Obstruction

A Grammar for the City

D o g m a I Office
Pier Vittorio Aureli
Kersten Geers
Marti no T a t t a r a
David V a n S e v e r e n

I
In the 1920s form was supposed to follow
In the 60s form was supposed to follow mc
In the 90s form was supposed to follow pre
In the 00s form is supposed to follow Icons
The time will come when form will only foil
Architectural form will be there before
being something, and it will be there
after: hard and unalterable, relentlessly
mocking its own meaning, its function,^
programme, content, images, style,
clients, representations, pretensions....

In the face o f t h e current, value-free

fetishism of information, analysis,
diagrams, mappings, multidisciplinary
discourses and 'research', it seems
impossible to raise the issue of
architectural form. Yet a large part
of today's architecture \s gratuitous
formalism, despite all the
programmatic, functional,
philosophical, sociological and
technological arguments to the
contrary. It is precisely for this reason
that it has again become urgent to
raise the issue of form. The crucial and
only question to answer is: how can the
formal language of architecture be
politically and socially relevant from
witiiin its specific constraints?

A city witiiout landmarl<s:

Proposal for tlie New
Multifunctional
Administrative City in
South Korea, international
competition (first prize).

AA F I L E S 54

It should be stated from the outset

that we are not interested in the
hermeneutics of architectural form.
Rather, we are interested in its
instrumental criticality, in so much
as it defines the realm and the
problems of architecture, in so
much as it establishes a subjective
way of composing things, in so much
as it sets a limited and precise scope
for seeing things. The responsibility
ofthe architect coincides with the
responsibility of form. Architectural
form is critical not for being the image
of some hermeneutic paranoia or
newness per se, but for articulating

Obstruction
A Grammar f o r t h e City
Dogma I Office
P i e r V i t t o r i o AureLi
Kersten Geers
M a r t i n o Tattara
David Van Severen

I
In t h e 1 9 2 0 s f o r m w a s s u p p o s e d t o f o l l o w f u n c t i o n .
In t h e 6 0 s f o r m w a s s u p p o s e d to f o l l o w m o v e m e n t .
In t h e 9 0 s f o r m w a s s u p p o s e d to f o l l o w p r o g r a m m e .
In t h e 0 0 s f o r m is s u p p o s e d t o f o l i o w Icons.
The t i m e w i l l c o m e w h e n f o r m w i l l only f o l l o w itself.
A r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m w i l l be t h e r e before

t h e c o n d i t i o n s w h i c h a l l o w a public,

b e i n g s o m e t h i n g , a n d it w i l l be t h e r e

and t h e r e f o r e c o h e r e n t , u t t e r a n c e

a f t e r : hard and u n a l t e r a b l e , relentlessl y

to be m a d e . In a w o r l d of i n c o h e r e n t

m o c k i n g its o w n m e a n i n g , its f u n c t i o n , '

yet persuasive 'publicity', t h e role

p r o g r a m m e , c o n t e n t , i m a g e s , style,

of a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m as e n a b l e r of

c l i e n t s , r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , pretensions... .

p u b l i c u t t e r a n c e is c r i t i c a l even u n d e r
architecture's current circumstances
of p r o d u c t i o n and c o n s u m p t i o n .

II
In t h e f a c e o f t h e c u r r e n t , v a l u e - f r e e
f e t i s h i s m of i n f o r m a t i o n , a n a l y s i s,

Ill

diagrams, mappings, multidisciplinary

T r a d i t i o n a l l y a f o r m a l i s t a t t i t u d e is

d i s c o u r s e s a n d 'research', it s e e m s

identified with processes, techniques,

i m p o s s i b l e t o raise t h e issue of

m a t e r i a l s ; in s h o r t w i t h h o w : how f o r m

a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m . Yet a large p a r t

is p r o d u c e d and c o m p o s e d . T h i s

of today's a r c h i t e c t u r e Is

a w a r e n e s s of f o r m is i m p o r t a n t , b u t

gratuitous

f o r m a l i s m , d e s p i t e all t h e

it has o f t e n been used as an alibi for

programmatic, functional,

c o m f o r t a b l e n e u t r a l i t y. We e m b r a c e

p h i l o s o p h i c a l , s o c i o l o g i c a l and

t h e p r o j e c t of f o r m a l i s m w i t h a new

technological arguments to the

q u e s t i o n : winy? Why f o r m ? A n d w h y

c o n t r a r y It is precisely for t h i s reason

this form rather t h a n another?

t h a t it has again b e c o m e urgent to

raise t h e issue of f o r m . The c r u c i a l a n d

F o r m a l i s m here is c o n c e i v e d as
p u b l i c s e l f - r e f l e c t i o n by t h e a r c h i t e c t s :

only q u e s t i o n t o a n s w e r is: how c a n t h e

we are t h e m a k e r s of a r c h i t e c t u r a l

f o r m a l language of a r c h i t e c t u r e be

f o r m s ; we know t h e m a n d are

p o l i t i c a l l y a n d socially relevant f r o m

r e s p o n s i b l e for t h e m ; a n d we m u s t

within

c o n t i n u o u s l y ask o u r s e l v e s , 'Why is

its s p e c i f i c c o n s t r a i n t s ?

It s h o u l d be s t a t e d f r o m t h e o u t s e t

t h i s a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m necessary?'

t h a t we are not i n t e r e s t e d in t h e

A city without landmarl<s:

Proposal for the New
Multifunctional
Administrative City in
South Korea, international
competition (first prize).

AA F I L E S 54

h e r m e n e u t i c s of a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m .

IV

Rather, we are i n t e r e s t e d in its

Crucial for us is t h e d i f f e r e n c e

i n s t r u m e n t a l c r i t i c a l i t y in so m u c h

b e t w e e n recognitio n a n d p e r c e p t i o n .

as it d e f i n e s t h e r e a l m a n d t h e

Recognition of an o b j e c t w o r k s t h r o u g h

p r o b l e m s of a r c h i t e c t u r e , in so

a given s y s t e m of c o n v e n t i o n s , s y m b o l s

m u c h as it e s t a b l i s h e s a s u b j e c t i v e

and f o r m u l a e , w h i l e p e r c e p t i o n is a

w a y of c o m p o s i n g t h i n g s , in so m u c h

d y n a m i c a c t of s e e i n g and a f i r s t s t e p

as it sets a l i m i t e d a n d precise scope

t o w a r d s t h e e s t r a n g e m e n t b r o u g h t into

for s e e i n g t h i n g s . The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y

play by t h e a r c h i t e c t ' s t e c h n i q u e s for

of t h e a r c h i t e c t c o i n c i d e s w i t h t h e

m o b i l i s i n g w h a t , u n t i l t h e n , had not

r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of f o r m . A r c h i t e c t u r a l

a n d c o u l d not have c o m e into view.

f o r m is c r i t i c a l not for being t h e image

In t h e c o n t e x t of late c a p i t a l i s m ,

of s o m e h e r m e n e u t i c p a r a n o i a or

in w h i c h a e s t h e t i c s a n d c u l t u r e are t h e

n e w n e s s per se, b u t for a r t i c u l a t i n g

m a i n productive

forces, such a position

a i m s to d e f i n e a c o u n t e r - s p a c e
of a c t i o n for t i i e a r c h i t e c t , w h o
is increasingl y s u b j e c t e d t o
fashionable aesthetic mainstreams.
Late c a p i t a l i s m i n t e n d s to b l u r d e s i g n
w i t h t h e everyday in order to mal<e
society itself a 'convincing, and
t h e r e f o r e p r o d u c t i v e , worl< of art'.
The relevance of f o r m a l i s m , t h e n ,
c o n s i s t s not m e r e l y in e s t a b l i s h i n g
t h e a u t o n o m y of a r c h i t e c t u r a l
c r a f t s m a n s h i p b u t in e m a n c i p a t i n g

w a r y of t h e p r e t e n s i o n s of c u r r e n t

t h e d e s i g n of a new ' m u l t i f u n c t i o n a l

architectural discourse, which strikes

c i t y ' in Korea, a n d it b e c a m e for us t h e

us as a t e r m i n o l o g y of useles s

opportunity to construct a grammar

complexity: programme, digital

in w h i c h a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m is seen

morphing, branding, technological

as t h e p r o g r a m m a t i c f u l c r u m of t h e

f e t i s h i s m , etc. We believe t h a t only

city's i n v e n t i o n .

by f o c u s i n g on t h e absoluteness

of

a r c h i t e c t u r e c a n one t r u l y (and

honestly) evoke ~ by negative

Today m a n y l a r g e - s c a l e u r b a n d e s i g n

inference - the unpredictable and

d e v e l o p m e n t s are t h e r e s u l t of private

u n f o r e s e e a b l e c o m p l e x i t y of life t h a t

i n v e s t m e n t . Private i n v e s t m e n t is

will unfold within.

c a p a b l e of o p t i m i s i n g s u s t a i n a b i l i t y in
very l i m i t e d s e c t i o n s o f t h e c i t y but it

t h e a r c h i t e c t f r o m an e x p l o i t a t i v e
i m a g e r y by o f f e r i n g h i m t h e f u l l

VIII

f a i l s t o p r o p o se v a l u e s and i m a g e s of

a w a r e n e s s of his o w n p o s i t i o n .

If w e w e r e t o s u m m a r i s e life in a city

p u b l i c n e s s t h a t go beyond its o w n

a n d life in a b u i l d i n g in one g e s t u r e ,

i n t e r e s t s . W h a t is n e e d e d , t h e n , is

V
A r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m is itself a n d n o t h i n g
else. B u t its i r r e d u c i b l e a b s o l u t e n e s s ,
its b e i n g in a n d for itself, d o e s not end
t h e r e , in a s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l l o o p . T h e
f i n i t e n a t u r e of a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m
d e f i n e s itself crit/ca(/y a l w a y s b o t h
a g a i n s t and for s o m e t h i n g else.
A r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m is a t once o p p o s e d
t o a n d at t h e d i s p o s a l of t h a t w h i c h
is e x t e r n a l to it. C o n j e c t u r e a b o u t
a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m is really a m e a n s

it w o u l d have t o be t h a t of p a s s i n g

not a mere s t r a t e g y of p r o g r a m m e

t h r o u g h w a l l s . Every m o m e n t of our

accommodation, but rather a

e x i s t e n c e is a c o n t i n u o u s m o v e m e n t

principl e t h a t t r a n s c e n d s p u b l i c a n d

t h r o u g h s p a c e d e f i n e d by w a l l s .

private, t o w a r d s a new idea of civic

A r c h i t e c t s c a n n o t d e f i n e how

communality

p r o g r a m m e c h a n g e s , how m o v e m e n t

but a set of precise p r i n c i p l e s

c h a n g e o c c u r s . The only p r o g r a m m e

g u a r a n t e e i n g e q u a l i t y in t h e e n a b l i n g

t h a t c a n reliably be a t t r i b u t e d t o

of i n d i v i d u a l f r e e d o m . We believe

a r c h i t e c t u r e is its s p e c i f i c i n e r t i a

t h a t w h i l e t h e city is t h e e n a b l i n g

in t h e f a c e of life's m u t a b i l i t y Life

p l a y g r o u n d for private e n t e r p r i s e ,

is t h e essenc e of a c i t y or r a t h e r of

t h e p l a y g r o u n d i t s e l f s h o u l d be an

its c o n t e n t s .

intelligible set of s h a r e d a n d visible

to imagining configurations framed

p r i n c i p l e s . It is p e r h a p s an old idea,

by a r c h i t e c t u r e w i t h o u t p r e d i c t i n g
e i t h e r t h e i r c o n t e n t or c o u r s e .

VI
It is a p o p u l a r p r a c t i c e in a r c h i t e c t u r e
to work with a concept that puts
imagery ( f u n c t i o n , m o v e m e n t ,
p r o g r a m m e , d a t a , icons, logos,
diagrams) first and architecture
s e c o n d , b u t t h i s is a m i s t a k e ,
d o o m i n g a r c h i t e c t u r e to a p e r m a n e n t
and h o p e l e s s r e d u n d a n c y We t u r n
t h e p r o b l e m on its h e a d , reverse t h e
polarity, and s t a r t again f r o m
t h e b e g i n n i n g . The b e g i n n i n g is
a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m , in its a b s o l u t e n e s s ,
seen a g a i n s t t h e c o u r s e of life it s e e k s
t o serve a n d f r a m e .
The essence of a r c h i t e c t u r a l f o r m

D e m o c r a c y is not a b s o l u t e f r e e d o m

p e r f o r m s , how f l o w s u n f o l d , how

IX

but in our p r o p o s a l t h i s p o s i t i o n is

A r c h i t e c t u r e is a c o n s t r u c t i v e a n d

reflected in t h e overt s i m p l i c i t y o f t h e

theoretical apparatus whose

playground's a p p a r e n t f o r m a l

'publicness', in m o s t c a s e s, is less

organisation.

exclusive t h a n t h a t of a r t . S i m p l y by
being, a r c h i t e c t u r e is m a n i f e s t i n g a

XI

d e f i n i t i o n of public space. By ' p u b l i c

We p r o p o s e a city of r o o m s instead

space' we don't m e a n a legal d e f i n i t i o n

of a city of s t r e e t s . We p r o p o se a city of

t h a t s e t s it a p a r t f r o m private s p a c e

f r a m e s i n s t e a d of a city of l a n d m a r k s .

b u t a s h a r e d s p a c e w h i c h , given its

City d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l be

c o l l e c t i v e n e s s , d e f i n e s a f o r m of

c o n c e n t r a t e d in t h e f l a t p a r t o f t h e

c o e x i s t e n c e a m o n g i n d i v i d u a l s . For

assigned area , w i t h t h e p u r p o s e of

t h i s r e a s o n , t h e r e is no o p t i o n b u t for

preserving the integrity o f t h e existing

a r c h i t e c t u r e to express itself t h r o u g h

landscape and reinforcing a sharp

a language t h a t is radicall y a n d

c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n t h e c i t y and its

c o n s c i o u s l y appropriate,

exterior.

t h a t is clear

in its goals and its cause, able t o

In layout t h e city is o r g a n i s e d as a

represent and institutionalise the

s e q u e n c e of r o o m s e n c l o s e d by w h a t

b u s i n e s s of living as a value w h i c h is,

lies in its o b s t r u c t i v e n e s s . A r c h i t e c t u r a l

we refer to as c i t y - w a l l s . The c i t y - w a l l s

by d e f i n i t i o n , at once u n i v e r s a l a n d

f o r m w o r k s as a s t r a t e g y s i m p l y by

are c r u c i f o r m b u i l d i n g s , a n d t h e y

singular. A r c h i t e c t u r e c a n n o t have any

e x i s t i n g ; it is t h e r e to a d v a n c e its

e s t a b l i s h t h e s p a c e for d e v e l o p m e n t .

goal a p a r t f r o m t h a t of r e l e n t l e s s

c o n t e x t , not i t s e l f It d o e s not o f f e r

They are t h e basic i n h a b i t a b l e

e n q u i r y into its s i n g u l a r i t y - t h e very

e n d l e s s and u n f o c u s e d possibility,

a r c h i t e c t u r a l i n f r a s t r u c t u r e at t h e

s i n g u l a r i t y by w h i c h it c o n s t i t u t e s t h e

b u t e s t a b l i s h e s l i m i t s . Its d i c t a t o r i a l

service of u r b a n s p a c e - g e n e r a t i o n .

c i t y A r c h i t e c t u r e m u s t a d d r e s s t h e city

f r a m i n g is only u n b a l a n c e d by t h e city,

The c i t y - w a l l s a n d t h e i r r e s u l t i n g

even w h e n t h e city has no goal for

w h o s e u n c a n n y n a t u r e a n d c o n t e n t s it

r o o m s a c t as a f r a m i n g s y s t e m , a

a r c h i t e c t u r e . For t h i s r e a s o n , t h e city

s e e k s t o civilise.

g e n e r a t o r of available s p a c e . J u s t as

is u l t i m a t e l y t h e only o b j e c t for a n d

it used to be for s t r e e t s , t h e c i t y - w a l l s

m e t h o d of a r c h i t e c t u r a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n :

and r o o m s are not t h e c o n c l u s i v e f o r m

VII

c o n j e c t u r e a b o u t t h e f o r m of t h e city

o f t h e city but r a t h e r its d e f i n i t i v e

A r c h i t e c t u r e , in its e l e m e n t a r y

is t h e only way to a n s w e r t h e q u e s t i o n ,

b e g i n n i n g - its p r i m a r y u r b a n d a t u m .

c o n s t i t u t i o n , is only f o r m : w a l l s , r o o m s ,

'why a r c h i t e c t u r e ? '

The r e s u l t is a city w h e r e t h e grid is a

c o r r i d o r s , r a m p s , floors.... We view t h i s
g r a m m a r as t h e e s s e n t i a l p o l i t i c a l
site f o r a p p r o p r i a t i o n , i n h a b i t a t i o n ,
i m a g i n a t i o n a n d c o m p o s i t i o n . We are

We a n s w e r t h i s q u e s t i o n in t h e f o r m
of a p r o j e c t for a city. This p r o j e c t w a s
conceived as a c o m p e t i t i o n e n t r y f o r

b u i l t s t r u c t u r e r a t h e r t h a n t h e server
of b u i l d i n g : u r b a n i s m a n d a r c h i t e c t u r e
are one city s e c t i o n .

wary o f t he pretensions of current

architectural discourse, which stril<es
us as a terminology of useless
complexity: programme, digital
morphing, branding, technological
fetishism, etc. We believe that only
by focusing on the absoluteness of
architecture can one truly (and
honestly) evoke ~- by negative
nference - the unpredictable and
unforeseeable complexity of life that
will unfold within.
VIII

If we were to summarise life in a city

and life in a building in one gesture,
it would have to be that of passing
through walls. Every moment of our
existence is a continuous movement
through space defined by walls.
Architects cannot define how
programme changes, how movement
performs, how flows unfold, how
change occurs.The only programme
that can reliably be attributed to
architecture is its specific inertia
in the face of life's mutability Life
is the essence of a city or rather of
its contents.
IX

ArchitQcture is a constructive and

theoretical apparatus whose
'publicness', in most cases, is less
exclusive than that of art. Simply by
being, architecture is manifesting a
definition of public space. By 'public
space' we don't mean a legal definition
that sets it apart from private space
but a shared space which, given its
collectiveness, defines a form of
coexistence among individuals. For
this reason, there is no option but for
architecture to express itself through
a language that is radically and
consciously oppropr/ote, that is clear
in its goals and its cause, able to
represent and institutionalise the
business of living as a value which is,
by definition, at once universal and
singular. Architecture cannot have any
goal apart from that of relentless
enquiry into its singularity - the very
singularity by which it constitutes the
city. Architecture must address the city
even when the city has no goal for
architecture. For this reason, the city
is ultimately the only object for and
method of architectural investigation:
conjecture about the form o f t h e city
is the only way to answer the question,
'why architecture?'
We answer this question in the form
of a project for a city. This project was
conceived as a competition entry for

AA F I L E S 54

the design of a new 'multifunctional

city' in Korea, and it became for us the
opportunity to construct a grammar
in which architectural form is seen
as the programmatic fulcrum o f t h e
city's invention.
X

Today many large-scale urban design

developments are the result of private
investment. Private investment is
capable of optimising sustainability in
very limited sections o f t h e city but it
fails to propose values and images of
publicness that go beyond its own
interests. What is needed, then, is
not a mere strategy of programme
accommodation, but rather a
principle that transcends public and
private, towards a new idea of civic
communality
Democracy is not absolute freedom
but a set of precise principles
guaranteeing equality in the enabling
of individual freedom. We believe
that while the city is the enabling
playground for private enterprise,
the playground itself should be an
intelligible set of shared and visible
principles. It is perhaps an old idea,
but in our proposal this position is
reflected in the overt simplicity ofthe
playground's apparent formal
organisation.
XI

We propose a city of rooms instead

of a city of streets. We propose a city of
frames instead of a city of landmarks.
City development will be
concentrated in the flat part ofthe
assigned area, with the purpose of
preserving the integrity o f t he existing
landscape and reinforcing a sharp
contrast between the city and its
exterior.
In layout the city is organised as a
sequence of rooms enclosed by what
we refer to as city-walls. The city-walls
are cruciform buildings, and they
establish the space for development.
They are the basic inhabitable
architectural infrastructure at the
service of urban space-generation.
The city-walls and their resulting
rooms act as a framing system, a
generator of available space. Just as
it used to be for streets, the city-walls
and rooms are not the conclusive form
o f t h e city but rather its definitive
beginning - its primary urban datum.
The result is a city where the grid is a
built structure rather than the server
of building: urbanism and architecture
are one city section.

Architecture as frame,
clockwise from top left:
The city seen from the
surrounding landscape;
views of two urban rooms,
includina a covered room.

|,:+H-|H

,4-

XII

IlL

-+++h +

I
+

|-

for u r b a n coexistence t o f l o u r i s h .

exterior in t h e u r b a n s e c t i o n s

XVI

o r g a n i s e d by t h e e n c l o s i n g w a l l s .

Once we have r e s t r i c t e d t h e design

The roo m p r i n c i p l e o r g a n i s e s t h e

of t h e city to c i t y - w a l l s , t h e o u t c o m e

n e c e s s a r y s e p a r a t i o n of city u n i t s

is not a city m a d e up of s t r e e t s and

and reinforces their c o m m u n a l i t y

- | - '

|_

provide t h e m i n i m u m design n e c e s s a r y

t h e m e of t h e c i ty is m e a n t to c o l l a p s e
t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n i n t e r i o r and

+4

1 -I

t h e d e f i n i t i o n of c i t y - w a l l s , i n t e n d i n g to

The c h o i c e o f t h e roo m as t h e m a i n

iii i i i i i

1^1

plazas, of i n t e r i o r a n d exterio r l a y o u t s ;

The s p a c e of t h e u r b a n room

t h e o u t c o m e is s p a c e . T h e p r i n c i p l e

e m p h a s i s e s a c c e s s i b i l i t y as t h e

c a t e g o r i c a l l y r e f u s e s t h e old s t r e e t -

s h a r i n g of s p a c e r a t h e r t h a n a s j u s t

b u i l d i n g syntax o f t h e c i t y Our p r o p o s a l

t h e i n f r a s t r u c t u r a l p l u g g i n g - i n of u n i t s .

a d d r e s s e s a cit y w i t h o u t s t r e e t s ,

The f r a m e o r g a n i s e s t h e u n p l a n n a b l e

c o m p o s e d only as an array of s p a c e s

by p r o v i d i n g t h e r o o m s w i t h a f i x e d and

f r a m e d by w a l l s . The p e r c e p t i o n of t h e

precise ( b a c k ) g r o u n d . In our p r o p o s a l ,

city w i l l be c o n s t i t u t e d by a s e q u e n c e

t h e i n h a b i t a b l e c i t y - w a l l s are i n t e n d e d

of r o o m s in w h i c h c o n t e n t is s t a g e d as

as an u r b a n - a r c h i t e c t u r a l o b j e c t

furniture. Further building development

w h o s e p u r p o s e is t h e c o i n c i d e n c e

inside t h e u r b a n r o o m s w i l l be visible,

of f i x i t y and f l e x i b i l i t y ; t h e c i t y - w a l l

a v a i l a b l e , p l a y f u l a n d , at t h e s a m e

is i n t e n d e d as t h e g e o m e t r i c a l place

t i m e , o v e r w h e l m e d by its c a p t i v e

w h e r e t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n of f r a m e

c o n d i t i o n . The cit y w i l l look like a

a n d t h e u n p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of c o n t e n t

house, in w h i c h everyday passage

are solved in one f o r m . This f o r m is t h e

through rooms makes the feeling

e x p e r i e n c e of e n c l o s u r e as a p r i m a r y

o f t h e a r c h i t e c t u r e m o r e relevant to

e l e m e n t t h a t u n i f i e s and s e p a r a t e s

our lives and less i m p o r t a n t in r e l a t i o n

d o m e s t i c and u r b a n life,

to i t s e l f

XIII

XVil

A p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t ring e s t a b l i s h e s t h e

The c o n s t r u c t i o n of our p r o p o s a l

p e r i m e t e r of t h e d e v e l o p m e n t area, in

d e p e n d s heavily on t h e f e e b l e

the initial stage, development takes

r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t w o basic

place in p r o x i m i t y to t h e f o u r m a i n

c o m p o n e n t s : w a l l s and s p a c e s . Wall

s t a t i o n s t h a t link car t r a f f i c f r o m

is t h e s e r v a n t , s p a c e is t h e m a s t e r

outside with the public transpor t

The i n h a b i t a b l e w a l l a c t s as a

s y s t e m . S t a r t i n g f r o m t h e s e poles,

s e r v a n t in a b l i s s f u l s t a t e of i n n o c e n c e

development will gradually occupy the

- giving so m u c h in r e t u r n fo r so l i t t l e .

city's interior. Public t r a n s p o r t h u b s

S u c h an a t t i t u d e plays a c r u c i a l role,

i n d i c a t e t h e p r i o r i t i e s for d e v e l o p m e n t .

since it e s t a b l i s h e s a regime of

In t h e place of t h e m o r e t y p i c a l
centre-towards-periphery movement,

equality the symmetry determining

f a c t o r s like plot d i m e n s i o n a n d

our p r o p o s a l c o n c e r n s d e v e l o p m e n t

s e r v i c e a b l e area. The s e r v a n t is b o t h

from the periphery towards the centre.

t h e e n c l o s u r e of u r b a n spac e and t h e

This p r i n c i p l e is m e a n t to preserve

d o m e s t i c s h e l f (a b u i l d i n g on its own),

t h e rigidity o f t h e city's l i m i t s w h i l e

w h i c h , d e s p i t e its a b s t r a c t character,

a l l o w i n g f l e x i b i l i t y of d e v e l o p m e n t

has e n o r m o u s s p a t i a l o f f e r i n g s . This

t o w a r d s its core.

a b s t r a c t i o n r e p r e s e n t s a new
m o n u m e n t a l i t y a l w a y s on t h e

XIV
The p r i n c i p l e w e c h o o s e is e x p l i c i t l y

verge of d i s s o l u t i o n , d i s a p p e a r a n c e .
The room (the s p a c e e n c l o s e d

arbitrary, b u t o n c e w e are c o m m i t t e d

by t h e c i t y - w a l l s ) a c t s as a m a s t e r :

to s u c h a b e g i n n i n g , t h e r e s u l t i n g

a w a r e of its generic character, it is

organism will follow a natural

r e l u c t a n t to a t t a c h itsel f to a s p e c i f i c

e v o l u t i o n . W h e t h e r t h e e v o l u t i o n of

p r o g r a m m e . T h e m a s t e r is a m o d u l e

t h i s o r g a n i s m c o n t i n u e s or s t o p s w i l l

t h a t can s t a n d a l o n e or as a c o m p o n e n t

d e p e n d on t h e use o f t h e p r i n c i p l e -

of a larger u n i t . Regardless o f t h e

not as an a b s t r a c t p r o g r a m m a t i c

a r r a n g e m e n t , a s y m m e t r y w i l l always

s c e n a r i o c o n t r o l l e d by s o m e d i a g r a m ,

r e s u l t , due to t h e s h a r p d i s e q u i l i b r i u m

b u t as a real a n d p a s s i o n a t e p o l i t i c a l

b e t w e e n t h e room's d i c t a t o r i a l f r a m i n g

w i l l to c o n s t r u c t a c i t y

and t h e u n c a n n y n a t u r e of t h e c o n t e n t
it seeks t o civilise.

XV

Walls as s e r v a n t and rooms as

The image o f t h e c i t y is t h e n o n - i c o n i c

m a s t e r t o g e t h e r f o r m t h e only

a p p e a r a n c e of w a l l s . In ou r p r o p o s a l

e s s e n t i a l p r i n c i p l e o f t h e c i t y a n d it

w e d e l i b e r a t e l y r e s t r i c t our d e s i g n to

is one t h a t s e t s a s i d e a l l c e l e b r a t i o n s

XII

The choice of the room as the main

theme of the city is meant to collapse
the distinction between interior and
exterior in the urban sections
organised by the enclosing walls.
The room principle organises the
necessary separation of city units
and reinforces their communality.
The space of the urban room
emphasises accessibility as the
sharing of space ratherthan as just
the infrastructural plugging-in of units.
The frame organises the unplannable
by providing the rooms with a fixed and
precise (back)ground. In our proposal,
the inhabitable city-walls are intended
as an urban-architectural object
whose purpose is the coincidence
of fixity and flexibility; the city-wall
is intended as the geometrical place
where the determination of frame
and the unpredictability of content
are solved in one form,This form is the
experience of enclosure as a primary
element that unifies and separates
domestic and urban life.

the definition of city-walls, intending to

provide the minimum design necessary
for urban coexistence to flourish,
XVI

Once we have restricted the design

of the city to city-walls, the outcome
is not a city made up of streets and
plazas, of interior and exterior layouts;
the outcome is space. The principle
categorically refuses the old streetbuilding syntax of the city Our proposal
addresses a city without streets,
composed only as an array of spaces
framed by walls. The perception of the
city will be constituted by a sequence
of rooms in which content is staged as
furniture. Further building development
inside the urban rooms will be visible,
available, playful and, a t t h e same
time, overwhelmed by its captive
condition. The city will look like a
house, in which everyday passage
through rooms makes the feeling
of the architecture more relevant to
our lives and less important in relation
to itself.

XIII

XVII

A public transport ring establishes the

perimeter of the development area. In
the inij:ial stage, development takes
place in proximity to the four main
stations that link car traffic from
outside with the public transport
system. Starting from these poles,
development will gradually occupy the
city's interior. Public transport hubs
indicate the priorities for development.

The construction of our proposal

depends heavily on the feeble
relationship between two basic
components: walls and spaces. Wall
is the servant, space is the master
The inhabitable wall acts as a
servant in a blissful state of innocence
- giving so much in return for so little.
Such an attitude plays a cruciai role,
since it establishes a regime of
equality the symmetry determining
factors like plot dimension and
serviceable area. The servant is both
the enclosure of urban space and the
domestic shelf (a building on its own),
which, despite its abstract character,
has enormous spatial offerings. This
abstraction represents a new
monumentality always on the
verge of dissolution, disappearance.

In the place of the more typical

centre-towards-periphery movement,
our proposal concerns development
from the periphery towards the centre.
This principle is meant to preserve
the rigidity of the city's limits while
allowing flexibility of development
towards its core,
XIV

The principle we choose is explicitly

arbitrary but once we are committed
to such a beginning, the resulting
organism will follow a natural
evolution. Whether the evolution of
this organism continues or stops will
depend on the use of the principle not as an abstract programmatic
scenario controlled by some diagram,
but as a real and passionate political
will to construct a city

The room (the space enclosed

by the city-walls) acts as a master:
aware of its generic character, it is
reluctant to attach itself to a specific
programme,The master is a module
that can stand alone or as a component
of a larger unit. Regardless of the
arrangement, asymmetry will always
result, due to the sharp disequilibrium
between the room's dictatorial framing
and the uncanny nature of the content
it seeks to civilise.

XV

Walls as servant and rooms as

master together form the only
essential principle of the city, and" it
is one that sets aside all celebrations

The image of the city is the non-iconic

appearance of walls. In our proposal
we deliberately restrict our design to

but one; an idea of the city that is

served/spared bythe uncompromising
conclusion of its own logic.
Taking walls and spaces as the
bare essentials of our position, city
development can be that of a
bifurcated path along which linear
logic and blunt juxtaposition can start
to give way to a completely new
grammar of the city
XVlll

The days of systems, mappings,

random research, complexity - of
vulgarity elevated to the status of
systematic discourse - are over
What is needed now is a new
beginning, with rigorously one-sided
logic. Courage and determination for
ourselves, and detached irony
towards the rest.