Architecture and Nature

block

culture

and nature

translated by fernanda critelli

This collection, edited by Fernando Luiz Lara and Silvana Romano Santos, brings together articles that are somehow related to a common nodule, that I believe was identified few years ago, and points to a kind of birth mark of Brazilian’s architectural culture. For me, the here handled intellectual package — where conceptual and theoretical aspects are present — was put together in little less than two decades, from 1980 to 2000, a period that correspond to my studies in the Department of History at the Institute of Philosophy and Humanities at University of Campinas — IFCH Unicamp. I can’t imagine better definition of the meaning of this studies than the one made by Otavio Leonidio, during a presentation of a PhD dissertation, when he situated to the public the statement I had just articulated: Abilio is part of the first generation of Brazilian architects who read Michel Foucault systematically while his books were being translated and published in Brazil; for this generation, history is understood as a narrative, as a speech, and to understand its logic and intention is the very reason of the profession.¹­

The importance of Michel Foucault’s works for this generation has as an inflection point the publication of the Brazilian version of his book Discipline and Punish in 1977, only two years after the original French publication, with an immediate impact on the disciplines of architecture and urbanism. The presence, in contents and title of the master’s thesis of Raquel Rolnik — in the end of 1970s — and my own thesis project in architecture attests to the relevance of Foucault’s discipline concept in that analytical moment in our field of knowledge.²

However, if it’s right that the disciplinary view present in Discipline and Punish — with its immediate spatial connections brought through Bentham’s Panopticon — makes Foucault easy to be assimilated by architects, it will be his considerations about the constitution and speech analysis — present in The Order of Things, Microphysics of Power, Fearless Speech and in some other books — that will deeply mark the historic evaluations that our group attemped.³­ It is in the language’s materiality, understood as historically built narrative and speech — at the same time history product and producer —, that the interpretation efforts will find support. The understanding of history as multiple relations between subject, collective and its representations, will make obligatory the manipulation of methodological instruments borrowed from psychology, sociology and language analysis, conforming hybrid theories to the understanding of the cultural-historic phenomena. The expanded field of these preoccupations will house important authors of the period — as Félix Guattari, Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Derrida, Jean-François Lyotard, Paul Virilio, Paul Veyne, Carlo Ginzburg — and others more traditional, case of Sigmund Freud, Walter Benjamin, Jean-Paul Sartre, Elias Canetti, Paul Ricoeur, Mikhail Bakhtin, Karl Marx, Santo Agostinho, Aristóteles.

A second aspect of Otavio Leonidio’s phrase — the reference to the collective dimension of my personal path, architect graduated at PUC-Campinas in 1982 with a second undergraduate degree followed by masters and PhD in History at Unicamp — seems to me equally significant. In my generation and in the one before, it is flagrant the enchantment provoked by various courses of Humanities in some architects that started their graduate education in the 1980s — for example, Anne Marie Sumner and Carlos Alberto Ferreira Martins (Philosophy and History at the School of Philoshophy, Literature and Humanities of USP — FFLCH), Agnaldo Farias, Renato Anelli and Abilio Guerra (History at the Institute of Philosophy and Humanities of Unicamp — IFCH), Rui Moreira Leite and Marcos do Valle (Arts at the School of Communication and Arts of USP).⁴­ In the opposite path, we have at least two important names: Sophia da Silva Telles, graduated in History and with a master in Philosophy at USP, and Silvana Rubino, Social Scientist graduated at USP, with a master in Social Anthropology at Unicamp. Both theses focused in Architecture and befitted to the teaching activity in the School of Architecture and Urbanism at PUC-Campinas (respectively since 1978 and 1987).⁵­

It’s not casually that articles from all of them, based in their master’s theses, are grouped in the second edition of Óculum magazine, published in 1992.⁶­ Originally conceived by a group of students and young architects — the first edition, of 1985, was published with the seal of the Óculum Cultural Association —, the magazine, from its second edition on, transformed itself in a personal editorial project, in partnership with Silvana Romano Santos, and developed in association with the School of Architecture and Urbanism of PUC-Campinas, always counting with the collaboration of the invited assistant editors, some of them members of the founding group — Renato Anelli, Paulo Gaia Dizioli and Francisco Spadoni. Within the authors of the inaugural edition was Alcyr Lenharo, Nicolau Sevcenko and Wili Bolle, at that time my teachers at IFCH Unicamp. I not only invited them to participate of Óculum’s first edition as personally made the transcriptions of their lectures in an academic event at FFLCH USP, in 1983.⁷

Wili Bolle’s article has its place in history in another area of knowledge. Gunter Karl Pressler — in his book Benjamin, Brasil: a recepção de Walter Benjamin, de 1960 a 2005: um estudo sobre a formação da intelectualidade brasileira — gives Bolle relevant role and thus explains his initial appropriation of Benjamin’s work: the contact with artists during the 70s and beginning of 80s at PUC-São Paulo, its activity as actor in the School of Dramatic Arts of USP transmitted to him, beyond the rational and disciplined analysis and interpretations, another field of perception and experience. Thus, an idea of metropolis was created — São Paulo as the city chosen to live — as a physical presence, readable as a face. [...] The first of many articles and essays from the second half of 1980 brings with it a pragmatic title: ‘Walter Benjamin. Fisionomista da metrópole moderna’ (1985).⁸

The importance given to the mixture of areas of knowledge and the openness to innovating themes can yet be exemplified with the publication, in the magazine Óculum 4, of four articles signed by members of the so called International Situationist — Formulary for a New Urbanism, by Gilles Ivain; Theory of the Dérive, by Guy Debord; New Babylon, by Constant Nieuwenhuis; and Unitary Urbanism at the End of the 1950s, anonymous author. In her book Apologia da deriva, Paola Berenstein Jacques affirms that "the first selection and translation of Brazilian situationist articles was made by Carlos Roberto Monteiro de Andrade to the fourth edition of Óculum magazine (PUC-Campinas, at that time edited by Abilio Guerra) in 1993".⁹­

The themes with an enormous spectrum of variation — modern, post-modern, land art, heritage, social housing, derive, music, literature, theory, work... —, authors of various origins and almost all of them well known today — Adrián Gorelik, Alberto Tassinari, Carlos Eduardo Comas, Christian Girard, Fernando Álvarez Prozorovich, Françoise Fromonot, Gérard Monnier, Giancarlo de Carlo, Guido Zucconi, Jean-Pierre Le Dantec, Jorge Francisco Liernur, Josep Quetglas, Luis Espallargas Gimenez, Marcos Tognon, Maria Beatriz de Camargo Aranha, Mário D’Agostino, Nabil Bonduki, Nuno Portas, Olívia de Oliveira, Paul Meurs, Peter Eisenman, Pillar Pérez Piñeyro, Ricardo Marques de Azevedo, Vladimir Bartalini... — and the artists and architects owners of world views sometimes different from each other — Adoniran Barbosa, Aldo Rossi, Álvaro Siza, Amancio Williams, Christian de Portzamparc, Daniele Calabi, Éolo Maia, Flávio de Carvalho, Francisco Bolonha, Frédéric Borel, Glenn Murcutt, Gregori Warchavchik, Jo Coenen, Jô Vasconcellos, Mário de Andrade, Moshe Safdie, Oscar Niemeyer, Oswald de Andrade, Raul Bopp, Richard Long, Rino Levi, Robert Smithson, Sylvio de Podestá... — present in the eleven published editions of Óculum magazine portrays the constant bet in multiple relations between arts and humanities, direct reflex of my hybrid studies and of the circumstantial presence of the assistant editors, invited to contemplate intellectual interests that varies with time. As it couldn›t not be, the textual production present in this collection can be understood as a portrait of this not linear path, thus the interpretative strategies adopted in the articles can be understood from this ambiguity, as intellectual as institutional.

It remains only a brief explanation about the common nodule mentioned in the first phrase. I’ll go direct to the point: it is the believe (that houses texts, narratives and speeches of the decades of 1920 to 1940) in an alternative project of modern action — where culture and nature have main roles —, that due its discursive efficiency metamorphoses itself in real characteristics of Brazilian modern architecture. In synthesis, the intellectual artifices turn themselves in an organic character. Thus, the understanding of the discursive assembly of Brazilian modern is, at the same time, the understanding of its efficiency in the constitution of an art and of an architecture with its own characteristics. The comprehension of such historic phenomena happens, therefore, through a speech that describes, constitutes and legitimizes itself.

Finally, it won’t be useless to mention that some of the selected articles are nothing more than simple registers of the architectural culture — something with partial and provisional analysis about architecture’s teaching, critic or historiography —, which we must read with the same unpretentiousness that motivated them.

NOTES

1. The phrase, quoted by memory, was pronounced in the presentation of the following work: Ana Paula Polizzo, Paisagem, arquitetura, cidade. Uma discussão da produção do espaço moderno (PhD diss., PUC-Rio, 2016).

2. Raquel Rolnik, Cada um no seu lugar! São Paulo, início da industrialização: geografia do poder (master’s thesis, FAU USP, 1981); Abilio Guerra, Urbanística e poder — as origens da disciplinarização do espaço urbano (final graduation project, FAU PUC-Campinas, 1982).

3. Michel Foucault, Vigiar e punir — história da violência nas prisões, trans. Lígia M. Pondé Vassallo (Petrópolis: Vozes, 1987); Michel Foucault, As palavras e as coisas — uma arqueologia das ciências humanas, trans. Salma Tannus Muchail (São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1981); Michel Foucault, Microfísica do poder, trans. Robert Machado (Rio de Janeiro: Graal, 1979); Michel Foucault, A ordem do discurso, trans. Laura Fraga de Almeida Sampaio (São Paulo: Loyola, 1996).

4. Anne Marie Summer, Uma arquitetura não adjetivada (master’s thesis, FFLCH USP, 1987); Carlos Alberto Ferreira Martins, Arquitetura e Estado no Brasil. Elementos para uma análise da constituição do discurso moderno no Brasil. A obra de Lucio Costa 1924-52 (master’s thesis, FFLCH USP, 1988); Agnaldo Farias, Arquitetura eclipsada — notas sobre arquitetura e história, a propósito da obra de Gregori Warchavchik, introdutor da arquitetura moderna no Brasil (master’s thesis, IFCH Unicamp, 1990); Renato Anelli, Arquitetura de cinemas na cidade de São Paulo (master’s thesis, IFCH Unicamp, 1990); Abilio Guerra, O homem primitivo — origem e conformação no universo intelectual brasileiro (séculos XIX e XX), (master’s thesis, IFCH Unicamp, 1992); Rui Moreira Leite, A experiência sem número: uma década marcada pela atuação de Flávio de Carvalho (master’s thesis, ECA USP, 1988); Marco do Valle, Processos de apagamento em escultura moderna e contemporânea (master’s thesis, ECA USP, 1991).

5. Sophia S. Telles, Arquitetura moderna no Brasil — o desenho da superfície (master’s thesis, FFLCH USP, 1988); Silvana Barbosa Rubino, As fachadas da história. As origens, a criação e os trabalhos do Sphan, 1936-1967 (master’s thesis, Unicamp, 1992).

6. The articles published at magazine Óculum 2 are the following: Sophia S. Telles, Oscar Niemeyer. Técnica e forma, 4-7; Agnaldo Farias, Gregori Warchavchik. Introdutor da arquitetura moderna no Brasil, 8-22; Anne Marie Summer, A arquitetura e o rapto do significado, 23-24; Rui Moreira Leite, Flávio de Carvalho. O arquiteto modernista em três tempos, 25-34; Renato Anelli, Arquitetura de cinemas em São Paulo, 35-42; Abilio Guerra, O primitivismo modernista em Mário de Andrade, Oswald de Andrade e Raul Bopp, 43-59; Marco do Valle, Processos de apagamento em escultura, 60-70; Carlos Alberto Ferreira Martins, Identidade nacional e estado no projeto modernista, 71-76; Silvana Barbosa Rubino, Gilberto Freyre e Lúcio Costa, ou a boa tradição, 77-80.

7. The referred articles published at magazine Óculum 1 are the following: Willi Bolle, Walter Benjamin. Fisionomista da metrópole moderna, 40-43; Nicolau Sevcenko, As muralhas invisíveis da Babilônia moderna, 44-49; Alcyr Lenharo, Luzes da cidade, 50-55. One of these were republished by me a year later: Nicolau Sevcenko, As muralhas invisíveis da Babilônia moderna, Arquitextos, July 2014, www.vitruvius.com.br/revistas/read/arquitextos/15.170/5253.

8. Gunter Karl Pressler, Benjamin, Brasil: a recepção de Walter Benjamin, de 1960 a 2005: um estudo sobre a formação da intelectualidade brasileira (São Paulo: Annablume, 2006), 233. Free translation.

9. Paola Berenstein Jacques, Apologia da deriva. Escritos situacionistas sobre a cidade (Rio de Janeiro: Casa da Palavra, 2003), 159. Free translation.

the construction of

a historiographical

field

translated by luca senise

the historiography of modern architecture introduced in brazil since the end of the 1920s is a relatively recent phenomenon. for decades a vision prevailed in the mythological ‘brazil builds’ (philip goodwin, 1943)¹­ and ‘modern architecture in brazil’ (henrique mindlin, preface by sigfried giedion, 1956),

²

being repeated so systematically that transformed itself into almost axiom. The texts of Goodwin and Giedion looked at new architecture from a perspective that was informed by the historical and theoretical assumptions of Lúcio Costa. In Costa’s understanding, Brazilian modern architecture was a result of two distinct yet complimentary factors: a fusion of European principles with national cultural elements; and the creativity of the native genius, especially in Oscar Niemeyer. There is here a blatant conditioning of an intellectual environment that assumes national identity as the core of its cultural and artistic activities; this environment, hegemonic in the early moments of modernism in Brazil also occupied a central position in the modern developments of the 1940s and 1950s.

The limited historical production of modern architecture in Brazil until the beginning of the 1980s is a result, among other factors, of a lack of theoretical and methodological consistency — the few graduate programs had not yet consolidated — and of the insular nature of architectural production where those involved in the realization of architectural works and their dissemination — architects, photographers, editors, writers etc. — shared the same principles and values with respect to good architecture. It is no wonder, then, that in a congealed intellectual environment it was a foreigner, the French Yves Bruand, who conducted the first comprehensive study of the trajectory of modern architecture in our country (Brazil). But even in his fundamental book — Arquitetura contemporânea no Brasil, published in 1981³­ — the agenda that structures the arguments and the evolutionary logic is still embedded in the DNA of Costa’s ideas.

bruand’s book, itself a product of a doctoral investigation, signals a fundamental change in two areas: post-graduate reseach and periodical publications.

At the School of Architecture and Urbanism at the University of São Paulo — FAU USP, pioneer in architecture graduate programs in Brazil,⁴­ the master’s program was added in 1972. But it would be the PhD program, founded in 1980, that besides bringing new parameters to historical research, would create a significant group of professors for the masters programs that would soon be founded in other Brazilian public universities, especially at the School of Engineering of São Carlos at USP. In this school, the master’s program in architecture dates back to 1971, but only after 1985, with the implementation of undegraduate architecture taught by professors with master’s and PhD’s from FAU USP — including Carlos Alberto Ferreira Martins, Carlos Roberto Monteiro de Andrade, Renato Anelli, Agnaldo Farias and Nabil Bonduki — did a new area of concentration emerge in 1993 entitled, Theory and History of Architecture and Urbanism. Other master’s programs, as is the case with those implemented at the Federal University of Bahia — UFBA in 1983 and at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro — UFRJ in 1987, also benefited from the USPian methods, but to a lesser extent, for in those programs a significant proportion of the faculty held degrees from abroad. This kind of situation is even more pronounced at the Federal University of Rio Grande