Defending the Irish Border: The Map of Watchful Architecture

This chapter offers an analysis of a map of the Irish border. The Map of Watchful Architecture charts the history of defensive structures in the border region.

Portrush: Architecture for the North Irish Coast

The North Irish coast resembles one of the unique landscapes that define the scenic character of the place. To understand place you need to engage with stories and histories behind it. The search for Portrush has to start from Ulster. This book offers a journey to explore histories, traditions, festivities and the architecture of the Irish town. Approaching Portrush as a field of experimental architectural studio, the studio at Queen’s University Belfast teamed up to rediscover the Irish coastal condition and have a rethink about the origins and ingredients of Irish architecture and landscape. This book records and discusses this ambitious project and its outcome. Divided into two parts, the book introduces a comprehensive contextual and historical investigation into the heritage, culture and architecture followed by a display of students’ theoretical encounters and designs.

In Search of the Origins of Modernism: Venice and the Crisis of Classical Architecture in the mid-eighteenth century

This paper attempts to prove that in the years 1735 to 1755 Venice was the birthplace and cradle of Modern architectural theory, generating a major crisis in classical architecture traditionally based on the Vitruvian assumption that it imitates early wooden structures in stone or in marble. According to its rationalist critics such as the Venetian Observant Franciscan friar and architectural theorist Carlo Lodoli (1690-1761) and his nineteenth-century followers, classical architecture is singularly deceptive and not true to the nature of materials, in other words, dishonest and fallacious. This questioning did not emanate from practising architects, but from Lodoli himself– a philosopher and educator of the Venetian patriciate – who had not been trained as an architect. The roots of this crisis lay in a new approach to architecture stemming from the new rationalist philosophy of the Enlightenment age with its emphasis on reason and universal criticism.

Max Bill in Italia . Lo spazio logico dell'architettura

I Max Bill is an intense giornata of a big fresco. An analysis of the main social, artistic and cultural events throughout the twentieth century is needed in order to trace his career through his masterpieces and architectures. Some of the faces of this hypothetical mural painting are, among others, Le Corbusier, Walter Gropius, Ernesto Nathan Rogers, Kandinskij, Klee, Mondrian, Vatongerloo, Ignazio Silone, while the backcloth is given by artistic avant-gardes, Bauhaus, International Exhibitions, CIAM, war events, reconstruction, Milan Triennali, Venice Biennali, the School of Ulm. Architect, even though more known as painter, sculptor, designer and graphic artist, Max Bill attends the Bauhaus as a student in the years 1927-1929, and from this experience derives the main features of a rational, objective, constructive and non figurative art. His research is devoted to give his art a scientific methodology: each work proceeds from the analysis of a problem to the logical and always verifiable solution of the same problem. By means of composition elements (such as rhythm, seriality, theme and its variation, harmony and dissonance), he faces, with consistent results, themes apparently very distant from each other as the project for the H.f.G. or the design for a font. Mathematics are a constant reference frame as field of certainties, order, objectivity: ‘for Bill mathematics are never confined to a simple function: they represent a climate of spiritual certainties, and also the theme of non attempted in its purest state, objectivity of the sign and of the geometrical place, and at the same time restlessness of the infinity: Limited and Unlimited ’. In almost sixty years of activity, experiencing all artistic fields, Max Bill works, projects, designs, holds conferences and exhibitions in Europe, Asia and Americas, confronting himself with the most influencing personalities of the twentieth century. In such a vast scenery, the need to limit the investigation field combined with the necessity to address and analyse the unpublished and original aspect of Bill’s relations with Italy. The original contribution of the present research regards this particular ‘geographic delimitation’; in particular, beyond the deep cultural exchanges between Bill and a series of Milanese architects, most of all with Rogers, two main projects have been addressed: the realtà nuova at Milan Triennale in 1947, and the Contemporary Art Museum in Florence in 1980. It is important to note that these projects have not been previously investigated, and the former never appears in the sources either. These works, together with the most well-known ones, such as the projects for the VI and IX Triennale, and the Swiss pavilion for the Biennale, add important details to the reference frame of the relations which took place between Zurich and Milan. Most of the occasions for exchanges took part in between the Thirties and the Fifties, years during which Bill underwent a significant period of artistic growth. He meets the Swiss progressive architects and the Paris artists from the Abstraction-Création movement, enters the CIAM, collaborates with Le Corbusier to the third volume of his Complete Works, and in Milan he works and gets confronted with the events related to post-war reconstruction. In these years Bill defines his own working methodology, attaining an artistic maturity in his work. The present research investigates the mentioned time period, despite some necessary exceptions. II The official Max Bill bibliography is naturally wide, including spreading works along with ones more devoted to analytical investigation, mainly written in German and often translated into French and English (Max Bill himself published his works in three languages). Few works have been published in Italian and, excluding the catalogue of the Parma exhibition from 1977, they cannot be considered comprehensive. Many publications are exhibition catalogues, some of which include essays written by Max Bill himself, some others bring Bill’s comments in a educational-pedagogical approach, to accompany the observer towards a full understanding of the composition processes of his art works. Bill also left a great amount of theoretical speculations to encourage a critical reading of his works in the form of books edited or written by him, and essays published in ‘Werk’, magazine of the Swiss Werkbund, and other international reviews, among which Domus and Casabella. These three reviews have been important tools of analysis, since they include tracks of some of Max Bill’s architectural works. The architectural aspect is less investigated than the plastic and pictorial ones in all the main reference manuals on the subject: Benevolo, Tafuri and Dal Co, Frampton, Allenspach consider Max Bill as an artist proceeding in his work from Bauhaus in the Ulm experience . A first filing of his works was published in 2004 in the monographic issue of the Spanish magazine 2G, together with critical essays by Karin Gimmi, Stanislaus von Moos, Arthur Rüegg and Hans Frei, and in ‘Konkrete Architektur?’, again by Hans Frei. Moreover, the monographic essay on the Atelier Haus building by Arthur Rüegg from 1997, and the DPA 17 issue of the Catalonia Polytechnic with contributions of Carlos Martì, Bruno Reichlin and Ton Salvadò, the latter publication concentrating on a few Bill’s themes and architectures. An urge to studying and going in depth in Max Bill’s works was marked in 2008 by the centenary of his birth and by a recent rediscovery of Bill as initiator of the ‘minimalist’ tradition in Swiss architecture. Bill’s heirs are both very active in promoting exhibitions, researching and publishing. Jakob Bill, Max Bill’s son and painter himself, recently published a work on Bill’s experience in Bauhaus, and earlier on he had published an in-depth study on ‘Endless Ribbons’ sculptures. Angela Thomas Schmid, Bill’s wife and art historian, published in end 2008 the first volume of a biography on Max Bill and, together with the film maker Eric Schmid, produced a documentary film which was also presented at the last Locarno Film Festival. Both biography and documentary concentrate on Max Bill’s political involvement, from antifascism and 1968 protest movements to Bill experiences as Zurich Municipality councilman and member of the Swiss Confederation Parliament. In the present research, the bibliography includes also direct sources, such as interviews and original materials in the form of letters correspondence and graphic works together with related essays, kept in the max+binia+jakob bill stiftung archive in Zurich. III The results of the present research are organized into four main chapters, each of them subdivided into four parts. The first chapter concentrates on the research field, reasons, tools and methodologies employed, whereas the second one consists of a short biographical note organized by topics, introducing the subject of the research. The third chapter, which includes unpublished events, traces the historical and cultural frame with particular reference to the relations between Max Bill and the Italian scene, especially Milan and the architects Rogers and Baldessari around the Fifties, searching the themes and the keys for interpretation of Bill’s architectures and investigating the critical debate on the reviews and the plastic survey through sculpture. The fourth and last chapter examines four main architectures chosen on a geographical basis, all devoted to exhibition spaces, investigating Max Bill’s composition process related to the pictorial field. Paintings has surely been easier and faster to investigate and verify than the building field. A doctoral thesis discussed in Lausanne in 1977 investigating Max Bill’s plastic and pictorial works, provided a series of devices which were corrected and adapted for the definition of the interpretation grid for the composition structures of Bill’s main architectures. Four different tools are employed in the investigation of each work: a context analysis related to chapter three results; a specific theoretical essay by Max Bill briefly explaining his main theses, even though not directly linked to the very same work of art considered; the interpretation grid for the composition themes derived from a related pictorial work; the architecture drawing and digital three-dimensional model. The double analysis of the architectural and pictorial fields is functional to underlining the relation among the different elements of the composition process; the two fields, however, cannot be compared and they stay, in Max Bill’s works as in the present research, interdependent though self-sufficient. IV An important aspect of Max Bill production is self-referentiality: talking of Max Bill, also through Max Bill, as a need for coherence instead of a method limitation. Ernesto Nathan Rogers describes Bill as the last humanist, and his horizon is the known world but, as the ‘Concrete Art’ of which he is one of the main representatives, his production justifies itself: Max Bill not only found a method, but he autonomously re-wrote the ‘rules of the game’, derived timeless theoretical principles and verified them through a rich and interdisciplinary artistic production. The most recurrent words in the present research work are synthesis, unity, space and logic. These terms are part of Max Bill’s vocabulary and can be referred to his works. Similarly, graphic settings or analytical schemes in this research text referring to or commenting Bill’s architectural projects were drawn up keeping in mind the concise precision of his architectural design. As for Mies van der Rohe, it has been written that Max Bill took art to ‘zero degree’ reaching in this way a high complexity. His works are a synthesis of art: they conceptually encompass all previous and –considered their developments- most of contemporary pictures. Contents and message are generally explicitly declared in the title or in Bill’s essays on his artistic works and architectural projects: the beneficiary is invited to go through and re-build the process of synthesis generating the shape. In the course of the interview with the Milan artist Getulio Alviani, he tells how he would not write more than a page for an essay on Josef Albers: everything was already evident ‘on the surface’ and any additional sentence would be redundant. Two years after that interview, these pages attempt to decompose and single out the elements and processes connected with some of Max Bill’s works which, for their own origin, already contain all possible explanations and interpretations. The formal reduction in favour of contents maximization is, perhaps, Max Bill’s main lesson.

Pietilä: El proyecto de Dipoli

Dipoli es un edificio plurifuncional localizado en el campus de Otaniemi que acoge los servicios generales del alumnado. Tanto encargo como propiedad pertenecía, hasta 2013, a la Asociación de Estudiantes de Helsinki University of Technology TKK (actualmente conocida como Aalto University), cuando se vendió y traspasó a la propia universidad. La tesis estudia este proyecto (1961-66) como uno de los ejemplos más significativos de la obra de los arquitectos Reima (1923-93)y Raili Pietilä (1926-), quienes se unieron tanto personal como profesionalmente el mismo año de la convocatoria del concurso (1961). Debido a la dificultad del encargo por la dimensión y flexibilidad de los espacios requeridos, el primer premio quedó desierto puesto que ninguna propuesta cumplía con todos los requisitos establecidos. El jurado otorgó el segundo premio a su proyecto junto con Osmo Lappo y solicitó posteriormente a ambos un desarrollo más profundo del mismo. Finalmente optaron por construir el edificio planteado por los Pietilä. En él debía desarrollarse un amplio abanico de actividades sociales como reuniones, entretenimiento nocturno, actuaciones, proyecciones de películas, cenas y bailes, así como servir de comedor durante los meses de invierno y espacio destinado a congresos en la época estival. Además, en dicho edificio se pretendía acoger el Sindicato de Estudiantes de la Universidad Tecnológica de Helsinki y se localizaría en el nuevo campus de Otaniemi a escasos kilómetros de la capital, donde Alvar Aalto ya estaba diseñando varios equipamientos universitarios siguiendo el planeamiento general que proyectó en el concurso de 1949. El elemento más característico de este proyecto es la cubierta, una estructura continua formada a partir de un caparazón hueco de hormigón in situ capaz de absorber dos lenguajes diferentes y generar, bajo ella, un espacio singular con multitud de posibilidades funcionales. Su geometría permite dividir el programa en estancias de menor tamaño sin perder ni la identidad ni unidad formal. La manera en que se iluminan los espacios bajo ella se consigue de formas diferentes: si bien la volumetría de líneas cartesianas presenta un sistema de aperturas longitudinales por donde penetra la luz cenital, en la forma más libre aparecen un conjunto de lucernarios de diferente tamaños y posiciones aparentemente aleatorias que introducen la luz natural por el plano del techo de forma más controlada, apoyada por la disposición de las ventanas perimetrales. El juego de espesores de la cubierta ofrece un conjunto de matices que pretenden resolver los tres condicionantes principales del proyecto, la adecuación de los usos en su interior, la compatibilidad de circulaciones de los usuarios y la inserción en el lugar. La percepción de este plano horizontal atraviesa lecturas múltiples, desde su uso primario de cubrición y cuya distancia con el plano del suelo se comprime para tensionar la grieta de luz al tiempo que ofrece nuevas relaciones con el paisaje hasta convertirse en fachada al apoyarse en el suelo y crear un límite físico entre interior y exterior. El objetivo fundamental de la tesis es entender mejor la traza particular de Dipoli desde una visión rigurosa que amplíe el conocimiento del edificio y al mismo tiempo explique el espacio propuesto a través de las diferentes herramientas de proyecto. Para ello se ha elaborado una documentación de la obra que parte de recopilar, seleccionar y redibujar la información existente desde el estado previo a la construcción del objeto terminado. El sentido de volver al Centro de Estudiantes de Otaniemi, supone, además de ayudar a comprender el trabajo de sus autores, entender el proceso de la historia de la arquitectura finlandesa y detectar relaciones con otras obras más lejanas con las que pudiese compartir ciertos valores, facilitando un entendimiento más global de la historia. Esta investigación se inicia desde la hipótesis que la forma final del edificio y su relación con el lugar, para proponer un tipo de arquitectura que confía en la observación sensible del programa, del uso, de las escalas de los espacios, del movimiento de las personas y su relación y anclaje con el lugar. Y en este sentido, el trabajo se desarrolla guiado por estos aspectos que se manifiestan también desde la influencia y comprensión de otros trabajos propios y ajenos. Para detectar las claves de proyecto que les han permitido la construcción espacial y formal de su arquitectura, entendiendo éstas como el conjunto de herramientas y mecanismos que reflexionan sobre una particular composición volumétrica y espacios dinámicos que ofrecen un aspecto exterior expresivo, la tesis se articula sobre dos capítulos principales “Contextos” y “Proyecto y Construcción” donde se quiere estudiar el proyecto en su forma más completa. Esta pareja de apartados aborda la descripción del marco temporal, físico, cultural, personal y profesional de los arquitectos, el análisis y síntesis de la propuesta y, por último, la repercusión del proyecto. Contextos pretende ubicar la obra además de facilitar la comprensión del conjunto de aspectos y condicionantes que determinaron la materialización de Dipoli. Este capítulo se subdivide a su vez en cinco apartados: Contexto Histórico, Físico y Cultural, Personal, Profesional e Incidencia de Dipoli. El Contexto histórico se centra en la descripción pormenorizada del conjunto de situaciones que influyen en el arquitecto cuando se toman decisiones durante el proceso de proyectar. El objetivo es definir los condicionantes que pueden haber afectado directa o indirectamente la obra. El capítulo comienza subrayando los temas de interés comunes para el resto de sus homólogos finlandeses. Principalmente se centra en la década de 1950 como etapa previa a la gestación de Dipoli. También atiende el proceso de evolución de la arquitectura finlandesa desde finales del S.XIX unido a la crisis de identidad nacional que el maestro Alvar Aalto superará por sus obras pero también por su personalidad y supondrá una gran sombra al resto de sus compañeros en el marco nacional e internacional provocando una reacción contraria a sus proyectos y persona entre el resto de arquitectos. Por este motivo, al tiempo que se gestaba el proyecto de Dipoli emergieron un grupo de profesionales que defendían fuertemente las trazas cartesianas del racionalismo como Aulis Blomstedt o Juhani Pallasmaa y que consiguieron abrir una nueva perspectiva intelectual. Por tanto será inevitable que la presencia del maestro nórdico Alvar Aalto aparezca a lo largo de toda la tesis, permitiéndonos un mejor entendimiento de la carga orgánica y humana de sus trabajos desde la perspectiva de los Pietilä. Posteriormente este capítulo desgrana aquellos intereses que dominaban el marco arquitectónico internacional y que pudieron influir en las soluciones planteadas. Dipoli será puesto en relación a diversas arquitecturas contemporáneas que presentan un enfoque diferente al esbozado por el Movimiento Moderno y cuyo marco de referencias guarda algún tipo de relación con los mismos temas de proyecto. Es el caso del grupo Team 10 o determinados ejemplos de arquitectos alemanes como Hugo Häring y Hans Scharoun, incluso puntos en común con el sistema constructivista del vanguardismo soviético. Estas relaciones con otras arquitecturas matizan su carácter singular e incluso se revisa en qué medida esta propuesta amplifica los aspectos que comparten. En cuanto al Contexto físico y cultural, una primera aproximación al ámbito donde el edificio se sitúa nos revela las características generales de un lugar claramente diferente a la ubicación del resto de edificios del campus. A continuación se adentra en el origen del nuevo centro universitario desde el planeamiento urbanístico de Alvar Aalto y revela tanto la forma de disponer las construcciones como las propuestas que el maestro había desarrollado con anterioridad a la convocatoria del concurso. Además aquí se destacan aquellos aspectos que propiciaron la elección del solar. Prosigue adentrándose en el programa propuesto por el jurado –entre cuyos miembros se encontraba el propio Aalto- y el análisis de las propuestas presentadas por cada uno de los arquitectos que obtuvieron una mención. Por último, se estudian y definen las obras más relevantes localizadas en el entorno físico del proyecto y que existían con anterioridad, destacando principalmente el trabajo de los Siren (Heikki y Kaija) y Alvar Aalto por los motivos desarrollados en el punto anterior. Prosigue con el Contexto Personal donde se seleccionan de datos biográficos que expliquen, en parte, las circunstancias personales que perfilaron su manera de entender la arquitectura y que consecuentemente influyeron en su camino intelectual hasta llegar a Dipoli. A continuación se indaga en la relación profesional y personal con Raili Paatelainen para establecer en qué medida participaron ambos en la propuesta. Este apartado concluye con el estudio de la etapa docente que profundiza en los temas de proyecto que Pietilä presentaba a los alumnos en sus clases de proyectos. En el proceso de comprensión de la evolución teórica y proyectual de los arquitectos se considera imprescindible la revisión de otros edificios propios que se enmarcan en el Contexto profesional. Éstos forman parte de la etapa de mayor actividad del estudio como son el Pabellón de Finlandia para la Exposición de Bruselas (1956-58), la Iglesia de Kaleva en Tampere (1959-66) y el Pabellón Nórdico para la Bienal de Venecia de 1960. Se completa la visión de estos tres ejemplos previos a Dipoli desde las investigaciones teóricas que realizó de forma paralela y que se difundieron a través de varias exposiciones. Nos centraremos en aquellas tres que fueron más relevantes en la madurez del arquitecto (Morfología y Urbanismo, La Zona y Estudios Modulares) para establecer relaciones entre unos aspectos y otros. En esta sección no se pretende realizar un análisis en profundidad, ni tampoco recoger la mayor parte de la obra de los Pietilä, sino más bien revelar los rasgos más significativos que faciliten el entendimiento de los valores anteriormente mencionados. Por último, Incidencia de Dipoli se refiere a la repercusión del edificio durante su construcción y finalización. Desde esta premisa, recoge el conjunto de críticas publicadas en las revistas de mayor difusión internacional que decidieron mostrar la propuesta además desde el propio interés del proyecto, por tratarse de un arquitecto reconocido internacionalmente gracias a la repercusión que obtuvieron sus proyectos anteriores. Se analiza el contenido de los artículos para establecer diversos encuentros con el capítulo Contextos y con los propios escritos de Pietilä. También se recogen las opiniones de críticos relevantes como Kenneth Frampton, Bruno Zevi o Christian Norberg-Schulz, destacando aquellos aspectos por los que mostraron un interés mayor. También se recoge y valora la opinión de sus homólogos finlandeses y que contradictoriamente se sitúa en el polo opuesto a la del juicio internacional. Se adentra en las situaciones complejas que propició el rechazo del edificio al desvincularse por completo de la corriente racionalista que dominaba el pensamiento crítico finés unido a la búsqueda de nuevas alternativas proyectuales que les distanciase del éxito del maestro Alvar Aalto. Pretende esclarecer tanto la justificación de dichos comentarios negativos como los motivos por los cuales Reima y Raili no obtuvieron encargos durante casi diez años, tras la finalización de Dipoli. Nos referiremos también a la propia opinión de los arquitectos. Para ello, en el apartado Morfología Literal se recoge el texto que Reima Pietilä publicó en el número 9 de la revista Arkkitehti para contrarrestar las numerosas críticas recibidas. Se subraya aquellos aspectos de proyecto que inciden directamente en la percepción y razón de ser de la propuesta. Por último, se manifiesta la valoración crítica de dos personas muy próximas al entorno personal y profesional de los Pietilä: Roger Connah y Malcolm Quantrill. Ambas figuras son las que han adentrado en el trabajo de los arquitectos con mayor profundidad y aportado una visión más completa del contexto arquitectónico de Finlandia en el s.XX. Se han interesado principalmente por el conocimiento morfológico que les ha llevado a la observación de los fenómenos de la naturaleza. Se apunta también la falta de objetividad de sus opiniones originadas en parte por haber colaborado profesionalmente y ser amigo íntimo de la familia respectivamente. El valor de la documentación aportada por ambos reside principalmente en la fiel transmisión de las explicaciones del propio Pietilä. El último capítulo Proyecto y Construcción engloba tanto la descripción exhaustiva del proyecto como el análisis de la obra. Al tiempo que se explica la propuesta, se establecen continuamente relaciones y paralelismos con otras arquitecturas que ayudan a entenderla. Para ello, se establecen tres apartados elementales: “El lugar”, “Programa y geometrías” y “Presencia y materialidad física” y se pretende identificar aquellas herramientas de proyecto en las que confía para la materialización de la obra al tiempo que se profundiza en la evolución de la propuesta. En cuanto a El lugar, se describe de manera pormenorizada el recorrido hasta alcanzar el edificio y cómo la mirada atenta de la naturaleza que lo rodea está continuamente presente en todos los dibujos de la propuesta. Se realiza un estudio tanto de la multiplicidad de accesos como del vacío existente en planta baja que forma parte del espacio público y que atraviesa el edificio diagonalmente. Desde aquí se evaluará los espacios intermedios existentes que matizan los ámbitos donde se desarrolla cada una de las actividades. A continuación se enfoca el estudio de la ventana como elemento relevante en la transición de espacios interiores y exteriores para posteriormente adentrarnos en la importancia de los recorridos en la planta superior y cómo las salas polivalentes se acomodan a estos. Programas y geometrías explica la solución y desarrollo de la propuesta a través de los tanteos de la planta. Detecta simultáneamente aquellos aspectos que aparecen en otros proyectos y que pueden haber influido en el desarrollo de la obra. Una vez que han sido estudiados los dos niveles se introduce la sección para analizar las conexiones entre ambos planos, destacando los tipos de escaleras y accesos que propician la multiplicidad de recorridos y en consecuencia el movimiento de las personas. En el último apartado se identifica la geometría de la estructura a través de la descripción formal de la cubierta y sus apoyos en planta para conocer cómo responde el volumen definitivo a la adecuación de los usos. El carácter del edificio a través del empleo de los materiales y las técnicas de construcción utilizadas se indaga desde la Materialidad física. Este punto de vista esclarece temas de proyecto como la relación multisensorial de Dipoli y el concepto del tiempo relacionado con espacios de carácter dinámico o estático. Una vez se ha realizado un análisis de la obra construida a través de sus recorridos, se plantea un último regreso al exterior para observar la presencia del edificio a través de su tamaño, color y texturas. Este apartado nos mostrará la mirada atenta a la escala del proyecto como vector de dirección que pretende encontrar la inserción adecuada del edificio en el lugar, cerrando el proceso de proyecto. El motivo de desarrollar esta tesis en torno a Dipoli se apoya en su consideración como paradigma de una arquitectura que confía en la observación sensible del programa, uso, las escalas de los espacios, circulaciones y su relación y anclaje con el lugar como argumentos fundamentales de proyecto, cuya realidad concreta consigue situar la propuesta en el marco histórico de la arquitectura nórdica e internacional. Además la distancia histórica desde mundo actual respecto a la década de los años 60 del s.XX nos permite entender el contexto cultural donde se inserta Dipoli que continúa nuestra historia reciente de la arquitectura y concibe la obra construida como una extensión de nuestro mundo contemporáneo. Por ello se valora el proyecto desde la mirada hacia atrás que analiza las diferencias entre la realidad construida y las intenciones de partida. Esta revisión dotada de una distancia crítica nos permite adentrarnos en la investigación de manera objetiva. Igualmente presenta una distancia histórica (referida al tiempo transcurrido desde su construcción) y socio-cultural que favorece la atenuación de prejuicios y aspectos morales que puedan desviar una mirada analítica y se alejen de una valoración imparcial. Dipoli, enmarcada en dicho periodo, mantiene la capacidad crítica para ser analizada. ABSTRACT The dissertation defends Dipoli ( 1961-1966 ) as one of the most significant examples of the Reima ( 1923-1993 ) Raili Pietilä (1926 -), who joined both personally and professionally the same year of the project´s competition (1961). Due to the difficulty of the commission by the size and flexibility of the required areas, there was not first prize awarded because none of the submitted proposals met all the requirements. The jury awarded Dipoli with second prize together with a competing scheme by Osmo Lappo. The board subsequently asked for a further development of both proposals and finally selected the one by Pietilä. The completed project allows a wide range of social activities such as meetings, night entertainment, performances, film screenings, dinners and dance to take place while the facility can also serve as a dining hall during winter months and conference center in the summer when necessary. In addition, the building was intended to house the Helsinki University of Technology (now Aalto University) Student Union. The University, at the time being designed by Alvar Aalto following his successful entry to the master plan competition in 1949, was located a few kilometers from the capital on the new campus in Otaniemi. The most characteristic element of the project is its roof which can be described as a continuous form achieved an in-situ concrete cavity structure that can modulate two different geometric languages and generate a singular space under it. The building is, in general terms, an unique shell space with many functional possibilities. Its geometry allows the program to split its functions into smaller sizes without losing the identity or formal unity of the general object. The way in which the spaces are illuminated is solved in two different ways. First, while the Cartesian-line volume presents a series of longitudinal openings into which natural light penetrates, the free-form volume shows a set of skylights in apparently random positions that vary in size and that introduce natural light through the roof in a more controlled manner. In addition the perimeter openings are present that relate directly to the nature that surrounds the building. The adaptable thickness of the roof provides a set of solutions that resolve the three main issues of the project: the adequacy of the functions in the interior areas, the complex capability for user flows and circulation and the manner in which the building is inserted in its context. The perception of the roof´ horizontal plane offers multiple interpretations, from its primary use as a primitive cover whose distance from the ground compresses the void and creates a light tension, to the new relationships with the landscape where by the roof becomes a façade cladding and rests directly on the ground to create a physical boundary between interior and exterior. The main scope of this research is to better understand the particular trace of Dipoli from a rigorous architectural view to deep into the knowledge of the building and, at the same time, to explain the space through a series of project design tools that have been used. For this reason, an accurate documentation has arisen from collecting, selecting and redrawing the existing information from the sketching stage to the built object. A through reanalysis of the Otaniemi Student Center therefore provides not only a more complete understanding of the work of the architects, but also leads to a better comprehension of the history of Finnish architecture, which is related to other cultural relationships and which shares certain architectural values which a more comprehensive understanding of general architectural history. This research starts from the working hypothesis that the final shape of the building and its relationship to its place created a type of architecture that relies on a sensitive observation of the program, the use of varying scales of space, the movement and flow of people and finally the coexistence with the natural context. In this sense, the work is developed based on those aspects that are also reflected in the influence of others architects by understanding both their own and other architects´ work. In order to obtain a personal reading of the project facts that allowed the architects construct Dipoli (understanding the facts as a set of tools and project mechanisms that are able to generate a particular volumetric composition and dynamic spaces that at the same time provide an expressive exterior), the research hinges on two main sections, "Contexts" and "Design and Construction", that study the project from all perspectives. This two parts address the description of temporal , physical , cultural , personal and professional framework, analysis and synthesis of the proposal and finally, the national and international influences on the project. Contexts seek to place the work and to facilitate the understanding of all aspects and conditions that led to the creation of Dipoli. This chapter is subdivided into five sections: Historical Context, Cultural and Physical, Personal, Professional and Dipoli Influences. Historical Context focuses on a detailed description of a set of precedents that influenced the architect when making decisions during design process. The objective is to define the conditions that could directly or indirectly shape the work. This chapter begins by highlighting issues of common interest to the rest its Finnish counterparts. The text is mainly focused on the 1950s as a prelude to Dipoli´s conception. It will also address the process of Finnish architecture from the late nineteenth century as linked to the national identity crisis that the great master Alvar Aalto overcame with both his works and personality, being a great drain on the rest of his colleagues. This aspect caused a reaction against Aalto and his projects. For this reason, at the time that Dipoli came into being a number of professionals who strongly defended the traces of Cartesian Rationalism, including Juhani Pallasmaa and Aulis Blomstedt emerged and brought a new intellectual perspective to the Finnish architecture scene. It is thus inevitable that the presence of Alvar Aalto will be apparent throughout the dissertation to allow a better understanding of the organizational and human character of their work from the Pietiläs´ perspective. Later, this chapter identifies those interests that dominated the international architectural framework that could have influenced Dipoli. The project will be placed in relation to various contemporary architectural works that were created using a different approach to that outlined by the Modern Movement. This is present in the case of Team 10 group and with specific examples of German architects including Hans Scharoun and Hugo Häring, as well as some commonalities with Soviet Constructivism. These relationships with other architecture qualify its singular character and even extend how this proposal amplifies those shared aspects. Physical and Cultural Context involves the unique site where the building is located which includes different features from the location of other buildings on the campus. IT then progresses into the origin of the new campus from the urban planning of Alvar Aalto and reveals both the setting and proposed constructions that Aalto had developed. This section also highlights the aspects that led to the choice of the site. I go deep into the program proposed by the jury (of whom Aalto was a member) and the analysis of the alternative proposals that received a special commendation. Finally, I study and define the most relevant works located near Dipoli, emphasizing primarily the work of the Sirens (Heikki and Kaija) and Alvar Aalto for the reasons developed in the previous section. I then proceed with the Personal Context, where a series of biographical data are selected to begin to explain the personal circumstances that outlined the Pietilas´ architectural understanding and consequently could have influenced their intellectual approach to design Dipoli. Then the text explores their professional and personal relationship to establish what extent they participated in the proposal. This section concludes with the study of the Reima Pietilä´s teaching period at Oulu that explores the issues he presented to his students there. In the process of understanding the Pietiläs´ theoretical and design evolution, it must be considered essential to study other buildings that are part of their professional context. These projects belong to the most active stage of their office and include the Finnish Pavilion for the World´s Fair in Brussels (1956-1958), Kaleva Church in Tampere (1959-1966) and the Nordic Pavilion at the 1960 Venice Biennale. We will complete the view of Dipoli from previous theoretical investigations performed in parallel that were spread through several exhibitions. We will focus on the three that were most relevant to the evolution of the architect (Morphology and Urbanism, the Zone, and Stick Studies) to establish a series of useful relationships. This section is not intended to be an in-depth analysis nor to collect most of the work of the Pietiläs´; but rather to reveal the most significant features that facilitate an understanding of the above values. Finally, Dipoli´s Impact refers to the influence of the building from many points of view during its construction and after its completion. It collects the reviews published in the world's most relevant magazines which had decided to show the alternate proposals, generally conceived of by internationally-renowned architects. I analyze the content of the articles in order to establish a series of parallels with the chapter Contexts and own writings Pietilä to clarify if main design directions were clear at that time. The views of relevant critics, including Kenneth Frampton, Bruno Zevi and Christian Norberg -Schulz, are also collected here. This episode also collects and assesses the views of these critics´ Finnish counterparts that generally stood at the opposite side of the international debate. It delves into the complex situation that led to the rejection of the building by the rationalists that dominated the Finnish critical thinking while searching for new alternatives to distance themselves from the Alvar Aalto´s success. It aims to clarify both the justification for these negative comments and the reasons why Reima and Raili not obtain a single commission for nearly ten years after the completion of Dipoli. From the critics we will approach the opinion of Reima Pietilä himself. To do this, in the Literal Morphology section we will see how the architect tried to defend his position. Those design tool that directly affected the perception of the proposal are provided through the figures of Roger Connah and Malcolm Quantrill. Finally, a critical –personal and professional- review of these two very close figures will take place. Despite knowing that both delved into the work of architects with greater depth and provided a complete view of the Finnish architectural context in 20th century, they have focused mainly morphological knowledge which has led to the observation of natural phenomena. It also notes the lack of objectivity in their views caused in part by, in the case of Connah, collaborating professionally and in that of Quantrill being a close friend of the Pietilä family. The value of the documentation provided by both resides mainly in the faithful transmission of the Pietiläs´ own explanations. The final chapter covers both Design and Construction and provides a comprehensive project description in order tofaithfully analyse the work. As the proposal is being explained, relationships of its built form are continuously linked to other architectural projects to gain a better understanding of Dipoli itself. To do this we have set three basic sections: "The Place", "Geometries & Function" and "Presence and Materiality. Construction process" that intended to identify those project tools for the realization of the work while deepens the proposal´s evolution. The Place describes how to approach and reach the building in detail and how the view out towards the surrounding natural setting is continuously shown in the proposal´s drawings. We will study both the multiplicity of entrances as well as the corridor downstairs as part of the public space that diagonally goes through the building. Then, the existing voids in the concrete cave for public activities will be evaluated. Lastly, the study will focus on the openings as a significant element in the transition from interior and exterior areas to describe the importance of the circulation on the second floor and how function is able to accommodate through the areas of void. Geometries & Function explains the final solution and the development of the proposal through the floor plan. Simultaneously it detects those aspects that appear in other projects and that may have influenced the development of the work. Once we have analyzed both levels –ground and second floor- section drawings come into the topic to study the connections between the two levels and highlighting the types of hierarchy for the multiple paths to organize the flows of people inside the building. In the last section the structural geometry is identified through the description of the form and how it responds to the final volumetrical settings. The character of the building through the use of materials and construction techniques inquires from Presence and Materiality. This point of view clarifies multisensory project issues as Dipoli relationship to the dynamic or static character or different spaces inside the building. Once the analysis has been made we will step back to a final return to the building´s exterior to analyze the presence of the building through its scale, colour and textures. This section emphasizes the project´s scale and orientation to find the proper insertion of the building in place. In short, this dissertation has been done by the idea that Pietiläs´special abilities were allowed from a sensitive observation of the program, the creation of a variety of special scales, dynamic circulation and the relating relationship with the project´s location as fundamental design tools. From this aspect, Dipoli could be more usefully framed in the historical context of Nordic and international architecture. The dissertation allows us to better understand the cultural context of the 1960s, in which Dipoli was established since it continues our recent architectural history. The final built form is conceived as an extension of our contemporary world. Therefore the project is assessed through the comparison of the architects´ intentions and the final completed project.

The ecclesiastical architecture of Ireland, anterior to the Anglo-Norman invasion; comprising an essay on the origin and uses of the round towers of Ireland, which obtained the gold medal and prize of the Royal Irish Academy.

First published as v.20 of the Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy.

Engagement

I came here to Münster as the second part of what could have been a four-part grand tour of art. I went to Kassel for Documenta, but couldn't afford to go to Venice for the Biennale or to Basel for its art fair. I hadn't planned to go to Münster for the Sculpture Project '07, but a friend said I may as well go if I was in the Netherlands anyway. I came over the border into Germany through Arnhem, driving at somewhere from 130 to 180 kilometers an hour.

Ian Weir Research Architect

Dr Ian Weir's practice is driven by a passion for the Fitzgerald Bioregion, a remote, bushfire-prone landscape on the south coats of Western Australia which is renowned internationally for its biodiversity. It is here that Dr Weir collaborates with individuals and organisations from the fields of ecology, botany, bushfire science, land surveying, landscape architecture and art practice, all of whom seek to expand understandings of this remarkable landscape. This diverse practice formation is constructed to address a significant problem beyond the scope of conventional modes of architectural practice: the reconciliation of biodiversity and bushfire with human habitation, through a multimodal approach using art practice cartography and architectural intervention. The chapter articulates Dr Weir's practice through a formation diagram and depicts key works of landscape representaion taken from "Enacted Cartography" and "Lightsite", two of Dr Weir's key research themes.

National architecture conference 2012

May was a particularly busy month with lots of exciting architectural things happening in Brisbane, including the sell-out 2012 National Architecture Conference. The total number of conference attendees was 1,625, which was the largest number of attendees to any Australian National Architecture Conference to date. This was the first time that the National Architecture Conference had been held in Brisbane in over 20 years, and the enormous turnout of 947 Queenslanders to the conference was testament to the positive decision to include Brisbane as a conference venue. The theme of this year’s conference was ‘experience’. Building on ideas introduced in the recent ‘natural artifice’ conference, creative directors Shane Thompson, Michael Rayner and Peter Skinner focused closely on the real, sensed experience of architecture within its natural and constructed settings and the experience of designing and making architecture. The conference attracted a variety of high profile international speakers, including architect and professor, Wang Shu, the 2012 Pritzker Architecture Prize Laureate and co-founder of the Amateur Architecture Studio in China. Other highlights included presentations from Peter Rich [South Africa], Kathryn Findlay [United Kingdom], Rachel Neeson [Australia], Anuradha Mathur & Dilip da Cunha [United States] and Kjetil Thorsen [Norway]. QUT had a strong presence at the conference. In addition to pleasing attendance rates from QUT School of Design students and staff, our Head-of-School Professor Paul Sanders, was given the honourable task of introducing keynote speaker Peter Rich, and facilitating the Q&A session after his presentation, which received a standing ovation. There were many events organised for students and young architects by QUT’s SONA reps, including a masterclass, opening party, collaborative design and construction of the SONA Pavilion, and finally, organisation of the all important SONA Hangover Breakfast, the morning after the closing party. The 2012 National Architecture Conference was truly memorable and an experience not to have been missed. I encourage anyone with a passion for architecture and a desire to be completely inspired by current and emerging leaders in our exciting profession, to start making plans to attend next year’s conference.

The subject and architecture

Invited Presentation on my book Architecture for a Free Subjectivity. In March of 1982, Skyline, the Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies serial, published the landmark interview between Paul Rabinow, an American anthropologist, and Michel Foucault, which would only appear two years later under the title “Space, Knowledge, and Power,” in Rabinow’s edited book The Foucault Reader. Foucault said that in the spatialization of knowledge and power beginning in the 18th century, architecture is not a signifier or metaphor for power, it is rather the “technique for practising social organization.” The role of the IAUS in the architectural dissemination of Foucault’s ideas on the subject and space in the North American academy – such as the concept “heterotopia,” and Foucault’s writing on surveillance and Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon, subsequently analysed by Georges Teyssot, who was teaching at the Venice School – is well known. Teyssot’s work is part of the historical canalization of Foucauldianism, and French subjectivity more broadly, along its dizzying path, via Italy, to American architecture schools, where it solidified in the 1980s paradigm that would come to be known as American architecture theory. Foucault was already writing on incarceration and prisons, from the 1970s. (In the 1975 lectures he said “architecture was responsible for the invention of madness.”) But this work was not properly incorporated into architectural discussion until the early ’80s. What is not immediately apparent, what this history suggests to me is that subjectivity was not a marginal topic within “theory”, but was perhaps a platform and entry point for architecture theory. One of the ideas that I’m working on is that “theory” can be viewed, historically, as the making of architectural subjectivity, something that can be traced back to the Frankfurt School critique which begins with the modern subject...

Cidade é uma palavra plural [City is a manifold word]

This text elaborates on the city as cultural construct and representation and Lisbocópio, the installation by Pancho Guedes and Ricardo Jacinto in the context of the Official Representation of Portugal at the 10. Mostra Internazionale di Architettura-La Biennale di Venezia.

Edible materials in design fabrication

Current practice based research explores the organic properties of edible materials such as rice-paper to contemplate possible material usage from garment manufacture, landscape interventions and temporary architectural canopies/facades. Research outcomes have been published through The International Conference on Designing Food and Designing for Food, London 2012, and in Burke, Anthony + Reinmuth, Gerard (Eds.) (2012) 'Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture.' Australian Pavilion 13th International Architecture Exhibition la biennale di Venezia.

Scopophobia/Scopophilia: electric light and the anxiety of the gaze in postwar American architecture

In the years of reconstruction and economic boom that followed the Second World War, the domestic sphere encountered new expectations regarding social behaviour, modes of living, and forms of dwelling. This book brings together an international group of scholars from architecture, design, urban planning, and interior design to reappraise mid-twentieth century modern life, offering a timely reassessment of culture and the economic and political effects on civilian life. This collection contains essays that examine the material of art, objects, and spaces in the context of practices of dwelling over the long span of the postwar period. It asks what role material objects, interior spaces, and architecture played in quelling or fanning the anxieties of modernism’s ordinary denizens, and how this role informs their legacy today. Table of Contents [Book] Introduction Robin Schuldenfrei Part 1: Psychological Constructions: Anxiety of Isolation and Exposure 1. Taking Comfort in the Age of Anxiety: Eero Saarinen’s Womb Chair Cammie McAtee 2. The Future is Possibly Past: The Anxious Spaces of Gaetano Pesce Jane Pavitt 3. Scopophobia/Scopophilia: Electric Light and the Anxiety of the Gaze in American Postwar Domestic Architecture Margaret Petty Part 2: Ideological Objects: Design and Representation 4. The Allegory of the Socialist Lifestyle: The Czechoslovak Pavilion at the Brussels Expo, its Gold Medal and the Politburo Ana Miljacki 5. Assimilating Unease: Moholy-Nagy and the Wartime-Postwar Bauhaus in Chicago Robin Schuldenfrei 6. The Anxieties of Autonomy: Peter Eisenman from Cambridge to House VI Sean Keller Part 3: Societies of Consumers: Materialist Ideologies and Postwar Goods 7. "But a home is not a laboratory": The Anxieties of Designing for the Socialist Home in the German Democratic Republic 1950—1965 Katharina Pfützner 8. Architect-designed Interiors for a Culturally Progressive Upper-Middle Class: The Implicit Political Presence of Knoll International in Belgium Fredie Floré 9. Domestic Environment: Italian Neo-Avant-Garde Design and the Politics of Post-Materialism Mary Louise Lobsinger Part 4: Class Concerns and Conflict: Dwelling and Politics 10. Dirt and Disorder: Taste and Anxiety in the Working Class Home Christine Atha 11. Upper West Side Stories: Race, Liberalism, and Narratives of Urban Renewal in Postwar New York Jennifer Hock 12. Pawns or Prophets? Postwar Architects and Utopian Designs for Southern Italy Anne Parmly Toxey. Coda: From Homelessness to Homelessness David Crowley