Our body was not born for a monologue, but for differences and the meeting of those differences. Polyphony is the destiny of our body.
Luce Irigaray defines it as “sexed body” (luce irigaray) determining its subjectivity and capable of becoming the point from which to set out once more to “meet the other”.
Staying true to reality means accepting all events with our own physicality. Thus, as architects, we pursue the idea of an architecture that is “body”, that seeks pleasure, that has physicality, sensuality, subjectivity and uniqueness to be able to form relationships and avoid monologue: architecture as a “sexed body”, the bearer, therefore, of dialogue, encounter, polyphony, vision, reality.
Architecture is not a machine.
Architecture is a body.
It does not have perfection as its goal, but its essence is to be found in its ability to integrate, transform, decay and be reborn. In contrast to machines, to the world of technology that, in everyday life, aims for speed, dematerialization and loss of weight, the body of architecture that we are pursuing is the bearer of physicality.
An idea of architecture that is “body”, then, has to do directly with the theme of matter, of the physical, of the weight of architecture itself: we firmly believe that in this evil present stubbornly founded on speed, superficiality, communication and the dematerialisation of reality, the physical strength of the matter of the body is the principal antidote to the denial of the truth.
The body and its matter form the basis for dialogue and knowledge.
« poetry in general seems to spring from two causes, each of them lying deep in our nature. First, the instinct of imitation is implanted in man from childhood, one difference between him and other animals being that he is the most imitative of living creatures, and through imitation learns his earliest lessons; and no less universal is the pleasure felt in things imitated. »
We consider the (architectonic) poetic work as an instrument of knowledge. The subject of poetry are the things “possible through likelihood”.
« what matters is the representative (mimetic) ability of which the poet must provide evidence. The narrative, which consists of a beginning and an end (and an aim) is made up of a meaningful sequence (constructed through mimesis) of elements, which are chosen in the infinite and random mass of phenomena of reality and historic memory which the poet (narrator, painter, writer, architect) proposes with a dual aesthetic and informative purpose to the public. (…) “unlike the real, the likely is something that happens “mostly”, it has therefore to do with the possible and the probable. » (Ferdinando Amigoni)
The poetic (architectonic) art is a mimetic game for adults, where the mimesis does not have as its aim disappearing and hiding, but, on the contrary, setting in motion the mechanism of pleasure and sharing that leads to knowledge.
Its “conceptual chain” consists of: mimesis-likelihood-universal-identification-pleasure /catharsis-knowledge (sharing).
The aim of architecture is sharing.
The architectonic poetic machine selects and sets in motion elements of reality and historical and mythical memory, capable of bringing together individual and collective feelings.
The aims that we pursue in architecture are pleasure and knowledge.
The tools we use are narrative, the choice of the elements of the narrative, the choice of language, the use of the likelihood (of the possible, of the probable, of the imaginable) and the resulting wonder.