 Welcome. It's a great pleasure to welcome Fabrizio Baruzzi this evening to talk about the work of his practice, which he shares with his partner Alberto Vega. One of the first striking characteristics of the practice is that while it was founded in 2004, barely 13 years ago, it has already produced an impressive body of work from cultural and institutional to exhibitions and installations and to urban plans. And while one can simply assume it is the result of practicing in Europe and operating through public competitions, an assumption many of the envious practices on the other side of the Atlantic probably quickly make, clearly there is something that is more specifically the result of design and intent rather than the happy coincidence of being in a certain context at a certain time. One way to trace this willful design intent, whether the practice or the work itself, is to take a trip through Baruzzi Vega's website. It seems a little easy to rely on a firm's website to think through its practice. But as the academic year comes to a close and the subject of representation and of representing one's work is feverishly spreading across students at this critical juncture, I thought it might be an interesting exercise. This is particularly tempting since architects' websites are often notoriously bad and theirs is unique and especially uniquely striking. First, there's the even black and white photography which renders the certain monumentality of the work clearly present. The play with scale, the strong and simple figures, the importance of apertures in the solid masses, the striated materiality, whether vertical or horizontal strata or grid-like fields, the light and its revealing of texture all work to produce the effect of buildings that are designed for a kind of silent, yet very powerful aura. Then there are the drawings, simple and also evenly black and white, that render plans and sections a renewed kind of diagram at times singularly isolated and at others embedded within the city, often represented as figure ground with an emphasis on its morphology, again emphasizing the apertures and voids within the urban fabric itself. Throughout the work, the city is in fact omnipresent as inseparable from the architecture which it is in dialogue with. This investment in representation is not accidental, of course, and is a privileged window through which to understand the work that it generates as well as it captures the strength and clarity of its position, the intent of its effects and the beauty of the built artifacts that result. At once simple and powerful, bare yet textured, shaping the present were also irrevocably building a new continuity with the past. This holding together of seeming opposites transpires through Barosi Vega's practice as they have said about their beautiful installation, a sentimental monumentality at the last Venice Architecture Biennale. I quote, it is the opposition between monument and sentiment that our work and the meaning of the installation lie in the pursuit of an architecture that is specific and autonomous, intimate and monumental, which aspires to belong to a place and at the same time belongs to all places. Building on this tension between the specificity of place and the autonomy of form, the practice has grown a body of work that is at once always deeply embedded within its context but also undeniably continuous and consistent. This growing body of work has been met with equal growing interest and awards. In 2015, they were awarded the European Union Prize for Contemporary Architecture, the Mies van der Rohe Award, which recognized in particular their Philharmonic building in Poland. In 2014, the studio was selected as one of the design Vanguard 10 firms of the year, Architecture Records Special Award for Emerging Practices. And in 2013, they received the young talent of Italian Architecture Award granted by the National Council of Architects Planners and Landscape Architects of Italy. Fabrizio graduated from the Instituto Universitario di Architektura di Venezia in 2003 and completed his academic studies at the Escuela Tecnica Superior de Arquitectura de Sevilla. He has been an Associate Professor of Architecture Design at the Universitat de Girona since 2009 and is currently enjoying MIT for the semester. I have to tempt you to come to Colombia in the future, I hope. But in the meantime, please join me in welcoming Fabrizio Varossi. Hi, hi everyone. And thank you to the dean for the introduction. And it's really a pleasure to be here to present our work. It's one, I think, the most important lecture that I have done here in the US. So it's really an honor have the opportunity to talk about our work here. But before the lecture, for today's lecture, I prepare, I will present you five projects and one installation. Probably they are the most representative project we have done during these 12 years that since we started. But before starting the presentation, I would like to say just a few words about our office or about our way of work. So we start in 2004 in Barcelona and the studio composed by me and Alberto. I'm Italian, Alberto is Spanish. And since the beginning, we started to work with competition, but also working abroad in Europe. So this maybe ideal condition that link an architect with a local territory with a city or a region or a context, in a way. In our case, it didn't exist. So since the beginning, we started working in abroad and in different contexts, in different reality with different cultural background. And in a way, these biography data has shaped our way of work. Since the beginning, we started thinking about the notion of specificity. We started thinking about what is specific, how to face these different contexts that you don't know. And I think that these biography, in a way, has transformed or modeling our way of work. And since now, this idea to be specific, in a way, it's very, very important for us. Or if trying to explain better, I think that our work reside in a paradox, in a way. We try to find in all the project we prepare, we present, we try to find the balance between the specificity of the place and the autonomy of the form. And this is basically a paradox, a dichotomy. It is impossible to solve that. It doesn't make sense. But in a way, I can assure you that exactly there in this space in between, in between from something specific and something autonomous, reside our work. Before the lecture, I had a small interview with Aisha, a colleague of us. And she asked me which are our obsessions now. And I think that this dichotomy that for us has been very, very important. Now it's start to create sort of language, in a way. So I say to her that during these 10 years, we were not interesting to creating a language, a personal language. So we were interesting about how to solve very specific problem or condition. But now, I think that we are trying to define, maybe it's a personal language, but starting from the specificity of the place. I don't know if you can understand me, but it's exactly an opposite starting point from other architects in a way. How you can find some key element able to create a language, but starting from the diversity and the uniqueness of different places. And maybe now we are exactly in this moment in our practice. Recently, at the Biennale, we had the opportunity to reflect again about our work. The curator asked us about what is our everyday pattern. So we tried to take advantage of this opportunity and reflect through an installation about our work. So we decided to do not exactly an installation, but a project. And we did a very simple column, in a way, that in a way is at the same time something very specific for this place, but at the same time it's something autonomous. We decided to work at the corpteria and in a way the project rise from the site. It's a site-specific project, in a way, but at the same time we did a column that is an archetype, something that has its own rules, in a way. And we thought a lot about the title of this installation, and at the end we decided to call it a sentimental monumentality, because in a way what we tried to do in this project was to highlight, in a way, or monumentalize what is specific, in a way. So started from what you found in a place, you tried to highlight it, make it more evident and transform it in something more universal, starting from a very specific condition. So what we tried to do is discover this sentimental link or emotional link with a context, but at the same time discover what is monumental, so in a way independent and autonomous, able to transcend the specific condition of one place. And this idea was also very important at the beginning of our career. One of the first projects we did represented this way of working quite clear, I think. This project is a small office building, basically, for a regulatory council that controlled the quality of a wine in Spain. The project is placed in a small village in north Madrid, in the Castilian Meseta, this very flat, horizontal, archaic, and old territory. And in a way, this geographical condition, this boundary condition, has marked the project since the beginning. The project is set on the limit between the city and the landscape, and this double condition, this duality reinforces also or creates the project. From one side, the project just completes the urban context, just tries to be sensible and define and complete this element, but from the other side, another archetypal element tries to establish a relationship with the horizon, with the geography. So, if we see the building from distance, the building is just the end of an urban condition and marks the end of the city in front of the landscape. And it appears like a very simple element, precise, archetypical in a way, that tries to have in mind this landscape that surrounds the building, this old landscape, this whole territory that conforms to this region of Spain. But if we start to see the building more close, we discover that this autonomous and independent building starts from a pre-existing building that we restore and transform. And if we turn a little bit around the building, we start to discover this dichotomy that I tried to present to you at the beginning. The building is something very specific, it tries to establish a continuity with the pre-existing building, with the landscape in a way, but at the same time, the tower becomes something more independent, more autonomous. And this image, I think, it tries to present visually what I tried to explain to you at the beginning. This staying between, from a specific condition and autonomous condition. And the tower, in the tower there are places, the main representative spaces of the building. But what is important is the project, is that in the central part of the site, it doesn't exist really a building. But what appears here, it's a public space. For us, all of our projects are created, starting from our reflection about the public space. For, we intend many times the architecture, just a frame of the urban. And here, in the middle of the site, we decide inside of a private building, we define this small plaza surrounded from buildings. And this image that represents this plaza, it's like a manifesto. What is important here is not the architecture, but it's the void here in the middle that the architecture conforms. Many of our projects are cultural, public buildings. And in a way, it is important that this building try to give something in return to the city. And also, a public, a private building could conform a public space in its heart. In this space, we try to work with this different condition. From one side, this space is quite intimate that facing the landscape in front there. But we are interested in discovering unexpected scenarios, discovering how an historical element could be transformed and present a new condition. We are interested in creating such a microcosm, in a way. We are interested in creating this hybrid condition where the contemporary element discovers a continuity with the pre-existing element and creates an unexpected scenario for a context. And this small element that completes the fragment of the city are basically some big skylights that take light into the building. And in order to achieve this clear and precise relationship with the city, the program is controlled very precisely. Here, for example, the great part of the program in order to make free this space and create here the public space. And here is the auditorium with the light coming from the skylight. In all our building, we try to find the precise materiality able to establish this intimate connection with the context, with the pre-existing building. And for example, here in this project, the entire building is covered by stone, but it's not a ventilated facade, but it's really stone. And in order to give to the project some gravity, some density in a way. And this permits also to control the time of the building, how it will be transformed during the year. More recent, we finalized also another project, a philharmonic in Poland, in the north of Poland, in a small city very close to Berlin. And this image that you see here is taken from our office there. The image is not so good, but in a way, it represents how is the city. Stretching is a patchwork of different conditions. There are some socialist housing blocks from the 70s and 60s. There are some part of the medieval part of the city. There are some Gothic monuments in a way. For this project, we have the idea that the project has to confront with this condition, with this uncertain condition. And here you can see the original drawing of our closest neighbor, is the building on the side of the philharmonic. And when I speak about specificity, it means also try to learn from what exists. We start all the project with what we found in a place. And here we found this building. This building that speak about verticality, speak about mass, speak about repetition. This specific condition has been transformed by obsession, by our personal interpretation. And the result is this small model that represent this autonomous element that rise from a contextual condition. The philharmonic is sitting here, and it is the first step of a more general reorganization of this courtyard. That now it's quite depressed in a way. And from an urban point of view, the building just fix a corner here and try to clarify a condition that was not so clear. Also because this city was completely destroyed during the Second World War. So the result is this building. In a way I can say that all the elements that appears in the project, you can find it also in this small building there. The buildings speak about the identitary condition that conform the character of this city. So what we try to find in our work, it's the right tone, the right tonality. Discover this point in where it's possible that the building establish an emotional, sentimental continuity with the landscape but at the same time try to make a new step in a way. And I think that this building is speak about that. The only expressive element is the roof. This steeped roof that permit that the building establish a continuity with the skyline of the city. So in a way we try to make a building that is a part, a new part of the city. For sure when you try to think in a project there are other ideas that floating in the mind. Here maybe there are something expressionist in this building. And without any nostalgia we modify the material. We don't use a traditional material in order to highlight the independence of this building from the context. So the only expressive element of the building is the roof here. Because we try to be saintetic. We try to solve and create a figure just with a few elements. And here we use the roof. But also because when you arrive to the city you discover the building surrounded by this tree. So the only visible element is the roof. And here is from the park that is behind of the building. So as I said the starting point of all our project is the reflection about the public space. Here for example in the ground floor the half of the ground floor is occupied by a big foyer that basically it's a public space inside of the building. So it's a covered plaza a space for the city where the citizen can use it and can stay there. And this space is characterized by the stairs that permit the connection with the exhibition area here and characterized from the hole in this part and the light coming through the skylight. In a way what is important that the architecture is just a background sometimes. It's a background where the things happen in a way. And we try every time to solve a very complex program like in this case for example it's a big symphonic hole here another chamber hole here with simplicity. All this complex program in stitching is solved by three elements in a way. There is one chrome here that contains all the technical element vertical element installation and so on. And in the middle of this chrome are places to the two big holes and the interstitial space is basically the public space inside of the building. And the building is easily understandable. There is a loop that starts from the foyer go up there, cross the entire building arrive in the upper floor and return from these stairs. So there is an internal loop that the visitor can move freely through the building. It is important that the building are understandable from the people. And this is the upper level where the path from here and the path from here joined here in the exhibition area. So this floor is suspended over the foyer here and there are a visual connection between all the levels of the building. But the heart of the project the philharmonic is the symphonic hole. How to conform a contemporary symphonic hole? In a way what we have done here is basically try to reinterpret the tradition in a way. And we start thinking about section, light and ornament. The section as you see here it's basically a reinterpretation of a classical typology. And we also start thinking that also the decoration or the ornament could be a link with a history. So we started thinking about a detail, a triangular surface that conforms an ornament and then the repetition and the transformation, the variation of this element could conform the entire hole. So our goal in this space was to work in continuity with the history but try to give a new step of a tradition. And this idea of ornament that I think that is still important in a way in order to think about contemporary architecture and an ornament is not an ornament if it is able to solve a technical issue. In this case all these surfaces basically are conformed like this in order to create the best acoustic. So in a way the goal was to link a decoration and technique in this case. And the light is another element able to establish a continuity with a history. The light permits to transform the materiality of the hole. The entire hole is a work of craft mansion. It's an artisanal work. It's made in wood but covered with golden, scintetting golden leaf. And speaking about specificity means also discover how you can work in a particular place. And there in Poland was possible to conform this type of work because there are still an artisanal tradition that permits to create this type of space. So everything it's appear natural and simple but starting from here we are able to conform an entire wall. And the facade is also a sort of ornamentation in a way. The facade is composed of different aluminum profile and behind there is a white glass. And this permits that the building is very sensible to light and transform its materiality during the day. And when the night approach the building start to change in its materiality we can feel that an activity it is inside of the building and so the building that at the beginning was solid and monolith it became more lighted it start to discover that something happened inside and it changed dramatically its presence in the city and at the night only the light conformed the shape of the building. And in the morning the building became another thing. And I think that here in this building the most important thing has been that the city understood the building start to use it and now it's really a cultural and social center for the city. At the end our work as architects is exactly there in a way try to give to return to the city something. And here also in this image you can start to understand how the building give continuity to this landscape this urban landscape. More recent this summer we have finished another fine art museum in Switzerland and this museum is placed here it is an extension of a historical museum just in the limit of the historical center and this image show the villa that host, actually host the museum. It's a beautiful building quite bizarre in a way it's a Neopaladian building but where there is an orientalist decoration in this part because it was the house of a man that became rich giving things from Egypt and maybe this oriental condition has been interpreted also by Peter Zumtor that in 1982 he had this winter garden here and there with this very beautiful wood element in this part. Here for example at the beginning there is some sphinx and around the building there is a romantic garden. This was the original condition with the Zumtor element a connection here and a building that has been demolished in order to conform the new extension so the project was very complex because we need to organize in this very small size a big program and here also you can see this scheme of the original villa that is based on the La Rotonda by Palladio in a way. So this how to say this absolute condition of this reference that has marked the original building in a way has also an impact through our building. So what we have done is exactly this try to extract the axis and the geometry the Cartesian geometry from the original building and conform the new project the new addition in continuity with this building. But what is important to notice is that here also the conformation the organization of the garden here this public space has been crucial in order to make this duality became coherent. So like in a diptych what we have done is try to preserve the independence the autonomy of each building but at the same time try to conform both building with the same element with the same identitary element. So and the result is this in a way it's there are two building every building has its own history in a way at its own figure but there are the same element that conform in different way to this two building. So in a way this project is still something specific for this place. I can see that the project it's a Neopaladian building because it's conformed by a double symmetry and the exhibition area are conformed by a sequence of room in a way like the villa planta the original building and also there is this idea of decoration and ornamentation that it's present in the original building that here has been transformed it creates something new. So in a way this building like the other two speaks conceptually again the same thing but in a very different with a very different language and maybe you can start now to understand what I said at the beginning that we are our effort now it's try to create or try to create a language starting from the context. And here there are other different view of this of the project and here it's not possible to understand clearly maybe through the image but this small space that surround the building it's absolutely crucial in order to conform a coherent urban unit. The two building are a unitary urban element into the city. And but in order to conform this public space here the small public space we basically organize quite radical the program. The exhibition area are placed here underground and we let outside only the public space the public area, the foyer the pedagogical space and other space for atelier in this part. Again like in Roa program it is has been solved very very clearly very precise and what we have done is just try to conform the building about what is essential in a way. So the foyer here show this relationship with the historical building the historical building conform basically the facade of the new foyer it's maybe long to explain but here this area is the foyer but at the same time it is the delivery area because a truck can enter here and the elevator is there so we try to compact the building at its maximum in order to maximize the public space around the building. And this drawing that you saw here it's one drawing that I am more interesting about our production in a way it's the building is basically conformed with two cores here and no more than this so the construction the construction, the program it's organized with two very simple elements that conform a public space here in the middle and the same the load that is marked here it's transformed in the other part and transformed in something different there so there is a big stairs that go down through in the exhibition area this is the level minus one where it plays the permanent exhibition and as I say before the exhibition area are just a sequence of well proportionate room here in a paladian way in a way and here there is the connection with the exhibition area that has been transformed by Peter Zuntor the interior are very simple clear here there is the connection with the Villa Planta with the original building and the level minus one there are just the two cores and it is conformed by one big room that permits the maximum flexibility in order to present the temporary exhibition as there the materiality is still absolutely crucial in order to create this link with the pre-existing building in this context here for example in Switzerland we have the possibility to conform an extraordinary concrete bus relief that conforms the entire facade so the entire facade is composed starting from a detail it's a a module by in concrete that is 15 x 50 cm that conforms the entire facade so when I speak about specificity it is important to take advantage from the opportunity that you have to work in different place and there in Switzerland we have the opportunity to conform a very sophisticated facade that conforms the entire building it is the opposite in a way from the philharmonic in stetching but here this element is the door from the delivery and it is a disconnection into the building the building is conformed by a double symmetry but this element that is very significant that it is the reason why we are able to conform ground floor here it represents a disconnection here and in Mark also the starting point of the building and so at the end what we have done in this project more or less is the same of what we have found the first date that we visited the site and the atelier we discovered these two very beautiful sculptures by Giacometti one on the side of the other everyone with its face, with its identity but everyone that speaks has its own character now we are working in Lausanne for another fine art museum that now it is on the site the site of this project is very big is more is all this building close to the rail station and this site is full of different industrial building that you for the maintenance of the train and there is this building it's a hall by it's 1911 there is a big art here so and the program for this project was to reorganize in this site the three main museum of the city the fine art museum the museum of photography and the design museum here is a picture from the interior of this historical hall so what this is the site the actual condition and we have to place it there the three museum so we work a lot in order to discover how to transform this historical hall but in one moment of the process we discover that was find a urban strategy in order to places there the museum then reorganize an historical element so we start thinking that the architecture and the urban could be combined in a way and again the architecture could became just the frame of the urban so our scheme is that one what we decide to do is put in the heart of the site a new big public plaza here that is connect with the plaza of the rail station and this element it's able to link the new building here with the city this scheme represent the second phase of the building where the two museum are combined in one element and this image show our proposal for the competition and what is important here is not the architecture in itself but it is this public space here that we can discover that we can give to the city and again the project is something specific for there the museum is just a container an industrial building like the historical building that there are there is something very abstract in a way very rigorous the entire building here is made in brick so in a way a different skate from the project for the Rivera del Duero the architecture is still modeling from the public space that in this case conform this this plaza and the building it's very simple it's basic and in an abitated wall that divide the new public space here from Ray World in this part and what was important is that we decided to demolish a part of the historical building in order to give a new public space to the city but we also discover that it was possible to preserve a memory of a place starting from a constellation of different fragments and one of the important this element that was the most beautiful and maybe the most interesting element of the historical hall become here the principal figure of the new composition the museum is just a background where a natural background where it plays this figure there that became the compositive element and from the other side the museum is very permeable, very open in order to give life to this space so again the project is very pragmatic the ground from it's conform by public all the public area the foyer, the cafe, the auditorium and this small element from the the pre-existing it's became the new foyer of the building so the historical art the key element of the new foyer of the new composition these are the stairs, there are two stairs that go up to the different floors and these represent the second floor of the building again a very complex building is solved with simplicity a few core that organize in a very pragmatic way the program temporal exhibition, permanent exhibition, again the structure figure and composition are organized in one just just in one current element and this representation of the second floor where there are the light coming from the ceiling and the last project that I show you it's a different it's an experiment for us we start after 10 years we start to have the possibility to return to design and house and this is we made this house last here it's announced for a weekend, it's a weekend house and this is the landscape in a picture taken from the side it's a natural side there are no pre-existing element there are nothing just the landscape and when you have to design a house you have to discover which are your main and more deeper intention in a way so we decide where to place the house on the top of a hill and there we just place some small pavilions so in this case we are not interested to conform an object but what is more important was to conform such a domestic microcosm we are interested to conform this interstitial space in between these different pavilions so the plan of the house is very very simple there are four pavilions one entry pavilion the house an exterior space here and the swimming pool in that part to reduce the project to its to the fond to the fondament in a way and the house is conform a platform here where there are places just some shelter this shelter contain the main house just with the kitchen and the living room upstairs that go down in the another level more intimate, more protected where there are the the room so the client has to create not an house for living all the day but just to enjoy stay there for a few days for a weekend and start a particularly relationship with the landscape so when you arrive to the house you let the car road you discover a path and you entry here to this pavilion you discover a different temperature there this place, the house is placed in the south of Barcelona in a very warm climate this small entry pavilion and you enter in this small small, I don't know how to say these small villages made composed by just four pavilions and here again what is important for us is the relationship that you can establish with the nature around here through the building this important space is the space in between of this different shelter this view it's the opposite view which the living area here, the entry and the exterior area in that part so again we try to conform the house just with one element this element here that is not a column but is not also a window it is something in between this space represents the living room and here there are the other pavilions this is the exterior area covered area and the swimming pool in that part so I hope that with this project you have a more general idea about our work and at the end I think that what for us is important is to discover the diversity and the uniqueness of the different context and starting from there discover how to interpret this different condition and create at the same time that is able to create a personal language start from this diversity thank you very much I've been a big fan for a while and I've been really enjoying your monograph and for those who don't know it it's 20 projects, 20 words and what really struck me about that is that it really emphasized what you've been talking about for the last hour that those 20 projects actually are not labeled by their project names is the city in which the projects are located in so 20 projects I think six or eight of them were in Spain so the first thing that I was struck by was that you don't have what is typical in terms of how we define the context of our practice that there are the national projects versus the international projects that ratio alone and the fact that you represent, you know you identify it by city not by country or any other means in that you're just looking at the specific context every time and that is much more important so I wanted to start with that word context and to ask you to elaborate a little bit more on the context of your practice just to kind of pull back a little bit you started in 2004 let's say that was the height of the Spanish architectural scene you grew up in the post Franco era started at the height of that survived the recession so but there is also and so I'm curious about the kind of what you started to say that from the very beginning you were in a sense a borderless practice that you are you're Italian, your partner is Spanish, you started automatically with projects abroad and have been working in various cities so I'm curious about the context of that practice and how has that changed at all do you imagine that it might change in the current political context that we are in where we seem to be locking down our borders I have to say that we are really a typical office in a way because our career has been quite different from the career of our colleagues there in Barcelona for example and as I say at the beginning this maybe this international condition that we had since the beginning not because we're looking for that but just because we start work with competition in Europe has marked in a very important way our way of work in a way so we start to make a project with a size quite big now we are returning to the house after 10 years and we didn't have work when in 2004-2005 that was the top of the moment but then we survived the crisis working abroad for example so it's true that our trajectory our career has been very very difficult from the other part and also this is for this biography for these histories that we focus our attention in this idea of this notion of this notion of context because of our personal history but also because for example I grew up in I studied in Venice and there were an important study tradition about this notion so I think that part of this my background has marked my career and my way of work so for me this notion of context I think that has been very put away during the last I don't know decades was not so important I think that is still important in order to for my work to discover an architectural thinking and basically it's for us it's a way to try to reject what is generic in a way so working with this idea of context of what is specific and try to define every time a very precise project that permit to move away from a generic condition that I think that's been critical and in architecture during maybe the last 15 years or something and but when I speak about context context is not only a physical things but it's a cultural thing, it's a social thing it's an economical thing so all these different we try to understand and interpret all these different context or reality that exists in a place and start the project basically from there I think that's an interesting point and I was wondering about other contexts or call them narratives what really comes across in your work and how you draw your work how you represent the work is how you deal with the historical context whether that is by looking at the typology, the building typology the courtyard typology or whatever the urban fabric is the materiality of your projects it tends to be what you tend to draw what you represent is the physical context that you're working in and so I was wondering about the other contexts that are there but you don't necessarily draw them that is the social perhaps the political and I'm also thinking about the context of North America where often these contexts are much more front and center particularly the ones that have to do with the social political, the economic the energy etc so can you elaborate on how those other contexts are folded in and the decision in terms of what you represent yeah but for sure I don't know we draw and we represent and we think in the physical context in a way has prioritaring to develop the project but it's true that behind this troving that they establish a relationship with the physical context there are all these other contexts that you explain a context means discover how to work in a place which are the possibility of this place in order to an architecture how to build the building in a way or how, which are the advantage that you have in a place and not in the other place but this is another important thing that it is every time in our mind for example it's not evident but it is there for sure for example this idea to maybe you can identify our project in a very simple and bold figure in a way but sometime what is behind this figure, this image it's even more important than the building for example the idea to conform the public space that is crucial in order to establish also a social condition for a project if it's possible to say that sometime it is the starting point of our project maybe it's not easy to perceive it in the project but I can assure that this is the most crucial element it's another type of context and also for example we really try to condense the building in the main element for example also to control the economical condition of the building I didn't have time to speak more about stitching for example but this building has been built with a very very very low budget the Philharmonic Hall we were able to build it also because after many years was able to reduce also the economic cost of the building because the political and economical condition has to make that these are in order context that mark the project in a way all the decision about materiality or the space has been keeping in mind these constraints for example so it is another context that has marked the project so there are a constellation of constraints but it is true that for us it is important to create architecture in a way architecture has a physical condition so there are different concepts that conform it but at the end what you can do as architect is conform an object that maybe if you are lucky it is able to establish this intimate link with the context through the physicality of the building I think I just want to make maybe one or two small comments before opening it up to questions from the students this is probably an oversimplification of your work you spoke about this idea of creating either through void or through exterior void or through interior void the idea of the social and I found it really interesting that in your plans there is far more consistency in how you make spaces in plan where you are always kind of compacting and solidifying the necessity of program the cores etc and then in between whether it is inside that lobby of the Philharmonic Hall or in between the building footprints of Roa there is the public or the social or the flexible space there is a very clear hierarchy in plan and so again it is probably a complete oversimplification but I was thinking about what you presented as the dichotomy that you are trying to create specificity and diversity in each project but underlying that is this kind of consistent approach consistent architectural language especially now 10 years plus about trying to find that consistency and for me oversimplification more consistency in the plan than in the section there is always very idiosyncratic actually relationship between plan and section yeah maybe it depends in some I think we it is difficult to we don't think about a project starting from the plan or section we start to think more globally but it is true that through the plans you can sometime feel how the building fit in a urban environment and all our plans try to be very very precise in this sense and also there are super simple sometimes but if you are able to achieve this very basic and essential and simple and dense plan at the same time that suddenly discover an unexpected relationship with the environment it is important it is what we try to find so maybe in the plan they discover what we try to do from a urban point of view but then for example the section sometime they discover how the program is organized in order to achieve this possibility in a way and sometime the section is quite from my point of view even more simple but the same radical in a way because for example in RO we decide to work with the slope for example in order to achieve the space in KUR for example has been the same or for example in stretching where this element also to organize technical elements structure and so on but it is also in the section and in the elevation profile where you are in dialogue in very local ways with the diversity of each local context and it is very clear the long bar building of Lausanne of course is very different site response to that of Tichen how do you pronounce that Tichen so it is it is how exactly how to explain but in a way the section is very all the buildings are very pragmatic in a way we try to find this point where I don't know you can solve everything with just a few elements and maybe in Lausanne for example it is a big element it is more than architecture it is a urban strategy and the elevation declare this strategy in a way also the duality from one side and the other and the other side so I don't know exactly but all our thinking to find the best way in order to fit a building into the space and as I said at the beginning find the right tone for me it is very important this more than language it is speaking about tonality speaking about tone it is very important for example the museum in Lausanne it is very direct very strong also it is a huge building it is 150 meter long just a container in a way so it is quite impositive there but because the site condition askadise maybe to conform that but for example today I didn't show another project that we have in Italy for a music school there where basically the building is just from the outside is basically just a wall that complete an existing context and the project it is almost anonymous so it doesn't appear there so it is the Lausanne and this other project how for us is important to find the right tonality the right strongness of the building more than other things so I am going to stop projecting my own desires onto your work and let the audience do that do we have any questions someone in the back before I come here sorry thanks before I come here I usually go on the website and see what the work is and when I looked at your work the first time I felt it was very tense so coming here I was looking at your work and experiencing it and just picking up on what you guys have been talking about I feel there is a lot of tension in the buildings itself so sometimes on the last building for instance there was a staircase that was just brick I don't know if it's related in which building? Lausanne so I just wanted to maybe get if certain things are I guess they are intentional but what your thoughts are on that I see the buildings it's in certain space in the building I feel it's really tense but then in other space it's like wow so I just feel a lot of that in your work which for me it's great because it brings emotion but yes I just wanted you to expand on that because you know if I was trying to build something that's just like a staircase for instance just brick the way I saw it right there I don't know if people would say what is this you know like it's almost like you push that the tolerance for something at certain space in the building and then at other space it's like it's very I totally see what you're getting at but yeah so I maybe the question is about a contrast between extreme compression it's a tension between you know the staircase is it something that you're doing with conscience is it related to the context again like are those bricks from the original site and you decided to use them in a particular way because you wanted to conduct something or am I reading too much into this but that's just a visceral sort of thing but what I can say is that as I said it's many of this project has been with different material so also the material condition of a building for us is absolutely important and crucial in order to establish a connection or a relationship with the context for example in Lausanne we use brick and in core it's concrete and Lausanne it's aluminum for example so it's another way to trying to finding this tone that I speak in and then in the interior space it depends but we try to push the project at its limit in a way and sometimes happens sometimes it's not enough so we have still to learn a lot but sometimes we don't think in terms of how it is this stairs or how this skylight how it is other element but we try to find a global coherency inside of the building and for example in Lausanne I can assure you that the building it's more is 12,000 square meters so it's quite huge but at the end it's conformed by four cores in a way and solve this building in this way it's not at all simple it's appear simple but it's the result of a process of a process of reduce the building to its minimum term and then other element is there so opening so it's appear where it makes sense in this general coherence in a way thank you I really feel like you pushed the limit and I've never seen it so drastic in a space so it's amazing that I find that you got it built you got to accept it most people some things I don't know what the most drastic thing you try to pass through that didn't get accepted but I think you're really pushing the limit so thank you so it's what we try to do but I think every time we try to make a better project than the previous one so I know what it doesn't work in the first project and what work better in the second one and we try every time to make the project more essential in a way that's definitely coming across another question two one in the corner one in the front I'm interested to hear you talk about your design development relationship with your partner and how do you make each other stronger in the design process it's how we work together so we don't have a different role in the office so basically the project the process of the project is based on dialogue discussing a lot and follow I don't know every one of us is make critics to the other ideas in a way and we try again to find something the most strongest idea that we have and sometimes this was at the beginning now it's true that we start to have quite a lot of work it's true that for example I follow a little bit more the conceptual part of the building the starting point of the building and Alberto is sometimes more focus in the construction part of the building so it's a very generic division it's like this we start working in this way maybe two years or three years ago because of the general organization but what is more important is that we still understand the design process as a dialogue between us if you propose an idea that the other is able to or you are able to you can defend an idea that is just an impulse so it doesn't work maybe the other your partner can tell you honestly that this doesn't work I think we have two questions right? you're next and maybe the last one is another one some other project the same material sensitivity understand what is the role of references in your project I use these references just to try explain some idea in a way this image that I show recently we have done a book where we present our work so one idea was try to describe every project with a word or with a general concept that for us is important so in order to explain this concept we use also some some different references but so these references for us are important in order to try to transmit an idea but for example we for some references that I show we didn't use this reference as a starting point for the project not at all but in KUR is true I show this image basically because the original building it's a Neopaladian building it's declared that it's coming from this building and for me was important in this case to show these references because this idea of absolute that you can feel in this project by Palladio in a way an important thing also for thinking our project in a way this idea of double symmetry, simplicity and combination of rooms for example so I show this reference because basically it explains how is the original the original building so basically are a way to transmit idea but it's not at all a starting point and about ROA for example I think that this building maybe it's the most I have to say the most contextual one that I present today in our beginning this project and other project maybe we were more interested in complete something but was not so clear how the building was this idea of autonomy that maybe is more present in the new more recent project than the first one thank you can you answer one last question can you make that microphone work or speak up thank you very much for the presentation just related to the first we started the lecture and what seemed like you were trying to do was outline somewhat of not a manifesto but a design idea or design theory an approach that you want to go through and whenever I think about these I always think about composition and your your awareness the context and it's sort of it's in follows fighting the autonomy of the building and I wanted to ask where the opportunities or the outlets for your personal desires or for your the outlets for you to express your desires in terms of composition where do you find the gaps for you within that awareness of the context to express what you want or how you see the building should work because especially in the European context it is very strong it is very present and so I'm kind of interested in how you navigate that to express what you want or to envision the building in the way you want yeah it's very interesting questions in a way I don't know during this year we have done this this project basically it's true that we worked in a very consolidated context in a way so we have different possibility in order to establish relationship with different processes so we have some material in order to create the project but so when for example the for us now is important also to discover in a way which are which is our language in a way when we start to find or work in a not consolidated context for example the house that I show here for us it is an important project in a way for two reasons first because of the typology of the project it's a project it's a domestic project it's not exactly an house but it's similar to an house in a weekend house so it's a different size and also because this type of natural we didn't work before in this type of natural and not constructor or the urban environment so you have to find your own voice in a way so we try to solve this problem and try to be even more basic and even more simple and even more I use during the interview award that I like so much even more archaic in a way or primal so basically the house is composed by different shelter and that is it's just a structure so probably our intention is going in this direction try to be every time maybe primitive in some time maybe I think on that note of returning to the beginning of the lecture and also returning to the beginnings of the search in your practice is a perfect place to end thank you very much