It is a commonplace by now to grumble about the chaos and confusion of architectural idioms in this age of globalisation. True, we are witnessing the irresistible rise of eclecticism, the glaring medley of ethnic cultures and the half-caste hybridisation of ornaments. On closer reflection though, urban situations in all periods have been distinguished by the complexity and contradictions of aesthetic pluralism. Only in the more naive popular manuals have "styles" – coherently – succeeded one another on the stage of history, like the characters in a play.
We should not be misled by the maze of icons in today's mass media imaginary. Constructing has never confined itself to carrying out mere practical functions, but has sublimated utility in plastic emotion. Architecture is an ancient word that includes by now, in the conventionality of its sound, diverse and dissonant, all too heterogeneous phenomenologies. For brevity's sake, I shall try to unravel the intricate knot by distinguishing at least three main threads: the right to widespread quality, the necessity for the symbolic, and the desire for wonder. The beauty of historic cities lies mainly in the silent fabric of brick, houses and streets, from which emerge a few eloquent monuments and, still more seldom, lyrical architectures. Think of Siena, of the collective culture of building sedimented in its enchanting forma urbis, erected by the wisdom of anonymous craftsmen and ripped open by the scenographic Piazza del Campo or by the lyrical verticalism of the Mangia Tower. If that level of civilisation is to be emulated in our time, it would be advisable to raise the technical quality of current building. The promotion of ever more advanced research in that sector ought to give priority to entrepreneurial leadership, albeit flanked by politicians, architects and planners. The client's role is decisive.
However, the contemporary city, to be such, cannot exist – to quote Ledoux – without "talking" architecture. In European tradition, symbolism has been almost exclusively reserved to the sacredness of temples and public monuments, in which the community identifies the values of collective memory. The creation of metaphors in stone has, significantly, been entrusted to the architects of the time. Historically, it is in that sphere of design that the paradigmatic innovations have been produced. In American metropolises and Asian megalopolises today, it is primarily the private clients represented by seasoned developers who fuel linguistic research to exalt corporate images. Experimentalism, in its way, continues.
Finally, lyrical constructions are inevitably extremely rare, due both to the enormity of their costs and to aesthetic excellence. An urban setting, if crowded with too many high notes, would be deafening. It would, however, be senseless to curse the foppish formalism of "archistars". Realised architecture responds to the demands of society. We should not be surprised if in our time, too, there is still a demand for wondrous architecture, and for spectacular inventions to seduce the puer aeternus that mingles with the crowd. What has been called the "star-system" is simply the emphasis produced by today's mass media culture on the legitimate expectation of emotions, in an effort to get away from ordinariness.
Benedetto Gravagnuolo
Architect