Pernette Perriand-Barsac on the lawsuit against the Prouvé family

Pernette Perriand-Barsac, Charlotte Perriand's daughter and heir, and husband Jacques Barsac explain why thay had to go to court to protect their rights and the ensuing lawsuit against the Prouvé family.

Loredana Mascheroni: So was it to honor Charlotte's vision of the future that you sought legal protection for the authorship of her project in a long battle that has just come to an end?

Jacques Barsac: There were problems about the authorship of a piece of furniture that had been produced for fifteen years from 1956 to 1970 by Galerie Steph Simon. What is interesting is that the renowned Steph Simon, who produced all of Charlotte's bookcases, was also Jean Prouvé's producer. They two were somehow tutelary figures in this famous Parisian gallery that played such an important role in the history of design because it was the first to show Prouvé's and Perriand's pre-war modern furniture. When Prouvé was alive, he never questioned Perriand's authorship of that piece.

Pernette Perriand: We must also remember that Prouvé never claimed paternity of this furniture. He and my mother were always on good terms.

When did the problems arise and why?

JB: After Prouvé's death, around 1985-86, some young "scavengers" — let's call them that — found some furniture at the Cité Universitaire that had not been used for over 40 years. They were in bad shape but they found them interesting, even if they didn't quite know what they were. After some research, they discovered that the furniture was manufactured by Ateliers Jean Prouvé so they took them to the then director suggesting a swap in exchange for some new furniture. They exhibited it and also sold it by saying that they were by Charlotte Perriand and Ateliers Jean Prouvé. As time went by, they realized that Jean Prouvé furniture was worth about 20% more than Charlotte's (it was 1990). These young dealers were tempted to remove the word Ateliers from the credits and leave the names of the two designers. In fact, Ateliers Jean Prouvé was the factory that produced Charlotte's first pieces of furniture. The plant was so large and challenging to manage that Prouvé signed a collaboration agreement with Charlotte; besides being able to produce her furniture, in 1952 she was also charged with improving the aesthetics of Prouvé's work and producing new furniture as well as directing the furniture department.

Going back to 1990, these young people began to sell the furniture in Paris, New York and elsewhere maintaining that they were by Prouvé and Charlotte. Historians, who often are not very serious, took those words at face value without checking their facts. Charlotte immediately started to protest; that furniture had been produced for fifteen years under her name! She began writing to the dealers but fifty years after its creation and fifteen years after Prouvé's death, many books in circulation carried this false information; these books were used by the dealers as evidence to support their case in court. The dealers became richer and lent and donated some of the furniture to museums... all the documents and acts of ownership relating to the furniture showed both architects as authors. At that point it was too late, or too awkward, to admit that they were wrong. That truth would also have caused economic problems.

PP: We asked them to visit the archives to read and study the history but they never wanted to do that. After Charlotte's death, the Prouvé family and many dealers repeated the historians' and museums' statements (including the Museum of Modern Art in New York where there is a cabinet with the wrong description). Today, instead of coming to study the source information, museums take what the dealers say — and they are not historians — at face value.

JB: The Prouvé family had been convinced — certainly in good faith — by dealers from all over the world that it was also Prouvé furniture and they endorsed this version. At that point, we decided to go to court and we won the first and second trials. Since the third go-round will concern procedural flaws, I don't think the case will reach the Court of Cassation. They had only recent articles and catalogues as evidence... not documents. We had very extensive certified documentation. The drawings show that the Ateliers was the manufacturer and refer to Charlotte's drawings.

PP: Charlotte was a remarkable person who never wanted to steal from anyone. She didn't deserve this kind of treatment. I will fight this to the end to defend her work. Justice has confirmed the rights that she had for fifty years.

©Domus

Source.