Letters

Architectural Review, The, June, 2000

VITRUVIUS VERSUS ROSSI

SIR: If I recall it rightly, you said on one occasion that it is difficult to write about architecture, particularly in its critical appreciation. This is the case of the letter in AR March (p27) 'Outrage, outrage'. I have to defend your position in AR January (p23), when you rightly stated your view on Aldo Rossi: 'thoughtful writer about the city', but in his work 'exceedingly tough, inhuman and unpitying'.

Whoever preaches architecture and makes it real, has to be reminded that the deeds not words will judge his performance. Unfortunately Rossi's buildings and projects are not only out of proportion to human scale, but they fail simply to fulfil the Vitruvian credo of Voluptas. Their heavy-laden structures are alien to Firmitas in modern terms. Of course only the users can give us a proper answer on the Utilitas of Rossi's interiors and near urban approaches. Whoever has any doubt on above negative attribution, should take time to look through the book Aldo Rossi - The Complete Buildings and Projects 1981-1991 (Thames and Hudson, London, 1992). He will not find on the 300 pages (23 x 30cm) of colour illustrations a trace of human existence. Only Rossi's portrait appears on the first page and on the last, where he is presented in full stature.

Almost all buildings in this book could be subscribed to the Cemetery of San Cataldo (1971) in Modena, Italy, as a 'trademark' of Rossi's architecture. The same critical notion could be applied to Giorgio Grassi's College library in Valencia, described in 'Outrage' (AR February, p27). Here Grassi and Rossi shake hands: the prison-like sadness in company of abusive, offensive surroundings. Despite all this, I am sure the Italian architects, copious of glory in modern architecture, will give us in this new century buildings and their environments full of joy and elegance.

Yours etc

ADAM MILCZYNSKI KAAS

Pamplona, Spain

MORAL POINT

SIR: Regarding your item on 'Postmodern Urbanity' in the February number of your excellent magazine (p34), I wish to take exception to your contention that post-modern urbanism rejects morality. I must believe that you are unfamiliar with many of the, profoundly moral positions proposed by post-modern urbanism, particularly in the form of the New Urbanism. Here are a few illustrations:

Community as inclusive of all ages, incomes and family types: the localized variety of housing types characteristic of good New Urban plans speaks to human diversity and harmony rather than stratification and segregation.

The re-establishment of the public realm: the postwar American suburb provides little spatial focus or forum for protected public association. The first amendment to the US constitution protecting free speech does not apply in private shopping malls. New Urban communities provide designed public realms whose purpose is to re-energize public discourse.

Settlement as an act of environmental stewardship: sprawl is increasingly seen to be the primary degradation of American life. New Urbanist communities are compact, enhancing the public realm and defining the private realm to heighten the character of each, while clearly defining edges and open space for protection.

The concept of family life in which all members have freedom of association and mobility: in automobile focused postwar suburbs, older citizens lose their liberty with their driving privileges and the young are captives of carpools until they earn their licences. New Urbanist communities provide pedestrian, transit serviceable environments where the car is much less necessary.

The applicability of principles to new and existing communities: the success of the Federal HOPE VI program shows that New Urbanist principles are as appropriate to restoring older communities as they are to designing new ones.

Certainly New Urbanist communities take the forms of marketable architectures. These superficial stylistic features should not, however, obscure the fundamentally revolutionary form of New Urbanist communities and the high principles they embody. Please look again.

Yours etc

RALPH BENNETT

Maryland, USA