Qualcuno ha detto che lo ZEN si ispira "all'architettura mediterranea spontanea"
COMPLIMENTI!
Saturday, August 16, 2008
LE IENE: GREGOTTI INTERVISTATO SULLO ZEN
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Friday, May 2, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Royal Ontario Museum - Daniel Libeskind Designed Addition
In video è anche peggio che in foto. Come sarà dal vero?
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
PRAYER, Camillo Langone
PRAYER, CAMILLO LANGONE
Camillo Langone, writer and journalist of Il Foglio, is a lover of wine and food, Masses (plural of Mass) and traditions, women and architecture - the order is not necessarily hierarchical-in short, of the beauty of life. I do not know him personally, but he let me to publish his post as Prayer, heading daily, dedicated to the identity of our cities. Thanks Pietro Pagliardini
Website Camillo Langone: http://www.camillolangone.it/
Prayer, Camillo Langone – Il Foglio Wednesday March 5, 2008
God blind those whom he want to condemn: why quite the italian mayors?You might not dazzle the mayors of Burkina Faso, where a lot I will not go never?City Brands Index 2008 has decreed that the most recognizable city of the world is Sydney.Year after year the Italian cities disclaim towards unrecognizableness, only Rome holds on(thanks to San Pietro and the Coliseum, despite Richard Meier).Obvious, not there is an our mayor who has opened the eyes on the concept of "site specific".).In Milan call Libeskind to build a skyscraper that makes it similar to Busan, South Korea.In Reggio Emilia are proud of Calatrava with his serial bridge that fits to Argentina and Wisconsin. In Salerno the new Chipperfield court of justice gives me the shivers, formed by the same parallelepipeds that the English architect has placed in Anchorage, Alaska.With great public expenditure the Italian cities disguise themselves, try to avoid the identity, as those who have committed a crime, those who want to be forgotten.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
THE SUBURBS: AN EPOCHAL FAILURE
Giulio Rupi
The suburbs of Paris are burning, but also in Italy there are those who sounded the alarm and fear similar reactions in front of the deterioration of our cities: this, then, inevitably, together with considerations on the social aspects of the problem, including the causes of the malaise urban dance also rolled in material aspects, namely the physical shape of our suburbs and the sins of those who has designed.
Who is writing was compared since the sixties with the many factors which led to the process of building cities: the teaching of architecture and urban design at the University, a large succession of laws Town Planning and Public Construction, debate national and international professionals from Modern to Postmodern controversy on "Tricky Architects."
I drew the conviction that "everything is held” that the theories of Modern Movement, the teaching of the craft of designer in secondary schools as well as in university faculties, the conduct of magazines, the choices of architecture competitions, the mentality Public officials, the processing industry laws and their application in the construction of the city, were all absolutely related issues and consequential of a single cultural system, strong and consistent, still hegemonic.
Therefore it seems unlikely that we can cope with the historic failure in the construction of urban suburbs using the tools of cultural always, without a thorough rethink theories and clichés that are behind this failure and yet still whoop for granted.
So here we are to enumerate some of the aspects of this unique thought that "always" have presided over the construction of the city.
The reduction of urban space from interior space to outer space: from "internal" squares and streets of the ancient centres "Ville radieuse" building blocks in the midst of Nature.
Le Corbusier said verbatim (and consistently, from his point of view) that it was necessary to "destroy the historical centers of European cities" and realized that "Unité d'abitation" in its strength is theoretical paradigm and foreknowledge of what was then success all suburbs of the World.
The urban space is no longer an interior, almost an extension in your home, a friendly space of buildings bounded by streets and squares as "living rooms": it frays and becomes an exterior, a vacuum populated by buildings isolated: this is wished and theorized, is consistent with that single thought.
The architectural monuments become so isolated.
In a space of this type every episode is an architectural monument
Do not you create a more urban roads and squares, but a series of episodes in an architectural space not more structured.
This is wished and theorized: in any competition still not win those seeking humbly to recreate an urban space but who exhibits a peculiar monument of architecture.
So the Architect becomes "Artist", destroys any continuity with the past, every rule of art transmissible and Universities churn out, each year, thousands of designers who face at work, each with the intention of becoming "a great architect" and put his indelible signature on the territory releasing its uninhibited imagination Artist.
The house, or rather "the home", the place of family, the place where it is the autonomy of the individual, becomes a "machine for living", becomes "a service" for the city”, devoid of any symbolic value.
So in the seventies we enact laws for housing which set parameters on parameters and forcing both to a design approved (“the districts of law n°457 "all equal and recognizable in any city in Italy) is a technical choices of low quality, buildings leading to a rapid deterioration.
And over this philosophy has been theorized and practiced the so-called "housing industrialization", which works only in the big scale size and by design obsessively levelled.
Side by side with this, whole system evolves in a way that the mechanisms, structures governing the construction of the city should grow in size and complexity.
Who has taken part, since the sixties, in the construction of houses by cooperative housing societies knows that in those years the cooperatives were formed by the end users who built housing "in the first person."
Then, for the promulgation of a series of laws on assignments and funding, management turned to higher-level structures, the largest and complex, and today users of the cooperative does not differ much from any purchaser of the private market.
Thus was interrupted confrontation between planners and citizens, which was once characteristic of cooperation.
Because is essential and common to all the different sides of this single issue is the relationship paternalistic who is behind this cultural system.
While for the car-planners is essential the end-users final approval, for the city-planners is totally indifferent final verification of "consumers", the so-called "success with the public."
Only means the internal consensus to this system, built on specialized magazines, professorships and contests.
But the consequence of the indifference to the reactions of consumers, is the degradation and the suburbs.
So it is easier to heal with urbanisation and services districts abusive constructed on one’s own according to a criterion some spontaneous, rather than get started on the rehabilitation of some sadly famous macro-structures, the so-called "monsters" made in social housing areas from the public and immediately rejected by people who condemned them to a fast deterioration.
For these buildings, the only solution remains the demolition.
But then, if "everything is held," if this cultural system that is absolutely consistent and unassailable (there is still competition in which a project can prevail ideologically alien to this system) has ruled here since the construction of the city and produced these results, as you can understand that it arises from solving the problem, unless there is first a "change of paradigm" that calls into question all the premises?
A little hope comes from the United States, where the current path of the "New Urbanism" is coming forward, which moves from observation of the failure of American cities built on the theories of Modernism, it has called into question all the postulates and watch to the values of urban centres Historical Europe.
So we European people risk dwell in the isms of survivors, Modernism in architecture, while others are inspired to their own future at those beautiful urban spaces that our culture has been able to build in the past.
Monday, March 24, 2008
IDENTITY vs MODERNITY
Pietro Pagliardini
Contemporary architecture produced by the star-system architecture, and its provincial emulators, is destroying the identity of the city, homogenizes, makes them all equal to each other. With a few targeted interventions cities lose the cultural heritage accumulated over the centuries. All in the name of modernity: but modernity not telling us anything on the form it should take.
Modernity means responding to the needs of contemporary society; for example means that if a city needs fast connections should make fast connections, if you need a centre for the youth culture, we must make a centre for the youth culture, but not telling us anything about these works form that should take.Who did say that the link should be a monorail that passes over a city and who did say that the centre for culture must be a metal and glass amoeboid form?The architecture is not a dress that changes with the seasons and fashion shows, and it is not responding to the need for change which arises from the need to sell new products and food market, and the city is not a shop that has to change for ever to stand up to competition with the market.In a mature society inserted in the global market, the cultural identity of every people, nation or city must be safeguarded, not least because it is an economic value, the greater the larger and noble is his identityAt Wikipedia, remaining in the world of the Internet, the identity voice says:In sociology, science ethno-anthropological and other social sciences in the concept of identity concerns, on the one hand, the way in which individuals and manufactures considers himself as a member of certain social groups: nation, social class, level of education, ethnicity, gender, profession and so on, and, on the other hand, the way in which the rules of these groups enables each individual to think, move, place and relate than himself, to others, to the group which is concerned and external groups aimed perceived and labelled like otherness.If this is true is always true, it is true even today unless you really think that man "contemporary" is anthropologically different from that of a hundred years ago.When you see is different because only influenced by cultural models inoculated by the media.So, the identity has a positive value because strongly encourages the integration of the group even if, taken to excess, where ethnic identities become too strong, it can lead to the clash between different identities.But this tells us a lot about how architecture and urban design can support, so call it, the good identity, one that integrates and accepts, that helps the individual to feel secure within its environment without this fear other identities.For example, a separate city districts each characterized by a different nationalities is a city that does not communicate, where everyone lives in their own closed area.This means the end of European cities and certainly the end of the Italian one.But the end of European city is also marked by construction organisms unrelated to it that have nothing to do with architectural tradition, which creates a "rupture" in the.The revolts in the French banlieue should do think everbody, because they are an example to us: place of division and social exclusion in a dehumanising urban environment, devoid of any identity so that its residents do not belong to any social group or that of its origin or that of adoption.
The identity of a city means that the city must inform and communicate their brands to those who live there and must tell them: "I am your city and not another one, you are in the right place because you recognize me, because I identified, because not much difference of what you have seen in the old town and what you see here in the suburbs, you saw homogeneous signs though with some variations; don’t worry, you are not lost”.So when the inhabitants of a city go to visit another one, this will say to them: "Have you seen how beautiful I am? Different from your city but equally beautiful. Nice to know different cities, as it is beautiful to know different people. Think how boring if you meet people all the same! "
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
