|
 |
|
Modern architecture has at its disposal an almost infinite palette of
materials: natural and synthetic, transparent and solid, of the most diverse
colours and textures, making it possible to clad surfaces of any height
and of the most diverse forms. A building’s external and internal skins are
among the key elements in creating its architectural image, its atmosphere
and mood. Back in the mid 19th century, Gottfried Semper and, in his
wake, Adolf Loos stressed that cladding serves the same function for
buildings as clothes do for people. This is still relevant today. Indeed, in
the latter half of the 20th century, architecture became a subject to the
influence of fashion, as clothing, becoming an essential part of the playing
out of a lifestyle. Yet, while dresses that have gone out of fashion can be
thrown away or recycled, buildings which have become obsolete – primarily
in physical terms – remain standing, defining the appearance of streets,
and sometimes entire cities.
The creation of forms that come across as modern, yet are not in thrall
to the vagaries of fashion and are endowed with the ability to grow old
gracefully and with dignity is a topical issue in modern architecture. And it is
directly related to the choice of material. Stone and brick, materials which
have proved their timeless durability and aesthetic appeal, have once
more returned to the domain of architecture following decades of neglect
and marginalisation. Through them, architecture is rediscovering what has
always been its inherent quality – materiality.
Experiments with transparent shells and flowing forms that dematerialise
the building, erasing the boundaries between outside and inside, private
and public, real and virtual spaces, would appear to have been taken as far
as they can go (in most European cities, at least). And the natural reaction
to this has been the need for a certain visual stability, for conventional
tectonics, for the materialisation of a wall – its physical presence, a
surface with palpably tactile qualities, a hand-crafted artefact. It need not
be of brick or stone – concrete is capable of making a similar impact. The
examples shown in this issue of SPEECH: demonstrate that materiality is
not just something specific to individual buildings but a relevant, clearly
visible trend in modern architecture.
Irina Chipova
|
|
|
subject
Irina Chipova
Honest materiality
Nina Frolova
Materiality 2.0
history
Bernhard Schulz
Messages encoded in the materials
pro & contra
Falk Jaeger, Jan Skuratovsky
Arno Lederer/Dominique Perrault
object
Maria Fadeeva
Stones by the water
Sergei Tchoban, Evgeny Gerasimov. Residential
complex «House by the Sea». St Petersburg
Jan Skuratovsky
Reconciling opposites spanish-style
estudio.entresitio. Municipal health centre San Blas.
Madrid
Ivan Nevzgodin
Psychotherapy through architecture
Claus & Kaan. De Eekenhof complex in Enschede.
The Netherlands
Nina Frolova
A museum in a suit of stone armour
Arata Isozaki. CAFA museum in Beijing
Jan Skuratovsky
The calming endurance
Max Dudler. Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm Centre. Berlin
David Cohn
Over carthaginian stones
Rafael Moneo. Museum of the Roman theatre.
Cartagena, Spain
environment
Ivan Nevzgodin
«Baked stone»:
the Netherlands build in brick
expert
Irina Krymova
The art of architecture and the truth
of materials
portrait
Elena Petukhova
Resources for expressiveness
Interview with Sergei Skuratov
Bernhard Schulz
Not everything has to be champagne
Interview with David Chipperfeld
David Cohn
Using what‘s at hand
Interview with Fernando Menis
gallery
Irina Chipova
Loos’ architectural dandyism
Photography by Roberto Schezen
Authors of this issue
|
|
|
|
|
