‘Theron qutstion forte atone of Opposition but thatthe face of lrchitectire of 1975 i radially altered from that of 195. Equally, ‘there canbe little argument that signean contribution to that Aiference is the conept of ltonomons architecture. Ttean be ‘een now tobe one of the few ideas ‘ipl of articulation internationally ‘which has reached this country nee World War I, an perhaps it willbe of as much consequence as the functionalist doctrines ofthe early ‘Modern Movement. Ts potential tobe tf some relevance here perhape fied by the fact that there is ite ‘oe col eal dretion in either the stools, of in our present program of ‘ling ‘With this set ofetces, Oppoitions ‘ings tits English-speaking reader, fr the fst ie, the work ot ‘Ado Rass. The article by Rafuel ‘Moneo was writin in 1973 before the ‘riennale of September 1973, and tht befre the exibition mounted by ‘wei and his followers which codified the notion of autonomous architecture fn the form ofthe neo rationalist Tondensn. The artile presents two of the themes central to Rona’: work First, there i the concept af the relationship of reitecure tothe city ‘an second, the concept of an ‘stonomous architecture expressed in the deveupmient of «typology of relationships between architecture tnd the city, Neither one of these themes i new; both having a long history in European achiveture, What seems of relevance in these Aldo Rossi: The Idea of Architecture and the Modena Cemetery Rafael Moneo ‘Translated by Angela Girl ‘ogee the parila juxtaposition of ‘ay autonomy whichis developed fom {an analysis ofthe strutare of the city. That I, one understands what farchitecture i from an analyse of those things nthe urban fabre which architecture isnot ‘Moneo makes the connection between the two aspects inherent in Rose's work by breaking the arte into two dialectic halves; each with its own theme and its own rhythm and fadence, The fst pat, which ‘soos Ross's thinking In his book Larehitettura ¢ La Cit, is intense; the second part, which examines Rosa's projet for the Modena cemetery, i Iyrieal. Por me, this is shitecural writing a is best — ‘dense snd informative, analytic and (questioning. Tere is no question but that Ross's metaphysics demand this nd of dsetion, Bqually important forthe European content ie the fact hat such an article bby Moneo, who sone ofthe Barcelona lroup ofthe magazine Arguitcturas Bis, signals a possible change inthe Milan/Barcelona axis from the Influenee inthe early sites of Vittorio Gregtti and post-war functional tothe new ideology resent in Ross work What remains in question, ten years ster loa!» book, i whelber ‘arohtetturaautonomia' a merely sother architect's amakescren, a8 Furetinalism was, for ‘aesthetic free-play”. This question persists bocatse the forms of this‘autonomous arcitactor nt Roa and others of 06 the sold Tendenen exhibit, have such a marked preference for & eodasial ste. And now this autonomous larcitecture hat acquired the mora Tenefaton azering tothe label of “tational and, withthe broom of the Tendon, as swept up the metaphyseal Scolar, the romartie Kier brothers, the delirious ohaas, te. Anu who willdare ery inthe fae ofl of tia — Formalism! PDE Rafael Monco was bor in Tudela, Spain in 1847. He graduated in sehitectae in 1961. Between ‘68-1061 be worked in the oes of Saenz Oia and fram 1961 to 1862 in the off of Jarm Utzon, After living in Rome asa Fellow of the Spanish “Aeademy he returned to Spain 1965. to sar his own professional practice sito teach at the School of Madi ‘in 1971 he obtained a Profesorship st the Sehool of Architetae in Barcelona where he presently teaching whe maintaining his private practice in Madrid This esnny, publiha her forthe fret. time in English, was originally ‘published n Spanish (Jose Rafeat Monco Valley, La Tea “Anputecture en Rosey el Cementerlo de Modena Barcelona: Bulcione da BTSAB)),106 1. Modena Cemetery, Modena, Italy ‘Aldo Rows, architec, 1971, Model 2, Cover of Casabells-Contint 19511886 8, Alo Rossi 4. Coer of Aldo Rossi's book, Dareiettara della Citta, 1266‘The recent competition for the Motena Cemetery (1, published in 1972 in Cornbella (no. 872) and Controspasio (Go, 10), consolidated and reinforced the movement known "La Tend” (iteraly in Bnglsh th “tendeney") i fisted some years ago by 2 group of Taian architects headed by Aldo Rossi Because the Tendenza has ceased to ‘bean iit proportion and has become an aehitetural, ‘lal shared ard asimlated by a great numberof profes: sana, we are forced to consider ad examine the Modena ‘ojet in depth and to question is meaning in the context fof ot ony the Tendenza but allo other eurrent architec tural ideologies. This i not merely because of the intrinsic value of Ross's winning design, out also beeause ofits concern for how a system of thug ean enfront the prob- lem of design and ita realization in bait form. thas been along te since the appesrance of a common postion with Both a coberent and eontinuous view of ar ‘hiteture. Soca position ean be sen both nthe projects {or the Medora competition and inthe work of student in the Italian architectural school, published in Controspacio and Casablla.Perhape not since the early sities, when ‘eorberty seemed to be of major interest ih Taly, as ‘here bee situation enilarto ts one. ‘The fir: thing which must be scnowladged is that the ‘Tendenza it sapported bya commen ideology, by the same theoreti ass, rather than by nere personal ait. Inwofar shes theoretical propostions are intelligible and are elealy formulated, thoy have a certain value in that they can gnerate both’ homogeneous architecture and one hich ear be differentiated from al others. This i obvious inthe puations already mentioned. Outside of what sto ‘be expectd fom a personal afi, a common positon i evident inthe works of Ross, Grassi, Aymonino, Dari Bonialt and Pracchi, Marzoli aml Viz, ete. One could ‘even expand thelist by including al thoee spattered bythe label “Tendenz.” But theres no oubt about Aldo Roses fundamental role in the development ofthis ideology. Let tas then use Ross and his writings to characterize the Ten denen aod to show the eontinlty between his theory and practic, as is manifest specify Inthe design fr the cometary. Ral (Oy. 9), who fas aught i Zavich and in Venice, worked with’ Ernesto Rogers, Vitorio Gregtti, Maro Zanuso, Tentor, ete, on Cosabella (ig. 2) in the early ‘ties and sixtize. Tis interesting tay to reread the pages ‘of Casella to understand the val of these people who detected so many future problems. In many masterfl i fice, the work of minor archivcts wa examinod and ‘hemes were presented that had been previously under valued and completly left out of traditional history. Al ready, at that time, it was a magazine which was an ‘anathema for Reyner Bashan's defense of neoiberty; « postion which, n those days, was break withthe accepted Indieriminating orthodoxy of the Modern Movement. ‘Within the framework of an Italy ofthe fies and the sae the atiude ofthe then young editors of Casabla surrounding Roger, led to less elementary architecture than before; one which cold allow for the complexity of realty. The editors had become concious that a maralistic Posture which woul allow an understanding of the evol- ‘ion of architecture through Manichaen glasses was not ‘possible, This title ultimately led to confrontation with {hose who understod the Modern Moverent from an ex- clasively plas pont of view. From this a fundamental Drine)ple developed slowiy in the work of Ross and in the fentie group: the Hea Uhat there was a specifiy or & puticular aspect of architecture which oud allow tt be ‘onsiered az an autonomous discipline. It was Ross idea that through astudy ofthe eity, soon asthe nest and most fomplete expression of architecture, a knowledge of these riocples could be found. This sutonomy of achiteetare ld the special quality ofits principles becomes clear upon fn explanation of the form of the ety. Tho idea is that the problems which aie on trying to understand the form of the city have not been resale, neither by tho highly abd onganie metaphors, nor by the most current model ‘theory. However, for Ross, the study ofthe city and its formal problems sbould be approached from the perspective ‘tr dlaptne wtih is beet equipped lyri Use ear ing; and that discipline ie architecture. Iis from the an ‘bial and unigu pnepes of arehitectre that the form of the ety can be explained; understanding the ety and its morphology (hich le th came assaying its birth or It fvoution), requires knowledge of the principles of108 arcitectre whieh govern the form of te cy. ‘The most outstanding feature ofthe Tendenza canbe lar fed inte following manner. The Modern Movement, and in partial the historiography of the Moder Movement ‘ar be sen a nssting onthe urative aspects of architec: tare, in an llempt (o establish a continuity between a Chitctare andthe other fie at, thus reducing the specie ‘Value of architecture tse, the other hand, Rosi can be een to defend the legitney and independence of the prin {Spl which govern the pracce of architecture ill. T0 Aiscover these piteiples, and to determine how they are Incorporated into the procs ofthe production of arciter- ture, and the eretion of the ety, he sys, should be the task of any theoretical discussion of architecture, Research inarehitectare tho leads tothe study ofthe speci aspects of achitectre whic allow ito bo understood as an auton fmous dssipine, not assisted within sealpture or pint Ing a discipline that cannot be understood excasively ‘through external parameters bt which ean be established through appropriate formal rules. Throagh the ides of au tonomy, neessary tothe understanding ofthe form of the ‘ity, arhtectre becomes a ategory of realty. Ross ke ‘Albert, Seamozs, and the arehitets ofthe Enlightenment, Aefendsarchitestire as an expression oF thought. The task ‘ofarchitectre, thn, would be th explanation and conver. ‘sion of this thought into realy. Buti itposible to think of frchitestare as an autonomous discipline? Isn't this perhaps 2 mere fatasy? Let us se ow Rose himself explains this Stulonomy snd where his theoretial propositions lead Ivithin the ies ofthe ety as arhivecture ‘The Architecture of the Cty Rosas ideas are aystematcly exhibited in his book, The Arohileture of the Cty ig 4) Some of his concept have ‘been elaborated with grester dep in ater writings —the CLUVA notebooks? the sades on th iy of Padova? a preface othe works of Boul,‘ ete. But one ean aay that his architetonie thought bas teen mor systematically de: ‘eloped inthis ook insite ofits belnz a somewhat dated tat ‘Siow the purpose ofthis aril the understanding ofthe ‘nnection between Roses thought and his work, or aker- ‘atively to see how the thougt is eonverted into work, we fan use The Architecture ofthe City as a fist analog or 3 todel for this thought, Roaa begins his bol with the following: “Tho ity, which isthe object of this Book, is Understood within i as architectare. When T speak of ar ‘hitecture I dont mean excusvely the visible image ofthe ‘ity and the whole of its arizetur, but rather arehitee ture as construction, [refer tothe enstrution ofthe citys tine > ‘The development and growth ofthe city is subject to certain ‘les and forms which alow frit “onstrctio,” which it its architecture, ‘This Wea of architecture as construction mnskes us understand arehiectare at that disptine or that {eld of knowledge within the rel, which gives a realization to the ety. Naturally, fromthe very hennng,obe must void the temptation to Understand construction in terms of ructure an of building fr Rosi, constructs imply to fet on the basi of reaon, mo, a6 one might think, to materialize thought. ‘Thus, from the beginning ofthe book, Ross has announced the aspects of the spec of the discipline of architec ture; that i, to understand bow the city iseonstracted, bow 4k produced from arciteetare, ad how it frees the tstablishment of an estonomousdsepine that wil be aided by the analysis of politi, soil and economic systems, ‘ut at the same time canct rely solely on ther, First, Rossi begins sdeserptin ofthe elements from which the city is constracted. Once the elements have been estab- Tshed ie is posible to grgp the lws hy which they are composed and through which they ereate a more complex reality — the city. For Ras, the experience of the ot that permit the discovery of thece elements, and iden Tiesto of them sr url facts, as a “unica,” having Nave in the whole aswell a individually as form, in & particular place, These ements are intelligible through memory, not through remerbering. This kind of extreme snalytie suspension gives ua leeting glimpse of the raison (Fetre ofthe city. On the bas of these elements, we mast“understand the ety asa grat represntaton of te una condition” We wil attempt to rad, “representation {hrowgh ts fixed and profound scenery, architcture."* But the wish to clarify, to order the eleznts with which the city canstroctd, lads Rossi to preant "the fundamental Inypotherit of the book... the study of typology of ‘alge in relation tothe ly." 1 is not necessary to underline the importance thatthe ‘concept of typolgy has had in Taian theoretical studies of frchitectare. But we should make les the discovery af the ‘ality ofthis concept, whether tbe rthe analysis ofthe ‘chy oF a point of departure for certin approaches to de~ ‘sign, suchas in that of Rossi, Aymonibo, Grassi or Scolari, In fact, what we have is merely the reineorporation of concep that had been forgotten ky arevious generation of trite who were more attentive to pel visual prinepls Such ab Geetalé and cultural consdentions. These erties fonsidered that the eclectic treatise: had wed typology Improperly typology was, for most modem erties, an ol fashioned concep. But twas more than a resue operation tat was performed by Ross. Rather twas the afimation fofanew Hea of achitectre that strated a greater value to te capacity ae an autonomous dieipline with internal orm, than to the personalist dctatrhip tht had been the end result of mich that went by the name of Modern “Architecture. It was, if we may be sowed such an over- fSmplifeation, a mater of attributing greater valve to ar- ‘tecture than to arcitets Rossi pts up, as does Argan (fg. 5, the definition o type, to often quoted, from Quatremore de Quiney, “the word type doesnot represent ao much Ue image of something that must be coped or imitated perfeiy, asthe ea of 22 tlement that mist itself eve asa rl forthe model... ‘The mode, understod from the punto view ofthe pract- calexeattion ofr, is an lbject tht rust be repeated such ‘sii the type, on the contrary, is ar object on Ue basis of ‘which everyone can eonesve of warks that may not reset ‘Be eachother a al." ‘Type is wmething constant, ite wht remains beyond the particular and the coneret, someting that appears during 45, Sketch from Franceco Milisin Principles of Cive Architecture, 1882110 tne examination of architectural fats ang ven the aap porta structure thats revealed and male knowledgeable through he fact self...” Rossi condenses this ea when tre says: no type ean be identied with particular form, ‘bu all rectal forms can be referred to typas™*—— (One can examine the entire history of architecture from the fonceptof typology, from the templet the suburban house: through ype we ean explan the farmation ofthe iy. "We ‘ean say that type is tho idea itsolf of architecture, that ‘which selbst to ite essence and therefore what, in siteaf change, has aways imposed itself 'over fling and reason? ‘as the priniple of artivctare and the ey." ‘The intruction ofthe concept of type vil allow Basi to rake anew kindof elassiatso which wil become a neces. ary tel forthe interpretation, through fragmentation, of the ely, Ths type of dassifeation eomes close to the one employed by @ botanist in his examination of plant Ue peropetive proposed by Roel sagas «real dimension and fn immediacy that dstarbs any conservative vison of the ‘ity deseribed in tema of immobility ad inaltraility, ‘Thus, we could sy that tho concept of typology allows Rosi to establish a continuity between type and form, 50 that one is able to understand the formation of tho ety in terms of what he calls “areas or “sectors” through sch & concep of type fig. 6. These sectors are seen a lees not tefined by thelr scologea identity bt by a frmal code ‘ion which responds to momphologeally sila sectors. The sity it thor understood at Bomogengous continuum in ‘which diversity snc aesdental but, onthe contrary, same hing appropriate oie rots; and history, the ets mem- oy, takes eare ofthe given sense Uo that divers. ‘Thus it happens that “the monument is something perme: rent beemane already ina daletc position withinurban evelopment, permitting an understanding ofthe cy as — -somothing that created through points (primary le- However, before proceeding, iti necessary to real the stchitedoni catogory of fermanenee which Rosi as faciates wth memory. Thore are, in the city, urban fats Which are permanent, that withstand the passage of time; these uur facts are the monuments that, in one way oF fnother,enstitte or mike up and conigurate the cy ‘The monument therefure has more than an iteligible and atmosphere value, i not only achitetre a8 analate, fs the pctarenque, but it gives meaning to the life ofthe ‘ty wtih, through these monuments, bo-h remembers the alt and ies its memory.” ‘The momanent, which again as been underestimated by the peeing generation of eritizs because oft singulanty And its rhetoreis restored by Rossi who understands tbe role the monument as played in giving structure to the city, Faced wthsuch aconservative view of the past, Rossi Schlevesnvinltatho ofthe presence of monument ot ts they an embody the current moment the citys pre- sent "The recovery of monuments then is far rom a merely ar cchaclogial devotion to the past, Monuments from the Tents) and areas (oeighborhoods); and while fe acuies ‘alae az such through the form, it disappears inthe lttor fom which the value af use comes forth.” Furthermore, Rosi considers “te plan as primary ele- rent, just as a temple oF a fortress" it the way one thinks ofa ity, the way It ist recorded in our md and from this imposes an architectone reflection, At the same time, urban facts express thle content, their io, their destiny: Visit an asylum: pin there i something omerets Iie to be found inthe courtyard nthe walls in the rooms” Rossi quotes LeviStraus and sys that “space poseeses its omn salu; just as sound and perme have color and fling” ‘And thu appears plc; individuaizd,coneret sce. The ‘ite which Rows! han called "the conetete ign of pee"” oal says, refereing to urban facts “sometines T have asked myself, a [aguin do here, where the individ of fn urban fae begins, whether Ie si fom, in faetion, in remory orn something else, We might thn say isn the ‘event self and in the sgn that fixed the event." Tt is8, Roman fortfctions, Dapantys, ‘onda. These element constitute ‘ype of urban form ‘Beret wnereloal that eh itaaton, each event whooe recollection is retained in memory, has a corresponding architectonic answer, a sign which fixes it whether ibe from the pubie domain or from a enerete, individu, pr vate domain. Pace allows every architecture to acquire its Condition of being, allows to achieve the dimension of the Individual, which as we have seen is necessary for the entiation of an urban fact. But place alludes also toa collective support; place means, or can be understood through, the clletve. ‘The principles of architecture will become concrete jn a place, in a certain time, whether in the city, or in the landscape. Architetare cannot, be made Ignoring these realities which give ta sense of place and of history ‘The ide of place encompasses something deeper, more rooted In Roography’ itself, in the. physieal reality that Underies history place, from whieh urban facts acquire ‘ean, is someting tore tha the environment (ne should remember, however, an exception: ti sme times the role of symbols to condense in architecture the ‘world of desire, “architecture and its principles are sum Tarzed in sym; and on the other hand there i the endition for building — motivation. Iti the diference between architecture and urban fit between principles and conerete construction, which slows ss to make a value judgment about architecture, Ross faye, “precisely what composition and style want to say about architecture, is that architecture becomes a deter Iining factor inthe constitution of urban facts when ite thle to assume the entire evi and polities dimension ofan fra when it ie highly rational, comprehensible and trans Isle, Inother words, when tcan bo judged as style." ‘Therefore, when & syle sehieved, arciuctane is wr Todd in an urban fact “the dentifeation of some urban facta an of the ety lf with style in architecture is 50 immediate that canbe found Ina certain environment of ‘spacetime with disereet precision In the Goth cy, in the Baroque ct, inthe Neo-Clasie city.”“The failure of mont current urban designs i becane of conception of the city in terms of architectural design, tthch does nat consider the notion ofan aretecture of the ‘iy. Tis ncessary to rethink bailing from the form of the tity o, better yet fom how it forms the ety. Toa erin fxtent, building” makes one omsider al the prior ‘morphological problems that demand bath a knowledge of ple and a certain intrpretation of history before it can spite to bean urban fact and thas become a iy. This way of understanding things “contrat the eli? held by ‘any that preondered functions can give she necessary Giection to fasts and that the problem conse in giving fort certain fnetione in eat the forms themselves ih ‘their materialzation, separate the function; ey ar stated. ss De city itself Buliing must besome an urban fc, ‘This particular way’ of understanding urban ‘nt as form is therefore the area in which the ariect wrk, thes the aehitec’s effort is directed to realize "the importance of, he form and of the logical process of architecture while ‘ing inthe form itself the eapaty for assuming value, resning, and the most diverse use" The problem of srhitcture, apd of understanding the eit i its fullest ‘dimension, can only be sled aren the loge of its form ie ‘understood. Use or funtion ea only be solved through the Jogi of form itself ‘Thejection that this ine of thought ean only be applied to tld ities can te dismantled if one eoosders thatthe pro- ‘posed hypotheses do not distinguish between old and new ‘ies; onthe other hand, the ety is avays making refer tenor tothe past insofar aa “one ofthe charade ofthe ‘yi its permanence in time.” On the contrary one must Insist on the aeration ofthe pati and eoletive nature ofthe city, “such a beauty rests bath inthe lars of architec {ue and inthe coie in valu tat the collective wishes to sve or these works." This collie nature explains the Yaluc of history *te city is a reer of istoy."™* As rele of thir primal encouncer wien man, the ky ever today, bears traces of the conversion f this physi en ronment into ple ‘The city i fallful to its own “memory” term that Mautce Halbwachs already appt o the ct. "The ity in the locus of eoletive memory. Moniry thus becomes + ‘the conducting thread ofthe entire complex structure the eoletive naliire and the individuality of urban facts arrange themselves inta the same urban strtare. Within this struct memory bewomes the eoncince.of the cay." Evolution of Urban Paste To understand how urban fet are produced in time, and to understand their evolution, we must adda new and fonda ‘mental dimension that will help us grasp the dynamics of the ity; we mean by this, the economic component. Urban faces are prodced under the preaure of economic ‘phenomena and in some way become ther rection. The ‘work of Halbwaths, acorting to Rossi, i enormously larifying inthis respect ™ The histor of the ety fall of episodes in which economic dreumstances, such a the un ‘wanted iberation of the land, force and push the evolution ofthe ety. From ths perspective as canbe expected given, Ross politcal positon, he ea be seen to ink up with & ‘materialistic and dete vison of history. ‘This is why plans ether conform or do nat conform to reality depending on the circumstance, For example, “iausmans plan offered an interpretation of the structure ‘of Pars fm avery enerete pont of view. However, Paris tonfrmed to. Hatssmann's plan from other perspectives Without considering Haussmas intentions ‘One can say tat in sme way all European cites, through- out the nineteenth century, were conscious when making. ich decisive interventions i thelr Inbastrcture, of & Intent new ety form brought sbout by industry (fi. ‘The problem of the ey, Ros ays, grows ot of "the end (o pollal al piysca Lounge which flowed the coming of industry... fist tage canbe deemed inthe Aestrction of the fndamental stractare ofthe medieval city based in abet identity between dweling and work place within the same bulking The breakdown of the ual, dweling/work, whose continuity was taken forranted until the appearance ofinustry. woud then be responable fr the current dsjunetn tha Has turned the problem of the sty into a problem of housing, with its ‘well Jnowm soelal implications. Rare say "the second, ecisive, stage begins with progressive industializatin provoking tho definitive split betwen residence and work nd destroying the relationships of teghborhood.”* Ross ‘ontinos that “the third phase inthe changing ity starts tvith the begining ofinivdual means of transportation.” Here Rossi must face an abjection: the atempt to bok at how “the new dimension” might change the substance of arban facts: that is to say, the mw sale. Does it not tlestroy a theory ofthe lassie ity? Onee more, Rosse clas thinking responds by admitng the continuity, the permanence, of urban facts in itis a timeless cy, Without eonerete references, in a ety that i so pressely fromthe permanence ofitraiaon dre, ofits architecture [At this pint, having incorporated the esonomie vision of “albwachs and Beroullinto his dynamic interpretation of the elty, Rossi must ask himself, if the architectare of ‘urban ots the construction of te ey how ean we leave tout ths construction which gives tits deisive moment — poltis?™* Poles here becomes in fat a problem of Shoe. Inthe last analysis who sit that looses the image of the sity? “The ety itself, but abays and only through poles! institutions" ‘Thus the city ie relied trom polis through architecture: “the city reais, in itself, its ov ‘es of ety when it materializes in stana."** "The city then becomes an steno entity forced to ac- count for itsel, for is history, its elective Tif, through Inetory, and realized from the logel constriction of = chiteetre Usa would be ts way of eling elf its own ‘orm ‘Obviously, no one can be in total dsureement with this vision ofthe architecture ofthe city us autonomous, with this astrtion of the independence of formal laws. Since if ‘ere issomething that architecture or the city cant boast about, ts autonomy. Let us see tin another way from 1, Plan of Boreelona.4 RuedelaFRoss text with ths aero uf ilepenont fra laws {or the architecture ofthe ity while, from olbers points of view if there i precisely something that architecture and city eanpot boast sbout, itis autenomy. Tt is not only ‘passionate, but al instruct tance of formal rltonships in arelitectre. To insist on the value of form in architecture, is a desirable antidote teray when consitering urban fas. A better understand Ing of Rosas poston, in relation tothe ers of orthodox larban studies, jsties any interest in these new propos tions, Architecture as Lage Construction Reason i Archieetar, ‘Once he has exposed the connection between architecture td ity, Roel then proposes some principles of archtee ture, Avehitecture for Hoss is fanlamentaly *constrac- tiot"'Phefunetn of any theory ofarhitectureis to exam- Ine the laws which low “construction,” These laws merely, confirm that sutonomy of archiectre which comes out of its specie reality. For Ross, then, the elaboration ofthese Jaws based an led experience are the objective of every theory. As Ross says “in the true clasiim of Albert, ‘onms are always modelled after lie rather than on an @ ‘rior position,” When oe studies e generation of these orm one reali at, in theory, an architectonic order ‘can be produced independently oft sequence of time ‘The fist principle ofall architecture for Rosi would be the possibility of abivving a form from set of elements; the Felationship between the elements and the whole in which they are develope isthe context ofthe architects work. Ross explains tow Boullée elaborated his project for a rary (Bg. 9) the beginning he sees the library asthe phytase forth srtualRentage of great mei, of the ‘ltr ofthe pate they and thet works that constitute the Ibrary. ‘We must notice that thse work, the books, remain throughout te developer of the project as pri ‘mary data, onginind material forthe project, the same as in the case of the rtinal pale, the material of architee: tre wil be eat by customs ws" This emotions definitive point of departure i not as sociated witha particular form of architecture; itis not wed to underlie the impor: -as «possible development of architecture. Assuming this [romce and thse components of reality (centralize light, sccessibly, inellgiity, ete.) which justify such ‘yplogieal adherence, architecture i constructed and be comes form, leaving for later development an examination fof the technical and constructive problems deriving fom the chosen type. And finally there the abigation of malk- Ing the work ral and true. ‘Nenelastical architecture states forthe frst time the prot- lem of content in arhiestre, In this eontext, achitecture mist derive reason for this meaning from its ow eld, fram ‘tsown log, fom its autonomous positon (8g. 8. It snot surprising Un to find Ue elaslal orders, thal are so elose to 8 primary constructed realty, completely upset when Toes: into a-new architecture which the dimension, sal, andthe traditional formal relationships, ete, have ‘been forgotten. Hosrever, this content is always sustained by lial development of architectural form, by wil to ritional expression which i perhaps the most pronounced tharactvisi,a diferentated festare, of syle. Further- ‘mor, the wil to reason it at times converted so that i ecomes the exeusve content of neo-elassie architecture, ‘The interest of Roslin neoclaiciam is thus to be ex- pected, This period witnessed the birth ofa whole series at ‘ew building types inthe serve of «civ vision of histor, “Arhiectre experienced with neo-asscism, the arhitee- ‘ure of the Enlghtenment, the adventure ofa new formal ‘wold, Inthi context, building assumes character, “that the nature af the subject, its evocative power.”* His tory, the calletive memory of certain pas, is poured into the archectra objet in order to mak it intelligible thus recovering its mature ‘The fact that men demand from architecture this ind of satiation jus an extremal rational atte. In this ‘ay one des not aversimpliy inthe manner ofthat other {ype of rationalism which, a6 Ros says, from a presumed sesentie reason, ie Torgedtng architecture's obligation to116. assume ae the contraction of «worl of eas ‘The Enlightenment marks the int tine inwhich architec ture ar an autonomous discipline was able uneoverprn- tiple which would allow Itself to be een as “onstruction. ‘Thus Canalett, Rossi says, can mount a cage with Pal- ladl's architecture in Venice, Canaleto i telling us how the city ean be thought of slg operatin. This ebje- tifeatin” of elements in building and ofbuilings i the city {is characters of this period, Tt entane am objectifeation that allows for construction and for eration ofan arcitec ture using the same kindof mechanisms lke such painters as Francesco de Giorgio Martini and Giorgio de Chic. ‘This a way of forming, or consriting Which, spread ‘throughout the Veneto, and even tiay, gives the Veneto ‘hat strange eling of urbanity thats doulslsely one of ts sreatest charms, ‘Thisthinking about architecture abstract fom time, that oceasionaly gives Rossi's drawings the qualiy-of-a de Circo ig 12), allows them ta attain a realty, to become rateril, nd be bull. The draving of achitectre, such ‘tin Canaletas paintings, already suggests construction itis already architecture. "Thi the senae of Koss ca lages. Dove columns with conorete framework are arcites tre: they presuppose a relationship away of bulding from memory, with jets and with aeitectorie mater, with: ‘ut any meiton imposed by use, ‘A quick examination of one of Rees projects (Bg. 18) ‘would be enough to prove to what extent te statements of the Enlightenment and the pins of rational architee tar, have been recovered, ‘The building is presented as a promenade, an axis around Which are gathered diffrent typusgal scemes, This xis ‘wll faite construction, the rslaionslip between el- nents — the encosed. square, the rower on colamns, he technological balustrade, the dome. Construction, in this ‘ase, isthe possiblity of manipulating these elements, of binding them, relating them, even aditing the fom diversity uderined by the uso of materials th columns In white stot, the facings in dark stone. Construction, the LAI co ‘ LL}: wo. poration of asbitectare, change disparate clement that ‘cohabit in an unsuspoeted image with content, almost sur- realistic in the mid of a park tat, secoring to Ross ‘lls “a building pulieper exeldence not to lose contact ‘without spans, ith the word to whieh it belongs." — ‘The Project for the Modena Cemetery (Our intention here is not to examine the entire ocwire of Rows but to focus onthe Modena cemetery ig 11). Having ‘made an intial interpretation of is theoretical postion, we far now attempt a reading ofthe cemetery 0 a8 to se how these principles are preset inthe work ‘The Modena competition ale foran extension ofthe exist- ing traditional ceratery (Bg, 10. Tei necessary to point out the effort that Rosi makes in hie acompanying txt to ‘eocrbe the projeet in sty architectural terms, Por Rosi, desribing aehitectre in some way guarantees ts understanding: he has always isited on a deseription of ‘the ety and of architecture ‘The fst concept introduced in i text forthe competition fe that of typology.» The cemetery is understood as a house; asthe house ofthe dea. The fist ¢ypologica alu Sion points ouf thst, in the earliest cultures, hoase and rave were the stne thing, "death signalled a passing stage between two condition with no welldefind limits... the cemetery as builing shal be tho house ofthe desd today the Wentfration of house with grave has only re= rained, a a distinctive feature, nthe architectonic struc- fhe of the cemetery. The bout ofthe dead, the grave, the cemetery isa deserted, abandaned house. "(i 19). ‘This de of abandoned house, of poli present through cout the entire work and deprives it ofthe condition of = owe fr Ups Hving, avg bst tne aeibates without Iaving itself become a run. Rass sets himself throughout the project, the program ofthe desolate house But to this idea of despild and abandoned house is added another and diferent typlogeal dimension: tht whieh3.8 City Hal, Hay. Aldo oes, architect, 1968, Mode.us 1h, Modena Cemetery, Modena, 17. The eightenthcentury Costa Italy. Aldo Ror, architect, 197. cemetery Mode. 15, Aerial porspective. 18, Path of tabs, er Piranesi, credunderstands the cemetery *as a tol form of rec: Uiear aresded walk" Rosai users tefeence forthe project the building typeof the laseal cemetery. 1 would be dint to find another theme better suited to Roses preocupatios. ‘The cemetery as an architectural type is eonsnlidatd during the beginsng ofthe nineteenth century ater te pltielans tok over the concerns of phYs- eal health and hygiene. The cemetery, the ety ofthe dead, vith walls that define it as 9 reliquery, with monumental {bors fl of archaeological resonance, with measurable of- der, with strict fnctonal services Unt suggest the newly Ascovered hygiene, i a bulding type that wa introduced ‘in thelate Prlightenment (fg. 16) The Costa cemetery (Sg. YP) and the Modena cemetery are ao exceptions. These wellknown typological dimensions ae scepted by Rossi hore more radically thn in any other of hk project We will ot enter into the discuss suggested by the acceptance of the type aa given obligation ofthe project In such case, the aceptance ofthe type eompromices the architets ene in its deepest sense To seep the tr Alona idea ofthe cometery supposes accepting the gravity of the place and ofthe situation; stpyoses acepting the ‘memory — forgetting those options that might understand the area ass park ora garden — as pntheistie recovery made by natare withthe internment ehunan spo. Ti is ‘n opposition to a None or Seandinaran sea ofthe ceme- tery, which would solve the problem from a basi of & natural azceptance of death. Rossi underlines the social ‘meaning of death — that history ia male by ou ives. Death ‘Sin this way incorporated in the graveyard; to an artical social mien whace meaning i ound rit. Architect holps man to lve, to formulate those atl situations, Within which custom and usage, the past and memory, rake sense. The recovery of a eerain typology ie Ui ‘intimately Take to the Mea of memory, ste ii from this role of the cemetary in solety that one may understand that, “the architectural deiition” contitats “an arhitec- tural place where the form and ratinalty of buildings as interpreters f the city an, iy ths cat, the meaning the centery, may bean alternative to tke tneles and disor ganized grovth of the modern ity." Architectural fam ‘must support such meaning that is is meaning in the Collective memory through which one may then understand Work, assimilate i and situate it inthe worl of known objects; this support establishes a relationship with the Aeep and so often forgotten word of oar experience ‘The cemetery, insofar as ie, spaces, andthe designation of thove space, accepts the’ model of the nearby Costa Cemetery. There is, however, something quite diffrent: the space is not covered by” graves, instead these are situated etacomb-lke, opposing eachother: here the space {sone with the monument, with the Wea of grave, one Standing fr al, undevining the value of the expt, bare, Aespoled enclosure (ig. 14). "The configuration of the etry emt hase the seein the enor of te cme ‘The cemetery today isthe place that postions the feings of the living towards death, but ths expression of the feeling of the living towards death is only achieved inthis ace through archteetare, through the specie node of Knowledge that architecture has as an autonomous disc pline, In general, our admiration forthe great neo-dassic cemeteries comes precisely from the fact that they ean be een as “the expression of cive achtectare""* The ‘cemetery can continue toe understnd aga known form hear mmedite: i does hot deny the characte of building, bt onthe contrary, it this character ite whichis the Aleparure for its arhiectre, We can accept that the cemetery responds, a8 an idea, tothe feling of abandon- ‘ment of house no longer tefl of emptines inthe most ‘Vulgar cence ofthe word, of denial of what was once fl tnd alive. How can the elaments of architecture be used to fchieve such an expressive level! “The eubie construction ‘vith regular windows bas the stracture ofa haase without Aoors and without root; the windows have no malo, iis merely the hove of the dead, iis an incomplete house, therefore, abandoned!” (ig 19) ‘The expressive value is given to the unfinished, to the lacking, to the missing. Tho bose is inhabited by people that no longer need protection frm the cli itis occupied by the living as they remember the dea, The architectural18. Modena Cemetery, Meena, aly. Aldo Rosi, architect, 197. The house of the dead, 18 Sheth lements — the windows for instance — are the same a in ‘the Pouses forte ving; they malntaln ther formal eond tion on the wall, but without those pices and parte which woul allow them to be usefal and petiea. ~The entire project enfores this We of empties, bn: ning with the areas, As we sa othe Seance City Hal, tm axis established which permits the loeston afelements Gf components fr the elaboration ofthe architecture ofthe ‘cemetery. But ii the emptiness, ce arrival to nothing, that gives meaning to the approach, iti the gol of the journey. ‘The sanctuary, a cule form, allows.one to be ‘ontinally with ‘the bide ofthe sly” hy way ofthe cham {ered windows cut outa the wall. Empty house no longer in need of fors or rots but not a run. An etemally new house forthe dead (8.18. But star crossing the ossuary, the charel house, we again meet the endless path, the path tht wil ake us to the fundamental form, the Key of the projet, the common ‘grave. The path ie given meaning al underived by the [graves where the componition relates a grester length toa Tesser height ona triangular orpla, an produces, inthe strange perspective feeling, an undersaod and assimilated Tabryinth in which the ereation of architectni form is presented ata problem of distance and propor. This is ‘one in lose proximity tothe ides of storage, thus crelly ‘exporing such proximity fone think ofthe meaning of his storage ‘The natural perepective Ie flied asthe height ofthe cossuary increases in depth, the cordor becomes an image contra natura; quivacl an atemporal Someone walking without a notion of time, without perspective, reaches the vavept the terminus atthe end of te path the metaphor IS obvious and effective Arcitectare fenot presented a volume, ata pate body to whieh aertaln ase aserbed. Rater the architectures constrocted with Inown primary and intelligible elements tnd, inthis way, they give birth to the individualized, concrete architettural Tact that is presented. The fart of bling, ae manifested in these element, bcos a dif‘nt realty whoce conte and moaning are aevesile and tanderstandable ‘The journey that ens in the common grave, as we sad before, isthe agent of constcton ¢arough wai rei ‘re is ult; where architecture ists meaning. The path fates us tothe end “the abandonment ofthe abandoned,” faye Rose, “Tn the eommon grave are the remains of the Shandoned dead .. often people from the asylum, the hospital, the jl from w desperate forgotten existence. ‘The ty builds it most inpertant mrnument forthe op- presi” However, we must make « more careful analysis of these ‘ements The memory of Myceneanombs, ofthe Partheon Atel, of indastrial ovens, et, is vious enough in the Ross quotations, Te truncated far allows us once more to remain alone withthe “blue ofthe ehy.” The gravity of the pace scoped tent rina exper ‘t ‘Once more itis proportion, the reltionship of measures, that supports the expresave value. The form, a truncated cone, overthrovts the posible dorelke experience and ‘bores les how, more abtra, yet understandable space (ig. 20). Everything is understood as forms that, through their exeesivenees which advidualiaes them, be come architecture, qualifying aplaceand ereatinga space in ‘which “funeral snd commemorative eremonies of religious nd ivi eharactar” ean be performed ‘The oninary graves, which are under the groan, are di vided into fields marked by numbered stones or stelae ‘hich are Hlentid by an orthogtel network af paths crossing the rectangular area of te epelosure. ‘Thus ‘wellknown distrbative mechanism, the orthogonal gi, is toed to suggest the function ofthe space. This eystem of ‘opus ides Ue vas apace defined by the ence ‘are imposing a sractre of form a measing and ws. “Thus “the aggregate of buildings is onigurated like a city the cemetery tecomes a puble balding with the neces ary laity and rationality ofthe pathways, witha suitable 20, The communal gravetae flan the reference tothe cometary s established 122 fhe aeleatare ofthe cometary, ofthe houte, of the ey ‘This same clarity is demanded of the constraction itself in its strictest sen. The construtin js extremely simple, ‘sing oly eonerete blocks which facta he clear, unam- biguiae Understanding of the contractive contet of the projec, without posible misinerpettin; the work and {he exlicly written statements having an enteal por pose Only the common grave, which i more complex in its eon Sruction, i thought of tn reinforced concrete, This ex {rmely subtle figure in renforeeeonerete imposes the intllectuliaed character ofthe proposal as dos cover on book —it isthe ideogram ofa cover. The clear paradigms tie image of cover erowns the cemetery walt. ange stones would be uted for paving the pathways; detail a abandoned Tr the take ofa greater clan of the eon- “Siretnn: the mental operation must be oby ous, providing fora possible articulation that would give the architectural form stactle quality necessary forts deesative ene rent. ‘The cemetery is thus close to the principles of a neo: classeal architecture to which it connrms. The result ‘lementary, known, erully and ainfly ingenoous, and it fan be underssod in this condition as a manifestation of first pritiples, Mtvals are elaborated within this ert ‘on; they appear in their original elate, witout the hues tnd shades that would allow for the virtosity of desig. ‘They ae natural materials, neither valved more than nother, since what matters not mac the material ut how itis emplyed: “the new materials ane not the most ‘moder ones but those which acquire their meaning from ‘he way in which Uy are undertod, that sto say, their sel ot oe other mr nt row In realty we find ourtelves confronted with an example of “how to bull" Uhat Rossi had sey made explicit in other projets but inthis ease is presented with greater ‘rut each aul every level i which the architect ‘work in defining form, ‘Technique doesnot count, the esence of architecture nat oud in technical matters; Whats asserted construction, the building activity, the specifi busines of the architect. It's the wort which Ross} underlines and values. Rational ftys in tol, is what matter, independent of any eeun- "The recl isan almost surreaitic image, phantasmagoric, ‘Nhe Chien.” Rational contruction paradoxeally ves place to little-known image. Iti as ifthe encounter Eetween realty and rational onder woul establish a dis tance which would give to Rose's work a surreal hal; in Site of Rosa telling us that “ths project for a cemetery ‘implies with the image of emetery that ech one of ws fam For whats certains thatthe image Ress gives ua todayof ‘cemetery, although inspired ky wellknown typologies, s prduced as 8 rental image and only from this viewpoint Eine have a sence otherwise Jit inthe retina hardened by the commonplace of everyday experience But it is also necesary to indicate some objections, not so much with the theory but eathor with the results of Roses projects and. proposals. The reference to surealisn, to Certain Renaissance and metaphysical perspectives, puts ms Cn the track of one of Rees characterises that is both (Bealy disputed and consciously proposed: this is his e= {rangement from the real, understood as the everyday oe farrence. Certainly ene could speak ofthe recovery of an “thentic dimension of reality as happened in the architec fare of the Enlightenment. But Ross's impostion ofa de Iberate distance between the image of reality, trivialized fd banalized through ute, andthe perspective that ro- owes what an arhiecture of se cy might bey als pnts fut certain altitude which sys something about the pos Sibi future ofthe architecture in our present society. One Inore sep and we find ourvelves fe with that extreme ‘teal position of Manfredo Tfur, which interprets theastonomy which Rose claims fir achitectare ae merely lowing the architect to cary ou his work through in ‘operative parameters, as» pure game. Parsdoxéaly, this ‘game, acing to Tafur only hasmesning in this society, ‘which Jn so many ways i unalterable. This architectre tay be seen at eapable of eruming is areitectural eo ton, its pec reality, because its only interested inthe problems that concern it, without neeesariy reaching a level of objectivity, however desirable, beease in ko doing §t would intrude into other aspects of soc ie. From the archives personal or indvidal canton this autonomous position would have valu since ie does nat trust thesia transcendence ofits work. ‘Therefore, Ross's architecture could be understod as an evasive ote, deliberately forgetting the framework of the real even at levels a evident amt compromised at Use ttchnologcl one, which, as is welnown, constitutes for some the ultimate aisontre of architecture. I is thas _porsibleto interpret his lemental entrain, his agares- ‘ive and polemical design which underlines the formal as- ‘pets of the primary spaces as something which borders on the expressive, ingenous and evident world of eildren. Furthermore it is easy to uvderstand how its monumen ‘alam hasbeen misinterpreted by crits who adhere tothe ‘orthodoxy af the Modern Movemet, as sh incomprehens- Die involution, as one more episode of waste which, inthis particular caso, is sen as too aophisteted ‘Such vison of Ros’ work would contrat his argument ‘which pretends to incorporate a dinension af the eoletive, athe weight of oil order, asa precition and obliged reference ta the process of individuation which spar of the production of an urban fc. It eould be the obligstion ‘of this architecture of te ity to bes meeting pint of tie ‘vidal snd colesive interests which could guarantee ts ‘al relevance ‘Ross clamors for an architecture witha precisely engaged ‘ive value of architecture and affine asthe only way to achive the ealletve. Nothing is frther fom Ross, then, ‘than architecture a esape, as nose sentiment, ‘We are now ian area in which every side thinks they aro defending the same positions. The antiautonomists vind ‘ate the vicarious role ofachivecture inthe consolidation of ‘the environment and refer contralto the exerise of ieaog feal power, architectine is simply game and as aoc to “understand it an autonomous, closed diseipine, canbe on insofar a is lens equivocal, (On the other hand, for the autonomist, tis precisely ‘through arehiteture that society ean express its evi and publi manifestation. The genuine value of the autonomy of farchiteture i that it allows for an expression of society in ‘Which architecture i an indispensable instrument forthe ‘roution of the framework necenery to evi ie. ‘On what does one bas a value judgment when speaking of architecture? Rossi’ ie to underline and make vsble the ‘value of architecture tet a a ime in which ite fans bil to speak of the extineton or death of arhitcture. This sition makes clr that one of he most important tasks of ‘man on earth is the cretion of the ey. In this light, Ros is a5 much ant-Archigram a be is ant Ventir, Archigram presupposes an attempt at calving the problems of architecture through technology in such a sway ss to produce an architecture almost automaticaly, Incorporating both formally and visual every teehnolog cal innovation. Architecture a2 "iii," as a way of thinking, as spatial order, disappears. ‘The answer to finetinal need, which are thought tobe the only ones that interest mankind, wil come frm technology and nat fom achiteture, Here we are in the atipodes of Roce! thought. Here man exeries contr! over space through farchitature and thereby the problems of the World we ive We can see the critic in Venturis understanding of taehltectaal realty. Here realy ix capable of ichding freryting, assuming everyting, diting that commun ‘ation in the physieal worl is based more in the supprt of hon-arehtecturl mechanisms than in thse that see ar ‘hteetare 8 a discipline through wich the pysial world lsboth transcended and intruded upon. Architecture must104 Ue egraed ine Usis process of commaniaion forgetting ite specie condition, its own norms; what is interesting is the control of eommunization, notte inte stay of the schitactural worl, from its internal eaberence, the logic of its production; to reeover, in a word, the sense that, in today’s sovety, have the forms that spelt ook upon as ‘anal. These proposals of Ventur's are radeally opposed to ‘hate of Rests, as we have sen throughout these notes, Where then is Rosas charm, his ability to convene, as demonstrated by the enthusiasm that surrounds him’ In ‘ur view it isthe emphasis on the explanation of architec {tare through the ety, a concept that inlues its opposite ‘his is equivalent to saying that architeture cannot be proposed as an vidual task which in a eompetitive so ty aystematially stimulates novelty; in fac in Ross ‘work, there i a deliberate relinguishing cf novelty, and a desi notte demand an excessive efor frum memory in Jeaning on a farmal repertory whose interpretation is lear tnd unique. The insistence on permanence the capacity memory has fr recognizing the past, f° living histor, presupposes 2 determined rejection of arhitecture as purely perwonal tk: However, from this approach tothe city it would make sense to speak ofthe individual task of ‘the architec, nf a inthis dimension oe could work a ‘the level of the coerete, of persona interention. For the architect doesnot atin a vacuum in ral slitade, Du onthe contrary, knowing whats colletivein the eit he, ‘an individu, ould penetrate the ground where architee- ‘tre belongs, and make architecture, ‘This is Rosse propose, one that has been developed ‘throughout all is projets, from the Segate fountain to Gallaratese a San Rocco, Ie can be pointed out that one fin find in thee projects the same attitude as in the ‘Modena celery. This anticipates the objection that comes from thinkirg tata theme sich as this — the cemetery — presents the best opportunity for the development of a methodology, ofa proposal sach as we hare deseribed. It ‘Would be dif to nd a work o architecture in whieh he continuty fomcontent needs greater expressive demand; fone need only read Ross's statement to nd out to what extent archestre is asked to express figs. ‘Dt then what ae the Binge means tied? Only those Rossi Judges to be supportive of architetare; they are Lerefre aie tothe formal fractures imposed hy vanguard rmovements, Rosia architecture is based on what he tnderetande-as tase principles — Telatonshipe, oner, Imeasurements, the mifror ofthe constraive, famal re sins stil denitable utilization of perspective as embolic form, such ae Panofiy explains it — rather than a de- seription of space, ete ‘The figurative supports of Rossi betray a certain elemen tarism: arehitectare a contained form secka suppor. la Primary, elemental sitions. Taste, or better yet the need the architets of the Enlightenment fol for expressing themselves through elementary forms, reappears a i variable in Rae's projects. Thar is something that might bind him tothe Corbusian definition of srehitecture: shor light sketches the realty othe object. The use Ross makes of thrown light in is drawings ia not aaimple proba of ‘representation - - ‘The refirmation of reality, Ukough these elementary con- ‘waste that define both the presence andthe encounter of architectural objets, appears in every one of his projets ‘the value of slope, of & corridor behind the stairs, of & cinder and a prism which had been atsgned fantinn= ‘lion to their form, et. are all episodes that ar teling us ‘what Rosi thins construction. Ite always quoetion of frchitecture that results from a certain mental operation, ‘hum construction therefore or, better yet, from 2 reco. struction of sensations that as such i a mental ac, reon- Steueton which, on the other hand, takes place fom a conscious manipalation ofthe elements of architecture ‘Thee isa certin Heilegerian vision that ntorprots con- struction atthe oeeupation of the land, though Td mat lieve Rosi ever mentions Heidegger. This what gives [oss archtectre that ontologeal and metaphyseal on- Aiton within which balding, achieving architecture, pre supposes a reflection alien to any possible spontanet. ‘The entire formal world of Roas and wha it mean en be understood as an temp at survival through evasion iother words that atime when areitecture as adscpline isabout to disapper, in which ts death has been dereed 6 often, the trage defense Ross makes could seem a desper- fate attempt at nosalgie evasion. In fact, ono enuld ask rmany questions after examining Reras works: can a de fons, such ashe hs attempted, be accomplished outside technology (Archigran) or alien tothe satisfaction that is demanded by the eye of the most valgarof mortals (Ven tari? Ts not Ross achaism witnes to the oblivion, in the ost vulgar sense ofthat word ofthe real? Monumentlity, in Rocsian terms, i ideed usefl forthe understanding of the ody, but an he meer cy be asted tothe ‘The answer to all tse questions, which we have formic lated several times throughout these notes, fores us to accept not only the autonomy of architecture but also to conser an atemprality, which woul lead us to admit that ‘thecal ity and the new are atleast in thei principles, the way compels the formal choles he has made. "This could bean extremely dangerous statement because it could be misuerstood athe posible rejection of Ross ‘doctin, asthe erronsous interpetation af his architec ‘re, as sch i would be totaly unjustified. ‘sume thing. And iia is the case then, the attitude of man — towards urban facts and to arehiteesare would also be the ‘sume. We would find ourselves in ily platane vision of ‘events or perhaps, put in more current terme, it would be 8 ‘strocturalist view capable of caning the city, and there= fore its architecture, through the eocept of typology and morphology. And this brings us to consider the double role played by Rossi as bath eretor anda ei. As the cite, one cannot doubt the clarifying valu of Ros- sis work. A critique of modern urbaiam haa been mado possible through the knowledge of the ol ety. This has ‘shown the terrible vis in moder urban theory and there fore the role the ol ity plays as an antidote. This i his mat important catibation tothe cevelopment of current urban thought But is there a one to one correspondence between the projects and thi thery ofan aeitectur ofthe city? That Istosay, does a Rossan view demard a figurative world as ‘xemplifed in an extreme sense in che Modena eometery? Tnmy understanding it does not. Athough I hve tried to ‘explain how his they was ralzd in aconereta project, I believe that folowing Ross's enun‘ated principles in noaaa ‘ie 7 wiiiiniaaaraii14 Notes 1, These notes, written in 1978 before the Trennale of Tryp not deat wath te complex nears gen provoked that exhibition, with the grouping under te banter of the fenienaa’ =a helerogeneus, et emacously selected, Po archiecs fom different courtrien, Phas Uae ote are limited to a dleaesion of Raa princpea made xls Bn Arteta dl an fight, ta see how Koss designed the Hodera Center ‘bout conideriagthe prope nbren i the Tri Male even though Ross wa undodbtedl the inspiration for these Hews. BT Aida Ross, “Rapporti tra ls morfoogia urbane ela Sli lin” CLAVA" she tre CLUVA 18a 3. See Aldo Rosa’ antse in La Cit #i Padove (Rome Oicina, 170) ‘intrducton by Aldo Rossi to Btieme Louis Boule, Arhteture Saggio sullarte (Pads Mavaibo Bator, is, Br Aldo Rass, 1’Aroktttura deli Cité (Pada Marsio Bator, 1965) pL 6 Mh p18 4 Thi p 8 thia . Thi, 530, toile $i. Qusation fm, Qutnemire de Gus, retonnaite Historie de [Arehete (Pars, Tk Hoss, L’Avchittra delle Cita, p32. 12 Ibid. Te That p87 M4 Thad. 107 1S Ibvt p12. 16. Tid” "Quotation from C. LéviStrauss, Tritee Trapiques (Pars, 185), p. 121. 1 tid, pos 16 Thad pao Betbid = Bt Ibid, p. 16 2 thid: pio BE Mauice Maibwachs, Za pupaltivn of tee leds dle ‘pee d Pore depuis wn viele Bars, 198), Road, LArehiatra della Cit, p18, Ibid p. 13 a Iba’ 52. Ibid, p. 188 Be 8. Bia BTR pte 43, Alto’ Rossi review of Frangis Cal, LOnire Gree (Paris, 1858), in Canabetla-Contnata 28, 1060 ‘Bp Iniroduction by Aldo Ross to Boale, Avehittara 3 Thi [Ro YArcitetira dl Aldo Rois 1957-1970,"Contronpacio, 10, ter 190, pp. 2 {8 ido oss, “Lrazourro del ciel,” Controspaia, 10, Oeiaber 1972 pp. C2 itp i. tb 2 Ibid, p 8. Ibi 5 I 48 Toad 8 42 Noncibetess, those who have flowed his principles Seem to have beer le inevitably towards an archiectae in les, uo inaccessible and soaberac set a have oer Paradociealy and contredieorly converted nto 4. ran: Fred style. Ta maintaan thatthe ey but romance: tare and i rps not to brng abut one peo hy tua of fixed and ideal element in other Words, a Understanding of Rosa's propsals des not sutomatically Imply the reproduction of Resa’ arttetare Figure Crests 4, Pog ty Sen Fan Corey A 2° Reprinted trom Cosabella Coninuti, no. 188, De ‘ember 1059 January 1954 SMES" Reprintod om Aido Ros L’Arcietéwra della Got (eadla: Maran tr, 190 “ by 1D BerlgsChritin Aber. Reprinted from Jean Mare Peroase de. Montes, Euionte Lots Boutée (aris Arta e Meters Graphiques, a 10H 18,1825 Cotas Alo Roy 18 opted frm Contoepan, i {f, Reprmed fom Ad How! gag ul er Grob So Sart Water erg Oa TE Reted frm Contos, Betber 1