Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Aurelio Vittore »

According to Pier Vittori Aureli, architectural form becomes political by being a clearly defined limit. These defining effects of architectural form are also what allow a civic and political space to exist. In contrast to the tradition of urbanism, Aureli praises Mies van der Rohe because of the architect’s use of form as an act of demarcation, where a reinterpreted classical plinth carries a glass-and-steel pavilion structure. While Aureli regards this Modernist plinth as a guarantor of absoluteness and independence from urbanism, this article conversely argues that the Miesian plinth is just as implicated in nineteenth-century urbanism as the gridded plans of Cerdà, since this model can be traced back, not to the Ancient Greek temple, but to a novel nineteenth-century visual culture which came into being under the spell of ocularcentrism and panopticism. Aureli’s theory is thus supplemented with its necessary counterpart to management: the representational component of urbanism.

An event organised by the Architecture Exchange in London brought together four architectural practitioners and academics, Pier Vittorio Aureli, Reinhold Martin, Ines Weizman, and Sarah Whiting to discuss political theorist Chantal Mouffe’s conceptions of the space of politics and agonism. The discussions were followed by a response from Mouffe herself. Convened by Joseph Bedford and Jessica Reynolds, the event was held at the Architectural Association in London on 6 December 2014. It followed previous events in 2013 – dubbed Architecture Exchange #1 – at which the philosopher of ‘Object Oriented Ontology’, Graham Harman, participated in a debate about his work.

STILE E MESSAGGIO SULLA COLONNA DI MARCO AURELIOQuesto lavoro affronta il problema di come stile ed iconografia forniscano insieme l'‘evidenza estetica’ per i messaggi impartiti dalla colonna aureliana. La discussione è soprattutto focalizzata sulle scene di battaglia e violenza, che hanno una posizione particolarmente prominente nel contenuto narrativo del fregio elicoidale. L'analisi di queste scene ha lo scopo principale di contribuire alla nostra comprensione della percezione della vittoria romana e della sconfitta dei barbari rappresentate sul fregio. Il concetto coerente di stile e messaggio mostra come esistesse una stretta relazione tra la formazione dello stile e l'iconografia del monumento, e le circostanze storiche della sua erezione. Alla luce di questi risultati, la asserita incoerenza tra la personalità di Marco, il ‘filosofo imperiale’, e le raccapriccianti scene di violenza rappresentate sulla colonna, viene rivalutata.

One of the most conventional architectural elements is the plinth. Neither a specifically modern nor Western element, it is a familiar feature of religious buildings, and associated in premodern societies with the altar. The plinth is commonly understood as an expression of the elevation of the structure towards the sacred and its separation from profane daily life. A number of fairly recent publications have discussed the function of the architectural plinth in the twentieth century. The architectural historian Fritz Neumeyer, architectural historian and theorist K. Michael Hays, and architect and theorist Pier Vittorio Aureli have all argued that the role of the plinth in the work of Mies van der Rohe is mediation.1 In this, they modify a common modern conception of the plinth as an element that isolates and separates a building from its environment.

AbstractAureli advances a fresh, spirited and combative account of the idea of ‘autonomy’, connecting Italian architectural debates from the 1960s with the politics of class-autonomy that was being developed and advanced by workerist theorists such as Raniero Panzieri, Mario Tronti and Toni Negri. Aureli’s account focuses on Aldo Rossi’s architectural ideas (his Tendenza and his book The Architecture of the City) and the project of the No-Stop City proposed by the young avant-garde group Archizoom. The Project of Autonomy is not simply envisaged as an historical exploration of the 1960s; primarily, it is conceived as an intervention in current architectural theory (and cultural politics), drawing on the author’s interest in Tronti’s politics to challenge the contemporary popularity of a broadly post-Negrian ‘autonomism’. This review questions aspects of Aureli’s reading of Rossi and Manfredo Tafuri. Furthermore, although Aureli’s discussion of Red Vienna opens up onto vital questions of strategies for social change, which remain pertinent to contemporary arguments over ‘enclaves’ or ‘zones’ of resistance, his antagonism towards Tafuri prevents his argument from either exploring or advancing the debate which he has initiated.

O texto apresenta uma leitura crítica da obra de Lelé em Salvador a partir de escritos de Pier Vittorio Aureli e Mark Wigley, que constituem uma moldura teórica que associa o desafio da arquitetura como disciplina autônoma diante dos violentos processos de urbanização aos protocolos de representação que estabelecem relações, sempre desprovidas de neutralidade ou clareza objetiva, entre a arquitetura e o lugar. Sob esta perspectiva, abre-se um campo interpretativo que revela uma acentuada diferenciação entre os dois períodos de atuação do arquiteto na cidade (o primeiro de meados dos anos 1970 até 1982 e o segundo entre 1986 e 1994): além das evidentes diferenças entre os materiais empregados, surgem de maneira inequívoca posturas e estratégias claramente distintas quanto à relação com a arquitetura da cidade e sua possibilidade de expressão contemporânea, reveladas através da análise das passarelas para pedestres para o sistema do bonde urbano, em oposição a obras como a Estação da Lapa ou as Secretarias de Estado no CAB, todas de autoria de Lelé.

Two major formal approaches have governed architectural discourse over the last century: formal autonomy and formal engagement. While formal autonomy disengaged architecture from its social, political, cultural, and physical context, formal engagement of current architectural new-pragmatism hardly offered a critical evaluation of these contextual features. Another approach is possible, which we will name here as third formalism alluding to Anthony Vidler’s seminal article “The Third Typology” (1998). This third formalism discusses the possibility of an architecture that realizes both the separation from and engagement with the external contextual conditions via the form. Without naming it as such, this alternative approach has been articulated by Pier Vittorio Aureli in his book The Possibility of an Absolute Architecture (2011). This paper aims at discussing this third alternative by analyzing the Arter building in İstanbul. Designed by Grimshaw Architects and opened in 2019, Arter’s new building is located in Dolapdere, Beyoğlu, which witnesses a rapid urban transformation. Arter is a good example of the third formalism since its finite and definitive form neither directly follows the external forces of its urban surrounding nor disregards its context by solely focusing on the intrinsic formal elements of architecture.

This thesis confronts the possibility of an architecture which limits and reveals, freedom for a way to live, for the activities of man which are vital to a good life. An architecture which is investigated and projected through making. Architecture Separates and makes Distinct, while finding meaningful connection. The work of drawing here attempts to project an architecture which is vital to man, by providing a connection to the activities of Man, in which the spirit of their beginning is recaptured and renewed through a reimagining of the Institutions of Man. Where a sense of Wonder is imperative, and the sense of the eternal in architecture is cultivated. One where a renewal is possible and sense of the cosmos is more evident. On the Threshold of 'Where the desire to express meets the possible' (Kahn) using architectural form. Awareness What is the form? Beginning with the room
Master of Architecture

Italiano: A partire dal 2007, nell’area di Piazza Venezia a Roma, sono stati realizzati alcuni sondaggi archeologici per la costruzione di una stazione per la Linea C della metropolitana. Nel sondaggio S14, quello realizzato nella Piazza della Madonna di Loreto, sono state trovate una serie di strutture appartenenti a diversi periodi storici:dal periodo tardo-repubblicano all’età moderna. Le strutture, appartenenti all’età adrianea, hanno aperto un intenso dibattito tra gli studiosi poiché i tecnici della Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma hanno proposto l’identificazione di queste strutture con quelle dell’Athenaeum dell’imperatore Adriano, un’istituzione accademica a noi nota grazie alle fonti letterarie. Purtroppo le scarse fonti a nostra disposizione, relative a questa istituzione, non hanno permesso fino ad ora di proporre un’ubicazione per l’Athenaeum di Adriano. Español: A partir del 2007, en el área de la Piazza Venezia en Roma, se realizaron una serie de sondeos arqueológicos para la construcción de una estación para la Línea C del metro. En el sondeo S14, realizado en la Piazza della Madonna di Loreto, se han encontrado una serie de estructuras pertenecientes a diversos periodos de la historia: desde el periodo tardo-republicano a la Edad Moderna. Las estructuras pertenecientes a la época adrianea han abierto un intenso debate entre los estudiosos, pues los técnicos de la Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma han propuesto la identificación de estas estructuras con las del Athenaeum del emperador Adriano, una institución académica conocida gracias a las fuentes literarias. Por desgracia, la ausencia de fuentes a nuestra disposición relativas a esta institución, no han permitido hasta ahora proponer una ubicación para el Athenaeum de Adriano. English: Since 2007, in the area of ​​the Piazza Venezia in Rome, a series of archaeological surveys for the construction of a station for Metro Line C were performed. In the survey S14, conducted in the Piazza della Madonna di Loreto, found a number of structures belonging to different periods of history from the late-Republican period to the Modern Age. The structures belonging to the Hadrian era have opened an intense debate among scholars, because technicians from the Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma have proposed the identification of these structures with the Athenaeum of Emperor Hadrian, an academic institution known through literary sources. Unfortunately, the absence of sources at our disposal concerning this institution have not allowed yet to propose a location for Hadrian's Athenaeum.