Intervention and Authenticity by connor.hewison

Intervention and Authenticity BE 1152 By Connor Hewison w11020014

Intervention and Authenticity

Contents 1.0_Introduction................................................................................................................................. 2

2.0_Authenticity................................................................................................................................. 3

3.0_Restoration................................................................................................................................... 6

4.0_Intervention................................................................................................................................. 9

5.0_Conclusion................................................................................................................................. 12

6.0_Bibliography.............................................................................................................................. 13

Intervention and Authenticity

1.0_Introduction You would assume that the general approach to the built environment at present day is favoured more towards new build as opposed to alteration of the existing. However, the money spent on the remodelling of old buildings now exceeds that of greenfield construction, and although dealing with the existing can be more expensive and labour intensive, it does suggest that this practise is becoming an increasingly popular alternative. This practice of alteration, primarily intervention within the built environment, remains to be seen as less valid than the more revered works of architects regarding the newly built, yet this notion of re using the existing is becoming progressively more important and relevant in present times. An idea that runs in parallel to the act of recycling, attempting to push away from the throw away culture of the 20th century. Alteration or remodelling, broadly speaking, can refer to a series of more specific methods of changing either a buildings composition or interior spaces directly. Be it; restoration, renovation or intervention, all of which contrast with the process of preservation, where no act of alteration takes place at all. Within a rapidly changing culture, come great changes in urban fabric, upon obsolescence, buildings are subject to three fates: Demolition, alteration, and most commonly, to remain unchanged, which ultimately results in dereliction.

‘Alteration is the mediation between preservation or demolition. In this less than perfect world the cause of obsolescence is generally derived from social and economic changes in the wider society’. (Fred Scott, 2008, p17) Demolition cannot always be the simple solution however, especially in regard to older buildings and those of historical interest, where listings dictate their potential future. Are preservation or refurbishment the only solutions? Or is the act of Intervention, namely creative reuse a viable alternative? Can this be seen as an authentic act? Some argue that a building must remain untouched in its original form and composition to be deemed truly authentic, exempt of alteration, or intervention. John Ruskin in his book The Lamp of Memory, asserts that:

‘It is for all these buildings, therefore, of all times and styles, that we plead and call upon those who have to deal with them, to put protection in the place of restoration, to stave off decay by daily care’. (As cited in Fred Scott, 2008, p52) In contrast others believe that through comprehensive research into the history of the site, a sympathetic intervention can be designed to complement the existing, and further elaborate the story of place.

‘It becomes like an act of transition or translation, from the past into the present, with logically also a consideration for the future host of the building’. (F. Scott, 2008, p11) Therefore, what is authenticity? And more importantly, what is its importance in the creation of architectural works? Can building alterations be classed as authentic acts? To understand this, one has to explore the various ways in which people perceive authenticity, and the distinct criteria displayed by works of architecture, deemed to have authentic qualities. This information can then be applied to practices of alteration in an attempt to ascertain a conclusion on whether this act is a genuine one.

Intervention and Authenticity

2.0_Authenticity au•then•tic•i•ty noun. 1.

The quality or condition of being authentic, trustworthy, or genuine.

Authenticity is the degree to which one is true to one's own personality, spirit, or character, despite external pressures.

Authenticity in architecture – like most things in the present era, is a highly sought after quality, to be genuine is to be true to oneself, to be unique, implying longevity, quality and depth in one’s cultural background. Evidence of a response to the architectures culture, genius loci and strong connections between aesthetic appearance and ethos could suggest authenticity; in contrast, authenticity could be purely in the eye of the beholder. This becomes problematic when trying to interpret what is an authentic build, when every style is arguably an amalgamation of continual borrowing and rearranging of the elements of past styles; the result could always be observed as a hybrid of preceding stylistic qualities with a modern material palette. One trend in the cultivation of authentic architecture might be the idea of the open air museum, in this instance, structures like farmhouses, and homesteads are reconstructed as close to the original image as possible, to then be retained in this constant state for its lifespan. Precise attention to detailing and correct materiality is the overall aim, but has a practical limit to the level of authenticity that can be achieved. The issue is that the overall use and context changes, regardless of the attention to detail, the atmosphere becomes theatrical; it is an act, a captured moment in time, blatantly distinguishable from reality (fig 1). Alternatively, a more pure example of authenticity may be found where there is no intervention at all, where the extent of time is obvious, and decay and disrepair become testament to this. In a ruin from World War 2 for example, a crumbled bunker or airfield displays itself and its age clearly, the era in which it belongs is still familiar in the memory of older generations, and through documentary and fictional portrayal in the medium of film and writing, has become known to generations born post-war (fig 2). In this case the impression of authenticity relies upon knowledge of that context, on the other hand, there is no accurate understanding of how people occupied and interacted in spaces like medieval cathedrals.

Fig 1.0 Beamish open air museum.

Fig 2.0 WWII Bunker at Point du Hoc

Intervention and Authenticity

One further example, Giancarlo di Carlo’s design for housing at Mazzorbo, situated on the Venetian Lagoon, may appear on surface level, to be pastiche, but upon closer inspection, however, this is not the case. Immediately it is apparent that this cluster of housing doesn’t comply with the local vernacular trends of form. Through a series of appointments with local residents, and further analysis of the surrounding buildings and spaces across the island, De Carlo derived the essence of the surrounding context and applied his interpretation of that essence into the new development. He adhered to the composition of squares, canals and streets, paying large attention to these public spaces and the treatment of their surfaces. In addition, Di Carlo followed the local typology of three story housing with street level entry and roof terraces. He also reinterpreted the local tradition of painting rendered walls, instead utilising the vibrant colours present on the local fishing vessels and boats. Most importantly, the manner in which these islands create threshold conditions to inform of the boundaries between public and private were successfully reproduced in Di Carlos design.

‘The result is evidently architects architecture, with a consistency and formality beyond that of vernacular building, and it belongs visibly to the 1980’s but it is deeply imbued with many qualities specific to the place and therefore seems to belong’. (Architects Journal, 10/1991, p29) Through reinterpretation of the vernacular and select traditions, instead of directly borrowing, the scheme successfully avoids pastiche. The features embraced, are structural as opposed to superficial, the idea of substance over mere style.

Fig.3.0 Mazzorbo Housing by the canal, painted facades reminiscent of docking boats.

Intervention and Authenticity

A relative authenticity in architecture is sustainable, and will continue to be of critical importance, so long as it respects one or more rules of thumb: truth to the material object, truth to form and arrangement, truth to place or context and truth to use and meaning of use. Therefore, the open air museum heeds to form and arrangement in that it is a carbon copy of the original, attempting to imitate the activities of the precedent, but lacks the original context, craftsmanship, and reason for undertaking such activities. On the other hand, the world war two ruin complies with all but its use, the purpose has been lost as it is outmoded and unnecessary, it has succumbed to time, and stands monumental to its absence of use. Finally, the Mazzorbo housing is arguably respectful of all rules; although form and material are by no means the same as that of the surrounding context, the application of these features is interpretive of the existing and vernacular, thus ultimately avoiding pastiche and appearing to fit within its surroundings. These notions create resonance between the built and the user, fulfilling the expectations, and implying instead of explicitly parading its use. The building can provide a familiarity with the user that induces acceptance, to where one can enter and begin the act of reading; the story and of the place, the function and the meaning- all of which combine to weave the aesthetic experience. As mentioned before, this resonance between building and user can only be achieved through responsiveness, fulfilment of the role in which it was designed and erected. Failure in connection with the surroundings or in meeting the functional requirements, results in a failure of communication with the world itself, and this overall produces a sense of estrangement to those who try to relate to it.

‘In their formal and spatial organisation, buildings make hints about how they might be used, and encourage certain kinds of use. Buildings also have to be made, and tell us about their making. They tell us stories about themselves, their relationships with their ancestors and their myths of origin. These stories are the means through which use, construction and image unite to produce an impression of self-evidence. Such self-evidence we call authenticity’. (Architects Journal, 01/1992, p32) Therefore, in effect, architecture is a catalyst for social drama, it becomes the stage, suggesting particular uses and discouraging others, this is its primary role, and in order to perform this role, it must be a fusion of the ideologies and expectations of the user, in failing this they become alien; architecture is required to change and grow simultaneously with society.

‘The true (authentic) measure of a modern work lies in its intention (not necessarily its complete success) to propose, perhaps only in small measure, a vision of what life might become’. (Architects Journal, 12/1991, p25)

Intervention and Authenticity

3.0_Restoration ‘The process of returning the condition of the building to its original state and this often involves using materials and techniques of the original period to ensure that the building appears as though it has just been constructed’. (Graeme Brooker, 2004, p11)

It would be correct to state that all alterations are derivative of the host building and the history of that particular site, but does that mean that they cannot be defined as an individual authentic act? Where a restoration is concerned, the intrinsic study of features specific to the host building is of utmost importance, this act of alteration is removed from the confines of a low art because of the intellectual and scientific requirement needed to uncover the many layers of time that are present. These manifest as the residual marks of styles, and scars from the past. Through study and comprehension of the existing building, its original material composition, in its spatial and temporal contexts, a thoughtful approach to restoring every detail can be undertaken, which, can act equally as an embellishment as it does a restoration. In the contrasting philosophy, one of preservation, where upon realisation that the original materials and craftsmanship native to the period cannot be replicated, seeks to pursue the conservation of the materials durability, in an attempt to retain a guaranteed authenticity. This was the favoured method of John Ruskin and William Morris, two main protagonists of the arts and crafts movement, who were strongly opposed to alteration of any kind to buildings of historical interest. On the topic of restoration, in his book The Seven Lamps of Architecture, Ruskin wrote:

‘It means the most total destruction which a building can suffer: a destruction out of which no remnants can be gathered: a destruction accompanied with false description of the thing destroyed’. (As cited in Fred Scott, 2008, p45) This opposing school of thought preferred the idea that a building of historic interest should be conserved until it is completely ruinous, then when appropriate; the site can be redeveloped for a new build. The pair repeatedly criticised projects of restoration as being mere copies, exempt of authenticity. Were they correct in saying that restoration is purely destructive and void of appraisal? More specifically, does that make any building alterations unable to be defined as authentic acts?

Intervention and Authenticity

One such project is the Notre Dame de Paris restoration (fig.4), on a surface level it may appear as an authentic medieval construction, but this particular incarnation known at present day was completed in 1864, it was the product of a grand restoration project undertaken by Viollet-le-Duc and Jean-Baptiste Lassus. Immediately you would assume that a medieval building, partly constructed in the 19th century, is deceptive and therefore unauthentic as a result. It was however, in Violletle-Duc’s genius strategy to unify what you could only describe as half a millennium of reckless additions and vandalism, the Notre Dame was subject to revolution and the passing of the ages, it had become a condensed juxtaposition of architectural styles. Their vision aimed to create the Notre Dame that was originally intended, but never became, aiming for an appearance that was as authentically medieval as possible, this involved two major operations: Removal of the crust and the disarray of preceding layers beneath, then replacing elements which had been extracted over time. Viollet described this role:

‘The artist must efface himself entirely, must forget his own tastes and instincts in order to study his subject, to recover and follow the thoughts that guided the construction of the work which he wishes to restore’. (As cited in Edward Hollis, 2009, p193)

The first was principally a task of archaeology; the latter would be a more difficult proceeding that would require scientific analysis and further research on spatial context when replacing what had been taken away. The sculptures of the western façade were crafted by an expertise that was centuries old, utilising a variety of stone that had been extracted from quarries that had long ago been exhausted, the stained glass windows once lining the nave depicted images that there was no remaining record of. Any suggestion of replacing the previous fabric with modern ornamentation and materials was overlooked by Viollet, who was insistent that everything must be as close to the original as possible:

‘It is impossible to conserve the form of something made in one material by making it into another {…} concrete cannot reproduce the appearance of stone any more than wood can pretend to be iron’. (As cited in Edward Hollis, 2009, p194)

Fig.4 Southern facing facade of the Notre Dame de Paris

Intervention and Authenticity

Accordingly, the materials and techniques used in the restoration matched with a precision that Viollet deemed authentic to the original; when considering the composure of the many statues (grotesques and chimera) and sculptures that had long since been missing, he turned to what remained of the interior, and to the many Gothic cathedrals in the surrounding area in search of models of which he could copy, with dismissal of any notion to create poor imitations. This concluded with a design that had become partially fictional. Effectively time had assumed the role of architect for The Notre Dame, in the centuries following the death of the original visionary, Maurice De Sully in 1196, the cathedral was reimagined then rebuilt repeatedly, there was never an original state so to say- if one was to be attained, it would be Viollet’s task to invent it. Oddly, the driving influence for the task at hand stemmed from a novel; a romance by Victor Hugo entitled: the Notre Dame de Paris- chronicling the story of Quasimodo, written in 1829. The novel itself is based in 1482, nearer to the time of the initial medieval construction, preceding the many remodelling attempts that would take place. It describes a vision of the past Notre Dame in great depth; it was, however, not strictly true to the reality. In the novel, Hugo had effectively conceived a eulogy for the Notre Dame long since passed; this imaginary cathedral became a modern invention simultaneously: Upon publication of the novel in 1831, it was extremely successful; an audience of hundreds of thousands at first read the tragedy then went to visit its setting. The depiction that had been constructed in their minds was that of Hugo’s description through writing, this vision was not subject to the alterations of latter ages, still containing the grandeur which had been masked or destroyed. Hugo invented the Notre Dame de Paris by medium of writing, this triggered an uproar from the reading public who were insistent upon rationalising the make believe, whereby the use of stone harmonized with the words of the book. There had never been a definite original Notre Dame; it had never been completed as a whole with which it could be restored to, Viollet’s design for the Notre Dame was in pursuit of consolidating a melting pot of styles, in a method similar to that of hitting a moving target, whereby he destroyed equally what he preserved, seemingly it became not so much an operation of historical and scientific enquiry, but more of romanticism and fantasy, it is was an outstanding example of building remodelling, a complete transformation based on a thoughtful response and restorative approach to what existed, being especially mindful of the historic and immediate contexts. Upon receiving widespread criticism for his work (not only for the restoration of Notre Dame), Viollet wrote:

‘To restore a building is not to preserve it, to repair, or rebuild it; it is to reinstate it in a condition of completeness that could never have existed at any given time’. (As cited in Edward Hollis, 2009, p205)

Intervention and Authenticity

4.0_Intervention â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Intervention is a process that transforms a building, the new and the old become interwined and completely dependent upon each otherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. (Graeme Brooker, 2009, p81)

An intervention, regarding that of remodelling buildings, is an act where the new is entangled with the existing, the modifications to the host, act intrusively with new components, which combine, and overwhelm the original. The additions can often take the form of a series of multiple smaller alterations, removals and additions, each of these acts are directly influenced from the host building, which is the creative stimulus, the language of the intervention generally, is in complete contrast to the original, but the spirit of each will remain in balance. So, it is clear that this act is derivative of the host, and exists inside of it, but does this intervention become a continuation of the existing? Or does it stand at odds with its host, purely contained within? To begin, the prerequisite steps in designing an intervention start like any other building alteration: with comprehensive historical research and site analysis. The existing building can be viewed as a narrative; a culmination of stories to be discovered and told. The designer must reveal and interpret the many layers of history belonging to the site; and by doing so, reactive the life of the place. This act is essentially one of specialised reading, the architect derives the catalyst for change from the original, using this newly found text that implies appropriate use. Often as a means to maintain a degree of control the host must first be simplified, which is constructive and destructive simultaneously, by way of stripping back, removal and establishing clarity, the host building can now be viewed and understood in new ways; it is laid bare, describing past stories with utmost honesty. Intervention, therefore, is a procedure which activates repressed and new meanings encapsulated within a place, and can only function where all alterations are interpretative of the host.

Intervention and Authenticity

Herzog and De Meuron describe their strategy of alteration as unleashing the hidden depths of a building:

‘It is exciting to deal with existing structures, because the constraints demand a very different kind of creative energy. When you don’t start from scratch you need architectural strategies that are not primarily motivated by taste or stylistic preferences. Our strategy was to accept the physical power the Bankside’s massive mountain-like brick building and even to enhance it rather than breaking it up or trying to diminish it. This is a kind of Aikido strategy, where you use your enemy’s strategy for your own purposes. Instead of fighting it, you take all the energy and shape it in an unexpected and new way’. (As cited in Graeme Brooker, 2009, p83)

In the remodelling of Castlevecchio, Carlo Scarpa utilised the methods of creative demolition and selective excavation to reveal the various strata of history present, the castle itself- similar to that of the Notre Dame de Paris, was a complex composition of many differing eras of construction, and Scarpa aimed to delve into, and segregate each of the various stages in an attempt to reveal the affluent inner beauty of the site. This meant cutting and disentangling the aforementioned strata of differing epochs, to achieve clarity and continuity throughout, the host building was not only a museum and gallery in a functional sense, but became an exhibit to itself, revealing its own development over time. Scarpa’s remodelling had little consideration for restoration, but more clarifying history in a chronological sense, by making it visible in the coexistence between layers of time.

‘The fact that today, in a time of ideological crisis in architecture, one looks at Scarpa, is because of his pragmatism, his experimentation and the density of his references which are devoid of cliché and matured in his own experience’. (Richard Murphy, 1990, p14)

Fig.5 Gallery space at Castlevecchio, ‘layers’ of time are easily distinguishable.

Intervention and Authenticity

Another, quite different idea of intervention, is purely functional; posed again by the historic protectors Ruskin and Morris, who argued a prop or crutch was a legitimate component in conserving a the structural integrity of a historic building. Although they were strongly opposed to any restorative works or alterations on ancient buildings, they condoned this particular intervention, as a means to protect a structure in danger of collapse that could result from a gravitational threat. The aim of such an act is straight forward and performs in an honest manner, it is comparable to that of the armature involved in the production of art pieces, namely sculptural, or like the framework which holds surviving shards of ancient Greek sculpture in their original place, relative to one another- the framework becomes a life support, and in the same way as the previous method of intervention, each party becomes completely reliant upon the other. The prop becomes testament to loss; the absence of the original matter, and by doing so becomes a point of interest in its own light, it is a thing of great integrity, separate from that which it supports, attractive and bearing a simple functional aesthetic. The museum of Olympia showcases many of these sculptural groups, for example: the east and west pediment collections, where the design of the armature itself, which holds divergent pieces in the original spatial context, bears great importance; the vital representation of loss, and a modest reminder of the impossible: Completion can never be achieved. With the exception of such an armature, building interventions are seldom functionally focussed, form follows form; the host building regulates it reuse, the size, scale, placement of the new interior spaces and their relationships to one another. The distinct characteristics of the host building are understood through the reading of this three dimensional text, the story is retold, remodelled and ultimately, the host is forever changed, meanings of new and old are surfaced which enrich the quality and significance of the place bestowing greater value upon the continuation of its story: intervention in its own right, is the activation of a space, irreversible but augmenting.

Fig.6 Armatures support the pediment group at the Museum of Olympia.

Intervention and Authenticity

5.0_Conclusion The idea of leaving a historic building completely unaltered, as a derelict masterpiece or a museum, which is purely self-evident is an appealing way to showcase history in a monumental manner, however it is an outdated 19th century philosophy, which is no longer applicable in our present day, an era which strives for authenticity and originality in everything, where the vast majority of buildings in Britain are mass produced and catalogue picked- this is not to say they are not resultantly efficient or unsuccessful, but it is increasingly vital that we concentrate on the existing as opposed to greenfield, for environmental concern but also as a means to protect our heritage: It is a method of continuity, a reminder of temporariness, to maximise potential re-use and cater for ever changing function.

Intervention and Authenticity

6.0_Bibliography References Fred Scott (2008). On Altering Architecture. Oxon: Routledge. 17. Peter Blundell Jones. (1991). In Search of Authenticity. Architects Journal. 12 (10), 29. Peter Blundell Jones. (1991). In Search of Authenticity. Architects Journal. 12 (12), 25. Peter Blundell Jones. (1992). In Search of Authenticity. Architects Journal. 13 (1), 32. Hollis, Edward (2009). The Secret Lives of Buildings. New York: Metropolitan Books. Brooker, Graham Stone, Sally (2004). Rereadings: Interior Architecture and the Design Principles of Remodelling Existing Buildings. London: RIBA Enterprises Ltd. Murphy, Richard (1990). Carlo Scarpa and the Castlevecchio. London: Reed International P.L.C. Schultz, Anne-Catrin (2007). Carlo Scarpa Layers. Stuttgart/London: Axel Menges.

Illustrations Toni Garbasso, (2013), Giancarlo De Carlo - Mazzorbo [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.studioargento.com/architettura/arch.html [Accessed 22 November 13]. Beamish Museum, (2009), Edwardian Street Scene at Beamish [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/beamishmuseum/5169273814/ [Accessed 13 January 14]. KuchSr, (2013), Point du Hoc Bunker [ONLINE]. Available at: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-M9FPukZNpzg/Uq9bbA0uK0I/AAAAAAAAAL4/9AG7YJPNY88/s1600/ Pointe%2Bdu%2BHoc.JPG [Accessed 13 January 14]. Loving Paris, (2013), Notre Dame de Paris [ONLINE]. Available at: http://lovingapartments.com/France/Paris/Religious-Site/POI-432-Notre-Dame-de-Paris [Accessed 13 January 14]. Keitaebidzuka, (2013), Castlevecchio [ONLINE]. Available at: http://kureator.tumblr. com/post/36882122604/keitaebidzuka-museo-di-castelvecchio [Accessed 13 January 14]. StudyBlue, (2013), Olymia pediments [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.studyblue.com/notes/note/n/classics-4/deck/6421029 [Accessed 13 January 14]. MiMoa, (2013), Castlevecchio Museum [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.mimoa.eu/projects/Italy/Verona/Castelvecchio%20Museum [Accessed 13 January 14].