Researching and designing GREAT; the extremely condensed hybrid urban block

The fact that the hybrid building is an extremely condensed urban block which increases the city’s density and contributes to the public realm of the city – horizontally as well vertically - forms one of the key interests of this documentation, research and master studio work. The “ground scraper” is not only public because of the character of its plinth facing surrounding streets, but also in regard to its interior space that is partly accessible to public. As such the European hybrid building potentially extends the city’s public domain horizontally and vertically into the building’s interior and links the public domain inside and outside. Notwithstanding, the hybrid building due to its specific and unconventional character represents a truly urban architecture that was unfortunately often rejected in the name of ‘purity’ of form and function during the twentieth century. Or with other words, its rejection demonstrates the domination of the building’s plan opposed to the section. Today, new frameworks for the city, like the “compact city,” ask for innovative interpretations and designs of building types, worthy to be investigated and proposed. The architectural type of the hybrid building, (re)defines and expresses the relation between architecture and the city in a specific manner. To begin with, the city of Rotterdam forms the first test-case of the Hybrid’s project to document and discuss statements, such as “the hybrid building has a long- standing tradition within this ‘modern city”, “it is a machine for urbanity,” “it enlarges the city,” “it innovates because of its ambitiousness but also because of necessity,” “it combines to activate,” “it asks for extraordinary design intelligence and craftsmanship.” A special way of drawing is developed to document, analyse and compare historical and contemporary representatives of the species. The method includes panoply of scales ranging from the morphological arrangement on the scale of the city, the typologies of stacking diverse programs to the architectural features that establish the mutual relationship between the public space of the city and the interior of the building. Basically the features analysed within the series of drawings are also constitutional for (the success of) every future hybrid building.

Memory and power : two movements

The institutions that work with the preservation and diffusion of cultural heritage - be them archive, libraries, museums, art galleries or cultural centres - present a certain discourse about reality. To understand this discourse, composed by sound and silence, by fullness and emptiness, by presence and absence, by remembrance and forgetting, an operation is implied, not only with the enunciation of speech and its gaps, but also the comprehension of that which causes to speak, of who is speaking and of the point whence one speaks. Preservation and destruction, or, in another way, conservation and loss, walk hand in hand in the arteries of life. As suggested by Nietzsche (1999, p.273), it is impossible to live without loss, it is entirely impossible to live avoiding destruction to play its game and drive the dynamics of life on. However, by means of a kind of tautological argument, one often justifies preservation by the imminence of loss and memory by the threat of forgetting. Thus, one ceases to consider that the game and the rules of the game between forgetting and memory are not fed by themselves and that preservation and destruction are not opposed in a deadly duel, but instead they complement one another and are always at the service of subjects that build themselves and are built through social practices. To indicate that memories and forgettings can be sown and cultivated corroborates the importance of working towards the denaturalisation of these concepts and towards the understanding that they result from a construction process also involving other forces, such as: power. Power is a sower, a promoter of memories and forgettings.