June 2017

76 BUILD / June 2017 , cultures and races, possess all the common denominators characterised by terms such as computerisation, consumerism, emigration and immigration. “Our research sets out to be a possible response to a series of events or, in some cases, a prediction to achieve utopian solutions. All this shows we work in ‘extreme’ spaces, placed ‘outside’ traditional, architectural rules. These are spaces, in which the concept of phenomenon is contaminated by some fundamental, philosophical ideas based on the bond between environment-subject-individual, but also by mathematical or scientific rules, which have always been the tools of architecture. “We work on spaces characterised by antinomies, which are part of the written and spoken language, such as: open-closed, inside-outside, visible-invisible, chaos-order, rational-organic, up-down. These contrasting terms (a time- honoured subject of philosophical studies) never achieve the typical equilibrium of tradition, an aspect which gave the individual emotional security (classicism searched for equilibrium between proportions, between empty and full spaces, etc.). “On the contrary, they find a reason to exist in the most extreme conflict and contrast, by creating new, different tensions, capable of arousing rather disorientating conditions for the individual, as disorientating as the world in which we live.” To achieve extreme spatial conditions, the firm uses movement as a tool to highlight a complex architecture, the main feature of which is not static. They have developed their research on this specific topic in two directions, more of which Anna outlines to us in her own words as the interview draws to a close. “The first deals with the movement of the individual as he wanders around the space. It is represented by a vacuum, a smooth space, which creates the principle of visual perception, and in which the fundamental element is the pathway. As he crosses the territory, the individual is made aware of the space to the extent that architecture becomes an item of clothing he can wear and carry around with him and then abandon in the territory once he has used it. “The second refers to the movement of architecture the moment it acquires subjectivity and replaces the individual. By moving architectural parts or elements in the space (by sliding, rotating, slipping and overturning), it is possible to reach infinite spatial conditions in a brief lapse of time without any particular spatial quality prevailing over the others. For us, this represents a different way of perceiving space, in which architecture no longer expresses itself by searching for shape, which for us takes on a deductive character, but by means of a pure, simple gesture. Only by action can we achieve ever-changing expressiveness. “To reinforce this concept, our architecture becomes ‘poor’ so we use simple, essential shapes, supported using simple, low cost materials, but also using highly innovative technology (systems of automation). All this does not exclude the scenic, illusory aspect, which architecture produces via everyday gestures. Sliding screen-printed windows, rotating drawn walls, lights, which by continually moving change the perception of space to create special optical effects. Each piece of architecture transforms into a theatrical work, which has no beginning and no end, and has no predetermined plot, but expresses itself freely without a script. For this and other reasons we can affirm that ours is in fact a ‘kinetic architecture’. “Lastly, it is fundamental to realise that these structures are designed to answer the canons of biocompatibility and self- sufficiency. More specifically, the architecture of movement is characterised by natural or recycled materials, whereas architecture in movement is constructed via systems of automation, intelligent systems able to respond to technologically innovative living comfort.”