An email from Gaston Saboulard

By Mario Rosaldo

Today we have received this email from Mr. Saboulard, which we publish immediately in the hope that you find it interesting and informative.



Monday 25, January 2010, 01:58 PM

To the responsible of Des Nouvelles sur la generation qui vient,


My name is Gastón Saboulard and I am writing to inform you about ArchMedium, a new project that we just launched with the collaboration of the Architecture School of Barcelona and Polytechnic University of Catalunya.

We organize architecture competitions where only students from any country can participate.

Our goals is to offer students the opportunity to become familiar with this kind of events, see how other students from other parts of the world deal with the same project and at the same time compete to win cash prizes, architecture books, and get their project published on some worldwide known and distributed architecture magazines, something that will definitely make a difference on a student portfolio.

We just opened the inscription to participate in the first competition. The project consists in designing the first Urban Center of Sustainable Transports in Barcelona. You can see all the details in www.archmedium.com/

I would like to ask for your cooperation in the task of promoting this event, which we believe will interest a great part of your Blog readers. If you think this event matches your blog theme it would be great if you could publish and entry about it. We would also appreciate if you could forward this information to anyone who might be interested in participating or is in touch with architecture students which might be.


Please don’t hesitate to contact me at any time. Thanks in advance!


Gastón Saboulard


Tel. + 34 667 840 209
C/Duran i Bas 1, 3º1ª
08002 Barcelona
S P A I N

Our Reflections on Architecture

In order to offer a fuller picture of the ideas we have been expressing on our blogs, now we are publishing them in a more readable format. Here you have an example.

Architectural Approach 2008

On the Subject of Critique and Criticism

By Mario Rosaldo


We often take for granted that, before starting a serious study of architecture, it must be given a complete or clear definition of its concept. Popper stated that this was rather a work for metaphysicians than for scientists. But definitions are useful in every dominion of science and art, and this is something nobody can deny. The key is not to forget that concepts form a part of theories; a concept always belongs to a theoretical framework. That is to say, when we choose a concept of architecture established by one of the renowned architects, we also choose the philosophy or the hypothesis on which it is founded. The case is not different when we believe we have just conceived a definition of our own; we usually forget we live in a society which continuously educates us with religious, philosophical or scientific concepts; even simple friendly relations stimulate the exchange of ideas. Of course it is correct to say we have ideas or concepts of our own as our social contribution consists above all on varying the point of view from which objects can be perceived. The problem arises when we intend to establish our concepts as the best perception of reality.

Some of these renowned architects have preferred not to choose any concept of architecture; they say they are intending to work with reality itself. They assume that a direct handling of objects will do to derive the ideas they need to create original projects or designs. But even this pragmatic approach is a conception of the problem, namely, a theoretical framework, a theory; call it sceptical or empirical. That is why the critics of art insist on studying the unconscious concepts they can derive from the works, the conceptual starting point they can reveal. But studies focusing on the qualities of architectural works are very often tempted to leave aside the philosophical and scientific discussion as they are mostly interested in value judgements not in objective theoretical discourses. It is in this sense that a critic like Giulio C. Argan held the thesis that everything in art is always related to value judgements; in other words, art criticism is necessarily subjective as it is a matter of taste. Echoing this widespread opinion, Charles Jencks has also emphasized the symbolic aspects of the architectural work, and the talent of critics to interpret works basing themselves on a lyrical criticism and taste.

At bottom, this is that old medieval discussion between Franciscans and Dominicans. Only the form has changed: we are still discussing about the best way of grasping reality. Thus, people’s refusal to continue searching for the truth is comprehensible. Although there is an argument we should consider before taking any drastic decision. Society has divided work, has specialized us to perform activities contributing to satisfy our basic necessities. This social organisation has helped us develop what we call human condition, that is to say, our abilities to produce as a group of individuals both physical and mental objects not existing in nature. These abilities or talents differ from one individual to another, so it is absolutely necessary to share responsibilities in teamwork. In architecture we are experiencing today a division between those who prefer to work as traditional architects and those who prefer to stop to see what more we can do to take part in the development of new abilities. That is the reason why an architectural study intending to practise a rigorous critique, to practise objectivity as a way to establish the degree of verisimilitude of theories, cannot overlook the discussions around philosophy and science, as well as art.