Keywords

1 Introduction

The origin of academic architectural education can be found in the inauguration of the Académie d'Architecture on the 3rd of December 1671 in France. This was the first institution whose entire focus was on the study of architecture and the specific training of architectural students [1].

The first director of the Académie, the architect Nicolas-François Blondel, outlined in a lecture the dual role of this new institution. The first role was to study the history of architecture, survey historic buildings, and define the most correct form of Classicism. The second role was to teach the found knowledge to ‘students’. Initially, the program of the Académie comprised weekly public lectures given by Blondel, but in the following decades was devised a teaching structure that resembled what is practiced in many current Western architectural schools.

Aesthetics as a dominant value remains in the sudden ‘revolutionary architecture’ of eighteenth-century France as the work of Etienne-Louis Boulée, Claude-Nicolas Ledoux, and Jean-Jacques Lequeu that express in a ‘visionary’ way the ideals of the time [2].

On the opposite, the Bauhaus school founded by Walter Gropius in 1919 in Weimar focused on artistic self-expression and handcraft techniques that negate classical style. It proposed a training model that reflected the needs of a ‘New Architecture’ of ‘standardization’ and ‘rationalization’ for mass production [3].

The idea of knowledge as the transmission of a ‘style’ or a ‘technique’, continues to characterize contemporary architectural education but in a different way, through the pursuit of a personal aesthetic expression or in the satisfaction of real estate and construction market requirements as a cynic acceptance of reality. The outcome is an architectural production that emphasizes the expression of the architect as a style, or on the other hand his disappearing in the mannerism of the mass production.

In 1971, Charles Jencks figured out in a diagram titled ‘Evolutionary Tree to the Year 2000’ [4], six coherent traditions that tend to self-organize around underlying structures: logical, idealist, self-conscious, intuitive, activist, unself-conscious. These deep structures act like ‘attractors’ not only because of personal preferences but as a result of typecasting and the ways in which the market requires architects to possess a distinct style and level of expertise.

The diagram was intended to be a prediction of architecture until the year 2000, so after 30 years he made a revised version of the diagram titled ‘The Century is Over. Evolutionary Tree of Twentieth-Century Architecture’ to summarize what happened. First, the diagram showed that almost 80 percent is not made by architects, or at least is the outcome of wider processes that are unselfconscious from an artistic point of view: ‘building regulations, governmental acts, the vernacular, planning laws, mass housing, the mallification of the suburbs, and inventions in the technical/industrial sphere’. The second observation is that the ecological imperative, started as a polemical movement, has been adopted by each of them in different ways so ‘green architecture’ comes from everywhere like a label on different products. The last one is the existence of a ‘reactionary modernism’ favored by corporate forces of production and patronage, looking for an impersonal, abstract, semi-classical sobriety [5].

To conceive architectural education only as serving the market is to lose the meaning of architecture itself as a way to design, and improve, humanity. This reduces education to the explanation of a manual for a new kind of working class, it becomes merely instruction.

2 Fragility

The contemporary age is characterized by the notion of fragility that represents the many uncertainties of our time related to different issues involved in politics, economy, energy, ecology, and demography [6].

Fragility is the quality of an object or system to be easily ‘broken’ even by a weak force, and it can be easily referred to people, cities, territories, and ecosystems to explain the instability of contemporary living conditions. In the field of architecture and urban design, the main causes of fragility come from the phenomena of planetary urbanization and climate change that are visible in disaster, migration, periphery, inequality, diversity, and planetary crisis. While the ‘Academié’ model of education is founded on the knowledge of historical buildings in their aesthetical prerogatives, an Architectural education focused on the contemporary issues of fragility needs to be based on the knowledge of projects that faced these challenges, to define a conceptual framework of a new teaching agenda, with new theories, technics, and references.

The following case studies illustrate several experiences that could be seen as a response to the issues of fragility and offer a wide range of conceptual tools for architectural education.

2.1 Disaster > Adaptation

In the past 50 years, the number of natural disasters has increased and affected territories all over the world that need to be restored from traumatic events or enhance their resilience. In response to the catastrophe brought on by the precariousness of Italian land, Marco Navarra (NOWA), developed the project ‘Loco Grande: variante al progetto del canale fugatore’ [7] in Giampilieri after the 2009 Messina flood.

Since the restoration projects involved every river flow from upstream to downstream, they required the modulation of instruments fitted to varied situations, ranging from the landscape to the urban context, following the flood. The Messina civil engineers’ first project for the hydraulic canal in the “Vallone Puntale” area was based on several strict decisions that provided few options for reducing the impact of the work on the land. The options were limited to burying the reinforced concrete box and covering the side walls with stone from the surrounding area.

The alternative put forth by NOWA with the motto ‘Riparare Fiumare’, drastically reexamined the purely technical solution to the issue and proposed a sophisticated urban project that was mindful of the locations and the community relations entwined with it, a point at which the previous hypothesis would have irreversibly destroyed. Certain project tools, including the section and topographic models, needed to be improved due to the unique nature of the interventions along the rivers (also known as ‘fiumare’).

The capability of rethinking space in a nomadic key is made possible by the compulsive repetition and superimposition exercise. Emphasis is placed not only on the archaeological fragments that arise like permanencies following a traumatic occurrence but also on the traces that are erased and moved along the route. The result is a project that combines infrastructure, landscape, public space, and belonging to the notion of adaptation.

This case highlights the importance of considering the land as a fundamental part of the design project through the comprehension of geology and morphology using the architectonic tool of sections to develop an integrated design with landscape and infrastructure, in symbiosis with natural events.

2.2 Migration > Hospitality

Natural disasters, hazards, wars, and poverty that arise in many countries push millions of people to migrate. From refugee camps to local hosting centers, the role of architects seems to be merely technical support in emergency management focused on providing shelters and survival for a short time response. Looking at the persistence and the complexity of these phenomena emerges the need for design strategies that accept migration as a context in which to operate and not only as a transitional condition.

Studio ABVM of Bonaventura Visconti di Modrone in collaboration with Leo Bettini Oberkalmsteiner tackled the issue of migration with their ‘Maidan tent’ project [8]. The disembarked, the repatriated, and the relocated live in the unseen cities that are the refugee camps in Greece along the Macedonian border. Humanitarian emergencies are now occurring in tent cities that were first built as temporary solutions.

The 200 square meter Maidan tent, which can accommodate 100 people, is the venue for social and sharing events including movie screenings, birthday celebrations, World Cup TV watching, and Ramadan celebrations. It will soon house a market for fruits and vegetables.

The circular Maidan tent structure is separated into eight pieces, each with two concentric zones. In addition to providing some privacy, it fills the social and interactive role of a public square, which is becoming less and less common in the age of globalization. Steel and aluminum are used in its 16-m diameter construction to provide a light and strong structure. The fabric canopy resists fire, wind, and water.

Gender inequalities were present in the requests. Men wanted a location to play ping-pong, play cards, smoke shisha, drink tea, and sell cigarettes. Women requested that the Maidan be divided into two sections, with doors, enclosed places, and spots for the kids to play.

In these ‘ephemeral cities’ that appear as new kinds of urbanization, the case of the Maidan tent expands the notion of hospitality through a new type of public space for a peculiar context. Light structures and flexible spaces are used to give form to a shared functional program according to different cultures and religious beliefs, and accepting migration as a new living condition that needs space and architectural responses.

2.3 Periphery > Community

The growth of urbanization that involves cities in the last decades, has increased the size of the periphery as a critical but predominant area. In that context, the density of population and informal settlements compounded by social and crime problems is proportioned to the absence of public services and facilities and demanding urban regeneration to avoid gentrification and top-down strategies.

The works realized by ‘El Equipo Mazzanti’ are emblematic interventions for the issue of the periphery as the case of the Parque Biblioteca España [9], which is situated on a hillside that has been impacted by violence since the 1980s due to the Medellin drug trafficking network. The government's social master plan program includes it in its efforts to provide everyone with equitable access to social and economic possibilities. A facility with an auditorium, training room, administrative room, and library on a separate volume was requested by the program. The plan was to divide the program into three sections: the auditorium, the rooms, and the library. These sections would then be connected by a bottom platform that would allow for flexibility and autonomy, hence increasing people's engagement since each section would function independently. The project is divided into two main structures: the building, which is made of rocks, and the platform, which integrates the cover and turns it into a square that explores the valley. In this way, the building gains more authority as a gathering spot, multiplies its connections, and allows it to grow as a point of reference.

More than just a building, it suggests creating an ‘operative geography’ that is part of the valley, akin to a mechanism for organizing the program and the zone. It does this by displaying the unknown directions of the erratic mountain contours, not in the sense of a metaphor but rather as an organization of the form in the location, a folded building sliced like the mountains. The project is a statement about architecture that belongs to the community and represents the context also in its morphology and appearance.

2.4 Inequality > Process

Urban regeneration of areas occupied by informal settlements usually causes phenomena of gentrification that push away residents toward the next periphery. Due to the economic values of housing and public facilities, they are often not affordable to all, and so invalidates the possibility to improve urban living conditions through architectural interventions.

The housing of Quinta Monroy [10] realized by Alejandro Aravena and Elemental faced the issue of inequality. Quinta Monroy was the last informal settlement in the heart of Iquique, a city located 1,500 km north of Santiago in the Chilean desert, at least at the time the project was started. Due to the poor living conditions, the government decided to replace the settlement by providing new housing units for the families residing there.

The project's first crucial choice was to remain on the same land, which was three times more expensive than the area typically designated for social housing. This was done to prevent evicting the current residents and moving them to the periphery, where land is less expensive but may cause marginalization and negatively impact property value growth. In addition, the 7,500 USD subsidy per family permitted the construction of a maximum of 36 square meters, which is half the area of a typical middle-class home. The project employs a typology that effectively utilizes the available space, allows for controlled house extensions to prevent crowding, and encourages self-build procedures in order to address these concerns. Families receive half of a nice home furnished with first-rate services, along with technical assistance so they can complete the additions on their own.

While architects usually claim to have total control over the formal outcome of the architectural project as an accomplished work of art in itself, Elemental focused on the process as the object of architectural design to develop a system open to future modification.

2.5 Diversity > Coexistence

Diversity of faith and culture is often the cause of social conflicts, especially in the era of globalization and melting pot society in which interactions between people from different backgrounds are more frequent.

The Abrahamic Family House [11] realized by David Adjaje Associates approaches the issue of diversity of culture and belief in a symbolic place. The project consists of three religious buildings situated atop a secular visitor pavilion: a church, a synagogue, and a mosque.

The house will foster the ideals of peaceful coexistence and acceptance among various beliefs, nationalities, and cultures by acting as a community for interreligious dialogue and exchange. Visitors will be able to take part in religious services, hear readings from the Holy Scriptures, and participate in sacred ceremonies within each house of worship. The fourth area, which is independent of any one religion, will act as a center for all good-willed people to unite as one. Additionally, the community will provide event-based and instructional programming.

The form is derived from the three faiths, and it is made by carefully defining what is similar versus what is different through the lens of these revelations. The next area of discovery is the shared ground, the public area between the three buildings, where the differences meet. The garden, which is situated between the three chambers and the three faiths, is used as a potent metaphor—a secure haven where civility, community, and connection coexist. The podium breaks down barriers to inclusion, enables one to engage with each space without feeling excluded, and promotes the celebration of this shared history and identity.

The case of the Abrahamic family house reveals how architecture through formal dialogue between different languages and identities, reflecting cultural and religious values, can build a space of shared feeling that unifies the diversity of beliefs, and thus people, realizing coexistence.

2.6 Planet > Imaginary

Global warming, the primary cause of climate change, is a process that started with the Industrial Revolution and increased by the accumulation of habits and production activities consolidated throughout the years. The planetary challenge to invert climate change requires an approach that could not be so immediate and solved in the short term. It needs to reinvent the way we conceive the whole society and thus architecture.

Four Dioramas [12] by Nemestudio is a speculative design that investigates the crisis of the Planet in terms of climate and resources. The project constitutes the physical exhibition of the Pavilion of Turkey at the 2021 Venice Architecture Biennale titled ‘Architecture as Measure’, which consists of four dioramas and a large table. The project queries the politics and implications of seemingly insignificant aspects of architectural construction and compares them with their planetary dimensions, such as resource extraction geographies, material supply chains, maintenance, and care in Turkey, in an effort to spark a renewed sense of planetary imagination.

Four dioramas each depict a portion of a narrative about the solidarity and survival of multiple species. Some of the current environmental controversies are reflected in the story through the archaeology of an imaginary future Turkey. An abandoned marble quarry depicted in the Diorama of Quarry is the result of centuries of resource extraction. We observe the extractive construction activities of ancient times and have a view towards the outdoor museum. Diorama of Logistics is a sizable warehouse that facilitates a significant amount of cargo during a multispecies migration to a new location. Diorama of Maintenance and Care is a repair site in the New Land where ongoing maintenance and care are provided for both the constructed structures and the endangered non-human species. A reconstruction site for Earth's future occupants is the Diorama of Formwork. In the distance, one can make out massive Carbon Monuments and a variety of statues representing the more-than-human imagination of the Ancient Lands of Anatolia. All of these depict the new mythologies of the ‘New Land’ and thus the future.

While architectural education typically involves transmitting established values, techniques, and practices based on the works of past masters or buildings, whether recent or remote, the work of Nemestudio exhibited in Four Dioramas, restores importance to the role of imaginary as a way to shape the present towards a different future.

3 Conclusions

Architectural education based on the classical academic approach of the transmission of a style is affected by the dominant market rules. The issues of fragility that characterize the contemporary age such as disaster, migration, periphery, inequality, diversity, and planet, require a different educational system based on social topics, instead of purely aesthetics, and referred to works that spread the field of architecture in contamination with external instances, maybe unexplored yet.

The case studies previously addressed are used to define notions that help to define an educational agenda: the emergency caused by a Disaster is faced by a project of ‘Adaptation’; the phenomenon of Migration needs to embrace the notion of ‘Hospitality’; the conflicts of the ‘Periphery’ are solved by spaces for ‘Community’; the scarcity of resources that produce inequality can be overcome by the ‘Process’; the ‘Diversity’ of beliefs is reflected in a peacefully ‘Coexistence’; the crisis of the ‘Planet’ reveals the need of a new ‘Imaginary’ to design an alternative future.

Teaching architecture in the age of fragility means promoting the critical role of architects inside, and for, human society through projects of adaptation, hospitality, community, process, coexistence, and imaginary. Adaptation refers both to the use of architectural tools to understand the consistency of context in the whole and to design architectures as adaptive organisms. Hospitality expands the notion of public space to the possibility of giving dignity to unstable living conditions in a neglected place. Community regards the feeling of belonging to an architecture made possible by people's participation and the sensitive appearance of the construction. Process as the object of architectural design to develop a system open to modification. Coexistence refers to the potential of architectural language and space to create a dialogue between cultures and people. Imaginary is a way to subvert the present scenario of habits and socioeconomic structures to prefigure a truly sustainable future.