Porto Academy 2019 Year Publication

Workshop leaders

Arrhov Frick

Atelier da Bouça

Dyvick Kahlen

Fala

Frida Escobedo

Johansen Skovsted

López Rivera

Mos

Nicolas Dorval-Bory

Ommx

Raamwerk

Scheidegger Keller

Guest

Lecturers

Juan Herreros

Madelon Vriesendorp

Tony Fretton

Porto Academy is the result of an enormous passion for architecture as a discipline. We admire the figures that dream about it, who build, study and promote it. We believe that practise – as an exercise of the architect’s profession – is central to the future of the discipline, and therefore one of the reasons why we’ve founded Porto Academy. For a week period, one lives the passion for the discipline of architecture and enjoys intellectual freedom.

The building of the Faculty of Architecture of the University of Porto from Álvaro Siza is an enhancer of this freedom we seek. Not just for the exceptional condition where it is placed, but also for the spatial qualities it offers.

Porto Academy promotes an exhaustive programme lived with enormous intensity. It is an experience that involves conferences, visits and classes, in addition to the experience of living in a new city and getting to know people from heterogeneous contexts, with whom one will almost certainly generate productive discussions and build new friendships. Here we seek to dilute borders while bringing people together.

Porto Academy doesn’t pretend to be an institution. To us, Porto Academy is a compliment to the school.

Amélia Brandão Costa Rodrigo da Costa Lima

PORTO ACADEMY

Founders

Amélia Brandão Costa

Rodrigo da Costa Lima

Production Assistant

Ana Luís Castro

Volunteers

Catarina Varela

Diana Chen

Francisca Canedo

Mariana Pimenta

Rebeca Jesus

Photography & Video

Ivo Tavares Studio

Ivo Tavares

João Jesus

ARRHOV FRICK

Leaders

Henrik Frick

Johan Arrhov

Assistant

José Pedro Lima

Participants

Ana Lía Rijo Sánchez

Christina Fotiadou

Dávid Engert

Emma Monfrino Svensson

Federico Taverna

Gilberto de los Santos

Helena Marit Oberholzer

Hugo Lindberg

Hlin Blondal

Joanna Sieradzka

Josephine Harold

Justus Schweer

Klára Walterová

Kok Seng Chee

Kristiane Fenger

Kristoffer Koefoed-Hansen

Laroslava Komissarova

Leonardo M. Barros Teixeira

Lucia Machado Dibo

Maria Rodriguez Gonzalez

Rodrigo Mengue Rocha

Stine Müller

Theresa Holl

ATELIER DA BOUÇA

Leaders

Filipa Guerreiro

Tiago Correia

Assistant

Margarida Marques

Participants

Anna Christina Neudolt

Elene Nemsadze

Gabriela Emi Kunieda Suzuki

Ioannis Antonios Moutsatsos

Irina Maskhulia

Jingliang Du

Jorge Bruno I Montanez

Jose Simo Miñana

Junyi Gao

Lourdes Soraia Sebastião

María Leonor Cordero

Marianela Gutiérrez Vargas

Mariam Gongladze

Oswaldo Javier Mogollón

Patricia Martínez Ferri

Rossella Gioda

DYVIK KAHLEN

Leaders

Christopher Dyvik

Max Kahlen Assistant

Fanny Nöel

Participants

Anja Mencinger

Charlotte Schoenberger

Cristiano Rodrigues Alves

Danail Machev

Felix Schuschan

Franziska Senz

Haiyeon Kim

Ileana Crim

Jakob Miland

Jonas Hamberger

Kamen Nikov

Leon Hidalgo

Lucy Braunstein

Marta Góis Faustino

Maximilian Bentler

Motong Yang

Nicholas Sartori Gennari

Sara Ramos

Tyra Nanna Matilda Rex

Vera Aredal Rundbom

FALA ATELIER

Leaders

Ahmed Belkhodja

Ana Luisa Soares

Filipe Magalhães

Assistant

Lera Samovich

Participants

Alice Monacelli

Giovanni Grignani

Giulia Cappelli

Giulia Mulinacci

Ilana Ginton

Ilaria Gianola

Jamie Kuehn

Jessica Morley

Jiyeon Hong

Joana Pinto Moreira

Jordanka Peycheva

Julia Wieshuber

Luis Druschke

Maria Glionna

Maria Terzano

Martina Margini

Michaela Lund

Michał Starzyński

Mihaela Janevska

Philipp Gruber

Ruta Misiunas

Sarah da Silva Almeida

Simone Bänziger

Theresa Michl

Vitor Kibaltchich Coelho

Porto Academy

FRIDA ESCOBEDO

Leader

Frida Escobedo

Assistant

Pedro Stattmiller

Participants

Alice Maria Colombo

Alina Aggujaro

Avani Vaidya

Beatriz Vieira Freitas

Breno Pires Pilot

Claudia Silveira

Dafni Ourania Drosou

Diogo Miguel Graça

Eduardo López Pérez

Julie Andrea Bay Johansen

Karolína Munková

Katie Barry

Malola Canay

Maria Miguel Trindade

Marilena Hewitt

Matilde Guiomar

Montgomery John Balding

Narine Gyulkhasyan

Nush Farzaan Wadia

Patrycja Raszka

Pepe Puchol-Salort

Tamara Németh

Valentina Luvini

JOHANSEN SKOVSTED

Leaders

Søren Johansen

Sebastian Skovsted

Assistant

Diogo Fonseca Lopes

Participants

Alice Steiner

Ana Catarina Marques da

Silva

Ana Rita Câncio

André Del Río Ares

Axel Fangueiro

Diana Maudslay

Diogo Miguel Borges Ferreira

Erica Fadda

Gino Baldi

Joana Gonçalves Santos

Johannes Sack

Jose Rodriguez Gonzalez

Lina Müller

Maria Inês Pires Reis

Mariano Mennucci

Mateusz Tkaczen

Nick Chadde

Serena Comi

Sjoerd Bosch

Sophie Charlotte Hoffmann

Thom Wood-Jones

Tilda Herrlin

LÓPEZ RIVERA

Leaders

Emiliano López

Mónica Rivera Assistant

Ricardo Leitão

Participants

Alessandro Bonadio

Brian Whelan

Carlos Pueyo Vicente

Chiara Turchi

Clément Jaffray

Elisa Cecconi

Inês Vasconcelos Moreira

Irina Kozlova

Joar Nordvall

Julian Lança Gil

Kim Jaehee

Lea Daniel

Manuela Mujica

Maria Ross

Marta Soler

Martín Olivera

Martina de Barba

Milagros Telecemian

Pebbles Lin

Rodrigo Watson Estrada

MOS Leaders

Hilary Sample

Michael Meredith Assistant

Rita Furtado

Participants

Ana Garcia Constantinescu

Asger Højlund Olsen

Aúna Souza Nunes

Daniela Manfredi

Giulia Ciuffoletti

Guanming Huang

Gustava Grüntuch

Hampus Thysell

Jérémie Dussault-Lefebvre

Júlia Fontes Nogueira

Magdalena Uhlířová

Marta Ribeiro Moreira

Mateus Araruna Gibson

Minjeong Kwon

Pavla Nesvadbíková

Peter Grue

Rafael Bauler Theiss

Sang Dae Lee

Sarah Hummel

Sébastien Roy

Simon McNair

Sophia Melliou

Vinicius Lemos Santos

NICOLAS DORVAL-BORY

Leader

Nicolas Dorval-Bory

Assistant

Marcos Veiga

Participants

Alette Igland Avsnes

Anisia Mouhamed

Anton Fedin

Antonia Lembcke

Barbara Perin Remussi

Bruno Chuluma

Burcu Cimenoglu

Carolina Hayat Kheireddine

Daria Kirpicheva

Elena Ogliani

Felix Wahlgren

Gabriel Nacif Garcia Silva

Iskra Bilic

Jair Armand Margarido Anjos

Juyoung Kim

Kalliopi Kontou

Marcus Yngwe

Mariana Leitão Menezes

Mieke Vink

Shadi Al-Begain

Simon Bergström

Siri Hannah Dacar

Yanting Xiong

OMMX

Leaders

Hikaru Nissanke

Jon Lopez Assistant

Elói Gonçalves

Participants

Amaia Zubimendi de la Hoz

Andrea Adami

Beomkyu Kim

Carme Rossello Oliver

Chen Hsin Chang

Denis Ibarra

Ekaterina Sherstneva

Elena Balabanska

Elena M’ Bouroukounda

Gabriela Meszaros

Jeremy Leithead

Kristina Delcheva

Martina Avanzi

Mona Al Jadir

Oline Haagemann Greve

Panuela Aasted

Raquel Peixoto de Babo

Susana Piquer Villaverde

Yunzhe Luo

Zoe Marson

RAAMWERK Leaders

Gijs De Cock

Freek Dendooven

Assistant

Nuno Reis Pereira

Participants

Antonia Pielmeier

Bas Leemans

Ethan Loo

Frederico Barbosa

Harald Forsmark

Joana Ceia

Johannes Lassen Platz

Juliana Khoury Gori

Klara Hallberg

Laurids Bager

Leo Berastegui

Mariana Pires Ricachinevsky

Oskar Madro

Pablo Mauleón Toniolo

Riccardo Barelli

Sabine Fremiot

Salome Schepers

Shuning Zhu

Sofie Emilie Boye Kjær

SCHEIDEGGER KELLER

Leaders

Christian Scheidegger

Jürg Keller

Assistant

Rui Pinto

Participants

Alex Curtis

Anna Hartmann Gyllenhammar

Eva Goula

Feng Ye

Francesco Conti

Georgia May Jaeckle

Gustave Kamanzi

Inga Skjulhaug

Isabella Merz

Janne Keskinen

Lucy Dennis

Maribel Amelie Sengewald

Natsuki Takeshita

Ricardo López Tiñena

Said Hafizh Sulton

Sara Bergström

Sara Lequaglie

Sarunas Petrauskas

Siri Birkeland

Valentin Abend

Xin Wang

Seven Notes in Porto Arrhov

Seven notes make the starting point for seven exercises.

Each one is important independently. They become strong together.

We like questions but don’t look for complete answers.

We like to discover the potential in constructions precisely in terms of capacity and economy. If we decide to add something, we need to understand.

The ambition is not new ideas about architecture, rather to think about the components that can become architecture. Pillar, primary beams, secondary beams. We like to learn from history in terms of what has been working or not.

No program. No moral.

No right or wrong.

We want you to think about economic constructions. Prefab components.

Knowledge in the proposal. Open- ended systems.

When you understand this.

You will be free.

We try to optimize structures.

We want to discover optimized structures. We would like to see the largest space (m3) possibly made from one 1 m 2x2mm wooden stick. The stick can be cut. A model, lots of models, with the stability to stand on its own.

We try to understand building components. For this research glue laminated timber is the building component. We will discover building components and connection methods. Connection to ground. Primary structure/ secondary structure. Bolted connections. Steel brackets. Connections without metal additions.

We try to understand the consequences of a decision.

We will think about capacity and economy. To start calculating structures in terms of loads and costs. A structure is complex, full of coworking, undetermined horizontal / vertical loads etc. We strip this down to the capacity of the components.

A decision of a certain shape has consequences as a result. Consequences of the capacity as well as budget.

We try to manage resources.

We turn the question around and try to build as much floor area with a roof out of 1000€. By now we understand ideas about structures, components and consequences. Be smart and develop the best solution out of the amount of money.

We try to understand adaption

Adaption to conditions is important. To learn, respect and absorb the qualities of a site. Observe and take into consideration what is important. Making the site as a component itself. Discover what you can or cannot do.

Don’t touch nature or urban space if you don’t have to. Or do, make a decision.

Be clear. Be radical. We draw a space of 100m2, capacity 5kN/m2, adapted to the conditions of a site.

We try to make open-ended systems

Who knows about the future, who knows about climate, who knows about cars, who knows about housing, who knows about nature, who knows about architecture?

We try to be free.

Choosing the site to be a place A void defined in partnership with nature

1 “A place is not a fact, but the result of condensing. In countries where man has been present for generations, all territorial accidents are significant. To understand them is to give one self the chance of a more intelligent intervention.”

Corboz, André. Le territoire comme palimpseste et autres essais. Les éditions de l’imprimeur, Besançon, 2001.

2 “To represent the territory is to seize it. The representation is not a decal, but always a construction. One elaborates a map to firstly know and secondly act. The map shares with the territory the fact of being a process, a product, a project: being simultaneously form and sense”

Corboz, André. Le territoire comme palimpseste et autres essais. Les éditions de l’imprimeur, Besançon, 2001.

3 “Months ago, in the heights of Machu Pichu, I thought about Portugal. It was the beauty and the strength of the landscape chosen to be place and the necessity of reason’s imposition for that Humanity doesn’t lose itself, defend itself and continues to deepen Mankind’s project.”

Alves Costa, Alexandre. Portugal, cidade e arquitectura. 2003.

4 Siza, Álvaro. Brasil, 1995. in 01 textos. Civilização Editora, Porto, 2009. p.51.

Atelier da Bouça

The act of considering the territory as something abstract and uniform where objects and activities can be placed freely is a risky process that produces superficial approaches to the places, favouring autonomous1 and preconceived schemes. We refuse to read the territory as an abstract space, over considering the richness of its places. The richness and complexity of the metaphor of Palimpsest, through its coherence with the Territory’s process of construction and its translation to a representation 2, sounds to us specially effective as a proposal of the interpretation possibilities of its writing sets with its inconstant levels of legibility, and the clarity with which it transmits a need for a special care as intervention in a finite and irreplaceable object.

We advocate that considering the “Territory as a Palimpsest” that one should decipher is a valuable contribute to a methodology of approaching a given project, objectively integrating in its premises, the information given by the site analysis.

We are interested in cities and buildings which projects use and promote the legibility of its territory, projects that are inscribed in the Palimpsest allowing the reading in its various layers. We propose and exercise about the fist level of this inscription: the choosing of a site to be a place3

The motto is designing a camping site, a composition surrounding an empty gathering space of a community, the insertion of a collective space in the landscape. The exercise is divided in 4 moments:

Site analysis

the choosing of the place

Camp simulation

ephemeral occupation

Definition of the empty gathering space

structuring void

The synthesis of the gesture

the inscription of the place

The main theme is the economy of resources, concentrating various intentions in minimum elements, achieving the conformation of a void in the wilderness of the landscape:

The portuguese gesture is more gentle, but equally definitive. Less “build all”: What nature gives doesn’t need to be done. [...] There’s always a hillside to support the fragilities and arrogances of Architecture.

It is worth to re study this way of building. And it is urgent: intuition does not explain nor teaches Álvaro Siza4

The assignment doesn’t stop here, it composes an architectural exercise so essential that allows assembling references in different scales, from a room or a house to an urban plaza, as the studied strategies can be further applied in other contexts of project.

Building Buildings

This workshop is meant to be an experience of construction, an act of building. Through the making of 1:10 plasterboard models, we speculate on a series of spaces and a possible language for an architecture. The subject will be spaces for working, organized over 5 floors.

Act 1

A design intention is articulated through simple drawings in plan and elevation, an iterative process of translating key spatial qualities from two selected reference buildings. Intuition and a careful reading of the image seems key.

Act 2

Translation from drawing to model. We explore the material aspects of plasterboard and develop a tectonic of construction details and assemblage to set principle for an architecture. The model of a building. Rough and specific at the same time.

Act 3

A plinth adds the final element to this model to produce an ambiguous piece. The plinth can be seen as a found object or piece of architecture. It stages the model in the actual space while it sets a context for the proposed architecture. A piece somewhere between architecture, furniture and prop.

The very best of Fala

Álvaro Siza

Peter Märkli

Terunobu Fujimori

Kazuo Shinohara

Itsuko Hasegawa

Mario Botta

Robert Venturi

Denise Scott Brown

Our subject will be seven of our heroes, the very best (if not the most recognized) architects of the last half century. They come from all around the world and defy easy classification. We will attempt to outline what can and should be learned from them. Also what can’t and shouldn’t.

This survey will be fragmentary and its conclusions will be subjective. Because architecture is always a succession of lucky misinterpretations and optimistic mistranslations.

Deep Reciprocity

Carl André described his artistic production as “rather than cut into the material, now I use the material as the cut in space”. With varying extensions, he worked on installations of a single material: lead, zinc, copper, graphite, wood. The abstract configurations are organized in such a way that they echo an architectural environment, which could be read as site-specific but never strictly autonomous. Each material used is already inscribed by original context of production.

In a similar fashion, architecture carves out space at least twice: the building itself, but also at the extraction site(s). The very concept of form is established by mass-replacing.

The students will work on proposals that explore this deep reciprocity: from geometric plays on mass-void substitution, to archeological inquiries into the origin of materials, to the subtle material displacement created almost imperceptibly by touch over time.

Small Structures

The topography of Porto is rich and riddled with challenges. In groups the workshop participants scout Porto for possible sites suitable for a spatial structure.

We approach structure as an essential part of build space. The brief considers the possibility that a strong and particular spatial character can occur by placing and connecting structural components in the urban fabric.

The brief defines all structures to be conceived from slabs. They can be horizontal, vertical, bent, curved, penetrated, fenestrated, profiled etc. They may approach other structural principals to the point of ambiguity, but no further.

3 TYPOLOGIES

A To give shape to an open covered space which is in close relation to its immediate surrounding space(s).

B To give shape to a tall independent structure in a place which calls for elevation. A vertical spatial sequence.

C To give shape to a bridging structure. A horizontal spatial sequence, on a site which calls for transition.

Tracing Thresholds López

In 1971, German artist Blinky Palermo made “Fenster I” for the Kabinett für Aktuelle Kunst in Bremerhaven. Palermo reproduced – with black paint and at the same scale – the storefront of the gallery itself on one of its interior walls. The proposal dematerializes the window frame of the gallery unifying its different components and eliminating the reflections of the glass. It shows a reductionist copy of reality that leads the observer to focus the attention on the size of the window and the relationship between frame and figure.

The window is a fundamental element in our work; a threshold of connection and filter whose definition, dimension, materiality and presence is presented as a new challenge in each project. Their size and their relationship with the body is always a difficult factor to calibrate in the design process.

Following the parameters proposed by Blinky Palermo, we propose an exercise that will disengage the thresholds from their architectural condition and raise awareness of their scale in relation to our bodies and the surrounding environment.

The exercise consists of two fundamental moments: First, thresholds will be identified within the Faculty of Architecture of the University of Porto by Álvaro Siza or in the city of Porto, in order to select, study and later synthesize in a real-scale line drawing.

Following, we will detect in the surroundings of the Faculty of Architecture, precise locations where to install

Facades, grids, windows... Mos

The facade is as important as the plan. The facade always says something even if it doesn’t want to. The facade is to look at and to look through. The facade is to open and close. The facade is interior and exterior. The facade is public and private. The facade has windows, doors, walls and none of them if you want to. The facade is building and city.

Studio instructions

A Design a facade with a grid of windows.

B Design a thin building (or a thick facade).

C It should be between 4m wide.

D The maximum length is 18m

E The maximum height is 24m.

F Think about the arrangement of elements, feel free to rearrange things.

G There are 6 floors.

H There is at least one stair.

I Each floor is a single space, an apartment or office.

J The ground floor and roof can be public or commercial.

K Draw axonometrics (or isometrics).

L Make a model.

M Photograph the model.

N Repeat, with variations.

O Arrange buildings to form streets and larger buildings.

P Photograph the arrangement.

Atmospheres of Porto Nicolas Dorval-Bory

When I first came to Portugal, a friend told me a story about the azulejos. According to it, in the 16th century, as Vasco de Gama opened a new route to Asia, Portugal started new commercial trades with China, then under the Ming Dynasty. While they were struggling back home to protect the façade of the buildings from the harsh oceanic climate and its salty rain storms, the far east explorers discovered the high quality of Chinese ceramics. There used to make pots and bowls, which apparently resisted extremely well to the daily use of salty soup, they thought it would be a good idea to import this technique to make those ceramics a façade material. Finally, azulejos pattern influences where just cultural vehicles for a universal and very pragmatic goal : resist to salt water.

This story might or might not be entirely true – we all know the complexity of influences of techniques throughout history – I feel it still tells us two important things that we could consider as architects. First, construction is about pure basic physics, it is about finding strategies for environmental management, as Reyner Banham put it, to create a climate that is acceptable for human being. Second, construction comes before, or below, culture, and one could define architecture as the exact moment when culture steps in. It’s the act of converting an ingenious solitary idea into something abstract, replicable, adaptable. Stacking stones is construction, calling it a column becomes architecture.

In this studio, we are exploring this definition in a contemporary context, where both science and comfort requirements are reaching unprecedented levels of precision and complexity, while the planet is suffering from the excess of our unsustainable way of life.

Somehow inspired by the contrasted garden scene of Alain Resnais’ L’année dernière à Marienbad, where two types of light create an uncanny visual tension, we are trying to invent radical spaces emerging from portuense atmospheric qualities, looking for extremes and oppositions in the specific parameters of climate.

First, students choose one of those parameters : radiation heat, convection heat, spectral quality of light, intensity of light, humidity, ventilation, noise. They then look for, in Porto, various opposed urban or interior situations that reflect this particular quality. One space with high radiation, another one where surrounding materials absorbs your radiation. One humid space, and a dry one. An area with poor spectrum light, another one with a good CRI…

It is their duty to extract from these situations, through very precise CAD drawings and photos, the material elements responsible for their atmosphere. We are aiming for the simplest devices, the modern mundane equipment or archaic forms that define those qualities.

Finally, students rebuild these contrasted situations in one elementary composition, a very direct way to divide – or dissolve – space.

Nothing New Ingredients

A collection of rooms, buildings and spaces found in Porto

Method

1. Collect 2. Collage 3. Project

Intelligent Ruin Raamwerk

The studio wants to explore the idea of the flexible structure, not within a generic architecture or efficient building, but within a (hyper)specific framework. We refer to the intelligent ruin by bOb Van Reeth:

“Architecture is too important to leave exclusively to architects. The architect must alert the client to the importance of this, not because of the so-called functional programme, but because of the will of the commissioner to leave traces for the future.

A building is the expression of a mental image and the mediation during a passage to which it grants brilliance. Architecture is not functional, it is elementary. A building is a possibility, is conducive, preferably taciturn, silent, is willing, liberates space, mediates.

Building as intelligent ruins. Suitable for use, fit for purpose, as Charles Voysey expressed it.” (fragment from: bOb Van Reeth, Good architecture, Oase 90)

The aim of the studio is to experiment with space. Architecture without direct context or clear authorship. The studio is about this space that is evolving during the week of the workshop. We are interested in the debate, the process more than the result.

1st Phase

Each student chooses 1 artwork as starting point for the workshop. The artwork is part of the collection of Serralves Contemporary Art Museum and will be visited on day 1.

A first spatial analysis will search for the main measurements and proportions of the space needed for the artwork. Subjects can be, the necessity of an antichambre, outdoor spaces, natural daylight, in-between spaces etc…

A simple space/pavilion will be designed for the chosen artwork. The pavilion is designed from the inside, in which the exterior is only a by-product. The pavilion is without direct context, the artwork is the context. The pavilion should be designed without construction details or materiality. The pavilion is only space. But with a specific atmosphere to experience the artwork. This specific atmosphere is part of the architecture as intelligent ruin, an elementary space.

2nd Phase

The 2nd phase of the studio is building on the pavilion resulting from the 1st phase. However, the program of the pavilion will no longer be the specific piece of art. We are projecting a banal program within the specific architecture of the pavilion, the house for a concierge. Maybe, this approach will be resulting in a banal complexity.

The students will not continue working on the pavilion they designed in the first phase. The students are assigned a model designed by another student. The authorship is not longer relevant.

The model is treated as given object, an existing structure. The model will be documented in plan, section, facade... A rational interpretation of the initial work of the other student. The analysis of an analysis.

The intervention can vary from a minimal addition to a radical demolition. Students are free to decide if they want to discuss this intervention with the other student or if they prefer to ignore the authorship.

Students will work directly in the model. The interventions are affecting the initial model. All new structure in the model is made within the same brown cardboard as the first phase. There is no distinction between the 1st phase and the 2nd phase. It will not be clear which decision is linked to the specific program or either to the banal program.

At the end of the studio there are only refurbished models in cardboard and uniform demolition plans.

Hidden Space Scheidegger Keller

Architecture is always defined by external conditions.

Just as the white sheet of paper defines the edge of the drawing, so too the site, together with the plot of land and the regulations determine the possibilities of a form. The struggle between facts on the one hand and our fiction on the other are part of our work as an architect. It is within this conflict, that the project determines its innovative power and architectural quality.

This week we will explore the relationship between form and space. While the outer form is determined, its interior is free and left to our imagination. The spaces should however bear an architectural relationship to the form. This can be uniform or fragmented. Questions of the spatial structure, the light, the movement, the scale and the opening in relation to the the form play a central role. A programme has not been foreseen and you may determine the scale yourself.

We exhibit the peep-box models and the everyday objects. On the one side the form, and the hidden spaces on the other.

GO HASEGAWA

Leader

Go Hasegawa

Assistant

Rita Furtado

Participants

Aleksandra Budaeva

Alexa Burkle

Bozhao Zhang

Daniela Gonzalez Cervantes

Diego Saenz

Esteban Hernández Martin

Hanseul Ju

Keon Ho Lee

Meryem Sekhri

Raymond Low

Santiago Esquivel del Bosque

MANUEL CERVANTES

Leader

Manuel Cervantes Assistant

Rita Furtado

Participants

Allen Pierce

Eduardo Daniel Ugarte Poot

Fabian Escalante Hernandez

Juan Manuel Chavez

Karen Cornejo Vilchis

Kinga Rusin

Luis Felipe Velazquez Rangel

Manolo Rubin

Manying Chen

Patricio Manzo Díaz

ROZANA MONTIEL

Leaders

Rozana Montiel

Hortense Blanchard Assistant

Ricardo Leitão

Participants

Diego Yáñez Vilet

Germán Peraza Valverde

Grisell Martinez

Jack Mitchell

Marco Ochoa

Maria Fernanda Reyes Lopez

Maria Sofia Caldo Quesada

Rodrigo Calzada Macias

Ryan Gillespie

Sebastian Montalvo Millet

Sergio Miguel Jasso Sánchez

SAM CHERMAYEFF WITH ZELLER & MOYE Leaders

Ingrid Moye

Sam Chermayeff Assistant

Ricardo Leitão

Participants

Alejandro Azcue

Franco Palacios Beltrán

Gilberto Santos

Gonzalo Torres

Jisu Yang

Josh Ren

Juan Agustin Rivera

Lukas Schlatter

Miguel Henao Osorno

Youngdae Song

Porto Academy proposes a nomadic school based on the very successful experience of the Summer School at the Faculty of Architecture of the University of Porto. Porto Academy started in 2013 to propose an alternative academic learning, based on a close tuition between students and a wide range of ambitious architects, whose practice based work focus drives their desire to build their intentions. Following invitations from institutions, friends and previous guests, we've decided to move next to them, in an attempt to settle new proximity and connection points. We are now moving around the world closing the gap between ambitious architects and passionate students. Porto Academy Visiting Barragán was the first programme and it happened from the May 31st until the June 7th 2019. Two local studios and two foreign studios worked over Luis Barragán's legacy inside two of his main buildings – Casa Barragán and Casa Gilardi. It was a privilege to work with some of the most ambitious contemporary architects inside two masterpieces designed by one of the most prestigious architects ever, Luis Barragán.

Porto Academy

Workshop leaders

Go Hasegawa

Manuel Cervantes

Rozana Montiel

Sam Chermayeff with Zeller & Moye

Guest Lecturers

Florian Idenburg

Salvador Macias

Guest Critics

Erick Pérez

Derek Dellekamp

Luis Aldrete

Embodying

It is said that you can’t explain poetry, that Barragán is the ultimate mexican master. The fact is that very few try to go beyond the clichés regarding his work. The visual aspect of it that you see in beautiful pictures and in beautiful books. The most superficial and obvious explanations from guided tours.

Through the exceptional opportunity of living in Barragán’s house for a week, rather than experiencing it merely as a museum, the studio aims toward comprehending the uniqueness of its propositions.

In order to do that, we imposed upon ourselves the difficult task of unveiling the hows but mainly the whys of the choices he made. We accomplished this by extrapolating the most iconic spaces and elements of barragán’s work – stairs, windows, terraces.

Rather than using our rational understanding which is embedded in preconceived notions we take the dimensions and emotions of our own body to explore the true meaning of what barragan was expressing, imagining what is evident.

Context – Handcraft – Tradition Manuel Cervantes

We are imagining how architecture shapes atmospheres by understanding these elements. The idea is to imagine the abstraction of how we place ourselves in the site, using handcraft to build the atmosphere where we will develop our traditions, our lives.

Looking Closer to Barragán’s Patios and Gardens

The workshop started by exploring and getting lost in Barragan’s gardens and patios. The group of eleven visited 11 sites: Barragan’s house and studio, Casa Gilardi, Jardín 17, Casa Ortega, the capuchinas convent, Cuadra San Cristobal, Fuente de los Amantes, los Bebederos, Casa Pedregal, Jardín Luis Barragan and Torres Satellite.

They were given a single use camera and were invited to observe; collect, accumulate information, drawings, objects, materials or extracts from each place . By bringing them together on a common table and wall, we created the patio and gardens cabinet of curiosities.

More than searching for a result, students had time and space to work around a process by obsessively looking closer and reinterpretating Barragan’s gardens and patios, creating multiple series of explorations, experiments and images.

Rozana Montiel + Hortense Blanchard

non–objects Sam Chermayeff

Non-objects is a series of free-standing furniture which is designed in dialogue with Barragán’s work, and more specifically, his Casa Gilardi.

Each piece establishes a specific relation to Barragán’s oeuvre, whilst introducing new functions into the house. They are as simple as a chair, or as complex as a lamp that encloses a wi-fi router; or they even hide imperfections.

The interventions intend to create a playful dialogue between past and present; reflecting (literally) the historical architecture over the surface of a contemporary object, while also reinterpreting Barragán’s approach and bringing it into contemporary life.

All objects are constructed out of reflective materials, these include mirror, reflective plastic and polished metal. These objects carry a dual function: they become a non-invasive presence amid the characterful context and they offer unexpected perspectives of the surrounding environment, thus expanding our conventional field of vision. The reflective nature of the objects is a homage to Barragan’s use of the reflected image within Casa Gilardi, be that through glass, water, light, or objects.

Non-objects will temporarily be exhibited within the house, later moving to new locations, bringing an essence of Barrgagán into new contexts.