e 5. doing - degreeshow.eca.ed.ac.uk...D. Scala Montesanto E. Funicolare Montesanto F. Piazza Montesanto Legend Propositional Territories 1. ‘Into & Out of Everyday Thickness(es)’

Following an interrogation of representational strategies for the interpenetrative porous conditions being R

uin, Labyrinth and Theatre, a spatial ‘field’ of intervention em

erges across the city from the ‘Quartieri Spagnoli’

to ‘Centro Storico’. Through shifting scales of an ‘Animate D

rawing’ process, propositional territories are

‘opened’; re-drawn and overw

ritten in an ‘(un)doing’ through ‘Performative Construction’ that takes

place in opening new conditions of ‘threshold’ across the city.

* Quartieri Spagnoli

* SS Trinita della Monache

* Monastero di Santa Chiara

* ‘ Il Campetto ’

* Ex Mercato di S. Anna

* ‘ la Porte della Citta ’

* ‘ Dentro la Mura ’

* Piazza della Carita

* Piazza Dante

* Piazza del Gesu Nuovo

* Piazza Montecalvario

* Piazza Portacarrese a Montecalvario

* Mercato Pignasecca

Primary Directional Axis

Vico Lungo Montecalvario

Vico Tofa

+ Corso Vittorio Emanuele

+ Via Toledo

+ Via Pignasecca

+ Via D

omenico Capitelli

+ Vico Lungo Montecalvario

+ Vico Tofa

+ Vico 2° Montecalvario

Re-Establish Connectivity with Parco Spagnoli

2nd Chance: Waking Up The Sleeping Giants

* Piazza Trieste e Trento

* Piazza del Plebiscito

* Centro Storico

* Oratorio di Santa Maria della Fede

* Piazzatta Nilo

+ Via Tribunali

Via San Biagio dei Librai

* Piazza S. Domenico Magiore

[ 1:1500 ]PERFORMATIVE CONSTRUCTION(S) :COMPOSITE METHODOLOGY DRAWING(section/elevation(s) to scale)

(Un)doingTHRESHOLDS

DOOR/WAYS to NEW NEAPOLITAN PRACTICE(S)

[(un)doing propositional territories: (threshold(s) to new field conditions]LegendD

oor / Ways Through the City

A. Via Toledo

B. Corso Vittorio Em

anueleC

. Vico TofaD

. Vico Lungo Montecalvario

E. Piazza della Carita

F. Piazza Montecalvario

LegendPropositional Territories1. Santissim

a Trinità della Monache

2. ‘Il Cam

petto’ (Quartieri Spagnoli) a. Football Pitch3. ‘le Porta della C

itta’ (Quartieri Spagnoli) a. ‘Bassi’ Food / D

rink ‘Kiosk(s)

4. ‘Dentro le M

ura’ (Quartieri Spagnoli)

a. ‘U

rban Gatew

ay’ & G

arden(s)5. Ex M

ercato di S. Anna di Palazzo (Quartieri Spagnoli) a. ‘U

rban Market Tow

er’6. O

ratorio di Santa Martia della Fede (Centro Storico)

a. ‘Curatorial Threshold’

b. ‘Com

mon G

oods Dining H

all’

7. * Monastero di Santa Chiara

8. * Funicolare Montesanto

G. Piazza Portacarrese a M

ontecalvarioH

. Piazza Trieste e TrentoI. Piazza del PlebiscitoJ. Piazza D

anteK

. Via TrubunaliTL Via San Biagio dei Librai

M. Piazza del G

esu Nuovo

N. Piazza San D

omenico M

aggiore

AN

IM

AT

ED

RA

WI

NG

(S

)

des-ign.

joseph coulter eirini makarouni

katy sidwell kat saranti

002

[ 2 02

0 ]C

ITY

FR

AG

MEN

TS:

NEA

POLI

TAN

PO

ROSI

TIES

[animate drawing][performative construction][tectonic assemblage]

(Un)doing ThresholdsDoor /Ways to New Neapolitan Practice(s)

(Un)doing Thresholds explores the temporalities and architectonic specificities of porous conditions of Naples, where (un)doing is presented through Andrew Benjamin as a productive conception of urbanity; one in which porous architectures are (un)done, drawn through one another, in a constructive overwriting founded in the immediacy of the city.

Exploring architectures of the ruin, labyrinth and theatre, be they programmatically labyrinthine or theatrical, or materially or spatially so, the thesis considers their interpenetration: each space becomes a threshold to another space. It promotes an expression of presence in the city, gathered in collectivity, that takes possession of space as a protagonist in constructing an experience of Naples that goes beyond the control of fixed political and historical representations of the city.

(U

n)d

oin

gT

HR

ES

HO

LD

S

* joseph coulter / MArch 2* eirini makarouni / MArch 2* katy sidwell / MArch 2* kat saranti / MArch 2

*chris french*maria mitsoula

[ 202

0 ]C

ITY

FR

AG

MEN

TS:

NEA

POLI

TAN

PO

ROSI

TIES

( U n ) d o i n gT H R E S H O L D S

[design report]

(Un)doing ThresholdsDoor /Ways to New Neapolitan Practice(s)

(Un)doing Thresholds explores the temporalities and architectonic specificities of porous conditions of Naples, where (un)doing is presented through Andrew Benjamin as a productive conception of urbanity; one in which porous architectures are (un)done, drawn through one another, in a constructive overwriting founded in the immediacy of the city.


1

page

2

“architecture should be seen not as a summary of totalities but rather as an open collection of fragments assembled to… produce a world that is recognisably unreal but ordered, where the technology of architecture reveals the reality being simultaneously surveyed and designed…” 1

“City Fragments: Neapolitan Porosities is the second in a series of studios exploring cities and themes framed by the idea of the ‘fragment’. This brief sets out the themes and agenda for the studio, and offers potential methodologies and frames by which to develop projects and theses for Napoli (Naples). It aims to instigate both the development of representational and spatial strategies for and deriving from the specific conditions of Napoli, and to encourage the development of architectures that emerge in response to a range of key themes relating to the intersection of architecture and landscape. It offers entry ways into thinking about Napoli, about the specificities of this city and its landscape, and about architecture and the city more broadly.” 2

The studio will pursue design-research methodologies to develop theses of ‘porous’ architectural speculations–to consider the interplay of porosities and to explore the implications of thinking of architecture as porous–for Napoli, a ‘porous’ city of fragments.3

1. Marco Frascari, 1985. “Carlo Scarpa in Magna Graecia: The Abatellis Palace in Palermo.” AA Files. Vol.9: 9.2. Chris French and Maria Mitsoula, City Fragments: Neapolitan Porosities, Project Brief: Vol. 1, Edinburgh School of Architecture & Landscape Architecture, September 2019. p. ii. t3. Chris French and Maria Mitsoula, City Fragments: Neapolitan Porosities, Studio Overview, Edinburgh School of Architecture & Landscape Architecture, August 2019. p. 2.

city

fra

gm

ents

: n

eapo

lita

n p

orr

osi

ties

Setti

ng up

them

atic c

ues a

nd

a fra

mew

ork f

or in

terv

entio

n wi

thin

the c

ity.

preface / studio agenda

Brief 1: Animate Drawings(Representing porosity)Studio Leaders:Dr Chris French & Dr Maria Mitsoula

MArch (Modular Pathway) 2019-20Programme Director: Adrian Hawker

City Fragments: NEAPOLITAN porosities

This content downloaded from 146.199.139.113 on Sun, 15 Sep 2019 09:08:15 UTCAll use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

figure 1.Imagery sourced from studio brief.

page

4ch

apte

r titl

e / p

age

title

(un)doing thresholds / thesis abstract

one in which porous architectures are (un)done, drawn through one another in a constructive overwriting founded in and based on the immediacy of the city.


Making space for figures not to guard thresholds, (this would be anathema to Benjamin’s description of the threshold), but to inhabit them; they are not policemen responsible for borders (real or perceptual). Rather they maintain the threshold, extend the spaces between things, providing both separations from and thickenings of the spaces of the city.

Reading Walter Benjamin’s descriptions of cities, Graeme Gilloch notes Benjamin’s recurrent use of the terms ‘ruin’, ‘labyrinth’ and ‘theatre’. If Benjamin’s Berlin, Gilloch suggest, is the labyrinth, his Naples is “the perpetual ruin, the home of the nothing-new” where “the cultural merges into the natural landscape, becoming indistinguishable.” 4

But this, as Gilloch subsequently notes, is to simplify Naples. In this merging of culture and nature—what Benjamin might describe as an interpenetration, a porosity—the city becomes labyrinthine. Boundaries blur and territories bleed, definitions lose their definition, terms are re-determined. These processes, as Benjamin and Lacis observe, are performed in the city, “buildings are used as a popular stage.” 5 The theatrical, the ruinous and the labyrinthine themselves, co-existent, porous conditions of Naples.

‘(Un)doing Thresholds’ explores the temporalities and architectonic specificities of porous conditions in Naples, a place in which (un)doing is—as described by Andrew Benjamin—a process vital to the formation of the city,

4. Graeme Gilloch, Myth & Metropolis: Walter Benjamin and the City. Cambridge: Polity Press,1996, p. 26.5. Walter Benjamin and Asja Lacis, “Naples” in Reflections: Essays, Aphorisms, Autobiographical Writings edited by Peter Demetz, 163-173. New York: Schocken Books, 2007 (1978), p. 167.

naples is“th

e perpetual ruin, th

e ho

me o

f the n

oth

ing

-n

ew” w

here “th

e cultural merg

es into

the n

atural lan

dscape, beco

min

g in

distin

guish

able.”4

figure 2.Proposed Axonomteric Field Drawing.(originally drawn at 1:1000)

[(un)doing thresholds: (door / ways to new neapolitan practice(s)]Napoli is re-figured, the city is ‘(un)done’ by thetic intervention that culminates in new ‘field conditions’. ‘Threshold connections’ are opened up across a conception of the city that performs interpenetrative conditions of porous architecture(s) and their relationships through time and across space. The Santa Trinità delle Monache holds these urban gestures in place and creates a new metropolitan axis upon which the city is ‘hinged’. It opens up to wider sequencing of the city that is punctuated by porous sites which are drawn into play by the thesis. They contribute towards a porous re-making of the city; themselves door / ways to new Neapolitan practice(s).

[ 1:10

00 ]

TEC

TON

IC A

SSEM

BLA

GE(

S) :

PRO

POSE

D F

IELD

CO

ND

ITIO

N(S

)(a

xono

met

ric(

s) to

scal

e)

(U

n)d

oin

gT

HR

ES

HO

LD

SD

OO

R/

WA

YS

t

o

NE

W

N

EA

PO

LI

TA

N

PR

AC

TI

CE

(S

)

LegendDoor / Ways Through the CityA. Vico ParadisoB. Via Pasquale ScuraC. Via S. Lucia a MonteD. Scala MontesantoE. Funicolare MontesantoF. Piazza Montesanto

LegendPropositional Territories1. ‘Into & Out of Everyday Thickness(es)’ a. ‘Live / Work’ b. ‘Bath House’2. ‘(In)Between Urban Thickness & Void’ a. ‘Gallery’ b. ‘Library’

3. * Santissima Trinita delle Monache4. Parco Spagnoli5. ‘Il Campetto’(Quartieri Spagnoli)6. ‘le Porta della Citta’ (Quartieri Spagnoli)7. ‘Dentro le Mura’ (Quartieri Spagnoli)8. Ex Mercato di S. Anna di Palazzo (Quartieri Spagnoli)

9. Oratorio di Santa Martia della Fede’(Centro Storico)10. Piazzetta Nilo (Centro Storico)11. * Monastero di Santa Chiara12. * Monastero di Certosa di San Martino13. * Castel Sant’Elmo

G. Mercato PignaseccaH. Via ToledoI. Corso Vittorio EmanueleJ. Vico TofaK. Vico Lungo MontecalvarioL. Piazza della Carita

M. Murales PudiciziaN. Piazza MontecalvarioO. Piazza Portacarrese a MontecalvariP. Piazza Trieste e TrentoQ. Piazza del PlebiscitoR. Piazza Dante

S. Via TrubunaliT. Via San Biagio dei LibraiU. Piazza del Gesu NuovoV. Piazza San Domenico Maggiore

A N I M A T ED R A W I N G ( S )


* Centro Storico

* Montesan

to

* Vomero

* Castel Sant’Elmo

* Certosa di San Martino


* Funicolare Montesanto

* Scala Montesanto

* SS Trinita delle Monache

* ‘Dentro le Mura’

* ‘Il Campetto’

* Urban Gateway

* Urban Garden

* Urban Garden

* Urban Landmark

* Urban Gateway


* Murales Pudicizia


* Urban Viewpoint

* Urban Viewpoint

* Parco Spagnoli

* ‘Il Campetto’


+ Corso Vitto

rio Emanuele

+ Via Toledo

1.

1a.

2a.

2b. 1b.

2.

+ Via Pignasecca

+ Via Domenico Capitelli


* Piazza Dante

* Piazza

Montesanto

* Orato

rio di Santa

Maraia de

lla Fede


+ Vico 2° M

ontecalvario



+ Vico Paradiso

Existing Metropolitan Directional Axis


Proposed ‘Hinged’ Metropolitan Directional Axis

(Un)doing T resholds; Door / Ways to New Neapolitan Practice via Urbact 2nd Chance ‘W

aking Up the Sleeping Giants’

‘ Into & Out of Everyday T icknes(es)’: Live/Work & Bath House

‘(In)Between Urban T ickness & Void’: Gallery & Public Library

Opening Extended Urban T reshold from ‘ Vico Tofa’ & Quartieri Spagnoli to SS Trinita delle Monache

Engaging with & Entering Into Cyop & Kaf ’s ‘Operative’ Street Art Field Condition from Quartieri Spagnoli

Opening of Urban ‘M

arket T reshold’ with Mercato Pignasecca

Opening of ‘Urban T reshold(s)’ into Santissima Trinità delle Monache

E

xten

ded

Visu

al T

resh

old

with

City

View

s to

‘Mt.

Vesu

vius’

Extended Visual T reshold Up & Along ‘Vico Tofa’

Wider Urban ‘Sequencing’ of Urban Gardens & Cloisters Across Napoli

(Un)doing a ‘Field’ of Existing Urban ‘Ruins’ that Open & Enter into a Wider Urban ‘Field Condition’

Re-Conf guring or (Un)doing a Contemporary Spatial Practice of Commoning to Engage with Municipal Strategic Development

Site(s) Open / Receptive to the (Un)doing of ‘Performative Constr

uction

’

Site(s) Open / Receptive to the (Un)doing of ‘Performative Construction’

Opening(s) of Piazza & Piazzetta Punctuate a Slowness of Movement as T reshold(s) within the ‘T ickness’ of an Otherwise Dense Urban Field

5

page

6(u

n)d

oin

g t

hre

sho

lds

Door

/ Way

s to

New

Neap

olita

nPr

actic

e(s)

; mak

ing-co

mm

on &

m

akin0

in-co

mm

on

In such an architecture, spaces become thresholds to other spaces, gathering people into collectivities in a manner that enables a form of possession of space in which an experience of Naples is constructed where the social politic evades the rigidities and restrictions of bureaucracy and antiquity. An operative tectonic language of performativity and mobility, extends, encloses, makes present and gathers spaces between things. It presents the city in a way that no longer offers up spaces bounded by pure interior and exterior, but rather as a continuous and responsive sequence of urbanity.

Through a methodological commoning—a making-common and a making-in-common—(Un)doing Thresholds brings disparate sites and functions into relation. As an ongoing piece of research by design, the thesis presents a collection of interventions across the city. These sites look to Santissima Trinita delle Monache, an abandoned monastery on the hill above Montesanto, creating Door / Ways to New Neapolitan Practice(s) through social amenities for residents of the Quartieri Spagnoli.

The proposals are curated to be read together as a coherent body of work towards an overarching thesis under shared authorship. They are however composed of components within such a framework that explore elements of the enquiry more explicitly with reference to the specificities of particular programme(s) and/or scale(s). In this sense, the set of proposals that the thesis offers for the Santissima Trinita delle Monache may be approached holistically as one response to the site, or de-constructed as works that pertain to the work of two pairs of authors with specifically domestic or institutional oriented focuses, or as works under singular authorship within those pairs that are construed more definitively by programme.

*the document explores the ‘porosities’ of this working methodology further under the title heading ‘Methodological Commoning’ in the ‘Fields’ chapter.

A R

ES

PO

NS

IVE

SE

QU

EN

CE

OF

NE

AP

OL

ITA

N U

RB

AN

ITY

figure 3.Culmination of a thetic animation of gestural proposition(s) for the site.

7

page

8

ANIMATE DRAWING;Provides the grounds for the gesture of drawing and recording conditions of the ongoing enquiry to become a porous register of its architectures and their relationships through time and across space. It allows porosities to be drawn and re-drawn through each other by which ‘Animate Drawing’ becomes a way to represent porosity assumed by the thesis both in its making (methodologically) and as made (tectonically).

PERFORMATIVECONSTRUCTION;Is seen as a way of holding speculations of porosity on and in the city and are articulated as explorations of an architecture emerging from the thesis. They are moments at/in which the gestures of ruin, labyrinth and theatre (porous conditions of the thesis) are (un)done and re-framed as spatial, material and architectural thetic devices. In this way Performative Constructions operate (perform) to reveal (construct) a tectonic language inherent of the thesis and of the city.

TECTONIC ASSEMBLAGE;Manifests in the composition of strategies and fabrication of architectures that are held at the centre of a reading of the city (un)done by the thesis. They employ the tectonic language established by the overarching enquiry to produce architectures with the material, functional, formal and technological complexities of the porous. As such, Tectonic assemblages present a conception of porosity and articulate the specificities of this conception (be they ruinous, labyrinthine or theatrical) by means of architectural proposition.

figure 4.Still taken from ‘Animate Drawing’ construction sequence projection.

The thesis, and as such this document, works with, and refers to three key thematic frameworks offered up by the design studio. These have been taken on, challenged and re-defined by the thesis and as productive constructs for its ongoing development. Each can be identified as an ‘act’ and/or ‘output’ of the thesis and are determined as follows;

The following document is organised to present a comprehensive understanding of the process(es) and conditions which lead to the work(s) produced under the thesis (Un)Doing Thresholds. It describes various architectural proposals and interventions across a variety of scales and and reflects upon the methodologies and modes of practice employed in the development of the thesis.

ME

TH

OD

OLO

GIC

AL

PR

AC

TIC

E(S

)

(un)

doin

g th

resh

olds

/ m

etho

dolo

gica

l pra

ctic

e(s)

(un)doing thresholds / methodological practice(s)

page

10

9

(un)

doin

g th

resh

olds

/ th

etic

voc

abul

ary

The chapter titles refer to these terminologies to describe moments of these architecture(s) and the way they came in being as part of the wider investigations. This thetic vocabulary can be considered in architectural and/or methodological contexts and manifests as follows;

Other, more specific working methodologies emerged as the thesis developed. These are folded into the discussions within the document which is structured around key terminology that together construct an interplay of porosities and explore the implications of the way in which (Un)Doing Thresholds considers its architecture(s) porous.

TH

ET

ICV

OC

AB

UL

AR

Y

page

10

POROSITY;‘A dynamic social, material and/or spatial condition of Naples established by the thesis to constitute of three interpenetrative fragments in ‘ruin’, ‘labyrinth’ and ‘theatre’ and which operate to create ‘openings’ across ‘fields’ of ‘thresholds’.

THREHSOLD(S); ‘The architectonic components and adjoining space(s) that contribute to, and are immediately affected by, the theatrical performance or mobility of an architecture.’

OPENING(S);‘An architecture or spatial gesture that performs or constructs an availability or inherent capacity to advance.’

FIELD(S) ;‘The spaces and/or sites that constitute the regions bound into territories affected by or associated with a particular threshold.’

RUIN; ‘The memory, or remnants of an architecture that facilitates the performance or agency of a given theatre.’

LABYRINTH;‘The register of a means of connectivity between architectures and/or fields that at once disconnects someone through the journey or experience of its discovery.’

THEATRE; ‘The mobility or agency of an architecture to change, choreograph or calibrate the quality of a space.’

figure 5.Still taken from ‘Animate Drawing’ construction sequence projection.

(un)doing thresholds / thetic vocabulary

[(un)doing thresholds: (door / ways to new neapolitan practice(s)]Napoli is re-figured, the city is ‘(un)done’ by thetic intervention that culminates in new ‘field conditions’. ‘Threshold connections’ are opened up across a conception of the city that performs interpenetrative conditions of porous architecture(s) and their relationships through time and across space. The Santa Trinità delle Monache holds these urban gestures in place and creates a new metropolitan axis upon which the city is ‘hinged’. It opens up to wider sequencing of the city that is punctuated by porous sites which are drawn into play by the thesis. They contribute towards a porous re-making of the city; themselves door / ways to new Neapolitan practice(s).

[ 1:10

00 ]

TEC

TON

IC A

SSEM

BLA

GE(

S) :

PRO

POSE

D F

IELD

CO

ND

ITIO

N(S

)(a

xono

met

ric(

s) to

scal

e)

LegendDoor / Ways Through the CityA. Vico ParadisoB. Via Pasquale ScuraC. Via S. Lucia a MonteD. Scala MontesantoE. Funicolare MontesantoF. Piazza Montesanto

LegendPropositional Territories1. ‘Into & Out of Everyday Thickness(es)’ a. ‘Live / Work’ b. ‘Bath House’2. ‘(In)Between Urban Thickness & Void’ a. ‘Gallery’ b. ‘Library’

3. * Santissima Trinita delle Monache4. Parco Spagnoli5. ‘Il Campetto’(Quartieri Spagnoli)6. ‘le Porta della Citta’ (Quartieri Spagnoli)7. ‘Dentro le Mura’ (Quartieri Spagnoli)8. Ex Mercato di S. Anna di Palazzo (Quartieri Spagnoli)

9. Oratorio di Santa Martia della Fede’(Centro Storico)10. Piazzetta Nilo (Centro Storico)11. * Monastero di Santa Chiara12. * Monastero di Certosa di San Martino13. * Castel Sant’Elmo

G. Mercato PignaseccaH. Via ToledoI. Corso Vittorio EmanueleJ. Vico TofaK. Vico Lungo MontecalvarioL. Piazza della Carita

M. Murales PudiciziaN. Piazza MontecalvarioO. Piazza Portacarrese a MontecalvariP. Piazza Trieste e TrentoQ. Piazza del PlebiscitoR. Piazza Dante

S. Via TrubunaliT. Via San Biagio dei LibraiU. Piazza del Gesu NuovoV. Piazza San Domenico Maggiore

A N I M A T ED R A W I N G ( S )


* Centro Storico

* Montesan

to


* Funicolare Montesanto

* Scala Montesanto


* Urban Gateway

* Urban Garden

* Urban Garden

* Urban Landmark

* Urban Gateway


* Murales Pudicizia


* Urban Viewpoint

* Urban Viewpoint

* Parco Spagnoli

* ‘Il Campetto’

+ Corso Vitto

rio Emanuele

+ Via Toledo

1.

1a.

2a.

2b. 1b.

2.

+ Via Pignasecca

+ Via Domenico Capitelli


* Piazza Dante

* Piazza

Montesanto

* Orato

rio di Santa

Maraia de

lla Fede



+ Vico Paradiso



Proposed ‘Hinged’ Metropolitan Directional Axis

(Un)doing T resholds; Door / Ways to New Neapolitan Practice via Urbact 2nd Chance ‘W

aking Up the Sleeping Giants’

‘ Into & Out of Everyday T icknes(es)’: Live/Work & Bath House

‘(In)Between Urban T ickness & Void’: Gallery & Public Library

Opening Extended Urban T reshold from ‘ Vico Tofa’ & Quartieri Spagnoli to SS Trinita delle Monache

Engaging with & Entering Into Cyop & Kaf ’s ‘Operative’ Street Art Field Condition from Quartieri Spagnoli

Opening of Urban ‘M

arket T reshold’ with Mercato Pignasecca

Opening of ‘Urban T reshold(s)’ into Santissima Trinità delle Monache

E

xten

ded

Visu

al T

resh

old

with

City

View

s to

‘Mt.

Vesu

vius’

Extended Visual T reshold Up & Along ‘Vico Tofa’

Wider Urban ‘Sequencing’ of Urban Gardens & Cloisters Across Napoli

(Un)doing a ‘Field’ of Existing Urban ‘Ruins’ that Open & Enter into a Wider Urban ‘Field Condition’

Re-Conf guring or (Un)doing a Contemporary Spatial Practice of Commoning to Engage with Municipal Strategic Development

Site(s) Open / Receptive to the (Un)doing of ‘Performative Constr

uction

’

Site(s) Open / Receptive to the (Un)doing of ‘Performative Construction’

Opening(s) of Piazza & Piazzetta Punctuate a Slowness of Movement as T reshold(s) within the ‘T ickness’ of an Otherwise Dense Urban Field

page

12

METHODOLOGICAL‘COMMONING’Though collectively, as previously alluded to, the design research put forth by this design report is a result of a joint investigation and should be accredited to all parties, there are two pairs of proposals that are presented in this report under the (Un)Doing Thresholds thetic enquiry.

They are each attributed to different authors, engage with each other in numerous ways and can be characterised as follows;

Project 1; ‘Into & Out of Everyday Thickness(es)’

a; Live / Work (Vico Paradiso) b; Bath House (Il Campetto)

Project 2; ‘(In)Between Urban Thickness & Void’

a; Gallery (Via Pasquale Scura) b; Library (Via S. Lucia a Monte)

*The works of these sub-enquires is interspersed to be presented coherently as one piece of research by design, to understand the nature of these proposals more explicitly as respective projects by author, please refer to the full folio appendix.

figure 6.Proposed Axonomteric Field Drawing.(originally drawn at 1:1000)

13

page

14

into and out of everydaythickness (es )

Performing densities of domesticity for the Neapolitan everyday.

Together, the proposals fold into and out of each other, creating a series of thresholds connections that overwrite the exiting site as a ‘ruinous’ condition of the city and which become (un)done to promote the uncertainty and dislocation of the ‘labyrinth’. ‘Theatrical’ skins perform to choreograph spatial conditions and ambiguities that operate to the specificities within the fields in which the ‘bassi’, workshop and bathhouse function.

[into & out of everyday thicknes(es): (un)doing skins & passage(s)]As a re-configuration of the ‘labyrinthine’ qualities of the ‘Vicolo’ in the Quarters, the proposals aim to create ‘Threshold Connections’ and ‘Spatial Relationships’ that are open to exploration. ‘Theatrical Skins and Screens’ of timber, hung stone, and perforated metal sheets become ‘Performative Nodes’ that control, extend or block passages within and across the two proposals. Folding spaces ‘into’ and ‘out’ of each other, Thresholds are ‘(un)done’ to promote the uncertainty and dislocation of the labyrinth while the theatrical skins perform to choreograph spatial conditions and ambiguities within the fields in which the ‘bassi’, workshops and bathhouse function.

[ 1:20

0 & 1:

500 ]

TEC

TON

IC A

SSEM

BLA

GES

(S)

: C

OM

POSI

TE T

HET

IC D

ECO

NST

RUC

TIO

N D

RAW

ING

(axo

nom

etri

c(s)

to sc

ale)

T E C T O N I cA S S E M B L A G E ( S )

(U

n)d

oin

gT

HR

ES

HO

LD

SD

OO

R/

WA

YS

t

o

NE

W

N

EA

PO

LI

TA

N

PR

AC

TI

CE

(S

)

LegendLive/ Work (Urban / Public Gestures)1. ‘Urban Gateway’ to Workshop(s) & Public Pool(s)2. ‘Urban Gateway’ to Priavte Baths & Lime Garden3. Urban Lime Garden4. ‘Urban Garden’; Domestic Lime Terrace5. Dive Pool Spectator Courtyard Garden

LegendPublic Pools & Private Bath HouseA. ‘Theatrical’ Skin; Opening to ‘Pools & Specator’s CourtyardB. ‘Theatrical’ Skin; Opening to ‘Pools & vico paradisoC. ‘Urban Gateway’ to Public Pools & Private Baths D. ‘Theatrical’ Skin; Opening to Dive Pool Spectator’s CourtyardE. Threshold [bridge link to Unit B (*see plans for unit breakdown)]

F. Threshold [staircase link to Unit A]G. Portico [doorway to atrium; Unit A]H. Portico [doorway from private garden] I. Portico [doorway to apodeterium; changing rooms]J. Passageway to Pools & Private Baths

6. Internal ‘Vicolo’ Courtyard(s)7. Covered Street Courtyard8. Public Stair to ‘Urban Pavilion’9. Viewing Platform10. Public Stair down to Urban Lime Garden

LegendLive / Work (Domestic / Private Gestures)i. Domestic Opening to Perpedincular ‘Vicolo’ ii. Full Height Voided Courtyard(s) & Garden(s) (*anchor(s) to FF Internal ‘Vicolo’ Courtyards)iii. Flexible Live / Work Kitchen / Dining Room(s)iv. ‘Bassi’ Entrance(s)

C.

A.

D.

G.

H.

I.

B.

E.

F.

J.

[ 1: 50

0]‘I

NTO

& O

UT

OF

EVER

YD

AY

TH

ICK

NES

S(ES

)’ :

PRO

POSE

D S

ITE

AX

ON

OM

ETR

IC

* ‘Urban Gateway’



* Theatrical Skin

* Theatrical Skin

* Theatrical Skin

* Theatrical Node

* ‘Ruinous Tower’

* ‘Voided’ Courtyard

* ‘Existing ’ Ruin * ‘ Urban Garden’

* ‘ Urban Garden’

* ‘ Urban Garden’

* ‘ Vicolo ’ Terrace

* ‘ Vicolo ’ Terrace

* ‘ Vicolo’ Courtyard

* ‘Domestic Vicolo’ Opening

* ‘Domestic Vicolo’ Opening

* Isometric Frame

* Isometric Frame

* ‘Vertical Core’

* ‘Domestic Core’



* ‘Domestic Core’

* ‘Urban Threshold


+ Vico Paradiso

Primary Urban Directional Axis

Internal Street ‘Vicolo’

* ‘ Parco Spagnoli’

* Montesanto Station


* ‘ Il Campetto’

+ Vico Paradiso

1.

2.

3.4.

iii.

iv.

7.

6.

6.

iv.

iv.

iii.

i.

i.

ii.

ii.

5. 8. 9.

9.

10.

11.

Opening of Urban ‘Market T reshold’ with Mercato Pignasecca

Vertical Connection from Montesanto

Opening of ‘Urban T reshold(s)’ into Santissi

ma Trinità delle Monache

Waypoints of an Extended T reshold Field from Internal ‘Vicolo’ Courtyards to Parco Spagnoli

Threshold Connection to Pool(s)

Threshold Connection to Baths

Extended Field Opened fro

m ‘Vico

Tofa’ &

‘Quart

ieri S

pagn

oli’

Threshold Connection to Lime Garden

Threshold Connection to vico pradiso

‘Into & Out of Everyday Thickness(es)’ brings a density of the everyday to the Santissima Trinitnà delle Monache by re-establishing programme(s) of domesticity and bearing a thickness of the Spanish Quarters in a porous ‘(un)doing’ of the site where it encounters Vico Paradiso into Montesanto.

(un)

doin

g th

resh

olds

/pro

ject

1a

& b

figure(s) 7 & 8.Components taken from exploded axonoteric exhibiton drawings. (originally drawn at 1:200/500 respectively)

page

16

15

* jos

eph

co

ult

er

* eiri

ni

mak

arou

ni

* joseph cou lter48 Bridge Street, Christchurch, Dorset, BH23 [email protected]

* eirini mak arouni14 Athinas str. Vrilissia, Athens, Greece,[email protected] 6934388934

University of Edinburgh. Masters of Architecture (Distinction)(2018 - 2020)* AJ Student Prize Nomination 2020* RIAS Urban Design Prize Nomination 2020* RIAS Silver Medal Runner-up 2019* Commendation at Blueprint for the . Future Exhibit 2019* Chief Editor of Degree Show Publication(s) Hilton Barnfield Architects. Architectural Designer (2015 - 2018)Plymouth University. Associate Design Tutor(2014 - 2018)Highland Council Design Competition. Shortlisted Competition Entry (1 of 3)(2016 - 2017)RIBA Plymouth. Chair Elect(2015 - 2016)Plymouth University. BA Architecture (1st Class Honours)(2012 - 2015)* 1st year design prize * 2nd year design prize * 2nd year technology prize * 3rd year design prize

University of Edinburgh. Masters of Architecture (Distinction)(2018 - 2020)* AJ Student Prize Nomination 2020* RIAS Urban Design Prize Nomination 2020Flexus ltd (Greece). Architectural Designer (2017 - 2018)Oxford Brookes University. BA Architecture (Upper 2nd Class Honours)(2014 - 2017)Katerina Diakomidou & Nikos Haritos Architects (Greece). Architectural Intern (2013 - 2014)

A B O U T U S . . .

Door / Ways to New Neapolitan Practice(s)

17

‘(In)Between Urban Thickness and Void’ responds to the public and institutional functionalities of the former monastery, reconfiguring these programmes in a contemporary rewriting of the southern side of the site, where the monastery complex meets the neighbouring Quartieri Spagnoli.

As a pair, the proposals put the terms of the thesis–Ruin, Labyrinth, Theatre–into practice, using them to determine and test programme and spatiality in an ‘(un)doing’ that challenges, produces and thickens thresholds within the site and outwards across the city. In response to their situation, the Gallery and Library employ an architectural language of void, thickness and performance at different scales, in an urban reconfiguration of the edge condition of the site.

( in )between urbanthickness and void

Performing new institutional urbanities for the city on stage.

page

18(un)doing thresholds /project 2a &

b

figure(s) 9 & 10.Components taken from exploded axonometric exhibition drawings. (originally drawn at 1:200/500 respectively)

19

page

20* k

aty

sid

wel

l

* kat

erin

a

sara

nti

* katy s idwel l6 Sambroke Square, London, EN4 [email protected]

* katerina saranti50/10 Lady Lawson Street, Edinburgh, EH3 [email protected]

Edinburgh University. Masters of Architecture (Distinction)(2018 - 2020)* AJ Student Prize Nomination 2020* RIAS Urban Design Prize Nomination 2020* RIAS Silver Medal Runner-up 2019* Featured in Blueprint for the Future Exhibit 2019 Edinburgh University Student Architecture Society. Treasurer(2019 - 2020)Squire and Partners. Architectural Designer(2017 - 2018)APE Architecture and Design. Architectural Designer(2016)University of Edinburgh. MA (Hons) Architecture (1st Class Honours)(2013 - 2017)

University of Edinburgh. Masters of Architecture (Distinction)(2018 - 2020)* AJ Student Prize Nomination 2020* RIAS Urban Design Prize Nomination 2020University of Edinburgh. MA (Hons) Architecture (Upper 2nd Class Honours)(2014 - 2018)GASS Architecture Studios (South Africa). Architectural Designer (2017)Potiropoulos+ Partners (Greece). Architectural Designer (2016)‘Hydra School Projects’ (Greece). Gallery Assistant(2012 - 2013)

A B O U T U S . . .


anim

ate

dra

win

g(s

)In

stall

atio

n of t

he ‘A

nim

ate

Draw

ing’

for c

ross

-stud

io

revie

w se

ries.

animate draw

ing(s) / installing porosity

... scan or click here for link through to full‘Thetic Film’ and ‘Animate Drawings’.

https://vimeo.com/user117340227

23

R E A D O N . . .


Walter Benjamin and Asja Lacis described Naples as a “porous” city, a city in which “building and action interpenetrate,” and architecture as the material “binding” of its indefinite “communal rhythm.” (Un)doing Thresholds develops proposals for Naples’ abandoned Santissima Trinità delle Monache which, following Benjamin and Lacis, fold urban gestures into lost interiors and domestic spaces into the city.

In this two-fold enfolding, the project engages Naples’ Department of Commons, which encourages communities to adopt neglected historic buildings, to explore what Eirini, Katy, Kat and Joe describe as a ‘methodological commoning’: a common-making and a making-in-common. Overlapping projected drawings and material studies enabled Eirini, Katy, Kat and Joe to develop a refined architecture of moving gateways and doorways, thick thresholds and domestic streets. Together these rich, intersecting spaces generate an urban-architectural figure that is both an intricate and sectionally-complex response to the abandoned monastery site, and which—in its careful curation of public and private programmes—puts forward an alternative to prolonged, function-driven municipal planning. Focusing on space not use as a guiding urban structure, and collective practices rather than the sub-

division of roles as a means of designing, (Un)doing Thresholds explores how architects might develop not only porous constructions but porous practices.

- Chris French & Maria Mitsoula (studio tutors)

...to continue reading the full edition of the thesis, please follow the adjacent link or QR code.

... scan or click here for link through to full ‘Design Report’ & supplementary package of ‘Portfolio Drawings’.

(un)doing thresholds / project testimonial

“ “

https://issuu.com/josephcoulter

http://issuu.com/josephcoulter

page

26

25

bibl

iog

raph

yW

orkin

g bib

liogr

aphy

of

refe

renc

ed so

urce

s use

d to

drive

an

ong

oing

thes

is.

Benjamin, Walter. One Way Street, London: Penguin, 2009.

Branzi, Andrea. “For a Post-Environmentalism: Seven Suggestions for a New Athens Charter” in Ecological Urbanism, edited by Mohsen Mostafavi & Gareth Doherty. Baden, 110-111. Switzerland: Lars Müllers Publishers, 2010.

Branzi, Andrea. “The Weak Metropolis” in Ecological Urbanism, edited by Mohsen Mostafavi & Gareth Doherty. Baden, 112-113. Switzerland: Lars Müllers Publishers, 2010.

Catacombe Di Napoli. “Catacombs of San Gennaro.” Accessed November 30, 2019. http://www.catacombedinapoli.it/en/places/catacombs-of-san-gennaro-naples#.

Cassano, Franco. “Southern Thought”, Thesis Eleven, 67(1), (Nov 2001), 1-10.

Cyop&Kaf. “Quore Spinato”. Cyop&Kaf, Accessed December 2, 2019, http://www.cyopekaf.org/en/qs/.

D’Acierno, Pellegrino. and Stanislao G. Pugliese, Delirious Naples: A Cultural History of the City of the Sun, edited by

Allen, Stan. Field Conditions Revisited. Long Island City, NY: Stan Allen Architect, 2010.

Allen, Stan. Points Lines: Diagrams and Projects for the City. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1999.

Allum, Percy. “The politics of town planning in post-war Naples”, Journal of Modern Italian Studies 8(4), (2003), 500-527.

Amin, Ash. and N. J. Thrift. Cities: Reimagining the Urban. Cambridge: Polity, 2002.

Benjamin, Andrew. “Porosity at the Edge: Working through Walter Benjamin’s Naples”, Architectural Theory Review, 10(1), (April 2012), 33-43.

Benjamin, Walter. and Asja Lacis. “Naples” in Reflections: Essays, Aphorisms, Autobiographical Writings edited by Peter Demetz, 163-173. New York: Schocken Books, 2007 (1978).

Benjamin, Walter. The Arcades Project edited by Rolf Tiedemann. Translated by Howard Eiland & Kevin McLaughlin. Harvard University Press, 1999.

Pellegrino D’Acierno and Stanislao G. Pugliese. New York: Fordham University Press, 2019.

Derrida, Jacques. Aporias: dying--awaiting (one another at) the “limits of truth.” Translated by Thomas Dutoit. Stanford University Press. California, 1993.

De Rosa, Simona and Luca Salvati. “Beyond a ‘side street story’? Naples from spontaneous centrality to entropic polycentricism, towards a ‘crisis city’”, Cities, 51 (Jan 2016), 74-83.

Domini, John. “Two Neighbourhoods, One Naples.” New York Times, September 14, 1997. https://www.nytimes.com/1997/09/14/travel/two-neighborhoods-one-naples.html.

Douglas, Carl. “Operative Drawing I: Miralles”, Diffusive Architectures, December 2, 2009, https://diffusive.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/operative-drawing-i-miralles/

Eisenman, Peter. “Introduction to Box 3” in Moving Arrows, Eros and Other Errors, London: Architectural Association Publications, 1986.

Faj, Ruth. “Understanding the ‘Fire Games of Napoli’”, Vice, January 2, 2018, https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/paqa5z/understanding-the-fire-games-of-napoli.

Flusser, Vilem. Gestures. Translated by Nancy Ann Roth. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2014.

Folle, Antonio. “Quartieri Spagnoli, a Napoli un campetto da calcio al posto del degrado.” Il Mattino, February 26, 2020. https://www.ilmattino.it/napoli/cronaca/quartieri_spagnoli_campo_calcio_area_abbandonata-5076525.html

French, Chris. and Maria Mitsoula. City Fragments: Neapolitan Porosities, Brief One: Animate Drawings (Representing Porosity), Project Brief: Vol. 1, Edinburgh School of Architecture & Landscape Architecture, September 2019.

French, Chris. and Maria Mitsoula. City Fragments: Neapolitan Porosities, Brief Two: Performative Constructions (Spatial Porosity), Project Brief: Vol. 2, Edinburgh School of Architecture & Landscape Architecture, October 2019.

French, Chris. and Maria Mitsoula. City Fragments: Neapolitan Porosities,

Brief Three & Four: Tectonic Assemblages (Material Porosity) / Thesis Closure, Project Brief: Vol. 3/4, Edinburgh School of Architecture & Landscape Architecture, January 2020.

French, Chris. and Maria Mitsoula. City Fragments: Neapolitan Porosities, Guidebook, Edinburgh School of Architecture & Landscape Architecture, September 2019.

French, Chris. and Maria Mitsoula. City Fragments: Neapolitan Porosities, Studio Overview, Edinburgh School of Architecture & Landscape Architecture, August 2019.

Galpin, Richard. “Erasure in Art: Destruction, Deconstruction, and Palimpsest” in Destruction: Documents of Contemporary Art Anthology edited by Sven Spieker. Whitechapel Gallery and MIT Press, 2017.

Gilloch, Graeme. Myth & Metropolis: Walter Benjamin and the City. Cambridge: Polity Press,1996.

Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays. Translated by. W. Lovvitt. (New York, Garldand Publishing Inc, 1997.

page

28

27

bibl

iog

raph

yW

orkin

g bib

liogr

aphy

of

refe

renc

ed so

urce

s use

d to

drive

an

ong

oing

thes

is.

Mastropaolo, Rino. “Il Segreto” dei writer Cyop & Kaf nei cinema di Napoli”, Napoli da Vivere, March 18, 2015, https://www.napolidavivere.it/2015/03/18/il-segreto-dei-writer-cyop-kaf-nei-cinema-di-napoli/.

Mazzeo, Giuseppe. “Naples”, Cities, 26(6), (Dec 2006), 363-376.

Nancy, Jean Luc. The Pleasure in Drawing, translated by P. Armstrong. New York: Fordham University Press, 2009.

Paetzold, Heinz. “Walter Benjamin and the Urban Labyrinth”, Filozofski Vestnik, 22(2), 2001, 111-126.

Pellet, Marcellin. Naples Contemporaine / Par Marcellin Pellet,... Paris, 1894.

Pérez Sánchez, Alfonso E., and Nicola Spinosa. Jusepe di Ribera: 1591-1652. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1992.

Racna Magazine. “Cyop & Kaf, Mostri Lunghi un Anno.” Racna Magazine, June 5, 2014. http://www.racnamagazine.it/cyopekaf-mostri-lunghi-un-anno/

Iovino, Serenella. “Bodies of Naples: Stories, Matter, and the Landscapes of Porosity” in Material Ecocriticism edited by Serenella Iovino and Serpil Oppermann, 97-113. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press, 2014.

Jackson, John. B. The Necessity for Ruins, and Other Topics. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1980.

Jansson, Andre. ““This Is Not Ruin Tourism”: Social Media and the Quest for Authenticity in Urban Exploration” in Ruin Porn and the Obsession with Decay edited by Siobhan Lyons, 217-234. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.

L’Assemblea Delle e Degli Abitanti di Santa Fede Liberata. A Partire dalla Nostra Esperienza di Bene Comune. Napoli: (Self-Published Manifesto), 2018.

Lyons, Siobhan. “Introduction: Ruin Porn, Capitalism, and the Anthropocene” in Ruin Porn and the Obsession with Decay edited by Siobhan Lyons, 1-10. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.

Mann, William “Inhabiting the Ruin: Works at Astley Castle”, first published in ASCHB Transactions, Vol.35 (2012).

Rompipalle. “I bassi”, Under the Neapolitan Son (Or, Kicked in the Shin: Naples and the Italian Experience to Tear Down your Tuscan Farmhouse Fantasy) February 15, 2007, http://undertheneapolitanson.blogspot.com/2007/02/i-bassi.html

Salter, Peter. Alvin Boyarsky, and Architectural Association. TS : Intuition & Process : [projects by Students under the Tutelage of Peter Salter]. Themes VI. London: Architectural Association, 1989.

Stavrides, Stavros. Common Space: The City as Commons. London: Zed Books, 2016.

Stavrides, Stavros. “Heterotopias and the Experience of Porous Urban Space” in Loose Space: Possibility and Diversity in Urban Life, edited by Karen A. Franck and Quentin Stevens, 174-92. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2006.

Stengel, Heiner. “Performativity, Sensuality, Temporary Interventions, Negotiation” in Porous City: From Metaphor to Urban Agenda edited by Sophie Wolfrum [and 6 others, 108-109. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2018.

Till, Jeremy. ‘Angels with Dirty Faces’, Scroope (University of Cambridge), 7, June 1995, 5-12.

URBACT. 2nd Chance Waking Up the Sleeping Giants: City of Naples Integrated Action Plan. Napoli: Comune di Napoli, 2018.

Waldheim, Charles. “Weak Work: Andrea Branzi’s “Weak Mtropolis” and the Projective Potential of an “Ecological Urbanism” in Ecological Urbanism, edited by Mohsen Mostafavi & Gareth Doherty. Baden, 115-121. Switzerland: Lars Müllers Publishers, 2010.

Whiteman, John. “Site Unscene – Notes on Architecture and the Concept of Fiction. Peter Eisenman: Moving Arrows, Eros and Other Errors.” AA Files, 12 (1986), 76-84.

Wigglesworth, Sarah. and Jeremy Till. The Everyday and Architecture, Chichester: Wiley, 1998.

Wolfrum, Sophie. “Still Here while Being There–About Boundaries and Thresholds,” in Porous City: From Metaphor to Urban Agenda, edited by. Sophie Wolfrum. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2018.

Following an interrogation of representational strategies for the interpenetrative porous conditions being R

uin, Labyrinth and Theatre, a spatial ‘field’ of intervention em

erges across the city from the ‘Quartieri Spagnoli’

to ‘Centro Storico’. Through shifting scales of an ‘Animate D

rawing’ process, propositional territories are

‘opened’; re-drawn and overw

ritten in an ‘(un)doing’ through ‘Performative Construction’ that takes

place in opening new conditions of ‘threshold’ across the city.


* SS Trinita della Monache


* ‘ Il Campetto ’

* Ex Mercato di S. Anna

* ‘ la Porte della Citta ’

* ‘ Dentro la Mura ’


* Piazza Dante





Primary Directional Axis

Vico Lungo Montecalvario

Vico Tofa


+ Via Toledo

+ Via Pignasecca

+ Via D

omenico Capitelli


+ Vico Tofa

+ Vico 2° Montecalvario

Re-Establish Connectivity with Parco Spagnoli

2nd Chance: Waking Up The Sleeping Giants

* Piazza Trieste e Trento

* Piazza del Plebiscito

* Centro Storico

* Oratorio di Santa Maria della Fede

* Piazzatta Nilo

+ Via Tribunali

Via San Biagio dei Librai

* Piazza S. Domenico Magiore

[ 1:1500 ]PERFORMATIVE CONSTRUCTION(S) :COMPOSITE METHODOLOGY DRAWING(section/elevation(s) to scale)

(Un)doingTHRESHOLDS

DOOR/WAYS to NEW NEAPOLITAN PRACTICE(S)

[(un)doing propositional territories: (threshold(s) to new field conditions]LegendD

oor / Ways Through the City

A. Via Toledo

B. Corso Vittorio Em

anueleC

. Vico TofaD

. Vico Lungo Montecalvario

E. Piazza della Carita

F. Piazza Montecalvario

LegendPropositional Territories1. Santissim

a Trinità della Monache

2. ‘Il Cam

petto’ (Quartieri Spagnoli) a. Football Pitch3. ‘le Porta della C

itta’ (Quartieri Spagnoli) a. ‘Bassi’ Food / D

rink ‘Kiosk(s)

4. ‘Dentro le M

ura’ (Quartieri Spagnoli)

a. ‘U

rban Gatew

ay’ & G

arden(s)5. Ex M

ercato di S. Anna di Palazzo (Quartieri Spagnoli) a. ‘U

rban Market Tow

er’6. O

ratorio di Santa Martia della Fede (Centro Storico)

a. ‘Curatorial Threshold’

b. ‘Com

mon G

oods Dining H

all’

7. * Monastero di Santa Chiara

8. * Funicolare Montesanto

G. Piazza Portacarrese a M

ontecalvarioH

. Piazza Trieste e TrentoI. Piazza del PlebiscitoJ. Piazza D

anteK

. Via TrubunaliTL Via San Biagio dei Librai

M. Piazza del G

esu Nuovo

N. Piazza San D

omenico M

aggiore

AN

IM

AT

ED

RA

WI

NG

(S

)

*chris french*maria mitsoula

(Un)Doing Thresholds explores the temporalities and architectonic specificities of these conditions where (un)doing is presented through Andrew Benjamin as a productive conception of urbanity; one in which porous architectures are (un)done, drawn through one another, in a constructive overwriting founded in the immediacy of the city.


Reading Walter Benjamin’s descriptions of cities, Graeme Gilloch notes Benjamin’s recurrent use of the terms ruin, theatre and labyrinth. If Benjamin’s Berlin, Gilloch suggest, is the labyrinth, his Naples is “the perpetual ruin, the home of the nothing-new” where “the cultural merges into the natural landscape, becoming indistinguishable.”

But this, as Gilloch subsequently notes, is to simplify Naples. In this merging of culture and nature—what Benjamin might describe as an interpenetration, a ‘porosity’—the city becomes labyrinthine. Boundaries blur and territories bleed, definitions lose their definition, terms are re-determined. These processes, as Benjamin and Lacis observe, are performed in the city, “buildings are used as a popular stage.” The theatrical, the ruinous and the labyrinthine themselves, co-existent, porous conditions of Naples.

Making space for figures not to guard thresholds, (this would be anathema to Benjamin’s description of the threshold), but to inhabit them; they are not policemen responsible for borders (real or perceptual). Rather they maintain the threshold, extend the spaces between things, providing both separations from and thickenings of the spaces of the city.

They bring disparate sites into relation (programmatically, materially and spatially). Together, they look from the city toward Santissima Trinita delle Monache, the abandoned monastery on the hill above Montesanto.

[ 202

0 ]C

ITY

FR

AG

MEN

TS:

NEA

POLI

TAN

PO

ROSI

TIES