Simone Gobbo graduated from Università IUAV di Venezia with a Bachelor of Architecture degree in 2006 and then went on to the University of Pisa for his Master’s degree. After graduation, Simone Gobbo founded the architecture firm DEMOGO with his colleagues Alberto Mottola and Davide De Marchi. In 2017, he received his Ph.D. in Architecture from the University of Architecture of Genoa, UNIGE with his thesis “The Innocence of Wall”, which was published in 2020. His value of education inspired him to start teaching architecture in 2018 as an Adjunct Professor in design at the Polytechnic University of Genoa and the University of Architecture of Ferrara. DEMOGO was founded upon the theme of the complex relationship between contemporary works and spatial articulation. The firm researches the evocative dimension of places and defines a changing register of interpretations and adaptations of sites through their works of architecture. DEMOGO has won several awards for competitions, such as the Europan10 international competition in 2009 for the new Gembloux Town Hall in Belgium. They were later invited by Europan to the international forum in 2010 where they obtained the second prize in the Under35 Young Italian Architects (YIA) selection. In 2015, DEMOGO won the competition for the reconstruction of the Bivouac Fanton on the Forcella Marmarole in the Dolomites, which was completed in 2020. Several works by DEMOGO have been published to several international architectural magazines, such as L’Architecture d’Aujourd’hui and Domus, where their research and practice can reach all of Italy, if not the world.
Eleanor: So first, we want to thank you for taking the time to discuss with us. We’re excited for this opportunity to dive in deeper with what you do before the lecture. It is my pleasure.
I want to start the conversation with just kind of a type of introduction of yourself. Specifically, why do you label yourself as a theorist over an architect within your firm?
Okay, I’ll try to introduce myself, though it is not easy because there is a lot of complexity in it, which is common, I think for humanity that kind of difference and the issue inside the way that an architect is.
I want to start from my relationship with the culture. I do not have a formal position. I really like the underground movements and I spent a lot of my time when I was younger listening to music and going to concerts to have confrontations with the underground art in my small city. And my city was really important for my formation because it’s an artistic city of Italy. And for Italy, it’s a condition of economy and culture and politics of the northeast. And this territory, it really changed weekly from the 80’s into the 2000’s. And in these 20 years, there was a big acceleration, a quick reservation of economy and the countryside became sprawled and totally changed the landscape and relationship between people and space. And that kind of situation had a big impact on my personal and human situation and really changed me. I come from a really small village. And for that reason, I started to have an obsession about space, about the condition of space and what is possible to do with the space. So now it is clear for me, in the past it was not. It’s only something you feel, but it’s not clear to understand.
And, sure, I go on with university because my father was a small builder and I spent, when I was really young, a lot of time in a countryard, able to watch the situation of the buildings and my father’s real estate speculation. And I really hated that kind of condition because really, for Italian people, it was a moment where the city and the structure of the landscape really changed. It became something different, and it was something traumatic for the Italian people in the northeast area. And this is the starting point and that condition goes on in my way and always stays in me doing the period of formation in architecture at Venice Institute of Architecture. And finally it became a book: my first book. It was a reaction starting from this condition of the suburbs. I don’t know if it is an answer but it is a starting point of my position in architecture.
“I started to have an obsession about space, about the condition of
Logan W: My question has to deal with the way that you communicate your work. How does digital media and publishing play a role in the way that you communicate with your audience? Have you found some means of communication to be more effective than others? I start from the underground approach. And communication in the underground is something a little strange because the underground culture like a fanzine likes to publish something quickly without lo-fi. No high definitions. And that kind of communication is not important to create a formal communication but it’s important to go quickly to create a communication, this is my starting point. But when I go on in my experience, my university [Ed. IUAV in Venice] really has a closed condition about communication. People don’t speak about
Bivouac Fanton in Forcella Marmarole 2020
Photo by Iwan Baan
communication, they always think architecture is something academic, something really high culture, and cannot have a relationship with the people and with social media and, and it’s a strange condition, but it’s common in some universities in Italy, they determine academics that’s a little bit closing. And for that reason, when I went out to the University, when I started my professional life, I didn’t have a good feeling with communication and I always have difficulty approaching that issue. But I understand for my office it is an important aspect of the work. And for that reason, I tried to build a system of communication, I decided to go slowly. We’ve don’t bomb the social media with our projects, but we decide to stay slow. If you spend a lot of time in the projects, you have not a lot of time to create a good communication system, if you are in a small office, because we start as three people and we spend a lot of time in competition and during the night and the day, and sometimes you don’t really have the time to organize the material to create a good system of communication. But when we go on, I think in the first year of the office, we understood that communication was important and I became responsible for the communication. And books, for me, are my preferred dimension.
Ramzey: Much of your work and its means of representation is presented in black and white. How do you interpret the absence of color? In what ways does it enrich the projects and media? How might it take away from the presented work as well?
Black and white, sure. I like punk and I like the idea of using architecture to realize syntax. To try to define a solid and a strong structure for the projects. And this idea is about the iceberg metaphor. You know, the iceberg? If you think, it’s the same in architecture. You have a lot of materials, documents, photos, drawings, models, and ideas which build the base of the iceberg. But those systems stay under the line of water. It’s not really visible to the public. We produce something that is really solid and really serious but what we show are only small elements. What is visible in an iceberg is really small. It’s not bigger. And for that reason, the idea of the project is the peak of the iceberg. But if you want to be a knife, it is necessary for the lower part of the iceberg to contain a big basis of theory.
Tim: My question kind of focuses on your built projects and their processes. I noticed that many of your works integrate geometries that subtly blend in with their surroundings, but also distinguish
“We understand now that it is necessary sometimes to lose control for any reason; because there is another actor in the industry and in the system of architecture.”
themselves at the same time. So what is your process in developing these forms for all of your projects?
The process is really a problem always. It is something changing during my career. I’m young, ten years of a career is not a long time for an architect. It’s only a short period but that still changed in these 10 years. The first time we have the idea to control all. The title of the lecture today is “To Lose Control”, because we understand now that it is necessary sometimes to lose control for any reason; because there is another actor in the industry and in the system of architecture. You are
Gembloux Town Hall in Belgium 2015
Photo
Gembloux Town Hall in Belgium 2015
Photo
not alone and I will try to answer your question. During the process we start with a concept design. For example, I like to write, I’m not really a good drawer, I’m really a shit drawer, but I like to write and I think I’m not a bad writer. I use that kind of text to send it to the other members of the team in the office. This idea to use the theory before the form is really important for me. Because if you start immediately with a form, you close the way and define a building before the project begins, and they think it’s interesting. Stay in a middle position where the form is not defined and it is possible to have a lot of exit ways for the project. And for that reason,
I use the text because the text is a good system that does not try to define or claim a situation; it’s a feeling but it’s not really a form. It is not about the drawings, drawings are more defined. Sure, there are a lot of architects that then use the drawings as a text. This is common, some people use the drawing as a system to produce research and don’t immediately define it in a form. What is something without a form, right? But for me, the text is better and I send the text to the members of the team. They read the text and ask what it is saying; they don’t understand what kind of projects we are on now and it is not really clear. But I’m really lucky because one partner of
my office is really a wonderful architect, he really likes designing the space. He doesn’t use the word and he likes to design the space. He starts from my text and starts to design and organize the program.
Next we go up and down because sometimes you change something you were torn on, and then you continue. Fortunately, the deadline arrives, and you can close the project because if there is not a deadline you can go on forever. It is dangerous for social relationships, it is not good.
Justin: When considering the urban context, are sort of
“I use the text because the text is a good system that does not try to define or claim a situation; it’s a feeling but it’s not really a form.”
unexpected uses or alterations made by the users of these urban spaces considered during the design process? Somewhat like you were saying, allowing other actors to play into the design process. It’s really another difficult question. When you are in your room, working on your project, it’s not easy to understand what the people feel and what the people who use your space feel. For those reasons, it is necessary to try and organize something that is flexible and not closed. It is not to realize a project that is really defined. This is another aspect of punk culture. For example, it is not really necessary if you are perfect with your guitar, but it is necessary that you have something to say. There is not only a technical aspect in architecture, but there is an aspect of what you are feeling. What do you want to tell the users? What is the idea under the projects? What do you feel about this space?
This is more important than the technique. It’s not really important if you are perfect with your guitar but it’s more important if your songs are something to communicate with the people. I think we are artists. Architecture is an art. It is necessary to have a feeling and an emotion to give something to the people. The idea is to try and define a space system that wasn’t never closed. Never
will only one possibility. Otherwise, it becomes a dogmatic space. Now, in this phase of my experience, I don’t like the dogma. I think when I was really young and went to university, I liked the idea of, “Awh, now I can draw my space and this space becomes really a monument, and the people can touch it.”
But when you realize your first house, you understand it’s not that kind of relationship with the people. This is important to understand because it’s a really difficult question. It’s not easy to understand the reaction of the people where you are in the project. I think it’s really a big issue for foreign architects because all together we have a different personal view of life. It’s difficult to enter into the jacket of another person or understand what they feel. If I ask here, we have different ideas of how public space should be used.
Logan A: I’m sort of building off of Justin’s question; so I’ve noticed a common theme across some of your projects in which you design to anticipate the subjection of the project to the passing of time. For instance, I’m thinking of the Town Hall of Gembloux or the Bivouac Fanton and which the exterior finishes are expected to change from the passing of the weather and the seasons. Do you ever
set up parameters or anticipate other actors that can change the architectural spaces over time, other than just the materials?
Okay, this is strange for me because I’m about the authorial approach, but when I was younger I remember, my father was a builder and I spent a lot of my time with the materials. Near my house my father had a building used to store materials. As a child, it was common for me to have a lot of material near my house. For that reason my position in the office is strange because I am an author but I have a relationship with the material. I hate the materials [chuckles]. It’s not true, but it’s a form of reaction with my father. Okay, but sure I have experience because I know what we can do with our materials. This is really important for the office because the condition of the material is really important if you want to build. I like to use a lot of mockups. It’s my passion. For example, you mentioned Gembloux. I was asked to realize five big mockups with materials and we did this two years before the completion of the project. In these two years, we try to observe the material and we decide, “Okay. this is good.” But mockups are a really good method to understand the project and the relationship with the builder. For example, I really like to spend some afternoons in the wood laboratory because it was always a
physical relation, and for theory it is interesting to jump. Not to stay in the middle but start from the walls and to go with the material directly. It’s impossible to stay in touch with the materials and with theory. I think it can be an interesting condition of our counterpositions, and this makes for an interesting life of an architect.
Logan A: Yeah, you mentioned how the design process itself, if not for deadlines, It might never be ended. You mentioned that you have this authorial approach, so do you ever speculate on the fictions or scenarios that might occur for the users in your spaces? If so, my question to you is more interested in an unfinished story where the users of this space might have some parameters or freedom to finish it.
[Sighs] It’s a really difficult question, sorry [chuckles]. But it’s interesting. I don’t know. This is an aspect that is difficult to understand because we are really in this moment where we are really in flux, and it is very intense inside the office. Sometimes you may not have the condition of the relationship between time. Really when I speak of time, I am referring to the theoretical concerns of time, you know? I’m writing a text and the title is L’inattuale [Ed. The
Baan
Inactual]. In the process it’s a little bit schizophrenic, and sometimes there is a lot of tension. Sometimes it’s difficult to understand the direction, the projection of time, or a finish line. It’s not easy in this phase of my career.
Gwen: We talked a lot about your projects in the urban context, but I noticed on your website many of your projects take place in rural, often mountainous environments. I wanted to ask, do you find it easier to design in the wilderness as opposed to urban landscapes, and, in your opinion, how does the site determine the effectiveness of the project? This relationship with the wilderness started six years ago, as it was necessary to start before I climbed. I really like the mountains, and I spend a lot of time in the mountains when possible. My father, that I hated in the past, and now I have grown to appreciate since he died last year, that really changed my relationship with him. He bought a house in the mountains for the holidays and for that reason, since I was a child, I have had a relationship with the mountains. Six years ago, I entered the office and I said, “Hey guys I want to realize a building in the mountains, I really like that condition”. And the team said “Okay, that is a good idea!”
We tried to do a lot of competitions in the mountains, and we lost three competitions, but then we won the next: the competition of Bivouac Fanton. In the beginning it was just like a sliding door for the office. In the first period, we worked with the city and received certification from the city for the project, and next that condition started to define our idea of architecture in the landscape and it was totally different, and it’s really another condition because if you are in the wilderness, the landscape destroys architecture, it’s really not only a physical relationship between landscape and architecture because the climate really destroys architecture. It is also a scale relation because if you imagine the mountain or a bigger landscape system, they have really a big impact on your building. One example would be the Alps. I don’t know if you know the Alps, but it’s a really strong landscape situation. It’s amazing. The feeling of the wind, the lights, the entire sensation is something a little animal. When you stay in the wilderness, you really feel that kind of relationship with the ground and with your past.
For that reason, it is necessary to use other instruments for good space and to think into the space. And this is decided to change the approach. If you are in an urban situation, you can use the other, the other architecture, the other
morphology, you can use the traditional construction systems so you can use the history. You can have a lot of material to use to create your new project. But if you are in the wilderness, there is no architecture, you are alone. And for that reason, it is necessary to invent another way to create. For example, for Bivouac Fanton, the inclined dimension is this idea to accept the condition. I think you have to accept the landscape. It is to say, okay I’m an architect, I want to realize something new but I want to upset the starting point of the condition. And this aspect, the first time, is really difficult to understand.
Tim: You just addressed this a little bit, but I have a follow-up question. With these buildings that stand alone in the natural landscape, is your intention to have them stand out or to integrate your work within the environment and kind of hide them?
I don’t like the idea of integration. I think we are a new generation and it’s important for us to create our idea of architecture. Sometimes it’s not always necessary to integrate all, and sometimes it’s necessary to feel the voice, the personal voice in architecture. And for that reason, I think the idea of innovations, the idea of the risk, and the idea of losing control is important
because if you are totally correct in your life, or in your art, it is clear that the results are not something special, they are something common.
Sure, society lives life within a set of rules. But sometimes in society, to lose contact with the rules and try a new way is important. We are artists guys; sometimes the architects don’t remember this. Sometimes the architects in other situations have only a technical function. But this is not the reason we want to create space. It’s not only to cover the people; it’s not only to realize a door. We want to change the interior and personal emotions of the people with architecture, and you can do it if you try to have a personal voice and always say to the guys entering our office to try your personal answer. Because they always tell me. “Okay, Simone. What can I do with this?... Try your own.” It’s better if you have a personal answer sometimes; we always think we don’t have the power to create something special. In my past, when I was young at the University, they always told me to “copy and paste” and go on to study the masterpiece of architecture. Okay, the masterpiece is wonderful and they like it. But we are a new generation and it’s necessary to realize our masterpiece sometimes. We think we do not have the energy and the idea to take this risk. To lose the control and go on I think is
sometimes a better answer than a copy paste answer.
Allison: You mentioned that you like being in the mountains. So I was curious to know if you had hiked to Bivouac Fountain and then as a follow-up question to that: what is important to know or to consider when it comes to designing on such an extreme site? Ah okay. The climate condition is the first aspect because inside the region the wind arrives around, some days, 200 kilometers. And if you have a surface and the wind just right, it’s really a problem. Another aspect is the form of the building in relation to the snow, because the snow over the building changes the form of the building. And that depends from the wind and the ice that create really a nice form over the building. And that is really a big technical problem for the structure of the building. Because when you are designing that building, you don’t have only one form, but you have a lot of forms, and then there is the result of the relationship with snow over the building. And that’s if you want to go down, really light with really free ability. It’s not easy for the structure. The first time, we have a lot of problems with that anchor with the ground. And another really big big problem is the logistics systems for for the countryside, for the
by Iwan Baan
country yard of the building. Because it is necessary to use a helicopter to bring up materials.It was always a risk. During the the period of the construction of the building, I was in the site and I remember the first day of construction that helicopter brought up some materials. Nothing really important, but the pilot lost the control and he opened the the line and all of the materials go down. This is the first day using the helicopter. Now we have a lot of materials to bring up. And for that reason, we want something light, the weight of the building is important. If you use a helicopter, you can’t have a lot of mass and that aspect, it was for three months, really terrible for me, I passed a lot of time to study to try a solution. Because during the competition, we have an idea, but it’s not possible during the evolution of the projects. But I’m lucky because I have a friend in engineering and he has a boat and they spend six years working on it, then they go with that boat. I’m a sailor. And I like really, when I have time to go in Croatia, with my boat, that is based in Venice. It’s really a small boat, but I remember. And it’s a passion. And I study. When you have a passion, you study a lot. I remember how they build the boats and use the systems. It’s interesting. Because if you think to compare American Cup, you remember that kind of boat are really light and
go really quickly but it was really resistance, and I liked this idea to take the construction system from a boat to use it in my buildings and it’s work. But there is a lot of considerations, because when the you are in, it’s around, 3,000 meters. It’s difficult because the dilatation of materials are not the same then in other conditions.
There’s a lot of problems really. When they finished the building this summer, I drank. I drank for one night I was I was really happy. And next day they go on, we go up, with Iwan Baan, the photographer, and we realized this wonderful photography. So I was really one, and it was really a super moment for an architect. When you close a project and the process is this difficult, you close. You are really up and you have so much energy to to do another competition to go on because it’s nothing more cool than architecture. When you realize and it’s your project and your result is not bad, it’s super, super.
Dominic: My question also deals with the Bivouac Fanton, but also with our previous conversations with materiality. In that project you talk about the necessity to design for the human dimension. How do you emphasize the human dimension through materiality in that project?
For that project, I liked the contradiction. I like the contradiction of life and architecture.There’s a wonderful book about complexity and contradiction in architecture by Robert Venturi. For that reason, I liked the idea that the external skin is in metal and something really strong. The interior is in wood and is completely different from the exterior. Im interested in this idea of starting from something really strong and as you enter, finding something really natural about the wood. For instance, the pine of dolomites. This acceleration, this kind of changing, I really like to emphasize within the different systems of materials in the same building. I think it’s common in a lot of good architecture. This idea of starting with a condition of a material and immediately changing it. It’s something for the people to react to. If you visit the buildings, you really feel this because outside is either too cold, too windy, or too much sun. There is always too much of something. As you enter, this idea of building protection systems in wood can be interesting for your body.
Andrew: SSo I have a question, I think you might have already answered it somewhat, but it involves your Malga Fosse Hut project. On the website’s description you mention how, ”…our architecture becomes
an iconographic catalyst of the landscape.”
Throughout some of these other projects seen on your site, you seem to discuss and describe a relationship between “man and mountain”. I was curious if that relationship plays a large factor in the locations you choose when designing these hut projects?
Would you say there’s more of a personal interest based on locations you’ve visited before, or is it rather something that essentially finds you?
Sure, I have a personal interest in the mountains and that project. You know it was one of our competitions…
I really, you know, I like to walk, I like to walk too much. In my experience I met a writer that I really like, Vitaliano Trevisan, and he died last month by committing suicide. He was an important Italian writer. We spent a lot of time together, and I shared with him the idea that walking is fundamental for both the writer and the architect.
I understood, for my mind, it was really a good method to go on with my thinking. There is a famous book by Thomas Bernard, the Austrian writer, whose title is Walking: A Novella. The plot is simple: the author is walking, and while walking he writes a monologue. And this condition of walking, I think it’s
important for an architect for me because if you liked the idea to know the space is necessary to move in the space and you are, you can use a different technique to move.
You can use the car, you can use the train, but work has a good relation between what you watch and the time of your movements. I think it’s a good way to understand the context, and this idea of work always helps me when I am in difficult situations.
I prefer to work and start from that condition of walking and thinking. I like the idea of realizing projects where those kinds of conditions are common. This is a hardworking or kind of tracking in a way, this idea that architecture is in relation between the people working and that kind of condition is interesting for me. Now sometimes I do not have a lot of time and it’s totally always complex. Now you can quickly go on Google, but sometimes if you only work without destinations it’s really a good possibility to stay in the world, I really like it so much. For example, the book by Jack Kerouac, I think you may know, he’s an American author. The book is wonderful, it’s called On the Road. It’s a super book, one of my favorites. I read a lot of Carver and David Foster Wallace. I have an interest in American authors, I don’t know why, maybe it’s these conditions of movements and the
movements in nature. It was really interesting, I think for an artist you can use it in other conditions. If you are working today on a project of a house or an urban space, you can use the human experience in the landscape in another place, but I think it’s more difficult to use the urban experience in landscape.
It’s easier to learn from your experience in nature for me. Sometimes we lose that condition, I don’t know. Your context, really your life, but in the city where I come from, sometimes we lose the condition of work because all the people are there. They use their house, their car, and go out to another house from supermarkets. They don’t work, but for an architect, it’s a good method to understand the space.
Justin: You talked about the great impact that sprawl has personally on your life. In your writing, I Wanna be Sedated, a part of Dark Side of the City, you describe the situation of suburbia analogous to a three-part play. You say that suburbia hasn’t yet reached the climax, so where do you see that resolution of suburbia?
Well, I think you have to accept suburbia, and I learned this from another architect much older than me, Maria Guseppina Grasso Cannizzo. She was a super
architect in Sicily. She’s a really incredible woman. During dinner she said to me after reading the book [Dark Side of the City], “Simone, is it necessary to have set the condition of the suburbia because you can find something interesting where the people don’t see any beauty”.
I think it’s a good point of view, and if you watch her architecture you can understand. She is really great at using the common space, like the normal building, and transforming it into something really interesting. This idea of using the normal and transforming that into something special is really interesting. It’s a good method to to change suburbia a little bit but sometimes suburbia is interesting. For example, if I don’t stay in Suburbia, I don’t have that reaction, that kind of hate for the seed, that kind of idea to change it to go on. Sometimes starting from difficult conditions is the best way for an artist. For example, I think it’s difficult if you’re born in Florence because it was always beautiful. It’s not easy if you are inside the beauty.
Katelyn : I find the concept of the innocence of the wall to be extremely intriguing. In part because, while built forms are not inherently oppressive, I feel like they often become symbols for or vehicles of power and social
practices. With that being said, do you think that it is possible for built elements to remain neutral when placed in non-neutral contexts?
It was another story of my experience, starting with an obsession with the wall because I really like that element, and I like the contradiction of this element. Contradiction is one of my favorite words. I think today I used it a lot, but this idea that a simple element can really become something so powerful is an amazing aspect of it for me. Because a wall is something really simple if you think about it. It’s a line and this simple element really became a social element, became a war line, became a protection system, became a hybrid point where it’s possible to organize the landscape. There are lots of conditions starting from a simple element, and you see this idea that it is possible to create a rule for a neutral element and to transform this into something other–something that can be dangerous, that can destroy the people, or that can save the people.
It’s really interesting for architecture. If you think of the space, sometimes we think the spaces are neutral at the starting point, but in the same place you can do a lot of actions. You can kill a man, you can save a man, you can board. And this idea that people always project their personal
view to the elements, and that element became something with significant meaning, it’s incredible because you understand how architecture is not only space. And this is interesting because there are a lot of architects who say architecture is a space question. I think it is not only a space question, that’s only the first part of the problem. The second is how can space enter in relation with the people?
How can that space become a social, political element? And that book used the wall as an element to create a reaction between what is around the architecture.
Colton:I notice you mention threshold in a few of your projects and it seems to play an important role. It can be defined in many different ways. Does the threshold always have to be physical? In what ways do you use a threshold to separate spaces? How do you apply the different meanings of a threshold to an architectural design?
What is that space in between or in the line is something material or something. I always think for the people it is necessary to have our presentations of the theoretical or what is not material. For example, in the book, there is a world, then one of the case study of the book is when the USA American
president, starting team work, you say I want to build a big wall. Trump. You know, Trump, typical of the man, big world and this idea is at the first time you think, oh, is it necessary for a really big wall, or it’s only a physical element to try to define our representation systems of the idea of the world?
And I think the answer is the people, for the people it is necessary to have a contact and to have an imaginary scenario of the elements. Is difficult If you say, this is dangerous. But if I do not show you anything, it’s okay for that reason. I understand the people in this sort of worries, totally, the reason for a totalization of the
Bivouac Fanton in Forcella Marmole 2020
Photo by Iwan Baan
Bivouac Fanton in Forcella Marmole 2020
Photo by Iwan Baan
society, there is an idea to have something physical. It’s strange, you know? Because for example, you can use drones, you can use other systems to control the space. There are a lot of instruments without use of physical elements, but I think it is really dangerous. The idea at the moment is to use architecture only for presentations of political aspects. For example, yesterday I was watching television with the image of Putin during the press conference. It’s incredible how the Russians use space to communicate. For example, I’m an architect, I don’t watch Putin. I watch only the scenarios: the columns, the table, you
know, the table of Putin with people sitting twenty meters from him. And the other people were from, I think, 20 meters from him, and this kind of use of architecture for representation, for political aspects is really dangerous and it’s not finished. Sometimes we think architecture is free from that kind of manipulation, but it’s not true. In this moment some people want to use the physical function of architecture, the representation, to create a condition, to create a position, to change the relationship between the people. And this is dangerous. It’s strange in our society that we use that kind. It’s a medieval system. If you want to go to the king, you have to respect, If you do not, then you stay. We are in the year 2020, but we are in the same conditions.
Gwen: Moving on from your projects and looking more at your life as an architect and theorist, is there anything you learned while running your firm that you wish you learned in school and do you teach that concept to your students now?
There is a lot. The greatest is this idea that it is possible to lose control. When I was in school, they always told me that in order to be a good architect, it is necessary to have control of the distance,
to control law, to really follow a rigid system, to have strong control of the drawings so that the spaces are the same as what you draw. They say your drawings are always something really important, but it’s not true. You draw something and there are a lot of people that then take your drawings and develop and transform them into something real, into a building. And there are a lot of factors. There is your commission, there are the political rules, there is the builder, there are the economical factors for the materials, etc. Now in Italy, it is not easy to use iron because the price of iron is really high and, when you are drawing, it is your job to think about this.I mean, at school, they always say your building is something really serious. Nothing can change it; it’s an art expression of high culture. But it’s not. True architecture is not something perfect, it is dirty.You may visit architecture because the photo was always clean, but in reality architecture is dirty. Life is dirty. It’s really important for students to understand this and that it’s possible to work with worldly, dirty spaces and conditions.
Eleni: While teaching architectural design at the University of Genova, what topics of design do you focus on the most with students? And how have your teaching
“True architecture is not something perfect, it is dirty. You may visit architecture because the photo was always clean, but in reality architecture is dirty. Life is dirty.”
methods changed since you began educating?
I don’t know if it’s really true now, but with my students I like to start from the human aspect. For example, the title of my course last year was transfiguration. It’s the moment when Jesus Christ transformed, or it’s more true if you say when the apostles watched him in a transfiguration phase and it’s different. We work all year in this aspect: how architecture can change the aspects in relation between what people think of a building, or the projection of people in the architecture. This idea of transfiguration of architecture starts from our personal reading of the space. It’s interesting for me, because if we go in a square all together, we have different kinds of reactions. For example I can watch something dirty, and someone can watch the water; we can have different attractions to elements. They (students) work every year on this idea to try to define a personal voice. I like the idea to form outdoors, it was a little experimental. There is some problem with the university because it’s not really a formal program. For example, in the bibliography of the course, there is not an architecture book. It was a good experiment for me, and I think the results of the final were architectural, but we started from another point, the point of our heart. A human heart is necessary to
Casa AV in Treviso 2019
Photo by Simone Bossi
Casa AV in Treviso 2019
Photo by Simone Bossi
create a personal idea of the life of people in the space of culture. And if you don’t have that kind of system, you can’t build your iceberg. I want students to have personal icebergs.
Allison: I have the closing question for the interview, which is what is the greatest challenge you have faced in architecture. And then, what advice would you give to the future generation of architects?
I think the challenge can be to understand what is outside of you. It is necessary to listen, try to, it’s really serious, that kind of sensibility. And I think if we are artists, and I always say the artists have a form of sensibility, really high really strong, and it is really important in each moment to try to listen to the space, the people, the reasons. And if you use that kind of energy and transform
“A
this into a project, I think the project can be really contemporary can really be an evolution with our time. And I hope the challenge is to stay connected with our time. Because sometimes we, in Italy at this moment you will see, we lose this idea. Then each generation can have a personal way. And this idea of staying in a personal way in a personal relation and reference system. It’s really important for me and it’s one aspect that I really like for the new generation. Listen. I think it’s important, and next, use what you listen. And because I think if you have incredible instruments, if you are a super trady renderer, super modeler, super drawer, but if you have nothing in the content to do, if you have no issues, it’s only noise.
“Listen. I think it’s important. And next, use what you listen.”
This interview with Simone Gobbo was focused upon collaborative process, the roles of text in architecture, and the willingness to lose control. It was a collaborative effort among students of the Video, Media, and Architecture course at Kent State University Florence. Guest lecturers were brought in from all over Europe for a Spring lecture series and students were tasked to create an interview before each of these lectures. After analyzing numerous interviews with other architects, students researched and explored the work of the visiting lecturers. Questions were then devised by each student, and these questions were analyzed based upon their relevance to the work of each lecturer. The most appropriate questions were chosen for each interview, and the specific students who created these questions then were charged with interviewing our guests, using the chosen questions as a base and posing any other questions that flowed with the interview.