Our architecture can be defined experimental that is we experiment the impact a particular space has on people. Those effects, mainly related to the phenomenological and perceptive aspect, as Merleau Ponty meant, take their inspiration from a series of phenomena inherent to the contemporary reality that influence the conception of the living space by changing the individual behaviour living space is meant both public and private).
We are talking about phenomena permeating the urban area (mobility, speed, complexity, etc…), natural phenomena (desertification, floods, earthquakes), or events concerning the whole world which, even interacting with different cultures and races, all share common elements underlined by terms such as information, consumerism, emigration, globalization etc…Our research is therefore intended as a possible response to a series of events, or, in some cases, rather like predictions sometimes approaching utopian solutions.
We often wondered how it was possible to reach abstract solutions, forecasting future whether immediate, even starting from real elements.. The answer lies in what we mean by ‘real’ talking about a specific phenomenon.
Moreover going beyond the event itself, that is pushing the phenomenon to its limits, new conditions, completely apart from reality, arise.
Given that you can say that we are working on extreme spaces, which set apart the architectural rules, spaces according to which the concept of phenomenon is influenced by some fundamental philosophical theories (Foucault, Deleuze, Merleau Ponty) based on the connection environment-subject-individual, but also by mathematical or scientific rules, which have always been considered instrumental for the architecture.
We thus work on spaces characterized by those contrasts that are usually part of the written and spoken language. Closed-opened, outside-inside, visible-invisible, chaos-order, rational-organic, under-above, etc. These are contrasting terms often matter of philosophical enquiry throughout history) that never reach the point of balance which was typically related to tradition (in the classic age they searched for the balanced proportions, for the balance between empty and full etc.). Indeed they exist just through conflict and contrast producing various new tensions which make people confusing within a confused reality. to reach extreme special conditions we use the movement as an instrument that shows a complex, but most of all, non static architecture.
We base our research on this matter along two main directions: the individual movement, which refers to the wandering space and which is represented by the empty, the smooth space on which the visual perception is based and in which the fundamental element is the route. Crossing the territory the individual perceive the space so architecture becomes a cloth to wear and to bring with us, to be soon left on the territory once used.
The movement of architecture as it acquires subjectivity replacing the individual.
Moving parts and elements through operations such as rotating, sliding, flowing, overturning etc. it is possible to reach infinite spatial conditions in a short time no one of which prevail. According to us this represents an alternative and different way of perceiving the space in which architecture expresses itself, not only through the searching for a form, which for us has a deductive character, but through pure and simple gesture. Just through action you can always reach different expressions.
To stress this concept, our architecture assumes a poor character; we use simple and essential forms, supported by the use of materials that are simple and economical.
All this does not exclude the scenic and illusory side of architecture, through this real use of its daily gestures: sliding serigraphic glass doors, drawing rotating walls, lighting elements that, moving change the perception of the space and create unique optical effects. Each structure becomes a theatrical work with no end and no beginning and without a specific plot, indeed it expresses without a script. In this sense we can define all our projects as ‘kinetic architecture’
. It is interesting the study and the resolution of the architectural detail related to the composition rules. For example the ‘Mies Van der Rohe’s cross pillar is divided into four parts to let the walls slide, or the volume itself is broken to reach the same effect.
New living types arise such as the semi-duplex, the double-face space and the holo-space, etc. Finally it is fundamental to notice that all structures are thought as the right answer to bio-compatibility and self-sufficiency. In particular the first group of architectures (architecture of movement) is characterised by natural and recycled materials while the second group (architecture in motion) is defined through automation systems, intelligent systems able to answer to the new technological living comforts