VLampada

Floor lamp in the style of Guglielmo Ulrich, 1940's Brass, painted wood and silkscreen shade

66 in. high, 15 in. diameter

V a

Slipper chair, 1935 For Trombini, Milan

V b

Interior, 1941 For Sig. Santagostino, Milan

V c

Three sconces, 1940's

VILampada in ottone

Floor lamp, c. 1941Leather and brass

71 in. high, 24 in. diameter

VI a

Interior, 1941

VI b

Interior, 1936

VI c

Interior, 1941

VIITavolo tondo in palissandro

Side table, c. 1938Rosewood

17 ¾ in. high, 23 ½ in. diameter

VII a

Small table, 1943For Casa Campanini Bononi

VII b

Interior, 1946For Casa Masciadri

VII c

Large Bedroom for the 6th Triennale, 1936

VIIITavolo basso in pergamena

Low table with drawer, c. 1932Parchment

Branded mark20 ½ in. high, 31 ½ in. wide, 17 ¾ in. deep

VIII a

Interior, 1932For Casa Sugar

VIII b, c

Table, 1932Parchment and leather

IXTavolo con piano in galuchat

Low table, 1930'sGaluchat and parchment

19 ½ in. high, 35 ½ in. diameter

IX a

Table, 1942Porphyry top and walnut

IX bTwo tiered table, 1932Galuchat and wood For Sig. Conte Cicogna, Milan

XTavolo in pergamena blu

Low table, 1939Blue parchment and brass14 in. high, 39 in. diameter

Giancorrado Ulrich collection

X a

Low table, 1941For Sig. Giacomini, Milan

X b

Low table, 1939

X c

Library, 1940For Casa Pasquinelli, Milan

XITavolo da caffè

Coffee table, 1930'sGiltwood and marble

20 in. high, 33 in. diameterGiancorrado Ulrich collection

XI a

Veranda table, 1937For Sig. Campiglio, Milan

XI b

Interior, 1930's

XIITavolo basso

Low table, 1936Leather and brass

23 ¾ in. high, 75 in. wide, 28 in. deepGiancorrado Ulrich collection

XII a

Low table, 1936

XII b

Large bedroom for the 6th Triennale, 1936

XIIIDivano in pelle

Sofa, 1930'sLeather


XIII a

Sofa, 1930'sLeather

XIII b

Sofa, 1936Green silk and walnutFor Sig. Fossati, Milan

XIII c

Interior, 1936

XIVDue poltrone in pelle

One of two club chairs, 1930'sLeather

30 ½ in. high, 26 in. wide, 30 in. deepGiancorrado Ulrich collection

XIV a

Club chair, 1942Leather

XIV a

Club chair, 1934Leather

XVPoltrona in seta

Slipper chair, c. 1936 Sea foam green silk


XV a

Slipper chair, 1937For Sig. Borletti

XV b

Slipper chair, 1941For Miss Daisy Dankers

XV c

Slipper chair, 1936Yellow silk satin

XVIToletta in pergamena e cristallo

Vanity, 1932Parchment and glass


XVI a, b

Desk/vanity, 1932Parchment with copper central panel

XVI c

Vanity, 1934For Sig. Silva, Milan

XVIIQuattro sedie

One of four chairs, 1942 Stained fruitwood

34 ½ in. high, 17 in. wide, 18 ½ in. deep

XVII a

Table and chairs, 1942

XVII b

Chair, 1942

XVIIISei sedie

One of six dining room chairs, 1940Stained Beech

30 in. high, 16 ½ in. wide, 16 ½ in. deep

XVIII a

Chair, 1940For Casa Silva, Rome

XVIII b

Chair, 1953For S.I.A.E., Rome

XIXCoppia di sedie in legno di noce

One of two dining Chairs, c. 1936Walnut

32 in. high, 17 in. wide, 18 ½ in. deepGiancorrado Ulrich collection

XIX a

Game table with chairs, 1936

XXSedia Fiera di Trieste

Prototype of the Fiera di Trieste chair, c. 1960Walnut

33 in. high, 16 ½ in. wide, 15 ½ in. deepGiancorrado Ulrich collection

XX a, b

Fiera di Trieste Chair, 1961

XXISedia Fiera di Trieste, con braccioli

Prototype of the Fiera di Trieste arm chair, c. 1960Walnut

33 in. High, 16 ½ in. Wide, 18 in. deepGiancorrado Ulrich collection

XXI a

Fiera di Trieste arm chair, 1961

XXIIScrittoio in pergamena

Desk, 1930-36Parchment and Walnut

Branded mark 30 in. high, 43 ½ in. wide, 21 in. deep

XXII a

Console, 1936-37

XXII b

Desk, 1935

XXIIIScrittoio in ciliegio

Desk with chair, 1940Cherry wood

31 in. high, 63 in. wide, 35 ½ in. deepGiancorrado Ulrich collection

XXIII a, b

Desk in Ulrich's house, 1940

XXIVCassettiera bianca

Chest of drawers, 1934Parchment

37 ½ in. high, 33 ½ in. wide, 16 in. deepGiancorrado Ulrich collection

XXIV a

Chest of drawers, 1934

XXIV b

Chest of drawers, 1937For Sig. Fossati, Milan

XXIV c

Chest of drawers, 1937For Sig. Sinai, Milan

XXVCassettiera a specchio

Commode, c. 1936Parchment and mirror

36 in. high, 54 in. wide, 17 ½ in. deep

XXV a

Commode, c.1936

XXV b

Commode, 1932For Sig. Sandoz, Rome

XXV c

Interior for the 5th Triennale, 1933

XXVILampadario

Chandelier, c. 1940Brass and etched glass

36 in. high, 17 in diameter

XXVI a

Candle stick holder, 1930's

XXVI b

Brass chandelier, 1961

XXVIIArmadio con specchio

Armoire, c. 1935Mirror and pear wood

81 in. high, 79 in. wide, 19 in deep

XXVII c

Armoire, 1935For Sig. Panebianco

XXVII a

Low storage unit, 1933For Casa Sorcinelli in Cagliari, Sardinia

XXVII b

Armoire, 1935Pear wood, mirror, brass with ivory handles

guglielmo ulrich

Documents