Theatre of Fragments by Kim Võ

THEATRE of

FRAGMENTS FILIPPIDIS

T H E AT R E O F F R AG M E N T S

Wayfinding Plans

Prologue

Q+A

Material

Works

Critics Review

Index

Notes

Knowledge Bank

WAYFINDING PL ANS GROUND FLOOR

FIRST FLOOR

2 9

13 12

6 7

SECOND FLOOR

14 15

16 17

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Exhib. Suite 1 Auditorium Shop Reception Graphic Col. Temp. Exhib. Entrance Garden Coffee Shop Exhib. Suite 2 Exhib. Suite 3 Exhib. Suite 4 Entrance Hall Exhib. Suite 5 Auditorium 2 Entrance Hall Exhib. Suite 6

PROLOGUE Message from the Architect

I. W H A T Theatre of fragments is a new museum on the MAXXI Museum site, Milan, where the NM (new museum) is considered both a ‘building’ (a museum) and ‘object of display’ (a Rossi exhibition). The NM is organised by the curatorial strategy called Theatre. Theatre is a strategy about representing the Rossi work (from the catalogue) in 1:1 artifacts, where collectively the artifacts are a theatre of fragments. The NM is an experiment of typological memory & morphology and the Rossi artifacts’ absorption within the MAXXI site. II. C O N T E X T Vialba is the Rossi archive residence that has been the founding basis of all the catalogue forms. The City, Monument, and Domestic Object are all three catalogue forms that explore the idea of typological memory, in which each composition is a reminiscent memory of Vialba’s courtyard typology. The exploration of typological memory & morphology is carried on into the NM’s DNA. Step 2.2’s curatorial strategy, Theatre, was chosen to organise the new museum. The curatorial strategy was based on the 1970 ‘Everything is Architecture’ exhibition, where the artifacts were represented in 1:1 scale and were also represented as incomplete forms with absent parts. This representation of the incomplete, which requires the viewer to complete it within their minds, is a focus explored in the new museum. III. N E W M U S E U M P R O C E S S The NM is made of 17 duplicate MAXXI programs (p.3). I first begin with new exhibition suites. On studying typological memory & morphology, Rossi writes in the Roma Interrotta, “The history of the Baths continues beyond Rome.”13 The courtyard type of the Rossi forms have morphed and have lived on into the new exhibition suites, where the civic courtyard’s volksgeist lives in these public rooms, composed of its formal 1:1 artifacts. The MAXXI Museum acts as the original artifact, absorbing the new artifacts (p.17). This interaction of the original artifact absorbing the new artifacts connects the new museum to Rome’s evolutionary memory, where new forms were built within old forms, absorbing the original fabric. (I.e. The new Roman city built within the old Nimes theatre, absorbing its fabric)15 The MAXXI’s axis controlled the other ensuing rooms. This position was taken from the axis study of Piranesi’s Campo Marzio (p.28), which revealed the axis controlled the city’s layout. The new rooms controlled by the MAXXI’s axis links and connect the new museum to Rome by the memory of its axial planning. The 1:1 artifacts are also represented as incomplete with their metal frame-work left in their absence, letting the viewer visually interact and complete the exhibit themselves.

Q+A Inter viewer : Jacob Komarzynski

I. O N R O S S I Do you think that you have moved out of Rossi’s shadow? How have you embraced him but also managed to move away from him? You know, Architects from the same cloth as Rossi and Rossi himself, I’ve always wanted to chase their shadows but I think for my own benefit, I needed to challenge myself and move away from his shadow. And I do think I have moved away from his shadow, or what I think his shadow looks like. Do you think Rossi is still relevant for contemporary discourse? If yes, why? If no, why? I would say yes. My reason why he is s ll relevant is because he is against the current grain, against the academy and the academic discourse, and in that sense he is a great spanner to chuck into the mix. And what do you mean when you say academic discourse? Well one thing which is upheld within our academy is the thinking of abstrac on, though very broad, but Rossi is a memorist and contextualist. He is from an older school, he is from the PoMo school, which we have moved away from. Do you think PoMo is still relevant for contemporary discourse? I do not think so at all, that’s such a broad ques on. Postmodernism to me is more about dressing architecture with historic finery, it’s about using the whole vocabulary of architecture, architecture that’s long gone behind us. Rossi to me was a part of that frey but never went too close to the light, that’s why his philosophy has endured.

II. O N E X H I B I T I O N What is the challenge of exhibiting architecture? What is exhibited and what does the exhibiting in your project? Is it that simple? For my Project, exhibi ng 1:1 architecture was difficult because you are forcing 1:1 architecture which was once inhabited to now become an object. Not saying you can’t inhabit the object but you can’t superimpose and exhibit a full blown building into a room, it’s impossible. So the way I did it was through fragments and you have to find a sweet spot, not too much and too li le where it just becomes a cluster of rocks, who wants to go and see that? I filled in the gaps with wire frame work, which replaced fragments to help complete and make it readable. How would you describe an architecture that exists solely inside the museum? How is that architecture different to architecture that exists outside the museum? When it’s pushed into the museum it is completely different, it’s not even architecture anymore, it becomes an object. You look at it differently, it’s communica ng differently, in its brand new context. It looks like an alien that has landed from another planet, like it doesn’t belong because it’s taken out of its context.

III. O N

T H E

PROJECT

ARCHITECTURE

Can you identify a moment of crisis in the development of your project or your thinking about your project – for example a particular problem that couldn’t be resolved, or the idea that took-over your project...? Is it an architectural problem that will continue to haunt your project even after its completion? There are two ques ons there, I will answer the second one first. When this is done, I am richer from the experience and will move on, there are a whole bunch of projects that are never complete, and I’m happy for it, it’s open ended research. [Pertaining to the moment of crisis] I think it was using the same things over and over again. Like the ingredients to a cake, you are always asking how can I change this, how can I challenge it. Maybe because my curatorial strategy which was only 1:1 artefacts, it got me into a rut but once again, maybe that rut was a good challenge for me. Has your project for an architecture exhibition changed your position or attitude to architecture more generally? If yes, how? It hasn’t changed my posi on on architecture. Enriched it? Yes. Like all studio’s I take a li le bit of stardust from each and form my own posi on. And from this studio and project it would be the cura on of architecture, I would want to further explore it past my studies and how our forefathers like Palladio used cura on to organise his farmhouses. And now every me I go to an exhibi on, not that I have been recently because of the lockdown, I will appreciate it more, from the cura on and storytelling. Then again, cura ng an architecture exhibi on is 6very diﬀerent compared to an Old Master pain ng exhibi on.

MATERIAL

R o s s i A rch ive D r aw i ng : Vi a l b a

8 Ferlenga

9 Ferlenga

10 Ferlenga : City Mantua

11 Ferlenga : City Mantua

WORK

Isometric view | 1:250

Pe r s p e c t i v e | V i e w i n to i n t h e n e w Te m p o r a r y E x h i b i t i o n Ro o m

Perspective | View into in the new Reception

Perspective | View into in the new Auditorium

Fr a g m e n t | A b s o r p t i o n I . Te m p o r a r y E x h i b i t i o n Ro o m

Fragment | Absorption II. new Reception

Fragment | Absorption III. new Exhibition suite 3

9 9 9

3 8

44 55

GROUND FLOOR 1:250 @ A1

FIRST FLOOR 1:250 @ A1

20 FIRST FLOOR 1:250 @ A1

3 3

SECOND FLOOR 1:250 @ A1

Second FLOOR 1:250 @ A1

SITE PLAN 1:1500 @ A1

100

200

CRITICS REVIEW Critic : Nan Hang Zhang

Christopher Fillippidis’ Theatre of Fragments transforms Aldo Rossi’s residential project in Vialba into a dramatic exhibition of architecture at the MAXXI museum. 1:1 fragments of Fillipidis’ earlier work – themselves based off the Vialba project – are absorbed into the MAXXI, generating a new work of architecture driven by typological memory. Rossi’s Vialba design, an elongated U-shape apartment building, features a material and formal choreography along its façade, through the alternation of its palette and the protrusion of its towers. A large column stands in a voided corner, rising to around half the height of the building. These qualities of the original work – the rhythm of the façade and the monumentality of the column – were explored in Fillippidis’ earlier projects, which sought to reimagine the Vialba building as a city, a monument, and a domestic object. Fragments of these earlier projects are brought together in a complex composition, which intensifies the rhythm and monumentality of Rossi’s work within the new context of the MAXXI. We see, for example, large columns penetrating into the museum walls, thus reframing the scale of the space, and introducing new dimensionality and depth to the wall surface. As the new insertions interact with the existing museum, the MAXXI finds itself diminished relative to the large scale of the fragments. The tall, flowing spaces of the museum are now mise-en-scene, shrunk into a smaller role while oversized letters, enormous curtains, and the aforementioned columns demand attention as the main performers. What story, then, is taking place on this stage? Rossi’s concern with typology and its associated memory seems appropriate here, as most of the exhibited fragments arrive as basic, stripped-back elements, arranged together to create forms and typologies embedded with history. On this stage we see forms from the linear beam-and-column evoking a Classical façade, to the rather more literal stage of the rounded auditorium. Interestingly, form is not the sole device of communication in this exhibition: the presence of large text attached to fragments, denoting the program of their location, blare like neon signs and throw into sharp relief their more modest colleagues. Whether by these eccentric signs, or by elemental forms, the fragments of this exhibition work in concert to communicate the culmination of Filippidis’ architectural exploration of Rossi.”

INDEX Step 1 & Step 2 Projects

Step 1.1|City

Step 1.2|Monument

Step 1.3|Domestic Object

2 Step

2.1

| S p a c e in S p a c e

Space in Space is a curatorial strategy about bringing exterior space into interior space by representing the artifacts as a landscape. A grid blankets the artifacts and in relationship to the pepper grinder and shakers, they morph into a representation of landscape and architecture. This project questions how you represent space in space. As you mobilise and view the terrain looking down, the ceiling morphs into a night sky and evaporates from your periphery. It questions if the relationship of the room space and the quasi space are the same thing, meaning are they two sides of the same coin?

Step

2.2

Precedence | Superarchitecture, 1966

|Theatre

Theatre is a curatorial strategy about presenting the Rossi work in 1:1 artifacts and then contrasting them with their scale models. Questioning how we view the 1:1 artifacts. In room one you can view the artifact through a hole in the model, so you can see its visual power through the model. In room two, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the inverse, you view the model through the 1:1 and then in room three you read it from left to right, first 1:1 then scaling down to the model.

Precedence | Everything is Architecture, 1970

2 Step

2.3

| Purification

This exhibition is about representing the Rossi work into a pure state, by the curatorial strategy Purification. A strategy of incrementally purifying the exhibition by reduction. The exhibition starts at the Locus (untouched by the process) and with each proceeding room, the magnitude of purification increases. The strategy purifies the artifacts, podiums, furniture and rooms and even how we view the exhibition, begins to purify, from standing, to kneeling to sitting. With the last room purifying down from 3D artifacts to their 2D plans. It questions if the exhibit should be purified down to tectonics or into a play of light and shadow. And what does purification mean for the viewer, are they affected or unaffected by the process?

Precedence | Revising Modernism, 1984

NOTES Process Documentation

LINE OF INQUIRY “ Yo u a re mu t a li a t i ng i t , a lte ring it, to e x h ibit it as some th ing e l se ” Ee va .

“ I mitatio n t h e re f o re i s n’ t mi mi c ry b u t r ath e r as th e fre e and th e re fore wanting an inc ompl e te , produc tion o f a nal ogon” Pr o p hy r i o s Ne w Classicism, P.54

M A X X I Position

L’A r t D e B a t i r

Absolutist

- T he ar t o f b u i ld i ng - Buil ding a s a rt - R eal is m i n ma te ri a l

O ne Language ( Fl uid) Circulation Formal l y Landsc ape Al l E nc ompassing Mono

T h e b u i ld i ng b e c o me s more important th an th e e x h ibit in it.

T h e r e d o e s n ’ t h av e to b e a n e x h i b i t i n t h e m u s e u m f o r p e o p l e to v i s i t … B u i l d i n g a s e x h b i te d . Imitate t his. My Posi ti on.

I M I T A T I O N Design Strategy An Incomplete Production of Analogon

“ Ru i n ” P r 0 f. Pe r t Fra g m e n t This is where my architectural interest lies Missing G ap

Fictitious Architecture C o l i n R o we x P i ra nes i “Piranesi was able to disco ve r ho w the urban fabric of Impe rial Rome w as col l ec ti o n o f i n te r se c ti o n s m a d e u p o f f o r ma l s ha pe s. ” Ro w e Collage Ci ty p.89

Fr agm e n t C o lle c ti ve Piranesi Campo Marzio

Piranesi Pianta di Roma

P lan

A critique on Maxxi’s absolutist principles on urban d e s i g n b y s t i tc h i n g to g e t h e r f o r m a l a r t i f a c t s to c r e a te a n e w u r b a n f a b r i c .

O mit to D elegitimize . Addition and Subtraction .

Cura to ria l S t rategy

T h ea t re

Tr aj e c to r y

A st rategy about r ep resent i ng t h e rossi work i n 1 :1 a rt if acts , wher e col l ec t ivel y t h e art ifac t s are a the a t re of f r agments. Theat re i s t h e m et am orph osis, su pe rpos ition and juxtaposi t ion of t h e Rossi art ifa ct s, layer ed onto the MAX X I . T h e Rossi art i fac t s a b s o r b t h e M a x x i m a te r i a l , o r g a n i s e d b y i m i t a t i n g t h e i m m a te r i a l m e m o r y o f t h e M a x x i . A n o p e r a t i c t h e a t r e of a rt ifac t s.

I n th e Ne w Mus e um th e M A XX I b e c o m e s t he u nto u c h e d a r t i f a c t , a n a b s o l u t i s t m o n u m e n t o f w h a t was. The curatorial strategy organises the Rossi artifacts to create the NM. This is a research into what i f t h e N M b e c o m e s to o d e v i a n t , a m u t i l a t i o n o f t h e M A XX I ? R o s s i th e o r i s e d a b o ut f o r m a l m e mory bu t w h a t i f t h e f o r m a l m e m o r y i s a b s o r b e d i n to t h e n e w museum and we cannot recall the memory of what was? How can the MAXXI continue if everything is a llo w e d; i s i t f o r go t to n o r do e s i t r e s ur f a c e ? Ca n imit a t i n g t h e i m m a te r i a l t h r o u g h a t h e a t r e o f f r a g m e n t s b e a n e x p r e s s i o n o f do ub li n g, b e c o m e a m o d e l f or the n e w Mu s e u m ?

Piranesi Via Appia

Rossi Nimes Ampitheater

Rossi Theater-City

“At Nimes the Visigoths transformed an amphitheate r into a fortress...Subseque ntly the city began to de velop again around this m o n u m e n t… a thea te r b e c a me a c i ty , the the a te r -c i ty. ” Ro s s i The Architecture of the city p.89

Im material

A xi s S tudy

Campus Martius Axis Study

MAXXI Axis Study

“The hi s to r y o f the B aths c o n ti n ue s be y o n d R o m e. ” Ro s s i Roma Inte rrotta 1978 p.187 “The relationship betwee n the ne w and the ancie nt is solved through a pre vale nt compositional procedure of ordinatio (O rde r) and dispositio (Arrange me nt) of objects in the give n s p ac e . Al d o Ro s s i w r i t e s : “T h e h is tory of t he Bat hs c on t in ue s be y on d Ro me.” 187 T he Baths, a pl ace of heal in g an d wel l -bein g, are n ot ju st a space or a f orm, but also and ab o ve al l a me a n i n g , a c o n c e p t , a n i d ea , th e i ma g e o f a Vo lksg ei st wh i c h li es be y o nd the phe n ome n on an d which is u sed to commu n icate and guarantee its existe nce. The ele me nts of the project – the fountain, the tea house with walk and trampoline, the locke r rooms, the wate r house, and the existing aqueduct – belong to a pe rsonal and collective poetic re pe rtoire which, extracted from the chronology or original conditions, are manipulated and relocated in space with the inte ntion of clarifying their meaning and characte r. The project, an “a lterna t iv e to t h e r e a l ,” an image of a possible future for the city and the te rritory, uses history and translates it into “thi ngs, o bjects, memo ri es that seek to express a dimension of t he e n v i r o n m e n t a n d o f me m ory.”188 In the city, the architectural object assumes a pre vale nt role in the process of se mantic qualification that transforms space s into place s. C on c e iv e d a s a l a r g e a r c h i tec t ural arte fac t , a c on s t ruc t ion of arc hi tectu re i n hi sto ri cal ti me, the ci ty beco mes an analo gi cal d i sco u rse mad e u p of ima ges, a sequ e n c e o f m u l ti p l e a l l us ion s an d he te rog e n e ous an n ot at ions that make the meani ngs, reco llecti o ns and memo ri es i mpli ci t i n i ts expli ci t forms.” Ali oscia M ozzato The Architecture of the city p.17

Rossi writes in the Roma Inte rrotta “The history of the Baths c o n ti n u e s b e y o n d Ro me . ”, The s pi r i t, the Vo lks g e i s t o f typ e conti n u e s. In the NM Ty po lo gi c al Mo r pho lo gy is explored, from Courtyard type morphed into exhibition hall while the Courtyard Volksgeist lives on, a Court-ition hall (Like the Nimes theatre… theatre became a city, the theatre-city.)The NM laye rs u po n the o r i g i n a l a r ti f a c ts , wi th the n e w a r ti f a c ts a b s orbing t he original. The ne w M use um will be a transce nde nce of Rome’s Axial arrange me nt with the NM arranged b y the Z aha Axis. Learned from the Piranesi’s Campus M artius, axis’ ordinatio (O rde ring) and dispositio (arranging) space.

Curatorial Strategy

T h ea t re

A s tr ategy about r epresent i ng t h e rossi work i n 1 : 1 a rtif acts , wher e c ol l ec t ivel y t h e art ifac t s are a theatr e of f r agment s. T h eat re is t h e t ypol og i c al metamor p hos is of Rossi art i fac t s, l ayered onto t h e M AXXI and or gansi ed by t h e MAX X I ax is. T h e Ro s s i a r t i f a c t s a b s o r b t h e M a x x i m a te r i a l . An op erat ic t h eat re of art i fac t s.

A rtifacts

Campus Martius Axis Study

O R GA NI S EA XIS D

MAXXI Axis Study

MAXXI Main Axis

NE W

TEMP’ EXHIBT RECEPTION AUDITORIUM

NEW

TEMP’ EXH I BT

NE W

RECEPTION

NEW

AUD IT ORIUM

KNOWLEDGE BANK Bibliographic information

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

14. 15. 16.

Sherer, Daniel. Essay. In Aldo Rossi: The Architecture and Art of the Analogous City, 16. Research Gate , 2019. “Cite This Item.” Architecture, Furniture and Some of My Dogs on JSTOR. Accessed November 8, 2020. http://www.jstor.com/stable/1567195. Ghirardo, Diane. Essay. In Memory and Monument , 86. Graham Foundation, 2019. Ferlenga, Alberto. “Fiera-Catena_Mantua.” Essay. In Aldo Rossi: Architetture 1988-1992, 108–9. Milano: Electa, 1995. Ferlenga, Alberto. “The Analogous City, 1976.” Essay. In Aldo Rossi: Architetture 1988-1992, 72. Milano: Electa, 1995. Gigliotti, Roberto. Displayed Spaces New Means of Architecture: Presentation through Exhibitions. Leipzig: Spector Books, 2015. Ferlenga, Alberto. “The Domestic theatre for the domestic design exhibition at the Milan Triennale, 1986.” Essay. In Aldo Rossi: Architetture 1988-1992, 154. Milano: Electa, 1995. 17_Everything Is Architecture_1970, n.d., 138–43. 10_Superarchitettura_1966, n.d., 128. 25_Revising Modernism_1984, n.d., 247. Ferlenga, Alberto. “Residential building in the Vialba district of Milan, 1985” Essay. In Aldo Rossi: Architetture 1988-1992, 142-43. Milano: Electa, 1995. 4.4 Anteriority and the Analogous City. Youtube , 2017. https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=CKJLy_P_uWc. Argan, Giulio Carlo., Piero Sartogo, and Christian Norberg-Schulz. Essay. In Roma Interrotta: Piero Sartogo, Costantino Dardi, Antoine Grumbach, James Stirling, Paolo Portoghesi, Romaldo Giurgola, Robert Venturi, Colin Rowe, Michael Graves, Leon Krier, ALdo Rossi, Robert Krier, 189. Roma: Incontri internazionali d’arte, 1978. Rowe, Colin, and Fred Koetter. Essay. In Collage City, 89. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2009. Rossi, Aldo. Essay. In The Architecture of the City, 89. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2007. Giovanni Battista Piranesi’s Campo Marzio. Pinterest. Accessed 2020. https:// www.pinterest.com.au/pin/553590979179616376/.