RALUCA STURZU SELECTED PROJECTS: AN ARCHITECTURAL PORTFOLIO 2.0
RALUCA STURZU SELECTED PROJECTS: AN ARCHITECTURAL PORTFOLIO 2.0
born 13th of September 1988 Bucharest, Romania GRADUATE
Str. Cetatea Veche nr.4, bl.39, ap.16, 041022, Bucharest, Romania +40 745174028 / skype: ralucasturzu firstname.lastname@example.org
EDUCATION Graduate studies
University of Architecture and Urbanism “Ion Mincu” (UAUIM), Bucharest, Romania, Architectural Design Section – B. Arch. + M. Arch.
Diploma project: “Urban equipment in Bucharest: a collective machinery” (architectural design tutor: conf. PhD. arch. Georgica Mitrache)
Master thesis: “Intermediate landscapes: exploring territories of interference” (dissertation tutor: lect. PhD. arch. Radu – Tudor Ponta) (Romanian version: http://issuu.com/ralucasturzu/docs/peisaje_intermediare )
École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Paris – Belleville (ENSAPB), Paris, France – Erasmus Grant, Master 1 in Architectural Design studios: 1st semester: “Architecture et paysage contemporain: deux lieux”Pierre-Louis Faloci / 2nd semester: “Architecture et territoire”- Frédéric Bonnet
National College “Mihai Viteazul”, Bucharest, Romania Baccalauréat Diploma in Mathematics and Computer Science (98.2 / 100)
sept 2012/ dec 2012
Périphériques Architectes, Paris, France / architecture activity for: The Brest Institute of Health Bio-Research Competition – Health Centre UBO, Brest, Parking, restaurant and public space at the Aix-en-Provence Campus, Social housing units, rue de Lorraine, Paris, Progress Art Gallery, Paris: www.progressgallery.com/Site/about.html / www.peripheriques-architectes.com
WORK EXPERIENCE Internships
sept 2013/ nov 2013
“A Common History of Individual Dreams” / Absorbing Modernity 1914-2014, competition entry for the 2014 Biennale di Architettura di Venezia, Romanian Pavilion in Giardini di Castello (with Flavia Maria Radu & Dragos Mihai Dordea)
sept 2013/ nov 2013
“Making Room: a Practice of the Contemporary”/ Absorbing Modernity 19142014, competition entry for the 2014 Biennale di Architettura di Venezia, Romanian Institute of Culture and Humanistic Research, Palazzo Correr (with Flavia Maria Radu & Dragos Mihai Dordea)
sept 2012/ nov 2012
The Brest Institute of Health Bio-Research Competition, Université de Bretagne Occidentale (UBO), Brest, France – with Périphériques Architectes: www.peripheriques-architectes.com/institut-brestois-de-recherche-en-bio-sant%C3%A9
“Le jardin aime la ville” – Art Installation Competition, hosted by the French Institute in Bucharest (with Flavia Maria Radu)
“Memory, context and creation” with architect Philippe Prost (ENSAPB), hosted by the French Institute in Bucharest
AutoCAD 2D & 3D, Rhinoceros, 3ds Max, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Illustrator, Artlantis, Google SketchUp, Processing, Microsoft Office Romanian – native / English – proficient / French – proficient (DALF C1) Driving licence (category B)
languages: other: PUBLICATIONS
“Guest house in Bughea de Jos” – 4 th year exercise of a contemporary insertion in the traditional Romanian coutryside landscape – featured in the Bucharest-based magazine Arhitectura no. 4 (646) / 2013, “Regeneration”: http://arhitectura-1906.ro/2013/09/pensiune-agroturistica-la-bughea-de-jos/
URBAN EQUIPMENT IN BUCHAREST:
A COLLECTIVE MACHINERY
GEORGICA MITRACHE 6th ACADEMIC YEAR
ANA-MARIA MACHEDON / DRAGOS 2013 / UAUIM / DIPLOMA PROJECT
© Google Maps 2013
OBJECTS: SCALE AND DEGREE OF POROSITY TO THE URBAN SPACE
BIG PERIPHERAL BOXES
SMALLER BOXES / GROUPS OF SMALL BOXES
PROJECTED EXPRESS WAY
POCKETS OF URBAN EQUIPMENTS
BD. IULIU MANIU
A CERTAIN POROSITY / DIAGONAL EFFECTS
STR. VALEA CASCADELOR
M 13945 sqm
18367 sqm Total: 101268 sqm
park & ride (1300 places)
international bus terminal (1 arrival / departure / hour ) national bus terminal (3-4 arrivals / departures / hour )
INTERNATIONAL BUS TERMINAL FLOOR (±0.00 M) A
NATIONAL BUS TERMINAL FLOOR (-6.00 M) M
STANDARD OFFICE FLOOR ( > +19.50 M)
ROOFTOP GARDEN FLOOR (+15.50 M)
ROOFTOP GARDEN / PANORAMA BAR
1ST TO 3RD FLOOR: PARKING GARAGE (+6.00/+12.00 M )
+ 6.00 m
OFFICE ACCESS / BUS TERMINAL ACCESS
MO U N T A I N
TUTORS: GEORGICA MITRACHE / ANA-MARIA MACHEDON / DRAGOS DORDEA / WINTER EXERCISE / 4th ACADEMIC YEAR / 2010-2011 / UAUIM / INDIVIDUAL WORK
ACCESS (+4.00 m)
ENTRANCE FLOOR (+6.00 m)
FIRST FLOOR (+4.00 m)
SECOND FLOOR (+10.30 m)
MIXED-USE: VARIOUS TYPOLOGIES
SENIA / ORLY-VILLE / ILE-DE-FRANCE / FRANCE TUTOR: FRÉDÉRIC BONNET / ARCHITECTURE & TERRITORY STUDIO / 5th ACADEMIC YEAR / 2011-2012 / ENSA PARIS-BELLEVILLE / FIRST PHASE: URBAN STRATEGY, SITE & PROGRAM DEFINITION (WITH RAYBUN FUNAKI & YUTA AWAYA) / SECOND PHASE: ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPT & DETAIL / INDIVIDUAL WORK
A : Raybun
C : Raluca B
B : Yuta
40% 1/ maximum building density = 40%
GENERAL RULES AND SITE PROGRAMMING
2/ green screen against the logistic area
3/ continuous interior garden + infiltration
A-A / FIRST FLOOR
B-B / FIRST FLOOR
A-B / FIRST FLOOR
A-A / GROUND FLOOR
B-B / GROUND FLOOR
A-B / GROUND FLOOR
A-A / THIRD FLOOR
B-B / THIRD FLOOR
A-B / THIRD FLOOR
A-A / SECOND FLOOR
B-B / SECOND FLOOR
A-B / SECOND FLOOR
GEORGICA MITRACHE / 4th ACADEMIC YEAR
ANA-MARIA MACHEDON / DRAGOS / 2010-2011 / UAUIM / INDIVIDUAL WORK
UNDERGORUND FLOOR (-9.20 m)
INTERMEDIATE FLOOR (-4.50 m)
FIRST FLOOR (+5.00 m)
TUTOR: PIERRE-LOUIS FALOCI / ARCHITECTURE & CONTEMPORARY LANDSCAPE / 5th ACADEMIC YEAR / 2011-2012 / ENSA PARIS-BELLEVILLE / FIRST PHASE: FOUR CULTURAL EQUIPMENTS ON A BUILT PATH INTO THE FOREST (WITH WENJING LEI & OLIVIA BERTRAND) / SECOND PHASE: ARCHITECTURAL OBJECT / INDIVIDUAL WORK
FIRST FLOOR (+5.50 m)
SECOND FLOOR (+11.00 m)
THIRD FLOOR (+21.25 m)
FOURTH FLOOR (+27.75 m)
IACOB FELIX STREET / BUCHAREST / ROMANIA TUTORS: EMIL BARBU POPESCU / ANDREI SERBESCU / STEFAN SIMION / 3rd ACADEMIC YEAR / 2009-2010 / UAUIM / FIRST PHASE: URBAN CONCEPT (WITH CARMEN PETREA) / SECOND PHASE: HOUSING UNIT DETAIL / INDIVIDUAL WORK
SECOND FLOOR (+6.80 m)
THIRD FLOOR (+10.30 m)
FIRST FLOOR (+3.40 m)
BIENNALE DI ARCHITETTURA DI VENEZIA
VENICE / ITALY / ABSORBING MODERNITY: 1914-2014 /
FIRST ENTRY: A COMMON HISTORY OF INDIVIDUAL DREAMS FOR THE ROMANIAN NATIONAL PAVILION IN GIARDINI DI CASTELLO / SECOND ENTRY: MAKING ROOM: A PRACTICE OF THE CONTEMPORARY FOR THE ROMANIAN CULTURAL INSTITUTE IN VENICE / BOTH WITH FLAVIA MARIA RADU & DRAGOS DORDEA / 2013 / COMPETITION
A COMMON HISTORY OF INDIVIDUAL DREAMS / ROMANIAN PAVILION IN GIARDINI DI CASTELLO
1914 Constantin Brancusi New York Exhibition foto: Man Ray
1922 - 1932 Contimporanul (The contemporary)
Old house, Curtea de Arges 1914 Zaharia Leon villa Toma T. Socolescu
1939-1945 World War Two
1931 City Lights Charlie Chaplin
1926 Hermann Iancu building Marcel Iancu
1930 Ion Miclescu villa Horia Creanga
1929 Mar Kisa villa project Leonida Plamadeala
1935 House Constantiniu Henrietta Delavrancea Gibory
1952-1953 Individual Housing 3rd year stud. Ninchevici 1945 House in Mangalia E. prof. Octav Doicescu 1956 Haralamb Georgescu Competition for single family urban houses 1st prize Radu Patrulius, Gh. Rosetti, M. Enescu
1957 Sputnik 1
1957 New House In Runcu
1977 Experimental solar house, INCERC 1970, Brasov Mircea Kassargian
1989 AD competition A dwelling for today entry: Ioan Andreescu Vlad Gaivoronschi Adrian Ionasiu
1998-2001 La Mesteceni 2000 Herczeg house Alexandru Beldiman Radu Mihailescu
“A Common History of Individual Dreams” offers a fragmented view on the continuity of time, sequences to be perceived separately. The exhibition aims to avoid the temporal linearity – history read from a chronological point of view, like pages in a history book – through the non-linearity of its layout, reminding of the modern fragmentary figure that overrules the classical figure of continuity. Still, the layout does not abolish the continuity of the pavilion’s space, nor the possibility of a chronological walk through the ‘rooms’ of history: what the layout does is to let each visitor have an individual read of history.
2000 1989 Revolution
1983 People’s House
1958 4 apartment villas, Eforie N. Stopler
The individual house represents the traditional urban way of living in Romania, a major architectural programme that under no circumstances ceased to be planned and built. The private dwelling is the most sensitive programme, quickly reacting to changes in politics or various aspects of society, including fashion or art; it holds the traces of past models and at the same time it shows the features of novelty. Moreover, the private house represents the opportunity to become visible for both the inhabitant and the architect and thus the coming into being of the individual dream.
In this context, the current exhibition opposes to the thickness of history the frail but resilient individual dream, a single thread followed through the dense and complicated events of the past hundred years. The object of this dream is the private house, considered as the appropriate space for an individual, a shelter, an exclusive place. At the same time, the private house often represents the modern architect’s manifesto, being the favourite means of expressing a particular view on architecture, the most permissive one, since it escapes the pressure of the official code. Thus, the small, private history of the individual dwelling can point out more clearly the subtle changes that architecture underwent throughout the century.
As the history of the last hundred years unfolds, dissolving at first the multinational empires into national identities and then the national identities into a global entity, the individuals are permanently considered together, as a block, a group to operate upon. There is an essential tension between the individual and the community, between individuals and their common history. Therefore, the modern discovery of intimacy and the praise of subjectivity can be seen as ways of empowering the individual to resist to the alienating force of history.
Modernity is a process of individuation. Hence, “A Common History of Individual Dreams” focuses on the individual as essential modern creation and intends to reveal history as framework for individual ideals. Indeed, the modern times and more particularly the last century of our common history is made of individuals and major events caused by the will and power of individuals; one glance at our modern past and figures pop out, powerful figures, strongly featured. Modernity is not an anonymous story.
2001 WTC terrorist attack
2002 Pestera house Dorin Stefan
2002-2005 House Radu Teaca
2009 House in Carpinis Graphic Studio
2011 House in Voluntari Florian Stanciu
1983 Al Swani villa, Libya Gabriel Tureanu Viorel Trocan M. Alexandru
+ 2.00 + 1.50
CROSS SECTION A - A’
+/- 0.00 - 0.45
1914 - 1926 Eclectic national expression The national dream being fulfilled by the 1918 Great Union, on the architectural level the urban dwellings tend to exercise a plethora of styles in the search for an individual expression. On the other hand, it is obvious that the rural, traditional architecture arrives to a point of classical beauty and integrity.
1926 - 1930 Avant-garde
1930 - 1940 The glorious ‘30s
1940 - 1948 Uncertain ground
1948 - 1957 Social realism ?
A pure modern esthetic arrives in Romania through German influence, Marcel Iancu being one of the forerunners of this movement. “Contimporanul” (“The Contemporary”) magazine promotes the new modern art and lifestyle soon after the end of the WWI, while the first modernist buildings are built in the private housing sphere.
The 1930s state the modern style as a main current in architecture. While the public buildings still follow a neo-Romanian style, the private investments share the ideas of a necessary modern architecture. A series of individual villas - with plans oscillating between rationalist and traditional spaces and with clearly modern exteriors - creates a strong identity for the Romanian modernism. The modern mutations make their way into the traditional, rural areas with the opening of The National Village Museum in 1936.
The beginning of WWII casts a shadow on the private building. The Modern Movement evolves and remains the most important reference in architecture. This interval lets the modern architects reflect on their own themes. An example for this personal reflection it is a private house in Mangalia designed by Haralamb Georgescu, just after the war, in 1945. Many architects choose exile, exporting for the first time the Romanian modernism.
1948 begins with the urge of setting in the communist regime of Soviet influence; thus, the official style is diverted from modernism to social realism. The single family house is conceived as double house, classical in ornamentation while functionalist in layout. Meanwhile, in the villages, new available materials produce mutations in the typology of the traditional house.
1968 - 1977 1957 - 1968 Back to international Innuendo style Maybe the launch of In may 1968, the Sputnik 1 would be authorities adopt the enough to mark a new laws which allow the era, one of modern development of private technologies conquer- individual houses. A ing new territories, newly formed clientele farther out in space; will build in the moreover, on a political following years a level, the discourse of series of interesting Nikita Hrusciov one individual houses, still year earlier had an unknown to the public. impact on redirecting In the same time, there the architecture are being held some towards an internation- competitions on al esthetics, following individual houses or the urge for more weekend houses. In economic building. the meantime, in the The architecture in rural areas the type Romania turns also to project is replaced by a kind of international the directive project. style.
1977 - 1989 Delirious regime
1989 - 2000 2000 - 2009 Transitory conscience Misleading dream
The individual housing is almost banned and the beginning of the works for the House of the people in 1979 state that there can be only one house, the Ceausescu couple’s coming into being of an individual private dream of domination. In the same time, a series of design collectives work for individual housing in North African and Middle Eastern countries and a small part of the architects try to evade by desiging for international competitions, thus exporting again the modern Romanian experience.
1989 ends with the overthrow of the communist regime as in all Central and Eastern Europe. The architecture in those years is following an uncertain path between the contemporary Western architecture and the rediscovery of interbelic modernism. The albums “A home for everyone” transform the old directive project catalogues into ready made projects for fulfilling instantly one’s dream of private life.
2009 - 2014 Seeking ways out
In architecture it is the moment when foreign investments become substantial. An impressive melange of all styles of rationalfunctional plan individual houses are being built on the outskirts of towns, following the dream of escaping the polluted city for the idyllic countryside life, often a place not quite urban, not quite rural, lacking the qualities of each and caught in the dullness of the in-between.
The financial crisis in 2009 marks the begining of new solutions within the framework of the first modern – economy of means, simplicity, esthetics. New solutions for dense, urban individual houses appear and a higher sense of awareness for sustainability is being shown. The tendencies are on one hand global in the research of a contemporary lifestyle; on the other hand, local communities restate the need for traditional values.
week 17 week 18
week 24 +1 day
major event repetitive manifestos
1st Level continuous space modernity yellow as unifiyng colour floor seating objects
CROSS SECTION C - Câ€™
Wooden beam 10x50cm
The first level is the ground level, painted in yellow, consisting of yellow seating objects spread throughout the pavilion; the seats are places where one discovers the continuity of space be low the beam and where one can rest, read or watch the video projections.
CROSS SECTION B - Bâ€™
2nd Level enclosure fragments of time framework beams content
3rd Level view from above understanding of the framework pulpits manifesto
The second level is that of the standing personâ€™s sight, the regular stance for reading the information displayed on the beam; it is the only level that offers a fragmented vision of the pavilionâ€™s space, in analogy to the fragments of history.
The third level is the pulpitsâ€™ one, from the height of which a view from above is ensured, one that reveals for the first time the framework as such; the pulpits are also places of affluence, where one can give lectures to the audience or simply have oneself photographed.
MAKING ROOM: A PRACTICE OF THE CONTEMPORARY / ROMANIAN CULTURAL INSTITUTE IN VENICE
A PRACTICE OF THE CONTEMPORARY
operated into the continuity of time, marking the abrupt passage from a time forever past to a present of novelty, the contemporary. The modern times, while actually resulting out of a complex process, are often seen as radical change, connected to events of massive impact, such as the break of WWI. In the aftermath of these powerful events, the urge to start anew pushes aside the past, in a state of suspension that makes room only for things to come, new and purged of the weight of history.
Furthermore, modernity relies on the idea of progress, stating the positive belief that the new is necessarily better than the old. Hence, the modern individual is permanently confronted to a present time when one has to prove oneself better than the day before and to adjust to the dynamics of change to the extent of anticipating it. In a lecture on contemporaneity, Giorgio Agamben is citing Nietzsche in order to defrom present time, to be already further gone in the future. â€œMaking Room: a Practice of the Contemporaryâ€? intends to reveal this obsessive pursuit of novelty, a constant throughout modern history.
The objects Furniture items from different periods of time are placed along the walls, pushed away from the centre of the space and painted in black. There are 20 old furniture items: two chairs, a stool, five armchairs, one couch, two hangers, two coffee tables, two floor lamps, a cabinet, a library, a vanity, an old tv set and a lounge. The number and the identity of the items may change depending on the findings.
SECTIUNE A-A’ SCARA 1/50
The veil A plastic foil will cover the furniture items. The foil is fixed at the joint between the walls and the ceiling. The foil falls down and is fixed under the furniture objects at the lower end. The table The new, the contemporary that has just arrived is shown by a sharp, white table with model-like objects upon. The display items are models, books, photographs.
SECTIUNE B-B’ SCARA 1/50
“PERLA MARII” RESTAURANT
Cezar Lazarescu Eforie Nord 1958-1959 “HERCZEG” RESIDENCE Radu Mihailescu Timisoara 1990 Radu Mihailescu reveals a fragmented composition, a personal and sensitive postmodernist approach.
BUCHAREST’S CENTRAL AREA
Bucharest 1980-1989 The destructions caused by the earthquake of 1977 created the opportunity to build a new civic centre with a massive impact on the historical area, altering the general image of the city.
The modernization of the Black Sea coast granted to the architect the freedom to state his own architectural expression, escaping the official code and thus generating quality modernist buildings.
“ C AT E L U ” NEIGHBORHOOD
Tiberiu Niga Bucharest 1954-1956 Conceived as an experimental neighbourhood, the project juxtaposes various minimal housing units in order to create space sequences that remind of the traditional dwelling structures.
I. C. BRATIANU BOULEVARD Bucharest 1937
The current exhibition presents ten isolated moments of the last hundred years which may be regarded as momentary embodiments of the contemporary, ten turning points in the Romanian architectural history. The selection shows how Romanian architecture was marked by expressions of personal experiments, but also by grim political events, that massively operated into the city’s appearance, without necessarily representing progress: the contemporary is not only about perceiving the lights, but also about perceiving the darkness of time. The items of novelty are displayed on a white table, each and every one of them moulding the surface with its own particular figure. The appearance of the table is sharp, almost abstract and bright, representing the novelty that took place and blurred away the past. As for the latter, it is represented by old furniture painted in black, pushed randomly against the walls and covered with a translucent veil, as in a state of suspension. Thus, the history is regarded as a process of accumulation, a crystallized body, always present, a permanent witness at the birth of novelty.
The street fronts of the boulevard previously cut (1853 – 1869) into the old fabric were designed by some of the most influential figures in modern architecture at the time (Horia Creanga, G.M. Cantacuzino, Arghir Culina, State Balosin, Duiliu Marcu, Rudolph Fraenkel). ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH Hans Fackelmann Orsova 1970-1976 During the communist regime, the Catholic church exalts the idea of structure as such, consisting of three monolithic volumes lacking in ornaments.
THE STATE CIRCUS Nicolae Porumbescu Constantin Rulea Bucharest 1960 “CONSTANTINIU” RESIDENCE Henrieta Delavrancea Gibory Balchik 1935
In a period of relative freedom, the architectural quest for a modern language, unlike more radical views, is searching for functional and local identity.
Henrieta Delavrancea Gibory combines modernist ideas with traditional cultural elements of Mediterranean architecture, making use of local materials and techniques.
“POLDI CHAPIER” VILLA
Marcel Iancu Bucharest 1929 Marcel Iancu was the initiator of the architectural and artistic avantgardes in Romania, establishing a connection with the principles of Modern Movement through his practice and theoretical work.
CEMETERY CHAPEL Florian Stanciu, Iulia Stanciu Chiajna 1998 Florian Stanciu operates a modern interpretation of the conservative Orthodox space, considering it as an essential enclosure receiving light from above.
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
© RALUCA STURZU 2014