Enacted Cartography : Formations - 2012 Venice Architecture Biennale

RESEARCH BACKGROUND Enacted Cartography documents 10 years of creative research practice by Ian Weir Research Architect and was developed as standalone exhibition to support Dr Weir’s selection by the Australian Institute of Architects to represent innovative architectural practice via the Institute’s review entitled Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture – which took the form of an exhibition and book presented in Venice, Italy for 13th International Architecture Exhibition (Venice Architecture Biennale). All works exhibited in Enacted Cartography are original works by Dr Weir and are generated either from or for the remote biodiverse landscapes of the Fitzgerald Bioregion on the south coast of Western Australia. RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION As a creative work in its own right, the Enacted Cartography exhibition makes the following contributions to knowledge: 1. Expands understandings of architectural practice by presenting a geographically-specific but multimodal form of architectural practice - wherein practitioners cross over discipline boundaries into art practice, landscape representation, website design, undergraduate university teaching and community advocacy. 2. Contributes to understandings of how such a diverse multimodal form of practice might be represented through both digital media and traditional print media in an exhibition format. 3. Expands understandings of how architectural practitioners might work within a particular place to develop a geographically-specific sense of identity, a ‘landscape of resistance’. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE Enacted Cartography was presented to an international audience during the 13th International Architecture Exhibition (Venice Architecture Biennale). The significance of Dr Weir’s research is evidence by his selected by the Australian Institute of Architects to represent innovation in architectural practice for the Biennale. Enacted Cartography addresses problems of national and international importance including: 1. The sustainable development of biodiverse remote landscapes; 2. The reconciliation of bushfire safety and biodiversity conservation; 3. The necessity for rethinking of architectural design methodologies to meet the complexity of landscape management and design; 4. It challenges orthodox forms of landscape representation (aerial photography, for example) which are demonstrably inadequate registrations of biophysical and cultural landscapes.

The Venice Architecture Biennale avoids lessons from the past

This article reviews the 14th Architectural Biennale in Venice.

Shifting Ground:Beyond National Architecture

The Irish Pavilion at the Venice Architecture Biennale 2012 charts a position for Irish architecture in a global culture where the modes of production of architecture are radically altered. Ireland is one of the most globalised countries in the world, yet it has developed a national culture of architecture derived from local place as a material construct. We now have to evolve our understanding in the light of the globalised nature of economic processes and architectural production which is largely dependent on internationally networked flows of products, data, and knowledge. We have just begun to represent this situation to ourselves and others. How should a global architecture be grounded culturally and philosophically? How does it position itself outside of shared national reference points?
heneghan peng architects were selected as participants because they are working across three continents on a range of competition-winning projects. Several of these are in sensitive and/or symbolic sites that include three UNESCO World Heritage sites, including the Grand Egyptian Museum in Cairo, the Giants Causeway Visitor Centre in Northern Ireland, and the new Rhine Bridge near Lorelei.
Our dialogue led us to discussing the universal languages of projective geometry and number are been shared by architects and related professionals. In the work of heneghan peng, the specific embodiment of these geometries is carefully calibrated by the choice of materials and the detailed design of their physical performance on site. The stone facade of the Giant’s Causeway Visitor Centre takes precise measure of the properties of the volcanic basalt seams from which it is hewn. The extraction of the stone is the subject of the pavilion wall drawings which record the cutting of stones to create the façade of the causeway centre.
We also identified water as an element which is shared across the different sites. Venice is a perfect place to take measure of this element which suggests links to another site – the Nile Valley which was enriched by the annual flooding of the River Nile. An ancient Egyptian rod for measuring the water level of the Nile inspired the design of the Nilometre - a responsive oscillating bench that invites visitors to balance their respective weights. This action embodies the ways of thinking that are evolving to operate in the globalised world, where the autonomous architectural object is dissolving into an expanded field of conceptual rules and systems. The bench constitutes a shifting ground located in the unstable field of Venice. It is about measurement and calibration of the weight of the body in relation to other bodies; in relation to the site of the installation; and in relation to water. The exhibit is located in the Artiglierie section of the Arsenale. Its level is calibrated against the mark of the acqua alta in the adjacent brickwork of the building which embodies a liminal moment in the fluctuating level of the lagoon.
The weights of bodies, the level of water, changes over time, are constant aspects of design across cultures and collectively they constitute a common ground for architecture - a ground shared with other design professionals. The movement of the bench required complex engineering design and active collaboration between the architects, engineers and fabricators. It is a kind of prototype – a physical object produced from digital data that explores the mathematics at play – the see-saw motion invites the observer to become a participant, to give it a test drive. It shows how a simple principle can generate complex effects that are difficult to predict and invites visitors to experiment and play with them.

Infra-Éireann: Making Ireland Modern - Irish Pavilion for the 14th Architectural biennale, Venice 2014.

After an open competition, we were selected to commission, curate and design the Irish pavilion for the Venice biennale 2014. Our proposal engage with the role of infrastructure and architecture in the cultural development of the new Irish state 1914-2014. This curatorial programme was realised in a demountable, open matrix pavilion measuring 12 x 5 x 6 metres.

How modernity is absorbed into national cultures usually presupposes an attachment to previous conditions and a desire to reconcile the two. In an Irish context, due to the processes of de-colonisation and political independence, this relationship is more complicated.

In 1914, Ireland was largely agricultural and lacked any significant industrial complex. The construction of new infrastructures after independence in 1921 became central to the cultural imagining of the new nation. The adoption of modernist architecture was perceived as a way to escape the colonial past. As the desire to reconcile cultural and technological aims developed, these infrastructures became both the physical manifestation and concrete identity of the new nation with architecture an essential element in this construct.

Technology and infrastructure are inherently cosmopolitan. Beginning with the Shannon hydro-electric facility at Ardnacrusha (1929) involving the German firm of Siemens-Schuckert, Ireland became a point of various intersections between imported international expertise and local need. By the turn of the last century, it had become one of the most globalised countries in the world, site of the European headquarters of multinationals such as Google and Microsoft. Climatically and economically expedient to the storing and harvesting of data, Ireland has subsequently become an important repository of digital information farmed in large, single-storey sheds absorbed into dispersed suburbs. In 2013, it became the preferred site for Intel to design and develop its new microprocessor board, the Galileo, a building block for the internet of things.

The story of the decades in between, of shifts made manifest in architecture and infrastructure, from the policies of economic protectionism to the embracing of the EU is one of the influx of technologies and cultural references into a small country on the edges of Europe: Ireland as both a launch-pad and testing ground for a series of aspects of designed modernity.

Of no fixed form: The Irish Pavilion at Venice 2014 and beyond

This paper explores the theme of exhibiting architectural research through a particular example, the development of the Irish pavilion for the 14th architectural biennale, Venice 2014. Responding to Rem Koolhaas’s call to investigate the international absorption of modernity, the Irish pavilion became a research project that engaged with the development of the architectures of infrastructure in Ireland in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Central to this proposition was that infrastructure is simultaneously a technological and cultural construct, one that for Ireland occupied a critical position in the building of a new, independent post-colonial nation state, after 1921.

Presupposing infrastructure as consisting of both visible and invisible networks, the idea of a matrix become a central conceptual and visual tool in the curatorial and design process for the exhibition and pavilion. To begin with this was a two-dimensional grid used to identify and order what became described as a series of ten ‘infrastructural episodes’. These were determined chronologically across the decades between 1914 and 2014 and their spatial manifestations articulated in terms of scale: micro, meso and macro. At this point ten academics were approached as researchers. Their purpose was twofold, to establish the broader narratives around which the infrastructures developed and to scrutinise relevant archives for compelling visual material. Defining the meso scale as that of the building, the media unearthed was further filtered and edited according to a range of categories – filmic/image, territory, building detail, and model – which sought to communicate the relationship between the pieces of architecture and the larger systems to which they connect. New drawings realised by the design team further iterated these relationships, filling in gaps in the narrative by providing composite, strategic or detailed drawings.

Conceived as an open-ended and extendable matrix, the pavilion was influenced by a series of academic writings, curatorial practices, artworks and other installations including: Frederick Kiesler’s City of Space (1925), Eduardo Persico and Marcello Nizzoli’s Medaglio d’Oro room (1934), Sol Le Witt’s Incomplete Open Cubes (1974) and Rosalind Krauss’s seminal text ‘Grids’ (1979). A modular frame whose structural bays would each hold and present an ‘episode’, the pavilion became both a visual analogue of the unseen networks embodying infrastructural systems and a reflection on the predominance of framed structures within the buildings exhibited. Sharing the aspiration of adaptability of many of these schemes, its white-painted timber components are connected by easily-dismantled steel fixings. These and its modularity allow the structure to be both taken down and re-erected subsequently in different iterations. The pavilion itself is, therefore, imagined as essentially provisional and – as with infrastructure – as having no fixed form. Presenting archives and other material over time, the transparent nature of the space allowed these to overlap visually conveying the nested nature of infrastructural production. Pursuing a means to evoke the qualities of infrastructural space while conveying a historical narrative, the exhibition’s termination in the present is designed to provoke in the visitor, a perceptual extension of the matrix to engage with the future.

Ian Weir Research Architect : website

Research background: Communicating the diverse nature of multimodal practice is inherently difficult for the design-led research academic. Websites are an effective means of displaying images and text, but for the user/viewer the act of viewing is often random and disorienting, due to the non-linear means of accessing the information. This characteristic of websites limits the medium’s efficacy in regard to presenting an overarching philosophical standpoint or theme - the key driver behind most academic research. Research Contribution: This website: http://www.ianweirarchitect.com, presents a means of reconciling this problem by presenting a deceptively simple graphic and temporal layout, which limits the opportunity for the user/viewer to become disoriented and miss the key themes and issues that binds, the otherwise divergent, research material together. Research significance: http://www.ianweirarchitect.com, is a creative work that supplements Dr Ian Weir’s exhibition “Enacted Cartography” held in August 2012 in Brisbane and in August/September 2012 in Venice, Italy for the 13th International Architecture Exhibition (Venice Architecture Biennale). Dr Weir was selected by the Australian Institute of Architects to represent innovation in architectural practice for the Institute’s Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture, exhibition and catalogue (of the same name) held in the Australian Pavilion, The Giardini, Venice. This website is creative output that compliments Dr Weir’s other multimodal outputs including photographic artworks, cartographic maps and architectural designs.

M.A.S. [MADRID ARCHITECTURE SEOUL] Exhibition Pavilion

A metacity represented by architectural clouds. Architecture and public spaces, represented symbolically and graphically on the ground plane.

Bus Transportation – Córas Iompair Éireann and Michael Scott

The book acts as a companion to the Irish pavilion at the 2014 Venice Biennale for Architecture. This chapter examines the context of roads transport and then analyses how its architectural infrastructure developed in this period, concentrating on the work carried out mainly by one Irish firm: Michael Scott and Partners.

Making Ireland Modern

Making Ireland Modern is a cross-disciplinary, inter-institutional, inter-media design and research project which emerged from an open competition (won by Boyd and McLaughlin) to commission/curate the Irish pavilion for the Venice biennale 2014. It explores the relationship between architecture, infrastructure and technology in the building of a new nation. Constructed as a demountable, open matrix of drawings, photographs, models and other artefacts, the exhibition (12 x 5 x 6 metres) presents ten infrastructural episodes – Negation, Electricity, Health, Transportation, Television, Aviation, Education, Telecommunications, Motorways, Data – spanning a period of one hundred years from 1916-2016. Exploring a range of scales from the detail design of objects to entire landscapes and other territories, Making Ireland Modern describes architecture’s role in transforming the physical and cultural identity of the new state through its intersession in the everyday lives of its population. In 2015, we were commissioned by the Arts Council of Ireland to expand and develop the pavilion for a three cities tour of Ireland as one of the five major strands of the Arts Council’s Art2016 programme of Irish State’s 1916-2016 centennial celebrations (2016).

Lindquist and Pytel

The foremost event in the international architecture calendar is the Venice International Architecture Biennale. In 2012, Creative Directors Gerard Reinmuth and Anthony Burke with TOKO Concept Design, led the Australian Pavilion exhibition, entitled FORMATIONS: New Practices in Australian Architecture. The exhibition focus was to explore and celebrate “the nature of innovative configurations of architectural practice in Australia today and the desire for a renewed form of architectural agency which drives them”. The Australian Pavilion exhibition purposely chose to highlight the actions and processes behind contemporary architectural practice, focusing not on ‘starchitecture’ projects but those far reaching and socially-engaged “practitioners who are making a substantial and consequential impact in the field and well beyond it”. FORMATIONS had two overarching themes: (1) to stimulate critical disciplinary commentary on a range of new types of Australian practices and their potentialities and (2) exciting a public audience with a spatially dynamic and thought provoking exhibition of new forms of architectural practice, their spatial consequences and transformative potentials. Six projects were displayed in the Australian Pavilion in Venice, with the printed catalogue showcasing 33 ground-breaking examples of Australian practitioners addressing internationally relevant issues in their practice. Lindquist and Pytels collaborative practice is programmed between the demands of academia and commercial fashion practice. Their interests lie in exploring the relationship between the body, new materiality and its application within different facts of design production. The creative practice is underpinned by scholarly theory such as Heidegger’s "nearness and revealing" (1927-1954), Simondon’s "transduction theory" (1989) and the Burke's "sublime" (1757). Outcomes feedback into academic studio programs, scholarly research and material development for commercial, installation and speculative design production.

Making strange

Marking Strange is a series of collaborative experimental creative works undertaken by Marissa Lindquist and Andrzej Pytel which explores the relationship between the body, new materiality and its application within different facets of design production. The ongoing experimental practice looks toward both organic and inorganic materials as a means of informing scholarly research, material development for commercial, installation and speculative design production and for academic studio programs. The work draws from theoretical positions such as Heidegger’s "nearness and revealing" (1927-1954), Simondon’s "transduction theory" (1989) and Burke's "sublime" (1757). Making Strange work has been exhibited within the Australian Pavilion Catalogue, FORMATIONS: New Practices in Australian Architecture, directed by Gerard Reinmuth and Anthony Burke with TOKO Concept Design, for the Venice International Architecture Biennale, 2012.

In pursuit of an architecture realism

The noble idea of studying seminal works to ‘see what we can learn’ has turned in the 1990s into ‘let’s see what we can take’ and in the last decade a more toxic derivative ‘what else can’t we take’. That is my observation as a student of architecture in the 1990s, and as a practitioner in the 2000s. In 2010, the sense that something is ending is clear. The next generation is rising and their gaze has shifted. The idea of classification (as a means of separation) was previously rejected by a generation of Postmodernists; the usefulness of difference declined. It’s there in the presence of plurality in the resulting architecture, a decision to mine history and seize in a willful manner. This is a process of looking back but never forward. It has been a mono-culture of absorption. The mono-culture rejected the pursuit of the realistic. It is a blanket suffocating all practice of architecture in this country from the mercantile to the intellectual. Independent reviews of Australia’s recent contributions to the Venice Architecture Biennales confirm the malaise. The next generation is beginning to reconsider classification as a means of unification. By acknowledging the characteristics of competing forces it is possible to bring them into a state of tension. Seeking a beautiful contrast is a means to a new end. In the political setting, this is described by Noel Pearson as the radical centre[1]. The concept transcends the political and in its most essential form is a cultural phenomenon. It resists the compromised position and suggests that we can look back while looking forward. The radical centre is the only demonstrated opportunity where it is possible to pursue a realistic architecture. A realistic architecture in Australia may be partially resolved by addressing our anxiety of permanence. Farrelly’s built desires[2] and Markham’s ritual demonstrations[3] are two ways into understanding the broader spectrum of permanence. But I think they are downstream of our core problem. Our problem, as architects, is that we are yet to come to terms with this place. Some call it landscape others call it country. Australian cities were laid out on what was mistaken for a blank canvas. On some occasions there was the consideration of the landscape when it presented insurmountable physical obstacles. The architecture since has continued to work on its piece of a constantly blank canvas. Even more ironic is the commercial awards programs that represent a claim within this framework but at best can only establish a dialogue within itself. This is a closed system unable to look forward. It is said that Melbourne is the most European city in the southern hemisphere but what is really being described there is the limitation of a senseless grid. After all, if Dutch landscape informs Dutch architecture why can’t the Australian landscape inform Australian architecture? To do that, we would have to acknowledge our moribund grasp of the meaning of the Australian landscape. Or more precisely what Indigenes call Country[4]. This is a complex notion and there are different ways into it. Country is experienced and understood through the senses and seared into memory. If one begins design at that starting point it is not unreasonable to think we can arrive at an end point that is a counter trajectory to where we have taken ourselves. A recent studio with Masters students confirmed this. Start by finding Country and it would be impossible to end up with a building looking like an Aboriginal man’s face. To date architecture in Australia has overwhelmingly ignored Country on the back of terra nullius. It can’t seem to get past the picturesque. Why is it so hard? The art world came to terms with this challenge, so too did the legal establishment, even the political scene headed into new waters. It would be easy to blame the budgets of commerce or the constraints of program or even the pressure of success. But that is too easy. Those factors are in fact the kind of limitations that opportunities grow out of. The past decade of economic plenty has, for the most part, smothered the idea that our capitals might enable civic settings or an architecture that is able to looks past lot line boundaries in a dignified manner. The denied opportunities of these settings to be prompted by the Country they occupy is criminal. The public realm is arrested in its development because we refuse to accept Country as a spatial condition. What we seem to be able to embrace is literal and symbolic gestures usually taking the form of a trumped up art installations. All talk – no action. To continue to leave the public realm to the stewardship of mercantile interests is like embracing derivative lending after the global financial crisis.Herein rests an argument for why we need a resourced Government Architect’s office operating not as an isolated lobbyist for business but as a steward of the public realm for both the past and the future. New South Wales is the leading model with Queensland close behind. That is not to say both do not have flaws but current calls for their cessation on the grounds of design parity poorly mask commercial self interest. In Queensland, lobbyists are heavily regulated now with an aim to ensure integrity and accountability. In essence, what I am speaking of will not be found in Reconciliation Action Plans that double as business plans, or the mining of Aboriginal culture for the next marketing gimmick, or even discussions around how to make buildings more ‘Aboriginal’. It will come from the next generation who reject the noxious mono-culture of absorption and embrace a counter trajectory to pursue an architecture of realism.