Italy Architecture 5

Italy Architecture Part 4


To these must be added E. Zacchiroli, in the effective Depot for the Transport Company of Bologna (1983), and J. Lafuente, overall for Esso alla Magliana in Rome (1980), redundant in the structural emphasis. In terms of virtuous developments in structural or plant technology, an important component of constructivism, now assumed to be the basal modality of form, various presences can be mentioned. According to ALLCOUNTRYLIST, the research of A. Mangiarotti, conducted on constructive modules defining tout court architecture, as in the elegant ” U / 70 ” prefabrication system used in Alzate Brianza (1971). The technological commitment of PL Spadolini, who manages to communicate with the monumental heritage, as in the restoration of the Palazzo del Monte dei Paschi di Siena (1972). Some works by L. Savioli, including the Nuovo Mercato dei Fiori in Pescia (1971-81) on the theme of large tyred roofs, as well as the researches of L. Pellegrini, including the Residential cell in polyester resin (1974).

But the Italian architect who most of all has linked his fortune to technological emphasis, which has become an architectural image, is R. Piano. This author, before and after the international success of the grand formal machination created with the Beaubourg in Paris, developed with the Englishman R. Rogers, developed both large technological complexes on a large scale, such as the B and B Italia offices in Novedrate (1973)., and small residential themes, as in the four single-family homes in Cusago near Milan (1974). More recent is the construction of the new San Nicola stadium in Bari (1990).

In the field of research on the ” large dimension ”, which emerged from the emphasis of the ” affluent ” society of the 1960s, is mainly V. Gregotti, of whom the decisive effort carried out in the 1950s and in the last decade should be remembered. in Casabella magazine. Active since the 1950s in the so-called neoliberty groupMilanese, subsequent developments see him as critical of the developments matured under the banner of ” after modern architecture ”. Gregotti becomes the elaborator of that particular poetic ” of territorial morphology as the language of the site ”, of the architectural work as a ” geographical ” expression, obtained by reducing the artifacts, mostly of large dimensions, to a few articulations, in the hope thereby obtaining quality control over the vast environment. A commitment that, alongside significant stages, sometimes risks slipping into the academy of the ” summary ”, as happens in small planning occasions. See the strange “ reduction ” to two floors of the wall, within which he closes the project for a single-family villa in Novara (1977), or for the House in Coldrerio (1983). More formally significant is instead in the residential systems of the urban suburbs – from the Zen district of Palermo (1970) to the building ” dams ” thrown to bar the valley in the 167 district of Cefalù (1976), to the large university structures, including those of the Departments of the University of Palermo (1969-84), developed together with G. Pollini. This training theme becomes an effective proposal when it is related to the large scale of the ” site ”, through essential signs, rich in archetypal value; as in the Montedison Research Center in Portici (1982), where the theme of the large portals takes the form of ” mythical ” access to the building complex behind it,

Beyond Gregotti’s position, in which the theme of large size, characteristic of the architectural culture of the 1960s, tries to find a way to provide a suitable response to the themes of large scale, the research on large size has informed some building projects – of economic and popular construction – whose thematic truth did not imply a run-up to gigantism and out of scale. Emblematic of this emphasis is the controversial mega-building of Corviale in Rome (1972-82), to which they have linked their name, among others, M. Fiorentino, F. Gorio, PM Lugli, M. Valori: engaged instead in the fifties, under the leadership of Ridolfi and Quaroni, in Tiburtino iii, in the poetics of neorealism and in the construction of a building ” neighborhood ” dimension on a traditional scale. In the megacomplex of Corviale, which amasses the 8000 people of the original economic and social housing district in the only building “ one mile long ”, the space public in the street and in the square, the place for social gatherings. Those spaces that L. Kahn defines the ” corridors ” and ” lounges ” of the city.

Out of the line of a formal obedience to rationalism but active in its methodological line, the research of G. De Carlo has moved: one of the protagonists of the Italian architecture and urban planning debate from the 1950s to today. His long architectural career has significant stages in the achievements for the University of Urbino (1962-83) and in the contribution offered, with the Matteotti District in Terni (1969-74), to the problem, which arose in the 1960s and 1970s, of the relationship between architecture -urban planning in the growth of the city. In which, overcoming the disappointed ideological hopes and the technocratic ” certainties ” of planning control of the new city, it has grafted on the previous planning convictions a further level, the participatory one of the population; who,

Italy Architecture 5