PRESERVATION vs MODERNISATION Critique of the ‘real
Edward Fisher
This paper examines the historical artefact that is Venice, the formation of the built environment and the cities devotion to the creation of public squares, the Venetian campo. The city is covered in campo’s all varying in size and form, providing respite from the dark enclosure of the narrow lanes, they open out to form a civic space flooded with sunlight producing the ideal setting for Venetians to socialise where the entire community can meet. Through out this paper I will ask. What is it that makes Venice so unique? What can we learn from the Venetian campo to influence 21st Century architecture? My aim for this paper is to make an analytical comparison between the Venetian campo, the social hub for the community and British post-war Modernist Architecture which was full off ambition regarding the social welfare. Why did Britain's post-war modernist architecture not engage the community? In ‘Species of Spaces’ by Georges Perec he describes selecting 12 places in Paris to carry out an objective study of place. He selected them either because he had lived near them or they held a particular memory for him. I have used a similar process for the selection of three campo’s in Venice. For each place he would write a brief description as objectively as possible describing what he saw, all the details that attracted his eye.
2
Venetian Campo Critique of ‘the real’ Venice’s greatest quality or the most significant is the relationship that has been maintained for centuries between the natural environment and the built environment, between nature and history. People often over look Venice’s third element the campo. This study will inform my understanding of what public spaces need if they are to forge and shape the population of a city into a truly civic urban society.
“For Venetians, the heart of their city is firmly rooted in the campo of their childhood, for it is here that they develop their joy in life, their delight in other people, their membership in a stable community and their intense pride in being Venetian”
Lennard, 2012
The Campo forms the heart for the neighbourhood and can have between ten and fifteen thousand people of every age and social background, living and working in its district. Venice is different from any other city in the fact that there are no cars to impede social interaction resulting in noise levels being dramatically reduced, you can here everyones conversation. Venice is emphatically the city of conversation; people talk all over the place because there is nothing to interfere with it being caught by the ear. As one walks the narrow network of streets there is an odd sense of enjoyment and distinct feeling one has arrived when you enter the campo. It forms a necessary breathing space in such a dense built environment. Each campo has its own unique character, its own special blend of social life that derives from its population and location within Venice. This individuality has been celebrated by the venetian poet Diego Valeri.
“The delight of all delights is that of the camp. Santa Margherita, S.Giacomo Dell’Orio, Santa Maria Formosa… each unlike the others, each with its own individual note, in architecture, colour, street life, poetry”
Valeri, 1946
The three campo’s I selected Campo S. Giacomo Dell’Orio, Campo S. Margherita and Campo S. Luca all have a personal connection, whether it be my local campo where I would go almost daily to buy food, or the campo where we would frequently meet up with friends for a few drinks in the evenings. The aim of this investigation is to critique ‘the real’ analysing the campo from an entirely objective point of view focusing on describing the ordinary and everyday, using the most unmetaphorical language, ‘flatly’ as Perec described it.
4
6
Campo S. Giacomo Dell’Orio, Santa Croce Upon entrance into the square it is clear that the entire community use the space. You see groups of young boys kicking a football, riding their bikes or playing a game of tag. A permeable wall of trees that enclose the square are located around the primary entrance, beneath the canopies of the trees there are benches where the older members of the community sit and catch up on the daily gossip. There is a small community garden used to grow fruit and vegetables squeezed in-between the trees. A noticeable reduction in the amount tourists wondering the streets in this area is reflected in the shops that occupy the campo, all very understated local businesses. The campo hosts regular community events every fortnight, using a raised platform to stage the music concerts and raffles. During the events tents line the perimeter edge of the square selling local delicacies. The San Giacomo Dell’Orio church sits in the middle of the campo resulting in the campo being divided up into four small zones forming a hierarchy of space each one having particular qualities which effects how the space is used. The larger shaded space is used by the children when playing games. The space that catches the last of sun is where the older members of the community congregate and the space that sits on the canal edge is used by the restaurants for outdoor seating.
8
Campo S. Luca, San Marco This intimate campo is enclosed on 4 sides by 4-5 storey buildings, forming the walls to an outdoor room. This focuses all the attention on the actions that occur in the campo forming an open theatre. This image is enhanced by four buildings that overlook the campo having balconies that cantilever into the space. There are six very narrow lanes that form the access points heightening the insular sensation felt as you enter Campo S.Luca. The campo is located in between the main tourist attractions of Venice, Rialto Bridge and San Marco this results in a constant flow of tourists using the campo as a through route to get from one to the other. Despite the heavy flow of tourists it is a popular meeting place for Venetians, it is known as the ‘talking campo' locals come from every part of Venice, summer and winter to meet friends.
10
Campo S. Margherita, Dorsoduro When entering Campo S. Margherita is immediately apparent the change in scale, the campo is one of the largest in Venice. The foot fall is not as high as Campo S. Luca primarily due to its distance from San Marco. The atmosphere in the square is very similar to that of Campo S. Giacomo Dell’Orio. It is predominantly used by members of the local community, It contains every shop they would require; grocery shop, butcher, pharmacy, book shop etc‌ All locally run business within close proximity of one another. There are no major retail shops with in the campo it appears to be apart of venetian culture to support local business. The campo hosts two large trees which are used firstly to provide welcome relief from the midday sun for the locals as they sit on benches underneath the canopies in the shade, and secondly as a device to break down the vast length of the campo into three distinct sections. As the sun sets the campo transforms from a quite peaceful place to read a book and have a coee into the student hub of the city where everyone meets up with their friends sitting outside until the early hours.
12
The three campo’s all have individual characteristics in scale, form, colour and street life. The diverse character of the spaces occurs because Venice’s built environment responds to the natural environment this results in a rich variety in Venice’s civic spaces. I believe that it is these qualities which induce the Venetians pride in preserving their architectural heritage.
Britain’s Post War Modernist Architecture The Smithson’s made great contributions to city planning during Britain's post war era. Both Alison and Peter Smithson attacked the decades old dogma proposed by Le Corbusier and Walter Gropius that cities should be zoned into specific areas for living, working, leisure and transport and that urban housing should consist of tall and widely spaced towers. Their agenda was an idealogical utopian vision of the city where form was devoid of any figurative or individualistic feature, guaranteeing that it will perform in the most efficient and rational way. The idea of the Smithson’s on the city development used the clusters and street structures to match the city to the Landscape. “Our intention has always been to turn architecture towards particularity…of place, person, activity.” (Smithson, 1968) Theoretically their ideas were very interesting, showing a concern for the cities relationship with the natural environment at both the urban and human scale. Robin Hood Gardens in London is an example of how the Smithson’s integrated architecture and landscape with an overriding social agenda. The two social housing blocks are separated by a park, which has a large mound formed in the landscape. It was aimed at being a place for social interaction, providing a high point in an otherwise flat landscape offereing a view of London from a different perspective. A similar idea had been successful at the Arnold Circus Boundary Estate in 1900. It was a simple idea that was affective, unfortunately Robin Hood Gardens never reached its potential. The project was plagued by structural flaws and compromise ultimately resulting in a building that, "fails as a place for human beings to live” (Hill, 2009). The building was often derided as an example of modernist architectural folly rather than the role model of progressive social housing that the architects had hoped. The building soon became neglected and was associated with high levels of crime. The social agenda adopted by the Smithton’s in the design was affective but the poor quality of the housing that enclosed the public space lead to its demise.
14
The theme preservation vs modernisation highlights the very different qualities of the public spaces. In Venice there is a real sense of delight in maintaining their public spaces and taking pride in their presentation. Every campo in Venice has a particular character offering great diversity and a sense of intrigue as one walks through the city you never quite know what is round the corner. The spatial diversity has come as a result of centuries of construction. The British Modernist ideology worked in principle but when it came to construction and the inhabitants embracing the architects vision it never worked. I think this was a result of modernism rejection of tradition and history which brought a new form of architecture that people had not seen before, people did not know how to engage with it. This resulted in public spaces being neglected and left to gather litter, this highlights an obvious cultural and social difference with the Venetian campo’s.
16
Bibliography Aureli. P. V. The possibility of an absolute architecture, 2011. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Hill. J. English Heritage Report on Robin Hood Gardens, 2009. Lennard. H. Crowhurst. S. The Venetian Campo, 2012. Corte del Fontego, Venice. Perec, Georges. Species of Spaces and Other Pieces, 1997. Penguin Books, London. Sergison. J. Bates. S. Papers 2, 2007. Editorial Gustavo Gili SL, Barcelona. Smithson. P. Smithson. A. Team X Primer, 1974. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Smithson. P. Smithson. A. The Charged Void: Architecture, 2002. The Monacelli Press, New York. Valeri. D. A sentimental Guide to Venice, 1946. Le Tre Venezie, Padua.