Fifty years ago, a lone skyscraper pierced the Parisian skyline. Its arrival was met with a chorus of groans and insults. Even the city’s official Twitter account received nothing but vitriol for wishing the Tour Montparnasse a happy birthday. While the world celebrates the Eiffel Tower, this new structure was dubbed “the worst thing to happen to Paris since the Nazis.” Yet, on a quiet Sunday afternoon, I ventured to the city’s least-loved landmark to commemorate its first half-century.
The scene was mundane: Falun Gong practitioners were in a silent protest, homeless individuals sought shelter in the building’s shopping center, and tourists flocked to the 56th-floor observation deck. The deck provided the most expansive view of Paris, with one crucial exception: it didn’t include the Tour Montparnasse itself. This quirk is a play on a similar joke about the Eiffel Tower, which is now beloved but was once criticized by the playwright Tristan Bernard. Unlike the Eiffel Tower, which graces countless postcards, the Tour Montparnasse is rarely seen in Parisian imagery. Even the tower’s own gift shop sells t-shirts with the Eiffel Tower. It seems this building, despite its imposing presence, has failed to make a cultural impact. Perhaps Parisians have simply stopped seeing it after fifty years.
A Symphony of Opinions: Architecture, Aesthetics, and Controversy
The Tour Montparnasse stands as a stark, almost Kubrickian, slab against its 19th-century surroundings. However, a closer look reveals a touch of French flair. In a book commemorating the tower’s 40th anniversary, architect Michel Holley, who was involved in its early stages, lauded its “fissures that lighten its shape and its oval character, along with the lateral indentation.” Another architect, Claude Parent, described it as a “European flavor, with ledges.” He felt it wasn’t a typical American skyscraper, but “something different,” with “a certain quest for form in the vocabulary of the parallelepiped.”
Many architectural professionals appreciate the Tour Montparnasse, a fact that will likely surprise its detractors. Similar to Boston’s brutalist City Hall, the Tour Montparnasse is often considered an eyesore, a structure that only an architect could love. However, beyond the “windswept” plaza, these two buildings share little. The standard rebuttal to those who admire Boston City Hall is that, despite its aesthetics, they don’t have to work inside it. Unlike Boston City Hall, the Tour Montparnasse lacks brutalism’s raw-concrete grandeur but also avoids its functional flaws. As architect and urban designer Virginie Picon-Lefebvre notes, “it was really comfortable to work there.”
A Legacy of Change: The Tour Montparnasse as a Symbol of Modernization
In postwar Paris, the Tour Montparnasse was a bold attempt to introduce high-tech modernity into a city scarred by time. Despite its lack of widespread bombing, Paris was in a state of disrepair. This project found an unexpected supporter in André Malraux, the novelist, art theorist, and Resistance member, who served as France’s first Minister of Cultural Affairs. While he championed preservation, he also embraced modernization. This dual commitment led to the restoration of the historic Le Marais district and the construction of the Tour Montparnasse as part of a broader neighborhood development scheme. This scheme involved eliminating streets and tearing down 4,400 homes deemed “unsanitary islets.”
This transformation came at a cost. Jean Digne, then president of the now-defunct Musée du Montparnasse, recounts hearing that 700 artists’ studios were destroyed. This was a stark reminder that Montparnasse was no longer the bohemian haven it had been in the interwar years, when it was a hotbed of artistic activity. Even in that era, the neighborhood struggled to accommodate its population. In the 1930s, the Gare Montparnasse, a train station dating back to 1852, was slated for replacement. It wasn’t until the 1950s that this project was finally realized, resulting in residential buildings, a commercial center, and the tower. As Malraux reportedly said in the late 1950s, “Montparnasse will have its landmark!”
A Monument to Missed Opportunities: The Tower’s Legacy
After years of political bickering and financial woes, the building permit for the Tour Montparnasse was finally granted. It opened in June 1973, fifteen years after it was first proposed. By then, it felt more like a relic of the past than a symbol of the future. The architects, including Eugène Beaudouin and Urbain Cassan, were no longer young revolutionaries; in fact, Beaudouin and Cassan had been born in the 19th century. Moreover, Les Trente Glorieuses, France’s era of rapid economic growth, was coming to an end. As Claude Parent stated, “The party was over and architecture was screwed.” The excitement of the 1950s was fading.
By 1977, Paris had imposed a 37-meter height limit on buildings, relegating skyscrapers to outer districts. In 2010, this limit was raised to 180 meters for offices and 50 meters for housing. Despite these changes, the Tour Montparnasse remains an anomaly. American writer Saul Bellow aptly described it as “something that had strayed away from Chicago and come to rest on a Parisian street corner.” While not out of place in a major American city, its isolation in Paris makes it seem ridiculous. Some politicians have suggested demolishing the tower, but the complex ownership makes this task nearly impossible. A more practical solution might be to change its context, surrounding it with other towers or even adding more skyscrapers to the city. This, of course, would require a delicate touch, a “tasteful” approach to urban planning.
A Symbol of Architectural Dissonance: The Tour Montparnasse’s Enduring Critique
The Tour Montparnasse has sparked criticism on various fronts, from its height to its interruption of the Rue de Rennes’ perspective. Many critics find its gray-brown color offensive, citing its resemblance to a “nicotine stain.” However, the most damning critique is aimed at its broad concrete base. This common feature of skyscrapers from the 1960s and 1970s is seen as a “rupture in the urban fabric.” It represents a classic French tendency, a craving for power that forces people to climb stairs to access the “thing,” the building itself.
Fifty years after its construction, the Tour Montparnasse continues to inspire controversy. It stands as a testament to the complex relationship between architecture, history, and the evolving urban landscape. While it may never achieve the cultural cachet of the Eiffel Tower, its story offers a compelling and nuanced look at the challenges and triumphs of modernization and the enduring debate over the impact of architecture on a city’s identity.
