In other times, it was common for Gaudinists to reaffirm themselves as supporters of the fact that everything had emerged from the creative hand of the great genius and were reluctant to admit the participation of certain collaborators. Such was the case that affected the architect Josep M. Jujol not a little.
With the passage of time, the studies published and also a different way of looking at and interpreting the works, Jujol's presence has only reaffirmed itself.
Here is a specific case. He gave a lot to talk about and even debate: the Batlló house. The scholar Juan Bassegoda Nonell gave me as an almost definitive argument that Jujol could not have intervened while he was still a student. True, to the point of having shone so much at the Escola d'Arquitecture that he had caught the attention of one of his professors.
Jaume Bayó commented that “the entire teaching staff spoke of the extraordinary artist and colorist that Jujol was, and he was valued and known throughout the School.” Despite his youth and still lacking a title, he was required to collaborate in the restoration and rehabilitation works of the Sabassona mansion, already owned by the Ateneu Barcelonès.
The architect Mateu Barba tells in his book with exquisite sensitivity the crucial moment in which the partner doctor Pere Santaló introduced the young Jujol there to his friend Gaudí. Such a meeting was destined to have transcendent consequences for both of them. As if that were not enough, it turned out that Professor Bayó's brother was the contractor for the Batlló house.
Gaudí admitted him to his work group, explained to him the brief idea he had to decorate the façade and did not hesitate to commission him to execute it. It was 1906. Jujol let go of his hand with a freedom and inventiveness that was surprising avant-garde. His abstract composition floats in a sea of suggestive and unpredictable movement. The result dazzled Gaudí.
It contrasts in a notable and obvious way with the coating created on the rear façade. The technique is the same, based on putting together pieces of chopped ceramic, but the result is completely different and reveals not only the performance of another hand, but also the poverty of a static and repetitive style, lacking a minimum of imagination. .
