I remember clearly the play of metaphors — much loved by Italians — that likened the Costa Concordia to poor old Italy helplessly adrift, the "crucifixion by media" of a captain who jumped off his sinking ship — with many fearing they might do the same — and the stern, resolute and liberating telephone call from the harbourmaster, who was like our father, our conscience, Good Government etc. We Italians love to wallow in such things, owning up to all our flaws and blaming a failed system. It happens with every earthquake, flood or disaster streamed live on TV — which keep on coming and are promptly flanked by the ready metaphor of an Italy that does not work. When it comes down to it, the whole population is to blame as to is a nationwide attribute, that Italian impudence that incorrigibly and fatally takes us too close to the rocks. We are all to blame and so no one person really is.
The conventional phrase that follows this cliché — along with the all too quick "indignation" — is the "outpouring of exceptional resources", put into practice by the best Italian spirit, by the Good People in which, once again, we are all quick to see ourselves. The same happened with the Concordia disaster. The magnificent inhabitants of Giglio Island lent a hand from the very first moment. Then came numerous appeals for positive and heartfelt actions (which never cost anything) to "avoid an eco-disaster" and complex operations to remove the pollutants, refloat and then tow the wreck away [1], whatever it might take. Once out of sight, problem solved and our conscience is crystal-clear again or, at least, until the next disaster.
Fortunately, someone sometimes tries to demolish this Italian contrivance by which we self-commiserate and exonerate ourselves without criticism. In the case of the Costa Concordia, Marco Navarra sought to do this with his New Concordia Island competition, organised by his ICSplat platform [2] in July 2012. The results were decided by an international jury of the highest standing [3] and published a couple of weeks ago.
With what I consider great courage, Navarra and ICSplat took it upon themselves to stimulate international reflection on the Costa Concordia disaster in an attempt to understand whether such a traumatic event — combined with the fact that ship and island have been features on the same landscape for months now — might prompt critical interpretations and design ideas that offer an alternative to the validation of the single thought and the transformation of pain into spectacle. If we can go beyond the concept of "an embarrassment to be removed" and the banal option of returning to the way things were before, we might, at last, catch sight of the complex and as yet unknown design potential that could arise from seemingly devastated landscapes such as this one. Unfortunately not everyone saw it this way.
When reading about the results, I was less struck by the single proposals — many fascinating [4] — and more so by the totally contrasting spirit behind the reactions of the readers of the Italian and English texts. The international article received positive comments or simply praise. The article in Italian, on the other hand, has left a trail of controversy, mostly voiced by readers offended and scandalised by the "lack of respect for the victims". This stance, which enters not in the least into the worth of the proposals, had already raised its head earlier in the Italian mainstream press. It is a real shame that people sometimes miss major opportunities to say nothing and look more carefully.
Designers are optimistic by definition. It is in their cultural DNA to be problem-solvers and see beyond what is in front of them. They can turn any design or contextual constraint into a resource, a good vantage point from which to come up with new ideas and test new visions. Those who develop designs spend their days thinking "What if?" and shoulder the cultural, technical and human burden of their choices. Every design has its own story, its own dignity and takes great effort, even if it will never come to life.
A competition for ideas as well devised and stimulating as this one is an ideal training ground and excellent exercise for this innate ability, all the more so when focused on extreme themes, with completely negative beginnings, that could not otherwise be addressed. Marco and ICSplat rightly chose the tool of the Ideas Competition for a deliberately paradoxical theme, a perfect catalyst for further design reflections and a sure approach not necessarily restricted to Giglio Island's context. Few Italian commentators realised this. The others got wound up in their indignation.
I hope the reflection generated by this fine competition, which encourages us to address taboos that we have borne with us all too long, does not end here. Indeed, it should help us rediscover that agile approach to all problems for which we were long admired both at home and abroad.
I do not know whether Italy really has run aground or is adrift. What I do know is that project designs generate serious thoughts and actions and they all have one sure advantage over metaphors — people always put their names to them. [5] Luca Silenzi (@spacelab_it)
Notes:
1. Work to remove the Costa Concordia wreck in several phases commenced on 29 May 2012 and is fully illustrated on the official website of the pool of companies involved (Costa Crociere - Titan Salvage - Microperi).
2. ICSplat is a "research platform for the landscape and new architectural forms". The clarity of the mission suggests the competition theme was no random choice.
3. Members of the jury (in alphabetic order): Cristina Díaz Moreno (AMID, cero9, Madrid), Andrea Bartoli (FARM CULTURAL PARK, Favara), Luca Emanueli (SEALINElab, Ferrara), Eva Franch i Gilabert (director of Storefront for Art & Architecture, New York), Joseph Grima (editor-in-chief of Domus, Milan), Kamiel Klaasse (NLarchitects, Amsterdam), Geoff Manaugh (BLDGBLOG, Los Angeles), Marco Navarra (NOWA, Caltagirone), Lori Nix (New York), François Roche (R&Sie(n), Paris), Italo Rota (Milan) and Yoshiharu Tsukamoto (Atelier Bow Wow, Tokyo).
4. Personally, I admire the lucid and refined proposal by Vulmaro Zoffi — far more respectful of the victims, to my mind, than the cancellation of the memory proposed by removal — and the refreshing irony of Ethel Barahona Pohl and César Reyes Nàjera's project.
5. These thoughts were partly triggered by a conversation I had with Marco Navarra a few days ago and in which I commented on the difference between the Italian and international reactions to his splendid initiative. Well done to him and ICSplat.