In our architectural environment we find ourselves surrounded by buildings that are considered by the general public to be modern. These structures provoke in us a profound reflection: What do these architectures contribute? Where does their essence lie? And as protagonists involved in their creation, can we be self-critical? In the following lines we will try to answer these and other considerations.
We are perplexed by the almost generalised absence of elements typical of the Mediterranean climate in these buildings, such as patios, porches, roof tiles and the lack of prominence of the wall, giving way to undiscerning openings. This denial of context, this lack of respect for the topography and the climate, engenders a scenographic architecture that is eager to impress visually, without considering the other senses. An architecture that relies on ephemeral and superficial technologies, allowing visual aesthetics to prevail over all other aspects.
Vernacular architecture: a dialogue with identity and environment
We can say that we are faced with an architecture out of context, universal, without a sense of location and timelessness, without connection with its surroundings. A global spectrum, devoid of roots and with the capacity to manifest itself in any corner of the planet.
An architecture that envelops us, yes, but like the homogeneous clothing of ZARA, unifying us on a lower level and with minimal creative and constructive pretensions. It equalises us, strips us of our uniqueness and gives us an identity devoid of depth.
The alternative on our horizon is not the rejection of the modern, but rather to seek a balance between opposing currents by mixing elements that allow the project to be born from the place, while using technology and the constructive advances of development and universalisation. In this way, we give ourselves over to the mixture of the past and the present, of the vernacular and the contemporary, in an embrace that nourishes and transcends time and cultural barriers.
Architecture is at the forefront of this struggle to preserve our essence, our roots, our culture and our culture.
We renounce the totem building, that construction that attracts blind admirers with its ephemeral radiance. We do not wish to close our eyes, but to open them wide. We long for that building that emanates an incessant dialogue with its surroundings, that exalts the unique aspects of geography and embraces its social and historical provenance.
This debate stands as a beacon of reflection in a world where cultural identities are blurring. Architecture is at the forefront of this struggle to preserve our essence, our roots. Through this reflection, we seek not only to rethink our identity, but also to inspire a transcendental and renovating design of what is considered modern. We aspire to be local moderns, as opposed to global moderns.
We look critically at the quality of modern projects around us. Such workmanship, both in its creative and constructive aspect, leaves us perplexed and uneasy. Not even the whisper of sustainability can be heard in their constructions. Is this the highest manifestation of our creative capacity? Is this the legacy we wish to leave for generations to come?