![]() |
Architecture is the background to life lived. As in Le Corbusier's
example, it retains the marks of our human use of it. Landscapes, rooms,
and streets are filled with voluble human activity—people promenading,
talking, buying and selling. Other scenes retain the clues of someone's
recent passage: rumpled clothing sits on a chair, laundry is left hanging
to dry. Inanimate things retain their obdurate separateness but are criss-crossed
and marked by human activity. Buildings and landscapes thus appear both
remote and enmeshed in the resulting tangle.
These drawings create the peculiar sense that we hover just before the drawn scene. They suggest the physical presence of the voyeur at the very site of the sketch. In literal terms, in some drawings Siza allows his own feet and hands—hands caught in the act of sketching the drawing we are now looking at—to enter into the drawing's frame. Architecture thought of as the consequence of the relationship between
work and life, and the reconceptualization of the subject according to
notions of sensation and the promenade—these are the two fields of thought
through which I would like to One of the reasons the vernacular was able to represent to Tavora and
his colleagues their notion of a natural language had to do with its historicity.
As an accretive process that maintained the evidence of the historical
circumstances of its making—the topographical conditions to which it responded,
and the accumulated agglomerations of an architecture continually added
upon without erasure of preceding layers—it represented an architecture
revealing the process of its own becoming. Maybe it did not so much demonstrate
the naturalness—whatever that might mean—of its forms in relation to
life itself; however, its archeological qualities suggested the historical
record of life's needs. Such effects depended on the passage of real history.
But there is a manner through which Siza's architecture produces an analogy,
or more properly, a representation of this process, although producing
an effect quite different from the original. As a representation, it is
not the thing referred to any more than a |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
One of Siza's early projects is the beach-side public pools
in Leca da Palmeira (1961–66) (figures 16–20). One portion of it is a series
of intermittent parallel concrete walls and slightly sloped roof slabs
running in parallel—some at a slight angle—and backing onto the face
of a concrete boardwalk. The roofs (when they exist) and the walls form
few closed corners but instead, in de Stijl fashion, slip by each other.
Of those closed corners visible in the plan, many are in fact buried underground
and thus hidden from view. Roof slabs reach beyond the edge of walls or
are separated by deep reveals that create the illusion that they float–independent
of the walls below. The beach itself is full of large formations of craggy
rocks, and the various swimming pools are formed by the conjunction of
the open figures of low concrete walls and the rock formations. Other elements
amid the rocks are cast concrete stairs, ramps, and platforms, whose regular
shapes are set within the rocks and sand and dive into the beach's jagged
formations.
This architecture is intimately calibrated to its site; the pools hold
water only through the collaboration of existing rock formations and the
newly cast concrete walls. The group of parallel walls at the back of the
site are like a delaminated extension of the boardwalk, its edge echoing
in layers into the territory of the beach. And concrete is made from sand.
Nevertheless, there is something alien about this architecture on the beach.
The hard-edged forms of the concrete planes—straight or, in one small
instance, smoothly and geometrically curved—do not enter into endless
negotiations with the particulars of the terrain. Those portions of the
project that enter into the territory or rocks stop and start as dictated
by the natural formations, but they do not become distorted in an attempt
to accommodate themselves. Walls, platforms, and roofs do not fuse with
the landscape, but form a kind of interrupted tracery over it, a kind of
drafted graffiti. And instead of a literal historical accumulation of artifacts
deposited over time, they offer something more akin to the primal markings
of a draughtsman over the territory. They seem more like the emblems of
drawing than of building. |
![]() |
Yet this drawing is no simple matter either: The syntax of slipping planes and spatial porousness has something of that original spatial generality, or placelessness as it has been called, that was a quality of the de Stijl vocabulary; it lurks in the pattern language of this project. Like the gridded canvases of Mondrian or the brick country house of Mies (figure 21), the spatial order—because there is nothing finite about it, no closed figure—suggests the possibility of the pattern's extension: beyond the frame in Mondrian's case, or as a latent and hidden order in the continuum of space with Mies's house. In the Leca project, the tendency to understand the language in relation to this more abstract extension makes the project feel that it lays there with a certain indifference between the new layer and the existing material of the site. We could imagine a series of traces, dashes, and hovering planes proliferating in collage fashion along the beach and beyond. And here lies the crux of one form of equivocation in the project. The particular arrangement of forms is particular to place, but hints at an abstracted indifference. The porous spatial paradigm of the syntax allows the site to visibly pass through it. Contrast this fact with the affect of an intact closed spatial figure or completed type where the nature of its autonomy would tend to close out the site, making the interaction and layering less continuous as the figure stated its formal independence. Here the formal syntax is everywhere autonomous, everywhere infiltrated by the site. |
The constant contact between the space of the architecture and the
space of the natural site binds them in an archeological fashion of layers,
at the same time that the layer of nature is an alien intrusion. It is
colonized without submitting to human ![]() The project suggests an architecture that, like graffiti, is drawn on
the site. In this sense, the layers of archeology have to do with the act
of conception and design settling upon the material of the existing. But
as with Le Corbusier, we are also given little emblematic traces of our
own peripatetic passage through the site. The ramps and the stairs are
like those set into the background of the columnar grid's spatial ideality.
Here similar ciphers now have as their alien background a real site. The
conceptuality of the architecture's syntax, conceived of as intimately
bound and alien to site, is echoed by the littered trail of ciphers that
put our phantom presence amid a world of rocks that we can touch but cannot
change. |