Compartir y debatir en Arquitectura

Abstract

The journal “proyecto, progreso, arquitectura” is an initiative of the HUM–632 research group at the University of Seville, its objective is to share architectural information and promote debate. Debate is a means to exchange ideas, compare points of view, reach a consensus of opinion, acquire elements of judgement, thereby being able to contribute to resolving any problems of mutual interest. Architecture is a specialization of knowledge, capable of projecting beyond the spheres that mark its speciality, a characteristic that distinguishes it but which also subjects it to continuous and considerable interference: it may only be a question of the “spirit of an age”. The diffusion of knowledge is a good antidote against the evils of the time: it is necessary to investigate, build, share, disseminate and then debate. Our advantage is the capacity to carefully observe reality from diverse points of view, without limitation of time and space, fundamental concepts and specific methodology allow the application of any subject we propose, to the present.Within the articles we make no attempt to recognize one sole research procedure. We consider conclusive works to be of as much interest as those based on study and observation, and present them to you with rigour and criterion, a new contribution to the topic. In architecture, knowledge is cumulative and can be attained from nu-merous, partial contributions, even those which may be biased. It differs from other fields of knowledge, where what was previously assumed without debate, is rendered out of date by continuous discoveries.It is a time of opportunity, and before straining to establish boundaries between teaching, research and practi-se, it would be more opportune to look for similarities and possible transfers between these three fields whose objectives are well defined. With these ideas in mind we are creating a journal that has a clear, simple and flexible structure. A series of arti-cles united around a current theme is the basis which supports the main argument of each issue. The different “open themes” that compose our editorial line, are the sources for this combination of diverse research. Other articles on the margin of the theme may be added to the debate, but always from the critique exercised in the sphere of architectural projects.New curricula are currently being drafted and implemented to reflect the Bologna criteria. Solutions are sought to an equation, conditioned by the terms “content”, “integration”, “interest”, “growth” and “credits”. In our case, the absence of a debate on the containing space is paradoxical, a direct way to give an enduring idea of architecture and the architect who proposes and defends it with such conviction. We propose to review how those great archi-tects of the twentieth century were trained and who later turned to the construction of buildings for the teaching of architecture. Over time, these have become the lasting images of the theories of their originators.At the beginning of the twentieth century, it was still possible to recognize the guild component that the profes-sion then had. In those times, drawing was the guarantee of a suitable aptitude and qualification to start an architectural education. The Bauhaus did not abandon the trades as essential and primary parts in the training of the architect. The workshop was a place for work, according to the different trades contained in the educatio-nal programme of the school. The transformation of the workshop as the space required for the development of contemporary architectural design is already present in Mies’s I.I.T. The Bauhaus and the Crown Hall represent a commitment to the specialization of physical spaces for the teaching of architecture to an outstanding few, with these spaces being seen today as “high performance” schools. The Sixties gave way to the generalization of these experiences. Artigas drew up his educational programme and entrusted architectural design to manage the times and methods of integrating the knowledge required by architects obliged to work in a society heading irreversibly towards mass production.The reflections contributed by lecturers from the schools of Vallés, Seville and Granada show us the reality where the distilled criteria of these investigations can have application. The exercise of criticism from architectural projects is essential to deepen the knowledge and intellectuality of architecture, and in this issue the latest arti-cles complete the main reflections proposed. A critical approach to architecture is the result of the educational process that we strive to deliver.

a revista que presentamos es una iniciativa del grupo de investigación de la Uni-versidad de Sevilla HUM–632 “proyecto, progreso, arquitectura”, con el objetivo primordial de compartir y debatir sobre arquitectura. Este número inaugural requie-re justificar los motivos de esta iniciativa, explicar brevemente el ideario fundamen-tal y aclarar cual será nuestro campo de intervención.Compartir y debatir son dos acciones que no conviene separar. El debate es un medio para intercambiar ideas, con la intención de confrontar puntos de vista, consensuar opiniones, adquirir elementos de juicio, para así poder contribuir a resolver algún problema de interés. Se necesita tener conocimiento sobre la materia a tratar y voluntad para dialogar. Que lo debatido sea del interés de todos es igualmente importante, porque implica el beneficio colectivo que ne-cesariamente la arquitectura ha de producir. No es operativo desvirtuar los objetivos del debate, utilizándolo como fuente rápida de conocimiento; las posturas personalistas son contrarias al fin último que debe ser la respuesta al problema enunciado; lo que antes se ha referido como “el interés”.La arquitectura es una especialización de conocimiento capaz de proyectarse más allá de los ámbitos que marca su especialidad, característica que la distingue pero también la somete a continuas e importantes intromisiones con el consiguiente riesgo de que estas injerencias se acaben instalando definitivamente entre nosotros; puede que tan sólo se trate del “espíritu de una época”. Esta revista de arquitectura, promovida por profesores de “proyectos arquitectónicos” debe ser sensible a estas cuestiones que deben reconocerse como parte de las razones que la motivan. La difusión de los conocimientos, reclamar la intelectualidad de la arquitectura, son buenos antídotos frente a los problemas surgidos de la oportunidad: es necesario, investigar, construir, compartir, difundir y entonces, debatir. Nuestra ventaja es la capacidad de observar detenidamente la realidad desde puntos de vista diversos, sin limitación de tiempo y espacio: idea fundamental y metodología específica que permiten aplicar a la actualidad cualquier tema que nos propongamos tratar. Una revista que aspira al intercambio de conocimientos y opiniones, debe admitir la plurali-dad. La capacidad de proponer, sin estar obligados a vitorear las últimas ocurrencias, es un reto para cualquier revista de arquitectura, quizá para nosotros un riesgo aumentado por la directa vinculación que tenemos con el ámbito universitario. En los textos de investigación no pretendemos un nivel uniforme de intensidad ni reconocer un único procedimiento disciplinar de investigación. Consideramos de interés tanto los trabajos concluyentes como los que siendo propositivos, se fundamentan en el estudio, la observación, la justa relación con otras experiencias, cuando presentan con rigor y criterio una nueva apor-tación al tema tratado; proyecto y obra deben ser en cualquier caso, el fundamento de toda discusión. En arquitectura, el conocimiento es acumulativo, puede que éste se alcance en base a numerosas aportaciones deliberadamente parciales incluso sesgadas; en eso, la arquitectura se diferencia de otros campos del saber donde continuos descubrimientos convierten en cadu-co lo que antes era asumido sin discusión por todos. Las “temáticas abiertas” que hemos establecido para la obra profesional tratan de ensayar posibles vías para establecer criterios de idoneidad y valoración de la obra y el proyecto de arquitectura como investigación.