Your browser is out-of-date.

In order to have a more interesting navigation, we suggest upgrading your browser, clicking in one of the following links.
All browsers are free and easy to install.

 
  • in vitruvius
    • in magazines
    • in journal
  • \/
  •  

research

magazines

interview ISSN 2175-6708

abstracts

português
A entrevista tem como temas o trabalho atual do Prof. Frampton, a situação das escolas de arquitetura nos EUA, a arquitetura moderna e sua relevância atual, o trabalho das grandes empresas de arquitetura dos EUA e o crescimento urbano em Manhattan.

english
The interview focuses on the current work of Prof. Frampton, the state of schools of Architecture in the USA, Modern Architecture and its pertinence nowadays, the work of the main architectural firms in the USA and the urban growth of Manhattan.

español
La entrevista tiene como temas el trabajo actual del profesor Frampton, las escuelas de Arquitectura en los EE.UU., la arquitectura moderna y su pertinencia hoy, el trabajo de las firmas de arquitectura en los EE.UU. y el crecimiento urbano de Manhattan.

how to quote

PALERMO, Nicolás Sica. Kenneth Frampton. Entrevista, São Paulo, year 13, n. 050.02, Vitruvius, may 2012 <https://vitruvius.com.br/revistas/read/entrevista/13.050/4325/en_US>.


Edifício Seagram, arquiteto Mies Van der Rohe, 1954-1958
Foto Nicolás Sica Palermo

NS: In your opinion, is modern architecture a formal system, such as the classical system? Why?

KF: Modern Architecture has never evolved into a coherent formal system comparable to that of European Classicism between 1750 and 1925. In as much as Modern Architecture came into being out of the European artistic avant garde it was always somewhat pluralist with respect to such primary formal allegiances as Purism, Neoplasticism, Constructivism, Expressionism, etc. Even if for some people Modern Architecture could be duly recognized as a more or less unified white, flat-roofed style, along the lines of Hitchcock and Johnson’s canonical so called International Style, dating from 1932, the work of European modern architects after WWII in the 50’s was invariably very diverse. One may also cite the post war work of Alvar Aalto which had nothing whatever to do with the International Style nor even at the time of his canonical Viipuri Library of 1938-1939.

NS: After post modernism, do you think that modernity is still pertinent nowadays? If so, what are the differences between modern architecture and the urban planning carried out between the 50’s and the 70’s and one that could can be carried out currently? Could the landscapes and environments - urban or not, the programs and the technology generate significant formal progress for this architecture?

KF: Perhaps the last truly significant large scale urban planning and refurbishment was carried out in Barcelona between 1980 and 1992 largely under the leadership of Oriol Bohigas (8) and under the neo-socialist administration of Pasqual Maragall. The most encouraging development of recent date has surely been the rise of landscape/urbanism as an environmental discourse, having its origin in the work of Ian McHarg, James Corner in Philadelphia and in that of Manuel de Solà Morales and Joan Busquets in Barcelona. Although there are other very important schools of landscape in Europe, above all Michel Corajoud’s landscape school of Versaille of which Michel Desvigne is one of its most creative progeny. As far as technology is concerned surely one of more important didactic lines is that stemming from Thomas Herzog in Munich, both as a teacher/researcher and as a practitioner. His book Architecture and Technology of 2001 is a fundamental response in this regard.

NS: Whereas modern architecture is an important topic of study, should research be considered only as historiographic record, or can it be utilized as a basis for future achievements, as buildings and urban planning?

KF: In my view the cultivation of tradition is crucial including the tradition of the new. I am convinced by the argument that there is no tradition without innovation and conversely no innovation without tradition. As far as the modern tradition is concerned there is perhaps no more fertile legacy for the future of architecture than the work of Aalto.

note

8
Frampton, Kenneth. Martorell, Bohigas, Mackay: trente ans d’architecture, 1954-1984. Paris: Electa Moniteur, 1985. 151 p.

comments

050.02
abstracts
how to quote

languages

original: português

outros: english español

share

050

050.01

Ian Bentley

Paula Barros

050.03

Yannis Tsiomis

Adalberto Retto Jr.

newspaper


© 2000–2024 Vitruvius
All rights reserved

The sources are always responsible for the accuracy of the information provided