Hit Home with the Biennale

By Francisco G. Zambrano

            

"Architecture is not only what it looks like, 

but also what it does." 

-Venice Biannale Poster

Fig.1: The entrance to the Architecture Biennale.

     

            Well where to even begin? For those of you who have not read the other blog posts, the Venice Biennale is an exposition that occurs ever two years with events that show case contemporary art exhibitions ranging from film, dance, art and architecture. The two most popular events are the film and architecture exhibitions. The theme for this years architecture exhibit was “common ground” and was lead by David Chipperfield. The reason for the theme was that David wanted to show how even though architects vary in origin, beliefs, styles and ideology, we, even students, share a common ground. This “common ground” means many things such as the earth, the common goal of an architect, methods of approach, design ideas etc.. Many of the exhibits managed to capture your attention and embrace you in their ideas and designs. Obviously some more than others, yet this is what they all tried to accomplish. Their “common ground” was to cause an effect to their surroundings and visitors.

Fig.2: Norman Foster exhibit at the Biennale.

            The first project to really absorb me and make an impact was the Norman Foster project. After walking through a narrow dark corridor, you turn into a dark room with sound of construction, destruction, accidents, people yelling, protests, all accompanied by large images projected onto the walls that would change at random time intervals. Apart from all of this, there were also moving words projected onto the floor. While being in this room, you are simply overwhelmed with all of imagery and noise that is going on around you. Then, after being in the space for a while and taking it all in, you start making sense of all of the chaos. The photographs, which were all taken by architects, photographers, writers and journalists from around the world, are of historic public spaces from the western world and major growing places in Asia and South America. With all of the chaos going on in the images, you get the idea that we, as well as the names of architects, designers, landscape architects, etc. that are being projected on the floor and yourself, are all responsible for what is going on. Likewise, this is our common ground, and we must all figure out a way to resolve this. I found this exhibit very fitting for the entrance to the exhibition, or as Norman Foster called it, a gateway.   

Fig.4: Objects from the pilgrimage..

Fig.3: Footage from the film
about the pilgrimage.

          One exhibit though that was not as immersive as others but that really hit the whole common ground message to me was that of the Pilgrim’s Route that is based in the mountain range in Jalisco, Mexico where I am from. My mothers’ family has attended this pilgrimage since my mother was four. She would tell me stories of how they would camp out under some tree, and if they were lucky enough, they would stay at a relative’s home and sleep on the floor. She told me about how they would walk through the rough mountain range for a whole week and when they reached the church, their feet would be so sore from so many blisters that they could not go up the stairs to the church entrance. She explained how they would cookout under trees and use the restroom out in the bushes. She would tell stories of some of the people whom they would meet on the way and their stories. These were stories that I could only perceive through my mother since I have never been. Yet now, I was seeing what they experienced on a projection a thousand miles away from where it happened. It blew my mind that I was in Venice, across the Atlantic Ocean, and here was a piece of home. Home being a place in the middle of no-where which no one had ever heard of, yet here in Venice, it was being displayed amongst projects from places of much higher recognition. It made me aware that it does not matter where you are or where you come from, some how we are all connected. Everyone’s problem is some how your problem, and believe it or not you can make a difference.

            

            The Biennale was a wonderful experience, one that I am grateful to have lived. Not only because of the really cool exhibitions, but because it really got through to me how we all have the responsibility of what happens to others on this world. We must think more of how our projects will not only affect the local area, but also how it will affect those who are not. We must go truly move from a local mentality to a world mentality, because we are now in the twenty-first century.

Fig.5: Clip from the pilgrimage video.

"Why are you here for Chuy?" 

-Pilgrimage Video

            

Venice Biennale

By Khris Kirk

To all my devoted Bloggers, 

   We just went to Venice and got to experience the Biennale for architecture. The Biennale is a gathering of architecture from many different countries. The theme this year is Common Ground, directed by David Chipperfield, who explains that "The emphasis of the 2012 Biennale is on what we have in common. Above all, the ambition of Common Ground is to reassert the existence of an architectural culture, made up not just of singular talents but a rich continuity of diverse ideas united in a common history, common ambitions, common predicaments and ideals. In architecture everything begins with the ground. It is our physical datum, where we make the first mark, digging the foundations that will support our shelter". (La Biennale di Venezia) 

         

         When I arrived at the Biennale, I had no idea what to expect. I have honestly never heard of it until my group did a presentation about Venice before we left for our trip. So I had I hopes for what I was about to see. Once I started walking through the exhibits, all I could do was look in awe. Everything around me was amazing. There were models everywhere! Each exhibit presented something new and different from the previous one. There were a few that I really liked in particular.

 One was the O’Donnell and Tuomey's wooden structure. When I first saw the wooden structure, I thought I looked like a giant chimney that you could walk through. After walking through the full scale model, I felt like it squeezed and then released as a space. I thought the woven pattern of the wood was fascinating by being able to see through little windows to the other side. Then I read about the project. O’Donnell and Tuomey built this structure as a response to Venice and its history. The timber work and brick work is evident within the architecture of Venice. Bricks were casted by wood and then a person had to break the brick away from the wood after it dried. The use of wood pilling up horizontally and parallel to the bricks in the Arsenale is their way of representing Venetian history. (O'Donnell and Tuomey) After reading this, I was amazed at how they were able to represent this piece of history contained by a wooden structure that looks like a chimney. 

        Another project that I really enjoyed was the Russian Pavilion in the Giardini. In the Giardini, there are pavilions representing each country, whereas in the Arsenale there were projects spread around representing specific architecture firms. The Russian Pavilion is a grid of QR codes throughout the inside of the building. As you walk in, a person hands you an Ipad and you scan the QR codes. Then information is revealed about the Skolkovo. At the bottom level of the Pavilion there is a room with little holes that show images of the past that lead up to the Strolkovo project. (Russian Pavilion) I liked how the pavilion integrated technology with their building so a person can see how the Strolkovo was constructed. It was very futuristic and the inside was an experience that put a person in awe. Even today, I’m still in shock of how amazing the Russian Pavilion was.

            Overall, the Biennale was an experience I will never forget. There were so many projects to see. If I could do it again, I would devote two days to explore the Biennale. One day to see the Arsenale and the other for the Giardini. I wonder what will be at the next Biennale in 2014. 

Links
La Biennale di Venezia 
O'Donnell and Tuomey
The Russian Pavilion

         

  

Simplifying for Common Ground

Caroline Smith

Over the past few weeks I have shown an interest in simplifying architecture, inspired by many great minds like Eisenman, Le Corbusier, and Scarpa. Peter Eisenman’s process of Deconstructivism has fueled my exploration of simple architecture that is enriched by its surroundings, or that acts as an aide to something else. At the Architecture Bienale in Venice, I was interested in more ways that architecture could be simplified in order to evoke an emotion. I concluded that architecture can create illusions of a space within another, without always using walls or distinct edges.

            Valerio Olgiati wanted to display works from the most unique contemporary architects, in his opinion. The space that he created for the display takes the shape of a small room within a larger one. No walls are used for the boundaries of this room, but are instead implied by columns and a change in height. The ceiling of the smaller area is much lower than that of the main room. It seems to be a small space, because of the enormousness of the surrounding one, but is still rather large when standing inside. The works are arranged on a large white table that mimics the lower ceiling, creating a visual third space. The technique is so simple, but it draws you in to look at what is displayed. Furthermore the display carries out the idea of the Biennale’s theme “Common Ground.” Each architect’s style displayed is very different but is united on this common ground, which architecturally exhists as a simple space within a space.

            Robbrecht  en Daem Architecten represented Places, Heights and Depths using cinematography and photography. Similar to Olgiati’s his work was displayed as a space within a space. Again, a lower ceiling created the implied boundaries of the exhibit but these pieces were suspended in the air. Lights contributed to this illusion by shining through the hanging pieces and adding a floor element resembling change in material. Now a boundary exhists between the new ceiling and the new floor. Architecture does not have not be made of clear walls and roofs, but may be composed of other elements that may appeal to more of the 5 senses. Again, this method is simple, but appealing, drawing a person into the space.

            Another exhibit appealing to the senses is Poland’s Giardidi exhibit- A “sound sculpture” by Katarzyna Krakowaik. The sound has been described as “making the walls quake as if they are dialating with the secret knowledge of great powers.” The exhibit is a bare, slightly uneven concrete room. There is not much to look at, but the beauty exists in the sound of the architecture and the emotions provoked by the noise. An uncomfortable fear came to me at first, but as I explored the room I became curious about the sound, causing me to linger in the space. Although the architecture appears to be in its most basic form, the sound works with the space, creating a depth and a reason to stay.

           Finding common ground among every country can be a difficult task, but as I saw in the Biennale, architecture can be related to any country when simplified. Architecture in its most basic form can always pair with something else, whether artwork, light or sound; movement or views; or a cause to improve something insignificant, as we have seen in the past few weeks.

Context or No Context?

Context or No Context?

by Sarah Wilson

Unexpected and perhaps unintended symbolism in Biennale exhibits

       Our visit to David Chipperfield’s ‘Common Ground’ architecture exhibition at La Biennale di Venezia was educating in a number of ways. We saw countless models, photos, displays, and constructions, all exploring and probing at the edges of what defines architecture. There was an enormous range of materiality, form, method, function, use of lighting, and use of display; all of these meshed in each exhibit to create different experiences for the individual visitor, whether it was bending down to examine a tiny model on a stand or climbing through a full-scale structure. While I expected to see incredible things, I was surprised at almost every turn, but these surprises could be chalked up to more than just initial appearances. The most memorable thing about the Biennale, for me, was the apparent symbolism I encountered in the presentation and materiality of several of the exhibits, however intentional or unintentional.

I will make a note here early on that I have a terrible memory for titles and names, and must rely on my own photos and what other recollections I do have. The fact remains that the impressions these exhibits stirred make for the best memories, and so it is these that I will write on. One of the earlier impressions I recall comes from this large-scale quartered neoclassical building which, in retrospect, bears a remarkable resemblance to Palladio’s Villa Rotunda. The model seems to be study of symmetry how the interior may reflect the exterior; in fact, the exterior quarter on the right appears to have been formed from a mold cut into the interior quarter on the left. This exacting construction may allude to the importance of the inside of a piece having connection to the outside, and that one cannot exist without the other. This symbolism of the molding process lends itself to an interesting expression of the construction process.

Browsing through my photos, I came across this other lightweight but memorable piece. If memory serves me correctly, these dark strands that both hang downwards and grow upwards were shaped and welded from pieces of metal. I remember this one well because of the stark contrast between the organic appearance of these strands and the very non-organic material they were created from. I would have loved to see this exhibit placed in a field of grass; it seems to be asking the question of how modern construction materials can be used to aid construction in blending in with the natural environment. It’s an interesting query, certainly, especially represented in this manner. It’s almost as if this shell of a house was made from the shadows of vines and grasses, an evanescent construction that fades impalpably into the land. Needless to say, this was one of my favorites.

Again, I wish I could remember the names and creators of these pieces, especially this one. It likely represented something entirely different than the impression I recall getting from it, but then again, taking a second look at a model without knowing its original purpose can be helpful in its own way; in this manner, the second and new impression can divulge a different bit of knowledge that may not have been accessible when one is lead in the direction the creator originally intended you to follow. For example, these carved blocks of translucent material, injected with different colors placed amidst smaller white blocks that literally pale in comparison, may have simply represented an architect’s city plan for new installations amongst old ones. My impression, on the other hand, is less direct (as usual). This exhibit leads me to ponder the juxtaposition of color and fluidity amongst stark regularity. I wonder if it could symbolize the greatest desire of most artists: to break free of the norm and laugh in the face of monotony. For an architect, it could be the wish to ignore the confines of context, and instead create something wild and unfitting, for its own sake.

                

 Sometimes it’s more appropriate to keep in mind the context which the creator gives you in order to better shape your impressions and thoughts into the ones the creator was hoping to inspire. Other times, it’s not so bad to ignore the plaque next to the model and formulate your own conclusions. Even unintended symbolism should occasionally be given importance, for not every citizen immediately recognizes a building’s architect, its style, its purpose. One must keep in mind those other minds that are uninformed, for they can see something very different than one intends, but that something can be just as beautiful.