Marianne Skjulhaug

You have to do right things before you do the things right – a search for the investigating field of architecture.

Can you find other ideas, other values in the not built? The answer is of course yes, even if you find into the profession a lack of interest or even disrespect towards not realized or not built architecture. I believe the importance of not built projects for the development of architecture is not only important, but crucial. Thus we must have in mind the variety of reasons why something is not built. In that sense not all unrealized architecture is of great interest. I believe we have to make distinctions speaking of not built architecture. The reasons for not being built, stretches from utopia to more pragmatic reasons. Some areas between these positions are more interesting to investigate.
Examples of more pragmatic reasons is the Norwegian cottage (Henriette Salvesen) that was declined because of its flat roof differing from the regulation plan. These pragmatic reasons are maybe less interesting. Still, this small cottage has become almost an icon for the Norwegian architects, a symbol for standing up against politicians and bureaucracy.
Many architects have through their studies been attracted to the utopian projects whether it has been city plans or buildings. I remember a diploma back in the eighties; a hotel without site (Bård Helland, NTNU). The diploma questioned the possibilities of making architecture without context, but was of course not meant to be built. It provoked the teachers and guest critics in a way that amazed us all. It was almost not accepted as a work of architecture and the value as a theoretical reflective work in a visual language was unfortunately not recognized.
A wide range of reasons for projects not being built has been present throughout the history of architecture. The values and the impact are different and can through a new focus on the unbuilt be discussed in new ways. Utopian ideas can in worst case lead us away from the actual problems and the more pragmatic reasons can just be seen as an extension of a normal process, developing a project where you as an architect always has to battle with different limitations and barriers like economy, regulations, technical solutions, user and client opinions.
My main intension with this text is therefore to focus on the architecture projects in between utopia and the one which did not pass pragmatic obstacles. I believe we find the most important attempts in those projects which really push the limits of architecture and at the same time has a strong intension of being realized. You can find open-mindedness in these projects involving both all the existing premises and the challenges for the future – the unknown. The European competition of architecture for young professional architects, EUROPAN, has this dual aim; a call for new ideas in the framework of realization. The winning project in Hamar (Brossa and Salcedo) presents a challenging way of developing urban patterns, taking time and place in consideration. The proposal is and has been mind-breaking for the future of Hamar.
The experience we have had with EUROPAN is amazing; the participating cities and the clients are given a possibility, even if the projects are not being realized, to debate matters concerning urban development based on extraordinary and innovative ideas made by young European architects.
Marianne Skjulhaug is new principal of Bergen School of Architecture and acting leader of Europan Norway.

24.09.07

Comments 0

Add comment