ok, i had enough of being so insecure and silent. here some LOUD manifesto :)

MANIFESTO

I despise:

Form generated just for the sake of itself. Form which does not have any contribution to the public realm, except violently occupying the space of the city. Such acts of barbarism will provoke further barbaric forms - a cycle of emerging forms, completely ignoring the sense of the architectural space itself: the program.

Spaces, which ignore the scale. It is true that the world's population is growing constantly, it is also true that governments, big media corporations and the religious communities want to control that population - and exactly that is the reason why I despise all the modern Germanias popping up in the scapes of the contemporary cities. The answer for the future city does not lie in the gentrification and uniformity but in the individualization of people and architecture.

Relativization of typology

It seems that there can't be any successful project without relativization of the use and the program. Library is not a library, but also a shopping mall, discussion forum, Kindergarten and might even have a section for the winter ski activities. A museum becomes a boutique, convention center and in order to earn some money (like in the example of Peter Cooks Graz museum, which is not only iconic in shape but also in costs, so the institution of the museum can not actually afford to purchase any art) it might also just become a new multiplex cinema.

I proclaim:

That there is no architecture without program.

Program is highly defined architectural element and not some liquid description of "event architecture", which is temporary and therefore not important. The humans are celebrating the things they do in a building, we are celebrating the thoughts, feelings, ideas, conversations, meetings, exchanges, fights... which we have within the walls of a building, and not celebrating the walls.

Program is defined by representation of event / public activity and also takes into consideration the human (body) scale required for that action (walking / sitting / procession / walking distance / light / visual perception of the space).

Merging programs can produce new typologies. But it is not done by just simply constructing a big empty space and adjusting to different programs by rearrangements of chairs. The new typology of the public building is a sequence of programs in plan or section and not a celebration of parasitic spaces surrounding a big hall (why does every building, containing a public program, has to have a SHOP?). I am not interested in designing GAP shop windows when thinking about a sport arena.

I will:

Create a public building, containing a series of highly defined programs. Those programs will be sheltered within the boundaries of the building, therefore the architectural iconicity will be directed towards the organism of the house, the inner organization, division and subdivision of space. The importance of the uniformed facade will be diminished, and will purely provide light from outside into the interior and programmatic use from inside into the fabric of the city. The skin will present and not represent the different programs.

I will create a true democratic interior space, which will not be a mini city, since I am not interested in reflecting the contemporary culture of consumerism. Programs defined in such a sharpness, that the sequence of spaces will almost be like a sequence of labs examining the different interests. The spaces will not be designed for masses, but for smaller groups of people, since opinions generated by mass thinking can (evidently) only have negative outcomes.

PLAN