Graz Architecture. Rationalists, Aesthetes, Gut Instinct Architects, Democrats, Mediacrats

Graz Architecture

Rationalists, Aesthetes, Gut Instinct Architects, Democrats, Mediacrats

Thanks Konrad Frey Volker Giencke Bernhard Hafner Eilfried Huth

TU Graz, Institute for Architectural Theory, History of Art and Cultural Studies: Ingrid Böck, Sophia Walk Andrea Gleiniger Karin Wilhelm

Karla Kowalski

Hermann Eisenköck

Manfred Wolff-Plottegg

Petra Friedl Eugen Gross

Julia Gaisbacher Oliver Hangl Mischa Kuball Anna Meyer

Sabine Pink Ingrid Thonhofer Anselm Wagner Gerhard Wallner

Arthur Zalewski HDA: Markus Bogensberger, Karin Oberhuber Academy of Fine Arts, Berlin: Werner Heegewaldt, Eva-Maria Barkhofen, Catherine Amé, Tanja Morgenstern, Juliane Kreißl Archive TU Graz: Bernhard Reismann Architektur Haus Kärnten: Raffaela Lackner, Gisela Stramitzer Architekturzentrum Wien: Angelika Fitz, Monika Platzer, Katrin Stingl Wolfgang Georg Fischer, Konrad Fischer Forum Stadtpark: Heidrun Primas, Filipa CicinSain, Roland Schwarz Ernst and Maria Gradischnig Gabriele Krenn, Heinz Kallan Gerald Zugmann, Sabine Haase-Zugmann Zultner Metall GmbH: Bernd Flachs, Julia Zeilinger

Künstlerhaus – Halle für Kunst & Medien: Helga and Sandro Droschl steirischer herbst: Veronica Kaup-Hasler, Martina Heil, Andreas Peternell Bernhard Schabbauer Stefan Schöttel Julia Gaisbacher gives her thanks to the residents of the Eschen Development.

Graz Architecture

Rationalists, Aesthetes, Gut Instinct Architects, Democrats, Mediacrats

This exhibition guide is published on occasion of the exhibition Graz Architecture Rationalists, Aesthetes, Gut Instinct Architects, Democrats, Mediacrats 23.09.2017–28.01.2018 Kunsthaus Graz Universalmuseum Joanneum

4 Arthur Zalewski 6 Family Affairs 10

Mischa Kuball

12 Beautiful, tasteful, attractive?

18 What matter who’s speaking, someone said, what matter who’s speaking?

30

Clean air and a lovely location

36 Continuity and change 40

Architecture is not only there for self-realisation

45 Energy from the sun is independent of all the oil sheiks and coal mines in the world. It shines on both the beggar and the millionaire 50

Only poverty has a future

56 Becoming involved, taking an active part, participating, with self-determination and joint decision-making 58 Julia Gaisbacher 62 Oliver Hangl 66 Interpretable, adaptable and extendable 78 Anna Meyer 80 Appendix

Arthur Zalewski Photography as an essay Arthur Zalewski went out in search of places that have connections with both exhibitions. He took photographs of the inside and the outside of the Kunsthaus, Wolff-Plottegg’s residential complex in Seiersberg, Domenig’s Z savings bank in Vienna and Giencke’s greenhouses in Graz, amongst others. Alongside these objects, all of which are presented in the exhibition Graz Architektur, he places photographs of other buildings in Graz, Styria or elsewhere.

In this way, Zalewski establishes a network of relationships between the protagonists of the exhibition and those whose work is not shown there, between architecturally sophisticated projects and purely practical ones, between masterpieces and purely functional buildings with no design ambition.

At first glance, many of Zaleweski’s photos seem like snapshots—they appear unspectacular and arbitrary, almost as though the artist had pressed the shutter release button at random. However, the images are based on a series of decisions—Zalewski photographs consistently with a focal length of 60 mm, slightly zooming in on the motif. The subject and framing are precisely chosen, and a similar precision is shown in the selection and presentation of the pictures. Whilst photographing, Zalewski proceeds in an associative manner, combining coincidence with an interest in precise image construction. The path between the objects he intends to photograph plays an important role. Anything that catches his interest just before he takes the photo may become a picture in its own right. This means that the artist’s material collection includes images of the routes he walked

or drove along on his way to the objects.

Even though the single objects and the single images retain their autonomy, they are thought of and treated in relation to one another. Basically, Zalewski adopts an essayistic understanding of photography—he approaches the objects he wishes to photograph from various perspectives, subjectively, unsystematically, discovering surprising cross connections and views of the architecture of Graz.

Born in 1971 in Kędzierzyn-Koźle (PL), lives in Leipzig (DE) Exhibitions and projects (selected): OFFENE FRAGEN — FACE to FACE, Bundesverwaltungsgericht, Leipzig (2015); 12“, ASPN, Leipzig (2015); Aufstocker, Kunstverein Leipzig (2014); Notes on Beijin­g, ASPN, Leipzig (2014, solo); Abstraktion und Erschöpfung, Galerie b2, Leipzig (2014); Ortsbestimmung. Zeitgenössische Kunst aus Sachsen, Museum Görlitz/Kaiser­trutz (2013); Irreguläre und andere Tage, Kunstmuseum Dieselkraftwerk, Cottbus (2013); Why I Gray, Werkschau/Halle 12, Baumwollspinnerei, Leipzig (2013); Messer im Wasser / Noz w wodzie, Freunde der Städtischen Sammlungen für Geschichte und Kultur e.

V. Görlitz (2012); Alle Allein, ASPN, Leipzig (2012, solo); RIGHT OF REFUSAL, Magazin4 - Kunstverein Bregenz (2012); since 2011 numerous book and photo projects with Spector Verlag Leipzig, Schauspiel Stuttgart, artist collective Liga und ASPN Leipzig.

4

5

Family Affairs The reason for showing the works of Günther Domenig, Konrad Frey, Volker Giencke, Bernhard Hafner, Eilfried Huth, Szyszkowitz + Kowalski and Manfred WolffPlottegg lies not only in their architectural significance, but—even if this may initially seem surprising—in their (multi-layered) relation to Peter Cook and Colin Fournier, the creators of the Kunsthaus. I was interested, starting with the Kunsthaus and how it came into being, in investigating the works of those Graz-based architects who like Cook and Fournier were born in the 1930s and 1940s and so belong to the same generation. It is no exaggeration to say that Graz and the TU had become a hub for contemporary building culture in the second half of the 20th century. Important architects such as Yona Friedman, Frei Otto or Cedric Price came to this city, while conversely Graz architects were successful beyond Austria’s borders for many years.

In the course of my research, it turned out that there are deep-reaching links between the Austrian and the British architects sometimes going back several decades.

Peter Cook and Eilfried Huth met in the mid-1980s on the occasion of the exhibition Vision of Modernism. The Construction Principle in Frankfurt’s Museum of Architecture, at which both Archigram and Huth/Domenig were represented. Eilfried Huth’s interest in British architecture, however, especially in Archigram and Cedric Price, goes back even further to the 1960s. Konrad Frey met Cook during his time in London. He lived in the British metropole from 1968 to 1974. Like Huth, he was already familiar with Archigram beforehand: his Cowicle is a direct reference to Michael Webb’s Cushicle. His state examination project at the TU Graz, the work on Kaiser-Josef-Platz, is also thanks

to the multifunctional and medial interest of British architecture, above all of Cedric Price, who for his part had inspired Archigram. Frey was impressed by the Kunsthaus design by architects Cook/Fournier, which culminated in a friendship with Fournier.

Frey, and later Manfred Wolff-Plottegg, were the first points of contact in Graz when the British architects began to set up their office. Karla Kowalski names Archigram as vital for her decision to add postgraduate study at the AA School in London to her degree in architecture. Peter Cook was working as a lecturer there, with Colin Fournier one of her fellow-students. After Kowalski’s time in London, the contact broke off. Only when the Kunsthaus was consecrated did the three meet again. Bernhard Hafner met Peter Cook and other Archigram members in Los Angeles in 1968/69, when he was teaching at that city’s UCLA. While Peter Cook and Günther Domenig only got to know each personally in 1980, the Briton had already previously published his Austrian colleague’s work in the Archigram magazine. The Architektur Consult ZT GmbH, to which Domenig still belonged at the time of the Kunsthaus competition, functioned as the contractor partner office in the construction of the Kunsthaus Graz. Volker Giencke was the 1976 award winner of the Shinkenchiku competition in Tokyo, at the time the world’s largest and most important competition for modern architecture. The only juror back then was Peter Cook. Cook and Giencke saw and met one another time and again after that, at large architectural symposia, as jurors, at lectures and at Biennials in Venice, etc. Giencke was also the chairman of the jury that decided upon the building of the Kunsthaus. Fournier met Giencke through Manfred Wolff-Plottegg in Graz in the 1990s. Fournier like Cook, was also a guest professor at the ./studio 3 at Innsbruck University. Fournier and Wolff6

Plottegg have known each other since 1994.

They met frequently, talking about ‘God and the devil in architecture’ (Plottegg), and not least—since Cook and Fournier had won the Kunsthaus competition—about the situation of architects in Graz, too. They cotranslated Jean Baudrillard as well (including Architecture: Truth or Radicalism?).

exists for him, and under which he also subsumes the exhibiting architects) as ‘cousins’ of the Kunsthaus, whereby in his eyes, his and Fournier’s contribution is ‘less spiky and less local’. They see themselves very much as one ‘family’, albeit one comprised of what may be clearly regarded as some highly idiosyncratic characters.

In the run-up to the exhibition I was frequently asked whether these relations between Cook/Fournier and Graz architects were important at all for the selection of the architects exhibiting. This is assuredly not the only significant point for showing these eight positions. The works themselves and the examination of their current sociopolitical relevance of course play the decisive role. This is because not all those who have a connection to Cook/Fournier or were born in the same decade are automatically represented. Beyond the architecture in the narrow sense, I am interested in the fabric of mutual influences, collegial exchange and the resultant effects on architectural practice. I am convinced that even if those involved may regard themselves as unique, the contacts and encounters among and with each other produced those powerful movements in architecture that permanently changed thinking in this field and in building.

As in every family, there are always disagreements, and we seek to be more or less close to some relatives; indeed, in some cases we break off relations altogether.

This characterises relations among those taking part in the exhibition titled Graz Architecture: Rationalists, Aesthetes, Gut Instinct Architects, Democrats, Mediacrats. The show’s title, taken from the book Architektur-Investitionen. ‘Grazer Schule’, 13 Standpunkte (Forum Stadtpark, 1984), takes into account the diversity of its protagonists. The exhibition takes the variety of architectural positions as its starting point and does not seek to stick a label on them such as the ‘Graz School’. A wide spectrum of different approaches is presented, which, as I read it, overlap in certain points, yet are far apart in others. ‘Knots’ are formed in the exhibition, which propose connections between the thoughts and projects—without, of course, claiming to be complete or indeed to possess any interpretational superiority. Several examples: the spatial, social and socio-economic redefinition of the family home was an issue for Szyszkowit­z + Kowalski, and Frey; possibilities of participation were played out in the programmes of Huth, and Szyszkowitz + Kowalski; Huth/Domenig, Frey and Hafner investigated on various levels the use of structures and structural architecture; Giencke, Szyszkowitz + Kowalski and Huth, too, had and have a special interest in aesthetics, without neglecting the functional, technical and socio-economic aspects of a

‘Does it (the relationship) really matter?’

Peter Cook asked me, only to add: ‘Of course such information/non-information is the scourge of the historian!’ If we look at other statements made both by Cook and Fournier, then they themselves create some links that were important for them to the architects in the exhibition living in Graz today. For example, Fournier describes Giencke’s greenhouses in the Botanical Garden as ‘favourite buildings’ in Graz, or Cook speaks of buildings of the ‘Graz School’ (which definitely

7

building; Szyszkowitz + Kowalski and Frey pursued ecological agendas, like Huth/ Domenig with their Floraskin, even though their positions initially seem to lie far apart from one another. Wolff-Plottegg and Domenig are concerned with authorship from opposing ends, as it were. Those are only some of the cross-connections that are formulated in the exhibition. Working through the most varied ‘knots’ does not play down individual approaches, nor differing ones; rather, positions are placed in relation to one another.

Graz Architecture: Rationalists, Aesthetes, Gut Instinct Architects, Democrats, Mediacrats is not restricted to the works of a particular era, e.g. the 1960s and 1970s, but rather throws light on the development and transformation of ideas over time to the present day, and of contexts of that time when compared with today. Projects that have an explicit link to Cook and Fournier and/or Archigram, such as Greenhouse/ Botanical Garden by Giencke, City in Space

by Hafner or Cowicle by Frey, are presented in the show Up into the Unknown, thus reinforcing the links between the two exhibition projects.

A key role is played in the exhibition by the view from the outside, so as to cast various perspectives on the architects’ works: the protagonists’ self-interpretation moves next to the perception influenced by curatorial and art institutional aspects, and next to the view of both exhibition architects Niels Jonkhans (for Up into the Unknown) und Rainer Stadlbauer (Graz Architecture: Rationalists, Aesthetes, Gut Instinct Architects, Democrats, Mediacrats). Jonkhans was co-author of the competition design as well as a leading collaborator in the execution of the Kunsthaus, and Stadlbauer was Wolff-Plottegg’s assistant at the TU

Vienna, yet they belong to another generation and so look at the material equally from a certain proximity and distance. The view from the outside can also be found with us the curators, with the exhibition graphic designer Anna Lena von Helldorff, and with invited visual artists. Their role can best be compared with that of commentators. They were tasked with engaging the architectural positions from a current perspective. Arthur Zalewski sought out places that have a link to both exhibitions: he took photographs both in and outside the Kunsthaus, he took pictures that included Wolff-Plottegg’s housing complex in Seiersberg, Domenig’s Z-Sparkasse in Vienna, and Giencke’s greenhouses in Graz. These objects presented in the Graz Architecture exhibition are extended by more buildings—whether from Graz, Styria or from other regions. In this way Zalewski creates a network of relationships, specifically between the protagonists of the exhibitions shown in the Kunsthaus and those that are not represented there, between architecturally demanding and purely pragmatic projects, between architectural masterpieces and functional buildings without any design ambitions. Anna Meyer starts with the transitional zones between house, animal and human, with hybrid architecture.

She latches on to the author oft-quoted

by Fournier, Jean Baudrillar­d: ‘Interesting works of architecture are like monsters.’ In a literal interpretation, the wall becomes the skin in Meyer’s paintings, the scaffolding the bones, the house like a human, yet also the other way round: the skin becomes the wall, the bones the scaffolding, and the human the house. Her hybrid architectural creations allow a link to Wolff-Plottegg, too.

Meyer herself focuses on buildings with an amorphous character such as the Schul­ schwester refectory by Huth and Domenig, or Cook’s and Fournier’s Kunsthaus. Yet the 8

present as depicted by Meyer is anything but rosy; rather, it appears apocalyptic.

Oliver Hangl adapts Showtime, a work created in 2010 at the invitation of the Institute of Art in Public Space in Styria, which engaged with a housing complex planned along participatory lines, the Alte Poststraße by Szyszkowit­z + Kowalski. Seven years after this project and more than 30 years after the housing complex was first occupied, Hangl produces an acoustic portrait that renders audible the developments of this spatial-social vision and altered requirements in the life of the estate. Julia Gaisbacher starts with the Eschen housing estate (Eschensiedlung) by Huth. After intensive research and including conversations with former and present residents of the complex a series of photographs was created, both interior and exterior, which is presented, together with documentary and archive material and the working model that was in use more than 40 years ago. Mischa Kuball’s work from the public prepositions series has the term ‘utopia’ mutate into ‘dystopia’ on the BIX façade of the Kunsthaus, and back again to ‘utopia’—thematising in the form of an endlessly repeated loop shifting perspectives on both architectural and social developments. Utopian reflections linger like a far-off ideal now a weak echo in the present, waiting to be activated afresh, transferred and thus interpreted. And here the circle closes for architecture: many utopian-seeming reflections

by Graz architects were real at one time, while today the realities of that period once again seem utopian.

Barbara Steiner

9

Mischa Kuball UTOPIA

siderations seem like a distant ideal, a faint echo. They wait to be reactivated, translated and interpreted, over and over again.

The Kunsthaus Graz can be interpreted as a utopian building that speaks of an (imagined) future, even today. Described in terms such as ‘living architecture’, ‘intelligent exhibition machine’ and ‘platform’, the building goes back to ideas from the late 1960s and the 1970s. The new architecture was to be modifiable, adaptable, participative and responsive. Many of these ideas were impossible to put into practice, they remain drafts, even today.

The facade of the Kunsthaus was originally designed to be transparent, clearly revealing the life in the interior of the exhibition machine. Instead, it became a pulsating illuminated façade that serves as a third, virtual exhibition space, facing outwards towards the city space. This is the very façade that is used for Mischa Kuball’s latest work from the series public prepositions. An inscription of the word ‘utopia’ is transformed into ‘dystopia’ and back again, in an endless loop. It poses questions related to changing perspectives, both in architectural and social developments.

In 2009, the artist began to carry out interventions in public space, titled public prepositions, mostly of a temporary nature.

Again and again, the series explores the question of what public space and political public could be, and what relationship could exist between this space and works of art.

Certainly, these approaches include a return to concepts from the past, including social utopias.

For Mischa Kuball, public prepositions are a tool that enables social developments to be observed. In today’s world, utopian con-

Born in 1959 in Düsseldorf (DE), lives in Düsseldorf (DE) Exhibitions and projects (selected): Licht auf Kirchner, Kirchner Museum Davos, Davos (2016, solo); public preposition, les fleurs du mal (Blumen für Marl) skulpture museum Glaskasten, Marl (2014, solo); public preposition, solidarity grid, SCAPE 6 & 7, Biennale Christchurch, Christchurch/NZ (2013, solo); platon’s mirror, The State Museum of Contemporary Art, Thessaloniki/Salon Muzeja savremene umetnosti, Belgrade/Kunsthalle, Düsseldorf/Museu Nacional de arte contemporanea, museu do chiado, Lisbon/Lethaby Gallery, Central Saint Martins, London/Samca, Sofia/Muzeul Naţional de Artă Contemporană, Bukarest (2012, solo); privat­e light/public light, Biennale Sao Paulo (1998, solo); refraction house, Synagoge Stommeln, Pulheim (1994, solo); bauhaus-block, Bauhaus Dessau, Dessau (1992, solo); Projektionsraum 1:1:1, Konrad Fischer Galerie, Düsseldorf (1992, solo); Megazeichen, Mannesmann-Hochhaus, Düssel­dorf (1990, solo). www.public-preposition.net 10

Beautiful, tasteful, attractive?

In everyday language, aesthetics is usually equated with ‘beautiful, tasteful or attractive’. In 1750/58, Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten defined aesthetics as the ‘science of sensual perception’,* establishing it as an independent philosophical discipline in parallel with logic. Rational understanding should be accompanyed by cognition via the senses. The meanings of aesthetics have broadened since Baumgarten—having undergone a constant shift in humanistic and cultural discourse. In keeping with the Greek word aísthēsis, aesthetics refers to perception—in concrete terms, a movement of the senses via perception. Various experiences and configurations relating to nature, everyday events and life are involved, along with reflection on the subject of experience.

In Huth’s work, aesthetics is ‘aisthesis’, i.e. sensual perception and the knowledge it results in, and it is closely linked with sociopolitical questions. This incorporates the ‘entire spectrum of negative and positive experience of our reality as a symptom of a development or a developmental state.’

Against this background, Huth describes the form of built objects as a ‘perceptible manifestation of the social framework’.** Huth’s ‘Teaching experiments on aesthetic learning’ basically consist of perceptive training to promote the gain of knowledge through sensual perception. Here, Huth is a representative of a reform movement that emerged in the 1970s, mainly initiated by educators, which called for an ‘aisthetic change in aesthetics’. The aim was to open up the concept of aisthesis and make it accessible beyond the realms of ‘high’ art, to a certain extent democratising aesthetic­s.

Aesthetics

Volker Giencke associates with ‘aesthetics, elegance, lightness and harmony’—a well-formed appearance and wholeness in the sense of Hans Scharoun’s vision of organic architecture. This means that function, materials and purposes are not subjugated to a preconceived idea of form or expression—the appearance of a building is allowed to evolve on its own terms.

Giencke’s view opposes that of Günther Domenig, whose entrance solution for the Z-Sparkasse Favoriten he found ‘much too baroque, heavy, quite offensive’. In fact, Domenig’s ‘attitude of exaggeration’*** was finally one of the reasons why Giencke went his own way, developing his own approach towards construction and the economy of means, which create the expression of a building. The methods and means of construction are openly displayed—they provide the spatial experience, becoming the subject of aesthetic considerations. In this way, industrial buildings such as the Odörfer company building and research facilities like the Greenhouses at the Botanical Garden of the University of Graz can certainly also be understood as places of aesthetic and sensual experience. * Alexander G. Baumgarten, Theoretische Ästhetik. Die grundlegenden Abschnitte aus der „Aesthetica“/Theory of Aesthetics. The Fundamental Sections of the A‘esthetica’ (1750/58), translated and edited by Hans Rudolf Schweizer, Hamburg 1983. ** Eilfried Huth, Doris Pollet, Beteiligung, Mitbestimmung im Wohnbau, Wohnmodell Deutschlandsberg Eschensiedlung, Arbeitsbericht 1972–76. *** Interview by Barbara Steiner with Volker Giencke, 24.08.2016.

12

Project name Unterrichtsversuche zum ästhetischen Lernen (Teaching Experiments on Aesthetic Learning) Author Eilfried Huth (with Günther Domenig until 1975) In collaboration with Hartmut Urban, Irmfried Windbichler Period 1972–1983 Status Completed Location/place Deutschlandsberg, Graz, Berlin Client/developer 1974: Styrian Academy Project type Workshops Association between architecture and society Eilfried Huth has always been interested in the mediation of architecture and its aesthetic and social conditions. In Huth’s opinion, teaching (and learning from one another) is the logical continuation of practical experience with participation models.

The last commission he undertook in partAesthetics

nership with Domenig was the organisation of the Styrian Academy in 1974, on the theme of ‘Building Culture’. The event, which addressed the subject of co-determination and participation in social housing, attracted much attention, not least that of politicians. Alongside specific building projects such as the Eschen development, Huth’s Teaching Experiments on Aesthetic Learning were committed to communicating contents that he considered important with regard to the association between architecture and society. In May 1974, he carried out workshops at the Girls’ Secondary School Deutschlandsberg and the Arts Education Gymnasium, teaching participants how to plan social housing projects from the point of view of various roles and follow them through to the implementation stages.

Workshops of this nature were later held at the Academic Gymnasium in Graz and at the Hochschule in Berlin.

13

Project name Church in Aigen Architecture Volker Giencke In collaboration with Alfred Bramberger, Markus Dorner, Robert Felber, Claudius Pratsch, Eckhart Rhode; Alois Winkler (structure planning); Fritz Panzer (Kunst am Bau, glass painting) Period 1985–1992 Status Completed Location/place Aigen im Ennstal, Styria Client/developer Municipality of Aigen im Ennstal and diocese Graz-Seckau Project type Sacred building The church leaves the village The church, with its parish house and freestanding bell tower, is separated from the village centre by a brook. Three narrow footbridges built from steel and oak cross over the brook, linking the village square with the church square. The ground plan of the church is an irregular polygon with stout concrete walls on the north and east sides, and coloured glass walls towards the south and west. A cavity wall accommodates the staircase to the roof, the confessional and an organ niche. The church interior is lowered, whilst the chancel is slightly elevated.

The choir platform is situated opposite the altar. A large green roof covers part of the church square, closing the church interior with a bellied wooden ceiling. The cubiform parish house is a steel construction with larch and glass façades. According to its ground plan, the church tower is a distorted rectangle. It is 32 m high, resting upon a broad basement and topped by a belfry.

Its steel framework is panelled with glass sheets that are attached elastically and point by point.

Aesthetics

14

Project name Zentralsparkasse Favoriten (Central savings bank Favoriten) Author Günther Domenig In collaboration with Emanuel Anders, Volker Giencke Period 1974–1979 Status Completed Location/place Vienna, Favoriten district Client/developer Zentralsparkasse Construction task/type Office building Aesthetics

District centre for banking, culture and communication Domenig’s concept for the construction of the Zentralsparkasse and Kommerzialbank in Vienna was that all materials were to be used in their raw manufactured state, and that the in-house installations and construction work were not to be concealed.

The visible pipelines, supply cables, red steel roof girders and the sculptural details give the building something of a surreal appearance, even today. Many decisions relating to the construction procedure were made on site, in collaboration with workers and craftsmen. This process was modelled on the medieval ‘mason’s lodge’, founded on qualified training and overseen by the ‘master’ as the highest authority.

Domenig understood the cooperation between all the participants as a form of working together to create a Gesamtkunstwerk.

The supports, made of moulded concrete (‘the trees’), form the basic static structure; they also hold the steel mesh of the courtyard roof. The spatial sculptures—‘The Water’ and ‘The Hand’—have no immediate structural function;* for Domenig, they created an important association with the visual arts. The enormous hand, depicting the architect’s (crippled) ring finger and the forman’s forefinger, is a symbol of the close collaboration between the two. The sculptural elements also feature red roots that appear to be growing out of the roof.

A spectacular stainless steel façade fronts the building, which appears to be ‘shedding its scales’ towards the bottom, bulging out above the entrance area. The entrance itself has also been designed sculpturally, with welding seams that have been left intentionally unconcealed. * ‘The hand’ did however have the ‘function’ of concealing the courtyard’s roof drainage system.

15

Project name Odörfer Architecture Volker Giencke In collaboration with Davide Ferrero, Susi Fritzer, Uta Giencke, Gino Kratzer, Reinhard Kropf, Eeva Liisa Pelkonen Period 1989–1992 Status Completed Location/place Klagenfurt, Carinthia Client/developer Odörfer-Röhrenhof, Graz Project type Exhibition, office and company building, warehouse Caution, architecture!

The company building that houses the sanitation wholesaler Odörfer, situated on a bypass road in Klagenfurt, functions as an office complex, exhibition and sales areas and a warehouse. When it was erected, it was the first building set in the midst of mainly agriculturally used land. During the construction phase, when a series of collisions occurred on the ringroad, a warning sign was erected with the inscription ‘Achtung Architektur!’ (caution, architecture).

‘Achtung Architektur’ is also the title of a Aesthetics

book written by Eeva-Liisa Pelkonen on Volker Giencke and Austrian architecture (Ritter-Verlag & MIT Press, Massachusetts 1996). Today, the building is situated in the industrial area of the town.

Particularly striking is the glass roof, façade and roof all in one, which inclines towards the north. It can be opened along its entire length, and appears transparent, reflective or shiny, depending on the lighting conditions. On the southern side of the building, which is used for goods deliveries, the roof projects considerably over the building. The exhibition and sales hall is equipped with a series of special details—hanging showcases, suspended flights of stairs, freestanding glass walls and so-called ‘meeting terraces’. The play of light, a distinguishing characteristic of both the interior and the exterior of the building, is enhanced by means of a water basin adjoining the glass façade. Giencke’s attention to detail also comes into play in the planting in the hall— architectural elements alternate with date palms, mimosas and jacaranda trees.

16

Project name Büro- und Lagergebäude Zultner (Zultner offices and warehouse) Authors Hermann Eisenköck, Günther Domenig In collaboration with Christian Halm, Peter Kaschnig, Sabine Krampl, Annemarie Scheidl; Wendl ZT-GmbH (structure planning) Period 2000–2001 Status Completed Location/place Graz-St. Peter Client/developer Wilhelm Zultner und Co Construction task/type Company building The most impressive feature of the building that houses ZULTNER Metall GmbH in Graz is the roof construction, with its expressive appearance. The warehouse, workshops, presentation and sales areas and a small parts storage room are situated beneath this roof. The office wing runs diagonally to the large roofing area, directly above the Aesthetics

entrance, where it appears to be suspended in mid-air. In a discreet yet effective manner, the struts of the office wing allude to the first letter of the company name. In principle, the shape of the roof can also be interpreted as a huge Z. The construction and materials reinforce the character of an industrial building. However, in keeping with the requirements of the enterprise, the building goes beyond the mere fulfilment of functions—it can be also understood in the sense of an aesthetic statement.

Not only by alluding to the letter ‘Z’, but also through the overall impression of the building—especially its materiality, i.e. with the use of aluminium slats and Rheinzink panels—the architects make direct reference to the client, ZULTNER Metall GmbH, a stockholding wholesaler specialising in stainless steel, aluminium, non-ferrous metals, welding technology and synthetics.

17

What matter who’s speaking, someone said, what matter who’s speaking?*

ship, the role of the architect, and planning in architecture.

The concept of the autonomous, creative author ruling over his work has been rendered problematic throughout the 20th century from various sides. Best known of all are the reflections on authorship by Roland Barthes or Michel Foucault, for example.

They opposed the notion that the author— following the Romantic idea of the genius— was not only the author of a text, but also the authority who determines its meaning.

The text-supported interpretation then advanced, which recognises readers and their interpretative abilities as the authority in lending meaning in the process of identifying significance. In the case of Barthes, we thus find the formulation: the ‘death of the author’ enables the ‘birth of the reader’.**

To a certain extent, Günther Domenig can be seen as the counter-position to Plottegg: At first glance form and design, a strong (authorial) subject and pathos-laden placings—understood as an emotional, theatrical and seemingly exaggerated expression—take priority. As a parallel to the artist Walter Pichler—highly regarded by Domenig—who built houses for his sculptures, Domenig sought to bring architecture ever closer to the sculpture. His architectural spatial sculptures are an expression of this undertaking. His connection to Pichler is also the use of individual mythology, meaning a retreat into the private and subjective while simultaneously drawing on (nature-based) mythologies.

In the exhibition, it is above all Manfred Wolff-Plottegg who opposes the demiurgic architect, who sees himself as ‘creator god’, located between a superior being who only brings forth the best possible, and a dubious figure who has created an imperfect world marked by a wide range of evils. In the Metamorphose einer Stadtwohnung, the Zusammengebrochenes Bett, the architectural designs or generators, authorship is transferred to chance, to force and to (technical) systems, while the personal gesture or signature evaporates. The appearance of the objects and projects concerned is neither determined in advance, nor can it be predicted or controlled. The designs— consequences of algorithmic manipulations—would like to be interpreted, both

by Plottegg and by others. Yet although he removes authorship on the one hand, it comes into play through the anticipated signature, the addition of ‘already’, and the respective dating, on the other. Plottegg thus provokes confrontations with author-

Yet ultimately in the case of Domenig, form is exploded, the authoritarian subject is permeable due to the joint creation and collaboration, and the charged nature of the pathos-laden formulae and individual mythologies are undermined by practical functions. Thus ‘The Hand’, for example, an over-sized three-dimensional placing in the interior of the Zentralsparkasse Wien-Favoriten, also serves as visual cover, while ‘The Rocket’, an object located in the basement of the Steinhaus that is focused on the family grave in neighbouring Feldkirchen, acts as a basin for catching rain water. The great authorial gesture crumbles, like the form.

Authorship

* Samuel Beckett, quoted by Michel Foucault: ‘What is an Author?’ (1969), in: Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology, ed. by James D. Faubion, New York 1998, p. 205. ** Roland Barthes: ‘The Death of the Author’ (1967), in: Image Music Text, ed. by Stephen Heath, London 1977, p. 142.

18

Project name Zusammengebrochenes Bett (Collapsed Bed) Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with Schwerkraft Period as early as 1971 Status Completed Location/place Lichtenfelsgasse, Graz Client/developer Project type Furniture manufacture Project name Metamorphose einer Stadtwohnung (Metamorphosis of a Town Flat) Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with Billy goat Period as early as 1971 Status Completed Location/place Lichtenfelsgasse, Graz Client/developer Project type Installation Authorship

I do not design, I change the rules In 1972, Plottegg took part in a course on furniture manufacture at the Technical University of Graz. He introduced Collapsed Bed as his new design for a bed. The process of collapsing itself was defined as the planning method, a non-reflecting procedure, a direct approach to objects. It did not start out from pre-formulated concepts, a title, a fixed conception of form or intention. The K.R.A.C.H. (‘crash’) at the moment of collapse is a symbol for the unstoppable nature of a corporeal process, the simultaneity of active force and outcome.

In Metamorphosis of a Town Flat, also from 1972, Plottegg laid a cloth over all of the furniture in the flat and reinforced it with a robust layer of glass fibre synthetic. Peat dust and humus was to be scattered to encourage plant growth. Animals were also to be taken into the flat—for example a billy goat—and a fresh water standpipe tapped, in order to create constant changes. The appearance is neither predetermined, foreseeable nor controllable.

In both the Collapsed Bed and the Metamorphosis of a Town Flat, Plottegg cancelled out the usual planning patterns and familiar ideas of a bed or a flat. Attention was shifted from the object to the algorithm*, to the process—in one case to the crash that occurs when something falls to pieces, and in the other to the (slow) permanent transformation of the flat itself and the lifestyle habits within it.

* An algorithm describes a rule or a procedure. Algorithms are found both in the analogue and in the digital world.

19

Project name Hybrid Architektur (Hybrid Architecture) Authors Manfred Wolff-Plottegg, Georg Gröller, Peter Hellweger, Oskar Panizza In collaboration with Peter Lipp/VAX TU Graz Period as early as 1980 Status Completed Location/place Künstlerhaus Graz (1981) Client/developer ZV Steiermark Project type Computer design Authorship

Hybrid Architecture: House & Cow On a superficial level, this concerns the transformation of one object into another— morphing, before the procedure became widespread. In the background, the drawing algorithm is active—the pencil is drawn along the T-square, along a template, along the contours seen by the eye or imagined in the brain. So when a house is being drawn, the pencil could be drawn around the contours of a cow—the cow could be used as the template, so to speak. In this selfdeveloped form finding programme, hybrids emerge by means of morphing.

Input is interchangeable in an algorithm, so that if one starts out with a Thonet chair and Le Corbusier’s Modulor*, the same script** generates either a new chair or a new Modulor. From a conventional house layout and the borderlines of Austria, the ‘Austria House’ emerges. Hybrid architecture becomes the forerunner of the Binary House. * The Modulor is a scale of proportions developed by the architect Le Corbusier between 1942 and 1955. ** A ‘script’ is a sequence of commands.

20

Project name Analoger Generator (Analogue Generator) Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with any user Period as early as 1987 Status Completed Location/place Client/developer Construction task/type Object Authorship

Analogue Generator The Analogue Generator originated in 1987, when a model for a competition was being built. Whilst documents were being copied, the overhead transparencies became thermally warped. They were labelled, signed and placed into an acrylic glass box with a horsehair (= line). If it is shaken vigorously or put down abruptly, continual configurations, new designs emerge, in a similar way to ‘throwing a dice’. On the one hand, due to the random factor, Plottegg cancels out the issue of authorship. However, it comes into play again in the form of the anticipated signature and date. No matter who shakes the box, Plottegg is the original author from ‘as early as 1987’.

21

Project name Digitaler Generator (Digital Generator) Authors Manfred Wolff-Plottegg, Hans Kupelwieser In collaboration with PC 385/MAC Period as early as 1991 Status Completed Location/place De Zonnehof, Amersfoort Client/developer Project type Computer design Authorship

Digital Generator Input consists of 2½ D data from the ‘Sonnen Busen Hammer’ logo of ‘Lord Jim Loge’, originally a drawing by Martin Kippenberger, Albert Oehlen and Wolfgang Bauer. The ‘generated’ lines come from a data crash that occurred when data from one operating system (Plottegg/DOS) was being transferred to another (Kupelwieser/ Mac OS) in 1991. The data was being sent via modem from Graz to Amersfoort to the exhibition The Synthetic Dimension. A comment generated via MS-Word/Macro was added: ‘README.1ST / update 9728 Bytes 10/12/1991 10:52 am’.

‘Lord Jim Loge’ was a cooperation of several artists.

22

Project name Neuronaler Generator (Neuronal Generator) Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with Wolfgang Maass, Harry Fuchs, Andreas Gruber Period as early as 1999, 2000, 2004 Status Completed Location/place Vienna Künstlerhaus, Neue Galerie Graz, ZKM Karlsruhe Client/developer Project type Computer design Authorship

Neuronal Generator The installation Neuronal Architecture Generator is an experimental arrangement on the subject of digital creativity. The principle is the equation: pulse sequences (spike trains) in biological organisms = binary sets of symbols (bit strings) = data (coordinates, vectors) interpretable as bodies (solids).

This links three areas with one another: ‘the world in our heads’, ‘the world of digital data processing’ and the ‘world of the generation of new images/spaces/architectures’. Plottegg’s installation illustrates the fact that the production of images/spaces/ architectures must no longer originate from the human being. Data does not have to be processed by the brain—creativity can be outsourced.

The programme runs live in the exhibition.

23

Project name Hyper-Hybrid Generator Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with Jochen Hoog, Lukas Ofner, Johannes Sperlhofer Period as early as 2008 Status Completed Location/place Internet, Bienal de Arte Contemporรกneo de Sevilla Client/developer Projekt type Installation Authorship

Hyper-Hybrid Generator On a building site on an island at Second Life*, a script continually drops building components/objects on the island. The building components automatically form architectural agglomerations, join together in multiple combinations and constructions, combine to form spatial constellations and create different interiors and sequences of free spaces. After a certain unit of time has passed, individual objects disperse and disappear spontaneously, only to fall back onto the island and generate new configurations.

This happens continuously. The diversity of the building components and the three-dimensionality of the virtual surroundings provide continually new spatial experiences. * An online 3D-infrastructure for virtual worlds created by users that has been available since 2003.

24

Project name Content Generator II Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with Richard Schaffranek Period 2017 Status Completed Location/place Internet Client/developer Project type Generator Authorship

Content Generator II The quantities of data available on the Internet are growing, but the rules relating to how information can be accessed—for example via search engines—are far from transparent. For the ZKM Karlsruhe, in collaboration with Richard Schaffranek, Plottegg developed the Content Generator I. From a large quantity of quotations on the theme of globalisation, individual sections are reassembled—generated—to form new statements on globalisation.The piecewise selection and assembly of this information creates new combinations—new content.

In the Content Generator II algorithm, two processes run side by side. A ‘selector’ generates new text fragments/headlines, and an ‘accumulator’ taps into constantly new sources, on the basis of the generated headlines.

25

Project name ReSoWi-Zentrum Universität Graz, ReSoWi Centre University of Graz (competition) Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with Martin Zechner Period as early as 1985 Status Not realised Location/place Graz Client/developer University of Graz/BIG Construction task/type University building Authorship

It is easier to change the rules in a computer than to control our own brain or behaviour In 1985, in collaboration with Maze Zechner, Plottegg participated in the competition for the ReSoWi Centre at the University of Graz.

In keeping with the spatial and functional programme specified in the tender— a building with over 500 rooms was to be designed—a script was used to calculate the proportions of the rooms, surface distribution, superimpositions, contours, building structures and finally diagrams.

This led to the statement: ‘I do not design with my brain or with my gut feeling, but with my little finger!’ (pressing the enter key). By means of the computer application, Plottegg distances himself from traditional patterns of behaviour, evaluation and production. Authorship is transferred to systems, the personal gesture/touch vanishes, but the works still remain typically Plottegg.

26

Project name Das Steinhaus (The Stone House) Author Günther Domenig In collaboration with Gilbert Acham, Hermann Eisenköck, Johannes Dullnigg, Andreas Gruber, Manfred Klement, Herbert Liska, Armin Lixl, Wolfgang Petek, Gerhard Wallner, Wolfgang Wimmer, Peter Zinganel; Harald Egger (structure planning) Period 1986–2008 Status Completed Location/place Steindorf at Lake Ossiach, Carinthia Client/developer Construction task/type Workshop for architecture The fractured house In 1959 Günther Domenig and his brother inherited the property in Steindorf from their grandmother. Domenig had already thought of creating a house for communal use, a collective workshop. However, Domenig was only in a position to begin building in 1986.

The scale of the undertaking brought the architect to the brink of his financial limits—continual changes to the design took decades to complete, leading right up to the time of his death. Around a central longituAuthorship

dinal axis stretching towards the lake, over a slightly staggered jetty that also leads into the lake, the main open-plan rooms of the house are grouped centrifugally, from the centre towards the edges. Building components tower over one another, push into each other, surfaces and structures burst open, penetrate cavities, form canyons. At the centre of the building there is a fountain, for Domenig ‘the source of all life’—it also represents the starting point of the house itself, as the architectural model of the Stone House clearly demonstrates. References to the four elements theory—fire, air, earth and water, elements that define all states of being—are found in the house. A rocket (which also functions as a collecting basin for rainwater) is directed at the family grave in the neighbouring Feldkirchen.

Domenig always referred to his own experiences and memories, the surrounding countryside, and he aimed to give these a material presence within the house. The Stone House brings together concepts of home/ localisation and universal thoughts, shelter and subjection, departure and ‘fracturing’*. * Domenig’s series of sketches Architektonische Zerbrechungen (Architectonic Fracturings) arose from a study of mountain rocks. The Stone House can also be viewed in this context.

27

Project name Vogel Nix-Nuz-Nix (Nix-Nuz-Nix Bird) Author Günther Domenig In collaboration with Andreas Gruber, Takasaki Masaharu Period 1983 Status Completed Location/place Steinhaus at Lake Ossiach, Carinthia Client/developer Originally Z-Bank Graz; later modified Project type Object Authorship

Good for nothing, quite useless Domenig worked on the Nix-Nuz-Nix for many years, a technically refined, bird-like structure that cannot fly and ‘is good for nothing, quite useless’. Originally, the bird was created to accentuate the corner of a branch of the Zentralsparkasse in Graz. In this context, Domenig spoke of an architectural ‘amplifying feature’.

The Nix-Nuz-Nix was too expensive for the client, so Domenig kept it. The ‘bird’ became his alter ego, celebrating its ‘birthday’ on the same day as its creator. Over time, the Nix-Nuz-Nix became a ‘decorative and advertising bird’. Engineered by the company Treiber, the Nix-Nuz-Nix may not have been able to fly, but it was a miracle of technical perfection. With its movable joints, it was used as a prototype for the examination of constructive nodes for support systems.

Today, this edition of the Nix-Nuz-Nix is located in the interior of the Stone House.

28

Project name Explosion Author Günther Domenig In collaboration with Period 1984 Status Completed Location/place Air raid shelter in the Graz Schlossberg, exhibition ‘Architekturvisionen’ (Visions of Architecture) Client/developer Festival steirischer herbst Project type Exhibition contribution Movement—destruction— transformation—renewal In the 1980s, Domenig produced a series entitled Explosions—including a project for business premises in Villach in 1982 and a contribution to the exhibition Architekturvisionen (Visions of Architecture) at the steirischer herbst festival in 1984. It is concerned with structures and installations that appear to be the result of explosions.

In the air raid shelter at the Graz Schlossberg, Domenig built a launch pad for his Nix-Nuz-Nix and showed the video film Der Flug über das Steinhaus (Flight over the Authorship

Stone House). Although the Nix-Nuz-Nix cannot fly, Domenig built a launch pad for it that appeared to have exploded—i.e. it was of no direct use, just like the bird itself. Domenig interlinks two kinds of explosions— structures that have been fragmented in a controlled, calculated way, and forms that have been blown up in an uncontrolled manner. The title of this exhibition in 1984, Architekturvisionen, can also be applied to the installation. They are situated on a ‘launch pad’, they can fly or ‘explode’, but they can also be brought down at great speed. On the occasion of an exhibition of his Stone House drawings at the Austrian Museum of Applied Arts in Vienna in 2007, Domenig staged another Explosion in the entrance area. He later installed it on the forecourt of the Stone House. Here, again, departure and termination, the ‘blowing up’ of solid, stable matter (form) are closely interrelated with burial, burden and heaviness. As in other projects, a practical function lies beneath the symbolic power—the Explosion conceals the drainage system in the forecourt.

29

Clean air and a lovely location* A detached house is a building that, by definition, is traditionally conceived as a residential house for a single family.

It is not resource-friendly, as it takes up more land than terraces or blocks, and is no longer in keeping with the social realities and lifestyles of its inhabitants today.

However, the prophecy—‘the detached house would disappear’, made by Huth and Domenig—turned out to be wrong. The free-standing family home is still at the top of many people’s wish list. However, it is subject to increased requirements and the building of a detached house today is expected to be economic, energy-efficient, functional and socially viable.

Architects are attaching more and more significance to economic and ecological factors and to the codetermination of the clients.

The usage of the house is thought of on a temporary basis, i.e. certain characteristics of the house can be activated as required, or the inhabitants can discover them as they use the house, and adopt them as their own. Manfred Wolff-Plottegg’s Das Binäre Haus represents a special case: considered in the context of the family home, not only the house is deconstructed, but the range of desires associated with it. * Huth & Domenig, Der Wohnbau, 1973. ** Konrad Frey, conversation with Ingrid Böck, 07.12.2016.

Against this background, it seems only natural that, for several decades now, this form of housing has been critically reviewed by architects on many levels—from spatial organisation to building economy up to ecological considerations and their embedding in the landscape.

In this exhibition, Szyszkowitz + Kowalski (House above Graz, Zusertal House) and Konrad Frey (Zankel House, Low Budget Loft House) in particular turn their attention to the task of building the detached house. Eilfried Huth is also represented with his Weinburg House. An especially important role is played by communal spaces, which become larger and more open in this context. The house community is no longer restricted to family members. The internal organisation of the house is redefined by creating a central area—a meeting place—for the house community. The home is seen more as a ‘time/space/elective area for a specific yet changeable temporary community, e.g. a family’.** Detached house

30

Project name Haus über Graz (House over Graz) Author/in Szyszkowitz + Kowalski In collaboration with Christo Grigorow (structural design) Period 1972–1974 Status Completed Location/place Graz-Mariatrost Client/developer Private Project type Detached house Architecture as establishing-a-relation The plot is the tip of a hill pointing southwards with an old stock of trees framing the view of the Graz roofscape. The house was designed in terms of colour, form and function for this situation.

The house, hill and trees interrelate with one another. The body of the house, dropping vertically to the slope, enables a high Detached house

spatial complexity both in the inner and external areas, which is also expressed in the diverse links between the interior spaces concerned and the surrounding nature, as expressly wished for by the clients. Many protected and open ‘external places’ are created in this manner, which can be used according to the season and individual needs. The spatial zones of the interior flow vertically and horizontally into one another. Special attention is paid to the living and communal rooms, to which smaller-sized retreat areas for family members are adjoined.

The external walls and roof were conceived in double-leaf fashion; the roof spans a reinforced concrete framework that is selfsupporting. The surface of the building consists of prefabricated wooden elements with plastic-coated steel plates affixed to them.

31

Project name Haus Zankel (Zankel House) Author Konrad Frey In collaboration with Karl Zankel, Wolfram Walluschek-Wallfeld (static), Institute for Environmental Research, Graz (solar technology) Period 1978–1985 Status Completed Location/place Prévessin near Geneva Client/developer Karl Zankel Project type Detached house The house as a poetic request programme Between 1978 and 1985, in collaboration with his client Karl Zankel, a physicist at CERN, Konrad Frey planned a house in Prévessin near Geneva. The ‘Sun House’ was to be developed in harmony with the old tree population on the site, and was to have a light, spacious and welcoming atmosphere.

Due to the open character of the spatial organisation—referred to by Konrad Frey as ‘the client’s poetic request programme’— there was scope for many different kinds of unexpected functions. The design was not only to incorporate a place of residence for the family of four, but also a separate wing to accommodate numerous guests.

Frey and Zankel made the house into a laboDetached house

ratory for new forms of living and working, and for the active and passive use of solar energy. In accordance with the client’s wish for solar energy heating, the entire exterior shell facing towards the south was used as a solar collector. The shiny plastic strips that rise on an alternately sloping and vertical incline consist of Tedlar foil, and are clamped into specially developed profiles. The solar collector completely covers both living tracts, whilst the translucent, filigree shell of the central atrium functions as a ‘sun space’.

A steel structure was erected, and the construction was completed using prefabricated lightweight concrete roofs, shell components made of wooden layered boards, and plasterboard partition walls. The construction of most of the house was carried out by the client himself, with the help of semiskilled workers from Styria. New cost-effective materials and adhesive techniques were used for the first time—bitumen shingles as a universal outer shell and the bonded ‘pure Plexiglass gate’ (‘aircraft wing’) for the entrance to the garden, six metres wide.

These technical details resulted from the pioneering spirit and experimental enthusiasm of Frey and Zankel, who were an ideally matched team.

32

Project name Haus Weinburg (Weinburg House) Author Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Heribert Altenbacher and the Lackner family Period 1978–1982 Status Completed Location/place Weinburg am SaĂ&#x;bach, Styria Client Familie Lackner Project type Detached house Detached house

Organic architecture The detached house in Weinburg, southeast Styria, is an example of organic architecture.

The design of the house, which is embedded in the landscape, was developed on the basis of codetermination regarding decisions related to both materials and form. Still resident in the house today, it was not only the Lackner family who were able to make considerable contributions to the design— the craftsmen also participated in the decision-making processes that arose during the construction of the house.

33

Project name Haus Zusertal (Zusertal House) Author/in Szyszkowitz + Kowalski In collaboration with Ernst Giselbrecht; Christo Grigorow (structure planning) Period 1979–1981 Status Completed Location/place Graz–Geidorf Client/developer private Project type Detached house The house in the valley The three-storey house, built for a couple with four children, lies in a valley and is surrounded by an old stock of trees that are part of a conservation area. The house is based on a rectangular floor plan, the narrow side of which faces towards the driveway. The entrance front, situated on the long side of the building, is highlighted with a small glass gable. A stringent axial symmetry emphasises the long side, leadDetached house

ing over to the roof shape with its diverging barrels.

The central feature of the house is the spacious hall, built over two storeys. Opening up towards the south in a visual sense, it determines the design of the entire building.

The inward convex curve of the façade and the glass roofing allow the sun to penetrate the depths of the house. On the upper floor, the small family bedrooms are situated along a U-shaped gallery. The dominating colour is the grey-green of the painted wooden lagging, which reflects the surrounding green space. Contrast is provided by the muted red of the plaster elements and the door soffits. This range of colours is repeated for the interior of the hall, particularly in the red tone of the skylight structure. In line with the interlinking between the architecture and the surroundings, Szyszkowitz + Kowalski developed their own concept for the garden.

34

Project name Das Binäre Haus (The Binary House) Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with Christoph Zechner Period as early as 1988 Status Completed Location/place CPU (central processing unit) Client/developer Construction task/type Computer generated architecture The Binary House In 1988, Plottegg and Cezet Zechner designed the Binary House for the international competition ‘La casa più bella del mondo’. For this, details were mixed from 3D Detached house

data that happened to be on the hard disc— of a random house, kindergarten and fitness centre—like how builders and architects usually blend various ideal images and memories. The input is interchangeable; all the datasets can be manipulated, as they can be differently interpreted and vary in their uses.

Two parallel lines no longer necessarily mean a wall—the meanings and interpretations of lines, grids, patterns and surfaces shift—for the time being they are nothing more than anonymous surfaces, patterns, grids and lines on the monitor that require interpretation. Changeable in all directions, in the design process directions change, borders become blurred, dimensions jump and perspectives flicker.

35

Continuity and change Großlobming Castle (Szyzkowitz + Kowalski­), Seckau Abbey (Volker Giencke) and the Monta­n University Leoben (Bernhard Hafner) are examples of ways of dealing with historical building stock. In the late 1970s interest grew both on the part of commissioners and architects in engaging with historical buildings. The focus was not on complete demolition, but rather a dialogue with what already existed. The buildings were extended and expanded in line with the new social requirements.

In several construction phases and with an axial layout, Szyzkowitz + Kowalski added extensions with individual character to Großlobming Castle, Gliencke developed a multistage concept for the overall renovation of Seckau Abbey that envisaged both adaptation to new functions together with some demolition and new building, while Hafner related old and new building parts in such a way at the Montan University Leoben that a new space arose between the two.

Szyzkowitz + Kowalski evoke associations with a ‘castle’ by means of an outside staircase, forecourt and defensive wall, for Großlobming only received its present appearance due to reconstruction and extensions carried out in the 19th century.

By employing industrial production methods, modern building materials and colours, they transferred historical props to the present, thereby also transforming these, connecting them with the old building stock and so taking account of its new function as a educational institution. Buildings, courts and gardens all form an overall structure with different accents. In his conversion and extension of Seckau Abbey, Giencke chose contemporary construction methods and materials (for example, concrete, glass, steel), which clearly contrast with the Continuity and change

centuries-old building stock. In this way, he positioned the original structure of the abbey, building on this step by step, and changing the ensemble to meet modern-day usage requirements. The additions support the old building substance, which in turn supported the new building parts. In extending the Montan University, Hafner layered three façades on top of each other, as it were, whereby aerial space was created between the old building and the extension, another room to be used—a connection, but also a ‘buffer zone’. In all three cases, the extensions and additions remain clearly visible; they do not subordinate themselves to the old building substance, but rather communicate confidently with the latter.

The qualities of each respective place were condensed and available potential of the building substance is utilised.

36

Project name Schloss Großlobming Fachschule und Kulturzentrum/ Volks­ schule (Großlobming Castle College and Cultural Centre/Primary School Author/in Szyszkowitz + Kowalski In collaboration with Werner Wratschko, Manfred Zernig, Hermann Eisenköck, Ernst Giselbrecht, Angela Klinger-Lohr, Meggy Kriwetz, Manfred Partl, Herbert Liska, Johann Schmitzberger, Adi Schmölzer, Alfred Sturm, Gerry Wratschko/Rolf Seifert, Andreas Gratl, Machel Caron, Gerald Flock, Werner Kanduth, Robert Leykam, Horst Schwarzl; Christo Grigorow (structure planning) Period 1979–1981/1994–1996 Status Completed Location/place Großlobming, Styria Client/developer Province of Styria Project type Refurbishment and new construction in two phases Continuity and change

Opposing Castle Großlobming Castle, which houses a college for agriculture and food economy, has been converted several times over the centuries.

In several construction phases, Szyszkowit­z + Kowalski added new axially coupled buildings. The first structure to be added is symmetrically composed in bold segments, opening up towards both the castle and the garden.

The main entrance to the college was moved to a new position between the old and new building, and the entrances and exits were shifted asymmetrically. Here, Szyszkowitz + Kowalski make reference to baroque flights of steps and forecourt, and give the new building the appearance of a real fortress. These references are interpreted in a contemporary way with the use of serial industrial fabrication methods and modern building materials, translating them into a contemporary vocabulary. The result is a fantastic and expressive structure that communicates with the old castle. With the additional building, Szyszkowitz + Kowalski create an ‘opposing castle’. It not only lies opposite the old building, but also presents a striking contrast to the original complex.

In a final construction phase, also axisymmetrically arranged and referring to the sections that had already been completed, a primary school was erected on a lower level.

Finally, the buildings, their courtyards and gardens form an overall structure with different accents.

37

Project name Abtei Seckau (Seckau Abbey) Architecture Volker Giencke In collaboration with Alfred Bramberger, Arpad Ferdinand, Davide Ferrero, Sandra Flury, Georg Giebeler, Eeva Liisa Pelkonen, Claudius Pratsch; Alois Winkler (structure planning); Karl-Heinz Lackner (construction management) Period 1988–2000 Status Completed Location/place Seckau, Styria Client/developer Benedictine Abbey Seckau, Order of Saint Benedict Seckau Project type General renovation, adaptation and extension of a Romanesque monastery complex with several new buildings Continuity and change

Monastic architecture was never really about cost-effectiveness, but it was always imaginative Today, the Benedictine monastery and Stiftsgymnasium Seckau, with its Romanesque basilica, is one of Styria’s greatest architectural masterpieces. Volker Giencke won the competition for the adaptation of the monastery complex and secondary school as early as 1988. Due to the modest budget, he developed a concept to complete the general renovation work in several stages, making provisions for the adaptation of the existing substance for new functions as well as partial demolition and rebuilding.

The northern tract was partly taken down and rebuilt, whereby few changes were made to the listed exterior, although new material was used. A glass staircase was added on the eastern side, providing access to the new gym. The multiple use of glass elements substantially changed the light situation in the school wing, creating views that opened the abbey up towards the exterior. A cable-supported glass roof was mounted above the entrance to the school.

While the entrance to the gym is inside the building, the new construction with its three-sided glass façade and no visible support structure projects beyond the abbey walls. Relatively little structural work was required for the new construction of the freely formed choral chamber, which is used for events. Encased in plywood that has been painted red and covered with translucent foil, the wooden construction remains open, immersing the interior in a warm light.

Giencke’s solution regarding access to the courtyard and the entrance to the basilica consisted of a wide, irregular concrete staircase with ramps, stairs and platforms.

38

Project name Montanuniversität, laboratory hall – extension Author Bernhard Hafner In collaboration with Johann Zimmermann; Otto Thaller (structure planning) Period 1989–1992 Status Completed Location/place Leoben, Styria Client/developer Austrian republic Project type Laboratory hall Continuity and change

Layers The starting point of the project was a three-storey office building from the 1950s at the Montanuniversität, which was to be extended with the addition of a laboratory hall. Hafner established a clear relationship between the two buildings. The hall covers a surface of 16 by 16 metres, without supports. Within it a concrete structure is situated, containing two tunnels for teaching and demonstration purposes. Due to the superimposition of three façade layers, an empty space is created between the old part of the building and the extension, which serves both as an entrance hall and an architectural link. In this way, the original façade is also restructured. The layers consist of the enveloping surfaces of building structures and the enveloping surfaces of the empty space linking them together.

Hafner’s colour scheme makes reference to the location, its function and its history, which is defined by steel production. All concrete and plaster surfaces have been coloured using slag sands from the steel production site in Leoben-Donawitz. Whilst the interiors remain white, the external walls are dyed a reddish brown.

39

Architecture is not only there for selfrealisation* In the 1990s, the Regional Councillor for Housing, the architect Michael Schmidt, alleged that ‘representatives of the “Graz School” were confusing residential buildings with monuments, that living quality was suffering as a consequence and that building costs were rising to astronomical levels.’* This was an attack on a unique housing model that was singular in Austria at that time, which had been developed in the framework of ‘Modell Steiermark’ (Model Styria) and was abandoned in the 1990s.

Initiated by the Styrian Governor Josef Krainer senior, the first ‘Model Styria’ was presented to the public for the first time in 1972 under Governor Friedrich Niederl, as a long-term political programme. In 1980, it was continued by Governor Josef Krainer junior. One of the work groups concerned with architecture, economics, democracy and energy was ‘Arbeitskreis 12’, in which various experts (architects, urban planners, financial experts and sociologists) came together to discuss questions of housing construction. Under the architect Wolfdiete­r Dreibholz, who was running the Structural Planning Department of the Province of Styri­a for many years, structural, cultural und architectural aspects of the program were implemented.

The ‘Model Styria’ made provisions for the participation of the future residents, encouraging variety instead of uniformity, larger residential areas with communal facilities, a mix of apartments for young families and senior citizens, and a restructuring of housing subsidies. It introduced measures to promote joint ownership as opposed to building rented apartments. A prerequisite was that the projects were coupled with Model Styria

an architectural competition. This created opportunities for a considerable number of young architects to win their first building contracts. The aim of the awarding authority ‘Model Styria’ was not only to stimulate discussions on prices per square metre, but also to support unconventional solutions in the construction of social housing. This was also a reaction to Social Democratic building projects.

As time passed, the pros and cons of the ‘Model’ were the subject of controversial debate. The accusation of artistic self-realisation, explosive costs and poor execution were set against the benefits of co-determination, opportunities for young architects and unusual building solutions that still attract architecture enthusiasts from all over the world.

The following projects shown in the exhibition were implemented as part of the ‘Model Styria’: Szyszkowitz + Kowalski, Alte Poststraße Residential Complex; Günther Domenig, Neufeldweg Residential Complex; Bernhard Hafner, Rettenbacher Development; Manfred Wolff-Plottegg, Heidenreichstraße, Seiersberg Residential Development and Volker Giencke, Residential Building Carl-Spitzweg-Gasse.

Giencke’s project gave rise to a heated discussion in 1994, stirred up by the media.

The architect was accused of running up excess building costs of over 40 %; de facto they only exceeded the budget by 10 %. * Regional Councillor for Housing Architect Michael Schmidt, 1994.

40

Project name Wohnbebauung Heidenreichstraße, Seiersberg (Residential Development) Author Manfred Wolff-Plottegg In collaboration with Fritz Mascher, Christoph Zechner Period 1987–1991 Status Completed Location/place Heidenreichstraße 7, Seiersberg Client/developer GGW Graz non-commercial housing association Construction task/type Residential housing Template for everything The development lies to the south of the Graz city boundary, in the municipality of Seiersberg. In 1987/88, Plottegg had won a competition to build 160 apartments in multi-storey buildings and 65 terraced houses. The first construction phase, comprising 24 apartments, was planned by Plottegg, whilst—counterproductive to the original concept—other responsible parties Model Styria

planned the following phases. The design of the entire development is based on secondlevel questions— ‘How do the lines get onto the paper and how do houses get onto the meadow?’. The project was developed primarily on screen, and is finally the result of the commands of an image editor, such as ‘insert’, ‘rotate’, ‘shift’, ‘stretch’, ‘setvar’, ‘double’, ‘cancel’, etc. In the printed image lines may be a floor plan or a section or a perspective view—the data is picked out as buildings or roads. Consequently, Plottegg declares a drawing with a large number of lines and grids to be a ‘template for everything’. A series of many (self-similar) working models shows several variations of the residential development. On the north side of the exterior, the sheet metal cladding is green (the colour of the 100 schilling note at the time). On the south side, walk-through balconies—extended ‘living rooms’—have been added. To ensure an excellent quality of life, every residential unit has its own entrance door.

41

Project name Wohnanlage Neufeldweg (Residential Complex) Author Günther Domenig In collaboration with Manfred Partl, Franz Jammernegg, Edeltraud Herz Period 1984–1988 Status Completed Location/place Graz-St. Peter Client/developer Interest group of the prospective residents, ÖWGes, Graz Construction task/type Residential building The dividing, growing and shrinking residential estate With the Neufeldweg residential project, Domenig aimed to meet the needs of the various life phases and plans of its inhabitants. The apartments can be changed, divided or extended as required, both horizontally and vertically, but also with regard Model Styria

to their inner spatial organisation. On the basis of (invisible) geometrical networks, Domenig developed a variable system using various components as well as constructive and technical elements. The basic units of the ensemble are made up of the so-called ‘youth towers’ (generational towers), flexible zones that can be separated. On both sides, these are adjoined by the zones that form the core area of the apartments, with technical facility zones in between. The houses are accessed via roofed outside staircases.

These are arranged in the area of the central axis of each basic unit. The ground-floor zones are also used as parking spaces. The external cladding of the residential complex consists of aluminium sheeting along with plywood and plasterwork attached to brick walls. The colour of the plasterwork, initially blue-grey, is now white.

42

Project name Rettenbachersiedlung (Rettenbacher Development) Author Bernhard Hafner In collaboration with Period 1986–1988 Status Completed Location/place Graz-Mariatrost Client/developer Interest group of the prospective residents, ÖWGes, Graz Projekttypus Social housing Living satisfaction The Rettenbacher Development is situated in Graz Mariatrost. It was a model construction realised as part of the ‘Model Styria’, tendered by the interest group of the prospective residents and managed by the ÖWG - Gemeinnützige Wohnbaugesellschaft mbH. The housing development consists of two elongated rows of three-storey buildings. They are arranged to form an inner courtyard that opens up to the southeast through the space between the first two buildings. The original plan to erect a connecting building at the point of access was not realised. The courtyard is one level higher than Rettenbacherstraße, and parking spaces are situated at street level. The Model Styria

development itself is designed as a trafficfree zone. The building is accessed via six staircases integrated into the buildings in the form of open, roofed entranceways, continuing on from the footpath. Economic to build and yet spacious inside—the expectations of the residents were taken into account. They were able to choose between various layouts—maisonettes, split-level and multi-storey apartments, all equipped with winter gardens or balconies set into the building.

Hafner did not use any mass-produced components for the construction. It is a compact structure with exposed brickwork inside. The exterior brickwork and the barrel-shaped roof are partially cladded with metal sheeting. The involvement of the apartments’ future residents in the planning process proved challenging—some of the apartments had to be redesigned up to three times. However, it also proved to be an advantage—a study initiated by the TU Graz in 2000 indicated that, today, the occupants of the Rettenbacher Development are more satisfied with their living conditions than those of any other multistorey development in Graz.

43

Project name Wohnbau Carl-SpitzwegGasse (Residential building) Architecture Volker Giencke In collaboration with Günes Aytar, Alfred Bramberger, Robert Clerici, Gernot Meisl, Gino Kratzer, Rudolf Schober; Alois Winkler (structure planning) Period 1987–1994 Status Completed Location/place Graz-St. Peter Client/developer MEG Carl-Spitzweg-Gasse —collective ownership Project type Residential building Model Styria

The price is not a question of quality* In 1987, under the banner of ‘cost-effective building’, Volker Giencke was one of seven architects invited to participate in the competition for the residential complex at CarlSpitzweg-Gasse, and was finally commissioned with the planning. Following initial disagreements between the architect and the housing cooperative assigned to implement the project, the future inhabitants of the apartments founded an interest group.

This group finally oversaw the construction project itself, and continues to manage the development today on a non-commercial basis. Due to the delays, work on the project did not begin until 1992. Although the initial cost estimate was exceeded, the final expenditure was still below comparable building costs per m2 for other residential buildings in Graz at the beginning of the 1990s.

The 49 apartments that make up the complex are arranged along two four-storey building blocks of different lengths, joined together to form a V-shape. The supporting structure is a simple concrete slab construction of a shallow depth, so that every single room in the building (including the underground garage) has natural daylight from both the north and the south. The building’s formal complexity is achieved through details—façades made of ship plywood and enamelled glass, jutting terraces, outside staircases, pent roofs and last but not least, communal open spaces such as a roof garden accessed via two winding staircases.

The layouts of the apartments themselves are structured in both a schematic and flexible way. Cost-effective prefabricated components provided economical solutions, yet there was still scope for individual ideas. * Kleine Zeitung, 1994.

44

Energy from the sun is independent of all the oil sheiks and coal mines in the world.

It shines on both the beggar and the millionaire* Starting in the 1960s, Konrad Frey carried out studies on cycles of energy and production and the use of alternative energy sources in architecture. In 1967, in collaboration with Florian Beigel, Frey won 1st prize in a competition for a community centre to revive the area surrounding the raised city motorway in Kensington, with a suggestion to build the centre beneath the motorway route. This and other projects concerned with the use of wasteland in London were early examples of an interest in energy systems and the cycle of oxygen and carbon dioxide. With an ecological approach, a closed system consisting of a greenhouse and spaces used by people was developed. Organic waste from a restaurant was used as a fertiliser for allotments under glass and the solar energy from the allotments was used to power a multi-purpose hall with a tented casing. Following on from these experiments, Frey and Beigel (Fischer House) and then Frey alone (Solar Shower for Alpine Dwellers, Zankel House, Low Budget Loft House) developed further projects.

A series of ecological considerations are also found in the work of Szyszkowitz + Kowalski. Their project Zusertal House faces towards the sun, making use of passive solar energy. The sun penetrates to the depths of the house through a glass roof, whilst planting frames on the house and greenery around it form a kind of mantle of vegetation. In the housing complex built for the IBA Emscher Park, on the former Küppersbusch site in Gelsenkirchen, the focus is on green spaces, the use of active solar energy, passive sun energy (sun orientaEcology

tion) and reservoirs that collect rain water and allow it to seep away slowly. The soil removed from the former industrial site was used to build a chain of grassed hills.

In contrast to Frey, who thinks in terms of ecological processes, economy, construction and function rather than form, this—along with colour—is the dominant factor that provides emotional charge and identification in the work of Szyszkowitz + Kowalski. * Samstag, Neues aus der Steiermark, „Er baut Österreichs erstes Sonnenhaus“, 18.05.1974.

Konrad Frey, Westway Complex Stadtrehabilitation London, 1973 45

Project name Cowicle Author Konrad Frey In collaboration with Period 1967 Status Not realised Location/place Client/developer Project type Mobile architecture The mobile suit for cows In 1967, Konrad Frey carried out investigations into agricultural construction and agricultural technology—reaching the conclusion that, taking advantage of new technological developments, buildings could be ‘almost completely dispensed with’. In the dairy industry, for example, maximum results could be achieved with a minimum of personnel expenditure.

Studies on the energy and production cycle—animal feed from the operational Ecology

area is fed into the livestock area, the milk comes onto the market, the manure goes into crop production and returns to the cycle as animal feed—complemented his idea of a ‘mobile suit’ for the cow, with environmental control equipment. This project follows on directly from Frey’s ideas on the ‘dissolution of the house’ from the year 1966. Space is no longer defined by pre-set walls, ceilings and floors, but by ‘appliances in position’ creating a ‘controlled space’, but ‘only where it is needed.’* The inspiration for Cowicle was the Cushicle

by Michael Webb, a member of Archigram.

This was a speculative design proposal for an individual, portable housing unit for people who lead a nomadic life—clothing that can function as a house or architecture. * Konrad Frey, Cowicle, wood plate with a collage of material, archive of the TU Graz.

46

Project name Haus Fischer (Fischer House) Author Konrad Frey In collaboration with Florian Beigel; consultation and support: Institute for Environmental Research Graz, Federal Ministry of Science and Research Period 1972–1978 Status Completed Location/place Grundlsee, Styria Client/developer Jutta and Wolfgang Fischer Project type Holiday home A Japanese teahouse in the Salzkammergut* The holiday home designed by Konrad Frey and Florian Beigel for the Fischer family at Grundlsee, Ausseerland in the Styrian Salzkammergut was the first solar house in Austria. Wolfgang and Jutta Fischer did not envision a holiday home in the traditional style. ‘The brief we gave to the architects was to build not a lederhosen house, but a Japanese teahouse’.** Frey and Beigel make reference to features of the landscape in the house, and vice versa. The house is nestled into the hillside, with the rooms structured accordingly. It is built using wood, a typical building material for the architecture of the Ausseerland region. The Ecology

glassed surfaces of the outer shell function like frames, opening up views of the landscape. The complex energy concept, developed for research purposes, features structural measures such as optimised thermal insulation, storage mass in the floors and south wall, and large glass surfaces in the south and east facades as solar energy receptors. Technical installation-related measures are also utilised—there are water collectors on the roof in combination with a 500-litre storage tank for service water and flooring in the rooms without sunlight, and an auxiliary heating system consisting of single wood furnaces and electric heating mats in the floors. All elements of the object are geared towards functional aspects and the idea of a solar house. The house and the original energy concept changed in the course of the years. But this is also a part of Frey’s understanding of architecture in use—buildings are adapted and transformed by their users. * Shortened form of the text developed as part of a research project funded by the FWF at the TU Graz, entitled ‘Die Solarhäuser von Konrad Frey - Umweltforschung und solares Wissen im Entwurf’ (Konrad Frey’s solar houses – environmental research and solar knowledge in the draft) (www.konradfrey.tugraz.at). ** Wolfgang Fischer in an interview with Sophia Walk, Grundlsee, 31.08.2016 47

Project name Wohnbebauung Küppersbusch IBA Emscher Park (Housing Development) Author Szyszkowitz + Kowalski In collaboration with Gerald Wratschko, Werner Wratschko, Kurt Fandler, Zeljka Hajsok-Momic, Christian Heim, Michael Lyssy, Elke Schmitter, Rolf Seifert, Alois Senfter, Robert Kropf (CAD), Manfred Suanjak (CAD); Johann Birner, Wilhelm Düffel, Egon Herms (structure planning) Period 1989–1997 Status Completed Location/place Küppersbuschstraße, Gelsenkirchen (DE) Client/developer The city of Gelsenkirchen and various property developers Project type Residential complex with kindergarten A city-IMAGE The construction of the residential complex took place as part of the International Building Exhibition Emscher Park. This exhibition addressed programmatic positions on social life and the city, especially with regard to the environment and landscape in the heavily industrialised Ruhr area. The Ecology

housing complex incorporates more than 200 apartments, including a building with apartments for senior citizens and a kindergarten. It is built on industrial wasteland.

The contaminated soil from the former industrial site was used to create a chain of hills that protects the housing complex that serves as a park-like recreation area.

However, the distinguishing feature of the complex is situated at its centre—a lenticular sunken green space, surrounded by an elevated furrow that defines its shape.

It absorbs the rainwater of the entire complex, allowing it to seep away within a few days. The complex is designed in a way that provides several different levels of intensity with regard to public or private life. The squares surrounding the centre are staggered with three staircases leading to the green space, joined together by means of a pathway. As far as the living units are concerned, an access hinge provides a large range of variety in the size and the position of the individual units in relation to one another. Active and passive use of solar energy is also an integral feature of the complex, making it both economically and ecologically effective.

48

Project name Nur Armut hat Zukunft – Konfrontationen 77 (Only poverty has a future – Confrontations 77) Author Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Forum Stadtpark Period 1977 Status Completed Location/place Vienna, Ministry of Finance Client Forum Stadtpark Graz, current events division Project type Art exhibition Ecology

Only poverty has a future Eilfried Huth was a member of the Forum Stadtpark, in the ‘current events’ division.

In 1977, the Forum organised the exhibition Konfrontationen 77 at the invitation of the Austrian Ministry of Finance, held in Prince Eugen’s Winter Palace in Vienna.

Huth’s contribution, with the provocative title Nur Armut hat Zukunft (Only Poverty has a Future) was a plea for an efficient handling of resources and a conscious reduction of waste in order to safeguard a liveable future—a principle that was always a very important aspect of his work as an architect.

49

Only poverty has a future* The report published by the Club of Rome 1972 on The Limits to Growth, along with the oil crises that followed in 1973 and 1979, triggered a rethinking process with regard to the worldwide use of resources.

Improved energy efficiency, a reduction in consumerism, sustainable development, thinking in terms of energy cycles, the protection of ecosystems and ‘qualitative growth’ were to help create an ecological and economic balance.

Since the 1960s, the economical use of materials and energy has been a consistent concern in the work of Konrad Frey.

The appearance of the buildings arises from their actual function as well as from constructive, economic and ecological considerations. In Cardboard House (1973), Konrad Frey and Florian Beigel were searching for an inexpensive building material.

This interest is also reflected in Frey’s Low Budget Loft House (2013), which makes use of standard elements from the DIY store.

Similar considerations—creating maximum living quality, reducing costs through intelligent planning and building with standard elements—are also found in the work of Eilfried Huth. Huth involves the residents in the actual construction process, in order to keep building costs as low as possible.

His economic interest begins before construction work commences—the future owners came together to form an interest group, with an elected building committee for the purposes of self-administration (Eschen Development Deutschlandsberg, 1972–1992; Gerlitzgründe Housing Model, 1976–1984)—residents were even involved in decisions related to financial resources.

Huth’s contribution Only poverty has a future for the exhibition Konfrontationen 77 clearly showed that ‘space and energy Economy

are limited in terms of opulence and availability’. He pleaded for the ‘definition of an active poverty, a poverty with an entitlement to aesthetic quality, knowledge through sensual perception’.

‘Inexpensive building’ was also one of the basic demands of residential building within the framework of ‘Model Styria’. Volker Giencke (Carl-Spitzweg-Gasse Residential Building, 1984–1997), Bernhard Hafner (Rettenbacher Development, 1986–88), Wolff-Plottegg (Heidenreichstraße, Seiersberg Development, 1987–88) and others, like Eilfried Huth attempted to combine economy, building and living quality and the individual ideas and demands of the residents by relying on well thought out planning, a simple language of materials, economic use of resources, and standardized elements. The costs were not to be cut at any cost, rather the goal was to achieve an ‘increase’ in quality of life. This collided occasionally with the rigid award conditions of ‘Model Styria’. * Title of a contribution by Eilfried Huth for the exhibition Konfrontationen 77 in the Winter Palace of Prinz Eugen in Vienna.

50

Project name Gewächshäuser Botanischer Garten der Universität Graz (Greenhouses, Botanical Garden at the University Graz) Architecture Volker Giencke In collaboration with Heribert Altenbacher, Nives Anicic, Alfred Bramberger, Davide Ferrero, Susi Fritzer, Herwig Kleinhapl, Ulrike Märzendorfer, Helene Le Merdy, Eeva Pelkonen, Robert Vucic; Ove Arup & Partners, Graber – Szyszkowitz (structure planning) Period 1982–1995 Status Completed Location/place Schubertstraße, Graz Client/developer Austrian Republic Project type Research building If anyone claims that ‘extra-terrestrial’ architecture did not exist in Graz before the Kunsthaus, then they haven’t yet seen Volker Giencke’s greenhouses* The complex consists of three parabolically arched glass roofs, offset at angles to each other and visually penetrating one another.

They accommodate the tropical, cold and moderate-temperature houses of the Botanical Garden of the University of Graz.

Economy

An additional prismatic glass structure with a sloping roof is designated for research and cultivation.

The tilt of the greenhouses is designed according to the sizes of the plants—that is to say, formal decisions are based on function as well as on aesthetics. For reasons of construction economics, the same arch element is used for all three houses—with the exception of a fragment along the street.

The glass structures are connected to one another via walkways and bridges. The light aluminium support structure, designed to allow maximum natural light to enter the greenhouses, is equipped with pipes for hot water heating. A nozzle system produces microscopically fine mist for lowering the temperature. Ventilation is controlled through valves in the base area or glass elements that can be opened in the crown area of the greenhouses. The architectural aesthetic is largely determined by the use of curved double-shell elements made of acrylic glass, inserted into the framework of the supporting structure. * www.freizeitinfo.at, 04.09.2017.

51

Project name Wellpappehaus (Cardboard House) Author Konrad Frey In collaboration with Florian Beigel – BPR Building Planning & Resources Period 1973 Status Not realised Location/place Client/developer Hamburger GmbH, Pitten Project type Detached house Alpine paper architecture* In 1973, on behalf of the paper manufacturer Hamburger in Pitten, Konrad Frey and Florian Beigel took on the task of searching for possible new ways of using corrugated cardboard, an extremely intelligent material with an astonishingly high load capacity. It is actually possible to build houses, even in snowy regions, by forming corrugated cardboard sheets into supporting building components, in keeping with their own operating principle, and reinforcing them with standard roof battens. Larger buildings can be assembled from 60 m2 spatial units with gabled roofs running lengthwise and crosswise.

The cardboard construction must be sealed with a weatherproof surface. This means that the outer appearance can be selected according to individual taste.

The project was carried through to production maturity, but finally failed due to high production costs and the fact that, under humid conditions, the corrugated cardboard can become permanently warped and lose its stability. * Shortened form of the text developed as part of a research project funded by the FWF at the TU Graz, entitled ‘Die Solarhäuser von Konrad Frey - Umweltforschung und solares Wissen im Entwurf’ (Konrad Frey’s solar houses – environmental research and solar knowledge in the draft) (www.konradfrey.tugraz.at).

Economy

52

Project name Low Budget Loft Haus Author Konrad Frey In collaboration with Period from 2005 Status Completed Location/place Hart near Graz Client/developer Project type Energy-saving house, prefabricated house (prototype) A prototype: the individual DIY store house In 2013, Konrad Frey began work on a new project—a prototype for a kind of ‘house for everybody’ that could be ordered from a catalogue. The object, which he is currently testing with his wife, is built entirely using standard elements from the DIY store.

Considering the fact that, even though highquality building materials can be purchased cheaply, it is becoming more and more expensive to build, a prototype was to be developed that could later be reproduced for others in the form of a prefabricated house. Frey asked the following question: ‘Is it possible to construct a house that is inspiring and vibrant using simple, even banal elements?’* In this respect, the name of the house is programmatic—Low Budget Loft House is tantamount to low costs with Economy

a loft atmosphere. In other words—despite the low costs, it should invoke a certain feeling of spaciousness. Under a gable roof, which Frey still considers to be one of the most economic but spacious solutions for bridging a higher span width, the house can be used in a large number of different ways. Set at various heights, there are a communal living area and kitchen, working areas and quiet rooms for the inhabitants and their guests. The rooms in the form of boxes, with adequate acoustic insulation, provide a high degree of privacy—an extremely important aspect of living quality and spending time together. They have direct access to outdoor areas, and may be used by guests without disturbing other members of the household. The interior and exterior are interlinked by means of views and openings. The house, well thoughtout in terms of use and function, is also economical and energy-efficient. ‘Apps’ are available for the basic 120 m2 type, additions that can be used to expand on the basic model. So far, additions such as a recess for a porch, a canopy and extra rooms such as storerooms, garage or a winter garden have been realised. * Interview by Barbara Steiner with Konrad Frey, 29.04.2017.

53

Interior with zip* Sundome was designed by Konrad Frey and his associate Florian Beigel at the office BPR Building Planning & Resources in collaboration with the structural engineer Anthony Hunt Associates. The aim was to build inexpensive housing from a thin construction made of transparent shell elements, three-dimensionally formed. This system was not only to be space-enclosing, but also self-supporting and freely expandable. Frey, Beigel and Hunt developed a series of constructively geometric forms, which finally led to a system of hall constructions made of spherical, double-curved shell elements. Uniform stress distribution and minimal bending procedures, as well as low costs for materials and manufacturing, were essential factors in the form-finding process.

The individual parts are joined together with snap locks for the transmission of tensile forces, and with massive neoprene rubber profiles that function like a zip. In order to make openings in the covering, some of the shell elements act as frames to accommodate access or ventilation elements. Handmade collages demonstrate several ways in which the system can be used for temporary or permanent halls. The lettering ‘Path­ finders in Urethanes’ refers to the chemicals corporation Bader, which sponsored the project with a view to launching the lightweight construction on the market.

Project name Sundome – Schalentragwerk für Hallen (shell structures for halls) Author Konrad Frey In collaboration with Florian Beigel – BPR Building Planning & Resources, Anthony Hunt Associates (static) Period 1970–1971 Status Not realised Location/place Client/developer Project type Glass house Economy

* Shortened form of the text developed as part of a research project funded by the FWF at the TU Graz, entitled ‘Die Solarhäuser von Konrad Frey - Umweltforschung und solares Wissen im Entwurf’ (Konrad Frey’s solar houses – environmental research and solar knowledge in the draft) (www.konradfrey.tugraz.at).

54

Project name Schulschwestern, Mehrzwecksaal (School sisters, multipurpose hall) Authors Günther Domenig, Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Heribert Altenbacher, Volker Giencke Period 1972–1977 Status Completed Location/place Graz-Eggenberg Client/developer School sisters of Graz Construction task/type Multi-purpose hall, refectory Then let us make a peak!

In the course of the renovation of the School Sisters convent in Graz-Eggenberg, a multi-purpose hall was to be erected in the courtyard—a refectory, events and assembly hall all in one. Based on static considerations, a support structure with ventilation and heating was developed, which defined the outward appearance. In other words, the form was found on the basis of the existing situation. ‘Then let us make a peak’* resulted from the first onsite inspection with Günther Domenig and Economy

the static calculations presented by the Thaler office. Due to budget restrictions, the architects searched for cost-effective solutions for the construction. By means of an injection moulding technique, used here for the first time in Austria, concrete was sprayed directly onto a steel mesh grid. This was finished off with a layer of heat plaster and a fine layer of PVC, which adapted to the curves of the roofing. The organic form of the building structure provides a strong contrast to the orthogonally arranged convent complex.

In 1980, when the thermal plaster began to peel off, the white shell was cladded with zinc sheeting. Up to the present day, the hall has not been converted—it remains in its original state, complete with the furniture designed by Alvar Aalto. It was planned

by Volker Giencke who, working for Domenig and Huth’s office at the time, was entrusted with the local site management. * Interview by Barbara Steiner with Eilfried Huth, 21.03.2017.

55

Becoming involved, taking an active part, participating, with self-determination and joint decision-making* The Eschen Development by Eilfried Huth formed the basis of a housing research assignment entitled ‘Participation, co-determination in residential building’, organised by the Federal Ministry of Housing and Technology. Its objective was ‘to create better apartments with a better functionality for the immediate surroundings with the same financial resources as other residential building developers have at their disposal.’ Participation was seen as the key, understood by Huth as a collective term to describe how the future users were to profit by ‘becoming involved, taking an active part, participating, with self-determination and joint decision-making.’ By means of semi-standardised interviews, discussions, working on the model and drawings, a closer relationship was established between the architect, the interest group and ‘home builders’. The architect took on the role of consultant, organiser, coordinator, motivator and partner in questions of design, whilst keeping his personal signature in the background.

for the implementation phase is a theme that is found in the work of both Elfried Huth and Günther Domenig. In the project Sparkasse Deutschlandsberg, Huth involved the craftsmen in finding constructive/logical and cost-effective ways of extending the building of the Sparkasse, on the basis of their practical experience. It is a meeting on equal terms, combining different levels of expertise—that of the craftsman and that of the architect—in a reciprocal process.

With Zentralsparkasse Favoriten (1974– 1979), Domenig saw himself as ‘a formulator and a specialist for form and artistic expression’ and the craftsman as ‘a specialist for implementation.’** Huth, however, allowed the construction workers also to make formal decisions arising from the production process. * Eilfried Huth, Doris Pollet, Beteiligung, Mitbestimmung im Wohnbau (Participation, Co-determination in residential building, residential model Deutschlandsberg Eschensiedlung, work report 1972–76. ** Günther Domenig, Der Architekt des Hauses, 1989 .

In Szyszkowitz’ + Kowalski‘s Alte Poststraße Residential Complex, the wishes of the future residents are translated into a single style. The architects’ model of co-determination strove to achieve a balance between all kinds of different individual living ideas by means of an overall architectural language. The whole complex was taken onto a superordinate level, overriding individual wishes and desires and unifying them. Here, the architects take on the role of moderator, translator and transformer.

The participation of the building workers in production processes and decision-making Participation

56

Project name Eschensiedlung Deutschlandsberg (Eschen Development) Author Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Heribert Altenbacher, Iradj Hashemizadeh, Heinz Lang, Peter Szammer, Doris Pollet Period 1972–1992 Status Completed Location/place Deutschlandsberg Client/developer Resident’s interest group Project type Estate of terraced houses, co-determination and participation (100 detached houses with 104 to 150 m² usable area) Codetermination and participation When work began on the Eschen Development, the partnership between Huth and Domenig came to an end. From now on, the two architects were to follow different architectural paths. In 1972, an ‘experimentation phase’ began for Eilfried Huth—it was to last around 20 years, during which time he completed 13 participatory housing projects.

Participation

On the one hand, the ‘Deutschlandsberg residential model’ was to be different from the kind of housing developments that were usual at the time. On the other hand, the aim was to achieve acceptance for high-density housing amongst low-income groups and house builders. For many people, the dream of owning their own home on affordable terms came true through their own participation, neighbourhood assistance and not least thanks to the support of the mayor Klauser. The future owners, who came together to form an interest group, were involved in the planning and realisation process from the very beginning, under the supervision of Eilfried Huth and his team. The combined expertise of the architects/the group of architects and the users was to be pooled. The Deutschlands­ berg estate was developed in a total of six building phases. Each was organised via a construction committee and a chairman, who were also responsible for making financial decisions. Following the first three phases, an association was founded. It took on responsibility for the management of the communal spaces and the subsequent use of the so-called ‘builders’ hut’, which in principle served as a communication centre and meeting place for the residents.

The architect’s creative fingerprint took second place to the personal needs of the residents and economic necessities, and specifications were limited to a small number of binding, constructive commitments. Thus the details of the houses vary, but nevertheless they form an overall development that makes a stand against fixed schemes in the house-building industry.

The Eschen Development formed the basis of a housing research assignment entitled ‘Participation, co-determination in residential construction’, organised by the Federal Ministry of Housing and Technology.

57

Julia Gaisbacher My dream house is not a house* In her works, the photographer and artist Julia Gaisbacher explores the field of tension between social conventions in public space, architecture, and individual representation. She often crosses the boundaries of photography, making use of intermedia strategies in her art.

For her contribution to the exhibition Graz Architecture, Julia Gaisbacher turned her attention to Eilfried Huth’s Eschen Development in Deutschlandsberg. It was this residential housing project that made the architect a pioneer of participatory projects in social housing at the beginning of the 1970s.

Following intensive research and interviews with Huth, Doris Pollet-Kammerlander (who accompanied the project as a sociologist) and former or current residents of the housing complex, Julia Gaisbacher completed a series of photographs of its inside and outside spaces.

Huth carried out his idea of overriding the hierarchical relationship between the architect and the residents by carrying out planning interviews and exercises on spatial perception. For these exercises he constructed, among others, a simple plug-in model. In this way, the architect attempted to provide the future users with a similar knowledge of house construction, enabling them to play an active role in the joint planning of the housing development. Huth’s idea of beauty was closely linked with personal involvement and identification with objects. This can be transferred to the residents and their home.

Gaisbacher shows her photographs in the form of slides, accompanied by documentation and archive material and the working model that was used more than 40 years ago. In this way, she follows on from a presentation method that was also used by Huth.

Nevertheless, the perspective from which the artist views the Eschen development is a contemporary one. What remains of the ideas on citizen participation that arose in the late 1960s? To what extent did active participation in planning and construction make a difference to the appearance of the houses?

Whatever answers one chooses to give to these questions, they all lead to a notion that is evoked in Gaisbacher’s artwork— joint design is possible. * Eilfried Huth, 2017

Born in 1983 in Grambach near Graz (AT), lives in Vienna (AT) Exhibitions and projects (selected): Who are you? Two centuries of portraits, Neue Galerie Graz, Graz (2017); Vis á Vis, Bautzner 69, Dresden (2016); Die Kunst der Frau – Freundinnen und Komplizinnen, Vereinigung Bildender Künstlerinnen Österreichs (2016); Hast du von Bergen geträumt?, Tschechisches Zentrum, Prague and Berlin (2014); Zi 121−136, Fotogalerie Rathaus Graz (solo, 2014); Schools of Art, Holden Gallery, Manchester (2013); Die Kommunikative Situation des Hin und Her mit einem Flugobjekt, Westwerk, Hamburg (2011).

58

Eilfried Huth with a resident of the Eschen Development in a meeting to discuss planning, 1974

Eilfried Huth in conversation wirh Julia Gaisbacher, 2017

Project name Wohnmodell Gerlitzgründe, Wohnbau Graz-Puntigam (Housing Model, Residential Building) Author Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Irmfried Windbichler; Günther Karasek, Werner Hochapfel (representatives of the residents’ association) Period 1976–1984 Status Completed Location/place Am Leopoldsgrund, Gradnerstraße, Graz-Puntigam Client/developer Residents’ interest group, represented by GWS and Neue Heimat on behalf of the city of Graz Project type Reihenhaussiedlung (66 Einfamilien-Reihenhäuser) Codetermination and participation II Not long after work began on the Eschen Development in Deutschlandsberg, the concept of codetermination and participation fell on fertile soil in the city of Graz, initiated by the city councillors Erich Edegger and Heinz Pammer. The Gerlitzgründe Housing Model was an attempt to give future owners a greater say in the construction process. This concept was opposed to that of producing minimum standard housing for socially and financially underprivileged Participation

young families, the so-called ‘point cases’, where the level of an applicant’s need was assessed by means of a points system.

Following the selection and counselling of suitable young families, an interest group was founded and a construction committee elected for the purposes of self-administration. Huth’s work began well before the usual construction planning phase—he first took the time to familiarise himself with the sociopolitical conditions surrounding building projects. In the case of the Gerlitzgründe Housing Model, he encouraged the foundation of an ÖVP- and SPÖ-linked cooperative in order to provide the project with a solid political base. The spatial organisation of the residential units was determined in individual discussions. Decisions regarding communal matters were resolved in a complex process of group dynamics involving weekly meetings, at which neighbourhood concerns and appeals were also discussed. The future inhabitants worked on the development themselves, based on the economic premise that building oneself is cheaper than using prefabricated elements. Decisions regarding the colour scheme of the houses were also made on an individual basis. The group of architects moved from house to house with their easel and designs, allowing the residents to choose directly from a commercially available range of colours. The high level of identification, the sense of communality and housing satisfaction underlying this long-standing process is demonstrated not least by the warmth the residents show towards the architect, even today.

Following on from the participation projects, the ‘Thal group construction project’ was initiated. In this case, people who were interested in building came together to form a group. They went out in search of building plots and an architect, and implemented the project together, under the guidance of the architect.

60

Project name Wohnanlage Alte Poststraße (Residential Complex) Authors Szyszkowitz + Kowalski In collaboration with Werner Wratschko, Ernst Gieselbrecht, Manfred Partl, Florian Riegler, Adolf Schmölzer, Gerhard Schweizer (colour consultant); Roland Baumkirchner (structure planning) Period 1981–1984 Status Completed Location/place Alte Poststraße/ Dreierschützengasse, Graz-Eggenberg Client/developer ‘Model Styria’, Rottenmanner residential cooperative, 43 prospective residents Project type Residential development (43 apartments, 1 tobacconist’s, 1 underground car park) The ‘small world of’ living spaces and the ‘large world’ of the city This complex, consisting of 43 living units, was the first residential building complex carried out by Szyszkowitz + Kowalski on the basis of the participation model.

The first aim of their design was to create Participation

set transition zones between public urban life, the semi-public sphere of interchange with neighbours, and the private sphere.

Convinced of the need for an interactive relationship both amongst the residents themselves and its outside environment, the architects created not only spatial connections within the complex of buildings, but also links with the outside world.

Staircases, access paths, the courtyard and communal rooms play an important role, and special attention was paid to their design. As far as the architecture itself was concerned, a lively interaction between all participants was encouraged.

Furthermore, the individual wishes of the residents were taken into consideration, with the aim of creating a balance between individual and social concerns. In a long preliminary planning process, the architects assembled the wishes of the future residents and translated them into one unifying architectural language, giving the ensemble an expression of a communal yet individual nature.

61

Oliver Hangl The concept and media artist Oliver Hangl operates in performative disciplines and medial spaces as well as in classical exhibition spaces for the visual arts. His works feature a consistent analysis of the human being in relation to space. When Hangl (inter)acts in real and fictional spaces, his focus is on the playful, partly procedural exploration of perception mechanisms, for which he generally stages (semi-)public settings.

Oliver Hangl’s contribution to the exhibition Graz Architektur is based on Showtime, an artwork produced in the year 2010 at the invitation of the Institute for Art in Public Space Styria, for the project Schönes Wohnen. It was concerned with the participatory housing project Alte Poststraße by Szyszkowit­z + Kowalski. Hangl’s main interest here was to investigate the architectural aims of creating a situation to promote strong links between the private and the public sphere through active participation in community life. On an autumn afternoon, the artist invited all previous and current residents of the development to a celebration, creating a stage for discussions on all kinds of aspects of past, present and future life in the housing complex. A large number of microphones were installed to record the discussions and communal singing performances (initiated by Hangl). The celebration was transmitted live by radio from the outskirts of Graz directly to the tourist centre of the city, the square in front of the Graz clock tower.

Seven years after this project, and more than 30 years after the first residents moved in to the housing complex, Oliver Hangl now functions once again as a catalyst for communication within the develop-

ment. In recordings of discussions between present and former residents, some of which have been newly produced, he draws an acoustic portrait for the exhibition, highlighting the developments of this spatial/ social vision and the residents’ changing needs. He combines this with a ‘conversation model’ of Alte Poststraße.

Thanks to:

Born in 1968 in Grieskirchen (AT), lives in Vienna (AT) Exhibitions and projects (selected): On Dizziness, Centre for Contemporary Art/Ujazdowski Castle, Warszawa (2017); URBAN ERASMUS TRAIL, Museum of History, Basel (solo, 2016); Zürich Guerillawalk I+II, Haus Konstruktiv, Zurich (performance, solo, 2016); Vienna Biennale, Angewandte Innovation Lab, Vienna (2015); Departure Austria, Cultural Capital Pilsen (2015); Kino im Kopf spezial: Die unglaubliche Entführung der Frau Elfriede Ott, KiÖR—Art in Public Space Styria, Graz (solo, 2014); Citopia Now, urb4nize-Festival, Wien (2013); Kino im Kopf spezial: Der Knochenmann, REGIONALE XII, Murau (2012); twotiming, museumORTH/publicart NÖ (solo, 2012).

62

‘Conversation model Alte Poststraße’, made live by the residents during Showtime, 2010

Project name Wohnanlage BIG (Residential Complex) Author Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Heribert Altenbacher, Armin Royer Period 1977–1982 Status Completed Location/place Deutschlandsberg Client/developer Municipality Deutschlandsberg Project type Multi-storey building, codetermination and participation Participation

Codetermination in a multi-storey building BIG stands for ‘Beteiligung im Geschossbau’ (participation in a multi-storey building). The concept consists of a flexible primary structure in the planning phase. Each storey has three possible angular layouts, each with two fixed installation points and a shared entranceway in a north-facing position.

Two apartment sizes of between 45 and 105 m2 were available and, in special cases, a two-storey layout with a total floor space of 150 m2. The size of the apartments decreased towards the higher levels. In theory, a minimum or maximum volume was possible. The actual volume was determined on the basis of demand and the housing provisions of the municipality of Deutschlandsberg.

In the second construction phase, residents were involved not only in the choice of ground plans, but also the colour of the exterior façade of their living unit.

64

Project name Sparkasse Deutschlandsberg (Savings Bank) Author Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Heribert Altenbacher Period 1978–1979 Status Completed (porch removed in 1995) Location/place Deutschlandsberg Client/developer Sparkasse Project type Refurbishment with porch and staircase Participation

Construction workers’ participation During the refurbishment of the Sparkasse in Deutschlandsberg, Eilfried Huth used the method of participation for both the design and implementation, too. In this case, the construction workers also participated in the process. The task was basically concerned with the extension of the ground floor by moving the entrance area and staircase to the exterior. Particular emphasis—in both a constructive and a formal sense— was given to the staircase, which was situated towards the courtyard. In collaboration with the construction workers, the architects found an economical way of producing the complicated reinforced concrete. In this example, the participation and codetermination of the involved parties is extended to include the production processes.

65

Interpretable, adaptable and extendable Structuralism is a movement and a method that was developed and used in the 20th century in various places and at various times in linguistics, anthropology, philosophy, the visual arts and architecture, to analyse structures and relational frameworks.

In architecture, structural settings are based on a framework structure or megastructure that is designed to last, along with temporary, modifiable, essentially endlessly extendable plug-in units or fillings. They are characterised on the one hand by the ‘aesthetics of numbers’, as stated by Aldo van Eyck in 1959.* Comparable with cell tissue, they represent a configurative form of architecture, like the one designed by Huth & Domenig in Floraskin. On the other hand, the term structuralism can refer to an ‘architecture of lively diversity’, as described

by N. John Habraken in 1961.** With its open structures, it promotes participation, as the fillings are interpretable, adaptable and extendable—the form of the building is not clearly predetermined. Architecture is understood as a process with an open outcome, basically including several possibilities, and temporally open-ended.

opments and changing ideas. Like Huth’s and Domenig’s residential complex Zellflex and the megastructure Ragnitz City, two dimensions meet—a social one, because various users can contribute their own design ideas, and a temporal one, because continual new interventions are possible, replacing existents. Konrad Frey picks up Jacob Berend Bakema’s idea of the ‘growing house’, which adapts to the needs of its inhabitants. * Aldo van Eyck, ‘Het verhaal van een andere gedachte’, in: Forum 7/1959, Amsterdam – Hilversum. ** N. John Habraken, Supports: an alternative to mass housing, London 1972.

Examples found in the exhibition include Bernhard Hafner’s Archegrams, his theoretical observations on principles of spatial organisation with the aim of optimising living space and providing structure to public space, City in Space, a multi-functional network of diverse infrastructures, and Linear City, a model simulation of an urban megastructure with a flexible configuration.

In Layered City, a multifunctional megastructure with a park, he separates longterm features—a structure with a long life cycle – from short-term elements, i.e. the contents, which follow social develStructure

66

Project name Archegramme/Archegrams Author Bernhard Hafner In collaboration with Period 1963 Status Not realised Location/place Client/developer Project type Theoretical observations on principles of spatial organisation Structure

Theoretical assumptions of an architectonic/urban development Archegrams are architectural diagrams.

That is to say, they use graphic means to describe ideas on how architectural constructions could be connected in space and arranged according to their volume, taking sunlight, air, orientation and access into consideration. The underlying principle of spatial organisation is aimed towards the optimisation of living space and the structuring of public space. Archegrams depict the theoretical assumptions of an architectonic/urban development, on which Hafner has been working since 1966.

67

Project name Raumstadt / City in Space Author Bernhard Hafner In collaboration with Period 1966 Status Not realised Location/place Client/developer Project type Multi-funktional network of diverse infrastructures Structure

Human activities, utility services and informationen City in Space shows a network of traffic and communication infrastructures where all utilities are summarised in a single vertical bundle. Based on the considerations developed in the Archegrams, the residential units are situated in this three-dimensional supply network, which is infinitely expandable. Spaces with multiple uses are situated along a vertical axis, characterised by a variable outward appearance. Longitudinal tunnels are provided for high-speed traffic.

For Hafner, urban space basically consists of interrelated streams of movement, of human activities, utility services and information.

68

Project name Lineare Stadt / Linear City Author Bernhard Hafner In collaboration with Period 1966 Status Not realised Location/place Client/developer Project type Model simulation of an urban mega structure (flexible configuration) Structure

Streams of movement and infrastructure nodes In Linear City, Hafner develops his ideas of the City in Space in a different form. Again based on streams of movement (traffic networks, energy supply, both above and below ground), infrastructure nodes are located along either side of a linear urban structure e.g. for office blocks, residential complexes and public facilities. Residential modules are inserted, based on the observations made in the Archegrams. The model shows how the units can be multiplied.

69

Project name Schichtenstadt / Layered City Author Bernhard Hafner In collaboration with Susan Abramson, Conte, Michael Mekeel, Pamela Palmer Period 1974 Status Not realised Location/place Client/developer Project type Multi-functional used structure ‘Hard image’ and ‘soft image’ of the city In 1974 the Layered City was created as a component of urban planning architecture— the result of a design studio at the UCLA lasting two semesters. It is a ‘hard image’ of the Smart City and applies the findings of the research on the Comparative Simulation Atlas of Alternative Urban Prototypes as a ‘soft image’ of the city.

Structure

As a structure, the Layered City separates the long term from the short term. The infrastructural model forms the longlasting structure for the expansion, which can change over time in view of new social developments. The structure and expansion are interdependent: components of varying form and function can be connected in a variety of ways. A multi-functional city district with stores and studios is divided up by pedestrian streets and lanes via a basement with parking places and infrastructural service. It is located next to a park and forms a base, the roof surfaces of which are a semipublic roof garden, from which stretched supporting systems for apartments can be accessed, like bridges. The apartments can also be reached from the streets via lifts and emergency stairs. Combining the parks leads to a city park with multi-functional Smart City modules surrounding it.

70

Urban investigations Computersimulationen alternativer Stadtprototypen/Comparative Simulation Atlas of Alternative Urban Prototypes (1967–1970, seit 2007): The Really Smart City; Urban planning competition, South Vienna (1968–1971)

Project name Computersimulationen alternativer Stadtprototypen/Comparative Simulation Atlas of Alternative Urban Prototypes Author Bernhard Hafner In collaboration with Period 1967–1970, since 2007 Status Completed Location/place Client/developer Project type Research project at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Structure

In a series of investigations, Hafner concerns himself with the depiction of urban planning interventions and their effect on the city.

The city presents itself in the ‘hard image’ through architecture, parks and infrastructure objects, and in the ‘soft image’ as its socio-economic condition, in which patterns emerge of locations, of population distribution and patronage of public or private facilities, of employees, turnover and land use. Such data can be mapped and serve for the simulation of city inhabitants’ behaviour, as also for their interactions with the said facilities. These are often unconscious acts, and moreover are also not the subject of urban planning.

Here the socio-economic state of the prototype of a distribution model is shown (dispersion prototype), a form of city without a centre. It is an open, entropic structure, marked by facilities and inhabitants’ behaviour—a decentralised agglomeration with concentrations in a infrastructural network that connects them. Patterns of locations are shown, as well as agglomerations, interactions, and the strains of the transport network of the lower level in a mesh size of 300 × 300 m. On the lowest level, all the spatial units (cells) can be accessed among each other, whether directly or indirectly.

71

Project name Zellflex Authors GĂźnther Domenig, Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Manfred Brogyanyi, Armin Royer Period 1965 Status Not realised Location/place Zeltweg Client/developer Director Franz Gumbsch, Zeltweg plant (steel and mechanical engineering) Construction task/type Residential building Moving on from the traditional detached house As early as 1965, in an attempt to move on from the traditional detached house and produce more compact developments, Huth and Domenig presented a concept describing a residential complex in Zeltweg for the employees of the engineering works located there. On behalf of the director of the plant, Franz Gumbsch, the architects designed a village-like arrangement of growing terraced houses set around a cenStructure

tral car-free square. The site where it was to be situated had originally been reserved for eight detached houses. However, Huth and Domenig carried out a study to show that 40 living units in the form of growing terraced houses could be accommodated there. As well as aspiring to urban consolidation, Zellflex incorporated initial attempts at user codetermination. Following the erection of a primary structure made of cost-effective prefabricated components, each family would be able to develop the floor plans of their individual living unit within a given plan grid. They also had privileged access to materials and formwork systems through their workplace at the plant, and they were to carry out much of the interior building work themselves. The project ended when Director Gumbsch was replaced by a new plant director, and Zellflex remained a mere concept design. Some of its ideas were used in the Ragnitz project in 1965-66.

72

Project name Stadt Ragnitz (City) Authors Günther Domenig, Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Heribert Altenbacher, Manfred Brogyanyi, Helmut Kraitsy, Peter Potthast, Armin Royer, Hilmar Schönauer, Eckhart Schuster, Peter Stöffler, Peter Hellweger Period 1965–1966 Status Not realised Location/place Graz-Ragnitz, Grand Prix d’Urbanisme et d’Architecture, Cannes, 1969 Auftraggeber Director Fleischmann/GWS Construction task/type Reality utopia of a vertically organised district Individual living as an active pursuit in a compact construction form In 1966, the contract for a development study in the Ragnitz valley led Huth and Domenig to design the megastructure Ragnitz City. However, the study they presented—for a compact living development incorporating private and public areas on an equal measure—was rejected. The Structure

architects were paid and released from the contract.

An exhibition held in 1967, in cooperation with the Werkgruppe Graz in the Forum Stadtpark, provided them with the opportunity to develop the study further and produce a model. Huth described the idea of a vertically stacked living development as a ‘reality utopia’—a technoid support structure with variable habitation modules, spatial cells and supply shafts. It represented a ‘city of the future’ for Ragnitz, a suburb of Graz. The living units were not thought of in a multiple way—residents were to design their living space individually, according to their own wishes. Although the project was never implemented, it attracted a great deal of attention. In 1968, Huth and Domenig submitted the plans to a French competition on visions of urban development. In 1969, the ‘Ragnitz Residential Project’ was selected from 800 applications for a presentation in Cannes, along with nine other projects. Finally, it was awarded the Grand Prix d’Urbanisme et d’Architecture.

73

Project name Space House Author Konrad Frey In collaboration with Heidulf Gerngross, Bernd Capra Period 1966 Status Not realised Location/place City of Salzburg Client/developer Project type Megastructure Life in space* The project Space House was carried out in 1966 as part of a seminar on urban development led by Jacob Berend Bakema at the Salzburg Summer Academy. Inspired not least by Yona Freedman’s Paris project and Bernhard Hafner’s City in Space, Konrad Frey designed a superstructure above the old town of Salzburg, a spatial service structure to support user loads and transport connection, with technical facilities throughout.

The construct, in the form of a self-reinforcing tetrahedron structure, is elevated with widely-spaced supports, creating an autonomous constructed landscape far above Structure

the ground. Urban organisation is seen as an open system of infrastructure. Users can furnish their homes according to their individual needs and tastes with the help of functional modules from the DIY store.

Space House is an example of the possibility of building a network of functional modules within a given infrastructure. The units connect to a central area that can be formed as a negative space between the modules ‘through the topological swelling of a node in the tetrahedron structure with connections in 18 directions’.

Frey adopts Bakema’s idea of the growing house, which, starting off from a central core, can be extended individually according to the needs of the inhabitants. He attempts to overcome limitations by means of geometry and construction. * Shortened form of the text developed as part of a research project funded by the FWF at the TU Graz, entitled ‘Die Solarhäuser von Konrad Frey - Umweltforschung und solares Wissen im Entwurf’ (Konrad Frey’s solar houses – environmental research and solar knowledge in the draft) (www.konradfrey.tugraz.at).

74

Project name Floraskin Authors Günther Domenig, Eilfried Huth In collaboration with Helmut Hafner, Hartmut Skerbisch, Michael Szyszkowitz, Gundi Trauna, Heinz Wondra Period 1971 Status Not realised Location/place Morocco, Atlantic coast Client/developer Morrocan Tourist Board, World Bank Construction task/type Large hotel complex, primary spatial structure with development elements and greenery Structure

A green outer skin In 1970, the German architect Hermann Grub was awarded the contract to develop a stretch of the Atlantic coastline near Agadir in Morocco, around 30 km long, for the tourist trade. Under the name of ‘actif au maroc’, he put together a team of sociologists, psychologists, culture professionals and architects committed to this task.

Floraskin is an agglomeration consisting of a primary support structure with filling elements and a spatial climate shell. The construction can be adapted to any kind of landscape situation, and expanded as required.

Following on from the ideas that emerged in Ragnitz City, Domenig and Huth designed a large hotel complex from serially produced individual units such as nodes, pressure rod traction cable bracing and connection points for expansion. The individual parts were to be built together into basic starshaped units which, joined together, would form the spatial support structure. The idea was to slide the infrastructure and the hotel room clusters into the construction volumes, which were to be produced from spatial cells reinforced with plastic (cocoons).

For reasons of climate protection, and in order to shield the entire shell, the external surface was to be overgrown with vegetation—as suggested by the name ‘Floraskin’.

Due to the overthrow of the Moroccan government, the implementation of the whole ‘actif au maroc’ programme failed.

In the project medium total (1969/70), ideas from Floraskin were transferred to a utopian level—a biological living jelly, selfsustaining, regenerating and adaptable, inhabited by future suprahumanides. It was most recently presented in Paris in 2015 at the World Climate Conference.

75

Project name Refurbishment of the church block at Kaiser-Josef-Platz Author Konrad Frey In collaboration with Period 1967 Status Not realised Location/place Kaiser-Josef-Platz, Graz Client/developer Technical University of Graz (final state examination project, architectural studies) Project type Multi-functional building complex Environmental Jukebox* Konrad Frey completed his architectural studies at the Technical University of Graz in 1967 with a design for a multifunctional building complex at Kaiser-Josef-Platz. Frey suggests a designed structure that is partly open towards the top. Like a built landscape, it transforms the site, making reference to the urban context.

At street level, provision is made for entranceways and a passage with shops, a library for young people, the church offices and a car lift to an underground car park.

On the upper level there is a ‘social laboratory on a raised meadow’ (Frey), consisting Structure

of the church interior, a kindergarten, a youth club, an extendable multi-purpose hall and an assembly room. The two main levels are connected by means of two ramps running towards one another, whilst a bridge on the upper level leads to the neighbouring building.

Frey’s design sees the church as an environmental jukebox, handing over the task of ‘interior design’ to the users. Through the control of installations at the exterior shell, visual and acoustic factors governing environmental impressions—such as light, climate, smells, noises and images—can be staged in a virtual sense. These are experienced in different ways, for example as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, a woodland monastery, a field of flowers, outer space ... This media-influenced idea of architecture is also shown at the exterior, where projections and installations are played out towards the public city space. * Shortened form of the text developed as part of a research project funded by the FWF at the TU Graz, entitled ‘Die Solarhäuser von Konrad Frey - Umweltforschung und solares Wissen im Entwurf’ (Konrad Frey’s solar houses – environmental research and solar knowledge in the draft) (www.konradfrey.tugraz.at).

76

Anna Meyer House—Animals—People On several visits to Graz and the surrounding area, Anna Meyer produced photographs, drawings and initial sketches. Back in her studio in Vienna, she transferred some of the motifs to larger formats and three-dimensional architectural models.

Some of the objects she painted appear in the exhibition Graz Architecture, whilst others are new additions made by the artist.

Anna Meyer begins with the transition zones between the house, animals and humans, with hybrid architecture. In her paintings and models, the wall becomes skin, the structure is bone, the house has similarities with a human being. On the other hand, however, the skin becomes a wall, the bones form a structure, the person becomes a house. Meyer focuses on buildings with an amorphous character, such as the refectory of the School Sisters Convent designed

by Huth/Domenig, or the Kunsthaus Graz

by Cook and Fournier. At first glance, the Zusertal House by Szyszkowitz + Kowalski almost looks as though it is attached to its surroundings by means of a kind of umbilical cord. Yet the present as portrayed by Meyer is anything but rosy—it has more of an apocalyptic feel to it. Familiar elements are alienated with regard to their size and colour, and exaggerated. Idyllic scenarios are placed alongside threatening ones, and the friendly alien finally turns out to be not so friendly when we read the inscription ‘Hi, ich schaff euch alle (Hi, I will get you all).’

In the objects, the principle of hybridity between human, animal and house, between painting and architecture, becomes clearer still when Meyer creates animal-like architectural models from packaging, empty water bottles, or cream jars, reworking them in a painterly manner. In Anna Meyer’s

paintings, objects and installations, the perception of (urban) reality is characterised by the superimposition of various elements of a global consumer culture and the threat of social decay.

Born in 1964 in Schaffhausen (CH), lives in Vienna (AT) Solo exhibition and projects (selected): Digitale Wesen befahlen, Galerie mera, Schaffhausen (2017); Weiche Profile, Kunstraum Weikendorf, Art in Public Space Lower Austria (2017); Curated by, Galerie Krobath, Vienna (group exhibition); Stupid Painting, Stop your Sobbing Kluckyland, Vienna (2016); Sein oder Online, Galerie Krobath, Berlin (2015); Time Wounds all Healers, Galerie Maçka, Istanbul (2013); Paint to Politain 2, Jesuitenfoyer, Vienna (2013); Angestellt in der Firma Welt, Chamber of Labour, Vienna, outdoor billboard (2013); PAINT TO POLITAIN, NACHKRISENMALEREI, Kunstverein Schaffhausen/ Galerie Mera (2011); Sense and Sensibility, Kunstverein Salzburg (group exhibition); FUTUREFEMINISMUS, Galerie HSLUK&D, Luzern (2011), WELTENSAUGER, Galerie Antje Wachs, Berli­n (2010); ANOTHER TIME, ANOTHER PLANET, outdoor billboard, Gasometer, Vienna(2010); WHITE CUBE SITCOM, Kunstverein Langenhagen e. V., Langhagen (2008); Schlechte Malerinnen sind bessere Künstlerinnen, Galerie für Zeitgenössische Kunst, Leipzig (2006).

78

Aesthetics

Günther Domenig Born in 1934 in Klagenfurt, studied architecture at the Technical University (TU) Graz. From 1963 to 1973 he was in an office partnership with Eilfried Huth; since 1973 he has had his own architectural offices in Graz, Klagenfurt and Vienna.

In 1998, Günther Domenig, Hermann Eisenköck and Herfried Peyker founded Architektur Consult ZT GmbH, which Domenig left in 2006. In 2005 he formed a partnership with Gerhard Wallner, founding Domenig & Wallner ZT GmbH. From 1980 to 2000, Domenig was a professor of building theory and residential construction at the TU Graz. As an architect, he designed premises or presentation rooms for numerous companies including Rikki Reiner, Humanic and Funder.

Domenig’s main field of interest was architectural spatial sculpture, for example the so-called Nix-Nuz-Nix—a ‘bird that cannot fly’, built from stainless steel and tinted perspex. The Nix-NuzNix started out as an architectonic ‘amplifying feature’ for a bank building, and later became a ‘decorative bird’ and an ‘advertising bird’ for the footwear company Humanic. On behalf of Graz Opera House, Domenig created stage designs for Elektra by Richard Strauss in 1995 and Moses and Aron by Arnold Schönberg in 1998. Domenig died in 2012.

Konrad Frey Born in 1934 in Vienna, studied chemistry in Graz and the USA, followed by architecture at the Technical University of Graz. He completed his studies in 1967, and went to London in 1968.

Between 1968 and 1971 he collaborated with Arup Associates, and from 1971 to 1975—formative years for Frey—he had a joint London office with Florian Beigel. In 1974, he returned to live in Graz. In search of opportunities to continue his innovative experimental approaches towards the modernisation of architecture, Frey worked at the Institute of Environmental Research (now Joanneum Research) between 1974 and 1987.

Here he turned his attention to testing alternative energy sources, culminating in the idea of designing buildings as collectors and storage systems in their own right. In the 1970s and

1980s, Frey’s projects pointing in this direction were planned at the ‘ifu’ (Institute of Environmental Research), in the form of interdisciplinary research. From 1988 to 2001, Frey had his own architectural office in Graz. Up to the present day, he works as a visiting professor and lecturer in Graz, Vienna, Innsbruck, Germany, England, the USA and Canada in addition to his architectural practice.

Volker Giencke Born in 1947 in Wolfsberg, Carinthia. After studying architecture and philosophy in Graz and Vienna, he collaborated with Merete Mattern’s office at Garnpoint near Prien/Chiemsee and in Munich, with Raimund Herms in Hamburg, and with Günther Domenig in Vienna. He opened ‘Giencke & Company’ in Graz in 1981. A further office was opened in Seville for the planning of the Austrian Pavilion at EXPO ’92, and another in Riga in 2004. From 1992 onwards, Giencke was a professor of construction and design at the University of Innsbruck. In 2000, he took over the Institut für Entwerfen und bildnerische Gestaltung and developed ./studio 3, a new institute for experimental architecture and design. For a period of ten years he lead the workshop ‘ESPREITA DO MAR’ in Lagoa de Santo André in Portugal, again on the theme of design.

He also carried out a large number of teaching assignments, for example at the Yale School of Architecture New Haven (USA), at the University College London—Bartlett School of Architecture, at Rizvi College Bombay, at L’Ecole Polytechnique Nantes, and at the Universidad de Buenos Aires. For Volker Giencke, architecture constitutes a balance between aesthetics, function, construction and science. Sometimes it took years for his innovative and ambitious buildings to be realised. His works feature a combination of simple, clear material language, economy of means, interest in detailed constructional/technical solutions with high aesthetic standards, and a desire for architecture to be emotional, unique and autonomous, creating a lasting spatial experience.

80

Bernhard Hafner Born in Graz in 1940, studied architecture at the Graz University and at Harvard University, where he first came into contact with the Harvard Laboratory of Computer Graphics. He was a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, and a guest professor at Cornell University, New York, the University of Texas, Arlington, and the New Jersey Institute of Technology. In 1980, Hafner moved back to Graz. He worked as a freelance architect until 2000. Up to the present day, his work has focussed primarily on the field of architectural theory and research.

In 1966, the architect showed his works at the exhibition Struktureller Städtebau (Structural Urban Development) at the Neue Galerie Graz. In 2002, he published essays and discussions on architecture and urban space under the title of Architektur und sozialer Raum (Architecture and Social Space). In the same year, Tanz der Lurche, Gruppensex im Quappenpool und andere Gedichte und Zeichnungen zum Zeitgeist (Dance of the Amphibians, Group Sex in the Tadpole Pool and Other Poems and Drawings on Zeitgeist) was published. Inspired by William Grey Walter’s book The Living Brain, Hafner developed his ideas on architecture and urban space, network architecture and architectural networks. In his theory, developed and undeveloped space is viewed as being synonymous and of equal value.

In contrast to form and composition, Hafner focuses on structures that organise space and arrange objects in a nondeterministic way—thus fundamentally offering several possibilities, without temporal restrictions. In a series of computer-generated studies on urban space, Hafner turned his attention to the behaviour patterns, usage and interactions of its inhabitants.

Eilfried Huth Born in 1930 in Pangalengan on Java, Indonesia.

He studied architecture at the Technical University of Graz, working as a freelance architect from 1956 onwards. Huth worked in partnership with Günther Domenig from 1963 until 1975, when he set up his own office. In 1985, he was appointed professor at the Berlin University

of the Arts, where he remained until 2002. In Huth’s approach, work begins before the traditional stages of construction planning. Political, economic and social structures form the basis of his architectural ideas. This is reflected in many of his projects featuring codetermination and participation (including the Eschen Development, Gerlitzgründe Residential Building, Thal Residential Complex) and his work on architectural mediation programmes (Teaching Experiments on Aesthetic Learning). His interest in social housing and participation models from the mid-1970s onwards made him a pioneer of userdefined housing and a ‘participation expert’.

Huth attributes a high value to aesthetics, considering it an important factor in the assimilation of knowledge through sensory perception.

In this way, the architect unites aesthetic and socio-political questions in his work.

Szyszkowitz + Kowalski Karla Kowalski, born in 1941 in Beuthen/Upper Silesia, studied architecture at the Technical University of Darmstadt and completed her postgraduate studies at the Architectural Association School in London. From 1969 to 1971, she worked on the Olympia buildings at the office of Behnisch & Partner in Munich, where she met Michael Szyszkowitz. From 1988 to 2003, she was a professor for public buildings and design at the University of Stuttgart.

Michael Szyszkowitz, born in 1944 in Graz, studied architecture at the Technical University there.

In 1970/71, he worked on the Olympia buildings in Munich at the office of Huth and Domenig.

From 1984 to 1991, Szyszkowitz was the vicepresident of the Central Association of Austrian Architects, local association of Styria. In 1987, he was a co-founder of the House of Architecture in Graz, and since 1998, he has been the deputy chairman of the ASVK. From 1998 to 2012, he was a professor for building theory and design at the University of Braunschweig.

In 1973, the planning partnership Szyszkowitz + Kowalski was founded, continuing until Michael Szyszkowitz’s sudden death in 2016. The couple married in 1974, and in 1978 they founded the architectural office Szyszkowitz + Kowalski in 81

Graz, which still exists today under the name of Szyszkowitz-Kowalski and Partners. Apart from a series of detached houses, some of the most important projects carried out by the team are extensive constructions in Graz city centre, and residential complexes and university buildings in Germany and Austria. Together, Szyszkowitz + Kowalski developed an architectural approach that engages residents, users and passers-by in an emotional way, attempting to forge a connection between people and the spatial structure.

Colour plays an important role in the design.

The merging of architecture, nature and the environment is another determining aspect of their work—in terms of its proportionality, architecture is directly related to people and their surroundings. It does not only inscribe itself into the landscape, but becomes part of the landscape itself, retaining its individual character at the same time. The main body of the team’s design work is visualised in drawings—drawing is used to approach the core of the construction task and as a method of discourse between the two architects.

2011, Hybridarchitektur & Hyperfunktionen (Hybrid Architecture and Hyperfunctions), 2007, Architekturalgorithmen (Architectural Algorithms), 1996, and Das Binäre Haus (The Binary House), 1989. He combines a theoretically developed basis with constructional implementation, working in the areas of the refurbishment of historical buildings, social housing, interior, object and exhibition design and media art. From the beginning, Plottegg followed a concept of architecture that deconstructs conventional working methods and any form of determinism, replacing them with open, generating systems. Plottegg does not use computers as a tool to imitate analogue/existing situations—his designs are the result of algorithmic manipulations. The main subject of interest is not an objective, a product, a building, but a planning process that allows processual architecture to develop. Basically, Plottegg questions both the auratic object and the demiurgic architect. In Plottegg’s work, deconstruction arises through overcoming the conventional rules of architecture.

Manfred Wolff-Plottegg Born in 1946 in Schröder, Styria, studied architecture at the Technical University of Graz and the Académie des Beaux-Arts in Paris. Completed a postgraduate management course at the Vienna University of Economics and Business. Since 1983, he has had his own architectural office in Graz, also teaching the basic principles of design, planning methods and algorithm design at institutions such as the University of Design in Linz, the Technical University of Graz and the University of Innsbruck.

In 1994/95, he was a professor of CAAD at the TU Munich, and from 2001 to 2011, a professor of building theory and design and director of the Institute of Architecture and Design at the Technical University of Vienna. Between 2014 and 2017, he was a teaching professor at the Academy of Fine Arts and Design Bratislava. Plottegg is the author of numerous essays and books, such as Architecture beyond Inclusion and Identity is Exclusion and Difference from Art, 2015, Architecture...Scripting, 82

Supporting programme Curator’s tours with Barbara Steiner and guests at 11 am respectively Sun, 15.10.2017, with Petra Friedl Sun, 19.11.2017, with Ingrid Böck Sun, 28.01.2018, bus tour with Sophia Walk and Barbara Steiner Tea on Tuesday (in cooperation with HDA) at 5 pm respectively Tue, 14.11.2017, with Eilfried Huth and Karla Kowalski in conversation with Helena Eichlinger and Leon Scheufler Tue, 12.12.2017, with Volker Giencke and Konrad Frey in conversation with Magdalena Schepe/ minifom and Zerina Dzubur Tue, 16.01.2018, with Bernhard Hafner and Eugen Gross in conversation with Anna Sachsenhofer and Philipp Glanzner

Work discussions with the architects with Christof Elpons, Monika Holzer-Kernbichler or Antonia Veitschegger at 3.30 pm respectively Fri, 13.10.2017, with Konrad Frey Fri, 10.11.2017, with Bernhard Hafner, drafts Fri, 17.11.2017, with Eilfried Huth in cooperation with the Künstlerhaus – Halle für Kunst und Medien Fri, 01.12.2017, with Volker Giencke Sun, 17.12.2017, with Bernhard Hafner, Smart City Fri, 26.01.2018, with Karla Kowalski Sat, 27.01.2018, with Manfred Wolff-Plottegg

Lecture by Eugen Gross Graz – lasst die Arche tektur an Land kommen Eine byblosophische Geschichte Thu, 11.01.2018, 7 pm, Space04 Further information on the events can be found at the website www.kunsthausgraz.at

83

Index of the architectonical projects

Eilfried Huth Eschensiedlung Deutschlandsberg ● Haus Weinburg ● Nur Armut hat Zukunft – Konfrontationen 77 ● Sparkasse Deutschlandsberg ● Unterrichtsversuche zum ästhetischen Lernen ● Wohnanlage BIG I, Deutschlandsberg ● Wohnmodell Gerlitzgründe, Wohnbau Graz-Puntigam ●

Günther Domenig ● Büro- und Lagergebäude Zultner ● Das Steinhaus ● Explosion ● Vogel Nix-Nuz-Nix ● Wohnanlage Neufeldweg ● Zentralsparkasse Favoriten

p. 17 p. 27 p. 29 p. 28 p. 42 p. 15

Günther Domenig, Eilfried Huth ● Floraskin ● Schulschwestern, Mehrzwecksaal ● Stadt Ragnitz ● Zellflex

p. 75 p. 55 p. 73 p. 72

Konrad Frey ● Cowicle ● Low Budget Loft Haus ● Haus Fischer ● Haus Zankel ● Space House

● Revitalisierung des Kirchenblocks am Kaiser-Josef-Platz ● Sundome – Schalentragwerk für Hallen ● Wellpappehaus Volker Giencke ● Abtei Seckau ● Gewächshäuser Botanischer Garten der Universität Graz ● Kirche in Aigen ● Odörfer ● Wohnbau Carl-Spitzweg-Gasse Bernhard Hafner ● Archegramme / Archegrams ● Computersimulationen alternativer Stadtprototypen / Comparative Simulation Atlas of Alternative Urban Prototypes ● Lineare Stadt / Linear City

● Montanuniversität, Laborhalle – Zubau ● Schichtenstadt / Layered City ● Raumstadt / City in Space ● Rettenbachersiedlung

p. 46 p. 53 p. 47 p. 32 p. 74 p. 76 p. 54 p. 52

p. 38 p. 51

Szyszkowitz + Kowalski ● Haus über Graz ● Haus Zusertal ● Schloss Großlobming Fachschule und Kulturzentrum / Volksschule ● Wohnanlage Alte Poststraße ● Wohnbebauung Küppersbusch IBA Emscher Park Manfred Wolff-Plottegg ● Das Binäre Haus ● Generatoren

● Hybrid Architektur ● ReSoWi-Zentrum Universität Graz, Wettbewerb ● Wohnbebauung Heidenreichstraße, Seiersberg ● Zusammengebrochenes Bett / Metamorphose einer Stadtwohnung

p. 57 p. 33 p. 49 p. 65 p. 13 p. 64 p. 60

p. 31 p. 34 p. 37 p. 61 p. 48

p. 35 p. 21 p. 20 p. 26 p. 41 p. 19

p. 14 p. 16 p. 44

p. 67 p. 71

p. 69 p. 39 p. 70 p. 68 p. 43

84

Index of the artistic projects Julia Gaisbacher p. 58 Mein Traumhaus ist kein Haus*, 2017 (*Quote Eilfried Huth) Installation, consisting of an 80-parts slide series, simulation model for the housing model Deutschlandsberg and for the Teaching Experiments on Aesthetic Learning, 1973–74 (loan Eilfried Huth) Archive of the TU Graz, slide collection Wolfdiete­r Dreibholz, Archive Doris PolletKammerland­er, Archive Eilfried Huth Courtesy of the artist

Oliver Hangl p. 62 Szenario Alte Poststraße, akustisch (II), 2017 Audio installation, conversation model: mixed media, 100 × 70 cm Courtesy of the artist

Mischa Kuball p. 10 public preposition / UTOPIA, 2017 BIX project / Kunsthaus Graz Courtesy of the artist

Anna Meyer p. 78 Skeleton, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 20 × 50 cm

Teslahaus, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 20 × 50 cm Wischfinger Gottes, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 20 × 50 cm All: Courtesy of the artist and Krobath Vienna Arthur Zalewski p. 4 Favoriten, 2017 Installation, consisting of silkscreens (100 × 70 cm) and dual projection Courtesy of the artist and ASPN, Leipzig

Fish, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 20 × 50 cm Knochenhaus, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 20 × 50 cm Walhaus, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 20 × 50 cm Kröte, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 20 × 50 cm Containerhaus, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 20 × 50 cm Elephanthaus, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 50 × 50 cm Pillengarten Eden, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 50 × 50 cm Austerpfau, 2017 Oil on plexiglass, 50 × 50 cm

85

Imprint This exhibition guide is published on occasion of the exhibition Graz Architecture Rationalists, Aesthetes, Gut Instinct Architects, Democrats, Mediacrats

In cooperation with the steirischer herbst festival and the Künstlerhaus – Halle für Kunst & Medien, Graz, Neue Galerie Graz, HDA and TU Graz.

Kunsthaus Graz Universalmuseum Joanneum September 23, 2017 – January 28, 2018

The Kunsthaus Graz is a joint venture between the Province of Styria and the City of Graz within the context of the Universalmuseum Joanneum.

Kindly supported by Stadt Graz Land Steiermark

Director Kunsthaus Graz Barbara Steiner Director Universalmuseum Joanneum Wolfgang Muchitsch

Exhibition Curator Barbara Steiner Co-Curator Katia Huemer Registrar Elisabeth Ganser, Magdalena Reininger Exhibition design Rainer Stadlbauer; Anna Lena von Helldorff (buero total) Exhibition Installation Robert Bodlos, David Bosin, Ivan Drlje, Simon Duh, Fabian Egger, Markus Ettinger, Helmut Fuchs, Ivan Gorickic, Bernd Klinger, Irmgard Knechtl, Andreas Lindbichler, Stefan Reichmann, Klaus Riegler, Michael Saupper, Stefan Savič, Peter Semlitsch Restoration/Conservation Paul-Bernhard Eipper, Julia Hüttmann, Evgeniia Sannikova, Melitta Schmiedel, Fenna Yola Tykwer Educational Team Monika Holzer-Kernbichler, Verena Borecky, Anna Döcker, Christof Elpons, Gabriele Gmeiner, Barbara Lainerberger, Marta Binder, Romana Schwarzenberger, Barbara Thaler, Antonia Veitschegger, Markus Waitschacher

Exhibition Guide

Kunsthaus Graz Universalmuseum Joanneum Lendkai 1 8020 Graz, Österreich T: +43-(0)316/8017-9200 kunsthausgraz@museum-joanneum.at www.kunsthausgraz.at

Editor Barbara Steiner Assistant Editor Elisabeth Schlögl Texts pp. 32, 52, 54, 74, 76: Ingrid Böck p. 58: Julia Gaisbacher, Katia Huemer, Barbara Steiner p. 31: Andrea Gleiniger, Karla Kowalski p. 71: Bernhard Hafner, Barbara Steiner p. 62: Katia Huemer p. 64: Eilfried Huth pp. 37, 48, 61: Karla Kowalski, Barbara Steiner

pp. S. 13, 14, 16, 33, 38, 44, 49, 51, 55, 60, 61, 72, 73, 75: Katia Huemer, Barbara Steiner p. 34: Karla Kowalski, Karin Wilhelm pp. 4, 6, 10, 12, 15, 17, 18, 27–30, 36, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 45, 46, 50, 53, 56, 57, 66–68, 70, 78: Barbara Steiner pp. 19–26, 35, 41: Barbara Steiner, Manfred WolffPlottegg p. 47: Sophia Walk Translation Louise Bromby, Andrew Horsfield (pp. 6, 18, 31, 36, 71, 83, 85) Proof Reading Kate Howlett-Jones; Y'plus (pp. 6, 12, 18, 30, 31, 36, 40, 45, 50, 56, 66, 70, 71) Graphic Concept, Design and Image Editing Karin Buol-Wischenau, Michael Posch Print Medienfabrik Graz Paper Invercote G, 260 g/m² Recycling Cyclus, 80 g/m² Fonts Tram Joanneum Published by Universal­museum Joanneum GmbH ISBN 978-3-90209-599-2 The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available on the Internet at http://dnb.ddb.de.

All rights reserved © 2017 Kunsthaus Graz, Universalmuseum Joanneum © for the reproduced works by the architects, artists or their estates © for the printed texts by the authors, translators or their estates © Bildrecht, Vienna, 2017: Julia Gaisbacher (p. 59), Volker Giencke (pp. 14, 16, 38, 44, 51), Oliver Hangl (p. 63), Anna Meyer (p. 79) © Photos: p. 31: Photo Courtesy Akademie der Künste, Berlin, Szyszkowitz-Kowalski-Archiv pp. 32, 34, 37, 45, 46, 47, 48, 63, 74, 76: Photo Courtesy Archiv der TU Graz

pp. 28, 29: Photo Courtesy Az W, Architekturzentrum Wien, Sammlung pp. 32, 34, 37, 49, 63: Wolfdieter Dreibholz p. 59 (below): Julia Gaisbacher pp. 14, 16, 44, 51: Photo Courtesy Archiv Atelier Giencke pp. 39, 43, 68, 70–72: Bernhard Hafner p. 63: Oliver Hangl p. 77: Anna Lena von Helldorff p. 53: Emilian Hinteregger pp. 13, 49, 57, 60–62: Photo Courtesy Eilfried Huth pp. 45–47, 74, 76: Konrad Frey pp. 15: Karl Kofler p. 11: Photo Courtesy Archiv Mischa Kuball, Düsseldorf pp. 21, 52, 54, 75: N. Lackner/UMJ p. 67: François Lauginie, Courtesy Collection Frac Centre-Val de Loire p. 55: Branko Lenart p. 79: Anna Meyer pp. 17, 68: paul ott photografiert p. 38: Ralph Richter p. 73: Eckart Schuster p. 33: Hans Georg Tropper Bild+Grafik p. 59 (above): G. Wolf pp. 19–26, 35, 41: Photo Courtesy Manfred WolffPlottegg pp. 5, 42: Arthur Zalewski p. 27: Gerald Zugmann / www.zugmann.com Cover: Arthur Zalewski, from: Favoriten, 2017, ASPN, Leipzig

Aesthetics