The spatialforces is a collective of architects, designers and researchers who came together to enhance their understanding of what architecture is all about. Investigating a wide range of topics spatialforces challenge the modes in which our built environment is composed. Our theoretical research and productive output is deeply focussed on how architecture is connected to fields such as art, design, history, politics and critical theory.
“The book takes up the (post-)operaist concept of immaterial labour (cf. Maurizio Lazzarato: 1998, Toni Negri, Michael Hardt: 2000) and relates it to spatial processes and architectural projects from the 1960s. The book’s title is the hypotheses of its investigation. It allows to be exemplified with the following questions: Do we find, parallel to a dominant cultural practice of immaterial labour new forms and orders of architecture? Which forms does it take on? Or does workplace architecture disappear at all parallel to the blurring of the formerly clearly marked spaces of the factory?”
“Design is associated with power. Designers plan to commit resources and thereby affect the lives of many. Designers are actors in the application of power.” - Horst Rittel in ‘The Reasoning of Designers’
aus: Martin Büdel: Mehr arbeiten - Carmen Losmann // Work Hard Play Hard
“Losmann gelingt es in ihrem Film ein gewisses Unbehagen auf den Zuschauer zu übertragen, das von den Ambitionen der Unternehmen ausgeht und einen Teil der Alltagsrealitäten vieler ArbeitnehmerInnen ausmacht. Sie legt Diskurse und Praktiken offen, mit denen »moderne« Großunternehmen“ versuchen, „in die gesellschaftliche Praxis einzudringen“, wie es der Soziologe Henri Lefebvre formulierte. Ein Unternehmen, so schrieb Lefebvre, schlage „der gesamten Gesellschaft seine Rationalität als Organisations- und Verwaltungsmodell vor […] reißt Funktionen an sich […] die morgen der städtischen Gesellschaft gehören müßten: Wohnen, Erziehung, […] Freizeit usw. […] Auf seine Weise vereinigt das Unternehmen das gesellschaftliche Leben [und] unterwirft es den totalitären Ansprüchen“.2 In diesem Prozess, so zeigt Losmanns Film, versuchen die Führungskräfte der Unternehmen immer weniger dem Zufall zu überlassen: von der räumlichen Gestaltung der Arbeitsplätze bis hin zur Selbstoptimierung der Angestellten.” via
Carceri d'invenzione (1749/1750), Giovanni Battista Piranesi
A walktrough this serie of Piranesi engravings, an animatition created by Gregoire Dupond for Factum Arte to be part of the exhibition The art of Piranesi. via
What I am especially bothered by today is that, particularly in the media, design is being used as a 'lifestyle asset.' I’m bothered by the arbitrariness and the thoughtlessness with which many things are produced and brought to the market. There are so many unnecessary things we produce, not only in the sector of consumer goods, but also in architecture, in advertising. We have too many unnecessary things everywhere. And I would even go as far as to describe this as inhumane. That is the situation today. But actually, it has always been a problem.
JAN GEHL: «ARCHITECTS KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT PEOPLE»
by Matthias Oppliger
He likes high-rises only from far away, he thinks cars should be banned from city-centers and he wants the public space to be the «living room of a city»: The danish urban planner Jan Gehl visited the Swiss City of Basel on an official mission.
As adress of welcome Jan Gehl hands a business card. Printed on its back is a photography. It shows the typical yellow-red tram from Baselland. «This should be in Switzerland.» Gehl gathered the various pictures on his business cards during numerous travels.Despite his hometown Copenhagen being one of the most liveable places of the world, the danish architect Jan Gehl gets about a lot. With his company «Gehl Architects» he helps cities around the world to build «cities for people». A few days ago, he visited Basel on invitation from the local planning department. We met him outside the «Gundeldingerfeld», where he held a well attended public lecture about sustainable cities the day before.
Jan Gehl, how many steps did you walk so far today?
I know that precisely (he fumbles for something and brings out a little red device). This is called a pedometer and it was given to me by the mayor of Kaliningrad. It says I walked 5000 steps so far, but actually it should be more. So I have to walk another 5000 steps today. You get seven more years to live, when you walk 10'000 steps a day.
Where have you been?
I have been walking around with these crazy people here all over this neighbourhood (Gundeldingen).
I’ve read somewhere that you like to stroll around a city and that you always bring your little camera along. What pictures do you take?
People mostly. People using public spaces. And I’m also interested in good solutions to planning problems. Or, of course, in silly solutions. I use this pictures in my presentations as I did yesterday. Or in my books. I’ve done this on five continents for fifty years. So I’ve got a lot of pictures by now. Pictures of people are always interesting. You can go on for hours looking at them, but by looking at pictures of houses or motorcars you will get bored pretty soon.
Did you take a picture in Basel too?
I haven’t had time to take many, because we worked a lot during my stay.
But did you take one? What drew your interest walking through the streets of Basel?
The first picture I took was of the little ferryboat on the Rhine, which was not propelled by anything but the sun and the streaming river. It’s genius. And I also took one of the Münsterplatz. I like it, it is a fine example of a good old city square. Its dimensions are within the human scale. You can still see the people standing at the far end. Modern squares are often built outside the human scale and therefore you lose sense of its dimension.
Just a few years ago, this exact square was regularly used as parking space. Now we have somehow managed to get rid of them.
This is a general pattern all over the world. The mutual love affair between people and their cars has waned. People start to think there might be other qualities in cities than just making space for cars.
“The mutual love affair between people and their cars has waned. People start to think there might be other qualities in cities than just making space for cars.”
It’s kind of a cliché to ask a foreigner if he likes Basel. But with you, it actually makes sense. Therefore, how do you like Basel?
Since I am only here for a short stay I can’t say too much. But I have the feeling that it is a nice city. Even more importantly, I feel that the spirit in the planning department and among the politicians I’ve met is promising. I truly believe these people are seriously working on improving this city. I feel confident and I feel comfortable.
However, a much more interesting question is: What didn’t you like about Basel?
One thing which I commented on, was the fact that there is a lot of asphalt in this city. Asphalt is for cars, busses and bicycles. In Basel cars and people all seem to have the same priority. Therefore I suggested that all pedestrian areas including sidewalks be celebrated by shifting them over a string of years into beautiful stone areas. This sends out a clear message: We would like you to be here and this public space should become the living room of the city.
You made Copenhagen one of the most liveable city worldwide. When do you start doing your magic in Basel?
I could start on Monday.
But you won’t?
No, I need an official invitation. But I can easily see that we could have fun together. We could increase the liveability in this city. Who knows, we might even find some kind of formal collaboration.
What advice did you give to our planners?
I am not a strong believer in giving advice after only 24 hours in any city. But my general advice to all cities is that they should do a systematic surveillance of what is going on in the city, how people are using it. It is exactly the same what traffic engineers have done for decades. They know everything about the life of traffic. And we generally know nothing about the lives of the people. It is a well known thing that you plan for the things you have information about. The things you know, you take care of. This is our message: Get information about how your city is used and then improve it where it needs improvement.
Your formula is quite simple: The fewer the cars, the more liveable a city is. In reality, there is a huge uproar with every parking slot that is taken away.
Only if it’s not done by God. Have God on your side and everything will be alright.
We have to pray for less traffic?
You could also provide information about how other cities have dealt with traffic. And that the level of traffic is something which can be influenced. People have to know that a city with less traffic is healthier, more sustainable, and more liveable.
How do you change people and their habits? For example: If someone doesn’t like walking and bicycling, this person will probably continue driving by car.
Let him. Because there will be other people who are more concerned about the environment and their health. The goal has to be to steadily increase the part of the public traffic which is done by your own energy or public transportation. Many cities around the world, small or large, have been quite successful in doing this. If it is attractive to use the bicycle, people will use it. If public transportation works well, people will use it. It has to become a good or even better alternative to your car. Traffic is like water, it goes where it can. And when it can’t go somewhere, it stops.
“If it is attractive to use the bicycle, people will use it. If public transportation works well, people will use it.”
So it is more a question of options instead of rules?
We found people’s behavior depends on what you invite them to do. The more streets you have, the more traffic you get. A more attractive public realm will be used by more people. One example is the congestion-rate in London, where you have to pay eight pounds to enter the city-center with your car. The next day, there were 20 percent less cars. A city has the level of traffic it invites, also people tend to accept a situation when it is given by God. We found that it is easier to reduce traffic, if God helps us. For example when the Embarcadero Freeway, which was the lifeline to San Francisco, got destroyed by an earthquake everybody expected the city to die. But after three months they noticed that they had no problem at all. Today San Francisco is much more liveable thanks to that earthquake. That is why, when we start working in a city, we ask them «do you have earthquakes which can take care of this or that disruptive street?».
Yesterday after your lecture, someone asked you about participation. This is a huge subject in Basel. How can a city involve its inhabitants in urban planning?
I have been teaching architecture for 40 years. And I am a very strong believer in education and information. All these issues about making a liveable city for yourself and your children and your grandchildren is something that people are extremely interested in. My experience is that if you show people better alternatives, then they will understand. I think participation is great. But people have to be properly informed of what their options are. If you skip the information part and just say that you want to take away all the parking space in the city-center you will have a revolution. I always tell the same story: When my wife and I had our 45th anniversary we decided to take our bicycles to the restaurant and pedaled side by side through Copenhagen. We were both around 70 and we suddenly realized how much better our city has become. I think this is the most important thing: Every morning when you wake up, you have to feel that your city is a little better than the day before. That is a nice feeling, because it gives you hope for the generations to come.
This is your urbanistic vision. How do you prevent its corruption through compromises?
Of course there are compromises. And of course when we finish a job at a place we leave them a fantastic plan and when we come back after a few years we see they have only done 60 percent of it. That is part of life. In the many years I have worked now in improving cities, I have seen so many wonderful turnarounds. The hardest case I know is London where they have a number of committees who are still discussing what we suggested to them ten years ago. Recently I have been to Perth in Australia. I did my first consultancy of Perth 22 years ago, in this time Perth turned from being an awful city to a wonderful city. Where there were cars and deserted streets there now are people walking around and drinking cappuccinos. This makes it worthwhile to be an elderly person.
Because you can see progress?
Because I can see these things happen.
You had your first contact with the human aspect of architecture thanks to your wife, a psychologist. She asked you, why architects never think about what their buildings do to people. Are psychologists the better architects?
No I don’t think so. But they have an angle of looking at the world which is different. The conversations with my wife revealed that the whole aspect of social and psychological sciences was completely missing in the education of architecture. And it still is. They learn very little about people in landscape architecture schools or in planning schools. In the sixties there started to be a greater openness between the different scientific disciplines. The traditional way of doing things and thinking about them was being questioned. All this led to windows being opened and people crossing borders. I kind of got caught in this and spent the next 50 years trying to find out more. Nowadays, all this is much sought-after and our work is spread immensely all over the world both with my books being translated in 30 languages and our company working in five continents.
You said architecture is about the room between the buildings, not about their form. I guess, there might be a few so called star-architects who would rather disagree.
Let them. There was this guy at a conference in London. He said: «I feel sorry for you, architects. Because your means of communication is a still photo. And on a still photo all you can see is form. So constantly you communicate form to each other and you get more and more obsessed with form. This is not architecture this is sculpture.» Architecture is the interaction between form and life. And architecture is good only if this interaction works. The same is true for cities. It’s not about buildings and streets, it’s about the interaction of life and the physical environment. It is this dimension of architecture and planning which has been pushed out by the modernists. Therefore we need a new planning paradigm: Cities have to be liveable, healthy and sustainable.
“Architecture is the interaction between form and life. And architecture is good only if this interaction works.”
In Basel we are so proud of our own star-architects, they seem to be allowed to build almost anything. In recent years they increasingly started building high-rises.
I have a number of viewpoints about high-rises. Certainly you should never build high-rises in windy climates or near the north-sea. Generally, high-rises are very nice when you see them from five kilometers away or when you are in the top floor. But when you’re close or when you’re in the third floor theres not much to be said about it. In my book I also point out, that after five or six stories you stop being part of the city and start being part of the airline system. You lose contact with your city. There can be reasons to build a high-rise but it has to be done with sensitivity.
You’re a sharp critic about architecture and urban planning. How come you’re still such an optimistic?
I am increasingly optimistic. That is because I have seen so many things change to the better on the ground of common sense. We really know now how to clean up after the cars in the existing cities. Where I see the greatest problems are in the fast growing cities of the third world. But all the things we talked about can be done there too. Because they are cheap and easy to do and everybody profits when more is done for the people, walking and bicycling.
The Interview first appeared on March 18th, 2015 , at www.tageswoche.ch
Many thanks to Matthias Oppliger
Jan Gehl
«I have gratuated from architecture school in 1960. That was the all time lowest point in city planning.» It is this trenchant but charming critique which is somewhat of a trademark for Jan Gehl. The 78-year-old from Copenhagen has dedicated his professional life to the «human aspect» in city planning. Thanks to his work at the university of Copenhagen for decades, his hometown now is one of the most liveable cities in the world. With his company «Gehl Architects» he helps cities around the globe to build «cities for people».
Matthias Oppliger
is a Basel/Switzerland-based journalist regularly reporting on urbanism and urban development. TagesWoche is a young non-profit media project, its main focus is on local online-coverage.
Kopieren ist etwas Gröberes. Ein Künstler, der kopiert, ist vielleicht so etwas wie ein Neandertaler, der herumläuft und ein totes Mammut findet. Das Mammut ist fast vollständig verrottet, aber es gibt ein paar Teile, die man noch essen kann. Und der Neandertaler nimmt sich diese Teile und verleibt sie sich ein.
Pier Paolo Tamburelli
Editor of San Rocco Magazine - interviewed by Kristina Herresthal und Lisa Kadel from Baunetzwoche on originality, copying and authorship.
„D.I.Y. ist gestohlen worden, und wir scheinen es nicht mal bemerkt zu haben. Mit dem Ideal der Selbstermächtigung auf ihren Fahnen fegte eine Seuche über unser Land und hinterlässt von beschissener Heimwerkerei entstellte Wohngebiete, von schlecht gekochten Gourmetmahlzeiten zerstörte Familien und haufenweise kaum benutze Werkzeuge, übrig gebliebene Verbrauchsmaterialien und unvollendete Projekte. Dieses eigenartige Elend erreicht uns unter den vertrauten Initialen D.I.Y., was “Do it yourself” bedeutet. Die Idee war gut gemeint, aber ihre Wirklichkeit ist unheimlich“
PROTOCOLS OF ATHENS. Swiss Architecture Museum (SAM) presents Aristide Antonas
via SAM
With the exhibition “Protocols of Athens”, SAM is breaking new ground, because despite its innovativeness, contemporary Greek architecture has been paid little public attention until now, and has been the subject of hardly any academic reflection.
In continuation of the exhibition series "Spatial Positions", which was initiated in 2013 and focuses on works by contemporary architects and artists at the boundary of the architectural discipline, this exhibition addresses the oeuvre of the Greek architect and philosopher Aristide Antonas (born 1963 in Athens). On the basis of his primarily speculative projects and theoretical writings, it deals with the issue of the critical potential of the financial and sovereign debt crisis (which has been ongoing since 2009) with regard to contemporary building culture in Greece: at the latest, it is since the crisis began, that the Greek architecture scene has been forced to rethink the role of its profession, to conduct a reassessment and to add a social dimension to architecture.
Interview with Aristide Antonas by Evelyn Steiner on Uncube
“Protocols of Athens” from 07.03.2015 to 26.04.2015, Swiss Architecture Museum Basel. Steinenberg 7, Basel, Switzerland
THE DARK LANDMARK - The Palace of Justice of Brussels
Today the debate on architectural landmarks is more or less led by urban marketing campaigns. Even the city administrations based in faraway province towns wish for just a little "Bilbao effect" to take place in their hometowns. In this genuine context, landmarks are supposed to generate a sense of identity and consciousness for a city or even a country. But this positive view shows only one side of the coin.
What happens if the semantic meaning of a landmark turn against these well worded narratives, prescribed by local authorities? If it begins to symbolize an alternative historiography, which has been expelled from the official discourse? The strong effect of such an unintentional turn away became apparent in Brussels, the Belgian capital.
On the top of what was once the gallows mountain of the city, high above the Marolles neighborhood, the Palace of Justice was built in 1883 on the initiative of King Leopold II.: A giant built from stone and marble, and the biggest building of its time. 26,000 square meters of megalomania, whose immense mass opposed all attempts to be put into service for the official reading of what Brussel is all about – a cosmopolitan, creative and modern city.
The Palace of Justice creates a meaning out of itself. This „unique architectural monstrosity“, as W.G. Sebald called it in his novel Austerlitz , is connected to the Belgian history like no other building. It was built with the bloody gold, which Leopold II. pressed out from the Congo Free State. His reign in the heart of Africa was responsible for the deaths of an estimated 2 to 15 Million Congolese. Only at first sight the Palace of Justice was a symbol of a civil society and the supremacy of the common law. In reality, it was just a democratic looking Potemkin Village for the occult absolutistic power at his back.
After the occupation of Belgium by the German Armed Forces in 1941, the collosal appearance of the Palace of Justice attract the admiring looks of Adolf Hitler, who was shocked by facing the real dimensions of this, „largest accumulation of stone blocks in Europe“ – to quote Sebald a second time. And finally, the building became the iconic background of the trial against the child abuser Marc Dutroux and his accomplices – a symbol of a country close to a moral abyss. The fiction of a democratic nation state that is represented in this building, turned into a symbol of the darkest parts of Belgium's history.
Still today, his dimensions appear gigantic. Eight inner courtyards, 27 big and 245(!) small courtrooms are arranged around the central hall, the Salle des pas perdus. The already labyrinthian impression of his interior was intensified by random set breakthroughs and additional false ceilings. In this building the rationalistic design of the architect Joseph Poelaert has turned to the opposite. He also paid a high price for the realization of his visions: he went mad.
"The phenomenon of “defensive” or “disciplinary” architecture, as it is known, remains pervasive. From ubiquitous protrusions on window ledges to bus-shelter seats that pivot forward, from water sprinklers and loud muzak to hard tubular rests, from metal park benches with solid dividers to forests of pointed cement bollards under bridges, urban spaces are aggressively rejecting soft, human bodies.[...] By making the city less accepting of the human frame, we make it less welcoming to all humans. By making our environment more hostile, we become more hostile within it."
Alex Andreou on "Anti-homeless spikes: ‘Sleeping rough opened my eyes to the city’s barbed cruelty"
Atlantropa and the draining of the dutch Zuiderzee - „Weltbauen“ in the modern age.
In 1932 the german architect Herman Sörgel presents his plans of the „Atlantropa“-project, a fully man made continent. By lowering the surface of the Mediterranean Sea up to 200 meters, Sörgel wants to open up new land for settlement and agriculture. The search for living space (Lebensraum) for the People of Europe - which leads to the east-expansion of the Nazi Regime during the Second World War - was a crucial theme for Hermann Sörgel as for many of hin contemporaries. But unlike the nazis and their predecessors, Sörgels intention was to create a peaceful and pacifist world at the junction of the two continents. In his eyes the combination of Europe and Africa should lead to one of three gigantic "great continents": Asia, America and Atlantropa.
The early years of the 20th century are characterized by the image of an omnipotent world creator - men like Sörgel, who doesn’t dare to change the surface of the world through utopian terra-forming. These macro projects are political architecture that create a new geography, a new economy a also a new society. These plans like Atlantropa and Bruno Tauts Alpine Architecture never have been realized, but the draining of the dutch Zuiderzee has become real.
Eines Tages erhielt ich einen Anruf der Deutschen Regierung. Man sagte mir, Frankreich und England würden einen Pavillon bauen und Deutschland auch. Ich sagte: "Was ist ein Pavillon? Ich habe nicht die geringste Ahnung." Mir wurde gesagt: "Wir brauchen eine Pavillon. Entwerfen Sie einen, aber nicht zuviel Aufwand!"
gummygunk
blakekathryn
theartofmadeline
janainaart