Tomorrow, April 15th at 14:30 pm, I will be presenting at Urban Hybridization Conference in Milan the paper URBAN APERTURE(S) >< POROSITY AS A NEW MODEL FOR HYBRID PUBLIC SPACE. The paper is the result of a collaboration and it’s written by:

Francesco Cingolani, Domenico Di Siena, Manu Fernandez, Paco Gonzalez, Cesar Reyes Najera and Ethel Baraona Pohl

Here is the abstract:

In the past 20 years, the communications revolution produced by the Internet substantially affected the way we interact with the world. This has driven us to a change of perception in the traditionally recognized opposition between real and virtual. Nowadays, a new paradigm is actually re-drawing reality as a complex system of relations between layers as “face” (physical) and virtual. Architects and urban planners can no longer ignore this new reality generated by ubiquitous computer technologies that we have translated to the reconfiguration of physical space in urban areas, with the term “hybrid public spaces”.

This “hybridization” of space is only an expression of wider radical changes between analytical systems (order and spacing) to synthetic (complexity, connectivity, permeability) ones. In a system characterized by its high capacity for communication, if space becomes a mix between reality and virtual presence, the separation between private and public space becomes obsolete. According to this theory of urban permeability, the concept of “filter” is important as a new indispensable (Technological? Architectural? Social? Cultural? ) device. Filter as a mean of connection with the capacity of handling private/public, real/virtual, inside a system where the channels are not separated anymore. Now these channels are communicating -APERTURE-.

In this model, public space is defined as the space in which information can flow freely. The public information consists in the communication generated from private channels screened by urban filters. In our point of view, this filter function cannot be automated: only people, through his sensitivity and emotions, can solve this function of discernment.

We propose an anthropocentric definition of these “hybrid public spaces”: considering the technological importance of information channels but restoring spirituality and intelligence that can only be provided by humans beings.

Tags:
# Urban Pore/porosity
# Hybrid typologies of public urban spaces
# Hybridization design strategies and case-study in urban, landscape or architectural design

Full Paper here.

Our friend Francesco has shared the abstract [in Spanish] that was accepted today for URBAN HYBRIDIZATION in Contemporary Territories. Here it is in English:

In the past 20 years, the communications revolution produced by the Internet substantially affected the way we interact with the world. This has driven us to a change of perception in the traditionally recognized opposition between real and virtual. Nowadays, a new paradigm is actually re-drawing reality as a complex system of relations between layers as “face” (physical) and virtual. Architects and urban planners can no longer ignore this new reality generated by ubiquitous computer technologies that we have translated to the reconfiguration of physical space in urban areas, with the term “hybrid public spaces”.

This “hybridization” of space is only an expression of wider radical changes between analytical systems (order and spacing) to synthetic (complexity, connectivity, permeability) ones. In a system characterized by its high capacity for communication, if space becomes a mix between reality and virtual presence, the separation between private and public space becomes obsolete. According to this theory of urban permeability, the concept of “filter” is important as a new indispensable (Technological? Architectural? Social? Cultural? ) device. Filter as a mean of connection with the capacity of handling private/public, real/virtual, inside a system where the channels are not separated anymore. Now these channels are communicating -APERTURE-.

In this model, public space is defined as the space in which information can flow freely. The public information consists in the communication generated from private channels screened by urban filters. In our point of view, this filter function cannot be automated: only people, through his sensitivity and emotions, can solve this function of discernment.

We propose an anthropocentric definition of these «hybrid public space»: considering the technological importance of information channels but restoring spirituality and intelligence that can only be provided by humans beings.

Submmited by: Francesco Cingolani, Domenico Di Siena, Manu Fernández, Paco González, César Reyes Nájera and Ethel Baraona Pohl

Hace algunos meses, la revista Volume publicó su número Unsolicited Architecture, en un momento más que oportuno para la profesión del arquitecto. Un momento en el que todos [o la gran mayoría] nos cuestionamos las diversas vías del hacer arquitectónico, ya que a raíz de las dificultades económicas que atraviesa el planeta, ha surgido una tendencia reflexiva en torno a nuestra profesión: ¿cuáles son los lineamientos a seguir para un arquitecto? ¿cuál es el papel del arquitecto en la sociedad?

El post completo en Arkinet.

“What defines the Internet is its social architecture. It’s the living environment that counts, the live interaction, not just the storage and retrieval procedure.” -Geert Lovink, 2005

Networking is revealed as the new way to explore the world. The ties in between users from different places help to create a new cartography, where new portions of terra incognita can be used to create new fields for data and information that can help to reduce the gap between developed and undeveloped countries. In this scenario, it is mandatory to invent new methods, fitting with the singular nature of this undiscovered new world. Internet is the new territory where people can innovate and be visionary and endlessly experimental. Andrew Maynard in one of their projects talks about “Architecture as an art form where people are forced to interact”. And one of the new forms of interaction is Web 2.0.

The complete post can be read here.

“Architecture is something different from building. So what makes it different? [...] And there is something else. The more concepts and ideas formulated by the architect have an immediacy for contemporary conditions of living, thinking, working, the higher we will value it as architecture. We want architecture to participate in the crucial changes affecting our lives, and not simply form a backdrop to them.”

Lebbeus Woods in What is Architecture?

…………………………………….

“It seems odd that in order to make a point, one often has to drag out historic precedents such as Cedric Price in order to illustrate the importance of critical, open source planning. Cedric’s Fun Palace description still, today, feels highly contemporary: “The varied and ever ever-changing activities will determine the form of the site. To enclose these activities the anti-building must have equal flexibility. Thus the prime motivation of the area is caused by the people and their activities and the resultant form is continually dependent on them.”

-Markus Miessen

Just a few hours ago, we received a tweet sent by our friend @javierest and thougt that is an event with the perfect philosophy and a great program to post as our first review in this blog, that came out from a networking session via twitter in between some of us [bloggers, friends, architects and non-architects] that were just wondering about the future of the architectural profession and about the new ways that architects have to be involved in the real and current socio-political reality that we are living.

The program,  under the theme Ten Days for Oppositional Architecture is really amazing and you can have a complete overview here:

The event is public and will be at the Storefront for Art and Architecture in New York, is a project developed by An Architektur and organized by Oliver Clemens, Sabine Horlitz, Anita Kaspar, Kim Förster. As they quotes in their web-site:

During the event we want to discuss the potential of the concept of commons as a political discourse and practice that sets a limit to capitalist accumulation but that also goes beyond it – a strategy of de-commodification and re-appropriation that tries to recognize and articulate the already existing though maybe minor and often micro-level alternative practices. Commons are an optimistic alternative, a grounded vision based on existing struggles but fundamentally questioning the hegemonic logic of today’s society. We want to explore the notion of commons in different historical situations and see how it can be actualized today. What are its potentials, limitations and can it be turned into a social and political force and perspective towards post-capitalist spaces?

The program includes multidisciplinary lecturers as James deFilippis [geographer], David Kotz [economist], Teddy Cruz [architect], Peter Linebaugh [historian], Lize Mogel ans Alexis Baghat, editors of An Atlas of Radical Cartography, among others. The complete program is here.

So, if you’re around New York in November 12th to 21th, don’t miss it… Did someone say #thinkark?