BROKEN NATURE. THE XXII TRIENNALE OF MILAN ACCORDING TO GILLO DORFLES

BROKEN NATURE. THE XXII TRIENNALE OF MILAN ACCORDING TO GILLO DORFLES BY GILLO DORFLES, REPORTED BY ALDO COLONETTI

“Every person is subject to freedom ”, thus concludes the illuminating and unpublished contribution of Gillo Dorfles, collected shortly before his disappearance, by Aldo Colonetti, by the way of the dialectic between artifice and nature, aesthetics and ethics, in the centre of the XXII Milan Triennial.

Gillo Dorfles Photo by Nicola Gnesi

Let’s begin with this consideration: man exists by himself as an object, but at the same time he is able in turn to create other objects, which are not necessarily artistic objects, but which are transformations of nature.

Birdsong, Khaled Malas, Salim Al Kadi, Alfred Tarazi with Jana Traboulsi of Sigil with Aamer Ibrahim, Emad Madah and the Fateh Moudarres Center for Art and Culture, 2019

Broken Nature is the title of the XXII Milan Triennale, open from 1st March to 1st September this year, curated by Paola Antonelli, head of design and architecture at MOMA in New York. One of the first documents to support this research is represented by Gillo Dorfles’ final work, a little less than a month before his death, dated 2 March 2018. It is a long dialogue with Aldo Colonetti, which revolves around one of his most important essays, Artificio e Natura (Artifice and Nature) (1968), one of the first international reflections on the transformation of nature by man, at the centre of which the designer’s role is fundamental. Dorfles returns to this theme after fifty years, indicating, on the one hand, an increasingly widespread problem and on the other, proposing a new design perspective in which, as Paola Antonelli writes, “ethics and aesthetics can coexist and prosper, with design examples all levels whose moral depth does not entail an aesthetic and sensual mortification. In the middle, nature understood as the best creator, engineer and builder. In its design practice, nature considers beauty and efficiency, plans with intelligence and sensitivity and operates according to a cradle-to-cradle approach, building with determination and according to a longterm vision of the future”. Here, some passages of that unpublished dialogue which remain, as always, illuminating to read and work concretely in the near-future. Gillo Dorfles: Let’s begin with this consideration: man exists by himself as an object, but at the same time he is able in turn to create other objects, which are not necessarily artistic objects, but which are transformations of nature. They do not exist in nature but are “objectivizations” of something, from which the tension of planning, the incessant development of design and production, the system of “things” that increasingly become centrepieces, transforming themselves from “objects” to “subjects” takes off. It is necessary to understand that, unfortunately, Broken Nature is not only the result of a specific economic system: it belongs, and it is precisely from this awareness that it is necessary to reform the practice of design, to the nature of man and in particular to his “creative autonomy” which it is at the same time both its strength and also its limit. Inventing from nothing beyond all limits, compared to all previous models: an infinite series of objects/ products which, although beginning from a functional model or necessity, which is always a symbolic necessity first of all, progressively assumes its own autonomy, moving away from the languages of nature, indeed often transforming nature as if it were an artifice, that is also understood as a product of man. As has been said, the attitude of man to assume this sort of domination over the world has always existed, but it is above all in these recent decades, with the development of new technologies, that we are witnessing a worrying phenomenon. This tendency is due to a particular condition of contemporary man: the totalizing identification with the concept of “creating”, which has spread from the traditional arts to the applied arts that do not remain in museums but determine the development of society, from the our homes to the cities we live in, from transport to the workplace, from the way we communicate to the creation of an artificial man. These transformations, apart from the immense material benefits they have brought to humanity, constitute a total diversification in the conditions of equilibrium between man and nature, creating a series of negative effects, both in our industrialized world and in other geographical areas, where development, although not present, uses up the “natural capital” by transferring it elsewhere. It is my belief that from this point of view it is necessary to intervene, to re-establish a new balance between natural artifice, in essence, to try to mend, even partially, “broken nature”. It is necessary to ensure that art and design activities communicate with each other, without, however, trespassing into each other’s fields, otherwise the multiplication of objects will be relentless and infinite. We must never lose the originality of all our design actions, avoiding unnecessary imitations and self-referential replicas. Multiplying is positive, but without losing the originality that is inherent in the fact that it is in

Broken Nature, view of the exhibition Courtesy of La Triennale di Milano Photo by Gianluca Di Ioia

It is a question of considering “nature” not just nature in the wild, but above all these new forms of mechanized nature, electronically integrated, “internet-ised”.

Totems, Neri Oxman and the Mediated Matter Group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2019 Courtesy of La Triennale di Milano Photo by Gianluca Di Ioia

man’s nature to create incessantly. It is not possible to go back as if a sort of Eden of the project had existed, we are within history and within history, we must act. Therefore, to obtain an improvement in the current situation, we must “redeem the unnatural”, transform artificial events into natural events, or “naturalized”, through action of will and knowledge. It is a question of considering “nature” not just nature in the wild, but above all these new forms of mechanized nature, electronically integrated, “internet-ised”. Man’s artificial constructions must be progressively “rectified”, undergoing this process of naturalisation that can only give him a new creative and symbolic value, keeping in mind and always keeping an eye on all research and inventions with respect to new materials and new production processes that take into account both energy consumption and wasting of resources. However, without giving up creative freedom: more autonomy in the name of knowledge, less heteronomy because it leads to the repetition and imitation of what already exists. We will need more and more “new objects” that, despite having their raison d’être within the pre-existing material culture, are able to speak the language of a concrete, recognisable future capable of communicating with cognitive autonomy and interpretation that each person possesses, regardless of language, religion, or economic level. Everyone is a subject of freedom; this is its fundamental natural dimension; recomposing it progressively means acting in the sign of a nature that is no longer “broken”.