This book was made possible thanks to the patronage of the Association of Architects of Caserta. The main topic is the “cavity and limit”. The theme is an extract from the PhD thesis entitled “The Architecture and the hollow”, PhD thesis developed at the Second University of Naples, Department of Architecture, from 2010 to 2012. PhD in Architecture and Urban Design and Restoration, XXV cycle, coordinated by prof. Arch. Giovanni Di Domenico, tutor of the research, and prof. arch. Massimiliano Rendina, co-tutor. The following people are thanked for their fundamental contributions, without which this research wouldn’t have been possible: Giovanni Di Domenico, Full Professor of Architecture and Urban Design at the Second University of Naples, Faculty of Architecture, tutor of the PhD thesis, with whom I collaborated on the research and the teaching activity from 2008 to 2012; Massimiliano Rendina, Associate Professor of Architecture and Urban Design at the Second University of Naples, Faculty of Architecture, co-tutor of the PhD thesis, with whom I collaborate on the research and the teaching since 2011; Alberto Campo Baeza, Professor at the Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura of Madrid. He has taught at several schools of architecture, including the ETH of Zurich, EPFL of Lausanne, Bauhaus of Weimar, Columbia University of New York, the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, the Kansas State University and the University CUA in Washington and is the author of the preface to the book. Questo libro è stato reso possibile, anche grazie al Patrocinio dell’Ordine degli Architetti, Pianificatori, Paesaggisti e Conservatori della Provincia di Caserta. Il tema trattato e quello della “Cavità e limite”. La tematica affrontata è un estratto della Tesi di Dottorato dal titolo “L’architettura e il cavo”. Tesi di Dottorato sviluppata all’interno della Seconda Università degli studi di Napoli, Facoltà di Architettura Dipartimento di Architettura, Ciclo XXV dal 2010 al 2012 Dottorato di Ricerca in Progettazione Architettonica e Urbana e Restauro dell’Architettura, coordinato dal Prof. Giovanni Di Domenico, che è stato anche il tutor della Ricerca, cotutor Prof. Massimiliano Rendina. Si ringraziano per i contributi fondamentali, senza i quali la stessa ricerca non avrebbe mai avuto seguito: Giovanni Di Domenico, professore ordinario di Progettazione Architettonica e Urbana alla Seconda Università degli studi di Napoli, Facoltà di Architettura, con cui ho collaborato al lavoro di ricerca e di didattica dal 2008 al 2012 e tutor della Tesi di Dottorato; Massimiliano Rendina, professore associato di Progettazione Architettonica e Urbana alla Seconda Università degli studi di Napoli, Facoltà di Architettura, con cui collaboro al lavoro di ricerca e di didattica dal 2011 e cotutor della Tesi di Dottorato; Alberto Campo Baeza, professore alla Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura di Madrid. Ha insegnato in diverse altre scuole di Architettura, tra cui l’ETH di Zurigo, EPFL di Losanna, la Bauhaus di Weimar, la Columbia University di New York, l’Università della Pennsylvania a Philadelphia, la Kansas State University e la University CUA a Washington ed è autore della prefazione al libro.
CONTENTS / INDICE
In search of the lost thickness Alberto Campo Baeza Alla ricerca dello spessore perduto Alberto Campo Baeza
6 7
Introduction Introduzione
14 15
Tectonics and stereotomy Tettonica e stereotomia
18 19
The ‘hollow’. The cave as an archetypal and symbolic element Il ‘cavo’. La caverna come elemento archetipico e simbolico
40 41
Architecture of the limit. The limit as strong thickness, the limit as a thin layer (from meter to micron) L’architettura del limite. Il limite come forte spessore, il limite come strato sottile (dal metro al micron) Structures and hollow elements. Mass e cavity, cavity and limit Strutture ed elementi cavi. Massa e cavità, cavità e limite
56 57 88 89
Conclusions Conclusioni
110 111
Bibliography Bibliografia
118 118
IN SEARCH OF THE LOST THICKNESS Alberto Campo Baeza ***
On my white table, a medium glass of Asprinio of Aversa, Marcus Aurelius Meditations, Amate l’Architettura by Gio Ponti, monograph iodicearchitetti 2000-2010, Libria publisher, a copy of Cavità e Limite and the picture of a sculpture by Henry Moore. This is a book where an Architect, Francesco Iodice, talks about Architecture and explains some of fundamentals of his works. I have always stated that Architecture, beyond the form it appears to us, is an idea expressed through form. It is an idea materialized with measurements that relates it with man. It is a constructed idea. Because the history of Architecture, far from being just history of forms, is basically history of constructed ideas. Over the passing of time the forms are destroyed, but the ideas remain, they are eternal. And here Iodice defends Architecture that we call stereotomic, that’s made in continuity with the ground. Henry Moore said: “The first hole made through a piece of stone is a revelation”. And he was right. An architect well knows that digging the stone, making a hole in the stone, it is the way to make visible the stone’s mass, its stereotomic nature. Moore, and Iodice with him, well knews that “the hollow” is an effective mechanism to reveal the stone’s gravity beauty through digging the mass with the shadow to let the light reach the bottom. Can a third millenium architect safeguard the thickness? Can a contemporary architect safeguard the stereotomic architecture against tectonic? Can an architect safeguard today the strength against the
6
ALLA RICERCA DELLO SPESSORE PERDUTO Alberto Campo Baeza ***
Sul mio grande tavolo bianco, un bicchiere mezzo pieno di Asprinio di Aversa, Meditazioni dell’imperatore Marco Aurelio, Amate l’Architettura di Giò Ponti, la monografia di iodicearchitetti 20002010, Libria Editore, una copia stampata di Cavità e Limite e un’immagine di una scultura di Henry Moore. Questo libro “Cavità e limite” è un libro in cui l’architetto, Francesco Iodice, parla di architettura e spiega alcuni motivi che sono alla base delle sue opere. Ho sempre affermato che l’architettura, al di là della forma con cui appare, è idea che si esprime tramite forma. È idea che si materializza tramite misure rapportate all’uomo, centro dell’architettura. È idea costruita. Perché la storia dell’architettura, oltre ad essere solo storia delle forme, è essenzialmente una storia di idee costruite. Col passare del tempo le forme si distruggono, però le idee rimangono, sono eterne. Qui Iodice difende l’architettura così detta stereotomica, quella fatta in continuità con la terra. Henry Moore diceva: Il primo buco fatto in un pezzo di pietra è una rivelazione. E aveva ragione. Un architetto sa bene che scavare la pietra, fare un buco in una pietra, è un modo per rendere visibile la massa della pietra, il suo carattere stereotomico. Moore, e Iodice con lui, sapeva bene che “il cavo” è un meccanismo efficace per rivelare la bellezza della gravità della pietra, attraverso l’atto dello scavare la massa con l’ombra affinché la luce penetri nel fondo. Un architetto del terzo millennio può difendere lo spessore? Può
7
TECTONICS AND STEREOTOMY ***
Examining in depth the issue concerning the cavity and the limit, is essential and very necessary to describe the concept of tectonic and stereotomic; architecture made of tectonic character and architecture made of stereotomic character. The distinction between tectonic and stereotomic refers essentially to two different design and construction approaches of architecture. The first, more dynamic, proceeds according to a principle of addition and juxtaposition of the elements; the second, more static, proceeds according to a principle of excavation and removal of parts. Aiming to identify two fundamental archetypes of the construction of the architecture we could state that the first manifests itself through the light frame, thin, linear, jointed at the nodes of connection and stressed mainly to tension; the second occurs through a wall structure made of ground, of stone, provided with mass and continuity of material and stressed mainly to compression. This distinction, made clear until now, find a substantial response even if we analyze the two terms from an etymological point of view. The term “tectonic” has Greek origins and derives from the word tékton that literally means woodworker, carpenter, builder. Stereotomic, also with Greek origin, comes from the words stereós, that means solid, and tomé, which means cutting. Over the centuries, both terms underwent evolution of interpretation, as Frampton state: “The verb corresponding to the word tékton is tektainomai, that corresponds to the sanskrit taksan, which indicates the craft of carpentry and the use of the axe. In the fifth century BC this meaning undergoes an evolution, moving from the designation of something specific
18
TETTONICA E STEREOTOMIA ***
Nell’analizzare la tematica riguardante la cavità e il limite, nell’intenzione di approfondire le opere architettoniche e gli elementi ricavati per sottrazione di materia, risulta indispensabile un passaggio obbligato riguardo il concetto di tettonico e di stereotomico, di architettura di carattere tettonico e di architettura di carattere stereotomico. La distinzione fra tettonico e sterotomico rimanda sostanzialmente a due differenti approcci progettuali e di costruzione dell’architettura. Il primo, decisamente più dinamico, procede secondo un principio di addizione e giustapposizione degli elementi. Il secondo, più statico, procede secondo un principio di scavo e sottrazione delle parti. Volendo individuare due archetipi fondamentali della costruzione dell’architettura potremmo affermare che la prima si manifesta attraverso l’intelaiatura leggera, sottile, lineare, giuntata nei nodi di connessione e sollecitata principalmente a tensione; la seconda si manifesta attraverso una struttura muraria fatta di terra, di pietra, dotata di massa e di continuità materica e sollecitata prevalentemente a sforzi di compressione. Questa distinzione esplicitata fino ad ora trova un sostanziale riscontro anche se analizziamo i due termini da un punto di vista etimologico. Di origine greca il termine “tettonico” deriva dalla parola tékton e significa letteralmente falegname, carpentiere, costruttore. Anch’esso di origine greca, il termine “stereotomico” deriva dalla parola stereós, che significa solido, e tomé, taglio. Entrambi i termini, dal loro significato originario, hanno subito nel corso dei secoli delle evoluzioni interpretative, come afferma lo stesso Frampton: “Il verbo
19
the ‘hollow’. the cave as an archetypal and symbolic element
Zevi, paradoxically, it could be argued that, from a linguistic profile, modern man, consciously or unconsciously, wants to return to the caveman experience. The cave has no façade; does not feel the need to close behind a wall; opens up to the outside; does not conform lights, captures them, filters them, owns them, manage them, refracting in each direction on rough boulders, triumphs in its thickness, wherever we find slits, holes, wounds and lacerations. Not laying on the ground, belongs to it in disguise, but they are inherently different one from the other, autonomous, devoid of patterns. With the generic term “cave” we refer to grottoes and antrums, although the last two are not perfectly synonymous. The first means an underground or rocky place, closed by a vault, more or less sunken in the ground or in the mountain, more or less dark; the antrum is, instead, a more deep dark cave, within a ravine, without opening to direct sunlight. In this place of the limit, between excavation and construction, we will analyze the negative soul of architecture. To subtract and to place could become a metaphor for a more complex relationship between excavation and construction. The verb to “subtract” is related, in fact, for the common latin root, to a series of actions strategically useful in the recent architectural debate, as to pull or to dig, to remove, to abstract; they have, indeed, a common root with the latin verb traho, which means to bring out, with the addition of prefixes ex-, de- and abs-. 1) Ex-traho: extract excavating, pull out. 2) De-traho: deduct, pull down, pull away, pull out, remove, diminish. 3) Abs-traho: remove separating, to abstract. The adoption of prefixes ex-, de-, abs- generates substantial
44
Aires Mateus, House in Monsaraz, 2007.
Aires Mateus, House in Cadoรงos, 2008.
structures and hollow elements. mass e cavity, cavity and limit
top in that particular historical period, that pursued principles related to the experimentation of the free plan, the use of prefabricated system as indispensable element of modernity, Kahn arose thanks to its research related to the value of the material and to what we might call a new monumentality in architecture. Indeed, it is around fifty years, in the most intense period of his professional maturity, which he shows his total inclination towards the timeless nature of material related to its dual aspect of stereotomy and tectonics, in conjunction with his return from the travel to Italy, Greece and Egypt. The research for a contemporary language was conducted by Kahn as his contemporary colleagues. However, while many just as Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe, Gropius, were completely in favour of the principles of the Modern Movement, Kahn finds the vocabulary from which to draw with both hands reworking and reinterpreting from a modern viewpoint the values linked to historic architecture. Kahn states: “There is no concept of the modern since everything that exists in architecture belongs to the architecture itself and from this derives its meaning�22. During his travel to Italy, essential for its mature education, his stay was very short, just three months, however, were sufficient to markedly affect his subsequent work. The physical presence of Rome, for the fundamental lesson of history, was pervasive. Shortly after his arrival he wrote to his colleagues in Philadelphia: “I realized that the Italian architecture will continue to be the source of inspiration for the future. Those who think differently should think again. The result of our work seems insignificant
94
Baths of Caracalla, Rome, 216 b.C.
Louis Kahn, First Unitarian Church, Rochester, 1957-1964.
structures and hollow elements. mass e cavity, cavity and limit
light to spaces�29. Another example quite emblematic inherent in the research of Kahn’s hollow architecture is undoubtedly the project for the Hurva synagogue in Jerusalem. The project is in perfect continuity with the strong elements from the place and reveals its contemporary using the hollow form, in hollow structural elements designed to host the various functions in support of the synagogue. Four hollow angular pillars characterize the squared center space; an ambulatory surrounding the pillars separates the external corral, consisting of niches to host a votive space for candles, the sanctuary itself, which develops at the center of the complex. The four corner pillars flare progressively upwards to become the roofing of the central space, while the niches along the corral outside, conversely, become thinner upward passing the roofing and manifesting as pylons similar to elements of fortifications.
108
Louis Kahn, Hurva Synagogue, Jerusalem, 1967-1974.