Objects against the Canon by Alessandro Magliani

OBJECTS THE CANON ENTROPY AND THE NEW BARBARIANS

Elevator Pitch The project seeks to stir up the historical context of Italian cities by tapping into their undiscovered, ‘barbaric’ potential. It is focused on the transformation of architectural form extracted from several urban sites into a series of itinerant objects, targeting the static and restrictive idea of the architectural ‘canon’. Buildings that are part of the historical tradition of several Italian cities are selected and gradually taken apart, to form a series of new ensembles, which are independent from their original sites, and are free to roam in and out of the city to interact with radically different contexts. Once they reach a different setting, the objects are able to deploy and expand into temporary exhibitions that show the original buildings samples in alternative, anti-hierarchical layouts. The mobility of the objects reflects a sense of precariousness and instability that characterizes contemporary Italy, which the architectural scene has not yet been able to adequately absorb and express. The project is ultimately an invitation to look at the existing form of our cities as a rich mining ground, that can be used freely to sample existing pieces of architecture in order to create new forms and assemblages within fluid and adaptable disciplinary frameworks. *DING*

CONTENTS

MANIFESTO 1. Canon and Anti-Canon 2. The Object 3. Objects Against the Canon Entropy and the New Barbarians 4. Venetian Transformations 5. Proposal for an Itinerant Monument 6. Outward Journeys 7. Venetian Vacation 8.Milan Meltdown 9. Journeys to the Meta-Italian Product

THE ARCHITECTURE OF IMPERMANENCE ALDO ROSSI AS THE CANON OF ITALIAN ARCHITECTURE

While globally post-modernism left us with a multiplicity of results that cannot be read in a single direction, in Italy the legacy of this movement is more homogeneous, and inevitably related to the work of Aldo Rossi. We can say that the difficulty of the Italian context to adapt to the contemporary condition can be explained with an excessive attachment to the philosophy and way of conceiving architecture that Rossi brought forward more than 30 years ago. In the first place The’ discovery’ of memory as an active tool in the design process is something that appealed to Italians, in the sense that it provided a suggestive way to deal with our personal and collective past. In addition to this, the idea of permanence of form is very easily applicable in a context where the different historical layers of the city are so clearly visible, and where historical buildings play a vital role as reference points in the city. The ideas expressed in Rossi's work have been enormously influential in the development of the architectural discourse on form, but have also lead a generation of architects to an endless exploration of the same methods, which has left a gap in the development of the discipline.

META - ITALIAN The idea of form as one of the few permanent entities in the city made sense in ARCHITECTURE a time when some sort of cohesion, whether generational or disciplinary, was

still possible. Today this cohesion cannot be found anymore, and this idea simply cannot be applied to the Italian context, now more than ever characterized by a sense deep instability and fragmentation. In the first place, It is misleading to address the idea of a cohesive “Italian” architecture, because most of our built heritage has been completed in a time when Italy as a nation did not exist. Even after the unification, with the exception of 20 years of fascist regime, the urban centres have always maintained a degree of independence, in the sense that each city has developed a slightly different take in terms of formal production. This is the reason why the project is based on cities, rather than on a country as a whole: the essence of Italy as a country is actually its fragmentation into smaller, independent hubs. This is why a meta-Italian project, one that mixes strands coming from different cities, is only possible as a marketing strategy to sell a packaged and curated product outside of the country.

IDENTITY Nowadays the only way for Italian architecture to gain a prominent role globally SELL-OUT is to address the issues of the contemporary world in a direct manner: Italy is

now at a moment in time when political instability and fragmentation are at their apex, and when its identity, in terms of material production, is getting sold elsewhere for the sake of economical growth. We are also witnessing a moment when entire sectors of the economy, which together make up the pride of national industrial and cultural production, are being sold to foreign investors, and the idea of an Italian identity is getting questioned and diluted now more than ever. The only factor that undoubtedly makes something “Italian” is its location within the geographical boundaries of the peninsula. By taking pieces of architecture that we tend to see as closely tied to their context and setting them adrift, I am merely making the architecture of our cities permeable to the same processes that are being applied to other cultural products. This is the reason why the buildings of our cities are being taken and transformed into objects, which respond to different impulses and are less tied to their context.

ARCHITECTURE The idea of incorporating objects as part of a larger vision for architecture is OF OBJECTS derived from the work of Hollein and other radical architects from the 60’s and

70’s. When stating that ‘Everything is Architecture’, Hollein was allowing a broader set of formal inputs to enter the realm of the discipline. Through provocative images of objects juxtaposed onto the city and the landscape, he used the same scalar shifts/displacement techniques as did many artists that were operating at the same time in the US, such as Oldenburg and Morris. The introduction of such operations into the toolkit of the architect inevitably led to a change in the way a site is dealt with. Rather than having volumes sitting on a tabula rasa like in modernism, this new type of architectural object heavily relied on its juxtaposition on a significantly different context (Usually achieved through scale shifts

ARCHITECTURE OF SHAPES

The idea of architecture as an object is not new, however, with recent developments pointing at shape architecture as the new norm, this notion is experiencing a comeback. The principles behind shape architecture are derived from an impulse towards an easier and more superficial use of form, which is more suited to respond to the commercial impulses that are driving architecture in the contemporary world. Following the aim of commercial success, shape architecture proposes a decontextualized and ultimately marketable approach to making architecture, which is undermining the local specificity of different cities. Even though its coming from a completely different ground, shape architecture is bringing this problem of modernism back to surface, especially in Italy, where each city has a distinct architectural heritage. However, while Italian cities rejected modernism and mostly pushed it out of their city centres, it seems that nowadays the tendency is going in the opposite direction, with an increasing number of shape projects being completed in the inner cities (Mostly in Milan).

JOURNEY OVER SITE

If on one hand the decontextualized approach of shape architecture is a way for architects to express the contemporary impulse towards speed and mobility, on the other it completely denies any expression of local specificity. In the same way artists in the 70â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s moved away from the abstraction of minimalism by putting an emphasis on the site and on the specificity of materials, I take pieces of the city and set them adrift, in order to collide them with different types of contexts. Following the renewed attitudes towards site that artists developed in the 70s, also architects started updating their position on it. John Hejduk is a key figure to understand the object as no longer an independent static piece, but rather as a part of a set of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;charactersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, that are able to roam the city. The project ultimately aims to blur the boundary between object and site, by engaging both in a cycle of constant exchange. The objects are moving in space and time, and from this movement they earn the ability to change. The objects that leave the city land on different contexts at different times. Once they reach a site they expand and enter a stage of display. After that the object compresses again and goes in travel mode, and while condensing it drags parts of the site within, while leaving some other parts where they are.

PROCESS OVER BUILDING

Architecture is known to be a slow discipline, and that is the main issue that it is facing nowadays: the long processes of architectural production are not able to keep up with a fast-paced world. We tend to forget that many of the historical monuments that we see in our cities lived most of their life in a state of incompleteness. Take the Duomo in Milan for example, 600 years it took to build, and only 250 years it has existed in its completed state. When the building is transformed into a site of disassembly, it can stop being a piece of architecture, and start being the physical manifestation of a time-based process. This emphasis on the process rather than on the building itself is what can tie together the heavy historical lineage of Italian architecture, and the contemporary impulses towards impermanence and volatility. On one hand, I want to transform existing buildings into construction sites, aimed at a self-disassembly of the building, on the other I take what is removed and transform it into a new kind of packaged, ready-to-ship architecture, which responds to more contemporary economic impulses of selling an idea of a meta-Italian product.

ARCHITECTURE AS CULTURAL CURRENCY

Rossi taught one generation of Italian architects how to elaborate a personal yet communicable method to re-interpret fragmented pieces of memories. This has been the only way Italian architects have been able to measure themselves with the heavy lineage of the past. The problem with this approach is that it often leads to a kind of nostalgia, which undermines the relationship of architecture with the contemporary world, and deprives it of any provocative message. Now is the time to acknowledge the fact that Italy has lost its cultural prominence in the world, and everything that is left to do is to sell what we have in the best possible way. Other European countries, faced with similar problems of Identity have already started to market their cultural heritage as a product, so why should we not follow their example? This is not a pessimistic view, it's just a necessary adaptation to the contemporary world, which is dominated by impulses that are far away from architecture's sphere of influence. In this world architecture is a commodity, and in this way we should treat it. Small gift, big smile.

1. CANON AND ANTI-CANON The project seeks to discover and activate certain objects that are present in our cities, which have never been fully considered as an official part of the architectural discipline. They are then used as ideal proxies to question the idea of Canon within the historical context of several Italian cities. Italian cities, as many others in Europe, have suffered a strict separation of centre and periphery throughout the second half of 20th century. While the peripheries were often a ground for formal experimentation, the centres have remained attached to their historical layouts, resulting in a situation of absolute stillness. The objects are the expressions of a search for individuality, which has obsessed generations of architects before us, and continues to play a fundamental role in the development of new ideas. What separates them from the idea of a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;canonicalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; city is their ability to communicate and be informed by fields of research which are considered external to architecture. These objects are able to operate independently of their surroundings, while at the same time drawing information from them, by absorbing specific formal characteristics. The quality of constantly shifting in and out of context is what also informs their design process, and by extension what delineates them as anti-canonical. The design of the objects is often based on a process of juxtaposition of a broad range of cultural references, which do not necessarily come from architecture as an established field of research. The references are used in a anti-hierarchical way, by putting them on the same plane in order to extract purely formal principles from them. By challenging the idea of canon, the objects are not constructed following established methods of architectural composition, but rather they are designed as transient structures, to emphasize their volatility and impermanence.

1.1 City Of the Canon The city of the Canon is developed as a strict structure based on a 9 square diagram. Each axis of the frame structure represents a specific diagram, which affects a series of formal variations spread on its surface. From Durandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Building Forms, to Eisenmanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Archaeology, the city of the canon is meant to embody a series of architectural restrictions that have shaped the idea of form in architecture during the postmodern period. The idea of Canon, however, will shift during the course of the project, according to the different context it will land onto.

1.1 City Of the Objects The city of the Objects, on the other hand, represents a different vision of what the architectural discipline can be. A series of figure-like shapes are marching onto the city of the Canon to demonstrate the existence of subconscious and irrational side to the discipline, which is often neglected and overlooked. As it happened before in the history of art, the ideal vessel to challenge the academic canon becomes a return to the origins, an interest for everything ancestral and irrational.

2. THE OBJECT

432 PARK AV.

FIRE STATION 4

PIRAMIDE CESTIA

SPIRAL MINARET

ROCK MUSEUM

S. CATA

ARCHITECT: RAFAEL VINOLY

ARCHITECT: UNKNOWN

YEAR: 2016

YEAR: 12 BC

YEAR: 851

ARCHITECT: MVRDV & COBE YEAR: 2016

ARCHITECT: ALDO R

YEAR: 2016

GEOMETRY

SHAPE

SURFACE

ISOLATION

SITELESSNESS

TOWER OF SILENCE

ICE WELL

VILLA MULLER

HINDENBURG MEMORIAL

DE ROTTERDAM

DUBAI R

ARCHITECT: UNKNOWN

ARCHITECT: ADOLF LOOS

ARCHITECT: HEINRICH TESSENOW

ARCHITECT: OMA

YEAR: 900 BCE

YEAR: UNKNOWN

YEAR: 1930

YEAR: 1936

YEAR: 2013

YEAR: 2006

GEOMETRY

SHAPE

SURFACE

ISOLATION

SITELESSNESS

TEA KETTLE

TOUR PERRET

MATITONE

DUBAI FRAME

ARCHITECT: PETER BEHRENS

ARCHITECT: AUGUSTE PERRET

ARCHITECT: SOM, LANATA, MESSINA

ARCHITECT: DONIS

ARCHITECT: ALDO ROSSI

ARCHITECT: UNKNO

YEAR: 1909

YEAR: 1954

YEAR: 1992

YEAR: 2017

YEAR: 1965

YEAR: 1905

GEOMETRY

SHAPE

SURFACE

ISOLATION

SITELESSNESS

MONUMENTO AI PARTIGIANI

YEAR: 1971

TOSCAN

ARET

EMORIAL

ROCK MUSEUM

S. CATALDO

TOTEMS

JERICHO TOWER

BBPR MONUMENT

ARCHITECT: MVRDV & COBE YEAR: 2016

ARCHITECT: ALDO ROSSI

ARCHITECT: ETTORE SOTSASS

ARCHITECT: UNKNOWN

ARCHITECT: BBPR

YEAR: 1971

YEAR: 1960

YEAR: 8000 BCE

YEAR: 1955

GEOMETRY

SHAPE

SURFACE

ISOLATION

SITELESSNESS

DE ROTTERDAM

DUBAI RENAISSANCE

LOCOMOTIVA 2

HELLERAU THEATER

SACRO MONTE

ARCHITECT: OMA

ARCHITECT: ALDO ROSSI

ARCHITECT: HEINRICH TESSENOW

ARCHITECT: UNKNOWN

YEAR: 2013

YEAR: 2006

YEAR: 1962

YEAR: 1911

YEAR: 1650

GEOMETRY

SHAPE

SURFACE

ISOLATION

SITELESSNESS

TOSCANINI TOMB

LALIBELA CHURCHES

ARCHITECT: ALDO ROSSI

ARCHITECT: UNKNOWN

ARCHITECT: MVRDV

YEAR: 1965

YEAR: 1905

YEAR: 1300

YEAR: 1344

YEAR: 2017

GEOMETRY

SHAPE

SURFACE

ISOLATION

SITELESSNESS

MONUMENTO AI PARTIGIANI

TOMB OF HAVANDA

BALTYK TOWER

1.2 Architectural Objects Matrix A survey of architectural objects, aimed at discovering basic principles behind the objecthood of certain architectural pieces

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;OBJECTHOODâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; IN ART AND ARCHITECTURE The concept of objecthood in architecture and art has been at the centre of debates for centuries. It is within this debate that the practices of art and architecture are able to influence each other, blurring the boundaries between the two disciplines. This debate, however, is far from resolved. The increasing speed of development in our societies requires a constant update of the inputs that fuel this argument. This map highlights some of the inputs that have contributed to this topic, as well as the context in which they have been generated.

RACHEL WHITEREAD The object as a memory. Casting the qualities of objects which have significant cultural meaning.

JUDD + SMITHSON Inspired by the anonymity of modern American cityscapes, Smithson and Judd rework the concept of objecthood, focusing on its superficiality and hollowness.

BRUNELLESCHI Invention of Perspective. Depiction of space and real space have the same qualities. Rediscovery of classical values and proportion.

DADA ARTISTS

Through the works of Magritte, Dada artists and the surrealists, the Focus shifts to the found object. Its scale and placement into a context alter and expand its meaning.

JOHN SOANE Rise of the figure of the collector, who accumulates architectural objects and arranges them in a collective display.

ADOLF LOOS

OLAFUR ELIASSON ANISH KAPOOR

Starts to practice a simplified architectural vocabulary, condemning ornament and promoting a purified and universal language.

The question of objecthood is often at the center of debates in both the worlds of architecture and art.

ALDO ROSSI Expands the simplification of form, basing his work on what is already present within the city.

1.3 Objecthood in Art and Architecture Map presenting the main developements of the idea of object, as a commond ground for art and architecture.

1.4 Disciplinary Context: Form/Form-Object/Shape

1.5 Objects in Context The drawings show the ambivalent relationship of the objects towards the context of the city: at times they can walk above it, at others they can directly absorb it.

1.6 Urban Object Typologies

Objects against the Canon Entropy and the New Barbarians Objects Against The Canon Entropy and the New Barbarians

In a recent article, sociologist Eric Michaud states that the barbarian invasions only took up a significant place in European culture during the late 1800s1. After centuries of neglect, the idea of Nordic and Germanic populations invading the late Roman empire acquired the positive meaning of cleansing a situation of moral and cultural stagnation. The use of the word 'Barbarian' was first attributed to the ancient Greeks, who used the term as a way to define the populations that were not able to speak or understand the greek language. It later got incorporated in the latin language with the term 'barbarus', which, in an analogous way to its Greek precedent, became the adjective to identify populations perceived as nonRoman. The use of this word is therefore tied to an idea of separation, identifying a strict opposition between the classical cultures and everything considered foreign and other. The former were built on universal and defined sets of rules, therefore constituting the canon, while the Barbarians coincided with a multitude of different cultures and populations, yet identified under the same name. The aim of this essay is to trace a parallel between the late re-discovery of Barbarians on one side, and the contemporary discourse on architectural form on the other. In a similar way to the time in which the Barbarians were re-evaluated, we are experiencing a moment when the theoretical side of the discipline is being questioned by admitting influences that were traditionally associated with other fields. The project of form is arguably no longer concerned with the autonomy of architecture, but it is rather opening up to the influence of broader cultural forces. This emphasizes the importance of 1 Michael Michaud, The modern Invention of Barbarians: Ethnicity and the Transmission of Form, in October ( Issue 161, defining the origin and lineage of 'Architectural Barbarians', or figures who Summer 2017 )

decided to work in an anti-canonical and often ironic way, preparing the ground for the current state of the architectural debate. In the same way historians marked a clear separation between the classical and barbaric cultures, Art historians and architectural theorists have often operated by formulating a personal definition of a canon, and excluding from it anything that did not fit within its rules. As an example, the Barbarians have been ignored by two of the most important accounts of western art, written by Giorgio Vasari and Johan Winkelmann, who singlehandedly excluded them from their analysis and relegated them to a marginal and insignificant position. In an analogous manner, the work of Colin Rowe and later Peter Eisenman contributed to the definition of a canon for architectural form, elaborated through a heavy body of research and published in books that would eventually reach a canonical status themselves. The work of Rowe and Eisenman, combined with the one of their predecessor Rudolf Wittkower, constitutes what is known as the critical project. Centered around the idea of architecture operating in a space of autonomy from other disciplines, the critical project treated form as an index of its generative process2. This means that only the more calculated and proportioned types of architecture, the ones deploying a strictly architectural and geometric language, could be regarded as critical, and therefore canonical. The methods of Rowe and Eisenmann are heavily focused on the use of the diagram, which they deploy at the same time as a retroactive tool for the analysis of classical buildings, and as a way to understand how it can be reevaluated and actively re-used in the creation of new forms.

from other disciplines, the critical project treated form as an index of its generative process2. This means that only the more calculated and proportioned types of architecture, the ones deploying a strictly architectural and geometric language, could be regarded as critical, and therefore canonical. The methods of Rowe and Eisenmann are heavily focused on the use of the diagram, which they deploy at the same time as a retroactive tool for the analysis of classical buildings, and as a way to understand how it can be reevaluated and actively re-used in the creation of new forms. The critical project eventually reconfirms the idea of a fixed canon, once again resurrecting the architectures of the classical and renaissance periods, using them as relevant case studies and as a basis for a formal research. The critical approach is also used in the analysis of architecture at a urban 2

scale. For Rowe especially, the understanding of urban form was focused on

Pier Vittorio Aureli, Architecture and Content: Who's afraid of the Form-Object?, in Log No. 3 (Fall 2004), pp. 29-36

a dismissal of the idea of architecture as an object in an open field, developed mainly by modernists, and the return of the idea of the city as a composition of figure-ground textures.3 If on one side we recognize Colin Rowe and Peter Eisenman as the theorizers of a formal canon, we could argue that there have been some figures, some architectural Barbarians, which have chosen to operate outside of it. These figures are the ones that, in a clear opposition to the critical project, advocated for a contamination of architecture with other disciplines, re-admitting objects into their projects. Amongst these, Hans Hollein was one of the first who enabled the discourse of architecture to extend beyond itself and permeate other disciplines. By stating 'everything is architecture'4, Hollein enthusiastically allows everyday objects and other natural or man made elements to enter in his personal interpretation of the canon. His work as an artist and as an architect has been deeply influenced by this conceptual opening to what was traditionally considered as 'other' in architecture. The transformation series well explains Hollein's enthusiasm and his ironic approach to the discipline. In particular, he is interested in the re-adaptation of objects, which he manipulates in his collages by means of scale and placement into a different context. In his way of working, a train carriage can become a monument by acquiring a different scale and a collaged plinth, while an aircraft carrier ship can sit in a gentle landscape, silently mocking modernism's obsession with the machine by being physically stuck in a place, therefore losing its function. It is this aversion for definite functions that motivated Hollein to look for objects outside of the discipline as elements of primary importance, which are able to initiate and influence his creative process. He started working from Vienna in the 1960s, a moment when the necessity for a new way to approach an architectural project was felt widely, in response to both the city's historical affiliation with Beaux Arts and the fading influence of modernism. His use of popular objects, as well as his interdisciplinary approach, put Hollein in relation to a set of figures 3 Colin Rowe and Fred Koetter, Collage City, MIT Press, 1978 operating at the same time, but on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. 4 Hans Hollein, Everything is Architecture, in Bau Magazine, 1968

The 60's are also the decade when the world of sculpture, in a similar way to architecture, was trying to define its position outside of the canon initiated by modernism. It is the time when minimalists surfaced from the art scene of New York, through the work of people like Frank Stella, Donald Judd and Robert Morris. Perhaps the most interesting interpretation of the development of minimal art comes from Michael Fried, a critic who tried to reiterate and save the modernist position of formalism against the simplicity, or literalness, of minimal art. His book â&#x20AC;&#x153;Art and Objecthoodâ&#x20AC;?5 remains to date one of the very few expanded interpretations of this moment, and is perhaps the most helpful to understand the development of this kind of anti-canonical art into today's architecture scene. Fried's position stems from modernist precepts of detachment from everyday reality, in order to search for form through a difficult and rigorous

LOSS OF OBJECTHOOD

THE GALLERY

THE BUILDING

THE CITY

Robert Morris. Perhaps the most interesting interpretation of the development of minimal art comes from Michael Fried, a critic who tried to reiterate and save the modernist position of formalism against the simplicity, or literalness, of minimal art. His book â&#x20AC;&#x153;Art and Objecthoodâ&#x20AC;?5 remains to date one of the very few expanded interpretations of this moment, and is perhaps the most helpful to understand the development of this kind of anti-canonical art into today's architecture scene. Fried's position stems from modernist precepts of detachment from everyday reality, in order to search for form through a difficult and rigorous artistic process. The abstract and somehow 'easy' shapes of minimal art were read in a negative light by Fried, who did not hesitate to condemn them as a literal and superficial reproduction of realistic forms. Like Hollein, the minimalist artists were trying to focus on the pure objecthood of things, in order to reduce sculpture to a mere depiction of presence, that would theatrically appear in front of a visitor inside a gallery. Both Hollein and the minimalists are united by the impulse to go against the perceived canon. Also the method they decide to deploy in order to do so is quite similar, as it relies on the qualities of objects, and often utilizes scale as a main operational tool. Both rely on the singularity and self-containment of the objects, which are meant to destroy by means of their only presence the exhausted anachronistic canon of modernism. In the case of Hollein, the singularity of the object is used in order to oppose a specific reading of the city as an open-ended system of textures, while for the minimalist artists it is deployed as a way of replicating and analyzing the banal and easy shapes of architecture that were sprawling across the US in the post-war years.

5 Michael Fried, Art and Objecthood, Universitiy of Chicago Press, 1998

Robert Smithson's manifesto 'Entropy and the New Monuments'6 well

explains the need that these artists felt towards a redefinition of the boundaries of sculpture and art in general. For Smithson, the American postwar urban sprawl and the rise of anonymous and blank buildings in New York and other cities was one of the biggest and most defining events that marked the history of post-war America. These new types of sterile and blank architecture were for him an expression of an intrinsic entropy, or loss of energy, of the city. The standardization and banality of forms that characterized American cities was enthusiastically accepted by Smithson, who elevated them to the status of 'new monuments', thus helping us to understand the sources of inspiration behind the work of other artists, such as Judd and Morris, and his own. To understand another, more personal and opaque method of reinterpreting the meaning of 'other' , with the aim of resisting the canon, we could look into the work of John Hejduk and Walter Pichler. Both of these figures are operating in a blurred interdisciplinary zone between art, poetry and architecture, but, most importantly, they start to develop the idea of the object as one of multiple agents of the same entropy that Smithson referred to in his manifesto. In their work, the role of ambassador to oppose the canon is taken up by a series of figures that let go of the formal austerity and abstraction of minimalism, in favor of an anthropomorphic and cartoonish form. Nevertheless these figures are also marginal and quintessentially 'other', and are to be considered parts of the same impulse to oppose the canon that drove Hollein and the Minimalist sculptors. Hejduk interprets these elements as urban 'masks', which have an opaque origin in the personal history of their author and interact with their context in different ways. These masks take the theatricality of minimalist sculpture and expand it further by acquiring a name and a specific role to play in urban sets. The naming of the masks is a key operation that Hejduk performs, because it suddenly enables us to read them as real characters, with their own 6 Robert Smithson, Entropy and the new Monuments, in Artforum, June 1966

agenda and set of values, as well as defining a specificity for each of them. His project on the city is closely related to the interplay between the hyperspecific masks and different urban contexts, which become almost stage sets intended to provide a backdrop for the masks's actions. Furthermore, the masks acquire a deeper meaning by being accompanied by often obscure and poetic text, which completes them and helps us to understand their origin in the subconscious mind of the author rather than in a rigorous process. Hejduk's weird and cartoonish masks are perhaps one of the first examples of the elaboration of an architectural subconscious used to conceive a project. This is a clear move that testifies Hejduk's need to distance himself from the canon, and enables other, more personal and opaque instances, to enter the architectural project. This way of working would prove to have an influential impact in the world of architecture, especially through the late works of Aldo Rossi and some other figures, like William Alsop. As Hollein reinterpreted the world of objects and admitted them into the canon by enlarging them, Hejduk takes a step further and gives the objects specific personalities and the ability to directly act on each other or on the city. By doing so, he goes as far as giving his masks limbs and faces, which is a bold and important step, that helps us to understand why we can use them as examples of modern-day barbarian artifacts. Objects that featured anthropomorphic and zoomorphic shapes were in fact widespread amongst the barbarian populations, and became an emblem of their view of the world. The use of curvilinear decorative elements was also one of the main factors that helped archaeologists to define the barbaric origin of an artifact, as opposed to the linear and angular geometries of roman and classical motifs. In the case of Pichler, the figures are elaborated in a series of formal variations, centered around a few themes. Some of them are depictions of women, while others are more abstract and resemble the poles and monoliths erected by our ancestors to testify their presence. The work of Pichler is, like Hejduk's, a collective one, because the figures are constructed in named groups or series, which have to be displayed together in order to deliver their meaning. Pichler goes even a step further, by designing also the enclosures that will host the statues, which almost become part of the same ensemble in his 'Acropolis' on the Austrian mountains. We can say that, by designing both the sculptures and their enclosures, Pichler is more of a mediator in comparison to Hollein and Hejduk, which is understandable as an influence of the different time period of his activity. Working mainly in the 90s and early 2000s, Pichler does not respond to the same urge of distancing himself from a specific canon, because that canon had been remodeled and questioned heavily during the 70s and 80s, and did not have the same influence as, for example, modernism had in the 60s. This does not mean that the project of the 'other' has lost its importance, but rather that it is itself slowly becoming the canon. In the same way 19th century intellectuals were re-reading European history by accepting the Barbarians as a necessary force for the development of art, nowadays the concept of 'other' is being accepted into architecture by an emphasis on its uniqueness and singularity. The uniqueness of an architectural artifact is surely better fitted to represent architecture's subjugation to external powers, such as economic and commercial forces, which require architects to suit the needs of companies that want to be represented by the buildings they commission. The recent work of OMA and other dutch practices, for example, testifies the slow assimilation of architectural barbarianism into the world of

subjugation to external powers, such as economic and commercial forces, which require architects to suit the needs of companies that want to be represented by the buildings they commission. The recent work of OMA and other dutch practices, for example, testifies the slow assimilation of architectural barbarianism into the world of mainstream commercial architecture production. As stated by Robert Somol in his manifesto '12 Reasons to get Back Into Shape'7, the way in which contemporary architecture is assimilating and digesting the idea of 'other' in our times, is through a preference for shape over form. Shape, states Somol, is the ultimate tool architects can use in order to deliver a commercially successful project, because of its immediacy and iconicity. The CCTV is used as an example of a building that has the qualities of a logo; The building can now define the brand identity of the commissioner, at the published same timewithin functioning anOMA alien and andAMO, theatrical 7 Robert Somol, 12 Reasons to Get Backwhile into Shape, Content,asby 2004object, much like the sculptures of 1960s artists. The project of shape seems to reiterate certain aspects of 1960s art, while letting go of the obscure and subconscious associations operated by outcast figures such as Hejduk or Hollein. This is justified again by Somol, when he states that shape needs to be easy in order to function and be recognizable. The word 'easy' has a double meaning, as it doesn't merely refer to a general return to abstracted and planar forms; it is also used to set the idea of shape in a state of clear opposition to the critical - and difficult - project of form, as developed by Colin Rowe and Peter Eisenman. Perhaps the clearest clue to help us understand the position of shape in the barbarian side of the discipline is the origin of the word itself. Whereas the word form, like in fact the word canon, have a classical origin in greek and latin languages, the word shape is of germanic and anglo-saxon derivation. Therefore on one side we have form, which has a heavy and difficult lineage rooted in classical culture, while on the other we have shape, which in turn represents the lightness and necessary freshness that 19th century historians attributed to the barbaric invasions. In order to find the first explorations of the 'other' in architecture, the 60's became a relevant decade, because there was a widespread need of moving away from the stagnation of modernism. It seems that also today a need for separation is felt widely across the discipline. This separation is intended as a dismissal of the critical project, and in general a move away from architectural theory itself, perceived as an unnecessary development, that has no real impact on the world of built architecture. This highlights the importance of defining a lineage for architectural barbarianism, which is now, in its most recent development of shape architecture, slowly emerging as an easy and fresh alternative to the canon of difficult form. However, the history of the barbarian invasions once again can help us to understand the future development of the project of otherness in architecture. As Eric Michaud states in his article8, the re-discovery of Barbarians prompted a craze for archaeological excavations across western and northern Europe. Archaeologists were digging burial sites to understand the formal genealogies of Barbaric artifacts, with the intent of defining a purely barbaric lineage, which in their opinion remained undiscovered for centuries. However, they were never able to clearly distinguish the sites of barbaric burials from the roman ones, as the excavations brought to light artifacts of both sides, often present in the same location. This is is helpful to understand how Barbarians never really had the intention of conquering the empire in a violent way, ending Roman civilization and replacing it with their own. In a much more subtle manner, the Barbarians were actually involved in a process of slow integration, which often meant the coexistence of roman and barbaric values around the same time period. It seems that in the contemporary architectural scene, we are experiencing a similar moment of re-discovery. The 'other' is no longer understood as an

of conquering the empire in a violent way, ending Roman civilization and replacing it with their own. In a much more subtle manner, the Barbarians were actually involved in a process of slow integration, which often meant the coexistence of roman and barbaric values around the same time period. It seems that in the contemporary architectural scene, we are experiencing a similar moment of re-discovery. The 'other' is no longer understood as an enemy or as a peripheral figure, but it is rather starting to merge and assimilate with the canon. The examples of shape architecture, brought forward by OMA and other Dutch contemporary practices, can confirm this switch with their increasing success and widespread distribution. However, through their assimilation with the canon, these examples of barbaric architecture have lost the initial energy and ideological strength that characterized the early developments from the 60s. The question that is now relevant is whether the architectural otherness of shapes will completely merge with the canon, and therefore generate another set of ideologically opposed figures, or it will somehow reiterate itself and return in the shoes of the destructive and energetic Barbarians once popular in the European collective imagination.

8 Michael Michaud, The modern Invention of Barbarians: Ethnicity and the Transmission of Form

3. CONTEXT

3.2 Meta-Italian Context The interstitial position between architecture and non-architecture that the objects occupy defines also the context in which the project sits: a site located between four Italian cities, that acts as a ground for the creation of meta-italian products

4. VENETIAN TRANSFORMATIONS

4.1 Venetian Construction The drawing shows the layering of different materials that together make up the majority of Venetian constructions. The aim of the Venetian transformations is to uncover the hidden wooden structures lying behind the marble facades of the lagunar city.

4.2 Altana Animation The altana (a wooden terrace widespread in the city) takes over the buildings of the city, causing them to shed their masonry elements, and transforming them into a series of itinerant boats.

4.2 Altana Animation

4.3 S.S. San Marco Parts of the city are re-elaborated and transformed into packaged and abstracted versions of themselves, in order to be loaded on large scale boats that can leave the city. In this case, the St. Markâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s basin is taken as a starting point, with several landmark pieces, including Sansovinoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s library and parts of the Dogeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s palace, transformed and loaded onto the ship.

St. Marks Basilica: Surfaces and elements of Display

Palazzo Ducale: Tripartite Lightweight Facade

Tripartite Plan with inner court.

San Marco: Repetiton of Facade elements

St Markâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Basin: Objects as visual cues on a surface

Interior/ exterior Mosaic Surface

Facade Pattern

Court Pattern

Inner Dome Construction

Sansovino Lacing of Orders.

Inner Stairs

Perforated Surface

Wooden Structure Activation

Clip-on Facade

Entrance Columnade

4.4 River Barge The same process of abstraction/packaging is applied to another Canonical building: the Ca dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Oro.

2. Wooden Structure Activation: Marble and stone get disassembled.

Materials become contained and get arranged and shifted

4. Construction site becomes a shipyard

5. Autonomous boat, carrying Composed Materials

Surface Activation: expanding nets and wrapping fabric

Context is fished and it crystalizes on the boat.

Contextual Collection

5. PROPOSAL FOR AN ITINERANT MONUMENT

The building processes of Venetian architecture will be reversed in order to gradually take down one canonical building, the Ca dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Oro, to allow for its displacement and transformation into an itinerant structure. The deconstruction process is developed so that it becomes a performance, which allows spectators to witness the whole process. Given Veniceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s unique location in a lagoon, the transportation of the deconstructed pieces will happen on boats, rather than wheeled vehicles.

Ca d’Oro - Cross Section Taken through the courtyard

Ca D’Oro Cross Section Taken through the courtyard

22 m

16 m

Whole Window Removal PVC DELIVERY

STAGE REMOVAL

ROOF REMOVAL - MACHINE PHASE 2 SETUP

Lower Loggia Removal

BOAT PICKUP

ROOF REMOVAL - MANUAL

FACADE REMOVAL - MANUAL FACADE REMOVAL - MACHINE

INTERIOR FLOOR REMOVAL - MACHINE

Second Floor Portego

PVC DELIVERY

WOOD STORAGE

PHASE 3 SETUP

PVC DELIVERY

PHASE 1 SETUP

BOAT PICKUP

Window Removal

Upper Loggia Removal

Deconstruction Timeline

Ground Floor Marble

Ground Floor Stone

Ground Floor Marble

Ground Floor Mosaic

Firts Floor Portego

STAGE REMOVAL

WALL AND FOUNDATION REMOVAL - MANUAL

WALL AND FOUNDATION REMOVAL - MACHINE STAGE REMOVAL

Outer Cladding Removal

Phase 1: Roof Stage Overview

1 2

1. Entrance and Changing Room 2. Security Briefing 3. Entrance to Roof stage - Visitors will enter in a row, and take place in an assigned seat 4. Roof Stage - Performers will occupy this space at different removal stages

Phase 1: Roof Stage Removal Timeline

Day 1 AM Duration: 3h 4 Workers 10 Visitors

Day 1 AM

Day 1 PM Duration: 4h 6 Workers 20 Visitors

Day 1 AM

Day 1 PM

Day 2 AM Duration: 4h 7 Workers 20 Visitors

1 AM

Day 1 AM

1 PM

Day 1 PM

Day 2

Day 3

Day 4

Day 5

Phase 2 Overview

1. Floating Seats 2. Connecting Bridge 3. Facade Stage - Some pieces of the facade will be laid down here 4. Theatrical Scaffold - To protect neighbouring buildings and enhance a theatrical effect

Stage 2 -Upper Loggia Removal

6. OUTWARD JOURNEYS As pieces of the building are removed, they are then loaded onto floating structures, which will leave the city and visit other sites, where they will pick up on different influences. In a similar way to the milanese exhibition, the pieces get arranged into ‘travel mode’ assemblages, which will be compacted versions of the building elements. In order to secure them and allow for travel, the assemblages will be wrapped by over structures, either rigid (wooden or aluminium) or soft (bands and cables). In order to allow heavy elements of the building to float, PVC cubes filled with air will be used as floating aids. In a similar way to Adrian Paci’s work (pictures on the left), the elements of the building will be reworked and rearranged during the journey.

7. VENETIAN VACATION

As Venice undoes itself, it abandons its canonical materiality to transform itself into a de-construction site. The city then turns into a loading facility and finally into a port, from where the pieces of the city will leave as packaged products.

100

102

104

106

108

110

8.MILAN MELTDOWN

Milan reacts to the attack on the canon in a different way compared to Venice. The city looks inwards, and concentrates all of the buildings of its very own tradition into the core of the city, in order to protect them.

112

114

8.1 Milanese Heist The Cariplo Building, designed by Milanese architect Giovanni Muzio, becomes the central stage for the activation of Milanese forms. Built before WW2, it features a hidden metal hull within the building, used during the war as a bunker to protect artworks from the nearby Pinacoteca di Brera.

116

8.2 Giovanni Muzio Samples

118

8.3 Luigi Caccia Dominioni Samples

120

8.4 Piero Portaluppi Samples

122

8.5 Packaged and Stores Samples

124

G.M - Triennale Entrance Portico

G.M - Caâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Brutta Corner

L.C.D - Caccia Dominioni House

P.P - Atellani House Window

A.R. - Sandro Pertini Monument

G.M - Garage Barnabone

P.P - Window Detail

L.C.D. - Corso Monforte 9 Facade

G.M - Ca Brutta Entrance Gate

G.M - Entrance detail

G.M - Ca Brutta Entrance Gate

L.C.D. - Corso Italia Facade

P.P - Interior Door

BBPR - Torre Velasca Detail

PHASE 3 - EXPLOSION

PHASE 2 - CONCENTRATION

PHASE 1 - SAMPLING

P.P - Entrance Gate

P.P - Stairs section

8.5 Milan Meltdown Sequence

126

128

130

132

134

8.6 Highway Score

136

roof parts shaders window gf portico columns

138

9.JOURNEYS TO THE META-ITALIAN PRODUCT

8.7 Crash Score Two carts, one coming from Milan and one from Venice, crash in the middle of the northern Italian plains. The crash allows for an extreme exchange of materials, mixing pieces from both carts and from the crash site

140

Cart 1 Origin: Milan Ca’ Brutta Corner

Cart 2 Origin: Venice Ca d’Oro

Scene 9

Scene 8

Scene 7

Scene 4

Scene 6

Scene1

Scene 2

Scene 3 Scene 5