Scroll down to read this interview in English
O que define arquitectura? Curioso, porque aproveitando a Trienal e a afluência de grandes vultos da arquitectura mundial para três dias de conversa, decidimos pegar na câmara de filmar e fazer três perguntas básicas à queima-roupa a alguns dos intervenientes, uma das quais era: O que é isso da Arquitectura? Depois fizémos as mesmas três perguntas a pessoas tangentes à disciplina como engenheiros, encarregados de obra, agentes imobiliários… e a outras completamente fora da órbita da profissão como taxistas ou empregados de café. Com o material produzimos uma vídeo instalação - Sonda3. Uma das coisas mais interessantes de constatar neste trabalho foi como o núcleo arquitectónico e derivados se refugiava em conceitos abstractos e muito nebulosos para definir a disciplina, e os entrevistados situados nas órbitas mais exteriores tinham uma resposta taxativa e directa: é edifícios! Diriamos, driblando um pouco a pergunta, que o que define a arquitectura deve andar algures entre os conceitos elaborados mas vagos de significado dos académicos e os edifícios da vox populi.
O que a distingue de outros actos da criação, e cingindo-nos a uma prática mais convencional, diríamos que é a importância do cliente no resultado final, bem como a necessidade de articular interesses vários na sua concepção e execução. A maioria das outras disciplinas artísticas estão mais libertas destes constrangimentos. Por outras palavras, a arquitectura apresenta-se como um processo constante de coordenação e negociação, outras disciplinas como a música, pintura e o vídeo podem adoptar uma postura mais egocentrista e autónoma.
O que a aproxima dos outros de criação é a capacidade de condensar e interpretar a realidade produzindo algo novo a partir desse processo.
Sonda 3 . moov 2007
02. Fazendo minhas as palavras de Peter Zumthor, "can architecture improve life"?Obviamente. A arquitectura pode e deve ambicionar ser um contributo para a melhoria da vida. No entanto, a sua capacidade de a influenciar, ao contrário do que nós arquitectos gostamos de apregoar, é relativamente limitada, sobretudo se compararmos com factores sociais, económicos e políticos. Um caso paradigmático destas limitações, e procurando utilizar uma referência actual, pode ser constado na obra do arquitecto italiano Franz Di Salvo, autor do agora famoso Vele di Scampia, o complexo edificado que serve de cenário ao excelente filme Gomorra. Na complexidade da organização do espaço em múltiplos passadiços, corredores, escadas e arcadas que ligam os diferentes apartamentos podemos ser tentados a ler espaços de potenciação da marginalidade do bairro. Conclusão lógica até pela forma hábil de filmar do realizador, que acompanha os personagens nas suas deambulações pelo edifício. No entanto, o que menos pessoas saberão, é que o mesmo arquitecto tem um projecto idêntico nos arredores de Cannes que se encontra impecavelmente conservado e a funcionar, sendo até objecto de rasgados elogios dos seus moradores. Parece evidente que o contexto económico e social acabou por ditar destinos diferentes para projectos idênticos.
Scampia . foto Maria di Pietro
03. Quais os problemas reais que o espaço público enfrenta na cidade contemporânea, e em que é que eles se diferenciam dos que, historicamente, sempre enfrentou?
O espaço público é um território de conflito, característica intemporal que é a sua maior fraqueza e, ao mesmo tempo, força.
Fraqueza porque nunca totalmente controlado é visto como o lugar onde o mal pode eclodir. Força, porque é do cruzamento e harmonização dos interesses, pessoas, fluxos e tendências no lugar público que se forja a diversidade da paisagem económica e social da cidade, factores essenciais à sua competitividade e capacidade de atrair habitantes.
Tendo isto em conta, cremos que a progressiva tentativa de domesticação das forças que actuam no espaço público, procurando-o tornar mais controlado, prevísivel, higiénico… é, actualmente, o maior problema. Esta domesticação é uma consequência directa de uma sociedade securitária que parece lidar mal com o imprevisto e com o outro. Apregoa a inclusão mas promove de forma subliminar a exclusão no lugar público através de mecanismos de vigilância, regulamentos desajustados, repressão…
Esta domesticação falha porque há hoje uma multiplicidade de grupos e tribos urbanas com usos do espaço público, que à partida, são incompativeis e para as quais a ideia de uso urbano enquanto actividade marginal é essencial. Muitos espaços esvaziados desta autenticidade ameaçadora, acabam por perder o seu elan e vida tornando-se apenas cascos comerciais. O desenho poderá tentar essa dificil tarefa de ambivalencia.
DEMO_polis . moov2006 . foto Mario Baú
04. O que determina a vivência e a morte de um espaço?
Correndo o risco de sermos repetitivos e por muito que isso nos custe admitir, a qualidade do desenho, os materiais empregues, acabamentos, ou seja, tudo aquilo a que se associa directamente o trabalho do arquitecto, não é essencial para a vivência ou morte de um espaço. Pelo contrário, as circunstâncias económicas, sociais e políticas são factores determinantes para o destino dos lugares. Um espaço, por mais belo que seja, está condenado quando deixa de ser um contributo efectivo para a dinâmica da sociedade.
Hotel Estoril Sol 1965 - 2007. Arquitecto Raul Tojal
05. Até que ponto é importante, para um Arquitecto, entender a Paisagem enquanto uma realidade em contínua transformação?
Mais que o caso específico da Paisagem e a sua contínua transformação, é importante para o Arquitecto ter consciência do Tempo. As necessidades e aspirações de hoje podem ser obsoletas amanhã. O trabalho do arquitecto deve procurar ter uma certa latitude que possa incorporar as dilatações ou contracções do futuro tendo a consciência que não está propriamente a redefinir o centro do universo.
Seta Amarela . moov 2004
06. Socialmente Portugal tem um estrato social fervorosamente adepto do conceito de condomínio privado. É este processo de guetização uma defesa contra aquilo que consideramos estranho?
Na sequência do que foi dito sobre o espaço público como território de conflito, o condomínio privado é uma tentativa de anular essa circunstância através da promoção de ambientes fechados, prevísiveis e habitados por uma população homogénea que procura serenar os seus receios na dormência de um lugar controlado.
07. Temos, só na cidade de Lisboa, quase 4.700 prédios devolutos. Como podemos curar-nos deste cancro?
Este é, sobretudo, um problema do mercado imobiliário que cultiva a inércia do presente com o objectivo de lucros futuros. Para o resolver/contrariar tem que haver: primeiro vontade política em criar mecanismos que penalizem fortemente o abandono das casas; em segundo, a promoção de soluções temporárias que possam aproveitar a janela de oportunidade criadas por espaço vazios - neste ponto, a pro-actividade da sociedade civil, escorada no apoio de quem decide, em propor e ocupar parece-nos vital.
Projecto +1 . Baixa de Lisboa . moov 2005
08. Somos o segundo país europeu (a seguir à Grécia) com o maior índice per capita de arquitectos. O que diriam aos recém-licenciados?
Que façam o seu melhor e procurem pensar para lá do que vem nas revistas.
Que há mais na prática de arquitectura que projecto e construção.
Que trabalho há sempre, o dinheiro é que varia.
Evitem trabalhar com idiotas, para idiotas e como idiotas.
Boa sorte.
09. Onde se vêem daqui a 10 anos?
... um ano de cada vez.
Casa Nomad . moov 2006
Alguma coisa a dizer?
...............................................................................................................................................................
01. What defines architecture? What distinguishes it and what brings it closer to other acts of creation?
What defines architecture? That’s an interesting question; given that at the Triennale (of Architecture, Lisbon) we decided to grab hold of a camera and ask three simple questions to some of the invitees, one of which was: What is Architecture? Then we asked the same three questions to people who work tangentially with the subject, such as engineers, real estate agents… as well as to other people who had nothing to do with architecture at all. With this material we produced a video installation - Sonda3. One of the most interesting things we came across in this situation was the way how those more directly related to Architecture came up with dubious and elaborately abstract answers, whereas those who had no connection to it gave very direct questions: it’s buildings! We’d say that what defines architecture is somewhere in between the elaborate yet vague academic concepts and the vox populi’s buildings.
We would say that what distinguishes it from other acts of creation is the importance that the role of the client assumes in the final result, as well as the need to articulate a number of different interests in its conception and execution. The majority of other artistic subjects are less attached to this kind of restraints. In other words, architecture presents itself as a constant process of coordination and negotiation, other subjects such as music, painting and video have the ability to adopt a more independent and egoistic position.
What brings it closer to the other acts of creation is the ability to condense and interpret reality by producing something new, extracted from that process.
02. As Peter Zumthor would say, "can architecture improve life"?
Obviously. Architecture can and should ambition to be an improvement of life. Still, its ability to influence it, despite what we architects tend to state, is relatively limited, especially if we compare it with social, economical and political factors. A practical and quite current case of these limitations is that of Italian architect Franz Di Salvo’s work, the author of the now famous Vele di Scampia, the building complex used as a set for the great film Gomorra. Amidst the complexity of the organization of this space in multiple passage ways, corridors, stairs and archades that connect the various apartments we might feel tempted to read spaces reminiscent to the marginality of the neighbourhood. A logical conclusion taken from the ingenious way the director shot the film, accompanying the characters in the journeys through out the building. Still, what fewer people are aware of is that this same architect has an identical project in the outskirts of Cannes that is in perfect maintenance and working shape, which is subject to high praise coming from its inhibitors. It would seem that the economical and social contexts eventually drew different fates for identical projects.
03. What are the real problems that public space faces in the contemporary city, and how different are they from those that, historically, the public space has always faced?
Public space is a war zone, this is an eternal trait that is its greatest weakness and, at the same time, it’s greatest strength.
It is a weakness because it is a place where all malice may meet, due to its uncontrollable nature. It is strength because it is from the mixture and harmonization of interests, people, fluxes and tendencies in the public space that the diversity of the city’s economical and social landscapes, essential to its ability to lure inhabitants, are forged.
While having this in mind, we believe that the progressive attempt to domesticate the forces that act upon the public space, seeking to turn it more controlled, predictable, hygienic… is, in our days, the greatest problem. This domestication is a direct consequence of a society that seems to cope badly with the unpredictable and to that which is foreign to it. It encourages inclusion but it also subliminarily promotes exclusion in the public space through surveillance mechanisms, unadjusted regulations, repression...
This domestication fails because nowadays there is a vast range of groups and urban tribes that make use of the public space in ways that are, at first, seen as incompatible and for which the ideia of urban use as a marginal activity is essential. Many of the spaces deprived from this threatening authenticity eventually lose their livelihood and turn into simple commercial shells.
The design may attempt that difficult task of ambivalence.
04. What determines the life and death of a space?
While taking the risk of being repetitive and as much as that may be hard for us to admit, the quality of the design, the materials used, the rendering... everything that is directly related to the work of the architect is not essential to the life or death of a space. On the other hand, economical, social and political circumstances determine the fate of spaces. A space, as beautiful as it may be, finds itself condemned when it ceases to be an actual contributor to the dynamics of society.
05. To what extent is it important, to an Architect, to understand the Landscape as a continuously transforming reality?
More important than the specific case of Landscape and its constant transformation, it is important for the Architect to be Time conscious. The needs and aspirations of today may turn obsolete tomorrow. The work of the architect should seek to have a certain latitude that can withstand the dilatations or contractions of the future, while bearing in mind that he is not redefining the centre of the universe.
06. Socially speaking, Portugal has a social class that is a major fan of joint estates. Is this process of creating guettos a defense against that which we see as strange?
After what was said about public space being a war zone, joint estates are seen as an attempt to erase that circumstance through the creation of closed and predictable environments, inhabited by homogeneous population that seeks to drown its fears in the dormancy of a controlled space.
07. In the city of Lisbon alone, there are nearly 4700 derelict buildings. How can we cure this cancer?
This is, above all, a problem of the real estate market that invests on the present inertia with to objective of making future profits. To resolve/fight this matter there has to be: firstly, political will to create mechanisms that severely punish the abandoning of houses; secondly, the implementation of temporary solutions that can take advantage of the windows of opportunity created by empty spaces – the pro-activity of the civil society in what comes to proposing and occupying seems vital.
08. We are the second European country (after Greece) with the greatest percentage of architects. What would you say to newly graduates?
To do their best and think out of the box.
That there is more to the practice of architecture than projects and construction.
That there is always work, it’s the pay that varies.
Avoid working with idiots, for idiots and as idiots.
Good luck.
09. Where do you see yourselves in 10 years?
... a year at a time.
01. What defines architecture? What distinguishes it and what brings it closer to other acts of creation?
What defines architecture? That’s an interesting question; given that at the Triennale (of Architecture, Lisbon) we decided to grab hold of a camera and ask three simple questions to some of the invitees, one of which was: What is Architecture? Then we asked the same three questions to people who work tangentially with the subject, such as engineers, real estate agents… as well as to other people who had nothing to do with architecture at all. With this material we produced a video installation - Sonda3. One of the most interesting things we came across in this situation was the way how those more directly related to Architecture came up with dubious and elaborately abstract answers, whereas those who had no connection to it gave very direct questions: it’s buildings! We’d say that what defines architecture is somewhere in between the elaborate yet vague academic concepts and the vox populi’s buildings.
We would say that what distinguishes it from other acts of creation is the importance that the role of the client assumes in the final result, as well as the need to articulate a number of different interests in its conception and execution. The majority of other artistic subjects are less attached to this kind of restraints. In other words, architecture presents itself as a constant process of coordination and negotiation, other subjects such as music, painting and video have the ability to adopt a more independent and egoistic position.
What brings it closer to the other acts of creation is the ability to condense and interpret reality by producing something new, extracted from that process.
02. As Peter Zumthor would say, "can architecture improve life"?
Obviously. Architecture can and should ambition to be an improvement of life. Still, its ability to influence it, despite what we architects tend to state, is relatively limited, especially if we compare it with social, economical and political factors. A practical and quite current case of these limitations is that of Italian architect Franz Di Salvo’s work, the author of the now famous Vele di Scampia, the building complex used as a set for the great film Gomorra. Amidst the complexity of the organization of this space in multiple passage ways, corridors, stairs and archades that connect the various apartments we might feel tempted to read spaces reminiscent to the marginality of the neighbourhood. A logical conclusion taken from the ingenious way the director shot the film, accompanying the characters in the journeys through out the building. Still, what fewer people are aware of is that this same architect has an identical project in the outskirts of Cannes that is in perfect maintenance and working shape, which is subject to high praise coming from its inhibitors. It would seem that the economical and social contexts eventually drew different fates for identical projects.
03. What are the real problems that public space faces in the contemporary city, and how different are they from those that, historically, the public space has always faced?
Public space is a war zone, this is an eternal trait that is its greatest weakness and, at the same time, it’s greatest strength.
It is a weakness because it is a place where all malice may meet, due to its uncontrollable nature. It is strength because it is from the mixture and harmonization of interests, people, fluxes and tendencies in the public space that the diversity of the city’s economical and social landscapes, essential to its ability to lure inhabitants, are forged.
While having this in mind, we believe that the progressive attempt to domesticate the forces that act upon the public space, seeking to turn it more controlled, predictable, hygienic… is, in our days, the greatest problem. This domestication is a direct consequence of a society that seems to cope badly with the unpredictable and to that which is foreign to it. It encourages inclusion but it also subliminarily promotes exclusion in the public space through surveillance mechanisms, unadjusted regulations, repression...
This domestication fails because nowadays there is a vast range of groups and urban tribes that make use of the public space in ways that are, at first, seen as incompatible and for which the ideia of urban use as a marginal activity is essential. Many of the spaces deprived from this threatening authenticity eventually lose their livelihood and turn into simple commercial shells.
The design may attempt that difficult task of ambivalence.
04. What determines the life and death of a space?
While taking the risk of being repetitive and as much as that may be hard for us to admit, the quality of the design, the materials used, the rendering... everything that is directly related to the work of the architect is not essential to the life or death of a space. On the other hand, economical, social and political circumstances determine the fate of spaces. A space, as beautiful as it may be, finds itself condemned when it ceases to be an actual contributor to the dynamics of society.
05. To what extent is it important, to an Architect, to understand the Landscape as a continuously transforming reality?
More important than the specific case of Landscape and its constant transformation, it is important for the Architect to be Time conscious. The needs and aspirations of today may turn obsolete tomorrow. The work of the architect should seek to have a certain latitude that can withstand the dilatations or contractions of the future, while bearing in mind that he is not redefining the centre of the universe.
06. Socially speaking, Portugal has a social class that is a major fan of joint estates. Is this process of creating guettos a defense against that which we see as strange?
After what was said about public space being a war zone, joint estates are seen as an attempt to erase that circumstance through the creation of closed and predictable environments, inhabited by homogeneous population that seeks to drown its fears in the dormancy of a controlled space.
07. In the city of Lisbon alone, there are nearly 4700 derelict buildings. How can we cure this cancer?
This is, above all, a problem of the real estate market that invests on the present inertia with to objective of making future profits. To resolve/fight this matter there has to be: firstly, political will to create mechanisms that severely punish the abandoning of houses; secondly, the implementation of temporary solutions that can take advantage of the windows of opportunity created by empty spaces – the pro-activity of the civil society in what comes to proposing and occupying seems vital.
08. We are the second European country (after Greece) with the greatest percentage of architects. What would you say to newly graduates?
To do their best and think out of the box.
That there is more to the practice of architecture than projects and construction.
That there is always work, it’s the pay that varies.
Avoid working with idiots, for idiots and as idiots.
Good luck.
09. Where do you see yourselves in 10 years?
... a year at a time.
Mensagens
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário