Anthropology has had a remarkable impact on modern culture in stressing the role of cultural diversities as unfitting with the universalization brought about by technology. Space and the city, of course, were not exceptions. Team X’s revision of the orthodox approach of Modern Movement was grounded on this cultural shift, epitomized by Levi Strauss’s discoveries, a main reference for those architects. Of course the cultural context was much wider, including sociology, art and existentialism. I just mention Paul Ricoeur’s seminal theories on the risks of universalization. Since then, other cultures were no longer overshadowed by the technology-oriented idea of progress. Non-Western cities and spaces became a non-marginal reference. The Smithsons’ idea of mat-building, just to quote an example, was brought about by this new attitude. At that time anthropologists had to travel to “foreign countries”. And so did architects: van Eyck for example. Nowadays, in the tragic age of migration, we no longer need to travel to confront other societies: they reach endlessly the Western world. Yet the broad approach of those architects needs to be further broadened and partly modified. Indeed we are urged to envisage a future architecture for a society which is not simply multiracial. For migration is colossal and migrants are, not merely uprooted and homeless, but also “spaceless”. A complex condition, far from the mere “cultural exchange”of the Sixties. Architecture has to rethink the principle of settlement, and partly reconsider nomadic and ephemeral conditions. Le Corbusier’s, rather whimsically, gave to a tent camp - le temple primitif - the primacy as original architecture. His hierarchy unexpectedly turns out to be profetic, much as Quatremère’s tent, or Laugier’s cabane. An unusual return to the origins permeates our future vision of a world with the “primitive” architecture of shelters and refugees camps. I will try to focus on the architectural outcomes of cities were the ephemeral parts will become increasingly extensive.

L’antropologia ha avuto un notevole impatto sulla cultura moderna specialmente nel rimarcare come le diversità culturali esistenti siano poco adeguate alla universalizzazione proposta dalla tecnologia. Lo spazio e la città, naturalmente, non fanno eccezione. La revisione dell’approccio ortodosso del Movimento Moderno operata dal Team X era basata su questo cambiamento culturale, epitomizzato dalle scoperte di Levi Strauss, un riferimento primario per quegli architetti. Naturalmente il contesto culturale era molto più ampio, in quanto comprendeva, fra l’altro, la sociologia, l’arte e l’esistenzialismo. Citiamo semplicemente le fondamentali teorie di Paul Ricoeur sui rischi della universalizzazione. Sin da allora le “culture altre” non furono più del tutto oscurate dall’idea tecnocratica di progresso. Le città e gli spazi non Occidentali divennero così un riferimento non marginale. L’idea di mat-building degli Smithson, giusto per citare un esempio, fu concepita all’interno di questo nuovo atteggiamento. In quei tempi gli antropologi dovevano recarsi nei cosiddetti “paesi stranieri”. E allo stesso modo facevano gli architetti: van Eyck per esempio. Al giorno d’oggi per confrontarci con altre società non abbiamo bisogno di viaggiare: esse stesse raggiungono il mondo occidentale in un esodo senza fine. Eppure la visione ampia di quegli architetti necessita di essere ulteriormente ampliata e parzialmente modificata. Siamo infatti perentoriamente chiamati a concepire una futura architettura per una società che non è semplicemente multirazziale. Infatti il fenomeno della migrazione è colossale e i migranti non sono solo “sradicati” e “senzatetto”, ma anche “senza spazio”. Una condizione complessa che determina uno scenario molto diverso dal semplice “scambio culturale” degli anni Sessanta. L’architettura deve ripensare la nozione di insediamento, e riconsiderare le condizioni “nomadica” ed “effimera.” Le Corbusier, curiosamente, conferì ad un accampamento di tende il primato di architettura originaria. Questa sua gerarchia inaspettatamente fu profetica, così come la tenda di Quatremere o la capanna di Laugier. Un inusuale ritorno alle origini permea la nostra futura visione di un mondo costituito dalla presenza dell’architettura “primitiva” delle baracche e dei campi profughi. Notevoli sono i risvolti architettonici di città dove le parti effimere diventeranno crescentemente estese.

Sbacchi, M. (2016). New Tents. In Migration and the Built Environment in the Mediterranean and the Middle East (pp. 39-42). Ariccia : Ermes Servizi Editoriali.

New Tents

SBACCHI, Michele
2016-01-01

Abstract

Anthropology has had a remarkable impact on modern culture in stressing the role of cultural diversities as unfitting with the universalization brought about by technology. Space and the city, of course, were not exceptions. Team X’s revision of the orthodox approach of Modern Movement was grounded on this cultural shift, epitomized by Levi Strauss’s discoveries, a main reference for those architects. Of course the cultural context was much wider, including sociology, art and existentialism. I just mention Paul Ricoeur’s seminal theories on the risks of universalization. Since then, other cultures were no longer overshadowed by the technology-oriented idea of progress. Non-Western cities and spaces became a non-marginal reference. The Smithsons’ idea of mat-building, just to quote an example, was brought about by this new attitude. At that time anthropologists had to travel to “foreign countries”. And so did architects: van Eyck for example. Nowadays, in the tragic age of migration, we no longer need to travel to confront other societies: they reach endlessly the Western world. Yet the broad approach of those architects needs to be further broadened and partly modified. Indeed we are urged to envisage a future architecture for a society which is not simply multiracial. For migration is colossal and migrants are, not merely uprooted and homeless, but also “spaceless”. A complex condition, far from the mere “cultural exchange”of the Sixties. Architecture has to rethink the principle of settlement, and partly reconsider nomadic and ephemeral conditions. Le Corbusier’s, rather whimsically, gave to a tent camp - le temple primitif - the primacy as original architecture. His hierarchy unexpectedly turns out to be profetic, much as Quatremère’s tent, or Laugier’s cabane. An unusual return to the origins permeates our future vision of a world with the “primitive” architecture of shelters and refugees camps. I will try to focus on the architectural outcomes of cities were the ephemeral parts will become increasingly extensive.
2016
978-886-975-154-7
Sbacchi, M. (2016). New Tents. In Migration and the Built Environment in the Mediterranean and the Middle East (pp. 39-42). Ariccia : Ermes Servizi Editoriali.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
80_New Tents.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Articolo principale
Dimensione 2.15 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.15 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
abstract CAUMME.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Abstract pubblicato su volume cartaceo
Dimensione 88.17 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
88.17 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10447/217943
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact