ARCHITETTURA + URBANISTICA + LANDSCAPE
C3 Magazine è una delle riviste internazionali di architettura, landscape e urbanistica più di tendenza e di qualità.
Esce 12 volte l’anno ed è disponibile anche in abbonamento senza spese di trasporto.
Contenuti di questo numero:
| Multi-Museum | |
   | The Contemporary Museum Recent studies of spatial behavior (Bill Hillier et al.) have demonstrated that people’s behavior in contemporary museums is significantly more affected by the physical forms of the building than by what it exhibits. This definitive finding contributes to establishing a clear position in the longstanding debate concerning cultural buildings—container or contained?—and hence concerning what a contemporary museum should be, or how its internal hierarchies should be arranged. This discussion has a long history: In the last few decades we have witnessed significant changes in the notion of the museum as a public building and its role for the city and—more broadly—for culture and society. Examples stretch from noble containers in which the main attraction and the source of its distinctive character are the exhibits the museum houses (think of the Sir John Soane House in London) to projects that are so powerfully evocative and breathtaking as to attract all the attention per se (e.g. Gehry’s Guggenheim Bilbao) until the museums themselves become the main piece on exhibit. Over time, architects and their commissioners have challenged traditional conceptions of the museum, and with them, standard assumptions as to its possible place in the city and its role in society. In the recent history of architecture, a few museums (e.g. the Guggenheim in New York and its spiral exhibition space, or Lina Bo Bardi’s São Paulo Museum of Art and the extraordinary public space it produces) have epitomized a clear position in the debate concerning what the contemporary museum should be and represent. Still, the question remains: what should a contemporary museum look like today? How do museums translate contemporary society’s demands for culture, entrainment and knowledge into strategies and physical forms? How should museums engage the city and its inhabitants? What user experiences should museums offer in the information age? Moreover, should the museum be for everybody, or for a small niche of experts? Such questions shed light on the broad sweep of the societal role that we may expect today’s museum to play. The projects presented in this issue offer a variety of approaches and solutions for the future of our cities which can help—if not to definitively answer—at least to frame such questions. written by Silvio Carta + Marta Gonzalez Anton |
| YoonGyoo Jang + UnSangDong Architects | |
   | Transformation of Compound Body to Social Imaginative Body – More Social, therefore Dreaming for More Ethics of Architecture –Towards More Ethical Architecture If architecture connotes the possibility as the act of selling the values which enrich human life, one of the most important question we ask return to architecture would be ‘how do you obtain ethics of space?’. In order to obtain minimum ethicality, architecture as regarded as cultural hegemony, pays attention to architectural process and attitude which social discorse actualize into space. In 2000, at the starting line of the 21st century, Venezia Biennale demand global introspection of architecturalization with interesting subject. What signification does connote in the subject ‘The City ; Less Aesthetics, More Ethics’? It has a serious warning against Moral Laxity in authorship which easily compromises with capital and Arrogant Elitism which own cultural code based on subjective values impose on the society. However, as architecture is confined in the conflicting composition of capital and society, concept and construction, space and happening, architecture bears inherent limitation walking on a tightrope at the boundary of ethics and aesthetics. In the urban context, continuous cycling of the existence caused by capital flows dominates as an absolute value rather than the existence itself. It seems absurd to ask the root of spatial values through architectural language in the urban where nothing is stable. Nonetheless, architectural values within transforming cities and endlessly changing society depend on spatial attitude towards how react to the changing and interact with the force behind it. Is it possible to combine aesthetics and ethics through architecturalization based on authorial perspective on sociality? Here I would like to look around UnSangDong Architects projects considering of this question. written by Young Bum Reigh |