Response to Harvard Design article by Silvetti

“A profession whose creativity and standing depends ultimately on its absolute command of this unique and difficult task.” (p22 Jorge Silvetti Harvard design magazine fall 2003)

Programism as defined by Silvetti is “A tendency to accumulate and manipulate information that, by the sheer power of its quantity, uncritical method of being gathered, apparent authority as “ neutral data,” and compelling graphic representation becomes, with little transformation, the very form of the architecture proposed or its figurative inspiration.” (p23 jorge silvetti) The site I am currently investigating for studio, in Barcelona Spain the Barceloneta Fish Market by Mias architects, used imagery of fish from the local culture to inspire the new roof structure which would engage the surroundings in a much more deliberate nature. Though successful in transforming the area, it is not clear if the use of the local imagery was the basis upon which people wanted to visit the site, as there are new amenities, more “engaging architecture”, new greenspace…etc. Could the architects not have based their intervention to this preexisting historic structure in such a way that would not have required such complicated geometries, and ultimately a non renewable material intensive project?. To compare I took a look at another market in Barcelona the Mercat Santa Caterina, and though I have no previous knowledge of the Mercat Santa Caterina, it would seem that the form is more system driven, having a keen understanding of how to enclose this large span space, where the Barceloneta market by Josep Mias architects market used;
“ a survey of the place with the object of identifying what would enable us to reveal its qualities and to describe it accurately for the purposes of a project… As early as the competition stage we did a collage with some of César Manrique's fantastic fish, drawings for children we hoped might embody and express the joy of these people: their liveliness, their energy, their enthusiasm in the face of frequent hardship… It is surprising to see now the photos we made of the market during construction, when the pieces, the bones, of this huge animal were being carried through the streets to their final place. This animal is now a prisoner in a military-imposed town plan, this neighborhood, with no chance of escape.”(Josep Mias website)
The building form and realization process is in some cases a direct translation of the process of the fish which come to this market. But I would argue that the outcome of this project shows that Mias architects has intelligently articulated “the passage from data to form” and has produced an outcome which is not dictated by the ‘automatisms’ of the initial program design understanding.

Thematization while as a business plan might be viable, it is certainly not what I would consider an ‘elevated’ architecture. There are some very clear differences in the two branches of Thematization which Silvetti outlines, The first ‘Thematization for entertainment’ only goes so far as to appropriately balance its supposed ‘setting’ or ‘theme’ with its economical viability, and is merely an escape from the everyday (unless you live in Las Vegas!) , while ‘Thematization for living’ could quite well be the reason for Americas recent demise (starting with the atomic household). WOW that’s strong, but bare with me while I try to justify my claim. Described by Silvetti as architecture that “ implies a double fakery: the formal operation of mimicking a well known architecture and the promise that such architecture will deliver a predetermined, good way of life. Or to put it in another way the attempt to mimesis is total-not just of forms but also of actions and contents.” (p 25 Silvetti) ’Thematization for living’ goes beyond an attempt to suspend a level of disbelief to make the architecture palatable in today’s standard and instead assumes underlying American values and can dictate how one lives in the broad sense, and one uses their living space. With the correlation of mass media ’Thematization for living’ can ultimately dictate how one makes judgments, and arrives at conclusions. Silvetti points out that living in such a setting as a new urbanist town (like seaside) can suppress disbelief, I would argue that most suburban settlements are all a strand of Thematization and not only are operative in suppressing doubt in our government and society (because everything is just so peachy at home isn’t it honey) but also give its inhabitants a false understanding of what quality architecture is and can provide. It will be important to pay close attention to this predicament, because while my thesis will not prescribe to a theme in the sense of setting or form or appearance, it will most defiantly address the philosophical, ideological, and physiological values and presumptions that define the typology of the ‘Home’

Creatures! Silvetti’s disdain for blobs and literalism, keeps him from even calling their architectural outcome, architecture. The creatures, as he refers to them are void of semantics, history and culture! I would say that is even a stronger statement than my understanding of ‘Thematization of living’ because we can and have seen a significant shift in American culture, where as we have not yet seen the adverse affects of Blob architecture on semantics, history, or culture, not only due to the fact that much of blob architecture is un-built, but also because of its recent ‘discovery’. The idea of futurism has been around for quite some time, but technology till now has not allowed us to implement these seemingly UFO like architecture to be fully represented or realized. It is interesting too that we have seem a shift on the scale as to what futuristic and blob architecture is. There is a lot to be learned from architecture that is ‘foreign’ especially when considering the semantics of architecture as a whole. Literalism however is something which currently should be dismissed when creating architecture. Architecture is not organic as Silvetti points out, even though we can use organic metaphors to describe them. The understanding of a site or program should not and cannot truly be addressed by the appearance of the architecture, but must rather be addressed by the hierarchy of decisions we call process, which in turn derives the buildings appearance.