"Traditions" by Adam Caruso

"We are interested in the emotional effect that buildings can have. We are interested in how buildings have been built in the past and how new constructions can achieve an equivalent formal and material presence. We are confused by the laissez faire state of contemporary architecture." Adam Caruso

Full text in Caruso St. John architects

En estos tiempos en los que no hay muchos libros de teoría arquitectónica, sencillamente porque no hay muchas teorías de arquitectura... los libros de artículos publicados por Caruso  St John, o Sergison Bates (hay conexiones entre estos dos estudios ingleses, probablemente porque comparten maestros comunes como Tony Fretton o los Smithson)  me parecen muy interesantes y tremendamente útiles. El tema de este artículo, es decir la tradición, creo que una vez desaparecidas las vanguardias e incluso cierta fascinación de los últimos años por lo moderno o las nuevas tecnologías, vuelve a estar entre los mayores intereses de la arquitectura contemporánea. Os recomiendo vivamente su lectura y la de otros artículos aparecidos en español en el monográfico sobre su obra publicado por A+T hace ya unos cuantos años. 

"The feeling of things" Adam Caruso

Una buena ocasión también para recordar algunos de sus mejores proyectos como la "Brick House" en la imagen que sirve de entrada a este post, o el último de sus grandes proyectos  que aparece en este video el Nottingham Contemporary donde aparece él mismo entrevistado... Un gran tipo que tuve la suerte de conocer con ocasión del congreso "Days of Oris" en Zagreb donde presentó este magnífico proyecto... Jordi Badia

Esta es una de las partes más interesantes del texto:

"...Today, the idea of erudition, of the architect as connoisseur has been rejected. It is curious that in a world of increasing specialisation, where artists and scientists are making dynamic new work from within their disciplines, architects have followed the lead of the management consultant, the ultimate example of the empty generalist. Rather than rise to the technical and artistic challenges of today, within the discipline of architecture, mainstream practice has embraced the rhetoric of the market to make work that is infused with brand recognition. Strategies of cybernetics, phylogenics, parametrics, mapping - each strive to generate completely original forms, unusual shapes, in plan, in section, sometimes both. These bold profiles can amplify or even replace corporate logos. Lacking the complexities and ambiguities that are held within the tradition of architectural form, these shapes quickly lose their shiny novelty and achieve a condition of not new, but also not old or ordinary enough to become a part of the urban background. This inability to grow old is all too resonant with an era of rebranding and cosmetic surgery. Architecture is now practiced at an unprecedented global scale, and the major players seem to be egging each other on. Who will produce the largest, and most formally outlandish project? Who will finally say stop?

Never has so much construction been based on so few ideas.

Our practice has always made work that is related to things that we have seen before. We are interested in the emotional effect that buildings can have. We are interested in how buildings have been built in the past and how new constructions can achieve an equivalent formal and material presence. We are confused by the laissez faire state of contemporary architecture. In this environment of excess we have found ourselves attracted to the more intimate artistic ambitions of past architectural traditions. We feel more comfortable than we once did to follow these traditions quite closely. Anything that can contribute to the fragile continuities between the contemporary situation and past architectures is worth the effort. It is only by understanding and reflecting on the past that architecture can continue to be a relevant social and artistic discipline.