Issuu on Google+


Introduction

“To

context

is

historically

opposed

determined

the

idea

existence,

of the

Monument. monument

Beyond

has

a

its

reality

that can be subjected to analysis. Moreover, we can design a „monument‟.”

1

In the most convenient (or modernist) sense, monument is a statue or other structure built to commemorate some important person or event. But what is a notion of monument in a contemporary city and its urban system? Aldo Rossi believes, that a city must be studied and valued as something constructed over time; of particular interest are urban artifacts that withstand the passage of time. City remembers its past and exposes that memory through monuments, that is, monuments give a structure to the city.2 In this essay, the dynamic socio-political nature of the city is positioned against the misleading notion of static and symbolic point - a monument. Rossi‟s definition of monuments, as symbols of collective will and fixed points in urban dynamics, is explored, and challenged by Andrea Branzi‟s hypothesis that monuments are not fixed in time, space or function, rather they are considered to be the urban dynamics, and not a static symbol. The argument put forward is that a monument is a territorial entity with enzymatic

and

auratic

properties.

Benjamin‟s

concept

of

aura

allows

a

monument, at any given point in time, to simultaneously activate different territories around it, or be activated and catalyse the synthesis of parts of the city. The direct link between an urban artefact, a monument, a territory

and

cadastral

city

politics

is

explored

through

the

common

qualities of these notions in a time-line of today‟s city. In the case study of Olbia, Sardinia, the project Aurascapes intends to test whether monuments are territorial and spatial, whether monuments have enzymatic

properties

and

can

generate or

be

generated by

aura.

A

new

concept of enzymatic monument is introduced in the essay to help explore the possibility of a new urban design methodology. An enzymatic monument is defined more as a process in time and space, rather than an architectural

1

Aldo Rossi, The Architecture of the City ( Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1982) (p. 126). 2

Ibid.


typology drawing the line between the monumental architecture and enzymatic monuments (or enzymatic architecture). Furthermore,

a

new

urban

model

of

enzymatic

monuments

is

presented,

creating enzymatic architecture and connecting the seemingly separate parts of the city into a system that has no functional or territorial boundaries. This new urban model can raise the awareness of the territorial politics and history, but does not depend on historical model of a city. Applying the

concept

of

enzymatic

territory

and

enzymatic

observation of three case studies in Olbia is presented.

Picture 2. ArchiZoom , „No-Stop Cityâ€&#x; , 1970-1972

monument,

a

short


Monument and Contemporary Monument

“Word Monument directly from Latin monumentum means "a monument, memorial

structure,

statue;

votive

offering;

tomb;

memorial

record" or literally "something that reminds," from monere "to remind, warn".

3

The monuments and their relation to the city and its context is the first step exploring the concept of monumental architecture. Society‟s demand to have monuments is inevitable 4 : monuments are symbols, built and left for the future generations to learn about the ideals of the past. There are always two sides to a monument: (1) the aesthetic context of the particular time and (2) the socio-political history. Although the concept of a monument has gone through a radical change in the 21st century, the willingness to preserve a moment of the past is still there. A critical approach is brought upon a monument by a new generation of artists, but that doesn‟t mean that the past has changed its meaning or the need for monuments is gone altogether. Instead monument has become a site of a cultural conflict instead of a symbol of national pride and triumph of the state. „Away with the monuments,‟ Nietzsche condemns the demand for greatness to be everlasting. He describes the need of monuments as a process of the most important

moments

of

the

past

forming

a

path

through

greatness, providing him with the belief in humanity.

3

'www.dictionary.com' [accessed 22 July 2013]

time

for

man‟s

5

<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/monument>

4

Critical Terms for Art History, ed. by Robert S. Nelson and Richard Shiff, 2nd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010) (p. 234). 5

F. W. Nietzsche, The Use and Abuse of History (New York: Cosimo, Inc, 2006) (p. 13).


More so, Mumford criticises monuments through their inability to survive the fall of symbolic meanings in current times when the universal value system has changed so dramatically. 6 The content of a monument depends on historical and aesthetical background of the society in that particular time. Thus, the time factor forbids the meaning of a monument from becoming everlasting. A modernist monument is a self-referring historical base. But what if the post-modernist monument is able to go beyond self-reference and become an abstract, a sign with no base, a gesture?7

Picture 3. Arhizoom. A lighting grave room.

Political memory, public art and the worldwide crisis of capital, they all reflect in monuments. Mumford once said, that „If it is a monument it is not modern, and if it is modern, it cannot be a monument.‟ the 21

st

century, the triumphant 19

conceptual

installations.

In

„The

th

8

Evidently, in

century monuments are replaced by

Nine

Points

of

New

Monumentality‟,

monuments, besides the features they already possess, are presented with critique over their inability to adapt to modern times and become powerful accents in the urban context. Ironic and ambivalent towards heroism or nationalism, challenged with multiple meanings and disbelief, monuments are on the verge of resisting their own existence; the need to create the illusion of common ideals or public memories is still alive. The change in

6

Lewis Mumford, The Culture of Cities (London: Martin Secker and Warburg Ltd., 1938) (p. 236). 7

Critical Terms for Art History, ed. by Robert S. Nelson and Richard Shiff, 2nd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010) (p. 237). 8

Mumford, (p. 434).


form or multiplicity in function or medium is not stopping the government‟s need to establish monuments and impose the bureaucratic apparatus. „Monuments are…only possible in periods in which a unifying consciousness and unifying culture exist‟.

9

Unlike the modernist era, the post-modernist society welcomes back the monuments. The more multi-cultural and heterogeneous the society becomes, the more it is longing for unification of these parts through some common grounds. A post-modernist monument is able to register this multiplicity and

number

of

competing

social

memories,

instead

of

representing

some

common ideals. The monument works more like an architectural apparatus to join these different cultural backgrounds, than a symbol of one universal ideal. Halbwachs argues that the state is therefore trying to create shared ideals to unify the society with a particular national identity.10

Anti-Monuments

Monuments are still a big challenge for today‟s architects. In today‟s society the need for monuments is being reborn. But the term monument has so much negative meaning concealed within “it almost evokes its antithesis without spelling it out as anti-monument.”11 Adolf Loos once said: “Only a very small part of architecture belongs to art: the tomb and the monument. Everything else that fulfils a function is to be excluded from the domain of art.” 12 Loos‟s idea implies that monument is something opposite to an „ordinary‟ building. What does a monument become then? Doesn‟t differentiating something as an „ordinary‟ , bring us straight to the anti-monument? According to Richard MacCormac there are two different ways monuments are perceived: they are either imposing or suggesting. The first ones being individual dwellings, for example, Walter Gropius's „Monument to the March Dead‟ or Ludwig Mies van der Rohe‟s „Memorial to Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht‟,

and

the

second

ones

being

like

Giedion‟s

description

of

9

Architectural Culture, 1943-68 (Readers in 20th Century Thought), ed. by Joan Ockman ([n.p]: Rizzoli International Publications, 1993) (p. 29). 10

Critical Terms for Art History, ed. by Robert S. Nelson and Richard Shiff, 2nd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010) (p. 237). 11

R. MacCormac, 'Monument: Antimonument', Architecture Review, 212 (2002),

89-97. 12

G. Baird, The Space of Appearance (London: MIT Press, 2003) (p. 130).


monumentality, like a city with no isolated buildings, but one connected urban dynamic.

13

Traditional monuments occupy space to impose limits on interpretation and interaction, whereas something imperfect and open to appropriations is the anti-monument. That is why the traditional view of a monument is an image of a structure in a city square without any connection to its surroundings, but a strong moral slogan. Braking or changing the connection between the collective

memory

and

the

form

of

the

monument,

brings

out

the

anti-

monument. The anti-monument is evoked through the realisation that public monuments are temporary. A perfect example of monument's temporality is the communist statues that have been removed from their pedestals after 1989 and brought back to life in specialised areas, like Grutas Park, Lithuania or Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow, just to show how provisional they were. With no strong role in propaganda and no high artistic value, these monuments were condemned to inevitable temporality. Hence the monument of today could embrace this fragile time factor, instead of fighting it and becoming irrelevant and even invite viewer to create an anti-monument.

13

Architectural Culture, ed. by Joan Ockman (p. 29).


Picture 4. ArchiZoom, "No-stop city", 1970

Context Unlike Mumford, who was convinced that a role of the monument is to make an impression on people, 14 the notion of context in monument comes firstly from a particularly local urban fabric: the existence of traditions and vernacular conditions. The City Beautiful movement demonstrated Mumfordâ&#x20AC;&#x;s views in the plans for Chicago Civic Centre, with imposing monumental buildings, that were to heighten the sense of pride in people and mask the overtly bad urban life conditions.15

14

Lewis Mumford, The City in History (London: Cox & Wyman Ltd., 1961).

15

Ibid., (p. 386).


“Although architects cannot make vernacular structures one can attempt to recreate the processes through which the vernacular emerges in each project. In the place of invention, rhetoric and signification one can embrace convention, awkwardness and repetition. presence

In

that

this comes

way

buildings

through

can

achieve

associative

memory

an and

auratic direct

experience.”16 For monument to be permanently functional in contemporary city and not to lose its meaning, it has to invoke the surrounding context. When calling a monument vernacular the emphasis is placed not on creation of a structure with

traditional

qualities,

but

the

opposite:

embedding

a

vernacular

condition into this monument. Even though Rossi‟s „Architecture of the city‟ presents the notion that to respond to or to create in context is different to the idea of building a Monument, 17 monuments still need to adapt to changes through society's ideals. If a modernist monument is attached to a place, the contemporary city has to have a monument attached to a space: the ever changing condition of everyday life. In such a way, a monument can become a political tool for the society switching the side from its imposing nature as a „traditional‟ monument to a contemporary one . This makes an interesting case for a notion of monument on the urban scale, because the small (body) scale feeling

of

a

city

vanished

when

imposing monumental structures.

18

medieval

cities

gradually

grew

into

After all, a monument has always been

excluded from the urban fabric because of its nature to exclude itself or impose certain ideas. Rem

Koolhaas

in

„Generic

City‟

proposes

that

the

city

has

to

have

a

meaningful context, a structure that is more of an urban fabric, not a static grid.

He also introduces the idea of decentralising the planning of

the city, to open it for alternatives and meet more specific needs of city‟s inhabitants. The city has to change constantly, without constraints, just like the inhabitants of the city come and go.

16

19

A. Caruso, 'The Feeling of Things', A+T ediciones, 1999, 48-51 (p. 51).

17

Aldo Rossi, The Architecture of the City ( Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1982) (p. 126). 18

N. Schoenauer, 6000 Years of Housing Vol. III: The Occidental Urban House (Madison: Garland Pub., 1981) (p. 141). 19

Rem Koolhaas, Delirious New York: a retroactive manifesto for Manhattan (New York: Monacelli Press, 1994) (p. 1248).


Nevertheless, a monument can create a big opposition to context, even if its existence is determined by historic or political situation of that time, even if the cultural or moral remark is right. While observing the stereotypical approach to a monument and a quite negative image of it, the question arises, of how to embody everything around in this monument, while the surrounding space is always in constant change. Especially, in today‟s city,

cultural

values

are

quick

to

change,

whereas

monuments

remain

unmoved, attached to the same place. If a monument inhabits fixed surroundings, but the inhabitants and their ideologies are constantly changing, what happens when monument‟s ability to oppose

or

suggest

is

suspended?

Does

the

contemporary

city

require

a

monument with a constant change in its contents, according to the relevance to the political, cultural and administrative aspects of the city? How does a constant form contains the ever-changing contents, or does it? Rossi suggests that the concept of a monument itself is a problem: the monument

is

supposed

to

be

a

symbol, which

embodies

and

projects

the

meaning of the city. This suggests that if one perceives the city as a space, a monument needs to be a part of that space. Monuments shouldn‟t be considered as statues suspended over pedestals or monumental memorials. It doesn‟t take the concept far away from the fact that a monument still carries some sort of idea or ideal within, but now that monument is a space and experience in the city, and not just a static point. A monument, as a cultural space, needs to be interactive and dynamic. Koolhas is the one to propose the experience of „moments‟ in the city.

20

The concept of a monument is the medium of embodying these moments: not static in space and fluid in meaning. The fluidity is a value of the urban context 21 , therefore the connection between the place and the inhabitant of the city is needed. Monument is to become the link in the urban fabric creating a fluid contemporary city. The design of a monument cannot remain unaffected by the urban context and the urban context must embrace the monument. The design process is aware of connecting and fracturing the space in the city, not with symbolic form, but rather a series of spaces, series of experiences.22 This brings us back to the „traditional‟ or modernist monument that finds itself in a grid of today‟s city context, which is partitioned according to

20

Rem Koolhaas, Delirious New York: a retroactive manifesto for Manhattan (New York: Monacelli Press, 1994). 21

Spiro Kostof, The Architect: chapters in the history of the profession (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000). 22

Ibid.


work patterns of the inhabitants, the purpose of the area. For instance, throughout

the

week

the

fluidity

of

the

city

changes

dramatically:

industrial areas are left empty over the weekends, while sleeping towns lie abandoned during the week. The city has become fragmented and there is nothing connecting it together. But if it was dominated by monuments, they could serve as connections between these fragments, binding them into one inseparable urban system.

Counter-Monuments and Socio-Politics

“to

propose

that

monuments

might

be

moved

from

the

realm

of

figurative sculpture to the art of space, of architecture, as the most perfected laboratory for an instrumental monumentality”23 Gregor Paulsson thought monumentality to be inconsistent with democratic society, 24 perfect example being countries in former Soviet Union and its Eastern European Satellites with Lenin‟s Statues in every square of the city, used to impose the regime‟s political views. The collective memory of the socio-political events of years of oppression is casting a long shadow over

the

concept

of

a

monument.

Instead

of

redefining

monumentality,

Paulsson proposed its antonym to be intimacy and dismisses the monument.25 Nevertheless, “Nine Points for New Monumentality” establishes the necessity of

monuments

as

a

human

need

for

symbols

of

the

society.

Pseudo-

monumentality was possible on urban scale, through creation of collective spaces and functioning as an apparatus of the expression of collective memory. Giedion proposes monuments to be collaborations between various forms of art, with no artificial boundaries enforced.

26

Monuments today can‟t be separated from social life; monuments become a base of reflecting upon the society, history and the collective memory. These counter-monuments are able to use the temporality of human nature, and change in time instead of becoming static points. Memory, challenged by

23

R. MacCormac, 'Monument: Antimonument', Architecture Review, 212 (2002),

89-97. 24

Patrick Amsellem, Remembering the Past, Constructing the Future. The Memorial to the Deportation in Paris and Experimental Commemoration After the Second World War (New York: ProQuest, 2007) (p. 192). 25

Ibid.,(p. 193).

26

Jeremy Melvin, 'Monument: antimonument.', The Architectural Review, 202.


historic time, brings post-modern monuments into being. 27 Monumentality is not something measured by size, but something that can be defined by its relation to the society. There has to be a well-defined relationship to a person other than gigantic proportions at work.

Monumental architecture and urban artifacts

Monumentality

is

only

possible

in

the

relevant

periods;

otherwise

it

becomes “pseudmonumentality”: a form with no meaning. But is the emergence of

„pseudomonuments‟

28

a

sign

of

a

lack

of

common

ideals

in

today‟s

society? What we call „monumental architecture‟ is an expression of political power, through expensive materials, works of art and “sacred adjuncts, great lions and bulls and eagles, with whose mighty virtue the head of state identifies his own frailer abilities.”29 Rossi in his “The Architecture and the City” is exploring the relation between the administrational or rational process of urban design and the value

of

the

place,

the

locus.

Architecture

is

balancing

between

the

interactions of public and private, an individual and the city; seeking order in the city composed of environments.

many individual dwellings, many specific

The theory of urban artifacts focuses on singular urban

artifacts, exploring their individuality and particularities. According to Rossi, urban artifact (it. Fatto urbano, fr. Faite urbaine) is not just a physical

point

in

the

city,

but

it

has

all

historical,

geographical

information attached to it; it is an expression of architecture interacting with the situation in the city. 30 Urban artifacts have a permanent form due to its relation to the history or time of the city, but its function can change or even be lost. The most important urban artifacts for Rossi are housing and monuments. 31 Housing

represents

the

dynamics

of

life

in

the

city.

Changes

in

architecture of buildings, in types of housing, in the land, where those

27

Critical Terms for Art History, ed. by Robert S. Nelson and Richard Shiff, 2nd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010). 28

Patrick Amsellem, Remembering the Past, Constructing the Future. The Memorial to the Deportation in Paris and Experimental Commemoration After the Second World War, (p. 192). 29

Lawrence J. Vale, Architecture, Power, and National Identity (London: Yale University Press, 1992) (p. 13). 30

Aldo Rossi, The Architecture of the City ( Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1982) (p. 22). 31

Ibid, (p. 22).


houses stand, become signs of everyday life in the city and the collective memory. These are followed by urban monuments that are primary elements acting as fixed points in the urban dynamics. Urban monuments have the quality of permanence due to their ability to store the uneasy role of an individual in what is destiny of the collective.32 Rossi, therefore, describes the city as a dual entity with an ever-growing man-made structure and urban artifacts with a rich history. Therefore urban artifacts, approached individually, produce an image of the totality of the city.

â&#x20AC;&#x17E;Persistence

in

an

urban

artefact

often

causes

it

to

become

identified as a monument, and that a monument persists in the city both symbolically

and

physically.â&#x20AC;&#x;

33

Therefore,

urban

artefactâ&#x20AC;&#x;s

ability

to

contain the totality of the city: the history, the locus, identifies it as a monument. No part of a city can be identified as an urban artefact if it has

only

the

qualities

prescribed

to

it

by

the

regulations

or

administrative planning of that particular time. Investigating one or several urban artifacts as variables would give us an image of the whole city, since the development of the city is dependent on the relations between these parts. The question is what is the difference between an urban artefact, or a monument, and the monumental architecture, as a monument? Urban artifacts are the expression on the urban system of the city, they define the city and the city can be defined by their totality, whereas monumental architecture actually opposes itself in the urban system. Thus, monumental architecture should possess the ability to connect with the history, the memory and the meaning of it. Monumental architecture should be subjected to the time and context of the city, it needs not to reject itself.

32 33

Aldo Rossi, The Architecture of the City. Ibid., (p. 60).


Picture 5. Andrea Branzi, Agronica.

Enzymatic Architecture â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Enzymatic Territories

â&#x20AC;&#x153;A

design

approach

that

falls

outside

the

tradition

architecture [is] seen as a formal metaphor of history.â&#x20AC;?

of

34

Architecture is limited to contain the urban conditions of today. In the contemporary Nevertheless,

tradition, the

it

is

expansion

reduced to

of

content,

a

symbol,

which

is

a

figure,

becoming

a

ever

code. more

virtual, gives architecture the passageway to a new and different urban condition

-

Contemporary

the

new

architecture

sensory is

reality

struggling

functions instead of a formal building.

of to

35

artificial see

itself

intelligence. as

a

flow

of

It is refusing to demonstrate

temporality and blurriness in the new urban condition, which should not be defined by a static architectural form.

34

Andrea Branzi, 'Per una architettura enzimatica [Enzymatic Architecture]', Domus, 2005, 48-57. 35

Ibid.


“The

„difficult

whole‟

is

an

architecture

of

complexity

and

contradiction, including multiplicity and diversity of elements in relationships that are inconsistent or among the weaker kinds perceptually.”36 Venturi‟s „difficult whole‟ would be one of the main qualities of enzymatic architecture.

For

example

„difficult

whole‟

is

architecture

that

encourages complex rhythms and patterns, instead of simple ones. According

to

Branzi,

new

models

of

urbanisation

should

constantly

reconfigure and re-functionalise the city. Architecture has to become a flexible part of this system without enforcing any political ideologies or generalities. The new urban model should be fluid, similarly to Archizoom‟s No-Stop City: its “freed of architecture” 37 , merging technology and nature, interiors and exteriors. The urban condition is not defined by architecture anymore, but by the diffusion of functions and evolution of this system through time. Branzi‟s „Seven Suggestions For A New Athens Charter” proposes the models of

„weak

urbanisation‟-

half

urbanised,

half

agricultural

landscapes,

territories capable of season change and reversible and diffusive housing. The

city

has

to

become

unique

and

integrated

system,

considered

as

a

totality, where architecture is a sensory reality, not a visual stimulus. 38

This kind of urbanism has no specific qualities and doesn‟t impose any

ideals upon the society. It

is

worth

mentioning

Benjamin‟s

aura,

when

talking

about

enzymatic

architecture and weak urbanisation, since the principal of how this blurry territoriality functions is a nature of an enzyme that is to activate and create a constant flow of functions. The concept of aura is helping to understand

how

the

enzymatic

monument

affects

the

territories

in

time

around it: “Aura unique

understood appearance

as

“a

strange

[apparition,

weave

of

semblance]

space of

and

time:

the

adistance,however

36

Robert Venturi, Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1977) (p. 88). 37

Andrea Branzi, Archizoom Associati. No-Stop City (Orleans: HYX, 2006) (p.

152). 38

Ten modest suggestions for a new Athens Charter, ed. by Mohsen Mostafavi and Gereth Dogerty (Zurich: Lars Muller Publishers, 2010) (p. 110).


near it may be” (or, “however close the thing that calls it forth”)”. Opposite from Koolhaas city with skyscraper islands 39 and urban block grid, the

weak

models

of

urbanisation

are

avoiding

the

rigid

administrative

planning. This kind of „weak metropolis‟ consists of dynamic enzymatic territories. Enzymatic city is also a network of technology, invention and communication. “an

activity

of

environmental

transformation

that

develops

following the profound action of a weak and diffuse enzyme, and one that is therefore hard to control and govern, but which can be used by vast sections of society, and which serves to produce innovation, knowledge, relationships and emotions”40

According to Andrea Branzi, Gianni Pettena was the first one in his works to emphasize on architecture as „evolutionary energy of a territory and a society, and no longer as practice of construction.‟41

An

example

Agronica,

of

this kind

where

he

is

of

network could

exploring

the

be

Branzi‟s 1993-94

possibility

of

a

capital

project spread

horizontally across thin layered territories, causing a „weak urbanism‟ model. This model is balanced between energy and agriculture production, and

consumption.

Branzi

similarly

explores

the

Philips

project

in

Eindhoven. 42 Branzi‟s weak urbanisation models show how relevant it is to today‟s socio-political situation and environment. Another important factor in

these

eruptions‟

projects 43

is

the

emphasis

on

„spontaneous

programmatic

, which occur across territories that are only bound by weak

relations, that don‟t contain them, but allow the territories to expand, to sprawl.

39

Rem Koolhaas, Delirious New York: a retroactive manifesto for Manhattan (New York: Monacelli Press, 1994). 40

Andrea Branzi, 'http://www.giannipettena.it/' <http://www.giannipettena.it/diconodilui/branzi/> [accessed 10 August 2013] 41

Ibid.

42

Ten modest suggestions for a new Athens Charter, ed. by Mohsen Mostafavi and Gereth Dogerty (Zurich: Lars Muller Publishers, 2010) (p. 118). 43

Ibid., (p. 119).


Picture 6. Archizoom, „No-Stop City‟, 1969

Branzi‟s weak urbanism model (flexible, mobile, open to change forms) 44 is a

perfect

setting

for

deploying

the

enzymatic

monument

apparatus

and

activating parts of the city to connect into wider networks of territories.

Branzi‟s proposed weak-urbanism model, that could be considered as a part of

ecological

urbanism

agenda,

is

a

political

tool

to

criticise

the

sociological, ecological and economic relations of the city. Mohsen Mostafi mentions „spaces of disagreement‟, that weak urbanism methodology could tackle. The range of disagreements is multi-disciplinary; therefore the strategy of urbanism in use needs to be diverse and multi-functional to understand and accept the challenges.45

44

Andrea Branzi, 'The Weak Metropolis', in Ecological Urbanism Conference ([n.p]: Harvard Graduate School of Design, April 2010.). 45

Ten modest suggestions for a new Athens Charter, ed. by Mohsen Mostafavi and Gereth Dogerty, (p. 114).


“Critical environmental relevance and environmental survival”

46

is the

main opposition, occurring in today‟s urbanism, which at this point is a choice between the two. Ecological urbanism is a methodology, which could become

the

dialogue

between

the

sustainability,

culture

and

politics.

Branzi‟s socio-cultural critique of the city can engage with particular political situations in the contemporary city.

Archizoom suggested city to be a surface, shaped by economic and ecological factors.

47

This

brings

us

to

Branzi‟s

Agronica,

illustrating

the

relentlessly horizontal spread of capital across thinly settled territory, and

the

enabled.

resulting

“weak

urbanization”

that

neo-liberal

economics

has

48

“The architecture of the large city depends essentially on the solution given to two factors: the elementary cell of space and the urban organism as a whole” 49 , says Hilberseimer in his Grossstadt Architektur(1927). The design of the whole is determined by the design of a single building, and vice versa.

Enzymatic Monuments of Olbia

The case study town of Olbia sprawled from its original size very quickly in the late 60s. By that time the historical city layers were covered by a modernist city grid, and areas that haven‟t changed since Roman times, were forced to acquire the appearances of the rest of the city. The political intricacies

of

administrative

family

relations

apparatus

being

were

beginning

enforced

upon

to

fade

existing

due

city

to

the

grid.

The

existent monumental proportion structures, like the port of Isola Bianca, or new Museum of Olbian History building, were large and imposing for all the wrong reasons in a delicate network of the medieval town, with streets still

accustomed

to

the

body

scale.

The

need

for

something

unifying,

significant and bespoke to Olbia was needed.

46 47

Ibid, (p. 114).

Andrea Branzi, 2006) (p. 135).

Archizoom

Associati.

No-Stop

City

(Orleans:

HYX,

48

Ten modest suggestions for a new Athens Charter, ed. by Gereth Doherty Mohsen Mostafvi), (p. 118). 49

Space, Difference, Everyday Life. Reading Henri Lefebvre., ed. by Goonewardena Kanishka , Stefan Kipfer and Richard Milg (New York: Routledge, 2008) (p. 68).


Picture 7. Agnes Denes , Wheatfield - A Confrontation.

The case study of Olbia town in Sardinia, Italy, is investigated through Agency Monument. This Agency looks into the territorial politics of old Olbian families and issues of cadastral system that arises from the sociopolitical relations and their importance. The notion of a monument is brought up to understand the importance of these political relations and their standpoint.

The monuments in this situation are considered territorial, with a deep code of politics, economy and history in them. The local monuments were identified as areas of great importance to the urban structure and the further formation of Olbia town.

Therefore

three

stages

of

the

project

investigate

different

stages

of

monuments in Olbia. The first one is the administrative monuments, or areas in

the

city,

that

are

of

importance

to

the

Agency

and

the

family

biographies and histories, though these monuments are defined by a socially and cadastre wise non-responsive municipal planning system. Second stage of a

monument

is

identified

through

an

intricate

network

of

territorial

politics: biography is of a monumental value; a biography must occupy space to embed itself into a city fabric. Third stage of Olbia monument is a proposed

architectural

solution,

which

is

a

set

of

three

buildings,


operating

through

the

biographical

narration

of

territories

and

administrative politics. Due to the nature of these projects, they are enzymatic in their territorial qualities and programmes, generating urban networks, which are in constant process of activating territories of the city and expanding this network.

Because of such a political territoriality of the city the project's aim was to test the differences between the urban areas of the town and the still existent urban farm landscape along the administrative boundaries of the

city.

The

administrative

boundary

was

chosen,

because

itâ&#x20AC;&#x;s

a

bureaucratic mark in the city's planning scheme that excludes some areas along the edges and creates urban landscape peninsulas. These peninsulas are territories of political conflicts between the city's landscape and the land

used

by

the

city,

but,

according

to

administrative

system,

not

included in its network.

The PARAsituations ( territories capable of power and renewable energy, such as biographies and politics)

of these buildings are urban farm areas,

caught up in the expansion of the town. The bureaucratic system is imposing boundaries that are not fluid, though the model of urban farming resembles Branziâ&#x20AC;&#x;s proposed Agronica. The farms are scattered across the landscape and

work

as

political

islands,

storing

in

them

the

remaining

encoded

cadastral information and acting as a part of this fluid urban peninsular territoriality. Each farm is an enzyme, which activates the agricultural landscape the context.

Picture 8. PARA situation [Fattoria Urbana] Metropolitan landscape, Set Scale.


The chosen architectural programmes for three buildings in the project deal with

different

scales

of

political

territoriality

and

enzymatic

architecture. The buildings act like enzymes to catalyse the landscape and other

buildings

around

them

through

their

programme

and

a

particular

schedule, depending on the activities in the building. The programme is attached to a family heirloom movement through the landscape, which in this case is a family chest. The schedule is attached to the programme and how the people, who live or work in the buildings, move. The architectural solutions are responsive to the schedule through Branziâ&#x20AC;&#x;s defined enzymatic qualities that they have.

The functions of areas inside the buildings can

shift from one to another, for example Dress Workshop is private and public building at the same time. There is always a mix of activity, it is ever changing. The influence of the building doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x;t stop where construction ends: the building is incorporated into an urban farm landscape, through water systems, relations to other buildings and other parts of the city.

Picture 9. PARAsituation [Fattoria Urbana] Dress workshop: Private Community House.

Furthermore, the three programmes are working together coherently as a network that is activated by auras generated by their enzymatic properties. This means, that one building starts an intricate network of enzymatic monuments, which are the territories of these buildings. These territories


are capable of changing the urban fabric, connecting excluded town areas and

shaping

the

architecture

around

them.

The

territoriality

of

these

buildings is temporal and dependant on time schedules – they are enzymatic. These territories are capable of adapting in the landscape and territorial - political situation they are in- they are monuments. They have an auratic quality and are constant flow of functions. These architectural proposals are

the

new

Olbia

monuments,

that

are

capable

of

reshaping

the

town

politics and creating a new model of urban contemporary city planning.

Conclusion

In a contemporary city, the understanding of a monument is dramatically different: it‟s a territory, holding within itself not just the collective memory, but at the same time it connects and structures the city. The old notion of a statue in the middle of the square has been replaced by a dynamic

and

enzymatic

territorial

concept.

Monuments

are

the

links

of

fractured contemporary city with a unique aura, capable to activate the urban network and the city‟s political, social and ecological environment.

There are only three things we need to ensure: the monumental enzymatic architecture has to have a large capacity to evoke common ideals around it, the significance of these ideals has to be the renewable energy of the process and the dwellers of the contemporary city have to be alerted by this kind of flow of architecture. Therefore enzymatic also works as an actual catalyst for local economy and ecology.

Enzymatic monuments are urban territorialities that can include buildings and

other

constructions.

They

are

to

become

links

of

fractured

administrative network of the current city fabric. Just like Olbia case study of Agency Monument demonstrates, architecture is to become a flow of functions, spread across the landscape, with an ability to adapt to a change in time. But unlike Branzi‟s defined enzymatic territories, this project takes enzymatic monument one step further, to be included into territorial socio-politics and biographical - cadastre systems of the city. They are catalysts capable of reviving the territorial codes, locked in the urban city fabric.

Enzymatic monuments is a next step to urban planning

methodology, with architecture, that doesn‟t stop beyond the walls of the buildings, where functions are not attached to the shape of the room, where materiality of the building corresponds to the locality and is sensible towards the ecological and economic situation the building finds itself in.


These enzymatic monuments are the new way of viewing the city network as a flow,

where

architecture

plays

a

role

of

connecting

and

constantly

reinventing itself, instead of being a static point in a grid. This kind of architecture has precious socio-politics encoded in it and is aware of the context of the place, but is still allowed to change and evolve, and challenge

the

current

administrative

system

and

the

monuments are the future of contemporary city planning.

context.

Enzymatic


Bibliography Brouwer, J., Mulde , A., & Martz, L. (A cura di). (2001). Transubranism. Rotterdam: V2_Publishing/NAi publishers. Vale, L. J. (1992). Architecture, Power, and National Identity. London: Yale University Press. Alexander, C. (1979). University Press.

The

Timeless

Way

Of

Building.

New

York:

Oxford

Amsellem, P. (2007). Remembering the Past, Constructing the Future. The Memorial to the Deportation in Paris and Experimental Commemoration After the Second World War. New York: ProQuest. Baird, G. (2003). The Space of Appearance. London: MIT Press. Basso Peressut, F. P. (2008). Places & Themes of Interiors. Contemporary Research Worldwide. Serie di architettura e design. Milano: r FrancoAngeli. Branzi, A. (2005, February 15). Per una architettura enzimatica [Enzymatic Architecture]. Domus(878), 48-57. Branzi, A. (2006). Archzoom Associati. No-Stop City. Orleans: HYX. Branzi, A. (April 2010.). The Weak Metropolis. Conference. Harvard Graduate School of Design.

Ecological

Urbanism

Branzi, A. (s.d.). http://www.giannipettena.it/. Tratto il giorno 08 10, 2013 da http://www.giannipettena.it/diconodilui/branzi/ Caruso, A. (1999). The Feeling of Things. A+T ediciones(13), 48-51. Di Palma, V., Periton, D., & Lethouri, M. (A cura di). (2009). Intimate Metropolis. London: Routledge. Kanishka , G., Kipfer, S., & Milg, R. (A cura di). (2008). Space, Difference, Everyday Life. Reading Henri Lefebvre. New York: Routledge. Koolhaas, R. (1994). Delirious New Manhattan. New York: Monacelli Press.

York:

a

retroactive

manifesto

for

Koolhaas, R. M. (1995). S,M,L,XL. New York: The Monacelli Press. Kostof, S. (2000). The Architect: chapters in the profession. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

history

of

the

Krier, R. (1979). Urban Space. London: Academy Editions. Lefebvre, H. (2004). Rhythmanalysis. Space, time and everyday life. London: Continuum. Melvin, J. (202). Monument: antimonument. The Architectural Review. Miles, M., Hall, T., & Borden, I. (A cura di). (2000). The City Cultures Reader. London: Routledge. Mostafavi, M., & Dogerty, G. (A cura di). (2010). Ten modest suggestions for a new Athens Charter. Zurich, Italy: Lars Muller Publishers. Mumford, L. (1938). Warburg Ltd.

The

Culture

of

Cities.

London:

Martin

Secker

and

Mumford, L. (1961). The City in History. London: Cox & Wyman Ltd. Nelson, R. S., & Shiff, R. (A cura di). (2010). Critical Terms for Art History (Second ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.


Nietzsche, F. W. (2006). The Use and Abuse of History. New York: Cosimo, Inc. Ockman, J. (A cura di). (1993). Architectural Culture, 1943-68 (Readers in 20th Century Thought). Rizzoli International Publications. Rossi, A. (1982). The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Rowe, C. (1994). The Architecture Of Good Intentions. Towards A Possible Retrospect. London: Academy Edtions. Rowe, C., & Koettter, F. (1978). Collage City. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Schoenauer, N. (1981). 6000 Years of Housing Vol. III: The Occidental Urban House. Madison: Garland Pub. Robert Venturi, Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1977) www.dictionary.com. (s.d.). Tratto il giorno http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/monument

07

22,

2013

da

Picture References

Cover .Picture 1. Photograph by Gabriel L贸pez Letayf, Personal Archive. Picture 2. ArchiZoom, 'www.megaestructuras.tumblr.com' <http://megaestructuras.tumblr.com/post/49938815148/archizoom-no-stop-city1970-1972> [accessed 11 August 2013] Picture 3. ArchiZoom, 'http://andreasangelidakis.blogspot.co.uk/' <http://andreasangelidakis.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/unseen-archizoom.html> [accessed 11 August 2013] Picture 4. ArchiZoom, 'http://www.abitare.it/it/architecture/non-stopthinking/' <http://www.abitare.it/> [accessed 11 August 2013] Picture 5. Andrea Branzi, 'http://codythesis1011.blogspot.co.uk/' <http://codythesis1011.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/precedents.html> [accessed 11 August 2013] Picture 6. ArchiZoom, 'http://www.heathermcorcoran.com/' <http://www.heathermcorcoran.com/blog/2012/11/20/no-stop-city/> [accessed 11 August 2013] Picture 7. Agnes Denes, 'www.greg.org/' <http://greg.org/archive/2008/07/03/agnes_deness_wheatfield__a_confrontation.html> [accessed 11 August 2013] Picture 8. Ruta Turcinaviciute, Aurascapes (2012-2013) MSc AUD, University of Edinburgh, ESALA. Picture 9. Ruta Turcinaviciute, Gabriel L贸pez Letayf, Jeet Datta, Aurascapes (2012-2013) MSc AUD, University of Edinburgh, ESALA.


Enzymatic Monument