A carregar...
Publicação
Progetto urbano e archeologia diffusa
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 96.5 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Resumo(s)
A relação entre a arquitetura contemporânea e a arqueologia é um tema muito amplo e largamente tratado, que se desenvolveu no tempo, sobretudo através da oposição entre duas categorias: o “antigo” e o “novo”. A discussão em torno desta dicotomia conduziu à afirmação da descontinuidade como critério de projeto em relação à arqueologia. Essa descontinuidade é muitas vezes expressa no contexto arquitetónico de forma preconceituosa, sendo declaradamente assumida a diferença entre a preexistência e a parte adicionada que se constitui, numa lógica de ruptura, a partir da utilização de diferentes formas e materiais.
Contudo, as grandes transformações urbanas, como a construção de infraestruturas, evidenciam um fenómeno, que é na verdade muito capilar, devido à extrema difusão dos objetos arqueolόgicos no território: a proximidade forçada entre o projeto do “novo” e a arqueologia .
Quando os artefactos passam novamente a fazer parte da dinâmica urbana por via de uma escavação programada ou até mesmo de uma forma acidental, ainda não têm assumido, ou terão perdido, o sentido de objeto de memória ou de ruína. Assumem assim a condição de fragmento, ou se quisermos, de signo. Esta condição leva à crise da dicotomia antigo/novo em que o projeto se baseia, estimulando fortemente novas possibilidades de projecto apoiadas em critérios de continuidade, de relação entre o que se adiciona e o que persiste.
No entanto, ao mesmo tempo, existe uma ausência de critérios de continuidade, também por causa da oposição inerente à terminologia adotada. Portanto, para superar esta lógica de oposição, é preciso uma emancipação do fator cronológico dos termos usados. Por isso, assumindo que o termo “arqueologia” não é sinónimo de “antigo”, neste trabalho os termos “antigo” e “novo” serão substituídos correspondentemente pelas expressões layer de transformação interrompida (ou arqueológica) e layer de transformação contínua. Estas expressões estão já vagamente implícitas em alguns estudos científicos, mas nunca totalmente explicados e desenvolvidos no campo teórico. Assim, pretende-se que estes conceitos se integrem na linguagem do projecto arquitetónico: as camadas (layers), entendidas quer no sentido físico quer no sentido imaterial, mas também como um complexo de relações e de significados.
Com isto, torna-se evidente a oportunidade e o objectivo da pesquisa: investigar a relação entre o projeto contemporâneo, arquitetónico e urbano, e os artefactos arqueológicos com particular enfoque nos projetos que se baseiam em critérios de continuidade entre os layers arqueológicos e os de transformação contínua.
Contexto geográfico, área temática e objectivo da pesquisa
O contexto geográfico e cultural a que se faz referência é o europeu, com um enfoque sobre Itália e Portugal, países onde a pesquisa foi realizada. A escolha é motivada pelo fato que, nesta área geográfica, o conceito de património cultural não sofre mudanças substanciais de significado. Além disso, é reconhecida a contribuição italiana para o debate sobre a protecção e valorização do património cultural, bem como para o estudo dos fenómenos urbanos, particularmente durante o período pós-guerra. A pesquisa realizada em contexto internacional tornou evidente o forte interesse português, no campo académico e profissional, pela cultura arquitetónica italiana. Além disso, o trabalho em Portugal facilitou, por um lado, o estudo de um caso paradigmático em Espanha, o do Museu Nacional de Arte Romana de Mérida, e, por outro, permitiu abordar as obras de alguns mestres portugueses, como Eduardo Souto de Moura e Álvaro Siza Vieira, onde é possivel observar a singular capacidade de utilização do material arqueológico como material de projeto.
A relação entre a arquitectura e a arqueologia transformou-se ao longo do tempo, passando inicialmente pela restituição da imagem original dos artefactos arqueológicos e mais tarde pela exibição do palimpsesto. Actualmente, resume-se de um modo particular a questões sobre a protecção do sítio arqueológico, da museografia e da museologia, com interesse sobre aspectos ligados ao tema da narrativa. Este facto revela uma tendência de percepção do projecto como um apêndice da obra arqueológica que, evidentemente, detém um reconhecimento particular por ser um objecto de memória ou uma ruína.
O presente estudo procura, pelo contrário, seguir uma linha de pesquisa menos difundida, interessada em criar uma relação de continuidade entre diferentes sistemas urbanos, entre os quais o arqueológico. Neste sentido, os vestígios arqueológicos não têm necessariamente o papel de recurso económico para o turismo. Tendo em conta a oposição inerente aos termos “antigo” e “novo” e a sua insuficiência na descrição da globalidade dos fenómenos urbanos, esta linha de estudo baseia-se na ideia de posicionar os vestígios arqueológicos na mesma área semiológica da arquitectura, tornando-os materiais do projeto. Essa hipótese, presente amplamente no pensamento de Aldo Rossi, é também assumida por outros autores italianos, como Raffaele Panella, e internacionais, embora numa outra perspectiva, como Rafael Moneo e Eduardo Souto de Moura. No entanto, tirando alguns casos excepcionais, não existe uma ideia precisa e amplamente compartilhada que corresponda à hipótese de tornar o material arqueológico em material do projeto.
Daqui emerge, por um lado, a questão de investigação sobre quais são as formas contemporâneas de continuidade e, por outro, o objectivo da pesquisa de construir um quadro de intervenções baseado em critérios de continuidade. A necessidade de definir as características que determinam a associação de um projeto com a ideia de continuidade também emerge.
Método e resultados esperados
A metodologia adotada na pesquisa foi organizada em 3 fases diferentes. A fase de scouting constou na recolha de material bibliográfico, observação in loco e levantamento de documentação gráfica para seleção de casos de estudos.
A fase de análise e interpretação dos dados constou na organização dos materiais recolhidos em categorias de intervenção. Essas categorias são resumidas e organizadas num diagrama no qual se pode ler as relações e as distâncias conceptuais entre os diferentes tipos de intervenção. Para cada categoria de intervenção foram evidenciadas as analogias entre as obras de arte e de arquitetura a fim de observar o problema do ponto de vista da composição. Além disso, a comparação entre a arquitetura contemporânea e a arquitetura do passado permite o reconhecimento de algumas afinidades e aspetos qualitativos que igualmente devem ser salvaguardados no projeto contemporâneo. Deste modo, as duas comparações permitem observar a problemática de uma perspetiva particular sem o preconceito ligado aos termos antigo e novo.
O resultado da análise aos casos estudo é uma espécie de dicionário visual essencial para delinear a estrutura correspondente a uma imagem atual de continuidade na arquitetura.
Por fim, a fase de validação da teoria consiste na aplicação do esquema elaborado (diagramas e categorias) para alguns casos particulares, a fim de mostrar os seus limites conceptuais.
O trabalho é composto por duas partes. A primeira parte contém o texto como referência principal na qual as imagens funcionam como legendas. A segunda contém as imagens onde o texto funciona como legenda. Desta última fazem ainda parte as referências bibliográficas.
As duas partes estão divididas em três capítulos, uma para cada etapa conceptual: a crise da dicotomia antigo/novo; a tese e os seus fundamentos; os dados para a demonstração da tese e a interpretação deles. No entanto, só a primeira parte tem um capítulo conclusivo.
O primeiro capítulo, intitulado Projeto urbano e arqueologia difusa, procura enquadrar o estudo nas problemáticas e instrumentos metodológicos associados à prática e teoria interventiva ao longo do tempo para demonstrar a sua inadequação ao contexto actual.
A definição do objeto de estudo, integrado no contexto geográfico e cultural da pesquisa, foi apoiada em casos práticos demonstrativos das metodologias comummente adoptadas no processo de transformação dos edifícios. Através de um excursus sobre a evolução do debate arquitectónico, que aparentemente distancia os fenómenos urbanos da protecção e musealização dos sítios arqueológicos, mostraremos a crise da dicotomia antigo/novo e a individualização do projecto urbano como ferramenta de intervenção.
Este enquadramento pretende assim justificar a necessidade de repensar a relação entre o projeto contemporâneo e os artefactos arqueológicos e, portanto, a importância deste estudo.
O segundo capítulo, intitulado Da dicotomia antigo/novo à continuidade como critério de projeto, trata da hipótese de resolver a relação entre arquitetura e arqueologia pela aplicação do critério de continuidade, com a condição de abandonar a terminologia “antigo” e “novo” cativa de um fator cronológico. Como tal, neste estudo, os termos “antigo” e “novo” serão substituídos pelas expressões layer de transformação interrompida (ou arqueológico) e layer de transformação contínua. A hipótese será apoiada por estudos científicos, dos quais emergem também duas características do critério de continuidade: a assunção do material arqueológico como material de projeto – corolário da hipótese suportada – e a necessidade de refazer o significado do signo arqueológico. Com base nessas observações, o critério de continuidade será definido como a interação recíproca entre a camada arqueológica e aquela em contínua transformação, em função de um conceito espacial unitário, resultado de uma reflexão crítica do significado do signo arqueológico.
No terceiro capítulo, intitulado Formas contemporâneas de continuidade, o critério de continuidade, definido no capítulo anterior, será utilizado como um fator de análise discriminante para selecionar alguns casos significativos dentro do contexto geográfico e cultural da pesquisa. Simultaneamente, será proposto um critério de classificação dos casos de estudo que levará em conta a relação espacial e de significado com a pré-existência, bem como o nível de interação e relação entre os layers. O resultado dessa classificação será demonstrado através de um diagrama tipológico no qual as distâncias conceptuais dos diferentes tipos de intervenção podem ser identificadas qualitativamente. As categorias definidas no âmbito do critério de continuidade são a Restituição,o Enchimento/Integração, a Adaptação, o Sobrescrever/Acumulação e a Re-invenção. Estas formas de leitura da arquitetura e da arqueologia procuram contribuir para a formação de um framework representativo da ideia de continuidade.
Este quadro de categorias será útil para identificar algumas tendências de cariz experimental na arquitetura, baseadas no conceito de continuidade, e para orientar a análise e comparação de projetos arquitetónicos relacionados com o material arqueológico (capítulo 4). No entanto, é-lhe também reconhecido o seu sentido casuístico.
Deve realçar-se assim que este estudo não se constitui como um valor absoluto e definitivo mas um conhecimento parcial. Trata-se de um contributo possível estruturado por um método científico preciso que oferece novas perspectivas e instrumentos úteis para a avaliação e avanço do debate sobre estas questões específicas. No entanto, ele permanece válido dentro de um determinado domínio e sob certas hipóteses.
Por fim, será possível demonstrar a hipótese e alcançar os objetivos propostos, mas notar-se-á que outras questões serão deixadas em aberto, como, por exemplo, o papel do adjetivo “arqueológico” na arquitetura e a relação entre o significado do signo arqueológico e o tempo. Portanto este trabalho de investigação é comparável a um ensaio de escavação que, ao atingir um objetivo de conhecimento específico, intercepta outras camadas disciplinares, satisfaz alguns conhecimentos e, ao mesmo tempo, abre novas questões.
ABSTRACT: Object of research Over the time, the very broad and widely treated theme of relationship between contemporary architecture and archaeology has been developed through the opposition of two concepts: “the ancient” and “the new”. The debate based on this dichotomy has led to the affirmation of discontinuity as main criterion of the architectural design for archaeology. The conceptual discontinuity, on one hand, leads to emphasize the gap between ancient and contemporary architectures by means of distinct shapes and materials. On the other hand is, generally, a negative prejudice in the common evaluation of contemporary architectural projects. However, the broader urban transformations, like the infrastructural developments highlight a very widespread phenomenon, due to the extreme dissemination of archaeological artifacts: the forced proximity between the contemporary architecture and the archaeological findings. When archaeological artifacts return in the urban dynamics by scheduled excavations or in any accidental ways, they have not assumed yet either the role of object of memory or of ruins, or, alternatively, they have lost it. So they are still in a preliminary condition of fragments or, if you want, of signs. These events strongly stress and undermine the ancient vs new dichotomy, on which the contemporary architectural design is based. Moreover, they require that the interference between architecture and archaeology becomes interaction, overturning the logic of the design from discontinuity to continuity. However, at the same time, the continuity, as theoretical criterion, has a lack of significance, meanly due to the intrinsic contradiction of the adopted terminology: ancient vs new. Consequently, in order to go beyond this logical opposition, the two terms need to be seen independently from the chronological factor. Therefore, because of the non-coincidence of the meanings of “archaeology” and “antiquity”, in this work the word “ancient” will be substituted by the expression interrupted transformation (or archaeological) layer and the term “new” by continuous transformation layer, as implicitly used in more authoritative studies. In this way, the terms of the debate become again conceptual tools of the architectural design: the layers, to be understood not only in the physical sense, but also as systems of relationships and meanings. What has been said above highlights the object of this research: to investigate the relationship between the contemporary architectural and urban design, focusing on the projects based on the continuity criterion between the archaeological layer and the continuous transforming one. Geographical context, thematic area and goal of research This research refers to the European geographical and cultural context, with a focus on Italy and Portugal, because they are the countries where this research was developed. The reason for this choice is the substantial homogeneity of the meaning of cultural heritage in this area. Moreover, the Italian cultural contribution to the debate on the protection and the enhancement of cultural heritage, as well as on the study of urban phenomena is widely appreciated. Indeed, these themes strongly characterized the theoretical Italian research, in particular during the postwar period. Instead, the research conducted in Portugal allowed us to analyse the works of some Portuguese architects, such as Eduardo Souto de Moura and Álvaro Siza Vieira, characterized by a singular ability to use the archaeological remains as design material. Therefore, it facilitated the study of some paradigmatic cases, like the National Museum of Roman Art of Mérida, in Spain. The relationship between architecture and archaeology changed over the time, passing from an earlier phase of restitution of the original appearance of the archaeological finding to the exhibition of the palimpsest. Currently, it principally deals with the issues about protection, museography and museology, with the consequential interest for the narrative theme. Therefore the architectural design is often set up as caption of the archaeological elements, because they benefit of particular consideration as objects of memory or ruins. This study differs from the mentioned research fields, because it belongs to the theoretical current, less common than the others, which aspires to create a relationship of continuity between contemporary urban systems and the archaeological ones. According to this thought, the archaeological findings do not necessarily have the role of economic resources for touristic purpose. After that the intrinsic contradiction of adjective “ancient” and “new” and their inadequacy to describe the urban phenomena have been proved, the research adopts the idea of leading back the archaeology in the semiological field of the architecture, conceiving the archaeological fragments as design materials. This hypothesis assumed by Aldo Rossi, belongs to the thinking of other Italian architects, like Raffaele Panella, and, although in other terms, of other international architects like Rafael Moneo and Eduardo Souto de Moura. However, excepting some cases, it does not exist a shared idea about the meaning of using archaeological remains as design materials. On those theoretical bases the mean question and the final goal of this research arise. The first one consists in wondering what the contemporary forms of continuity are like. The second one consists in tracing a framework of interventions inspired by the continuity criterion. Therefore, it is also requested to define the parameters which characterize the association of a project to the continuity criterion. Method and expected results The research has consisted of several phases. The first one is the scouting of bibliographical and graphic documentation and case studies. Consequently, the phase of analysis and interpretation has consisted in arranging the collected data in intervention categories, that have been resumed in a chart where you can read the conceptual affinities and distances between several typologies of interventions. For each category a compositional analogy between art and architecture has been highlighted in order to observe the problem from the compositional point of view. Moreover, the comparison between contemporary and past architectures allows us to recognize some conceptual affinities and qualitative aspects we have to keep also in contemporary projects. These two comparisons allow us to observe the question without the chronological prejudice. The result of this analysis is a kind of picture dictionary, essential to define the framework of continuity criterion in the contemporary architecture. Finally, the validation of the theory has been done by applying the theory, summarized in a chart, to some study cases, in order to show its conceptual limits of validity. This volume consists of two sections. The first one contains the text as main core and the images work as captions, while in the second one the roles are inverted. Both the sections are divided into three chapters, one for each conceptual step: the crisis of the ancient vs new dichotomy; the thesis and its foundations; the data for the demonstration of the thesis and their interpretation. Only the first section has a final chapter, in addiction. The first chapter, entitled Urban design and sprawled archaeology, shows the main questions and the crisis of the current conceptual and practical tools for managing the urban transformations, from which the necessity of their improvement and the importance of this research. The definition of the research object and of the geographical and cultural context represent the beginning of the dissertation. The explanation of the evolution of the debate about the urban phenomena and the protection of the archaeological heritage will show that currently there is a crisis of the approach based on the ancient vs new dichotomy and that the urban project is becoming a common instrument for both the architectural fields. The second chapter, entitled From ancient vs new dichotomy to continuity as design criterion, deals with the hypothesis of applying the continuity criterion to the contemporary architecture leaving the terms of the dichotomy. For this reason the expressions interrupted transformation layer (or archaeological layer) and continuous transformation layer will substitute the terms “ancient” and “new”. Authoritative studies support this hypothesis end underline some required properties of continuity criterion: to use archaeological findings as design materials – corollary of the supported thesis – and to rethink the significance of the archaeological sign. On these basis, in this work, the continuity criterion is defined as the mutual interaction between the archaeological layer and the continuous transformation layer, in function of a homogeneous spatial concept that is the result of a critical re-thinking of the archaeological sign. The third chapter, entitled Contemporary forms of continuity, deals with study cases. In this chapter the continuity criterion is used as “discriminant” for selecting study cases belonging to the geographical context of the research. The study cases are arranged in categories which consider the spatial and significance relationships between the two interacting layers. A diagram summarizes the results of this classification and shows, in a qualitative way, the conceptual distances and affinities between different interventions. The categories responding to the continuity criterion are: Restitution, Filling/Integration, Adaptation, Overwriting/Accumulation and Reinvention. They contribute to trace a framework of the continuity criterion in contemporary architecture with reference to the relationship between architecture and archaeology. Although some limits, this frame of reference allows us not only to take note of the current state of art, but also to have a reference for evaluating architectural projects dealing with archaeological structures. This research is not valid all-round, but it is a partial knowledge. It is a scientific contribution which offers new perspectives and conceptual instruments for evaluating architectural projects dealing with archaeology. Nevertheless, as all scientific works, it remains valid within a certain domain and under certain assumptions. Finally, some questions are still open, for example the role of the adjective archaeological in architecture and the relationship between the archaeological sign and the time factor. Therefore, this research is like an archaeological excavation, whose aim is to seek a goal of knowledge, but, at the same time, it intercepts other disciplinary layers, it answers some questions and opens other ones.
ABSTRACT: Object of research Over the time, the very broad and widely treated theme of relationship between contemporary architecture and archaeology has been developed through the opposition of two concepts: “the ancient” and “the new”. The debate based on this dichotomy has led to the affirmation of discontinuity as main criterion of the architectural design for archaeology. The conceptual discontinuity, on one hand, leads to emphasize the gap between ancient and contemporary architectures by means of distinct shapes and materials. On the other hand is, generally, a negative prejudice in the common evaluation of contemporary architectural projects. However, the broader urban transformations, like the infrastructural developments highlight a very widespread phenomenon, due to the extreme dissemination of archaeological artifacts: the forced proximity between the contemporary architecture and the archaeological findings. When archaeological artifacts return in the urban dynamics by scheduled excavations or in any accidental ways, they have not assumed yet either the role of object of memory or of ruins, or, alternatively, they have lost it. So they are still in a preliminary condition of fragments or, if you want, of signs. These events strongly stress and undermine the ancient vs new dichotomy, on which the contemporary architectural design is based. Moreover, they require that the interference between architecture and archaeology becomes interaction, overturning the logic of the design from discontinuity to continuity. However, at the same time, the continuity, as theoretical criterion, has a lack of significance, meanly due to the intrinsic contradiction of the adopted terminology: ancient vs new. Consequently, in order to go beyond this logical opposition, the two terms need to be seen independently from the chronological factor. Therefore, because of the non-coincidence of the meanings of “archaeology” and “antiquity”, in this work the word “ancient” will be substituted by the expression interrupted transformation (or archaeological) layer and the term “new” by continuous transformation layer, as implicitly used in more authoritative studies. In this way, the terms of the debate become again conceptual tools of the architectural design: the layers, to be understood not only in the physical sense, but also as systems of relationships and meanings. What has been said above highlights the object of this research: to investigate the relationship between the contemporary architectural and urban design, focusing on the projects based on the continuity criterion between the archaeological layer and the continuous transforming one. Geographical context, thematic area and goal of research This research refers to the European geographical and cultural context, with a focus on Italy and Portugal, because they are the countries where this research was developed. The reason for this choice is the substantial homogeneity of the meaning of cultural heritage in this area. Moreover, the Italian cultural contribution to the debate on the protection and the enhancement of cultural heritage, as well as on the study of urban phenomena is widely appreciated. Indeed, these themes strongly characterized the theoretical Italian research, in particular during the postwar period. Instead, the research conducted in Portugal allowed us to analyse the works of some Portuguese architects, such as Eduardo Souto de Moura and Álvaro Siza Vieira, characterized by a singular ability to use the archaeological remains as design material. Therefore, it facilitated the study of some paradigmatic cases, like the National Museum of Roman Art of Mérida, in Spain. The relationship between architecture and archaeology changed over the time, passing from an earlier phase of restitution of the original appearance of the archaeological finding to the exhibition of the palimpsest. Currently, it principally deals with the issues about protection, museography and museology, with the consequential interest for the narrative theme. Therefore the architectural design is often set up as caption of the archaeological elements, because they benefit of particular consideration as objects of memory or ruins. This study differs from the mentioned research fields, because it belongs to the theoretical current, less common than the others, which aspires to create a relationship of continuity between contemporary urban systems and the archaeological ones. According to this thought, the archaeological findings do not necessarily have the role of economic resources for touristic purpose. After that the intrinsic contradiction of adjective “ancient” and “new” and their inadequacy to describe the urban phenomena have been proved, the research adopts the idea of leading back the archaeology in the semiological field of the architecture, conceiving the archaeological fragments as design materials. This hypothesis assumed by Aldo Rossi, belongs to the thinking of other Italian architects, like Raffaele Panella, and, although in other terms, of other international architects like Rafael Moneo and Eduardo Souto de Moura. However, excepting some cases, it does not exist a shared idea about the meaning of using archaeological remains as design materials. On those theoretical bases the mean question and the final goal of this research arise. The first one consists in wondering what the contemporary forms of continuity are like. The second one consists in tracing a framework of interventions inspired by the continuity criterion. Therefore, it is also requested to define the parameters which characterize the association of a project to the continuity criterion. Method and expected results The research has consisted of several phases. The first one is the scouting of bibliographical and graphic documentation and case studies. Consequently, the phase of analysis and interpretation has consisted in arranging the collected data in intervention categories, that have been resumed in a chart where you can read the conceptual affinities and distances between several typologies of interventions. For each category a compositional analogy between art and architecture has been highlighted in order to observe the problem from the compositional point of view. Moreover, the comparison between contemporary and past architectures allows us to recognize some conceptual affinities and qualitative aspects we have to keep also in contemporary projects. These two comparisons allow us to observe the question without the chronological prejudice. The result of this analysis is a kind of picture dictionary, essential to define the framework of continuity criterion in the contemporary architecture. Finally, the validation of the theory has been done by applying the theory, summarized in a chart, to some study cases, in order to show its conceptual limits of validity. This volume consists of two sections. The first one contains the text as main core and the images work as captions, while in the second one the roles are inverted. Both the sections are divided into three chapters, one for each conceptual step: the crisis of the ancient vs new dichotomy; the thesis and its foundations; the data for the demonstration of the thesis and their interpretation. Only the first section has a final chapter, in addiction. The first chapter, entitled Urban design and sprawled archaeology, shows the main questions and the crisis of the current conceptual and practical tools for managing the urban transformations, from which the necessity of their improvement and the importance of this research. The definition of the research object and of the geographical and cultural context represent the beginning of the dissertation. The explanation of the evolution of the debate about the urban phenomena and the protection of the archaeological heritage will show that currently there is a crisis of the approach based on the ancient vs new dichotomy and that the urban project is becoming a common instrument for both the architectural fields. The second chapter, entitled From ancient vs new dichotomy to continuity as design criterion, deals with the hypothesis of applying the continuity criterion to the contemporary architecture leaving the terms of the dichotomy. For this reason the expressions interrupted transformation layer (or archaeological layer) and continuous transformation layer will substitute the terms “ancient” and “new”. Authoritative studies support this hypothesis end underline some required properties of continuity criterion: to use archaeological findings as design materials – corollary of the supported thesis – and to rethink the significance of the archaeological sign. On these basis, in this work, the continuity criterion is defined as the mutual interaction between the archaeological layer and the continuous transformation layer, in function of a homogeneous spatial concept that is the result of a critical re-thinking of the archaeological sign. The third chapter, entitled Contemporary forms of continuity, deals with study cases. In this chapter the continuity criterion is used as “discriminant” for selecting study cases belonging to the geographical context of the research. The study cases are arranged in categories which consider the spatial and significance relationships between the two interacting layers. A diagram summarizes the results of this classification and shows, in a qualitative way, the conceptual distances and affinities between different interventions. The categories responding to the continuity criterion are: Restitution, Filling/Integration, Adaptation, Overwriting/Accumulation and Reinvention. They contribute to trace a framework of the continuity criterion in contemporary architecture with reference to the relationship between architecture and archaeology. Although some limits, this frame of reference allows us not only to take note of the current state of art, but also to have a reference for evaluating architectural projects dealing with archaeological structures. This research is not valid all-round, but it is a partial knowledge. It is a scientific contribution which offers new perspectives and conceptual instruments for evaluating architectural projects dealing with archaeology. Nevertheless, as all scientific works, it remains valid within a certain domain and under certain assumptions. Finally, some questions are still open, for example the role of the adjective archaeological in architecture and the relationship between the archaeological sign and the time factor. Therefore, this research is like an archaeological excavation, whose aim is to seek a goal of knowledge, but, at the same time, it intercepts other disciplinary layers, it answers some questions and opens other ones.
Descrição
Tese de Doutoramento em Arquitetura, com a especialização em Arquitetura e Construção apresentada na Faculdade de Arquitetura da Universidade de Lisboa para obtenção do grau de Doutor.
Palavras-chave
Contexto Educativo
Citação
SPERA, Raffaele - Progetto urbano e archeologia diffusa : dalla dicotomia antico-nuovo alla continuità come criterio di progetto.- Lisboa: FA, 2019. Tese de Doutoramento.
Editora
Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Arquitetura