FONDAZIONE LA TRIENNALE · 2017-12-02 · Biagio Adamo Andrea Bertin Luca Bonazza Serena Cantarelli...

FONDAZIONE LA TRIENNALEDI MILANO—Board of DirectorsClaudio De AlbertisPresidentClarice Pecori GiraldiGianluca VagoCarlo Edoardo Valli

Auditors CommitteeMaria Daniela Muscolino PresidentBarbara PremoliGiuseppe Puma

Director GeneralAndrea Cancellato

Scientifi c CommitteeClaudio De AlbertisPresidentSilvana Annicchiarico Design, Manufacturing, HandicraftEdoardo Bonaspetti Visual Arts and New MediaAlberto FerlengaArchitecture and TerritoryEleonora FioraniFashion

General AffairsMaria Eugenia NotarbartoloFranco Romeo

Library, documentation, archivesTommaso TofanettiElvia RedaelliClaudia Di MartinoBeatrice Marangoni

Institutional Activities and EventsLaura Agnesi Roberta SommarivaAlessandra CadioliBianca IannacconeLaura Macchia

Exhibitions and InitiativesViolante Spinelli BarrileLaura MaeranEugenia FassatiAnna Premoli Antonio Rubinetti

Institutional Projects and Scientific Committee Carla MorogalloLuca LipariMichele Andreoletti

Technical ServicesAlessandro CammarataFranco Olivucci Xhezair Pulaj

Administrative ServicesPaola Monti

Institutional Communicationand Media RelationAntonella La Seta CatamancioMarco MartelloMicol BiassoniDario ZampironGianluca Di Ioia Stefano LattanziGiacomo Volpe

Cultural MediatorBiagio AdamoAndrea BertinLuca BonazzaSerena CantarelliLoredana FerroObler LuperiValentina MartiniClaudia MazzoleniAdele NicotraMonica PassoniDaniela SalaAndrea ScampiniRodrigo Torres PlataPaolo Villa

Art and Science PartnerFondazione Marino Golinelli

TRIENNALE DI MILANOSERVIZI SRL— Board of DirectorsCarlo Edoardo Valli PresidentAngelo Lorenzo CrespiAndrea CancellatoCEO

Supervisory BodyMaurizio Scazzina

CEO AssistantMassimiliano Perri

Exhibitions and Museum Set UpsRoberto GiustiCristina Gatti

Technical ServicesMarina GerosaRoberto CiriniAntonio CosenzaHernán Pitto BellocchioClementina Grandi

Administrative ServicesAnna Maria D’IgnotiIsabella MicieliSilvia AnglaniChiara LunardiniPaola Macrì

Fundraising and sponsorshipOlivia PonzanelliGiulia Panzone

Public services and ResearchValentina BarzaghiLucilla Manino

Marketing and Special ProjectsCaterina Concone Valeria Marta Francesca SaloneGaia SalpietroGabriele SavioliStefano BruschiIrene Magni

FONDAZIONE MUSEODEL DESIGN—Board of Directors Arturo Dell’Acqua BellavitisPresidentErica Corti Maddalena Dalla MuraBarbara PietrasantaValentina Sidoti

Board of Statutory Auditors Salvatore PercuocoPresidentMaria Rosa FestariAndrea Vestita

Scientific CommitteeArturo Dell’Acqua BellavitisPresidentSilvana AnnicchiaricoMarco AimeMatteo BittantiVanni CodeluppiDario CuratoloAnty Pansera

Director GeneralAndrea Cancellato

TRIENNALE DESIGNMUSEUM—DirectorSilvana Annicchiarico

Museum ResearchMarilia PederbelliChiara BlumerMichela Gazziero

Italian Design Collectionsand ArchivesGiorgio Galleani

Exhibitions, Initiativesand International ActivitiesMaria Pina Poledda

CommunicationsDamiano Gullì

TDMEducation Michele Corna

Administrative ServicesMarina Tuveri

Logistics Giuseppe Utano

Restoration, Researchand Preservation LaboratoryBarbara FerrianiCoordinationRafaela TrevisanAlessandra Vannini

XXI ESPOSIZIONE INTERNAZIONALE DELLA TRIENNALE DI MILANOXXI TRIENNALE DI MILANO INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION21ST CENTURY. DESIGN AFTER DESIGN —Comitato scientifico della XXI Esposizione Internazionale della Triennale di Milano/ XXI Triennale di Milano International ExhibitionScientific Committee: Claudio De Albertis, Vicente Gonzáles Loscertales, Silvana Annicchiarico, Andrea Branzi, Giorgio Camuffo, Andrea Cancellato, Luisa Collina, Arturo Dell’Acqua Bellavitis, Kenya Hara, Stefano Micelli, Pierluigi Nicolin, Clarice Pecori Giraldi, Cino Zucchi.

4 april → 12 septemberSpazio MostreScuola di Architettura Urbanistica Ingegneria delle CostruzioniPolitecnico di Milano—In collaboration with Politecnico di Milano Scuola di Architettura Urbanistica In-gegneria delle Costruzioniand Fondazione Politecnico di Milano

Curated by Ilaria Valenteand Marco Biraghi

ULTRA / BEYOND CITTÀ STUDIProjects for Politecnico di Milano4 April → 7 May 2016

curated by Gennaro Postiglioneand Alessandro Roccawith Michela Bassanelli

AULAE / HALLSBuildings for studying in Milan18 May → 18 June 2016

curated by Chiara Baglione and Roberto Duliowith Cassandra Cozza

UNIVERSITAS / UNIVERSITIESArchitecture Schools in the World23 June → 12 September 2016

curated by Marco Biraghiand Orsina Simona Pieriniwith Giulia Setti

Graphic Design and Visual Identity Stefano Mandato

Coordination Florencia Andreola

UNIVERSITAS/UNIVERSITIESAchitecture Schools in the World—Curated by Marco Biraghi and Orsina Simona Pieriniwith Giulia Setti

Perspective sectionsCaterina Marra

DrawingsStefano Minocchi and Giuditta Nacamulli

Exhibition DesignOrsina Simona Pierini and Eleonora Salsawith Tania Braca

SetupJobbing

Graphic Design and Visual Identity Stefano Mandatowith Valeria Sonia Aufiero

CatalogEdited by Marco Biraghi and Orsina Simona Pierini

Buildings as EducatorsMarco Biraghi from page 18 to 26

Orsina Simona Pierini from page 27 to 35Schools textsMatina Kousidi

TranslationTransiting Stephen Piccolo

index

xxi triennale international exhibition .11

Claudio de Albertis

Campus & countercampus .12

Ilaria Valente, Marco Biraghi

Buildings as educators

From karl friedrich schinkel to rem koolhaas

Marco Biraghi, Orsina Simona Pierini

timeline .38

sections .172

.18

3.1

technische universitÄt berlin .44

Institut für Architektur,

Fakultät VI Planen Bauen Umwelt

3.2

eth zÜrich .54

Departement Architektur,

Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule

3.3

École polytechnique de lausanne .62

Faculté de l’Environment Naturel,

Architectural et Construit (ENAC)

3.4

università della svizzera .68

italiana (USI)

Accademia di Architettura,

Mendrisio (AAM)

3.5

delft university of technology .74

Faculty of Architecture

and the Built Environment

3.6

architectural association (AA) .84

School of Architecture,London

3.7

columbia university .90

Graduate School of Architecture,

Planning and Preservation (GSAPP)

New York

3.8

illinois institute of technology .94

College of Architecture, Chicago

3.9

university of new heaven .102

Yale School of Architecture

3.10

harvard university .108

School of Design (GSD)

Cambridge, Mass.

3.11

the cooper union .112

The Irwin S.Chanin, School of Architecture

New York

3.12

Universidad Politécnica .118

de madrid

Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura

3.13

Universidad Politécnica .126

de catalunya

Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura

3.14

facultade de arquitectura .132

da universidade do porto (Faup)

3.15

universidade do sÃo paulo (usp) .138

Facultade de Arquitetura

e Urbanismo (FAU)

3.16

universidad central .148

de venezuela, caracas (FAU UCV)

Facultad de Arquitectura y Urbanismo

3.17

university AhMEdabad (cept) .154

School of Architecture, Centre

for Environmental Planning and Technology

3.18

bond University .164

Abedian School of Architecture

Gold Coast

xxi triennale international exhibition→ claudio de albertis

.11.xxi triennale international exhibition

With the XXI International Exhibition of the Milan Triennale, the capital of Lombardy becomes a meeting place for designers and architects, professionals and enthusiasts, and, of course, for students from all over the world. A cultural capital, where the university is the fundamental space in which we can build the future of architecture and design, and of the project in its broadest sense. Given this premise, it is paramount to think about appropriate facilities where new talents can grow, and how these facilities can engage in the urban fabric with more openness to integration.

The School of Architecture Urban Planning Construction Engineering and the Politecnico di Milano have taken up this challenge. Campus & Controcampus. Architetture per studiare e ricercare, curated by Ilaria Valente and Marco Biraghi, will present aprogramme of three exhibitions throughout the course of XX1T, and will target the world of education as a privileged interlocutor.

In the first exhibition, Ultra Città Studi – Beyond Città Studi, themes and projects for Politecnico di Milano’s Campuses, curated by Gennaro Postiglione and Alessandro Rocca, you can view Renzo Piano’s architectural proposal, the Sustainable Campus, the International Workshop projects from MIAW 2016, and those of the Atmospheres 2016 competition. Materials from the historical archives of the Technical University and other universities in the city will be featured in the exhibition curated by Chiara Baglione and Roberto Dulio, Aulae – Halls. Buildings for Studying in Milan. Meanwhile, Universitas – Universities. Architecture Schools in the World, curated by Marco Biraghi and Simona Pierini, and organized in collaboration with several foreign universities, will look beyond the national context towards visions and ideas developed at universities in other countries.By inhabiting the Campus of the Politecnico di Milano, these three exhibitions spanning the duration of the Triennale will cross many themes: the future, the past and the elsewhere.

campus & countercampus→ ilaria valente, Marco biraghi

.12.

For the ancient Romans, the term campus indicated the open country, or a plain, a cultivated field or a vast urban territory like the Campus Martius in Rome. In this latter sense – and more limited in size – the term is also used in Italian as a synonym for “piazza,” as demonstrated by the Campo in Siena (the Medieval Campus Sancti Pauli, now Piazza del Campo), or Campo Vaccino and Campo dei Fiori, both locations of venerable Roman markets; or the campi and campielli of Venice, units of open space of variable size inside the otherwise compact urban matter of that city.In present usage, the word campus instead comes from the English vocabulary (the Chambers Dictionary of Etymology dates it back to 1774, and associates it not only with the obvious root of the Latin campus, but also with the Anglo-Saxon term camp) and primarily indicates an educational complex. The first such complex to be thus called was Princeton University, in New Jersey, one of the oldest universities in America. For Europe and Italy the use of the term campus is definitely recent; and it is no coincidence that in 1915, when the first stone was laid for the university area that joins the Politecnico di Milano and the Science Departments of the Università Statale, the name selected was different: Città degli Studi. The spread into other contexts, different from that of America, of the term campus, while reflecting a clear phenomenon of cultural “colonization,” also speaks of a hybridization of models that finds its meaning, from the outset, in the shifting and grafting in “other” territories, as demonstrated by the fact that the term campus itself is seen as a loanword (borrowing) by the Americans. And in the only apparently incongruous encounter between the military semantic context, referring to the camp, and the agricultural context, referring to cultivation, there is something that undoubtedly deserves to be examined.

From this viewpoint, the famous image by Piranesi of the Campus Martius can offer a meaningful hinge with which to develop our reasoning: in fact, it contains the juxtaposition of space set aside for military functions with the accumulation – also fragmentary – of exceptional typologies. In American usage campus refers to a lawn in the middle, which imposes a distance between university buildings: at Princeton, but also at Harvard and MIT, in Cambridge, Massachusetts, or at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, around whose Lawn extends what its founder, Thomas Jefferson, preferred to call an “academical village.” Over time the American campuses have become places of concentration of some of the most significant “pieces” of

Universitas / universities

architecture of different eras: from the Rotunda by Jefferson himself to the Crown Hall by Mies van der Rohe, just to cite two very famous examples. But they have also proven to be fertile meeting places between very different authors (for example, between OMA/Koolhaas and the IIT of Mies in Chicago), or places of interaction and integration of multiple different ideas (the grafts of Le Corbusier, Sert, Gropius, Stirling at Harvard, or Aalto, Correa, Gehry, Holl at MIT, again to limit the range to the most famous examples). In these cases and others, the layering of important architecture often creates a dissonant landscape, a gathering of quality architectural objects on a programmatically open surface. The term campus absorbs and includes all these possibilities: far from simply indicating the point of application of very special kinds of teaching and learning, it points to the survival of a research – but perhaps we should say, instead, of a life, intellectual as well as physical – for which the buildings at times are not just the seat but also the interpreters, the most evident proof.

In parallel to the term campus many others have been used, in particular those that make the university settlement and the city coincide. Besides the “Città degli Studi” in Milan, there are the Cité Universitaire in Paris, and the Città Universitaria in the case of the Roman Sapienza University. After all, the coincidence between university and city is complete and striking, at times, as in the cases of Oxford and Cambridge. The antinomy between these terms – city, citadel (of studies, of science) and campus – though mitigated over time, can be traced back to two ways of thinking – one typically European, the other typically American – about the insertion of university settlements in cities or at their borders, or even in large open territories, as happens in California with the campuses of Stanford University or the California Institute of Technology, or UCLA in Santa Cruz, whose buildings scatter into the woods and on the hills of the town where Hitchcock shot The Birds. The latter is a “sustainable” campus par excellence, where you can encounter fawns on the way from one department to another, and where fire prevention bulletins are posted on a daily basis.The continuous reference to the coexistence of buildings and open space has generated, over time, urban spaces of great interest that take on different names in relation to certain important interpretations referring to their bordered and at the same time inclusive structure. Just consider

.13.campus & countercampus

the term applied to the technology parks and the complexes of private businesses, as in the case of the Vitra campus outside Basel, a true collection of architectural objects, often the first steps in the media-driven fame of their designers, or that of the Novartis campus, in the same Swiss city, designed by Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani, where the architecture makes a significant contribution to the qualitative construction of the brand.

While in the structure of the 19th and 20th-century city the campus and the education citadel become a possible settlement matrix inside the more general processes of urban expansion, in the major projects of transformation in Europe, which from the end of the 1970s until the 1990s have attempted to provide a solution for abandoned industrial area, the creation of works of architecture for study and research returns as a crucial issue. What is at stake in these cases is the construction of new urban centralities: peripheral centralities designed to make the university buildings interact with other functions, in particular those of residence and the service industries. The question of the urban character of the university settlement resurfaces: one very clear example is the project by Vittorio Gregotti for the Bicocca area in Milan, which twenty years after the University of Calabria at Rende, Cosenza, approaches the theme in a context no less plagued by problems, yet potentially ready to overcome them. The urban projects of the 1980s, in fact, were aimed at a new construction – or reconstruction – of situations rendered empty by their functional obsolescence; areas substantially and as a whole available for new architectural inscription. In the urban context of Milan it is possible to outline a history and an important role for university campuses; a history that cannot be separated from that of the buildings that have housed the university over time; a history that at its origins runs parallel to that of health care institutions, i.e. hospitals. The insertion of the Università Statale in the Ospedale Maggiore by Filarete is the paradigm of this, as is the appearance in the city of hospital “enclosures.” A passage, in the definition of settlement typologies, from the “court” to the “citadel,” with a different definition of scales of inclusion and openness.On a par with health care facilities, buildings for education and research – “institutions of man”, as Louis Kahn aptly put it – have represented and continue to represent a particular, lofty idea of civil space in the city: education and health care, when the city begins to be outfitted with urban services and facilities (in the case of Milan, after the second half of the 1800s, and

.14. Universitas / universities

for Città degli Studi and the Policlinico in particular starting with the Pavia-Masera Plan, namely from 1910 on), are addressed by important projects. Città degli Studi is a good example due to the pursuit of emblematic meaning of the buildings and an urban texture that alternates constructed and open spaces, on an unusually large scale, an arrangement repeated at least to a certain extend in the discreet juxtaposition of Parco Ravizza and the facilities of the Università Bocconi by Giuseppe Pagano; while the Università Cattolica of Giovanni Muzio had to come to terms with no lesser presence than the Basilica of Sant’Ambrogio.Over time the university complexes in Milan have been expanded and enhanced, with the construction of new buildings, often of very good quality: just on the campus of Città Studi, the Department of Architecture of Ponti, Portaluppi and Forti, the new headquarters by Vittoriano Viganò, and the Department of Biology by Vico Magistretti. A quality that at times is contradicted or challenged by inappropriate clustering, and further threatened by lack of maintenance.

More in general, in the case of Italy, the large numbers generated by the passage from elite to mass higher education has sorely tested the heritage of university buildings, often aged and in poor condition due to the lack of available resources. A failure to renew – joined by a failure to build, especially in the area of student housing – that actually has rather remote roots, already starting in the early 1970s: just consider certain competitions for new university complexes, that though necessary and urgent remained without constructed results (including the big competition for the University of Florence, a true proving ground for Italian architectural culture), or were only partially implemented, with intolerably long schedules. A constructed and architectural heritage repeatedly addressed by hypotheses of expansion not fulfilled or postponed, with partial closures and the impossibility of long-term programming, i.e. a convincing urban vision capable of establishing relations between the existing fabric and the university functions in their different guises, as demonstrated by the slow, obstacle-laden implementation process of the Bovisa Campus of the Politecnico di Milano. A vast, problematic area that has generated, over the years, at least two master plans left on paper, alongside the construction of three campuses around the railroad junction, built on the traces of or even inside old abandoned industrial buildings. An arduous, complex episode that has recently led to the forced abandonment of part of the Durando Campus.


If, as we have seen, campuses can be densified and enhanced by new works of architecture, the partial or total shift of university functions to new locations can also bring about an equal and opposite situation of “emptying.” Particularly in Milan, this can have particular potential impact on the Città Studi area, whether as a result of the construction of the new campus of the Politecnico in the “droplet” of Bovisa, or for the rumored move of the Università Statale to the Expo site. Parallel to this phenomenon, other abandonings of large urban portions appear, such as those of the rail yards and the military barracks, but also of other fragments of specialized fabric. In all these cases, we are looking at important opportunities to redesign public space and the institutions of man, and to regenerate the fabric of the city. In a dynamic that intertwines times of construction, stratification and demolition, what is most interesting are the possible correlations between the parts: to turn to a well known concept from ancient Chinese culture, we can imagine that the body of the city is modified in terms of polarities, according to the scheme of interaction between yin and yang: where the yin condenses, the yang dissolves; where one grows, the other shrinks, in a regulated, congruent alternation. It is inside this polar logic that next to the existing campuses, the other possible future campuses take on their most exact meaning: that of true countercampuses, capable of resonating with their predecessors, as in polyphonic music where the “countermelody” combines with the main melody, while remaining clearly distinguishable from it. Borrowing terms from the language of cinema, we might also say that with respect to a given shot, as in a film dialogue, there is a corresponding “reverse shot” seen from an opposite perspective. The principle of correspondence at a distance, even in terms of difference – if not complete opposition, as in the case of yin and yang – is fundamental in this sense, to understand what is implied in the most essential way by a state of relation. Therefore what emerges from reasoning on this theme is an invitation to work on the spaces of relation, for the construction of a new public city, precisely due to the open and relational character intrinsic to the term campus, which offers the stimuli for reflection on today’s design potential in university settlements, inside cities and metropolitan areas. Without failing, at the same time, to call into play reflection on the terms and models of urban design, since the quality of the space cannot only be delegated to the insertion of architectural objects already designed a priori as iconic presences.


In Milan, the opportunities for redesign of existing campuses and the possibilities of creation of new ones would make it possible to determine the nodes of an interesting network of public spaces, capable of working on the urban and metropolitan scale: interesting spaces, inhabited by young people from all over the world. In the light of this potential, it is even more important to envision their reciprocal relations and their insertion within the city as a system – of teaching and research – no longer of a local character, but belonging to what is by now a global network of other universities and research institutes (a network that is increasingly interconnected with other international networks of relations, from that of the Erasmus Program to the networks of excellence, but also intersects with the competitive “knowledge market” as can be seen in the ranking system). An important network can be envisioned in the cities of the world, potentially with the characteristics of a planetary infrastructure, but one that can be the seed of a new generation of public spaces integrated into cities and their individual histories; spaces destined to play host to multiethnic populations, whose integration and mingling constitutes a value.The word campus, then, now represents an interesting borrowed term. Transposed and contaminated, the campus incarnates, in its hybridizations, the mutation in progress in our way of thinking about spaces for study and research. A system in very rapid transformation and evolution, a system whose main protagonists are the young students who should find the gates of access to other cultures, wand through them to the future world, in the spaces of the university.


Buildings as Educators.From Karl Friedrich Schinkel to Rem Koolhaas→ marco biraghi, orsina simona pierini

Both a functional and a symbolic intent can be seen in the project for the Bauakademie of Berlin developed by Karl Friedrich Schinkel in 1831: a dual message aimed in particular at the students and teachers of the Academy of Architecture, which they were supposed to read on the four identical facades of the building. First, the clear reticular structure with pillars and horizontal cornices, with brick infill, permitting the creation of large three-part windows, ideal for the placement of the drawing rooms, the library and the model collections; second, a detailed iconographic program (in bas relief and sculpted) with unabashedly pedagogical aims: an «illustrated Bible of the architect» as Friedrich Adler, a student of Schinkel called it. A program in which the portraits (among others) of Vitruvius, Erwin von Steinbach, Filippo Brunelleschi, Leon Battista Alberti, Donato Bramante, Andrea Palladio are placed alongside allegorical figures representing virtues connected with the practice of architecture (including Daring, Calculation, Success), the tools of the trade and building techniques, as well as a very condensed history of architecture, from the decadence of classical antiquity to the rise of the Gothic. In both cases, what Schinkel feels he should offer to the users of the Bauakademie is an understanding of architecture through direct observation of the building: a lesson that is simultaneously constructive and narrative, conveyed by the building itself.


Furthermore, the Bauakademie was the last building made by Schinkel in the center of Berlin, the last segment of a system of visual relations between independent urban blocks composed of his previous buildings, the Neue Wache, the Schauspielhaus and the Altes Museum, all marked by compact volumes. The architecture lesson is thus completed with the modernity of the urban design by parts of his “Acropolis” on the Spree, where the cube without a main facade and by now without orders opens the history of construction to a new language.

While architecture often has an explicitly educational intent, this would seem to be even more pertinent in the case of buildings for the teaching of architecture. Actually, among the many architecture schools designed and built over the course of about two centuries, only a limited number seem to embody a stated, conscious will to assert pedagogical principles; principles that when they are present, take on increasingly three-dimensional, rather than simply figurative, form over time.Thus if the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule (previously Eidgenössisches Polytechnikum) in Zurich, built from 1858 to 1868 with a design by Gottfried Semper, while also displaying a humanistic program of decorations on the northern facade, shifts the second “focus” of its teaching action inside, in the structuring of the educational spaces (responding to

.19.Buildings as Educators

Semper’s conception of integration between technical-scientific, practical-artistic and theoretical-humanist disciplines, and culminating in the role assigned to the ateliers, composed of students of all ages), with the Bauhaus Hochschule für Gestaltung of Dessau the process of spatialization of architectural pedagogy is fully accomplished. The building speaks with extraordinary efficacy and clarity of the fundamental concept formulated by Walter Gropius on a theoretical level in the Program of 1919 («The Bauhaus sets out to gather in unity every form of artistic creation, to reunite in a new architecture, as its inseparable parts, all the practical-artistic disciplines: sculpture, painting, applied art, crafts») and visually expressed in the woodcut by Lyonel Feininger, Kathedrale, which accompanies it: it is the idea of “unity in diversity,” of “active collaboration” between the various components of the school that give the building its form, just as the students would be “formed” during the three years of theoretical and practical teachings. The difference between the purposes of the building, from this standpoint, finds precise correspondence in the treatment of the facades (entirely glazed, horizontally crossed by long ribbon windows, or cut by vertical openings), though the internal spaces are the most important point of its application. The workshops, the auditorium, the rooms of the students are produced

by the cooperation between «forces of different directions» and, at the same time, the experience of that cooperation, which students and teachers could have directly in each moment of the time they spent in the building.Regarding the Bauhaus, Giulio Carlo Argan spoke of «formal pedagogy,» which should be seen in the wider sense, as the attempt by Gropius and the other teachers to give each object, whatever its size or function, a “demonstrative” character in the perspective of correct education; and this is even more true in the case of the building in Dessau, designed by the director of the school in collaboration with the young students Carl Fieger and Ernst Neufert. Here – as Argan points out – the space is «constructive»: i.e., it is not simply a constructed space, but one with intention, a space possessed in the deepest sense of the term: desired space. It is the same design, though expressed in different forms and materials, that can be seen in the Pädagogisches Skizzenbuch of Paul Klee, developed inside the course he taught on Theory of Form, and in the exercises suggested by Josef Albers for the preliminary course on structures of folded paper. The teaching of the Bauhaus, summed up in the famous program of concentric circles, thus seems to have a tangible counterpart – though different in terms of form and organization – in the “pinwheel” layout of the building at Dessau.

.20. Universitas / universities→ K

. F.

Schinkel, Sammlung Architektonischer Entwürfe, Bauakademie, Berlin, 1831, facade.

→ G

. Se

mper, Main building, ETH Zürich, c. 1859, view from Southwest © gta Archiv, ETH Zürich.


→ W

. Gr

opius, Bauhaus, Dessau, 1925-26, exterior view © Erich Consemüller.

→ M

. Bi

ll, Hochschule für Gestaltung, Ulm, 1953-55, exterior view © Georg Aerni.

As we know, the Bauhaus – and in particular its research on form and materials – had and still has great influence in the teaching of architecture; its overseas interpretation, consolidated with the emigration to America of key figures like Gropius, Mies van de Rohe and Albers, led to various takes on its principles at Harvard or in Chicago; just as Josef Albers, first a student and then a teacher in Weimar and Dessau, with his preparatory course on materials, opened the way for exchanges between very different artistic disciplines, like the music of John Cage, first at Black Mountain College and later at Yale. In Europe, in postwar Germany, the Bauhaus found continuity with Max Bill, founder of the Hochschule für Gestaltung in Ulm, a school that already in its name alludes to education that ranges wider than construction, an education on form. The building Bill designed and built in 1955, with his usual architectural understatement, has the objective of moral training, whose ultimate goal is “life as a work of art.” No longer the artist as an exceptional figure, but a widespread, rigorous pursuit of formal consistency transmitted through an educational project for which the building is the metaphor. The diagram of the teaching program differs from the hierarchical figure of the concentric circles of the Bauhaus, aligning the alternation of technical and manual pursuits with the humanistic disciplines like philosophy, sociology or psychology,

introduced in this type of school for the first time. At the opening of the building, with Walter Gropius on hand, Bill clearly stated: «It is decisive that the external form of the School correspond to its spirit and help to train the students.» And in fact the building is a concatenation of different modular, simple facilities, adapting to – rather than imposing themselves on – the terrain.

The “demonstration” of pure space conceived as unity is at the center of the pedagogical mission Ludwig Mies van der Rohe assigns to the S. R. Crown Hall (1950-56), the building originally made to house the College of Architecture, that of Urban and Regional Planning and the Institute of Design in the wider context of the design of the campus of the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, a project that began in 1939. As a school of architecture, S. R. Crown Hall had to convey a message of particular clarity, which the German architect nevertheless brings out through a skillful crossing of ambiguity and refinement. To create a single large space inside, completely free of obstacles, 67 meters wide and 37 deep, Mies makes use of a steel exoskeleton already developed for previous projects but never before constructed: four trusses arranged as a bridge that have the function of supporting the flat roof. The clarity of the architectural “statement” of Mies is the reflection of the approach he believes the school should take in didactic


terms, while at the same time contributing to bring that approach into being. This correspondence is clearly evident in Mies’s words: «Because we believe in a structural architecture, our program of studies is based on the structural aspect.» In like manner, his statement that «our buildings are suited to the educational program» should not be seen as a mere observation, but instead as a notation filled with meaning. In this “suitability” there is more than mere “adequacy”: there is the sign of an educational intent expressed through design. In fact, Mies himself reveals his thinking in this regard: «If the students are surrounded by a building, or a group of buildings, that expresses the simple elements and basic principles of design, this environmental influence should be reflected in the research on basic principles conducted by the students.»The interior spaces of S. R. Crown Hall and the way Mies describes them are based on the same simplicity: «The structure has a single floor in steel and a basement. [...] The level of the hall is raised 6 feet above the ground, and this permits light and natural ventilation to enter the underground workshops. [...] The main hall [...] contains two large drawing areas on both sides of a central nucleus defined by low independent birch panels, which border the areas of the administration offices, a library and an exhibition space. In the basement there are studios and workshops of the Institute of Design,

as well as a recreation area for students, restrooms and the machine room.» The terse character of this apparently only “informative” sequence contains the essence of the school of architecture of IIT in Chicago: an essence that cannot help but be displayed in the precise and almost “natural” concatenation of the spaces and functions, making it an elementary mechanism, an articulated but unitary complex. Nothing remains to be added, nothing is left to demonstrate.

The School of Architecture (1958-64) of Yale University in New Haven is organized around a central courtyard, with different uses at different levels, bordered by four vigorous pillars with a rectangular base. In keeping with the architectural principles pursued by Paul Rudolph, the facility (formerly the Art and Architecture Building) is conceived as a single spatially complex block, where the interlocking, layering and interaction of the spaces corresponds to his idea of three-dimensional design, which not by chance finds its best illustration in the perspective section. An intense dialectic between material (massive, rugged, brutal, “rusticated,” obtained by hammering the surface of the concrete in slim vertical lines) and space (continuous, expanded, horizontal, but also a medium of connection between outside and inside, above and below) dominates, generating an unpredictable alternation of density and emptiness. The result is a three-dimensional labyrinth with an


.24. Universitas / universities→ L

. Mi

es van der Rohe, S. R. Crown Hall, Chicago, IIT, 1950-56, interior view © Tom Harris © Hedrich Bless

ing.

→ P

. Ru

dolph, Art and Architecture Building, Yale University, New Haven, 1958-64, the design studios © Ezra

Sto

ller

.


→ J

. He

jduk, Renovation of the Foundation Building, Cooper Union, New York, c. 1971, model.

→ B

. V.

Doshi, Faculty of Architecture, Cept University, Ahmedabad, 1972-77, model © Vastu Shilpa Foundatio

n.

almost Piranesian tone, inside which to position not only the collective functions like the auditorium, the library and the exhibition space, but also the spatial and didactic units – open yet clearly identified – of the design studios. But there is another teaching that at least in the view of his contemporaries, at the start of the 1960s, was supposed to emerge with physical clarity from the School of Architecture of Yale University, bordering on provocation or even on scandal: its proud rejection of the “neutralization” of form in much of modern architecture, in favor of its “brutal” reassertion. Against the regularity, transparency and “clarity” of the International Style, the informality of Rudolph Hall presents itself as a new urban value: the three-dimensional image of a dynamic centrality, an “organized chaos” that avoids any facile correspondence, any immediate legibility.

The two schools – that of Mies and that of Rudolph – clearly represent two very different positions of a shared pursuit, that of architectural space: the large unified space of S. R. Crown Hall corresponds to one of the few synthetic points on which Mies relies for the educational program of IIT in 1944: «the structure as an architectural factor: its possibilities and limitations; space as an architectural problem; proportion as a means of architectural expression; the expression value of materials;

painting and sculpture in their relationship to architecture.» While Mies’s research on materials is well known, like his focus on proportions and his figurative background, what is striking in this project is actually the word space. The large unified void of S. R. Crown Hall as opposed to the plurality and transverse character of the spaces Rudolph deploys in many of his buildings, and particularly in the School of Architecture of Yale, where they are forcefully accentuated, also through the famous perspective section. Observing these works today, one might have doubts regarding the results of the brusquely “unitary” approach of Mies, and understand better what happened, by reaction, in smaller schools outside the main circuits, such as that of Austin, Texas. Here Colin Rowe, Robert Slutkzy and John Hejduk – the Texas Rangers – had an opportunity to reinterpret certain avant-garde themes, setting up the well known exercise on the Nine Square Grid, but above all initiating that precious refinement of thinking that attempted to recover the historical continuity of forms. It is no coincidence that the analysis of the works of the past, modern or ancient, is still one of the main characteristics of the working method of Cooper Union in New York, examined in a recent exhibition, Analysis as Design. Hejduk taught at Cooper Union from 1964 to 2000, also preparing the project for the renovation of the existing building on Cooper Square.


The model and the photographs published in the book Mask of Medusa narrate a project that takes over the building with a few meaningful gestures: the “mask” of the double skin, certain rifts opened between spaces, but above all the assertion of an educational program that is embodied by the vertical section: on the ground floor there is an urban passage, a sort of covered street that brings the city into the building; this public space is faced by the library. Connecting a usually “internal” function of the school at street level brings out the meaning of teaching, for Hejduk: «Nothing is transmissible but thought.» Continuing to think in terms of section, we can also understand the didactic role of the placement between the school of architecture and that of art of a level devoted to materials workshops and another set aside for the work of the students, without separating different majors or years. It is in this “big studio” that the idea of exchange of knowledge as a pedagogical foundation finds fullest expression.

The Faculdade de Arquitetura e Urbanismo of the University of São Paulo, Brazil, built by João Batista Vilanova Artigas from 1961 to 1969, is again organized around a “unity of space” seen and offered as an ideal model of an architecture school, in terms of layout, perception and teaching. Conceived during the wave of progressive and reformist thinking connected to the presidency of Juscelino Kubitschek,

father of the great operation of Brasilia, the project for the FAU is the expression of the intention of Vilanova Artigas to make the school a place of complete integration of all its components, while making the students inside it into a true “social body.” A fully “communist” idea of the school (or even Trotskyist), corresponding to Vilanova Artigas’ position in the ranks of the Communist Party of Brazil, a position that was to lead, under the military regime that took over the country in 1964, to his removal from teaching posts and exile in Uruguay.The character of the FAU as a “manifesto” seems evident right from its external appearance: an imposing parallelepiped of 120 x 70 m in brutally exposed reinforced concrete, supported by 14 perimeter pillars with a double-trapezium profile (which Artigas initially wanted to be painted gold) and four rows of 9 pillars each inside. But it is above all the organization of the interior space that gives the school its clearly recognizable character: starting from the fact that Vilanova Artigas programmatically excludes the use of any elements of separation or closure (partitions, doors) between the outside and the inside. The school is thus – emblematically and in practice – always open, with the added effect of causing free interchange of climate and environment. The architect (who took an active part in the curriculum planning of the FAU) associates this complete openness with fluid paths and spaces: through the sequence


of ramps placed at one of the ends, in fact, it is possible to reach all the parts of the building, visually embracing them. And while the conceptual and spatial focal point of the school is the large covered plaza faced by the two upper levels, lit by a skylight composed of a grid of truncated pyramids in reinforced concrete – a political space par excellence, which permits those belonging to the school to conduct a sort of auto-reconnaissance of their own collective identity – the spaces on the upper level are no less important, containing both traditional classrooms and an entirely open, continuous workshop space, free of interruptions.In the words of Vilanova Artigas regarding the FAU of São Paulo we can sense all the idealism and concreteness he wanted the building to convey: «This building reflects the sacred ideals of today: I have though of it as a spatial translation of democracy, in dignified spaces, without entrance doors, because I like to think of it as a temple in which all the activities are transparent.»

On many occasions, as we have seen, the designer of a school building has also played the fundamental role of preparing the institution’s educational program, at times also acting as its director. The case of the school built by Balkrishna Doshi in Ahmedabad is a good example of this. The designer had worked with Le Corbusier and Kahn for their projects in India, always focusing

on the correct introduction of the ideas of the modern in continuity with local forms. Consistent with this, the building made by Doshi for the School of Architecture of the Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology of the University of Ahmedabad interprets certain stylemes of modernity in relation to natural elements of local origin. The construction is placed on the land leaving the relationship with the landscape open, in many places, which shapes its image. The system of the classrooms is crossed by the horizontal circulation: no classroom is completely closed, so there is ongoing indoor-outdoor exchange, between serving and served spaces, as Louis Kahn would have said.

In the case of the Faculdade de Arquitectura of the University of Porto, to define the main educational task of which the set of buildings is the expression, we can turn to the words written by Álvaro Siza, creator of the project built from 1985 to 1995, regarding architectural pedagogy in general: «No idea of opposition between landscape – perception and construction of the land – and object – fragment of the land – has any place in the teaching of Architecture.» Placed on a lot in a raised position, parallel to the bank of the Douro River, the FAUP “constructs” – besides the one just mentioned – other didactic principles that are fundamental for Siza: first of all that of «putting into relation by designing.» The first case is that of the pavilion


named for Carlos Ramos (1985-86), on the eastern part of the campus, next to the old building of the rector’s offices and a long, narrow construction, previously restored by Siza, used for drafting workshops. Designing the new pavilion, Siza’s primary concern seems to have been the insertion of his building in the network of existing features: not from a formal standpoint, but in typological and topological terms. The distortions of the volume bent around an open courtyard on one side, in this sense, can be seen as “responses” to the situation of the terrain and the surrounding buildings, combined with the internal pressures of the program. The result is a simple and at the same time elaborate work of architecture, in which white plaster walls and glass walls form an irregular sequence, in a free citation of the purist language that has, however, abandoned orthogonal arrangements and unpredictably incorporates diagonal volumes and skewed clusters.This attitude of correlating distinct and distant elements is further confirmed – and in the most silently striking of ways – in the buildings that starting in 1986 constitute the school of architecture itself. Starting from the opposite end of the triangular lot of the campus, after having crossed a small entrance pavilion with an eminently symbolic meaning, one enters a slightly graded circulation axis flanked by buildings that are separated from each other yet also closely connected:

on the left, the cafeteria and the main building (in turn composed of “pieces” with different layouts and plans: the auditorium, the drafting rooms, the computer and seminar rooms, and the administrative offices in the first block, the semicircular exhibition space in the second, the library in the third); on the right, four box volumes connected by underground corridors, containing faculty offices on the ground floors, and rooms for drafting and teaching on the upper levels. Each block has similar characteristics, but resolved with different forms. In spite of the almost exclusive use of longitudinal windows, the closest reference might be the Moller and Müller houses by Adolf Loos, though here the lesson of the Viennese master takes an unexpected “turn”: asymmetrical protrusions, declining volumes, encrustations of canopies, awnings and other overhangs. The “order” of the modern seems to be on the point of breakdown, but though it is put into crisis, it resists. In the space of the library a large “knife” of light cuts longitudinally across the space, updating the excellent exempla of Asplund in Stockholm and Aalto at Viipuri. But it is above all in the open space surrounded by the buildings – a sort of plaza paved with porphyry blocks, with an oblong, irregular form – that Siza’s project fully displays its didactic nature: it is precisely in this “void,” in fact, that the FAUP encourages us to “stay,” to take place; and it is likewise that “void” that is indicated as the school’s


.30. Universitas / universities→ H.

Scharoun and B. Hermkes, Faculty of Architecture, Berlin, 1963, section © Architekturmuseum, Technisch

e Un

iver

sitä

t.

→ R.

Gutbier, C. Siegel and G. Wilhelm, Kollegiengebäude 1, Universität Stuttgart, 1956-60, section.

→ J.

van den Broek and J. Bakema, Faculty of Architecture, TU, Delft ,1956-70, interior way © TU Delft, Col

lect

ions

and

Pro

duct

ions.


→ J

. B.

Vilanova Artigas, FAU, São Paulo, 1961-69, view of the big court during a meeting of students © Rau

l Ga

rcez

© Ac

ervo

João Batista Vilanova Artigas / FAUUSP.

“true center”: a space from which to learn the eminently architectural art of composition of distinct elements, and unification of the multiple.

While the Brazilian and Portuguese buildings establish a relationship with the natural landscape, by contrast the universities built in Germany in the 1960s, especially in Stuttgart and Berlin, work on the vertical section of the urban block, developing upward. In continuity with the parallel experience of the residential “scissor” typology, these buildings are based on experimentation on vertical access spaces that widen to contain the real public space of the school, offering zones of exhibition and interaction between the various design workshops. These complex sections tend to create a close relationship, with an alternating system of slabs, also between different spaces and functions that are usually separate from one another. The building in Stuttgart develops a section in which a smaller vertical body, containing the departments, faces the two-story body of the classrooms, allowing the staircases to move between the different exhibition spaces of the levels. The building designed by Bernhard Hermkes in 1963 for the TU in Berlin is more complex: the classrooms face one side of the building or the other, achieving also in the plan that mingling of spaces to which the section alludes. The didactic character of the architectural design can be gleaned from the legend of the various

plans, from the role of the plastic arts and drafting to the theory of construction. The sharing triggered by the exhibitions and the reviews held in the communal spaces facing the staircases is consistent with the educational approach, calling for programming by year, with substantial interaction between teachers and research.

The same type of vertically developed complex section is found in the case of the building created for the TU in Delft by Van der Broek and Bakema, with a different ground-level solution featuring a series of low buildings that contain the collective functions. The ideas of the residential city and that of public spaces these two building types represent are combined in the notion of the large “street” that formed the heart of the building, but are also the theoretical synthesis of the experimentation of the designers, active in those years inside Team X and in the debates on the critique of the modern city. In 2008, after the destruction of the building by fire, and faced with the necessity of relocating the school in a nearby industrial building, the nucleus of the collective spaces was revised, and conceived like an urban street. In this sense, the two most significant interventions in the new facility, located in the spaces of an old factory faced in clinker, made forcefully explicit by a decisive change of the materials, are the conference room and a very large model workshop, placed symbolically


at the center of the building. While in the tradition of Italian architecture schools theoretical courses are taught by professors of architectural design, in the Dutch experience – comparable in this aspect to that of Spain – the separation between theory and design workshops is permitted by the importance assigned to the discipline of Composition, seen as a combination of theory and critique.The institutional character of the Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura in Madrid, built during the years of the Republic, is still underlined today by the strongly hierarchical structure of the so-called faculty units of the design courses, which gather the activities of the various professors under a single chair, sharing collective theoretical lectures. The large corridors of the school occupied by students for their activities consolidate the thinking of Francisco Sáenz de Oiza, the well-known teacher and architect who directed the school for many years: «This is the key to a good school: to prepare people, to continue to make them work on things, and in the end you know what a staircase or another element is, and you talk about it in the corridors, coming into contact with other students, with the atmosphere of the school, and a moment arrives in which you say: “this is a good building, this is Architecture, and this is not.” Then you know how to distinguish, and you can go and build things! Because the corridors teach more

than anything else. Good students come out of a good school. Do you think integral calculus can teach something? No, what teaches is that sort of everyday battle, between what one student gives to another.»

In more recent years, architecture schools seem to have entered a new phase: with the “heroic” period of the foundations having ended for some time, and also the most innovative thrust – in both educational and architectural terms – that had characterized architectural education for a large portion of the 20th century, the architecture schools – like those of other disciplines – become primary a resource, to use with caution but at the same time to exploit. Thus a building like the Jockey Club Innovation Tower, home of the School of Design and of the Jockey Club Design Institute for Social Innovation at Hong Kong Polytechnic University, designed by Zaha Hadid Architects and built from 2007 to 2014, has the clear value of a three-dimensional “calling card” – outfitted with the usual curves and counter-curves – to attract students from every part of the world; while in other cases, more than “events” in themselves, university buildings become “event generators.” As Bernard Tschumi writes regarding the École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de la Ville et des Territoires of Marne-la-Vallée (1994-99), «these structures are often condensers of the city. Through their programs, and through their


spatial qualities, they accelerate or intensify a cultural and social transformation that is already in progress.» In this sense the fulcrum of the École he designed is a vast sheltered central space conceived to host ceremonies and parties, encounters and debates, screenings and installations, but also exhibitions and serious academic congresses. In this way, the school becomes a plaza faced by the design ateliers, conveying an image of the school as «a place of communication and discussion.»

Ever more rarely, then, architecture schools choose the path of the mute example – seen as eloquent silence – to communicate their message. Among the few recent cases, there is the École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture of Nancy (1993-95) by Livio Vacchini. The choice of prefabricated parts in reinforced concrete for the infill of the facades, and in general of standardized prefabrication for the entire construction, should not be seen only in terms of economy of timing and resources: the force and authority of the building have the value of a true architectural “program.” More often, however, today’s architecture schools represent a clever “mediation” between ideals and marketing. This is the case of Milstein Hall, the addition to the College for Architecture, Art and Planning of Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, created by Rem Koolhaas and Shohei Shigematsu for OMA from 2006 to 2011. Acting as an element of

connection between two of the four existing structures of the AAP of Cornell, the new building sets out to play a strategically emblematic role: not an iconic, isolated object, to be read as a mere “image,” but a complex, programmatically “in-between” object that projecting in an overhang connects the older buildings and becomes part of a system with them.

But perhaps more than any other it is the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design of Moscow that embodies the contemporary evolution of schools of architecture. Based on an educational and architectural project coordinated by Rem Koolhaas and Reinier de Graaf for AMO/OMA starting in 2009, the Strelka takes its cue from awareness of the fact that over the last thirty years architectural education has had trouble keeping the pace that globalization and the market economy have imposed on nearly all sector of society. Its didactic program, as a result, calls for the introduction of research as the essential foundation for architectural pedagogy. Guided by the principle of “thinking and doing,” five groups of 40 students (with a stipend and lodging supplied by the school) are guided in their research by tutors with different backgrounds, from different disciplines (architects, sociologists, historians, theorists, art critics, political scientists, etc.). In the first year of its existence the school selected five themes of research, regarding questions of general


importance that at the same time are particularly urgent in Russia (design, energy, preservation, public space and “thinning”), each conducted by a tutor. Among the jobs of the tutors, they are asked to stimulate students to get in touch with specialists, academics from other institutes, directors of museums, but also people of various kinds, in Moscow or other cities in Russia, to track down materials and information on their assigned research topics. The architecture school thus tends to intertwine with reality, more than ever before. Rather than theories or books, reality becomes the “basic text” from which to learn. And it is not without pertinence that in the heart of the Strelka Institute, located in the garage of the former Krasny Oktyabr (Red October) chocolate factory on Bolotny Island, on the banks of the Moskva, there is an open public space, a concrete courtyard faced by wooden stands, like a temporary theater: a gathering place for theater, lectures, events, workshops, recreation. A place from which a school of architecture can resemble the world that surrounds it.

NoteThe perspective sections shown in the exhibition were made by the architect Caterina Marra, who recently completed her doctoral thesis on the section as a tool of interpretation of relations between spaces. We have considered sections as the most meaningful representation to grasp the complexity of architecture schools, above all in those cases where the exchange of knowledge and expertise, and the communication between faculty and students, constitute the effective foundations

of the school.


.36. Universitas / universities→ L

. Va

cchini, École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture, Nancy, 1994-95, plan and section © Studio Vacchin

i ar

chit

etti

.

→ Á

. Si

za, FAUP, Porto, 1985-95, view of the court between the buildings © Orsina Simona Pierini.


→ B

. Ts

chumi, École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de la Ville et des Territoires,

Marn

e-la

-Vallée, 1994-99, plan of the 1s

t floor © Bernard Tschumi Architects.

→ O

MA,

Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design, Moscow, 2010-13, view of the court © Sergey Le

onti

ev.

1671 1696 1776 1799 1811 1829 18371794

Académie Royale d’Architectureof Paris

Bauakademieof Berlin—Karl Friedrich Schinkel (1831-36)

Kurfürstliche Academie der Mahler, Bildhauer und Architektur-Kunst of Berlin

Accademia di Belle Arti di Brera of Milan

École Polytechnique of Paris

École Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Artsof Paris

Vereinigte Kunst, Real und Gewerbeschuleof Stuttgart—now Fakultät 1 Architektur und Stadtplanung of the Universität

Government School of Design of London—now Royal College of Art

timeline


University College of London—now The Bartlett School of Architecture

Technische Universiteitof Delft —Johannes van den Broek and Jaap Bakema(1956-70)

Wytze Patijn Braaksma en Roos Fokkema Arch. Kossman de JongMVRDV, Octatube 2012 Architecten(2008)

1841 1842 1844 1845 1847 1853 1854 1859

Escuela Especial de Arquitectura of Madrid —now Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura

Government School of Design of Glasgow—now School of ArtCharles Rennie Mackintosh (1896-1909)

Architectural Association School of Architecture London

École Polytechnique Fédéraleof Lausanne—Schnebli Ammann Menz & Flora Ruchat-Roncati (1993-2000)

The University of Melbourne Australia

Eidgenössisches Polytechnikumof Zurich —now Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule

Gottfried Semper (1858-68) Max Ziegler and Erik Lanter (1972-76)

Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art of New York City—John Hejduk(1968-74)

.39.timeline

1863 1865 1868 1871 1875 1879 1881 1884 1886

Politecnicodi Milano —Gaetano Moretti (1913-27)

School of Architecture and Planning of the Massachusetts Institute of Technologyof Cambridge Massachusetts

Pennsylvania University Philadelphia

College of Architecture of the Cornell University of Ithaca, New York—now College of Architecture, Art, and Planning

TaiK, University of Arts and Design of Helsinki—now School of ArtDesign and Architecture Aalto University

Escuela Provincial de Arquitecturaof Barcelona—now Escola TècnicaSuperior d'ArquitecturaJosep Antoni Coderch (1980-1984)

Technischen Hochschuleof Berlin—now Technische Universität

Bernhard Hermkesand Hans Scharoun (1963-68)

School of Architecture of the Columbia Universityof New York City—McKim, Mead & White (1912)

Kunstgewerbe-schuleof Düsseldorf

The University of Tokyo


The University of Tokyo

1895 1908 1916 1919 1920 1925 1926 1927

School of Architecture of the Armour Instituteof Chicago—now Illinois Instituteof TecnologyLudwig Mies van der Rohe (1950-56)

Academie van Bouwkunst Amsterdam

School of Art and Architecture of the Yale University of New Haven Connecticut—Paul Rudolph (1958-63)

School of Architecture of the Princeton UniversityNew Jersey

Staatliches Bauhausof Weimar—Henry van de Velde (1904-11)

Vkhutemasof Moscow

Bauhaus-Hochschule für Gestaltungof Dessau—Walter Gropius (1925-26)

Istituto Universitariodi Venezia

Carlo Scarpa(1985)

College of Architecture and Urban PlanningTongji University of Shanghai

École Nationale Supérieure d'Architecture et des Arts VisuelsLa CambreBruxelles

.41.timeline

1933 1934 1936 1937 1941 1948 1950 1953

BlackMountain College, Black Mountain NC, USA

Facoltà di Architetturadi Milano—Giò Ponti, Piero Portaluppi, Giordano Forti (1954-64) Vittoriano Viganò (1970-85)

Harvard Graduate School of Design of Cambridge Mass—John Andrews (1968-72)

School of Architecture of Taliesin West Scottsdale Arizona—Frank Llyod Wright(1937-39)

Escuela de Arquitectura of Universidad Central de Venezuela of Caracas—now Facultad de Arquitectura y UrbanismoCarlos Raúl Villanueva(1944-60)

Faculdade de Arquitectura e urbanismo da Universidade of São Paulo Brazil—João Batista Vilanova Artigas(1961-68)

Departmentof Architecture of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University Hong Kong—nowFacultyof Architecture

Hochsulefür Gestaltungof Ulm—Max Bill (1953-55)


1962 1967 1969 1979 1987 1995 1999 2009

School of Architecture of the Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology University of AhmedabadIndia—nowFaculty of Architecture,Balkrishna Vithaldas Doshi (1972-77)

Institute of Architecture & Urban Studies of New York City

École Nationale Supérieure d'Architecture of Paris-Belleville—Atelier Jean-Paul Philippon (2002-09)

École Nationale Supérieure d'Architectureof Nancy—Livio Vacchini(1994-95)

Faculdade de Arquitectura da Universidadeof Porto—Álvaro Siza(1985-95)

Bond University Gold Coast Australia—Arata Isozaki(1985-95) CRAB Studio(2011-14)

Accademia di Architettura of Mendrisio—Soliman & Zurkirchen Architekten (1997-2002)

École Nationale Supérieure d'Architecture de la Ville et des Territoires of Marne-la-Vallée—Bernard Tschumi (1994-1999)

Strelka Institute for Media Architecture and Design of Moscow—OMA(2010-13)

.43.timeline

Students 1300

Students incoming 160

Design studio ratio

1st year 80 st. / 1 pr. + 3 ass.

2nd year 70 st. / 1 pr. + 3 ass.

3rd year 25-40 st. / 1 pr. + 3 ass.

Master 15-50 st. / 1 pr. + 2-3 ass.

Technische universitÄt berlin→ Institut für Architektur, Fakultät VI Planen Bauen Umwelt

3.1-

Founded in 1799 by King Friedrich Wilhelm III, the Building Academy – a higher education school for the training of master builders, designed by Karl Friedrich Schinkel, with its origins dating back to 1704 – was the precursor of the contemporary Institute of Architecture of the Technical University of Berlin, founded in 1879. Despite its long tradition, the Institute’s establishment took place in the mid-twenty-first century after the merging of the Civil Engineering and Applied Geosciences and the Architecture Environment Society faculties. The Institute is located in the main campus of the University in the Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf borough of Berlin and in the building (1963-1968) designed by Bernhard Hermkes with Hans Scharoun. Its characteristic facade panels, which enable an efficient relationship between working and exterior spaces, the wide staircases, which allow articulation among its different levels, and the variable floor height, all add up to the responsiveness the building demonstrates to the academic curriculum needs. Prominent German architects such as Bruno Taut, Heinrich Tessenow, Hans Poelzig, Oswald Mathias Ungers and are a few of its alumni or former faculty members, testifying to its international educational repute. Divided into the principal poles of architecture design, urbanism, representation, history and sociology, and technology, the Institute’s actual didactic program emphasizes on the design studios, with themes that vary from design and building construction to architecture for health to constructive design and climate-adapted architecture. It is the principal educational objective of the Institute to enable students to develop their individual stance on architecture through the production of holistic solutions that consider greatly the various political, sociocultural, financial and environmental requirements of each project assignment. Concerning the Institute’s facilities, the Technical University of Berlin and the Berlin University of the Arts share a common library, inaugurated in 2004 and located in the Volkswagen building of the main University campus – unofficially known as the Volkswagen Bibliothek. Apart from the library, the members of the Institute also profit from an exhibition space (the Forum), a digital laboratory, wood and metal-working laboratories. (M.K.)


. F.

Schinkel, Bauakademie, Perspective on the Spree, 1831 © Architekturmuseum, Technische Universität B

erli

n.

→ K

. F.

Schinkel, Sammlung Architektonischer Entwürfe, Bauakademie, plan of the site and plan of the ground

flo

or o

f th

e bu

ildi

ng, 1831

.

.47.technische universitÄt berlin

→ E

duar

d Gärtner, Berlin, Schlossbrüc

ke.

→ E

duar

d Gärtner, Berlin, Bauakademie.


. F.

Schinkel, Sammlung Architektonischer Entwürfe, table of the iconological program, 1831.

.49.

→ B

ernh

ard Hermkes, plans of the 1s

t and 2n

d floors of the building, 1961 © Architekturmuseum, Technische Uni

vers

ität

Ber

lin.

→ H

ans

Scharoun and Bernhard Hermkes, Fac

ulty of Architecture, plan of the ground floor, 1962 © Architektur

muse

um,

Tech

nisc

he U

niversit

ät B

erli

n.

technische universitÄt berlin

.50. Universitas / universities→ H

ans

Scharoun and Bernhard Hermkes, Faculty of Architecture, View from South, 1963 © Architekturmuseum, T

echn

isch

e Un

iver

sitä

t Berlin

.

→ H

ans

Scharoun and Bernhard Hermkes, Faculty of Architecture, View from West, 1963 © Architekturmuseum, Te

chni

sche

Uni

vers

ität

Berlin.

.51.

→ E

xter

ior view from the South © Anja Dotter - Gesine Zeller.

→ D

etai

l of the façade © Anja Dotter - Gesine Zeller.


.52. Universitas / universities→ T

he m

ain staircase © Anja Dotter - Gesine Zeller.

.53.

→ T

he d

esign studio © Anja Dotter - Gesine Zeller.

→ E

ntra

nce hall © Giulia Setti.


Students 1900


Bachelor 241

Master 243

Academic staff 350

eth zÜrich→ Departement Architektur, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule

3.2-

Founded in Zurich in 1854, the Department of Architecture of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETH Zürich) was initially directed by the German architect and theorist Gottfried Semper, and its original state bore the title Building School. Ten years would pass before the School would relocate to the ground floor of the north and west wings of the actual ETH Zurich Hauptgebäude – a Neoclassical-style building, the erection of which was entirely based on Semper’s plans. From the former educational guidelines of Siegfried Giedion, Aldo Rossi and Werner Oechslin to current times, and the design studios of Jacques Herzog, Pierre de Meuron and Adam Caruso, the Department of Architecture has been marked by influential design- and theory-led academic discourses.In 1976, the Department of Architecture establishes its new home at the Hönggerberg Campus, located on a wooded hill at the north-west part of Zurich, and precisely in the HIL building, designed by Max Ziegler and Erik Lanter between 1972 and 1976, where its core still remains. Serving as the entrance to the Campus until recently, before two new residential buildings were erected as part of the Campus’ expansion plan, the HIL building hosts, among other spaces, the gta historical archives, an exhibition space, the Baubibliothek and the Alumni Lounge – a reference space of the academic community’s social life. The design studios spaces, however, expand across various other locations beyond the HIL building, such as a series of adjacent wooden pavilions, the ONA building at the Oerlikon Campus and the Atelier Studio in the heart of Zurich. Milica Topalovic’s explorations into the transformation of contemporary territories, Fabio Gramazio’s and Matthias Kohler’s investigations into the intersection of digital manufacturing methods and architectural production, as well as Tom Emerson’s reflections on architecture’s relationship with craftsmanship, nature and culture, represent a few of the Department’s design studios themes. The HIL building is due to major renovation in the upcoming years; it has already been paired with an additional building that will host the Robotic Fabrication Laboratory (RFL), a workshop which will enable construction and simulation experiments at full scale, hinting at the changing character and demands of architectural education. (M.K.)

.56. Universitas / universities→ G

ottf

ried Semper, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule, Zürich, section, 1858 – 68 © gta Archiv, ETH Züri

ch.

→ G

ottf

ried Semper, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule, Zürich, perspectical view © gta Archiv, ETH Züric

h.

.57.eth zürich

→ G

ottf

ried Semper, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule, Zürich, plans © gta Archiv, ETH Zürich


ottf

ried Semper, sketch of a drawing table for the ETH Zürich, © gta Archiv, ETH Zürich.

→ G

ottf

ried Semper, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule, Zürich, detail of a moulding © gta Archiv, ETH Zü

rich

.

.59.

→ M

ax Z

iegler and Erik Lanter, Department of Architecture, Hönggerberg, plans of the ground floor and 1

st flo

or o

f th

e bu

ildi

ng,

1972

-76.

eth zürich

.60. Universitas / universities→ A

eria

l view © gta Archiv, ETH Zürich.

→ E

xter

ior view © gta Archiv, ETH Zürich.

.61.

→ E

xter

ior view © gta Archiv, ETH Zürich.

→ T

he d

esign studio © Zeljko Medved.

eth zürich

Students 1100

Bachelor 850

Master 250

Students incoming

Bachelor 281

Design studio ratio

1st year 240 st. / 1 pr. + 16 ass.

2nd year 35 st. / 1 pr. + 2 ass.

3rd year 32 st. / 1 pr. + 2 ass.

Master 20 st. / 1 pr. + 2 ass.

École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne → Faculté de l’Environment Naturel, Architectural et Construit (ENAC)

3.3-

Founded in 1853, the private school École Spéciale de Lausanne was the underlying basis of the current Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne; it was converted to the technical department of the public institution Académie de Lausanne in 1869 and a few years later, in 1890, it was recognized as a university under the title of École d’Ingénieurs de l’Université de Lausanne. Bearing an international reputation the ENAC moved to the Écublens suburb of Lausanne – located less than six kilometers west from the city’s central train station at the shores of Lake Geneva – in 2002, being a late admission to the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL) new campus, which spans across fifty five hectares and is characterized, overall, by a strong focus on the engineering and technology disciplines. Since 2010, the campus boasts of an additional building: the Rolex Learning Center, designed by Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa, stands out in the campus plan with its organic voids and serves as a reference point for the students, faculty members and the wider public. Inviting one to occupy at will the gray carpet that runs along its surface, it accommodates the research and working needs of the students and serves as a pole of interest for international visitors. Beyond its exquisite library building, the campus also includes a conference center, two museums, a radio station, the Satellite bar and a cafeteria named after Swiss-born architect Le Corbusier. More precisely, the School of Architecture comprises a multitude of design laboratories that address the requirements of undergraduate and postgraduate students. Doctoral research, on topics that vary from history and theory of architecture to art and architectural expression to sustainable architecture, holds a key role in the School’s curriculum. The latter is supported by a senior faculty that consists of distinguished professors, architects and researchers, namely Bernard Cache (Digital Culture for Architectural Projects), Roberto Gargiani (Theory and History of Architecture), Franz Graf (Techniques and Preservation of Modern Architecture) and Jeffrey Huang (Media and Design), who testify for the School’s said reputation. (M.K.)

.64. Universitas / universities→ S

chne

bli Ammann Menz & Flora Ruchat-Roncati, ground floor plan, 1993-2000.

→ A

eria

l view.

.65.ecolé polytechnique fédérale de lausanne

→ E

xter

ior view © Paolo de Jesus.

→ T

he m

ain hall © Nadja Maillard.

.67.ecolé polytechnique fédérale de lausanne

→ T

he d

esign studio.

→ T

he m

ain hall.

Students 800


Bachelor 150

Master 125

Design studio ratio 20 st. / 1 pr. + 2-3 ass.

Università della Svizzera Italiana (usi) → Accademia di Architettura, Mendrisio (AAM)

3.4-

Besides two main federal polytechnic institutes – situated in Lausanne and Zurich respectively –, Switzerland incorporates also nine universities, the youngest of which is the University of Italian Switzerland, founded in 1996, holding campuses in both the cities of Lugano and Mendrisio. Among its four distinct faculties, the Academy of Architecture in Mendrisio is found. In the proximity of the mountains, the Academy is located in the wider region of Ticino, which in the 1960s had been associated with the Ticino School – an architectural group that consisted of Luigi Snozzi, Mario Botta, Aurelio Galfetti and Livio Vacchini that received an international acclaim for its urban design projects and various rationalist characters, especially after a travelling exhibition originally shown at the ETH Zürich in 1975 – members of which are still present in its educational curriculum. The Academy is currently directed by Marc-Henri Collomb – a Lausanne- and New York-trained architect, also the co-founder of Atelier Cube, who oversees its three diverse programs that span from Bachelor’s to doctoral degrees.Marked by the direction of Marianne Burkhalter and Christian Sumi, Mario Botta, Valerio Olgiati, François Charbonnet, Antonio Citterio and the group Made In, the contemporary design studios of the Academy investigate a multifaceted array of subjects, including the Rethinking Le Corbusier, Trace(s) and Music Campus in Lugano themes. The variety sought during the architectural development of the University of Lugano’s Mendrisio campus, aimed at being reflected on the students’ educational and creative paths. In this context, the spacious existing building of Palazzo Turconi, the former town hospital, which was refurbished so as to receive one part of the Academy of Architecture facilities, articulates this aim. Palazzo Canavée, designed by Amr Soliman and Patrik Zurkirchen, is the current main venue of the school. The buildings which complement the Academy’s premises are Villa Argentina, a building of neo-classical style, and the Foundation Archive of the Modern, designed by Mario Botta. (M.K.)

.70. Universitas / universities→ S

olim

an & Zurkirchen Architekten, Palazzo Canavée, ground floor plan, 1997-2002.

→ A

eria

l view of the campus.

.71.Univeristà della svizzera italiana (usi)

→ P

alaz

zo Canavée © Alberto Canepa.

→ E

xter

ior view © Michele Nastasi.

.72. Universitas / universities→ I

nter

ior view of the Atelier © Michele Nastasi.

→ T

he d

esign studio © Michele Nastasi.

.73.Univeristà della svizzera italiana (usi)

Concorso d'architettura - USI Accademia di architettura - spazi per la didatticaAMARCORDI N T E R N O . S T R U T T U R A . A T E L I E R .

!4.35

!7.25

±0.00(355.40 mslm)

Depositi

Uffici Atelier

Collegamento Teatrodell'architettura

Carico e Scarico

10 52 10

Sezione B 1:200

→ E

xhib

ition space © Michele Nastasi.

→ D

anie

l Bucher & Andreas Bründler (Basel), Amarcord project, Campus extension.

Students 3000


Design studio ratio 15-20 st. / 1 pr.

Students have an assigned studio space,

teachers move to design studios.

Delft University of Technology(tu delft) → Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment

3.5-

Founded in 1842 by King Willem II of the Netherlands, the Royal Academy for the education of civilian engineers was the predecessor of the Technical University of Delft, known as such since 1986 and recognized as an academic Institute of Technology since 1905. The seeds of its current form can be however traced back to 1864, when the Polytechnic School was founded and aimed to train and educate the prospective engineers in civil works, mining and shipbuilding – and among whom, the future architects as well. From the late 1960s until the catastrophic fire of May 2008, the Faculty occupied the Bouwkunde building designed by the Van den Broek and Bakema firm. The fire set the imperative need for the Faculty’s relocation, allowing the current students and faculty, researchers and administration members, alumni and technical staff to co-exist under the continuous, industrial metallic structure of the BK City building.Located in the Julianalaan district, and formerly occupied by chemistry students, the BK City is home to a series of design studio spaces, two main lecture spaces, a model workshop and an exhibition room – the latter being hosted in two glasshouses within the building’s structure. Signage and wall names are key to the navigation within the building, the wide open space of which has been modified to a great extent by the students themselves during the one-year conservation and refurbishment processes of the original structure. The list of renowned Dutch architects, former students of the Faculty, is long and does not limit itself to the names of Nathalie de Vries, Felix Claus, Willem-Jan Neutelings and Kees Christiaanse. Meanwhile, the line-up of visiting professors, namely Atelier Bow-Wow, James O’Callaghan and Stefan Behnisch, amounts to the reputation of the Faculty, formed by noted figures such as Max Risselada, Dick van Gameren, Tom Avermaete, Winy Maas and Peter Russell. Nurturing research on themes that range from computation and performance to green building innovation and urbanism, combining design studios with a number of minors, and promoting international exchanges, the Faculty holds a strong position in the ranking of the world’s leading architecture schools. (M.K.)

.76. Universitas / universities→ J

ohan

nes van den Broek & Jaap Bakema Architecten, TU Delft, sketches, 1965.

→ J

ohan

nes van den Broek & Jaap Bakema Architecten, TU Delft, floor plan, 1965.

.77.delft university of technology (tu delft)

→ J

ohan

nes van den Broek & Jaap Bakema Architecten, TU Delft, elevation, 1965 © TU Delft, Architectural Col

lect

ions

and

Pro

duct

ions.

→ J

ohan

nes van den Broek & Jaap Bakema Architecten, TU Delft, exterior view.

.78. Universitas / universities→ J

ohan

nes van den Broek & Jaap Bakema Architecten, TU Delft, the design studio.


→ J

ohan

nes van den Broek & Jaap Bakema Architecten, TU Delft, library.

→ J

ohan

nes van den Broek & Jaap Bakema Architecten, TU Delft, the interior street.

.80. Universitas / universities→ W

ytze

Patijn, Braaksma en Roos, Fokkema Architecten, Kossman de Jong, MVRDV, Octatube 2012 Architecten,

Desi

gn T

eam Vitra, the New School, ground floor plan, 2008.

→ A

eria

l view of the New School.


→ M

aque

tte modelmaking Workshop @ Orsina Simona Pierini.

Students 750


Academic Staff 250

15 Studio Units

Admitted women since 1918

Architectural Association (aa)→ School of Architecture, london

3.6-

Founded in London in 1847 at Lyon’s Inn hall by two students, Robert Kerr and Charles Gray, who were reacting against the conditions of architectural education in Britain in those days, the AA was officially recognized in 1890 and is the oldest independent school of architecture in the United Kingdom. Its current premises in Bedford Square – an outstanding example of Georgian architecture in the Camden borough of London – host annually approximately 750 students arriving in their majority from overseas. It was among a broader list of freshmen at the AA that the names of Rem Koolhaas, Zaha Hadid and David Chipperfield would appear, before going on to leave their marks on the contemporary architectural scene. From the Russian Constructivist and Suprematist-influenced forms of Hadid’s graduation thesis entitled Malevich’s Tektonik (1976-1977), to the ‘electric decade’, which spanned from the mid-1950s to the mid-1960s and saw the graduations of Cedric Price, Nicholas Grimshaw and Peter Cook, the historical hallmarks of the school account for its international reputation.Key moment in the school’s contemporary history, however, is the period of Alvin Boyarsky’s directorship (1971-1990), a time when its current international reputation was firmly founded and the unit system, later to be adopted by a great part of architectural schools internationally, was introduced. A place of colorful debate, but of even more radiant projects, the AA has offered students the possibility to acquire practical skills in architecture, in combination with theoretical-critical knowledge, as well as to engage with distinguished architects and tutors, namely Peter Smithson, Elia Zenghelis, Bernard Tschumi and Pier Vittorio Aureli. In recent years, the Design Research Laboratory (DRL) and the Emergent Technologies and Design (EmTech) postgraduate programs have been active in promoting experimentations with architectural form and new technologies, expressed through a series of ephemeral construction projects. Beyond its multifaceted educational activity, which expands across further initiatives, such as the Visiting and the Summer schools, the AA boasts also an exhibition gallery and a bookshop, a publication house and a print studio, a book and a journal, a series of public events and conversations, a blog and an annual birthday celebration – all identified by the distinctive AA initials. (M.K.)


roun

d floor plan.

→ 1

st f

loor plan.

.87.architectural association (AA)

→ T

he f

açades on Bedford Square.

→ T

he r

ear façade.

.88. Universitas / universities→ E

xter

ior view.

→ A

uni

t studio.

.89.architectural association (AA)

→ T

he c

afeteria.

→ T

he e

xhibition gallery.

FONDAZIONE LA TRIENNALE · 2017-12-02 · Biagio Adamo Andrea Bertin Luca Bonazza Serena Cantarelli...

Documents

Transcript of FONDAZIONE LA TRIENNALE · 2017-12-02 · Biagio Adamo Andrea Bertin Luca Bonazza Serena Cantarelli...