24 February 2006

to visit and to find

Perpetual redefinition could be an interesting “stable” present for architecture. Strategies towards building not only present architectural problems but problems of the current thought as well. The question “how to build?” is not only difficult to answer in an architectural background (oriented towards the oncoming ethics of architecture) but also in reference to the general theoretic ambience that is formed nowadays, in a level of thought constructivity. “Building in thought” does not offer foundations or stable substructures any more; this is a problem that haunts architecture even if it often remains hidden.
How can we preserve a tradition coming from modern architecture that relates thought and architecture, giving other perspectives to both? To form some answers, two more specific questions are posed: “what a visit could be?” and “how can we shape the notion of architectural finding?” Visiting a place is an act to be reconsidered in a post network epoch. We could try to grasp the vehemence of a “non artificial” approach even if this seems to unveil an insistence on something already lost. A finding is not understood here as the opposite of a loss. Even more: in all different archeologies, every finding corresponds directly to the creation of a loss.