Vittorio Gregotti. Architect of the Modern Project

The Plan Journal, 2020

The symposium wanted to return to ongoing investigations into the work of GDC with the objective of opening up new research perspectives. De Carlo's architecture is a multi-faceted field of work that offers today the possibility to reflect on the role of planners and on the tools at thier disposal to act in a deeply-changing reality. The ensemble of speeches went through the detailed framework of the methods used by a difficult-to-label author who intended to promote the project as a direct expression of an idea of society. The investigations into the correspondence of GDC, on the writings, preparatory and executed material in the IUAV Archivio Progetti and in other archives, the study of the references to the root of this thought, the direct or remote comparison, carried out through the architectures (also created with other authors), draw a wide field of research. The continuous revision of the critical and design tools utilised by GDC, his communication strategies, the connections between design, teaching and publishing are objects of study and possible research tracks yet to be developed. The published and unpublished documents were material for reflection and discussion, and also the realized architecture, on which we wanted to open a debate, not only raising

Similarly with the progressive turn from magic to sciences, architecture underwent a slow transformation starting with the last decades of the 17 th century. Inevitably, the increase in rationality provoked the loss of the mythical component that still infused the Early Modern architectural theory. Carlo Lodoli's thought plays an important part in this process, as it carries forth the questioning of the authority of ancient knowledge, practice and aesthetics, while emphasizing the ethical function of architecture. This paper is an attempt to see Lodoli's theory through the lens of the coeval scientific achievements, while presenting him as an actor of the architectural crisis at the end of classical modernity.

2002

momento di grande importanza la riconsiderazione della figura di Mario Ridolfi le cui ricerche sul modo di pensare e fare architettura continuano ancora oggi, a di stanza di quasi vent'anni dalla sua morte, a •raccontarci " dell'avi dità e di quell 'ansia conoscitiva che hanno "guidato" le infinite in quietudini dell'architetto romano sempre attento al rapporto tra ma ero e micro e agli aspetti di un'espressività ricca di valenze plasti che che si sono formalizzate in architetture che oltre che dalla loro stereometria sono precisate da una quanto mai necessaria e rawici nata lettura del dettaglio. Dalla fine degli anni '20, Ridolfi ha porta to avanti questa personale attività progettuale senza interruzioni, impegnandosi in prima persona su tutti i fronti, da quello didattico a quello professionale, ma rimanendo nello stesso tempo sempre in disparte rispetto al clamore suscitato dagli altri architetti più diretta mente coinvolti nel dibattito architettonico. Le ragioni per cui tanta elaborazione teorica e pratica sia passata in sordina, se non proprio sotto silenzio, sono da ricercare nel carattere stesso del suo lavoro. Un impegno che si è andato sempre più concentrando sui propri aspetti più specifici e più intimi , sino quasi a circoscriversi all'inter no di un'ossessiva variazione sul tema, come sembrano dichiarare gli ultimi progetti elaborati nello splendido isolamento delle "Marmore", in cui il lavoro sul particolare diventa il vero problema attorno cui far ruotare l'intera operazione progettuale. Il dettaglio, esasperato allora sia dimensionalmente che nella sua stratigrafìa segnica, diventa il "tutto", sino ad assumere in sé una connotazione simbolica che invece l 'intero progetto tende ad evitare, condotto com'è, sul filo di una continua ricerca di una corrispondenza alla realtà e di immediata rispondenza alle esigenze primarie della co struzione e della fruizione. Nell'immediato secondo dopo guerra si colloca la prima svolta im portante nell'itinerario progettuale di Ridolfl, e non tanto in riferi mento alle opere costruite in quel periodo che, semmai, presentano ancora carattere di continuità con le opere della sua prima formazio ne professionale e quelle più propriamente razionaliste, quanto piut tosto per il configurarsi di una vera e propria ideologia architettoni ca, comune a lui e ad altri architetti della sua generazione. Questa sì presenta strettamente legata al ruolo che l'edilizia deve svolgere in quel periodo dì ricostruzione in Italia e trova nell'elaborazione del "Manuale dell'architetto" (1946). da Ridolfi redatto con Calcaprina, Cardelli e Fiorentino. per conto del C.N.R. e deii'U.S.I.S., il più diret to veicolo di trasmissione. Ed è proprio quel manuale ad esaltare l'architettura come mestiere, mantenuto, quanto più possibile, nell'alveo della tradizione , e la professione come artigianato, seppure nella sua espressione più al-Francesco Moschlnl lt is always a moment of of great importance when we reconsider the work of Mario Ridolfi and his research into the way we think about archìtecture and practice it, stili now, almost twenty years after his death, when we recall the avid curiosity and desi re for knowledge that drove the Roman architect relentlessly to try to understand the relationship between the infinitely large and the infini tely small and the aspects of expressìvity rich in plastic values that are formalized In architecture and that beyond their stereometry are de manded by a necessary, as in no other field, reading of the details. After the end of the Twenties. Ridolfi carried on this personal design activity without interruption, engaged in first person on every front, from the didactic to the professional, but at the same time remaining outside of the clamor raised by other architects more directly involved in the architectural debate. The reasons for why much theoretical and practical work has gone to a great extent, but not entirely unnoticed are to be found in the very na ture of his work. His attention was concentrated more and more on the specific, most Intimate aspect, almost to the point of limiting himself to the obsessive variation on one theme, as his last works created in the splendid isolation of the "Marmore mountains seem to declare, in which his work on details becomes the real problem, around which the entire project seems to revolve. The details, exaggerated even dimensionally in his project design, be come ·everything" to the point where they take on a symbolic ~onnota tion that the project as a whole seems to avoid, on the other hand. carried out on the line of a constant search for a meeting ground between reality and the immediate response to primary requisites of construction and utilization. Soon after World War Il , we find the first important turning point in the career of Ridolfi, not so much with reference to work built during that period that. if anything, stili bear some relation to those of his early ca reer and his more rationalist period, than, rather, observing the confi guration of a real architectural ideology, shared by him and other archi tects of his generation. This is closely related to the role that the building was to perform in that period of reconstruction in ltaly and finds, in the elaboration of the "Architect's Manual " (1946), edited by Ridolfl with Calcaprina, Cardelli and Fiorentino, for the. C.N .R. and the U.S.I.S., the most direct vehicle of transmlssion. And it is just this manual that exalts architecture as a trade, maintai ned, as much as possible, in the niche of tradition, and the profession as a craft, although in ìts highest expression, to guarantee in this way the role of buìlding as a sack to raid for unqualified labor from the south or the country, in a view of ungoverned speculation and the 188

A Historical-Critical Guide to 20th-Century Architecture in Canton Ticino, 2021

A few years after Tita Carloni completed the building on via Franchini in Mendrisio, he again undertook a building project in an urban setting. The commission came from Carlo Garzoni, owner of the homonymous construction company, with whom Carloni had a fruitful professional partnership that produced interesting results, such as the famous Hotel Arizona, today regrettably disfigured.

2021

Il libro 1947-1991. Architetti italiani nel Mediterraneo. Istituzioni e Autori elabora una serie di osservazioni, raccolte nell’arco di un ventennio e approfondite negli ultimi anni in un saggio non definitivo che intende evidenziare la necessità di ricostruire un racconto di insieme sulle vicende che portarono, dopo la seconda guerra mondiale, alcuni architetti italiani ad avere una proiezione professionale internazionale, entro un assetto di relazioni internazionali politiche ed economiche ben definite. In questo quadro alcune istituzioni e aziende italiane guidate da personalità considerate da alcuni autorevoli studiosi “una comunità epistemica”, si distinsero per visione e capacità imprenditoriale. Questo saggio, in particolare, si concentra sui Paesi del Mediterraneo allargato, e pone il problema delle possibilità ancora aperte per la cultura italiana architettonica e urbana di continuare a contribuire alla costruzione o ricostruzione dell’habitat presente e futuro di quei paesi, spesso tragicamente attraversati negli ultimi tempi da eventi catastrofici ed entrati nella sfera di interesse delle più importanti potenze geopolitiche. Le questioni discusse dal saggio sono state verificate anche attraverso alcune conversazioni con Lucio Barbera, Pietro Barucci, Giuseppe De Rita, alcuni fra i protagonisti di quella fase storica in cui la cultura tecnica italiana si applicò anche all’estero oltre che nel Meridione d’Italia. E con Giovanni Farese, storico dell’economia, coetaneo dell’autrice, consultando il quale è stato possibile identificare gli strumenti finanziari e il quadro normativo che sostenne e rese possibile le azioni di molte imprese italiane all’estero nei decenni indagati. Il libro, inoltre, mette in luce quanto sia stato esiguo il numero di progetti architettonici effettivamente realizzati, nonostante l’ampio lavoro di progettazione e pianificazione svolto all’estero da diversi architetti italiani; un insieme di opere poco indagate e pubblicate dopo il catalogo della Seconda Biennale di Architettura nei Paesi islamici svoltasi nel 1982, durante la presidenza di Paolo Portoghesi, che ne fu il promotore. Si trattò di un’edizione della mostra speciale, interdisciplinare si direbbe oggi, che seguì la prima edizione del 1980 La Presenza del passato: Prima mostra internazionale di architettura nota soprattutto per la mostra “La Strada Novissima”. The book 1947-1991. Italian architects in the Mediterranean. Institutions and Authors elaborates a series of observations collected over a period of twenty years and deepened in recent years, in a non-definitive essay that intends to highlight the need to reconstruct an overall account of the events that led, after the Second World War, some Italian architects to have a projection international professional, within a framework of well-defined international political and economic relations. In this context, some Italian institutions and companies led by personalities considered by some authoritative scholars as “an epistemic community”, stood out for their vision and entrepreneurial ability. This essay, in particular, focuses on the countries of the enlarged Mediterranean, and poses the problem of the still open possibilities for the Italian architectural and urban culture to continue to contribute to the construction or reconstruction of the present and future habitat of those countries, often tragically crossed in recent times by catastrophic events and entered the sphere of interest of the most important geopolitical powers. The issues discussed by the essay were also verified through some conversations with Lucio Barbera, Pietro Barucci, Giuseppe De Rita, some of the protagonists of that historical phase in which the Italian technical culture also applied abroad as well as in Southern Italy. And with Giovanni Farese, economic historian, the same age as the author, by consulting whom it was possible to identify the financial instruments and the regulatory framework that supported and made possible the actions of many Italian companies abroad in the decades under investigation. The book also highlights how small the number of architectural projects actually carried out has been, despite the extensive design and planning work carried out abroad by several Italian architects. A little researched and published work after the catalog of the Second Architecture Biennale in Islamic Countries held in 1982 during the presidency of Paolo Portoghesi who was the promoter, an edition of the special, interdisciplinary exhibition, we would say today, which followed the first edition of 1980 The Presence of the Past: First international architecture edition known above all for the exhibition “La Strada Novissima”. https://www.nuovacultura.it/prodotto/1947-1991-architetti-italiani-nel-mediterraneo-istituzioni-e-autori/

2018

During the 30’s, the Fascist Party achieves its most significant territorial project: the reclamation of the Pontine Marshes and the construction of New Towns. In the same years starts the debate between modernity and tradition, that will characterize the whole history of modern Italian architecture, and the Fascist party obtains its highest approval trying to breathe life into a new Italian society full of new behaviours. This opens a new parenthesis within the debate of modern Italian architecture that not only has to find its own definition but must also be translated as State’s art. In this scenario, the founding cities of the Agro Pontino became the experimental territory for the Italian architects of the Modern era. The pivotal architect of the New Towns was Oriolo Frezzotti, chosen directly by Mussolini to build in 1932 the first new town, Latina, with a rural character and then in 1935, Pontinia where the architect abandoned the vernacular style to leave space to pure geomet...

Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 2014

When we think of the history of modern architecture the story might revolve around the Germans and the Bauhaus, but Diane Ghirardo’s Italy: Modern Architectures in History might give us pause, since it reminds us of a more fundamental driver of “the modern,” namely, the rise of the nation-state. This was a significant aspect for the Prussians during the Enlightenment, and indeed some have argued that Friedrich Schinkel was, in a sense, the first modern for the Germans. But the German unification as such took place only in 1871, and though there are many parallels, the Italian situation was considerably more stressed, for they not only had to build a nation-state after 1861 out of the chaos of unification but also had to do so in the vortex of modern industrialization. Timing was everything; the Greeks won their independence in 1830, but the Greeks never accepted—or perhaps one can say embraced— “the crisis of modernity” in quite the same way as the Italians.

Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 471 Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Architecture: Heritage, Traditions and Innovations (AHTI 2020), 2020

Moisei Yakovlevich Ginzburg (1892-1946)-an outstanding architect of the XX century and one of the key figures of constructivism used to pass the first years of his studies in Europe and most of all-around 4 years-in Italy, in Milan, at the Brera Academy and, as it turned out, in Milan Polytechnic. The paper proposes to describe, on the basis of archival data, the conditions that formed Ginzburg's creative personality, the features of the architectural education system, the methods of teachers, the main trends in the architecture and urban planning of Italy of those years, in relation to the further work of the architect and his theoretical legacy, pointing out some possible influences and interactions.

A Historical-Critical Guide to 20th-Century Architecture in Canton Ticino, 2021

The building is set on a slightly sloping site on the Chiasso-Lugano cantonal road on the southwest edge of the town. The building hosts a complex programme. On the entrance floor there is a restaurant-bar, a shop and some spaces for the management of the service station, now disused; in the first basement level, facing the valley, is the engineering offce of the client, Dante Gerosa (for whom Carloni carried out various projects, including the villa at Rancate and the buildings with residential, commercial and hotel functions known as "Albergo Milano" in Mendrisio); the second basement level houses garages, cellars and some utility rooms. The upper floors house two to five-room apartments. The drawings, kept at the Fondazione Archivi Architetti Ticinesi (FAAT) and the Mendrisio Municipal Technical Offce, document numerous variants that enable us to understand the design themes and reconstruct the genesis of the building.

The subversive architecture of Giuseppe Terragni - Politicization of architectural discourse in Fascist Italy Introduction - The architectural discourse in Fascist Italy A new building typology: the Casa del Fascio Giuseppe Terragni’s Casa del Fascio in Como Socio-cultural excursus: architecture and politics in post-World War I Italy Futurism and Novecento (1914-1930) New architecture and the Regime Rationalism and the “gruppo 7” Conclusion - A universal poetry