| In Globalization |
by Josep Lluís Mateo
Globalization is obvious, it means a new setting for the practice of architecture. I'm interested in considering globalization here in relation to the hard core of our activity: the project.
1. The "internationalist" visions of the past century were global, general visions: Siegfried Giedion and the contemporary school as a whole spoke of the commonplace harbored within the Zeitgeist; Philip Johnson and H. Russell-Hitchcock did this in terms of "style."
None of these pretensions is now relevant.
The contemporary scene is compatible with a landscape, diverse and interrelated multiple experiences. The outcome is a vectorial sum of forces. The vectors are individual ones and they flow, to a great or lesser degree, in the shuttle between provisional/final.
"Perhaps this needs to be a new type of communication that functions not on the basis of resemblances but on the basis of differences: a communication of singularities."
2. The global/local alternative corresponds at a physical level to the generic/specific dialectic: the generic as a point of arrival of the pressures of globalization, pressures understood as homogenization, and the specific as an expression of the singular.
The finest tradition of contemporary European architecture involves the construction of the project as the result of a specific intelligence, a task the deployment of globalization confronts with new challenges and questions; namely, new planning opportunities.
It would be over-pessimistic (and thus ingenuous) to deduce that the globalized world involves a stage set leveled by homogeneity.
In globalization a specific new project must be put forward.
3. Center and periphery.
Prior design represented the city, the territory, as a sum total of circles radiating from a center.
The energy diminished depending on how far we were from this center.
The final, specialized circle indicated a boundary line between interior and exterior.
The diagram is no longer this one, but rather a network located in space, in which the flows are dense and relatively homogeneous. Among these there are holes, some of them dangerous: the black holes of globalization, places on the edge and suffering increasing decadence.
Within the network, though, we are faced with "a superficial world whose center one can immediately arrive at from any point on its surface."
4. "We don't lack communication. On the contrary, we have too much. What we lack is creativity. We lack a resistance to the present."
In globalization, architecture must involve a frictional force that causes the globalizing pressures (basically immaterial ones) to acquire consistency and meaning.
Among the forces of globalization leading to the generic, one insists on the autonomous and protected, closed nature of the project. Architecture must work against these premises; it must try to open up, connect and explain.
In globalization architecture must work against.
5. The essence of globalization is immaterial and virtual. Architecture right now must be real. Today the material is a conquest; that's to say, it presupposes the existence of a battle to be won.
6. In its intellectual engagement with the world, architecture is perhaps one of the last activities that can aspire to monumentalizing and giving meaning to the archaically obvious. I'm referring to the world of sensations and primary contact with the cosmos and its forces (water, sun, gravity, wind, earth). Without architecture, forces limited to pure, fictitious experience.