Master's thesis - The new school of thought by Michal Mráz

THE NEW SCHOOL OF THOUGHT Palác U Stýblů Michal Mráz

University of Liechtenstein, Master’s Thesis, SS2016

Michal Mráz The New School of Thought Palác U Stýblů Studio Staub&Papathanasiou University of Liechtenstein, SS2016 Master’s Thesis Book to obtain the degree Master of Science in Architecture Fürst-Franz-Josef-Strasse, 9490 Vaduz, Liechtenstein

ABSTRACT The task of this thesis is to propose a new ;school of thought for architectural education. Opinions on the state of architectural education and its possible future development were gathered from literature sources and from conducted interviews. Position of the school within the context of the 21st century, importance of communication of architectural topics outside of academic sphere, and personalization of education were subjects of the research question. Personal opinions on the character of architectural education are confronted with positions gathered in the research part and are summed up in the Manifesto for the New School of Thought. This manifesto is then applied on the selected site, which is Prague, Czech Republic. Abandoned building in the city centre is selected and architectural design for the school of architecture is proposed. The role of the school within the context of the city is identified as one of the catalysts of the debate on the built environment of the city, numerous interest groups are considered to be invited to interact with the school and a curriculum for the school is proposed.

Table of Contents

Introduction 11

1A_Research part Brief history of university and academia Legal framework of higher education Specific aspects of architectural education Opinions on architectural education Context architectural education currently operates within Spaces for architectural education

1B_Interpretation of research Recurring topics Research question

2A_Proposal - theoretical approach Manifesto for the New School of Thought The site - Prague, Czech Republic The site - Palác U Stýblů (en.: Palace At Stýblů) Organizational structure of the new school of architecture Spatial program of the new school of architecture

2B_Proposal - design proposal The approach Elements of design Image documentation

126

Conclusion List of references List of figures

Introduction Brief

Where schools are equipped with laboratories, shops, and gardens, where dramatizations, plays, and games are freely used, opportunities exist for reproducing situations of life, and for acquiring and applying information and ideas. ... Ideas are not segregated, they do not form an isolated island. Information is vitalized by its function;by the place it occupies in direction of action. (Dewey) “Studio Staub will focus on the design of new schools of thought, in close collaboration with institutions and individuals working on the ongoing research project with the same name, short “NeST”. The semester will be composed by three highlights:”(Studio Staub&Papathanasiou) “i Designing a new Schoolf of Thought This studio will have a double character. It will be a research and design studio with the main goal to design a new school of thought within the realm of the architectural discipline. We will first develop a digital architve which will serve as a basis for the formulation of a manifesto for the students’ very own new school of thought, taking a position on the current architectural scene/milieu and the contemporary system of architectural education. We will specualte on what and how to learn, while simultaneously conceive, imagine and design spaces that emere from your manifesto and your ideological conception of knowledge production. By proposing spatial and syntactic structures, the projects will manifest different forms of learning processes and mediation. Within the semester a series of intensive group discussions will be held supported by special guests and specialists on the issue of architectural education. The studio will also take into consideration the work produced by students at the Institute for Art and Architecture at the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna during the winter term 2015.” (Studio Staub&Papathanasiou). “ii Design Seminar: London During our Design Seminar we will travel to London to experience new forms of architectural mediation as well as meeting and working with our research partners at the Architectural Association School of Architecture (AA) among other institutions.” (Studio Staub&Papathanasiou). “iii La Biennale di Venezia The student’s work will be included in a publication, event and performance part of the Salon Suisse 2016 on the opening day of the 15th International Architecture Exhibition, La Biennale, in Venice.” (Studio Staub&Papathanasiou).

1A_Research part

Research part Brief History of University and Academia

BRIEF HISTORY OF UNIVERSITY AND ACADEMIA Overview According to Encyclopaedia Britannica the role of higher education institutions such as universities, academias, schools and others has been changing throughout history. Since the Middle Ages university as we know it today started to emerge - firstly in north Italian cities such as Bologna, than in France, and afterwards in the whole western, central and Eastern Europe (Encyclopaedia Britannica, n.d.). As pointed out by Aldo Geuna the evolution towards current form was not linear. Universities played almost no role during rapid Enlightenment era science development since, simply said, they were occupied with religious disputes. They reclaimed their position during 19th century when they set up a framework for universities of the 20th century. Today the university faces new threats and opportunities and the next evolutionary step will probably be needed (Geuna, 1996). Geuna divides the history of university into four phases. The first describes the beginnings of university in the Middle Ages from late 12th century to the beginning of the 16th century. The second he characterizes by the decline of influence of university between 16th and the end of 18th centuries. The third depicts the recovery lead by Humboldtian reformed German university and the fourth is described by opening to masses and specialization after the Second World War up until 1970s. There might be a fifth phase defined by the changes brought by the end of 20th and the beginning of 21st centuries (Geuna, 1996). Medieaval University In Interpretative History of European Universities it is pointed out that even though a certain form of what we would today call higher education was crucial for most of prospering civilizations throughout history, the medieval university offered unprecedented degree/diploma system comparable throughout Europe. Educators were paid for teaching and travelled between European universities. They were enjoying certain degree of independence of empire, kingdom, or local authority and were protected usually by papacy or later by empire/royalty. They used Latin as universal language. In fact they were international, relatively independent institutions, which was in contrast to fragmented character of medieval societies. They would offer education in law and other disciplines such as medicine, theology and art to narrow group of students. Typical attendants would be adults deepening their knowledge in chosen profession. In 15th century universities sprang also in western and central Europe - typically created by local sovereignty. At the end of the Middle Ages (18th century) universities lost their independent position and were passive towards enlightenment and humanistic thoughts (Geuna, 1996).

Research part Brief History of University and Academia

Enlightenment Further he explains that during 17th and 18th centuries - up until the end of the Enlightenment period - universities did not really contribute to deepening of knowledge, moreover they sometimes even opposed scientific development which happened at academies and other private scientific institutions. These institutions developed first in London and Paris. They were not financed by state thus they were very independent. The actual research did not happen there, they were more places of confrontation of thoughts. Later on states started to finance them and establish their own academies with libraries and equipped laboratories. This development laid the foundation of today’s scientific community. Characteristic of the time was specialization of the fields of knowledge which academies were unable to deal with. Instead, universities came back to play (Geuna, 1996). German Model Interpretative History further explains that the most influential model of university that then spread across Europe was the German one. Even though the university reform initiated in 1809 by William Humboldt brought the holistic thinking and research to the front the trend towards specialization in research fields prevailed (Geuna, 1996). The reform enabled “the creation of an autonomous institutional setting for intellectual activities” (Wittrock, 1993, p.320). Geuna than continues by stating that university in this time played two major roles - it prepared individuals for professional careers. Secondly it was a means of strengthening cultural unity and national identity and was a key player in formation of the nation states in Europe. States started to maintain universities for ideological as well as economic purposes (Geuna, 1996). 20th Century The type of university with clearly defined fields of study remained more or less unchanged until the WWII an Interpretative History says and continues explaining that after the war the process of massification, democratizing processes in Europe, economic growth and the demand for skilled labour force changed the university’s environment. No more were they elite institutions but became open for those who were able to study there. The post war university was characterized by specialization in various fields of study and creating new ones and new combinations and also by dependency on equipment, research orientation and professional training. The need for absorbing masses into higher education was coped with by enlarging current universities, establishing new ones and establishing other types of higher education providers. The difference was that universities were capable of providing teaching as well as research and had higher status whereas the new institutions did usually train professionals only. Research also started to be carried out in specialized research centres which weakened the intellectual monopoly of universities. The influx of students caused lowered education quality and increased financial demands. Bureaucracy became a major burden for institutions. Universities

Research part Brief History of University and Academia

in this time were sponsored by state as it saw them economically viable - there was a trust in applicability of scientific discoveries in daily life which was supported by the example of WWII. The nation state-supported universities started to be challenged later (Geuna, 1996). Recent Development The most significant event in the development of European universities in recent decades is perhaps the so called Bologna process from 1999. It operates within the environment of mass education and it adds a new quality to the existing system. According to European University Association the main aim is to internationalize individual national education systems and make them concurrent. (European University Association, 2016) It is disputable if the standardization process did not weaken the specificity of each education institution Philip Urspurng discusses. (Ursprung, 2015, para. 11)

UNIVERSITY TODAY University as Carrier of Ideology Opinions on the current role of university differ. Brennan, King and Lebea see the power of universities to transform societies. They have identified several cases of university playing an important role in transformation of society from one state to another such as westernization process of Bulgaria after the fall of communist system. According to them the function of university is that of carrier of ideology, framework for selecting social elites and training labour force; less they are important in knowledge production as it is produced in specialized institutions (Brennan, King, Lebeau, 2004, pp. 11-25).

University as Knowledge Guardian As seen by Altbach, the role of university is not only in training professionals. Universities are still the institutions where the pure research for the sake of it takes place and which is eventually awarded by Nobel prizes. They are considered responsible for knowledge organization, archiving and distribution even in the digital age. They are key social mobility factor - a way to improve social status. Professors as well as students are usually publicly active. Nevertheless the current trend heads towards marketization of education. There is more emphasis on applied research and universities are becoming more dependent on studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; fees. Generally, more activities need to be focused on profit generation. There is an ongoing discussion on whether education is a public good or whether individuals benefit from it only for their private enrichment. This has consequences on funding (Altbach, 2008). The danger of universities becoming mere market servants is stressed also by Delanty who argues for the need to establish new relationships with state and market to be able to preserve the status of opinion leaders and societal change initiators; of a place where ideas could be tested freely (Delanty, 2003).

Research part Legal Framework of Higher Education

LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF HIGHER EDUCATION The Bologna Process Since 1999 higher education in Europe and other countries that have decided to join have been shaped by the so called Bologna Process. According to European University Association the process was initiated by France, Germany, UK and Italy by the Sorbonne Declaration from 1998. Other EU, non-EU and few non-European countries have joined later. So far there are 48 participating countries with their higher education systems. The members are expected to adapt their higher education systems to be concurrent among each other. (European University Association, 2016) European Commission names several objectives followed within the Bologna Process. The principal aim is to make formerly differing European higher education systems comparable. This should simplify education and job mobility within participating countries. Another goal is to make European education more attractive to foreigners and more competitive globally. (European Commission, n.d.) Further goals include fostering life-long learning, quality assurance, employability and social dimension of education. (Bologna Process, n.d.) EUR/lex states that the changes introduced through the process include threestage degree structure consisting of undergraduate (Bachelor) and graduate (Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and Doctorate) degrees and an ECTS system which serves as unifying element. The comparability of degrees among countries should lead to increased mobility of students and academic staff and promote European dimension in learning. (EUR-lex, 2015) Ursprung sees various reactions to the Bologna Process - from applauding it by politicians as another unifying element in Europe to criticism from teachers criticizing it for destroying continuity and specificity. Especially those from German-speaking countries where there is a long tradition of locally specific education institutions. (Ursprung, 2015, para. 11)

Research part Specific Aspects of Architectural Education

SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION Sociologist’s Point of View Based on the lecture given to studio Staub by Monica Kurath, there are certain common characteristics of architectural education. The studio or any other mutation of it (unit, project) is a constant which is rather specific among other educational fields. It is generally based on the master-student relationship. It is considered to be the core of education. Other courses revolve around this core and occasionally interact with it with varying intensity (Kurath, 2016). The way students’ work is assessed is specific, too. It ranges from pier review, student’s project presentation in front of jury, teacher’s presentation of student’s project to jury, table critic, public critic to submitting a portfolio as pointed out by Peter Staub (Staub, 2016). Subjective critique given by the jury after a project is presented is specific for architectural education says Kurath (Kurath, 2016). Despite its subjective character it is usually translated into a certain form of grading system whether it is pass or fail system, written assessment or any type of number or letter scale (Staub, 2016). The Five Approaches of Johan De Walsche Conforming to Johan De Walsche there are five ways to describe different types of architectural education. The first he refers to as a shielded world of ideas. Such place is comparable with the Greek academy. It is a geometrical island within the organic fabric of the city where ideas could be developed independently. The second could be described as a simulator showing the rite of passage. It imitates reality. The advantage is that it allows failure. Such school environment engages with real clients and real world problems. The headquarters type of school encourages students to observe, to go away and come back to report. It emphasises a personal change. Contractual construct type of school is based on agreement with a student. Education is offered as a commodity which could be received after fulfilling certain conditions. The Bologna system with its ECTS credit scheme could serve as an example. Finally a place of learning describes a well defined space with rituals, rooms, devices and tools (De Walsche, 2016). Summed up by Monica Kurath, other characteristics of architectural education include non-linear process of thinking, certain rituals (field work, jury critiques, excursion), training architectural gaze, translation process (representation of the design in drawings, visualization,...). There is also a pressure to establish research. Research in architecture is frequently referred to as research by design - each work of architecture is claimed to be a subject of research (Kurath, 2016).

Research part Opinions on Architectural Education

OPINIONS ON ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION Several differing points of view were encountered. They present opinions on the role of an architect within society, profession of architecture, schools of architecture and ways architecture or architectural knowledge is and should be produced, transferred and mediated. These observations are based on interviews conducted by studio Staub&Papathanasiou during the seminar week in London, several written papers, lectures or movies.

Research part Opinions on Architectural Education

ALDO ROSSI Importance of Aldo Rossi lies in his ability to influence the whole generation of architects not only in his home country Italy but also in Switzerland and to certain extent in France and Argentina where he taught. Sonea observes that Aldo Rossi understood architecture as a framework of life. Architectural order was considered to be able to shape the order of society. The pure form was Rossi’s ideal. Drawing was not understood by him as a testing ground for real architecture only. It was meant as real architecture. The drawn was as valid as the built (Sonea, 2011). Further she observes that for him architect is an intellectual thinker, a generalist and a visionary. Architect is a politically engaged person (Sonea, 2011). The practical meaning of such claim is hard to define. Perhaps Rossi’s writing about the city (Architettura della cittá) could be considered as a political engagement. He provides specific but consistent theory of the city. Because of his questioning of the powers influencing the north Italian cities and because of disputes he had with the then generation of architects he could be considered politically engaged. The project for Avenida de Mayo - a school project from Buenos Aires, Argentina, in which he participated in could serve as a good example. As shown by León it dealt with transforming of a boulevard meant to serve military parades into a pedestrian zone (León, n.d.). His opinion on what the school should be like could be best illustrated on the way he lead the studio. Lobsinger and Damiani report that it could be described as a research kind of studio rather than master to student knowledge transfer. This model served as a sort of blueprint spreading over European schools of architecture (Lobsinger&Damiani n.d.).

Fig. 1 Cittรก Analoga - Aldo Rossi.

Fig. 2 Fagnano Olona School.

Fig. 3 Drawing of Aldo Rossi.

Research part Opinions on Architectural Education

PETER MÄRKLI OF ETH ZÜRICH Based on the interview with Peter Märkli conducted by students from Eindhoven University of Technology there are several topics he addresses in his teaching. Firstly he emphasises the importance of learning the language of architecture. This language is a convention which is needed in order to understand each other and the whole picture. This convention is built slowly but constantly during one’s studies either at university or outside of it. People who do not know their alphabet tend to call everything original (Schevers, 2016). Secondly the importance of taking a personal stance was mentioned. This individual stance has to be positioned consciously within society since plain beauty production is not possible. Each individual has to be rooted somewhere (Schevers, 2016). References outside of architecture are considered crucial by him. “Contradiction in art is considered as a positive thing. (...) I learned that from Goethe and not from the ETH.” (Schevers, 2012). Extreme importance is given to really being aware of the context. It is shown on the example of palaces at Genoa which were only possible because of the rich trade with France and Spain and not because of architect’s will. This architectural context is then much wider than for example painter’s context which ends with a frame. One of his complaints goes to students’ poor knowledge of general history (Schevers, 2012).

Fig. 4 House by Peter Märkli.

Fig. 5 Sketches of Peter Märkli.

Fig. 6 Sketches of Peter Märkli.

Research part Opinions on Architectural Education

STEPHEN BATES OF KRUCKER&BATES STUDIO AT TU MÜNCHEN Stephen Bates explains in an interview conducted by the Eindhoven University of Technology his very clear and consistent opinions on architectural education and explains his and his colleague’s methods of teaching. In their teaching they still need to make an effort to break certain modernist clichés, which are deep rooted in architectural education such as a linear process of design and master-to-student knowledge transfer scheme Stephen Bates sighs. He says that it is not always desirable to start with a site plan and finish with a detail. On the contrary, the methods they employ in their studio include detailed model making in the beginning of the project or forbidding students to draw plans throughout the semester in favour of making models. The nature of the building students have designed is only revealed ex-post in the end of the semester when the plan of the model is finally drawn. As he puts it some of their semesters are focused on teaching numerous specific skills, therefore there is no need for a finalized project in the end of the semester,. In other words, the focus is on exploration and trial and error rather than perfect delivery. Discussion is a natural part of the teaching process (Schevers, 2016). Judged by their emphasis on detail, systematic approach, careful typological exercises and atmosphere exploration through exact models an architect seems to be seen as a craftsman. His notion about today’s conformal and conventional young people that are not questioning enough current status-quo gives insight into his thinking of the role of today’s generation. He also questions technology available today. He sees it as a great opportunity nevertheless only when a student is aware of it being only a tool (Schevers, 2016).

Fig.7 Work of students of Krucker&Bates studio.

Research part Opinions on Architectural Education

NIC CLEAR OF THE GREENWICH SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE Interview with Nic Clear, former teacher at the Bartlett School of Architecture, currently a head of architecture and landscape, was improvised at the corridor of the new building which the school recently moved into. He was the first interviewee to mention the importance of diversity in architectural education. In Greenwich this is supported by attracting international students and by sharing the building with other fields of study such as landscape architecture, graphic design or film making, he adds. Variety of discourses within units, which students should be judged upon, is essential to provide multiple points of view (Clear, 2016). According to him, architect is a person who is able to collaborate in a team and who is aware of political issues and the context he or she operates within since it is inextricable part of architect’s work. His view of the current state of the profession is slightly critical. He criticizes architects’ tendency to occupy themselves with profession’s internal topics which renders them not understood by general public. He is also unsatisfied with the system of education which is still in favor of raising individual egos over collaborators (Clear, 2016). According to Nic Clear there should be no ideals in architecture. Instead, architects should deal with what is in front of them - with material which is already at the place. This is in accordance with his belief that it is people, not equipment or actual spaces where education happens, who are important. That is why he did not mind having an interview in the corridor. In fact, architecture could be taught in this corridor if necessary, he admitted. Not changing the discourse when appropriate and staying at one place was depicted as one of the dangers to architecture. He concluded the interview with the statement that architecture is a fantastic world that is worth exploring (Clear, 2016).

Fig.8 Former work of Nic Clear.

Fig.9 The new building of school of architecture in Greenwich.

Research part Opinions on Architectural Education

HARRIET HARRIS OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF ART, INTERIOR DESIGN&ARCHITECTURE Great concerns about architectural education in UK were expressed by Harriet Harris during the interview. Not only financial issues seem to be the pressing point for UK’s architecture students. The costs of education that can newly reach up to £9.000 per annum for local students and £23.000 per annum for foreign students significantly influence architectural education as a whole, Harris observes. She describes numerous consequences. Students try to balance two things - studying and working - at a time, which compromises both. The demographic composition of students is changing in favor of well off students; these students come more often from new destinations like Asia - as a result only narrow part of society is represented in architectural education. Physical and mental health of a student is at risk under stressful conditions. Due to restricted environment there is less experimentation and less risk taken along the way. Dropout rates are considered high, particularly of female students, which she thinks proves the system to be broken. (Harris, 2016). New relations between architectural practices and academic environment are seen by her as one of the chances to overcome problems mentioned above. She pledges for earlier connection with reality as well as for shorter time of education. She imagines that by reducing stifling financial commitments of students their freedom will be increased together with room for experimentation in their projects (Harris, 2016). She describes architecture as a discipline able to actually solve problems such as social issues. An educational environment is seen as a rather diverse and heterogeneous community of collaborators and student of architecture is described as active, politically aware individual contributing to communicating architectural topics outside of the profession (Harris, 2016).

Research part Opinions on Architectural Education

WILL HUNTER OF THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE Will Hunter, a founding director of the London School of Architecture, expressed strong opinions on architecture and architectural education. His answers were immediate - with essentially no delay to think them through. He and his colleagues manifest their thoughts in their newly established school of architecture in London. Most interestingly he expressed his belief in architects becoming active and influential agents in communities rather than passive service providers. He tried to contest the clichĂŠ of an architect who is a house builder or a mere decorator. In his opinion architecture is the nexus of many disciplines. Therefore architects should be able to collaborate on projects with broad focus and give up on buildings being the only product of the profession (Hunter, 2016). The new school was presented by him as an alternative to existing institutions, as a proactive, to the future looking, with reality engaging entity which will anticipate problems within planetary concerns. The school comes with a counterproposal to the existing costly and unaffordable education system. The new system tries to blur the binary differentiation between academia and practice by merging the two into the new organizational scheme. Practices are invited to collaborate on academic projects and students are invited to take part in practicesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; projects. This cost-neutral symbiosis should prevent students from ending up indebted for their life. Decision to rent, not to own, the place where the school is based is one of many cost-cutting decisions (Hunter, 2016). The school was described as a product of time and context it is set within. It would not be possible without the advancement of technology and such city as London. A critical mass of people and businesses are essential for it to exist. It is a small school which fills one of the niches within architectural education. It is complementary to existing universities. The school is not didactic towards students. They are rather expected to search for their own interest instead of following given task (Hunter, 2016).

Research part Opinions on Architectural Education

C. J. LIM OF THE BARTLETT SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE Based on the interview studio Staub&Papathanasiou conducted and works of his students C. J. Limâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s approach to architecture seems to be rather poetic. Alongside critical thinking, the ability to narrate a story is one of the key skills to be gained in architecture school. Other skills were claimed to be important but secondary. On top of that student of architecture has to be politically and environmentally aware and has to have a clear and active position towards society. He or she has to explore and aim for innovation. Bartlett is there to facilitate and supervise these efforts. It was mentioned that there are no boundaries regarding the type of project. The only criterion is that it has to be explored in as much detail as possible (Lim, 2016). The sense of reality is brought to students by teachers who are at the same time part-time researchers as well as by the structure of the diploma portfolio where various categories has to be fulfilled he described. A studio was presented as the very core of architectural studies. Nevertheless history and theory courses are equally important parts of the curriculum to support the studio. The one-year-long diploma project compiled in a voluminous portfolio is a piece of work with which students usually present themselves after leaving the school (Lim, 2016). Identity of the Bartlett was said to be defined by diversity and heterogeneity of the student body which is characterized by a good mix of local and foreign students - each with their own cultural background. Dissatisfaction was expressed about the cost of education in UK which has a great impact on students. They either need to compromise their studies and work alongside or they end up indebted. This influences demographic composition of students. Students from wealthier families tend to come more often whereas students with middle and lower middle class background tend to be underrepresented complained C. J. Lim (Lim, 2016). An architect as defined by C. J. Lim is not a problem solver nor artist (Lim, 2016). Judging by the work presented during the interview architectsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; agenda is not limited to space only. It can incorporate cultural or political references (Lim, 2016).

Fig.10 Temporary studio of the Bartlett.

Research part Context Architectural Education Currently Operates Within

CURRENT ARCHITECTURAL MILIEU Overview Majority of the examined texts, discussions and lectures stress the fact that architecture and architectural education is not in a good condition. They often emphasize that there is a need to rethink, revolutionize, adapt or reform it. Way too often they depict a changing uncertain world of challenges awaiting architecture. Nonetheless considerable portion of these works see also opportunities in such conditions. The overall image given by the works is that architecture is in constant fight for survival. The factors shaping the world of today repeatedly mentioned in the texts mostly include technological advancement, pervasive economic crisis and architectural education that is not up to date to be able to keep up with changes. Generally the wish for architecture to be at the forefront of knowledge advancement is often formulated. There is a recurring complaint expressed about architecture still being intellectually stuck in renaissance. The two following views describe the field of architecture as a whole. Stuck in Renaissance Soolep depicts architectural profession under a threat of dissolving under new conditions and he is not afraid to depict a complete paradigm change in architecture. There have been three areas in which architecture is likely to be challenged identified by him. Firstly the representation of the design has not changed since Brunelleschi. Nevertheless the carefully done plans and drawings might be replaced by virtual reality representations or algorithms. Production of architecture is under pressure as automation and additive manufacturing have already started influencing it. The new methods of production and organization then lead to the question of authorship as many more actors influence the final design, especially when the final design is in many cases defined by algorithm. Then it is less clear who is responsible for the decision. If it is an architect who designed the algorithm or others capable of intervening with the it in later stage. Architect is then becoming just one of the consultants (Soolep, 2015). Architectural reality of today as described by Allan has roots in economically successful 1980s and technology rapidly advancing 1990s. 2010s are then described as reacting to economical and environmental crisis. The general trend is described as putting aside theories and focusing on practical implementation of knowledge and building techniques - getting dirty in the field. There is a wish expressed for architecture to be self confident, design driven, technologically agile, internationalized field freed from reliance on knowledge of other disciplines (Allan, 2012).

Research part Context Architectural Education Currently Operates Within

Medieval Analogy There is general confusion expressed by Buchanan about the fact that architectural education is behind in most of the aspects that are taught such as materials, tools, ways of analysis, etc. A complaint that not even sustainability has made major impact on architectural curricula is voiced. The influence of so called post-modernity is questioned because the benefits of it were already outbalanced by the cons. The university of today is compared to university of the Middle Ages (Buchanan, 2012). “Hence postmodern theory is exactly analogous to scholasticism at the end of the middle ages, which in its obsession with arguing over the number of angels on the head of a pin did not notice Renaissance burgeoning all around.” (Buchanan, para. 10). Also the topics that are taught are criticized. Such as teaching French philosophy: “Theory courses tend to be more concerned with such things as literary theory and French philosophy than anything to do with architecture and mistake obfuscation for profundity, dressing up the most banal of observations in obscure language.” (Buchanan, ,para. 12).

Research part Spaces for Architectural Education

WHERE ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION HAPPENS This chapter confronts two kinds of spaces where architectural education may happen. One of the spaces is used for a short period of time only and is described based on authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s personal experience. The second one is home to some 1000 students of architecture. They differ in density of the space. They are similar in their informality.

Research part Spaces for Architectural Education

OBORA - EXCURSION PLACE OF THE STUDIO OF KUZEMENSKÝ&SYNEK AT CZECH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY IN PRAGUE I attended studio of Michal Kuzemenský and Ondřej Synek at CTU in Prague four times. Studio always starts with an introduction to the topic, guest lectures are organized and the topic is discussed from different points of view. Then, students are asked not to appear in the studio for three weeks. After three weeks each student is expected to present others with a strong opinion on how to approach the topic and proposal of next steps. This happens in form of presentation which does not take place at the university but in the space depicted bellow. The place is a village near the Czech-German border where students spend five days. The house itself is a village’s Gemeindehaus. In this space students and teachers live, present work, sleep and cook for almost a week. It is a very modest place. It consists of one big room, small kitchen and a toilet. It is equipped with one Boullerion stove and one smaller stove as sources of heat fuelled by wood logs, many tables and chairs, and limited amount of electricity plugs. Students bring sleeping bags and mattresses. Majority of the people come by car, some by train. Each morning one car crew is assigned to shop for breakfast and food for a day in the nearby town. People cook together. During the day presentations in front of the two teachers, sometimes few guest teachers and others take place. They usually end by 6pm but sometimes last up until 10 in the night. Afterwards dinner is cooked. Evenings are dedicated to movie screening, music, synthesizer playing, talks, or beer drinking. The excursion ends on weekend by concluding discussion and generalizing comments in the morning and by hike through the surrounding villages, woods, fields, and swamps as part of the ritual in the afternoon. Next morning people leave.

Fig.11 Obora.

Research part Spaces for Architectural Education

NANTES SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE BY LACATON&VASSAL As summed up by Slessor of Architectural Review the new building of the school of architecture was built in Nantes in 2009 by French architectural office Lacaton&Vassal. Its design was chosen in competition. It was built in order to house rising amounts of students because the building from 1970s was not sufficient any more. Now the building serves 1000 students. The competition brief asked for approximately 15,000 square meters of floor area but Lacaton&Vassal were able to offer almost twice as much for the same price. It was possible due to using cheap materials and simple IKEA storage-like construction system (Slessor, 2009). Further the she adds that the building comprises of two layers of basic construction. There is a concrete structure stretching always over two floors and there is a lightweight steel structure built-in the concrete one stretching over one floor, which further divides it into smaller compartments. Outer and some of the inner surfaces are covered in polycarbonate sheets. None of the spaces except the steel built-in spaces are heated spaces. The most significant element of the building is the ramp winding up through all the floors, which leads to the roof terrace. Many of the spaces are left undedicated to any purpose. The parking spaces are located on the first floor therefore no ground digging was necessary. The ground floor surfaces are covered in asphalt (Slessor, 2009). Philip Ursprung of ETH in ZĂźrich describes the building as a mirror of the Bologna process - as if the school in Nantes was physical materialization of it and of the infrastructure associated with EU (Ursprung, 2015).

Fig.12 Nantes School of Architecture.

1B_Interpretation of the Research

Research part Recurring Topics

CHOSEN TOPICS Several topics and questions were chosen from the topics recurring in the researched material. They were completed with the topics of personal interest. These questions serve as a preparation for research question definition.

What does it mean to build a new school of architecture? What does it imply? Designing a new school of architecture does not only mean designing a building. It also means defining the task for architectural profession for upcoming years. What is this task? The role of the profession is defined against the context of the time. How is the context of our time defined? What are the relevant issues of today for me personally? What is the expertise of architecture if there is any? How is architectural education affected by the so called globalization? What is the role of technology in architecture and architectural education? How can architecture as a profession improve communication channels with other interest groups capable of affecting built environment? What kind of spaces should architecture be taught in? What are the tools of architect of today and tomorrow?

Research part Research Question

RESEARCH QUESTION Preliminary question I What should a new School of Thought be like in order to establish and explore new kinds of relationships within current educational system, private bodies, public bodies and general public? Preliminary question II How can I as an architect influence the built environment by other means than directly designing it? Could involving other agents (such as communities, professionals or organizations) in the architectural education process help with influencing it indirectly? How can different levels of interaction between architects and non-architects contribute to better understanding between the two?

Research question How can the current trend of personalization in education initiated by the so called Bologna Process be taken further in order to benefit students of architecture? How can this be manifested spatially?

2A_Proposal - theoretical approach

Proposal -theoretical approach Manifesto for the New School of Thought

MANIFESTO FOR THE NEW SCHOOL OF THOUGHT This manifesto applies for a generic school of architecture. No geographical context is imposed on the manifesto yet. After applying the manifesto in certain context only it will acquire particular meaning. This is the first approach to answering the research question.

Proposal -theoretical approach Manifesto for the New School of Thought

1_The new school of architecture is fully aware of its power to manifest its opinion on architecture. 2_The new school of architecture is a public institution. It demonstrates a desirable behaviour of such institutions in the context of 21st century. 3_The new school of architecture is set within the context of our time. This context is shaped by shared universal problems and opportunities on global level more than ever before. Reactions to such conditions should not be universal. 4_The new school of architecture is aware of bigger picture issues and will relate them to local specific conditions. 5_The new school of architecture blurs the edge between academic environment and real world. Full time students are not the only interest group. General public, fresh graduates, professionals from other fields, and local political and private representatives are inseparable part of the school. To do so the new school of architecture externalizes its content in order to provoke discussion and function as a catalyst of processes addressing built environment. 6_Architect is a person who addresses current important issues with theoretical or physical contributions to the built environment. He or she can do it directly by designing it or indirectly by influencing other agents active in the built environment. 7_Architect creates opportunities proactively. He or she does not wait for a client to come. Public engagement in its widest sense is the task for architects of today. 8_Student of architecture is not raised as individual, he or she is rather trained to be a constructive collaborator. School of architecture is studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s playground. He or she uses it as a framework allowing them to fail. Failure is the essential part of education process. Students of architecture are not passive recipients of pre-packaged knowledge, they are encouraged and expected to have their own opinions. 9_Students in the new school of architecture engage directly with the object of their interest not with its representation. 10_Discussion is the most emphasised communication channel exercised in the school of architecture. Architectural craft in its widest sense is the means of translation from theoretical to physical. Spatial narrative is the final product of architectural education. Technology is inextricable, nevertheless, always secondary part of the discourse of the school of architecture.

Proposal -theoretical approach Manifesto for the New School of Thought

MANIFESTO NOTES

Introduction - state of the profession The originally elite discipline of architecture is in identity crisis. It has the ambition to solve the problems of the world but it is not asked to do it. It is approaching a stage when each of its actions will have to be carefully justified since there is no guarantee of an architect being given second chance. This process of moving towards uncertainty should be seen as an opportunity to reconsider the role of an architect in society. If architects want to have any say in affecting the building processes and a physical appearance of the built environment and avoid marginalization of the profession they have to give up on being treated as individual heroes. Rather they need to be ready to adopt the role of mediators, collaborators, and catalysts of processes leading to better built environment. The image of linear hierarchy with architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s client at the top, followed by architect himself, followed by civil engineer and concluded by construction company should be overcome. Architect of the near future is part of a team. A generalist type of education architects get may predetermine them to take on certain roles within this new reality such as team leaders but not necessarily. In fact, the shift towards the scheme mentioned above is already taking place. The major problem is that none of the changes are reflected in education. This shift should not be seen as clearing former positions of architects. It should rather be seen as late but inevitable adaptation to ongoing changes. Character of the school and its organization The new school of architecture does not try to rethink the whole architectural education. It is rather complementary to the current system of education of architects. It addresses the gap between architectural educationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s insiders (students, lecturers, researchers) and outsiders (professional architects, fresh graduates, general public, professional public, public organizations, political representatives, other age groups, etc.) who may as well be interested in and contribute to a debate on architecture. The binary distinction between the two causes misunderstanding on both sides and is a missed opportunity to enrich both. It should not be a question of being or not being a part of architectural education system. Rather it should be a question of the intensity of interaction with it. This division could be overcome by introducing a sort of buffer zone, which is flexible and robust enough to contain various activities related to architecture. These could include some of the spaces such as offices for non-profit or for-profit organizations to certain extent related to architecture, cost-effective offices for recent graduates; it could host a space serving as a discussion platform, several housing units for students or temporary school visitors, rentable working spaces, rentable workshops, exhibition spaces, etc. This needs to be addressed with concrete architectural solution. It should function as a low-barrier, easy plug-in interface.

Proposal -theoretical approach Manifesto for the New School of Thought

It does not necessarily mean that this buffer zone has to be neighboring the school directly in physical space. Even though the school aims for a concentric character, the above mentioned border could be softened by occasional interventions of the school elswhere in its surroundings or any other place of its interest. Depending on the context the school is going to operate within this approach could eventually be taken even further by declaring the school as having dual character - the base and the on-site projects. The heart and identity carrier of the school is the base. It is set within a certain context permanently. This context has to enable the school to create strong identity. It has to offer straightforward access to networks of people capable of collaborating on schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s projects and it has to be easily accessible to diverse groups of people (both interested and incidental passersby). This context is probably a city. Precise selection of the location of the base is crucial because it determines the schools character. The supplement of the base is the on-site project. Its purpose is to allow students to understand the space of their interest from immediate experience. Students will then deal with the object itself instead of its representations in the form of photographs, 3d models, or mediated experience of others. The on-site projects should be set within the reach of the school and within clearly defined context. This means within close surroundings, a city, a region, a country or within a wider region such as central Europe, alpine countries, etc. In other words, the on-site project could range from enhanced excursion to temporary stay. Nevertheless the concentric character of the school has to be kept. The length of the on-site project varies and is not fixed. There might be no need for it in some semesters but each student should be allowed and obliged to experience it at least once during his studies. Intensity, frequency and importance of the on-site project in curriculum is highly dependent on the context the school is set in, nevertheless is important part of it. Content and output The very intention of the school is to confront topics that are domestic to it with wider or global perspective. This should make it appealing enough to attract both local and foreign students. Even though, architecture has always been interacting with other disciplines and lately, as Michael Schindhelm interprets, started to invade them in self-defense (Schindhelm, 2016), its specialization is space. Therefore space will always be its main concern. Students are expected to have basic architectural skills. They are expected to take active part in creation of curriculum and other aspects of their education. Students are expected to introduce their own topics they desire to investigate or are passionate about. There should not be a possibility to avoid naming such topics. In order to enable so the whole Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s degree studies are transformed into two-year long diploma project. The main purpose is to let the topic crystallize. It provides time to investigate dead ends or time

Proposal -theoretical approach Manifesto for the New School of Thought

to change direction. The on-site project could be part of the preparation phase or final phase, depending on the topic and student’s intentions. Organization The constant of architectural education system is a studio. It is seen as the most significant advantage that students of architecture have over students from other fields. The quality of interaction between students and tutors is considered high for it enables group as well as individual tutoring and it stimulates discussion. Its advantage is that this single entity could combine numerous means of knowledge transfer such as tutoring, lecture, excursion, spontaneous learning among students, etc. It acts against fragmentation and enables mixing, hybridization, misuse, unexpected combinations. Any effort to over categorize knowledge too early (e.g. into subjects) is undesirable. Studio functions as identity carrier and emotional connector. Therefore any tendencies to dismantle studio are considered unfavorable. Size of the studio is a key factor determining its atmosphere. The school aims at 10-12 (15 at maximum) students per studio. Such group of people is likely to develop closer personal ties among its members and is able to act operatively according to possible changes in projects. Mobility and accommodation of such group during the on-site project phases or excursions is easier as well. Due to its size, requirement for frequent excursions, on-site projects and necessity to interact with architectural education’s outsiders via exhibition material the new school of architecture is financially demanding. Consequently it has to establish ties with several public or private subjects, existing universities or generate profit itself. Profit generation is legitimate but might become problematic as soon as students’ projects start to be seen as a cheap commodity. On account of funding generation several stakeholders have to be incorporated into school’s organization. Their type depends exclusively on the chosen site. Space Spaces of the school can be divided into two categories: spaces of the school itself (studio, offices, workshop, computer lab, etc.) and spaces for affiliated entities. There should be a tendency to mix spaces rather than separate them. In case of longer term stay at the site of onsite project its spaces might be appropriated into working spaces or, if possible with appropriate effort, even into accommodation spaces. Size The school is proposed as a rather small entity of approximately 25 to 30 students. Small size fits its complementary character to large universities and enables it to be flexible. It reduces the need for large organizational structures and permits self-adjustment when necessary. As a small-sized organization it can intercalate itself into existing structures without major obstructions - it allows to find itself a proper niche to fit into. The need for a large number of spaces could be reduced.

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Prague, Czech Republic

THE CHOSEN SITE

Prague, Czech Republic was chosen as geographical, social, historical and political context for the new school of architecture.

REASONS FOR SELECTING PRAGUE

Subjective and Objective There are two layers of reasons for choosing Prague as a site for the new school of architecture. The first two reasons are solely subjective. Since I spent four years living in the city I am familiar with its context and I am personally interested in proposing a new intervention to the city. Also, there was a new building of the Faculty of Architecture built recently, which I visited for four years and which I am critical about. Therefore coming up with a counterproposal is a chance to confront my opinion with status-quo. The second layer is rather objective. Prague could be seen as a prototype of Central European city, which is based around its medieval core. Vienna, Budapest, Munich or Warsaw could be mentioned as like-sized cities with similar character and importance within their particular region. In contrast to such cities Prague was almost untouched by World War II. This leaves the city with extremely rich and well preserved architectural heritage. Implications of this state are many. Exodus From the City Centre The intensity of tourism is extremely high. On one hand it puts pressure on the city centre; on the other hand it is a major source of income. The intensity is magnified by the fact, that large parts of the city are subject not only to national-level conservation laws but the city core falls under UNESCO World Heritage-protection, therefore makes it world-known site. This entails another characteristic, which is strict building regulations. These may extend the building approval process to years especially in the centre. Supposedly, this might be one of many reasons why the city grows in size but not in population (fig. 15 and 17). E15 daily observes that a trend towards depopulation (fig. 16) of the city centre promises to culminate in upcoming years but is still a problem (E15, n.d.). A2 daily points out that the reason is gentrification based on turistification. Further it is explained that less and less the pulse of the city centre is determined by its residents. In extreme scenario this part of the city might become an excluded area. Concomitant of this state are empty houses of both residential and non-residential characters (BĂrovĂĄ, 2016). Nevertheless, individual empty houses signify larger-scale problem of inner reserves of the city that are not being used. Instead the city is ever growing (fig. 15). One of the apparent reasons for not using these sites might be that it is more difficult to build there. They range from former railway stations that are no longer being used to simply gaps in urban fabric. Nevertheless, Prague is not a city with significant building dynamic. It is a city without cranes. A question to ask is how long can it exploit its past without adding new contemporary layer, which will finally move it into 21st century. On one hand, characteristics mentioned above make it possible to put Prague in certain categories and match it with other cities, which may share similar problems, on the other hand there are local specifics that make it special enough to be able to create strong identity, which is also a reason to chose it.

Fig.13 Prague. The site, empty building and former medieval walls.

PRAGUE - EMPTY BUILDINGS

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Prague, Czech Republic

MANIFESTO APPLIED

1_The new school of architecture in Prague is aware of the danger that due to lack of activity and unclear vision the city might slide into insignificance within Europe. The school is concerned by recent development when some of the iconic buildings of 20th century were torn down or are under a threat of being removed. The newly established school of architecture in Prague manifests against cultural exploitation and stands for creating new values. It is manifestation for progressivity in dealing with heritage as exploration of new ways for doing so is its main agenda. 2_Working with existing building register is considered as one of the desirable directions of Prague of 2016. There is no need to cut deeper into empty space surrounding the city. Building on a green field is an outdated concept. Architect of today is master of reinterpretation of existing. That is why the new school of architecture appropriates one of the available empty properties. Precise selection of the site within the city is crucial factor determining significantly character of the school. 3_Global in case of Prague means region of Central Europe. Universal means problems of alike cities. Local means Prague itself. 4_The case for Prague is to realize that it is not always necessary to build new objects to satisfy demand. There might already be appropriate space available whether it is an existing object or a site inside the city. As examples of such approach might serve the efforts of planners from Netherlands who have listed each single building in the country in order to visualize growth of their cities (All building in the Netherlands, n.d.). According to E15 cities like Vienna have taken measures to attract inhabitants back to their centres such as demarcating a zone where it is not allowed to transform flats into offices (E15, n.d.). These bits form the bigger picture for Prague. Vocabulary used in relation to cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s built environment should include at most words such as: reinterpret, inhabit, reconnect, inject, evolve, squat, reveal, adapt, fit in, squeeze in, build on top, add layer, remove layer, intervene with surgical precision, explore, uncover, demolish, dig in, refine, make available, initiate, guide through. Available properties are going to be explored, analyzed and categorized.

Fig.14 Prague. The UNESCO protected area.

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Prague, Czech Republic

5_Architectural discourse in Prague is shaped by several academic and non-academic parties. Academic environment is formed by five schools of architecture (Faculty of Architecture at Czech Technical University; architectural programme at Faculty of Civil Engineering at the same university; School of Architecture at Academy of Fine Arts; School of Arts, Architecture&Design in Prague; ARCHIP - private school of architecture). Other creative fields are represented by Academy of Fine Arts (painting, graphic, sculpture, new media, restoration), School of Arts, Architecture and Design (graphic, free art, applied art). Theoretical contribution is taken care of e.g. by Institute of History of Art at philosophical faculty of the Charles University and other institutions with occasional contributions of other five architectural programmes from the rest of the country. Other parties interested in architectural discourse may include official institutions (city council representatives; National Antiquities Authority; Prague Institute of Planning and Development; Czech Chamber of Architects), civic associations (Club for Old Prague), other institutions (several public and private galleries frequently or occasionally organizing exhibitions on architecture, student organizations, public initiatives), passersby (tourists, citizens, people from other parts of the country), individuals (fresh architectural graduates from architectural schools from all over the country, graduates from other fields, professional architects, general public), private business entities (investors), festivals and conferences (Day of Architecture, Architecture Week, Re-Site) and many others. The new school of architecture has the ambition to function as one of the moderators of the debate by actively inviting interested parties to participate in discussion on academic premises. 6_Current important issues in Prague might be represented by ongoing preparation of legislative directives (new Prague Building Regulations building on experience with regulation of such cities as Vienna; new Metropolitan master plan), ongoing discussions regarding 20th century heritage protection (are there other proofs of quality than age?), emptying city centre, discussion on socialist era housing blocks rejuvenation, increasing number of architectural competitions, or big infrastructural projects. 7_Architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s client of today does not necessarily have to be a builder. Architect does not have to fulfil orders for buildings only. Architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to organize, find patterns, and interpret may be useful in many aspects of human activity. 8_The new school of architecture should allow student to fail as many times as possible. The sooner the better.

1968 1968

1784 1968

1922

1974

1968

Fig.15 Territorial expansion of administrative borders of Prague.

1974

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Prague, Czech Republic

9_Objects of studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interest are in case of Prague buildings as much as one thousand years old. The city is a library of architectural archetypes collected over one millennium. Strong baroque presence is layered over the original medieval core based on gothic parcelation. 19th century blocks crowned by Cubist jewels are sliced by infrastructural projects of 20th century, functionalist planning contribution is felt behind the city centre limits and typified housing blocks of socialist era circumscribe the city. 10_The level of academic discussions on architecture in the context of Prague could be considered satisfactory at the moment, even though the frequency could be higher, topics much more encouraging and forward looking and not only reactionary to current political development. However, the discussion exists. The deficit perhaps lies in communicating architectural topics outside of academic sphere. The new school of architecture aims to function as initiator of discussion between different subjects and serves as a neutral ground where such discussions could take place. Architectural craft is understood as a skill to materialize the imaginary. Tools of architectural craftsmanship are materials, architectural language, and well elaborated detail. It is desirable to let advanced technological procedures invade traditional processes. Computer aided manufacturing and prototype making is considered as standard of the field. Experiments with unconventional materials are part of the schools agenda. The new school of architecture encourages students to challenge traditional material processing approaches. In Pragueâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s context a spatial narrative means linking existing spaces with new ones, guiding through carefully elaborated atmospheres, revealing one space after the other, giving hints. It is an art of subtle changes. The task for an architect is to create a film setting for real life actors. To create an ideal narrative for each designed space, scenes to be inhabited by real people.

Fig.17 Population diagram.

2011

2001

1991

1980

1970

1961

1950

1 272 690

1 169 106

1 214 147

1 182 186

1 140 795

1 133 056

1 057 570

Fig.16 Change in population index.

1.200.000

800.000

400.000

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Prague, Czech Republic

KEY TO SELECTING CONCRETE SITE

The range of sites to chose from in the inner city is large (fig. 13 and 14). Not all of them are convenient for the school, though. In general they may be sorted out into categories: 1_Empty objects. Objects no longer taken care of for various reasons. Often dilapidating objects, typically in city center. They range from single to multi-storey buildings; from historical to recent ones (fig. 18). 2_Gaps in city fabric. Obvious gaps within city blocks (fig. 19) or not so obvious sites that might or might not be considered as unfinished urban structure. 3_Empty areas. Leftovers such as train stations that are no longer being used. Parts of them may be interesting for the school as they offer large open spaces like halls suitable to establish workshops (fig. 20). Basic criteria employed in the selection include: a need to be able to address diverse groups of people easily; to be able to create networks with interested subjects; it should offer spaces flexible enough to be able to appropriate them for the needs of the school; it should enable the school to manifest a radical (meaning desirable but not practiced) approach to the city. The most appropriate category that meets the intentions of the school is the first one Empty objects. More exactly empty objects within the city centre. It implies reuse rather than building new as implied by the second category. From this position it can easily address local inhabitants as well as visitors to the city. City centre is well served by public transport.

Fig.18 House Na KocandÄ&#x203A;

Fig.19 Gap in the city block at Na Poříčí

Fig.20 Former railway station Bubny

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Palác U Stýblů

THE SITE - PALÁC U STÝBLŮ The selected object is a functionalist building from 1929, which, according to Brůhová, has been abandoned since 1994 (Brůhová, 2012). Its privileged position at one of the most important squares in Prague, near the Central Railway Station, close to subway interchange station and position on one of the main routes where streams of tourists flow towards the city center make the school able to inter-grow with many available networks.

Fig.21 Position of the Palác U Stýblů within one of the New Town blocks CLOSE SURROUNDING OF THE BUILDING

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Palác U Stýblů

REASONS TO CHOOSE IT 1_Position (fig. 14 and 21) The selected building lies in the city center in the quarter called New Town established in 14th century. It is not part of the very core of the city, which is the Old Town. It lies in the area between the two former medieval walls. The building itself is part of the block structure which defines the urban pattern of the New Town. These blocks vary in size. Some of them are as wide as 40 meters, some can reach up to 250 meters in one direction. The chosen building is part of one of the largest blocks whose largest dimension equals approximately 350 meters. Due to their size intricate structures developed within them over time. They are characterized by complex system of courtyards that let sunlight in and passages interconnecting the courtyards and the streets. The duality of the streets of the New Town and the hidden inner world of the blocks make the place particularly interesting. The streets are arteries of the city. The passages, niches and pouches hidden behind the facades form the second layer with different type of life inside. Far reaching system of pathways leading through the blocks is interconnected in a similar manner as the streets. It creates a dense network of secondary communication routes. The richness of public, private, semi-public, and semi-private spaces creates an interesting tension. The school inhabits private and semi-private spaces of the house (the house itself) that are related to semi-public and public spaces (passage, garden, street). The position of the school is purposely chosen inside the UNESCO-protected area (fig. 14).

Fig.22 House Palác U Stýblů at historic photograph

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Palác U Stýblů

2_Typology of the house The house is typologically very interesting and specific for its location. In local terminology it is called a palace. It is a type of poly-functional house usually combining spaces for living (upper floors), commerce (ground floor), work (upper floors) and culture (underground cinema and theater), executed in high quality materials and with excellent craftsmanship. Its rigid concrete skeletal construction contains spaces that are easy to repurpose. The size of the building would be inappropriate if it was meant to house the school of architecture alone, as its spatial requirements are modest. However, oversized building was chosen on purpose. It offers plenty of space to choose from and to accommodate affiliated activities in the so called buffer zone as mentioned above. In this case the new school of architecture should serve as a trigger of the process of rejuvenation of the building. 3_Implications of the choice The building is a good example of high quality object from the early 20th century. Finding a new purpose for the abandoned building is a good contribution to the debate about criteria for protection and about qualities that make certain building be considered as cultural heritage. Here the criterion is simply the quality of spaces it offers. Embedding a school of architecture in a building that is privately owned has certain consequences. The interior as well exterior of the house is in desolate conditions. In order to improve its situation there needs to be a critical amount of funds available. In such case it is likely to be financially demanding rather than not. Undoubtedly there will have to be established a financial cooperation between the owner and public authorities. The process will most likely need to be staged. The first stage should include installing the school of architecture.

Fig.23 Palác U Stýblů - passage

Fig.24 Palác U Stýblů - the Václavské Square entrance

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Palác U Stýblů

THE HOUSE IN DETAIL Brief history As summed up by Potůček the construction of the house was finished in 1929. Authors were architects Ludvík Kysela and Jan Jarolím. The name of the house as it is used today is Palác U Stýblů (en.: Pallace at Stýblů; Stýblů equals family name of the builder). It used to host dance café, restaurant, offices, apartments and a cinema and theatre in the underground. During 1960s the cinema was reconstructed because of disrepair of the ceiling. The cinema was in operation until 1994. Since then it is owned by the descendant of the original owner and is in dilapidating state (Potůček, 2011). Overview of the building Typologically it is a courtyard house. It has a front and a back facade. On its sides it touches neighbouring houses. The courtyard runs through all floors above ground. Underground it continues as a cinema auditorium of the same size as the courtyard. All the floors except the cinema, theatre and parts of the passage are one-storey high. The building has longitudinal character. The largest mass is positioned at the front of the building towards the square (15,5 m deep) and at the back towards the garden (12,5 m deep). Spaces attached to the neighbouring buildings are as less as 6,5 m deep and are illuminated only through the courtyard. The passage running on the ground floor through the middle of the building leads to the garden inside the block and to the neighbouring passage. Construction Basic structural elements are concrete columns, beams, slabs and walls. Partitions are supposedly made of bricks. The most frequent span between columns ranges from approximately 4 to 6,5 meters. In some places beams can span up to 13 meters (part of the building towards the square) or 16 meters (underground cinema and parts of mezzanine).

Proposal -theoretical approach The site - Palác U Stýblů

CATALOGUE OF SPACES

Underground Low-ceiling technical rooms Auditorium (three-storey space with dimensions of 15,5 x 28,0 m) (fig. 25) Gallery of the auditorium (used to be used as lodge, 5,5 m wide) (fig. 25) Entertainment room (with a stage) (fig. 26) Ground floor Passage (longitudinal space connecting the square and inner garden, (fig. 27) topped with a dome-like structure) Shops (individual compartments) Mezzanine Column space (26,5 m wide, 13,2 m deep space composed of modules 6,25 x 5,3 m) (fig. 29) Middle-span space (privileged position with the view of the square) (fig. 31) Long-span space (span of 13 m) (fig. 30) Circular space (circumscribing the dome) (fig. 28) Bellow roof Large space I (formerly used as a flat, oriented towards garden) (fig. 32) Large space II (formerly used as a flat, oriented towards the square) (fig. 33) Terraces and balconies Courtyard balconies (narrow space adjacent to former flats) (fig. 34) Courtyard terraces (two terraces adjacent to the dome) (fig. 34) Rooftop terrace (oriented towards the square) (fig. 33) Communications Main staircases (two pieces of staircases leading from the underground to the roof) (fig. 36) Back staircase (additional staircase in the back part of the building) (fig. 35) Cinema staircase (a pair of large staircases leading from ground floor to the cinema) (fig. 38) Large staircase (underground staircase) (fig. 26) Backstage staircase (small utilitarian staircase) (fig. 37)

Fig.25 Souterrain auditorium

Fig.26 Entertainment room

Fig.27 The passage

Fig.28 Circular space

Fig.29 Columns space

Fig.30 Long-spac space

Fig.31 Mid-span space

Fig.32 Large space I

Fig.33 Large space II and a terrace

Fig.34 Balconies and a terrace

Fig.35 Staircase in the back

Fig.36 Main staircase

Fig.37 Backstage staircase

Fig.38 Cinema staircase

80 Fig.39 Longitudinal section through the building

Proposal -theoretical approach Structure of the School

STRUCTURE OF THE SCHOOL Symbiotic relation The new school of architecture is understood as a part of the existing university. Main purpose for that is that it might be beneficial for both. The new school of architecture can build on already existing networks within university; it can outsource some of the lecturers and researchers. The benefit for the university might be diversification of its portfolio. Another aimedfor benefit is that the new school, by its physical presence in the city centre, might serve as a sort of showroom of the university dwelling in the campus off centre - as a sort of offshoot. In fact, the new school is considered as one of the Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s program modules additional to existing ones. In case of Prague the university is the Czech Technical University in Prague. The new school of architecture (understand the new module) will be part of the Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s program Architecture and Planning at Faculty of Architecture. As stated before, one of the main focuses is communication of the internal content with public. Undeniably the school can do that. Nonetheless, a school of proposed size would spend significant amount of energy and resources to do so in quality that is necessary. It needs a critical mass of content so that visitors can dive in architecture if they wish. For this reason it needs a partner institution with similar agenda. This institution is a Centre for Architecture - an institution missing in Prague. It is a public institution whose agenda is to inform, collect, research, publish, and promote high quality building culture. The audience is general and professional public and in Prague tourists especially. Examples of such centres could be found e. g. in Vienna (Architekturzentrum Wien), or Graz (Haus der Architektur).

University Level

CTU Prague

Faculty

Faculty 2

Faculty of Architecture

Programme

Industrial Design

Focus

Faculty 3

Faculty 4

Architecture and Planning

Architecture - the Big Picture

Heritage

Architecture and Urbanism

Landscape Architecture

1 The Base

School of Architecture

Centre for Architecture

researchers

administration

Coordination of activities

tutors

curators

Sharing spaces

archive workers

assistant/lecturer

PR, communication

external lecturer

occasional volunteers

students stakeholders

Uni

City

Private

ngo

Graduates

Practices

Discussion with a public representative moderated by students

Exhibition

Tourists and visitors

Buffer zone

On-site project, example I Light

On-site project, example II Light

On-site project, example III Heavy

One week intensive workshoop on material processing.

Individual excursion.

1 month. Building information kiosks in three or more unused objects - guiding visitor through the city using subtle interventions.

Proposal -theoretical approach Structure of the School

CURRICULUM In the heart of the curriculum there is the studio - a constant, educational concept that is not challenged as it is considered suited for architectural education. Its character is dual since there are two tasks for an architect to master: architectural craft and ability to observe; and the art of discussion, communication and thought translation. That is why there are two equally important components feeding in the studio: theoretical and practical (fig. 41). Fundamental part of the theoretical component is the history course. It focuses not only on history of architecture and arts but by a same proportion on general historical overview with the main emphasis on the 20th century. Prague offers perfect environment to discover it layer by layer through the field exploration. Special focus is put on empirical observation, categorization and interpretation of the latest layers of typologies added to the city. Debate culture cultivation is centred around the course Mediation, translation and initiation. The task of this course is to explore means of communication between students and other parties; to mediate a contact between two parties external to the school and moderate their discussion on academic premises with the help of tutors; and to initiate activities e.g. by raising awareness about a topic. Practical component consists of two parts - the On-site project and Construction techniques, materials and prototyping course. The latter investigates procedures of intervention into existing buildings, materiality and manufacturing techniques. It employs excursions, lectures and workshop time to enable students to try things out personally. The On-site project (fig. ..) is an occasional supplement of the curriculum. Its purpose is to allow students to spend significant amount of time dealing with the object of their design. It includes temporary studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; interventions on site, 1:1 mock-ups, simple construction testing, etc. For this reason sometimes temporary stay will be necessary. The four courses (History, Mediation, translation and initiation, On-site project and Construction techniques, materials and prototyping) are the backbone of the curriculum. They run through the whole Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s program and are supported by additional lectures, workshops or excursion if necessary. The simple structure of the curriculum is substantial for it avoids fragmentation of studies into disconnected bits and pieces. For further information see the examples. The advantage of the new school being established as part of existing university is that its students can outsource certain lecturers for individual consultation. These lecturers are not directly incorporated into the curriculum but serve as occasional source of specialized advice. They can either be invited to attend the school or students can individually consult their projects.

DESIGN PROJECT

THEORETICAL COMPONENT

History

Mediation, translation and initiation

PRACTICAL COMPONENT

On-site project

Construction techniques, materials and prototyping

Fig.41 Curriculum diagram

Topic crystalizes Last verification of the opposite before full focus on the chosen topic

Dead ends Synthesis

Fig. 42 Curriculum timeline

Side design project or optional stay abroad

Minor exercises/ excursions On-site project Heavy Thesis project

No contact time

Beginning of studies Intensive tutoring time

Side design project

Break taken to think possibilities through

Exploring topics

Proposal -theoretical approach Structure of the School

Curriculum timeline Since the new school of architecture is part of existing university it adopts the Bologna system as well. It is a 2-year Master’s program (fig. 42). The main intention of the program is to allow students to have more control of their studies. That is why it does not operate with division into semesters. It rather offers basic elements to operate with that can be assembled by students individually according to the topic they follow and according to their interests. These elements cannot be numerous to allow simple and clear combinations and to prevent exaggerated demands on organization. The intention to give students freedom to decide should not be read as enabling them to have each personalized timetable with no need to meet other students. The individual topics need to be grouped and perpetually regrouped by general themes as they crystallize. There is no list of topics available at the beginning of one’s studies. Rather there are general directions sketched by tutors. The first encounter with the school should leave the impression that my opinion is going to matter. The first weeks and months are the most important part of one’s studies as they are dedicated to intensive tutoring. This is the start of the diploma project. The topic slowly crystallizes and student is getting ready to be left alone with the topic for some time. Alongside the main topic there are minor design projects along the way. Student’s stay at the school is conceived as a balance between intensive tutoring time and time of being left alone to think. Elements to choose from: Intensive tutoring time. Some of the tutoring is obligatory, nevertheless there is certain time assigned for student to chose. No contact time. Only regarding the studio project, not courses. Equals 1/3 of study time. Has to be used. On-site project. It can take on various forms. It can have a form of group project with a tutor; group excursion with a tutor; group excursion without tutor with consecutive report on what was observed; individual excursion/study trip/investigation. It may be initiated by a student or a student might be sent by a tutor. Excursion might be started with a tutor who leaves after some time to let students finish it on their own and then report on it at school. Time to spend outside of the school is set to at least 1 month to 3 months at maximum. It could be used within the preparation phase of the topic or it could be conceived as an execution of the diploma project. Tutoring with lecturers from university. Could be used at any time the tutor is available. Stay abroad. May or may not be used. Falls under the rules of Erasmus program. Break. Understood as floating summer holiday. 60 days of vacation time. Could be used solely as one block in any part of the year. Could be split into two parts at maximum with the length of one part being at least 20 days.

Proposal -theoretical approach Structure of the School

Rules Periods when No contact time or Break is forbidden. At least one month between No contact time and Break. Coordination with other members of studio and tutors is expected. Each combination has to be approved by the tutor. If there is high probability that it does not work in favour of studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s progress he or she might be refused. Fixed times: Introduction to studies. Several anchor points - reports on the state of the project. To be announced by tutors; public presentation; discussion. Tutors have additional 15 days time available when they can announce a ban on Break or No contact time. They have to be announced in advance.

CENTRE FOR ARCHITECTURE The role of the Centre for Architecture is to hold presentations, lectures, workshops, discussions, and screenings on topics of architecture and quality built environment. It organizes permanent or temporary exhibitions. It is a collector and organizer of material related to architecture of Prague. It mediates intentions of the city representatives regarding future development of the city; it mediates statistic figures; it issues publications.

Proposal -theoretical approach Structure of the School

RELATIONS OF THE SCHOOL WITH THIRD PARTIES Who are the third parties and how are they involved Owner of the building. Certain agreement regarding financial investment beneficial for both private and public stakeholders has to be negotiated. The object could either be bought by the city and made available for the use of university or it could be rented from the owner or other ways of sharing could be implemented such as the city may invest into reconstruction of the object and in return some of the spaces could be made available for its use.

Buffer zone. Two parties could benefit from cooperation by either physical presence in the building or negotiating a deal. Graduates. They may be offered an office to rent for reasonable price for certain time. This may be restricted by age or time passed since graduation. Practicing architects and other professionals. The building may offer them offices to rent for regular price. Public and tourists. They are offered information about the city to study. In case of tourists it may serve as their first stop on their way from railway station to the city centre. Different depths of information should be offered. Representative bodies and communities. They could be offered cooperation on chosen topics. Cooperation could be initiated by both the school or a community. Ideally, the topic offered by community should fit in overall focus of the school. It should be assured that students are not being used as a â&#x20AC;&#x153;cheap labourâ&#x20AC;?. Therefore the cooperation should ideally be initiated by the academic institution. Non-governmental organizations. They can initiate cooperation in a same way as representative bodies can or they could be asked to cooperate with the school. Centre for Architecture. Cooperation takes place on the level of sharing spaces within the building. Age relation. Not only full time students between 20-30 years of age but also other age groups could be involved. The school in cooperation with the Centre for Architecture can address them with lectures or workshops. This approach could enable age groups such as high school students interested in studying architecture interact with architectural environment earlier and adjust their decision based on this experience.

Proposal -theoretical approach Structure of the School

SPATIAL PROGRAMME Preliminary catalog of spaces

The school of architecture Studio Lecture room Class room Library Café/bar Computer room Workshop Exhibition space Offices The Center for Architecture Shop Library Lecture room Exhibition spaces of various sizes Café

Archive

2B_Proposal - design proposal

Proposal -design proposal Approach

APPROACH For a while the building was treated as a found object - completely empty. For a while its history was forgotten not to influence the design. Spaces were seen as they are in order to allow different interpretation. Because the building is so vast the basic approach is to select appropriate spaces here and there and connect them somehow. Some of the most interesting and quality spaces were selected to be inhabited by the school and the Centre for Architecture. Nonetheless, they were not usurped. On the contrary, these spaces were made accessible to public. The rest of the spaces are conceived as an empty mass to be gradually inhabited. This is the place where the buffer zone could grow into and which could serve as profit generator (fig. section). The approach could as well be described as injecting a virus of the school that is little by little taking over the building. There were a few surgical cuts made in order to connect rooms in different manner than before. The extent of all interventions is rather small. A building like this deserves careful treatment. High quality materials are proposed to guide a visitor through the building.

PRINCIPLES There were a few basic principles used in the design. Defining some of the spaces of the school as inaccessible and some of them as open to public - mixing the flow of visitors in selected spaces with the school dwellers. Guiding visitors through the building by using a similar architectural language for all the interventions. Guidance is based on subtle hints and employs not only visual but also haptic and acoustic sensations. Visitors are let alone to discover the spaces, which brings a sense of adventure. Some of the routes do not clearly indicate whether the visitor is allowed to enter or not. Some of the spaces could be enjoyed in group of people, some of them on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own. Some of the places are highlighted and create almost a theatrical setting. In this way a visitor could be navigated to a position from where he or she can perceive the space from a particular perspective. As a visitor makes his way through the building atmospheres are gradually revealed to him.

Proposal -design proposal Approach

ATMOSPHERES

The building as it is now is in desolate condition but there is no intention whatsoever to return it to its original state as it would mean loss of identity. For 20 years it has been abandoned and this period of its lifetime cannot be denied. A new layer is laid over the interior of the building. Nevertheless it is a subtle one. If there is an opportunity to keep the surface as it is now then it is kept. Guidance through the building is based on changing atmospheres. Each room with a distinctive atmosphere is pointed by a place of transition, which takes a visitor to another one.

ELEMENTS OF DESIGN

Floors. They unify the space. Used in a form of concrete screed or terrazzo layer on top of currently naked concrete floor. Cladding. Used for covering walls and columns. Never used higher than two thirds of the height of the room and never used on ceilings. Permeable thresholds. Designed as sort of membranes between the spaces of the school and spaces that are publicly accessible. Such membranes allow users for different levels of privacy. They are materialized in a form of wall elements with folding door or heavy and light curtains. Staircases. They range from very heavy, almost opulent ones made with multiple materials to inconspicuous light-weight ones. Elevator. New shaft was cut through the building at appropriate place. It takes a visitor silently from one floor to another. A moment of opening the door is a moment of surprise. It is a heavyload elevator. It is used for transportation of exhibited objects. During the night it is used for loading the workshop with material. Cantilevered ramps. Lightweight constructions attached to the edge of the ceiling slab from the side. Used in basement. They evoke a sense of instability. Handrails. One of the most intimate connections with a piece of architecture. No sight is needed. There are heavy ones where the palm has to be fully opened as well as fragile feeling ones, which bring sense of insecurity.

Proposal -design proposal Approach

MATERIALS There are warm and cold types of materials used. Some of the elements like staircases are composed of multiple layers. In such case the outer layer is always made of cold material whereas the inner layer is made of warm material. Outer layer creates sort of a protective shell, inner layer creates a safety familiar feeling. Floor in the workshop is made of cold concrete screet. Floor in mezzanin is made of terrazzo with greenish tint. Warm materials are contrasted against the grey concrete background of the building.

MATERIALS USED Wood Wood with a green tint. Hard wood such as beech. Used for inner layers. Wood in natural colour. Hard wood such as beech. Used for handrails. Wood with a black tint. Hard wood such as beech. Used for cladding.

Hard surfaces Terrazzo with a green tint. Terrazzo with a grey tint. Concrete screed, grey. Concrete screed, grey. Heavy duty for workshop.

Metals Brushed brass. For handrails. Chromed steel. For covering construction joints of prefabricated elements.

TOUR THROUGH THE BUILDING

Followig pages are dedicated to a guided tour through the building with imagery.

Green tinted terrazzo Brass Black tinted wood Natural wood Green tinted wood Greenigh curtain fabric

Fig. 43 Materials

Fig. 44 Main entrance

Fig. 45 Mezzanin cafĂŠ/bar; where visitors and students mix

Fig. 46 Gallery space shared with the Centre for Architecture and the school of architecture

Fig. 47 Café bellow roof

Fig. 48 Rooftop observation deck

Fig. 49 Former souterrain auditorium used as exhibition space by Centre for Architecture

Fig. 50 Former souterrain auditorium used by students as a workshop

Fig. 51 Mezzanin; threshold between the school of architecture (studio) and cafĂŠ/ bar

Fig. 52 Gallery space; preparation of the exhibition by students

Fig. 53 Detail - main staircase

Fig. 54 Detail - staircase to the roof

Fig. 56 Detail - observation deck

Fig. 57 Detail - souterrain cantilevered terrace

MEZZANIN - BAR U STÝBLŮ Fig. 58 Detail - bar U Stýblů

MEZZANIN - BAR U STÝBLŮ

114 Fig. 59 Detail - bar U Stýblů

ROOF - OBSERVATION DECK Fig. 60 Detail - Rooftop observation deck

STAIRCASE TO THE ROOFTOP - NEW FORM

115 Fig. 61 Detail - staircase to the roof

ANIN - BAR U STÝBLŮ

MEZZANIN - BAR U STÝBLŮ FORMER BASEMENT CINEMA - UPPER TERRACE

Fig. 62 Detail - souterrain terracec and staircase

GROUND FLOOR - MAIN ENTRANCE

116 Fig. 63 Detail - main staircase

118 Fig. 64 Plan - souterrain III

119 Fig. 65 Plan - souterrain II

120 Fig. 66 Plan - souterrain I

121 Fig. 67 Plan - ground floor

122 Fig. 68 Plan - mezzanin with the school of architecture

123 Fig. 69 Plan first floor with the school of architecture and gallery spaces

124 Fig. 70 Plan - typical floor with offices

125 Fig. 71 Plan - bellow roof; cafĂŠ

Conclusion

CONCLUSION The new school of architecture in Prague addresses four important issues. What is the opportunity for a city like Prague in the context of 21st century? How should an architectural heritage be defined and how should it be treated? What is the responsibility of a school of architecture as public institution?. What is the role of a student within architectural curriculum and within architectural discourse? In my opinion the only right answer for the first question is that yet another layer should be added to the city. This time it should be a delicate one, one that is almost unnoticed but which adds a great value. The approach to heritage protection as manifested by the school of architecture could be both sensitive to the object and challenging it at the same time. In my opinion heritage protection cannot be seen as a mere conservation and we should not aim for Prague becoming a city-sized museum. Otherwise, bringing new life into the city centre is what is needed. In my opinion students of architecture should be allowed for more influence of what they are taught. The proposed curriculum system tries to give tutors and their students a sort of rules of the game. Students are given more freedom within defined borders. Their curriculum could be personalized enough while not losing the overall dynamic of the school, which is one the answers to the research question. One of the main contributions of the new school of architecture is that it tries to create quality exclusively with what is already in place. But not only in terms of using the existing building. It also builds on existing institution and tries to establish a symbiotic relationship. It is not introducing many new structures either physical or organizational. It rather plugs-in, rewires and reorganizes existing into a new reality. It manifests one but not the only possible approaches of dealing with a city.

126

Conclusion

The new school of architecture fills a specific niche within architectural education. It challenges the current status quo by approaching students differently - they are trusted more in their ability to decide about what they are going to acquire from their studies. They are expected to have opinions. They are not expected to be able to perfectly solve a given task. The approach to teaching is taken one step further. Students are expected to co-create their own task as asking the right question is incomparably more important than virtuously answering a wrong one. For doing so they are given a framework of curriculum with very few simple rules to play with. The curriculum is characterized by considerable amount of time that a student spends not being present in the actual school but by exploring outer world either on his own or in a group. Physical proximity is one of the main means of creating new relationships with other parties. Simply by placing the school to the chosen place the amount of people who might occasionally pop in increases. Selecting an oversized building was one of the important decisions. It offers enough room for affiliated activities to happen. Reflection of the given critique Anne Feenstra told me after the presentations that he was there in December 1989 when the country decided to take the opposite direction; that this square is the place where history of the nation was made. He said that the power of symbolic meaning should not be overlooked. Even though it is difficult task to do the emotion must be felt from the building. This is probably the most interesting aspect to work on further.

127

List of references

Allan, S. (2012). The Future That Is Now. Hamden: Observer Omnimedia LLC.

All buildings in the Netherlands, shaded by year of construction. (n.d.). Retrieved July 01, 2016, from http://code. waag.org/buildings/ Altbach, P. G. (2008). The complex roles of universities in the period of globalization. Higher Education in the World 3: New Challenges and Emerging Roles for Human and Social Development. Retrieved June 23, 2016, from http://upcommons.upc.edu/bitstream/handle/2099/8111/altbach.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Bírová, B. (2016). Jak obnovit život v centru Prahy? A2. Retrieved July 1 2016 from: http://a2larm.cz/2016/02/jakobnovit-zivot-v-centru-prahy/ Bologna Process. (n.d.). Employability. Retrieved [09/04/2016] from: http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/ hogeronderwijs/bologna/actionlines/employability.htm Bologna Process. (n.d.). Lifelong learning. Retrieved [09/04/2016] from: http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/ hogeronderwijs/bologna/actionlines/LLL.htm Bologna Process. (n.d.). Quality Assurance. Retrieved [09/04/2016] from: http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/ hogeronderwijs/bologna/actionlines/QA.htm Bologna Process. (n.d.). Social Dimension. Retrieved [09/04/2016] from: http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/ hogeronderwijs/bologna/actionlines/socialdimension.htm Brennan, J., King, R., & Lebeau, Y. (2004). The role of universities in the transformation of societies: An international research project: Synthesis report. Retrieved June 23, 2016, from https://www.open.ac.uk/cheri/ documents/transf-final-report.pdf Bruhová, K. (2012). Palác Alfa - U Stýblu. Film a Video. Retrieved July 1 2016 from: http://w.filmavideo.cz/index. php/architektura/98-palac-alfa Buchanan, P. (2012). The Big Rethink Part 9: Rethinking Architectural Education. Architectural Review. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from http://www.architectural-review.com/the-big-rethink/the-big-rethink-rethinkingarchitectural-education/8636035.article Clear, N. (2016). Interview with Nic Clear of the Greenwich School of Architecture [Interview by L. Tommelein, G. Bako, & L. Ka Hei]. In Studio Staub&Papathanasiou: The New School of Thought. Retrieved from https:// newschoolofthought.wordpress.com/2016/03/24/interview-with-nic-clear/ Delanty, G. (2003). Ideologies of the Knowledge Society and the Cultural Contradictions of Higher Education. Policy Futures in Education, 1(1). doi:10.2304/pfie.2003.1.1.9 Dewey, J. (2005). Democracy and Education, Stilwek, KS: DigiReads.com Publishing. [Original Work published in 1916]. E15. (n.d.). Centrum Prahy se vylidnuje, mesto se s tím snaží bojovat. (2013). Retrieved July 01, 2016, from http:// zpravy.e15.cz/domaci/udalosti/centrum-prahy-se-vylidnuje-mesto-se-s-tim-snazi-bojovat-1048937

128

List of references

Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica. (n.d.). University. Retrieved June 21, 2016, from http://www.britannica.com/ topic/university EUR-Lex Access to European Union law. (2015). The Bologna process: setting up the European higher education area. Retrieved June 23, 2016, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:c11088 European Commission. (n.d.). The Bologna Process and the European Higher Education Area. Retrieved April 4, 2016, from http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/higher-education/bologna-process_en.htm European University Association. (2016). The European Higher Education Area and the Bologna Process. Retrieved June 23, 2016, from http://www.eua.be/policy-representation/higher-education-policies/theeuropean-higher-education-area-and-the-bologna-process Geuna, A. (1996). European universities: An interpretative history. Maastricht: MERIT. Retrieved from: file:///C:/ Users/U%C5%BEivatel/Downloads/rm1996-012.pdf Harris, H. (2016). Interview with Harriet Harris of the Royal College of Art, Interior Design&Architecture [Interview by Z. Széplaki, A. Frei, K. Han Yu, & P. Staub]. In Studio Staub&Papathanasiou: The New School of Thought. Retrieved July 1, 2016, from https://newschoolofthought.wordpress.com/2016/03/21/interview-withharriet-harriss/ Hunter, W. (2016). Interview with Will Hunter of the London School of Architecture [Interview by M. Mráz, N. Podejko, & G. Papathanasiou]. In Studio Staub&Papathanasiou: The New School of Thought. Kurath, M. (2016, March). Epistemic Cultures. Lecture presented at Studio Staub&Papathanasiou: The New School of Thought, Vaduz. León, A. M. (n.d.). Aldo Rossi - La Escuelita, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from http:// radical-pedagogies.com/search-cases/a10-aldo-rossila-escuelita/ Lobsinger, M. L. & Damiani, R. (n.d.). Aldo Rossi - Istituto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia (IUAV) and the Politecnico di Milano, Venice and Milan. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from http://radical-pedagogies.com/searchcases/v13-istituto-universitario-architettura-venezia-iauv-politecnico-milano/ Lim, C. J. (2016, March). Interview with C. J. Lim of The Bartlett School of Architecture [Interview by Studio Staub&Papathanasiou]. In Studio Staub&Papathanasiou: The New School of Thought. Potucek, J. (2011). Palác U Stýblu (Palác Alfa). Archiweb. Retrieved July 1 2016 from: http://www.archiweb.cz/ buildings.php?&action=show&id=1427 Rothblatt, S., & Wittrock, B. (Eds.). (1993). The European and American university since 1800: Historical and sociological essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sonea, A. (2011). Paradox and Metaphor, The Monologic Architecture of Aldo Rossi and O. M. Ungers. Vaduz: Universität Liechtenstein. Schevers, J., Herrenberg, H. [Jan Schevers]. (2012, January, 31). Peter Märkli on Education, Research and Practice in Architecture. [Video file]. Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/PdcU8ZGKZkk

129

List of references

Schindhelm, M. (2016, April 14). Kulturelle IdentitĂ¤ten: Michael Schindhelm. Lecture presented at Architecture Lecture Series, Vaduz. Schevers, J., Schevers, E. [Jan Schevers]. (2011, December, 13). Stephen Bates on Education, Research and Practice in Architecture. [Video file]. Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/ sHI3dMhsUbk?t=25m18s Slessor, C. (2009). Nantes School of Architecture by Lacaton & Vassal, Nantes, France. Architectural Review. Retrieved July 1 2016 from: http://www.architectural-review.com/today/ nantes-school-of-architecture-by-lacaton-and-vassal-nantes-france/8601117.fullarticle Soolep, J. (2015, March 10). Architecture, Education and Tomorrow. Estonian Architectural Review. Retrieved April, 2016, from http://www.solness.ee/maja/?mid=129&id=617&p=1 Staub, P. (2016, March). Speech presented at Discussion in studio Staub&Papathanasiou in University of Liechtenstein, Vaduz. Studio Staub&Papathanasiou, (2016). New School of Thought. Vaduz: University of Liechtenstein. Ursprung, P. (2015). Out of Bologna: Lacaton and Vassalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Nantes School of Architecture. Retrieved June 23, 2016, from http://www.e-flux.com/journal/out-of-bologna-lacaton-vassalsnantes-school-of-architecture/ Walsche De, J. (2016, March). Architecture School: An Oxymoron? Lecture presented at Skype lecture in studio Staub&Papathanasiou in University of Liechtenstein, Vaduz.

130

List of figures

Fig. 1

Cittá Analoga - Aldo Rossi. [Digital image]. Retrieved July, 2016, from http://www. mauriziogalluzzo.it/wordpress/clasa2013/273681_img_2.png

Fig. 2

Navia, E. (n.d.). Fagnano Olona School [Digital image]. Retrieved July, 2016, from https://twitter. com/estebannavianl/status/552571830247358464

Fig. 3

Drawing of Aldo Rossi [Digital image]. Retrieved July, 2016, from https://www.flickr.com/photos/ artyapt/4300397069

Fig. 4

Helfenstein, H. (n.d.). House by Peter Märkli [Digital image]. Retrieved July, 2016, from https:// www.architecture.com/Awards/RIBAIntFellows/RIBAInternationalFellows2016/PeterMarkli.aspx

Fig. 5

Sketches of Peter Märkli [Image]. Mion, C. (2015). Peter Märkli - Zeichnungen = Peter Märkli Drawings. Luzern: Quart.

Fig. 6

Sketches of Peter Märkli [Image]. Mion, C. (2015). Peter Märkli - Zeichnungen = Peter Märkli Drawings. Luzern: Quart.

Fig. 7

Work of students of Kurcker&Bates studio [Image]. Bates, S., & Krucker, B. (2013). Hornbækhus: Building register. München: Schiermeier.

Fig. 8

Former work of Nic Clear.

Fig. 9

The new building of school of architecture in Greenwich.

Fig. 10

Temporary studio of the Bartlett.

Fig. 11

Obora.

Fig. 12

Nantes School of Architecture. Retraced from: http://www.lacatonvassal.com/index.php?idp=55#

Fig. 13

Prague. The site, empty building and former medieval walls. Retraced from: https://prazdnedomy. cz/

Fig. 14

Prague. The UNESCO protected area. Retraced from: http://www.praha1.cz/cps/praha-1-1864. html

Fig. 15

Oficiální stránky Českého statistického úřadu. (n.d.). Territorial expansion of administrative borders of Prague. Retraced July 01, 2016, from https://www.czso.cz/csu/czso/104007-11-n_2011uzemni_rust_hlavniho_mesta_prahy_podle_katastralnich_uzemi

Fig. 16

Brabec, T. (2015). Demografie, bydlení a veřejná vybavenost v Praze. 12. Change in population index. Retrieved June 20, 2016, from http://www.iprpraha.cz/uploads/assets/dokumenty/ Demografie/2_Demografie_2015-06-29_final.pdf

131

List of figures

132

Fig. 17

Population diagram. Retraced from: https://media.novinky.cz/575/305750-gallery1-zy3tp.jpg

Fig. 18

Kmínek, M. (n.d.). [Digital image]. House na Kocandě. Retrieved July 1, 2016, from https:// commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Činžovní_dům_Na_Kocandě_(Staré_Město),_Praha_1,_ Křižovnická_14,_Staré_Město.JPG

Fig. 19

Gap in the city block at Na Poříčí [Digital image]. Retrieved July 1, 2016, from https://commons. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Praha,_Na_po%C5%99%C3%AD%C4%8D%C3%AD_48_(proluka)_a_50.jpg

Fig. 20

Former railway station Bubny [Digital image]. Retrieved July 1, 2016, from http://www. ceskatelevize.cz/ct24/regiony/1580150-demolice-na-nadrazi-praha-bubny-radnice-prahy-7mluvi-o-barbarstvi

Fig. 21

Position of the Palác U Stýblů within one of the New Town blocks

Fig. 22

House Palác U Stýblů at historic photograph [Digital image]. Retrieved July 1, 2016, from http:// www.ctyridny.cz/program-2013/ludvik-kysela-a-funkcionalisticky-obchodni-dum/

Fig. 23

Palác U Stýblů - passage [Digital image]. Retrieved July 1, 2016, from http://bydleni.idnes.cz/ pasaze-praha-cyy-/dum_osobnosti.aspx?c=A151214_125719_dum_osobnosti_web

Fig. 24

Palác U Stýblů - the Václavské Square entrance [Digital image]. Retrieved July 1, 2016, from http:// www.modelyskoda.info/2011/03/Aktuality-ABREX-Podnikova-prodejna-v-Praze.html#foto641

Fig. 25

Souterrain auditorium

Fig. 26

Entertainment room

Fig. 27

The passage

Fig. 28

Circular space

Fig. 29

Columns space

Fig. 30

Long-span space

Fig. 31

Mid-span space

Fig. 32

Large space I

Fig. 33

Large space II and a terrace

Fig. 34

Balconies and a terrace

Fig. 35

Staircase in the back

Fig. 36

Main staircase

List of figures

Fig. 37

Backstage staircase

Fig. 38

Cinema staircase

Fig. 39

Longitudinal section through the building

Fig. 40

Structure of the school

Fig. 41

Curriculum diagram

Fig. 42

Curriculum timeline

Fig. 43

Materials

Fig. 44

Main entrance

Fig. 45

Mezzanin café/bar; where visitors and students mix

Fig. 46

Gallery space shared with the Centre for Architecture and the school of architecture

Fig. 47

Café bellow roof

Fig. 48

Rooftop observation deck

Fig. 49

Former souterrain auditorium used as exhibition space by Centre for Architecture

Fig. 50

Former souterrain auditorium used by students as a workshop

Fig. 51

Mezzanin; threshold between the school of architecture (studio) and café/bar

Fig. 52

Gallery space; preparation of the exhibition by students

Fig. 53

Detail - main staircase

Fig. 54

Detail - staircase to the roof

Fig. 55

Detail - bar U Stýblů

Fig. 56

Detail - observation deck

Fig. 57

Detail - souterrain cantilevered terrace

Fig. 58

Detail - bar U Stýblů

Fig. 59

Detail - bar U Stýblů

Fig. 60

Detail - Rooftop observation deck

133

List of figures

134

Fig. 61

Detail - staircase to the roof

Fig. 62

Detail - souterrain terracec and staircase

Fig. 63

Detail - main staircase

Fig. 64

Plan - souterrain III

Fig. 65

Plan - souterrain II

Fig. 66

Plan - souterrain I

Fig. 67

Plan - ground floor

Fig. 68

Plan - mezzanin with the school of architecture

Fig. 69

Plan first floor with the school of architecture and gallery spaces

Fig. 70

Plan - typical floor with offices

Fig. 71

Plan - bellow roof; cafĂŠ

135

136

ACKNOLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Hanka for her help and patience, to my parents for allowing me to study here, to my brother for distant project consultations, and to my grandmother for her distant support. I would like to thank Peter and Georgia for amazing semester; I could not have chosen better topic to finish my studies with.

137

AFFIDAVIT I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the present paper has been prepared independently by myself and without unpermitted aid. Anything that has been taken verbatim or paraphrased from other writings has been identified as such. This paper has hitherto been neither submitted to an examining body in the same or similar form, nor published.

Vaduz, 30/6/2016

Michal Mrรกz

139