2 G Riegler Riewe / International Architecture Review Number 31. Nexus - Tetra Pak by Roger Riewe.

VARIOS

ISBN 10: 8425219590 / ISBN 13: 9788425219597

Editore: Gustavo Gili, 2002., 2002

Riguardo questo articolo

143 Seiten mit zahlreichen Fotografien und Grundrissen. Mit Texten von Eva Guttmann,Peter Allison und Bart Lootsma.Texte spanisch / englisch.Beiheft mit deutscher Übersetzung liegt bei.Gutes und sauberes Exemplar. Sprache: Spanisch Gewicht in Gramm: 850.

Codice articolo 24972

Dati bibliografici

• Titolo: 2 G Riegler Riewe / International Architecture Review Number 31. Nexus - Tetra Pak by Roger Riewe.
• Editore: Gustavo Gili, 2002.
• Data di pubblicazione: 2002
• Lingua: Spagnolo
• ISBN 10: 8425219590
• ISBN 13: 9788425219597
• Rilegatura: 4° kartoniert.
• Peso: 850 grammi
• Cataloghi dei venditori:
  • Architektur und Bauwesen

Descrizione articolo

Riassunto

Associates since 1987, the Austrian architects Florian Riegler and Roger Riewe, with their professional practice in Graz and Cologne, tackle their projects in a subtle and practical way, renouncing formal authorship as the motor of the design process. Their buildings respond to the environment and to the cultural baggage of society without wishing to offer the spectator a stunning form with pre-existing symbolic meanings. Quite the opposite, in fact: Riegler Riewe s buildings reveal themselves to be places in which the user has a highly active role in the definition and perception of the spaces. This number of the magazine 2G demonstrates how their planning strategies enable them to readily tackle buildings of an ever-increasing size and complexity, from transport infrastructures such as the rail stations in Innsbruck and Vienna or the airports in Graz and Hamburg, taking in educational buildings like the Computer and Electronics Institutes of the University of Graz, complex residential projects and the football stadium in Cologne.

Estratto. © Ristampato con autorizzazione. Tutti i diritti riservati.

Excerpt from the nexus section. Tetra Pak, or an Architecture of the Background by Roger Riewe Tetra Pak For the most part we use open materials, materials that are not occupied by or subject to a meaning. Open materials are for us those materials that cannot per se be connected with nature or ecology, or not those materials that are automatically associated with the past because they were deliberately used in the past as a medium of meaning in order to present and misuse architecture as an instrument of power. Where we do use materials that bear a certain meaning we change their form by taking them apart, deconstructing them and putting them together in a new way in order to deprive them of their meaning. By using materials without a meaning or that are relatively poor in meaning the perception of the viewer is not bound to certain attempts at interpretation, as would happen with materials that convey meaning. Creating a material surface that is neutral in terms of meaning, which acquires, to a certain extent, an immaterial character, allows much space for perception, not only through the depth of the surface or, as Jean-François Lyotard puts it, to allow it be seen that there is something invisible in the visible. Architecture is background. With these premises we choose the appropriate material for each commission with a great deal of care, also taking into account the ways of working it. Thus it can happen that materials that are usually seen as belonging to the area of low tech are used with a high level of technical expenditure, similar to the application in the area of high tech but with the important difference that the aestheticisation takes place on different levels. In high tech it becomes a formal element, as a result of which high tech becomes a style, whereas in low tech, in contrast, the aestheticisation, inasmuch as one can speak of it at all, is not celebrated; it has a minor, project-related, contextual meaning. Sol LeWitt: New materials are one of the great afflictions of contemporary art. Some artists confuse new materials with new ideas. There is nothing worse than seeing art that wallows in gaudy baubles [...]. The danger is, I think, in making the physicality of the materials so important that it becomes the idea of the work (another kind of expressionism). Thus, for example, it is certainly significant that in our buildings for the Institutes for Computer Science and Electronics a rough in situ concrete surface was made without construction joints and that the facade was not made of pre-cast elements. Equally it was also important to us that the facade of the Innsbruck Railway Station building should not be erected using a pre-cast construction system but with in situ concrete as the perception of and the effect achieved by these different construction methods are very different. That the facade in Innsbruck was ultimately made with a special concrete technology (self-compacting concrete) and with the first use of pigmentation on this scale was a consequence of our design requirements. What we attempted was not under any circumstances to give the technology used a special value or to celebrate it. Using the same approach in 1992 we built the thinnest facade in the field of Austrian housing and in 1994 used the first thermal glazing in office building to be filled with heavy gases. What applies to the materials and the execution is also a premise for the details and detailing. The details never assert themselves in the foreground; they play a minor role that is, nevertheless, important in the overall context of the project. The development of the details in the planning phase demands a great deal of time, as the contextuality in the overall concept must be considered as well as the formation of the detail as an individual element. At the same time and this is perhaps the most difficult thing about this process we also take into account local levels of construction and specialist skills. This is not intended to imply that good architecture can only be made where there are specialist skilled workers of a particular standard. Le Corbusier s La Tourette, Peter Märkli s Haus für Skulpturen in Giornico in Switzerland or Max Bill s Hochschule für Gestaltung in Ulm, to cite just a few examples, prove the opposite. Hereby we are dealing with a very specific form of the glocal, that is an overlay of a supra-local, indeed globally shaped, approach and local circumstances. In the future we will have to examine the question whether, particularly in the area of cultural studies, the term glocal for our architecture and our approach is too vague or even wrongly connoted and whether our approach to architecture could be better described by the term eurocal.