Διάλεξη Τάσου Mπίρη στην UDK στο Βερολίνο

Η πρόσκληση για την διάλεξη αυτή είχε την ιδιόμορφη ιστορία της.
Αρχικά η καθηγήτρια Bettina Götz και η διδακτική της ομάδα στο πανεπιστήμιο, επικοινώνησαν μαζί του και πρότειναν να συνοδέψει αυτούς και τους σπουδαστές και τις σπουδάστριες τους σε έργα του, κατά την διάρκεια μελλοντικής επίσκεψης τους στην Αθήνα.

Είναι χαρακτηριστικό ότι τα έργα αυτά είχε ήδη επισημάνει η διδακτική ομάδα με δική της πρωτοβουλία και χωρίς προσυνεννόηση με τον Μπίρη(!!) μπαίνοντας στο site του (όπως και στα sites των άλλων αρχιτεκτόνων). Και ακολούθως είχε αναθέσει σε επιμέρους ομάδες διδασκομένων να κάνουν εισαγωγική ανάλυση των έργων αυτών.

Η επίσκεψη έγινε όπως είχε προγραμματιστεί. Στην προκειμένη περίπτωση διήρκεσε έξι ώρες, περιλαμβάνοντας και την γνωστή πολυκατοικία στον «Ασύρματο», καθώς και τα έργα του Δ. Πικιώνη στο λόφο του Φιλοπάππου.

Κατά την διάρκεια του περίπατου αυτού έγινε γενικότερη (και πολύ σοβαρή) συζήτηση για την αρχιτεκτονική, όπου και πάλι η συμμετοχή των σπουδαστών και σπουδαστριών, μέσω ερωτήσεων και τοποθετήσεων ουσίας, ήταν εντυπωσιακή.

Αποτέλεσμα ήταν να ζητηθεί εκείνη την ημέρα από τον Μπίρη να πραγματοποιήσει μετά από μερικούς μήνες στο Βερολίνο την παρά πάνω διάλεξη. Κάτι το οποίο και έγινε (και μάλιστα σε εξωτερικές συνθήκες θερμο- κρασίας 8 υπό το μηδέν!).

Και κάτι ακόμα: Όπως μας είπε ο αρχιτέκτονας, θεωρεί περίεργη σύμπτωση ότι για δεύτερη φορά μέσα σε σχετικά λίγο χρόνο, του ζητήθηκε να αναφερθεί στο προσωπικό του έργο, με την έννοια της δυνατότητας από πλευράς του να αναπτύξει τις προσωπικές ιδεολογικές θέσεις του για την αρχιτεκτονική. Κάτι που πιστεύει ότι μπορεί να έχει ίσως κάποιο θετικό νόημα, αλλά μόνο όταν συμβαίνει κατ' εξαίρεση και με μέτρο.

Και τούτο γιατί είναι γνωστό το έργο που έχει πραγματοποιήσει το γραφείο «Τάσος Μπίρης, Δημήτρης Μπίρης και Συνεργάτες» είναι συλλογικό και εξ' αδιαιρέτου με τον πρόωρα χαμένο αδελφό του, όπως κατ' επανάληψη έχει διευκρινιστεί σε βιβλία, άρθρα και παρουσιάσεις.

Το «Greek Architects» δημοσιεύει στην συνέχεια την διάλεξη του Τάσου Μπίρη στην πλήρη της μορφή, καθώς και τις εικόνες που την συνοδεύουν.

 

 

I want to thank the University, Professor Enrique Sobejano, Professor Bettina Gotz and her team for the invitation, and also, the students for their interest to come and hear what I have to say about our work. I also want to thank Sofia Tsiraki, assistant professor and member of our architectural office, without whose help during the last days (but also today in this hall) this lecture would not have been properly prepared and presented.

I. "The responsibility of doing and teaching Architecture: A difficult and complex correlation"

What do we believe is Architecture?
- Is it a test of our personal ego or talent?
- An esthetic or high- tech "extreme- sports" test?
- A test of our social awareness and intervention?
- A constant test of our ability to create human living space in the span of time and history?

In a way, all the above tend to define major differences in the meaning and the reason of doing and -accordingly- teaching architecture.

On the other hand, teaching has also to do with how architecture is done. (Starting from the blank white sketching pad, or the blank computer screen and ending with the completion of the project). And by "how it is done" I don't mean just by using the student's or the architect's talent, or even by chance. But by using special ways of thinking and specific design methods, syntactic systems and vocabulary which constitute architecture as an esthetic, scientific, structural and above all social entirety.

In this way, the work of an architect (theoretical, tutorial and practical) can be traced, analyzedand evaluated in reference to a common ethical, practical and methodological basis. So that even the different phases and changes in its regularity, obtain a holistic meaning as anevolving, innovative process and not as a "game" played at random (as I often think ishappening in this present period of general confusion and ambiguity). A fact that explains whythe issue of correlation and consistency concerning our thoughts and actions, will keep arisingthroughout my lecture, as one of its basic objectives.

 

II. A teaching model for introducing structural syntax

(First application in the School of Architecture, National Technical University of Athens, from 1991 and later, in the Thrace School of Architecture, from 2000 till now).

In the next pictures I show you a model (or a kit, or a lego), which I have devised (while working together with Eleni Amerikanou and Panos Exarhopoulos), concerning structural syntax, by using the basic methodological system of the "column", the "beam" and the "panel".

 

a1,a2

(a)
The model is "played" between the teacher and the students in a direct, face-to-face correlation (a1). In the famous painting of Sezanne, "The cardplayers", (a2), the game ia about architecture, by the use of the model!

 

 

(b)
By the use of the cover of the model as a platform (and only by applying the before mentioned elements) archetypal space formations are constituted and analyzed, not as morphological compositions, but strictly as abstract spatial ideograms.

(c)
It is important to keep in mind that the rational way of teaching architecture with this system exceeds architecture itself. For example, it introduces the same rational methodology by which Socrates constitutes his philosophy.
Accordingly, his way of thinking is like gradually building a house or a temple. He starts by applying a primary basis (a foundation) and then goes on to erect "columns", "beams" and "panels" on its surface, moving step by step to a second or third elevation. In the end he places the "roof" (as a "slab", or as a triangular construction), thus configuring the "conclusion" of his thoughts.

(d)
The use of the model and the application of "rules" in the syntactic procedure usually arise the same dilemma on the part of the students:

In essence, the dilemma is between doing architecture in accordance to some kind of restrictions, or in a state of complete freedom, or even at random.
I usually answer this question by using parts of the model itself and also the grid designed on its cover.
Three examples:

 

 

In the first example the panels follow the rule constituted by the grid.
In the second example the curved panel frees itself from the rule constituted by the grid.
In the third example, no grid and no rules are constituted. One could say that the curved panel hovers in
outer space in a state of "complete freedom".

Let as see if this is true by comparing the two last examples :
The second example is about gaining freedom under pressure, by using personal will power to go against the rule, but for an appropriate reason. (Such us to constitute a new way of thinking or a new kind of architecture).
In this case freedom obtains a dynamic cognitional meaning which -by far-exceeds aesthetics.
What is more, the presence of the grid makes it possible for the meaning to be communicated in an emphatic and definite way!
Such a meaning is absent in the third example. Here, the curved panel sails incoherently in "no-man's land", without any probable reason and in a state of timeless and meaningless tranquility. (A state that I would not define as real -and even less as complete- freedom).
Metaphorically speaking (not only about architecture, but also about our life as a whole) I think it is imperative for us to keep in mind that either "following grids" (example 1) or "not following them" (example 2) may be right or wrong . What justifies, or does not justify which of the two we choose to do, depends on the reason, the way of implication and -of course- the results of this choice, always in reference to the existing conditions of each period, but also of the periods to come.

 

 

(e)
Here I show you the elements (or parts) of the model and -in succession- some basic (or archetypal) spatial formations constituted by combining the elements with one another and then analyzing the results. As you see, the elements are the least possible, referring to structure and not form.
It is important to note that in every formation appear one or more human figures (male or female). This is done in order to constantly stress the humanistic meaning of architecture and also to apply human scale to every space formation.

(f) Examples :
-The first human being stands alone and unprotected in the chaotic natural environment.
After thousands of years in this condition, the need to show that this human being exists and is present here becomes imperative. The first step is by creating a lasting point of reference which differentiates "here" from "there". Accordingly the "Menhir" (or vertical column) constitutes one of the first signs of architecture.

-The colonnade, and the axis: moving from "here" to "there". Also, the meaning of scale, rhythm, proportion.
-The "atrium": the introvert space to stand, to communicate, to talk and debate with other people.
-The "gallery"(with or without the wall). Bearing and not bearing elements.
-The "corner" (a place to protect your back).
-The "staircase" and the "second elevation".
-The "roof" (the "slab", the "triangular roof", the "vault", the "dome").
-The wall and the panel (opacity and transparency).

 

 

(g)
Teaching architecture to children with the same model in a workshop organized by the Benaki Museum (2014). The condition was that I would use the same methodological system I imply during my University lessons, in order to test the tutorial range of the use of the model.

 

III. The New Acropolis Museum: A "non-building" to house the sculptures of the Parthenon. (not constructed)

(As you see, I start by showing you especially this project of ours, because in its implementation the effect of the previous teaching model is - I think- evident).

 

 

The concept:
(a) The site: A natural concave rocky receptor which is the "non-building" it self.

 

(b) Nudity constituted as an ethical value: nudity of nature, nudity of the human body, nudity of architecture.
-The gray rock of Attica is the protagonist of the concept.
-Just by adding 21 columns directly embedded in the natural rocky floor the "non-building" is -in essence- complete.

 

 

(c) The austere grid of beams holding the zigzag metal construction of the roof constitute the "non building" as a simple shed.

 

 

(d) A series of counterpoint correlations: Three superposed traces combine natural with human geometry.

(e) Also, the "tower"(1) in which the administration offices are situated and the "screen"(2) through which an instant direct view of the museum is made possible for people driving quickly along the highway. Two autonomous "points of counterpoint reference" in the composition.

 

 

(f) The sideway entrance, through a bypass of the highway.

The groundfloor (counterpoint correlation of natural and human geometry).

Cross-sections drawn by hand and pencil, show the numerous shades of light and darkness, transparency and opacity. (drawings by Panos Kokoris)

(g) Inner space

 

 

IV. Uncovered Concrete

 

As a prelude to the main part of my lecture, I bring up the issue of "uncovered concrete" (or -in German- "sicht-beton"), which is a basic component of our architecture.

Starting from the masterpieces of Le Corbusier that followed his first modernistic period, till the latest famous works of international architecture at the beginning of the 21th century, "sicht-beton" has been constantly in use and -of course- not simply as an adequate building material.
We must not forget that it also manifests the need to show -not hide- the true (nude, not covered by plaster or other layers) nature of architecture, as a major aesthetic and -above all- ethical value.
Thus, I will never understand why so many well-known historians have falsely given this expressionistic and sensitive method of structural design, the vulgar name of "brutalism".
In the first place, I think this shows how difficult it is to define art with words while, at the same time, not having real feeling for it.
And secondly, it explains why we sometimes describe certain structural materials of a very high quality (for example, stone, brick, clay or sicht-beton) as "brutal" (!), just because they are not soft to the touch (!!).
At the same time real brutalism can be found in the inappropriate "new" words, randomly used to define whatever we cannot feel or understand.

In sequence with the above, I will show you some examples of (what I think as exceptional) contemporary Greek architecture, done by well-known Greek architects, mostly by the use of uncovered concrete.
I usually do this whenever I show our work, in order to explain that -as a team- we don't feel as being unique and absolutely self- educated in our field. That -on the contrary- we follow a specific (but common) trail, together with other Greek architects whose work is based on common beliefs, and design methods, covering a broad span of time from 1950 till 2016. (Regardless if some of them are no longer alive and with us).

 

 

V. In the last part of my lecture I will show you some private and public projects, as examples of the work we have done as a team, in a span of 40 years. V(1) to V(13).

V(1),(2),(3). From the archetypal unitary cubic habitat and the arhetypal "whole" (the vernacular settlement) to a typology for contemporary collective inhabitation.

 

 

The constitution of the typology. Three examples:

V(1). A One-family house in Ekali, 1972-1975
The unitary element of the typology.

 

 

The syntactic idea of the typology: the notional cubic contour, from (and in accordance to) which, smaller cubic parts are subtracted or added.
In this sense the "element" is not a cube, but belongs to a cubic "family".

 

 

The design method used in order to form living space is constituted by strong emphatic "movements", "lines"or "axes", which compose the cubic whole and its parts, in what we call "the house- box".
At this point the syntactic procedure is mainly structural and not aesthetical.

 

 

The inner core of the element is the staircase winding upwards through the big opening in the slab of the second floor.
In a series of phases (or stages) that follow, living space and its inner and outer boundaries are constituted in detail (functionally, aesthetically and technically), by the use of an appropriate syntactic vocabulary.

 

 

V(2) and V(3). The typology in its final constitution as a "whole". In other words, "collective inhabitation" (or -in this case- the Greek "polykatoikia"), of which I will show you two different versions:
The concept of the "linear bar" (V2) and the concept of the "square" with an inner atrium -courtyard (V3).

 

 

Common features of both projects:
-The sliding (inward, outward and diagonal movement of the "box-like" -one or two level- cubic "cells" produces a new concept about collective inhabitation. It enables dwellers to have a more direct way of communicating with one another, mainly by using their open private courtyards situated throughout the different levels of the composition. Thus, a new kind of common social behavior is constituted between them, which helps the "polykatoikia" to obtain an outward view towards the city, and at the same time, an inward view towards itself.

V(2). An apartment complex in the suburbs of Athens, 1980
Collective inhabitation as a "whole".
The following pictures show details of the typology:
-The private open courtyards in the facades and the terrace.
-The multifunctional shutters. (see details).
-The everyday alterations of the facades: The dwellers innovative interventions produce a kinetic "patchwork", by using the yellow light metallic structures which underline the outer boundaries of the balconies and open courtyards.

 

 

Syntactic Vocabulary of the typology:
The "fitting" together (the articulation of different structural systems, joints, parts, materials between them.

 

 

 

V(3). An apartment complex in the historical center of Athens, 2006-2008
International Competition, 3rd Prize

A different application of the same typological system, by using the concept of the atrium and the spiral upward movement of the (common) roof.

 

 

Team- work between the two exceptionally good young architects of the project and myself (as consulting architect) produced an unexpectedly innovative version of the "box-like" typology.

 

 

 

V(4) and V(5): The "composition" (V4) and "decomposition" (V5) of the "House-Box".

V(4). A One-family house in Koukaki, Athens, 2008-2012
(The composition of the "House-Box")
Greek participation in the "Mies van der Rohe" Competition, 2013

 

 

V(5). An apartment house in Gazi, Athens, 2009-2013

(The decomposition of the "House-Box")
1st Prize for the best completed building during the years 1009-2013, EIA competition

 

 

 

V(6). A "Pharmaceutical Industrial Unit" in the suburbs of Athens, 2009-2015

1st Honorary mention for the best completed building during the years 2012-2015, Domes competition

(A "large scale" application of the "box" typology based on the same syntactic vocabulary. It refers strongly to the "teaching model" previously shown and the structural system of the "column", the "beam" and the "panel").

 

 

 

V(7). The Olympic Games Swimming pool complex.
Architectural Competition, 1984, 1st Prize (Unrealized)

The concept:
A big metallic shed that had collapsed after a heavy snowstorm was the basic example for constituting the concept. We saw the ruin by chance, while driving on the highway. An example of how (real) deconstruction can produce a new structural system.

 

 

 

V(8). A Building for the Municipal Services for the county of Viotia. (Called the "Snake", by the public).
Architectural Competition, 1987, 1st Prize. Construction : 2007

 

 

(A typical example reminding us of the worst problem concerning Greek public architecture: The great lapse of time -15,20, or even 30 years!- ranging from the day of designing a project to its completion. Bureaucracy "at its best"! ).

The concept:

-A "snake like" building in close accordance to the winding and unwinding trace of the river "Erkina" flowing exactly beside it.
-This flowing motion enabled us to exploit both the long and short axis of the "difficult" T shaped site. The main body of the building follows the long axis.

 

 

- At the point where the two axes meet each other, cubic elements of the building mass "fall apart" and "slide" downwards along the short axis, forming a promenade which leads from the main street towards the entrance of the complex.

 

- An upwards and downwards moving covered passage (identified by the succession of red wall panels) runs across the eastern façade, joining all the levels of the building. In this way it enables the public to have a second (free) way of entering it, while having at the same time a very nice view of the city of "Livadia".

 

 

V (9). The law-courts, also in the town of Livadia.
Construction 1978

The concept:

A more democratic and friendly architectural environment for the people of Livadia, which enables them to have a different way of coming in contact with the -usually very austere- public services and especially the courts of law.

-The covered atrium (or courtyard) surrounded by the courtrooms. It is the "heart" of the building and an common social meeting place.

 

Drawings by Elias Papayiannopoulos.

 

-A free covered pedestrian passage behind the transparent concrete façade, parallel to the main street. It is an informal sideway entrance besides the one through the official "portico" with the big rotating iron door.
This "in between" linear space can be used as a shortcut for pedestrians and also, as an "out of the way" spot where people can briefly stand and talk freely while waiting for the trials to begin, or after this formal procedure is completed.

 

 

V(10).The New Town Hall of Thessaloniki.
Architectural Competition 1987, 1st Prize. Construction 2010

The complex is situated on a very "difficult" spot of the urban tissue, exactly were the curved borderline of the
site directly faces the heavy traffic on the crossroad of the two main avenues of the city.

 

 

The concept:

We did not enforce this line by repeating it in the form of a monumental curved façade (in essence, a barrier), opposing the open space of the crossroad and the main direction followed by people coming to visit the Town Hall.
On the contrary, we composed this part of the complex as an open receptor (a piazza).

This piazza is also the beginning of an open passage. It starts form the direction of the "Thessaloniki International Fair" territory and then goes on, facing the tower of the "Town Hall clock" (a prominent point of public reference).
It then passes through the pilotis (where the two main entrances of the building are situated) and goes on following a zig-zag pattern towards the open inner core of the complex.

At this point, it broadens, taking the form of an amphitheatric courtyard.

Surpassing this area, the passage continues its route, leaving the Town-Hall and joining an existing pedestrian path throughout the neighboring park towards the dense urban territory beyond it.

 

The exit of the zig-zag passage towards the neighbouring park.

The Town-Hall Clock: A prominent point of reference and meeting place.

 

It is important to note that the zig-zag passage, while passing the inner courtyard, has a constant parallel correlation with the main Hall of the building. This central multi-functional meeting place has free visual contact with all the elevations, which surround it with their inner facades. Note the "difficult" unfolding geometric constitution of the roof and the rays of light infiltrating downwards from circular domes and slits placed on its surface.
Put together, the above seperate "movements", "spatial formations" and "points of reference" constitute a dynamic "system", which constantly attracts and guides public everyday life towards and inside the Town-Hall.
As a result, the visit to it, serves not only for giving and receiving official documents and certificates. It also, serves the public as a way to pass free time, by taking part in social events and happenings, for meeting friends and (of course) for taking part in political gatherings and demonstrations.
In other words, the Town Hall becomes a constant receptor of active social and political activities, which constitute the core of public architecture.

 

 

 

V (11), (12), (13). Three exceptions to the rules of our architecture.

The following projects are (maybe) not "in line" with the general modernistic conceptual system and syntactic vocabulary of our architecture, which I have presented to you in the previous examples of this lecture.
Does this have to do with the special needs that these three projects had to face and also with our personal need to experiment with new ideas?
Or does it show our inability to be "faithful" to our ideas, in accordance to a systematic way of thinking and doing?
This is something for you to decide.
It may also be a very good reason for an interesting conversation between us about architectural ideology and other important issues.
In this case I would be very happy, because I believe that dialogue is always a very good and useful way to close a lecture, so that it will not put you to sleep! (as it sometimes does).....

 

V (11). A Municipal daycare complex in the suburbs of Athens
Construction: 2007

 

 

The concept:

Besides functioning as a "daycare unit", the complex also serves its small inhabitants as an everyday "introductory lesson" about architecture. Accordingly, the composition is constituted as a system of correlating basic spatial formations, very different from the ones children usually become acquainted with while living in their nearby fashionable apartment houses.

 

 

The complex is part of the dense urban tissue, which causes great pressure on its perimeter. This pressure drove us to create living space that faces mostly inwards. And at the same time to find a way to relate the building with the unorthodox borderline formed by the backsides of the surrounding apartment houses which engulf it.
In other words, we preferred to turn the building towards the depth of the site (where the main entrance is situated) and in this way, to avoid extensively open facades towards its outer boundaries.

 

 

 

V(12). An underground Conference- Hall in the archaeological site of Olympia
Architectural Competition, 1989, Honorary mention. (not constructed)

 

 

The concept:

Because of its nearness to the ancient ruins, it was imperative that the new building should not force its presence on them by means of morphological and technological extremities. That -in a way- it should blend and be absorbed into the surrounding natural and architectural environment. This is why it was decided that it would be placed mostly underneath the surface of the surrounding hillside.

 

Drawing by Miltos Katsaros.

 

Only a few of its architectural parts would be visible. For example, a linear open passage, a low stone façade embedded in the hill side, four freestanding columns, a water reservoir for the storage of rain water, a sunken circular atrium, a dome, as well as lighting slits and openings, all protruding from the earth.
Visitors would meet all these scattered architectural signs and traces, while taking a walk on the hillside.
In the case of this project, lighting from above, but also semi-darkness and a gentle breeze flowing through the underground passages (mostly during the summer), would be the protagonists of our idea.

 

 

 

V(13) A Small chapel in the campus of the Democritus University of Thrace
First prize, architectural competition, 1999, (not constructed).

 

 

The concept:

We tried to create a tranquil spot of reference in the -somehow chaotic- university campus.

In order to strengthen the presence of the chapel, we placed it in close connection with a small mound of earth covered with trees and bushes. In fact, one side of the chapel is embedded in the side of the mound.

A ramp joins the ground floor with the top of the mound, where the steeple with the bell is situated. The ramp marks the beginning of a peaceful walk. Starting from the courtyard and the nearby ruins of an older church which consists a basic part of the composition, it goes up to the mound and then downwards, around and -finally- into the chapel.

The same "movement" is followed by an open drainage system for rainwater coming from the roof of the chapel and the sloping sides of the mound. Shallow trenches lead the water towards the tank near the living quarters of the priest.

 

 

It is important to keep in mind that the Orthodox Church is usually not an open receptor of bright daylight.
On the contrary it remains mostly in semi darkness (or even darkness) although underlined by bright linear slits, or spots of light coming from above, where small openings are situated.
In this way, a mystical counterpoint mixture of feelings is created, outside and inside the chapel, quite different, from the atmosphere constituted in churches of other clerical orders.

 

 

 

VI. The socio- economical crisis:

At the end of this lecture I feel that the projects I have shown you belong to an era by far gone by. Although very recent, this was a time when we falsely thought that everything in our life, as citizens and architects, was fine and in order.
What is more, that it would keep being so in the years to come!
And then came the big social and economical crisis which abruptly and very dramatically, changed everything.
As to what we can do now and in the future, (especially as architects, with unemployment reaching unbelievable high numbers) is something, which needs a lot of personal, but also collective thought.
And by «collective», I mean the way we think (and act) not only as Greek architects, but also as an international society in general. In this way, all our problems (ethical, social, political, economical, cultural -and of course- architectural) are in many ways common and correlated, in reference to the reasons that cause them and also the solutions that can solve them.
Of course, I believe that "hope is the last to die". But hope is not enough.
It is also important for us to find new appropriate ways and means to do and teach, not only virtual, but also real and very economical architecture. Putting aside misleading costly "fashions" and architectural "extreme sports" championships, which -I think- have no meaning.
And at the same time we must be very careful that this innovative procedure of common self-consciousness, must not degrade but -on the contrary- strengthen architecture's deep humanistic meaning and also its great value as a science and a high expression of art.

 

by Tassos Biris
Architect, Emeritus Professor, NTUA
Berlin 19.01.2016