Are We Still Modern?
CC Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives 2.5 Switzerland:
You are free to use, copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in unchanged form for any legal and non-commercial purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
Sánchez García, José María
Was modernism the last important epoch in the history of architecture? Or is a similarly revolutionary, all-encompassing movement currently in the making? What is it that provokes discussion today? Modernism continues to cast its shadow over the present, regardless of whether we try to escape its influence or make a stand against it. Is it even possible to flee from this shadow? By means of postmodernism, as was once the case? By retreating to a new historicism like we do today? Or might the real interest be found in once again picking up modernism’s trail? Might this lead to undiscovered sources of inspiration or might the same apply to modernism as Frank Zappa once said about jazz: modernism isn’t dead, it just smells funny? Did modernism choke on its own dogmatism, or did it have the life sucked from it by all of the bloodless and spiritless copying? In this series of departmental lectures in the 2016 spring semester, three architects and one architectural theorist will specifically address what has happened to the traces modernism left behind. For them, modernism is not a dark shadow to be avoided but a source of inspiration as well as a potentially fruitful source of friction.
 So, dear guests, dear colleagues and dear Jose, before I introduce our guests I would make a very short remark because the lecture today should have been the third one in the series of department lectures. Unfortunately today it's the first one because two of the four invited speakers cancelled their lecture, Eduardo Sotomore and Kenneth Frampton, and they cancelled it at the time when it was too late to invite other guests. I was very disappointed and I would like to apologize to those who came in vain. But now the positive all the more I'm very glad to welcome Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia. He is here and it's even better. He's not only here this evening but every week. Since February he's the visiting professor at our department and I think it's a great gain and a big luck for our department for the students of course as well. Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia is by far the youngest guest in the lecture series and I guess that his relation to modernism isn't the same as ours. The older generation who was raised with modernism as a universal doctrine. It's his love to geometry that made me speculate about his relation to the topic of the series, always still modern. But who is this young architect who dares to build a circle in the two days time? A circle the most absolute of all forms. It needs more courage to set a clear geometrical form than a free shaped one. An absolute geometrical form can be judged stricter than others. It can be judged on a clear and absolute scale. A free form first has to please whereas a geometrical one has a precise meaning and brings the whole history of architecture into play. Who then is this fearless architect? Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia was born in 1975 in Don Benito in the province Extremadura. Comes therefore his carriage. This Spanish region was the native country of the conquerors of the new world. From there they departed, there they returned. One can see this still today in the splendid architecture of their old palaces. I know this landscape well. I can't count the times I made the journey through the Portuguese border through endless scenery and their atorate sun. For hours and hours, nothing than cork oaks, in their shade, small black peaks. Probably the only happy peaks in the world. And then suddenly a lonesome building comes inside. A small arena, white and red, carefully embedded in the yellow earth. A perfect circle. The round form belongs here to the typology and this old to the function of the bullfight. If anybody wishes to learn more about the fascinating architecture of the Plaza de Toros, the Spanish architect Guillermo Vasquez Consuegra has dedicated to it a wonderful book with the same title. Jose, you know all this much better than me. Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia has graduated in 2002 at EZAN, the Polytechnic University of Madrid. In 2006 he founded his own office in Madrid. Soon he received different prices and distinctions. There are so many that I can only mention a few of them. 2009 he received the architecture review award of emerging architecture, the design Vanguard award, the Philippe Rotier award, all three in the same year. 2011 follows the first prize for young architects at the Spanish Biennale and the first prize at the Latin American Biennale. He was on the shortlist of the Mies van der Rohe award, the Piranesi prize in Rome and many others. From 2007 to 2008 he received the scholarship from the Royal Academy of Spain in Rome. He taught and gave lecture at different universities at Cornell, at the Riba Institute, at the Navarra Architecture School and he was associate professor at EZAN at the Polytechnic University in Madrid. In 2014 he received the BSI Swiss Architecture Award and was guest professor at the Uzi Mendrizio. In a few weeks he will initiate his contribution to the Venice Biennale. Why I have mentioned the landscape of Extremadura so in detail, it's not only the place Jose Maria Vospaun, it's also the place where he has built his first most important works. The environment of the Roman Catholic, of the Roman Diana Temple in Merida, the Sports Innovation Center in El Anillo, El Anillo means ring in Spanish in Granadilla, the Rohing Center in Alanque and last year an industrial building for electrical elements in Don Benito. When I did my internship in Spain there were two positions among the architects. Either one was a follower of Alejandro de la Sota or of Francisco Javier Sainz de Risa. Both with big influence on generations of architects. If I tried to place Jose Maria Sports Center in between the fundamentally different positions of the two masters, it would lay somewhere in the middle. The archaic gesture of the geometric form recalls Sainz de Aizos, the Uisa's strong pictorial language. The non-pathetic character and the lightness of construction however refers to the de la Sota's Mesian minimalism. Wherever we place Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia's work, his reference to modernism has the rationalistic spirit of the Latin modernism which was less ideological than the Norse one and merged easily with traditional architecture. Spanish architecture had to integrate so many different cultures along its history. Another piece in the puzzle is the topic of Jose Maria's doctoral thesis. It's here. It's about the architecture of the city of Bath in England, another circle. After all these evidences, I'm not so sure anymore if the references to modernism that I implied are still valid. Should I better refer to other ones, to Palladio maybe? One thing is sure. Whether we take the Renaissance architects, the classicists in Bath or even the master of modernism, the source is always the same. It lies in the beginning of architecture in its elementary prototypes. Coincidentally or not, Stonehenge is in the neighborhood of Bath as well. So Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia's work is maybe more than anything else an answer to the question how to transform universal themes through history and confront them with an existing territory and vice versa. Please welcome Jose Maria Sanchez. Can you hear me? It's amazing. Thank you so many thanks to Professor Espiro. They were so kind of your words. I don't know if I will try to do as soon as I can, but I think the words were much better than our work in my opinion. Anyway, from me it's a great pleasure to be here today, to be teaching during this semester in Eteha. It's a great experience. It's a beautiful opportunity and I hope some of our students, I don't know if some of them are here, but I hope we will manage to do a good course. I will try to explain how we work. Of course our projects are how talk, explain what we are, always in the studio. We talk to the students in that way. I think your project has to be your visiting car. So how your project is an extension of yourself. I believe that architecture is coming from the person itself. I suppose some of your experience, your childhood, your interest, of course, should be always on your work. In that way I will try to explain our work and I will try to explain that term, so that it is that question that we have on the table when we are working and when we are reading and when we are writing also. It's important to understand in that context, like I explained today, our work. So thinking of modernity, I was writing some words. Let's say that seven strategies are following our work and I hope some of them will be, well, I hope you will understand them through our work. Concentrate and release, dynamic centrality, symmetry per compensation, gravity as balance, linear configurations, technology as device, theoretical practice. Our first work, it was this space for giant creation. It was a water tank and of course a water tank didn't have any entrance, any gate. So we made a hole, the first hole for coming in and after it we made different holes. So many perforations as we need. Holes on the roof for leading light coming inside, holes around the thickness walls, the thick walls for passing from one part of the tank to the other part for crossing the main walls and even walls. Right? No. That's a problem. Please. No, it's okay. It's okay. It's okay. Yeah? It's okay. Yeah? It's okay. My English is not so good so it's better to look at the images. Okay. So somehow our strategy was very clear. We didn't have too many, let's say we took a decision and we were working with the geometry trying to give a new use to this old water tank. This was the original plan. You can see the two different water tanks and this tower with the gene systems on and we just try to live free all this void almost untouched just changing the conditions by this system, by this number of different perforations in every wall, even some staircase coming up to the roof, different gates to have the possibility to divide and at the same time we just concentrate all the program, let's say the server area with some photography picture developers and music cabins and different areas. We just concentrate all there and we release as empty as possible the rest of the plant. This was the only decision we took on this space. So it was this persistence building and all different holes. We just systemized all these situations. So in the end we had to paint it in white. It was like that. They needed a very neutral space for, I don't know, I was playing in the beginning for young creation, for painting, for dancing, for everything that young people could do on the space and the light becomes something very powerful. Suddenly it changed completely. It offered the character of this element. Just some furniture. And this is an interesting point. When the building starts to reuse, when this background, very neutral background made by an old architecture that has been changed, used by a new strategy, suddenly become alive. I really like this picture. You can, it is a picture but it's almost talking about a section. You have four different situations that have to be with the two, with the four base, dome base, no, made and how in each space is going on a different activity. So without having a real need to divide in a physically way different spaces, we managed to organize several activities at the same time. Even how the user started to customize the space. So let's say that this is not a coincidence that some years later when I started my PhD, I had all those questions in my mind. Somehow the same strategy applied to the first project I showed to you. It was a special one and I wanted to explain how I started. Somehow the same strategy was applied to this theoretical research. We are talking about the heavy PhD. And it came all of it from a sentence. A sentence that said never to be built on. Let's say that all this research starts with this old plan from the city of Bath in England. I could say that this is the sentence that forced and that preserved all this big field in front of this building during time. That sentence said that never to be built on. In my opinion, at least the hypothesis that the thesis tried to explain, establish, and a protection of the space and a protection at the same time of the building itself. So in the end, all the situation, it became a unique element. It is so important. This emptiness around the royal crescent, then the royal crescent itself, like a very compact, linear, but compact neoclassical building, a building we could say. In the 18th century, the city of Bath experiments a great growing due to the interest of the British high society in its hot waters. In this particular situation, the architect John Wood develops a unique architecture that based on speculation as a way to gain access to projects, six more ambitious aims. This extraordinary series of projects that they think they were doing by John Wood and his son during 60 years, in my opinion, it is only one building, all of it, that conforms Queen Square, King Circus, and royal crescent established the beginning of a new dealing typology that will extend throughout England. The way this architecture dialogues with the territory and the compactness of these constructions, searching for the maximum freedom of the public space, answer to a very singular way of thinking. When I realized we were working, I hope we are working on similar topics, like I would like to explain during the lecture. I would like to start explaining this building that somehow after winning it, it was the building that allowed me to start with the office. This is Merida, this is the temple of Vienna, more important Roman temple in Spain. All this was surrounding that it was nothing good, it was just some different plots of lands that have been void during different years. The question of the competition was to create a new building around the Roman temple and at the same time, of course, we understood that we had to give an answer to the fabric. It was a disaster, it was not a very new situation. We started trying to understand the different façades, different rare façades of houses and how this chaotic skyline could have a new audience. Here we can see some drawings from different, well, the recreation of archaeologists of how they thought this was this space in Roman time. For us, it was very important to realize that the only way that the Roman temple will get the right position was trying to answer to the old traces, to that old fabric that were not existing anymore, as you can see now. But in our opinion, they were still the importance around it. You can see how it was this Roman forum, also the city of Merida in Roman time with this very classic order of Cardus and the Gumanos. It was how the forum was on the heart of the city. Of course, how you can see on this engraving from the Renaissance period, the reason why the Roman temple is still there, it is just because another building, another layer was using some parts of it. I can touch it like that. We will see in a trip to Cordoba, the reason why the Mesquita in Cordoba is still there, it's just because a cathedral, a baroque cathedral was built inside of it. I think this image was very important for us to understand in which way we could dialogue with the Roman temple. So we started to apply different strategies that we understood that were necessary for creating a new surrounding for giving a new order to that void around the temple. So we started with that irregular border, trying to put order on it and in the end we got this shape. We were quite nervous because we didn't like it. We thought it was not a nice building. We didn't have a reference similar to it, but somehow it was the result of applying a strategy and if our basic laws were right, we should finish. The shape and this image is the result. After that we were working for several years because it took like three years before starting with the construction. In the end it was a period of six years where we were drawing, sizing. I went for a year to the Spanish Academy in Rome to study Roman architecture and the result of the project you have here. We have to deal with the chaos, with the anodine irregular border and with the regular order that has to be with all buildings. So I think that is the more important point that both geometries, a very regular geometry and a more or less a sorrow geometry gave in the end the result of a new shape, we could say. That mixture of geometry that I already explained were not answering to the actual and the contemporary fabric of the city, but it was really answering to that sort of situation. Let's say that overlapping traces with actual traces and the old ones have to deal and just from the situation we could answer to the project. So here you have a situation planned with the final solution where still you can recognize some Roman streets, but how in medieval period the street changed on the Roman side and suddenly we had even a street crossing outside, this one in front of us and we have to deal with that. So we have to change laws, we have to change some rules. We have to follow with the building over the street and we have to change the exactly geometry of the site. It was necessary because we were not answering to the existing site, to the site we were not answering to today, we were answering to a place from some years ago, from some thousand of years ago. Here you have the result, that is our project. Here you have, I hope you will recognize the museum of Rafael Monal, of course, and our building is answering to these old traces and not so much to the new ones. So we are just, we just get a new layer, a layer that's how it was not a building, we were not answering proper to the question of the competition. We were answering how to that old engraving, the old picture that reminds us why the Roman temple is there because this old Renaissance house was using its structure. So how we use again not the structure but the void, the old void that it was necessary to recuperate, to have again a good position for the temple and to reload somehow the fabric of the old marita. We started to work on model, we knew, which was a strategy, we knew our system but we were not sure about dimensions, about geometry that was after six years when we were already in construction. I really like these two images because you have just a plan from a model, a model made in the studio where you can recognize the final plan, the final structural plan. So they are not the same, I'm sure if you analyze it carefully, it's not the same shape but they are talking about the same. I think that is important. Maybe there are five years between these two documents but they are the same, but they are not the same shape. Okay, I will not explain the construction. So here you have again the same strategy that you could see in that small water tank where we release a big void and we just concentrate on the linear, very dense building that is answering to all the different situations and giving a new background, a new order to the Roman temple. Of course, it is a new public square, it is a new space to marry that but also we have to keep that archaeological character that the building has around. We work with the ground floor on the same material that we had just on Earth and we work with a white cement and concrete made by the white cement and the same sand that we have on the side. The building is just going on like a platform that keeps the different functions on it, functions that were not completely decided in the competition, they wanted to have the capacity to change it and just like a megastructure able to change time with two entrances, both of the edges and an open circulation around it. So in the end, of course, all the construction, the architecture that was already there still assists and we are not going to hide it. We just try to put order by geometry, we just try to give, like you can see in the work, we just try to give a new answer to Roman temple. Here you have this cantilever of five meters that create this platform that allow you to have a view of the temple and to have a view of all the different rooms that of course we keep it at the same position. Here you have this little street that is crossing outside like I already explained how the building is going over it, sorry, or even how the buildings, we left them in the same position and of course in the same situation that they were. We don't touch the persistence because that was part of the history, maybe not a very good one, but it is so important for us that the Roman temple is gone. So the building is just made of very basic material, just a big shadow all around it, important in Spain. On the ground floor, this square is open as possible so you can cross through the Roman temple like you did in Roman time. Well, these underground spaces were also kept in the same way, just leaving natural light to some rest and again the space changed completely when it, and it became alive when it is in use. Next project, this is a small pavilion, a Roman pavilion made on this site in front of a lake, and well this is a smaller scale project, but somehow still we were working with the same instrument. It was quite strange because the site was like that and it was a strange rule that forced us to use all the site, to use the geometry for your building. In the end, we didn't do like that, we just wanted to create a main room with that dimension, 21 meters plus 21, that will allow us to use the different canoes, different elements. The rest, this is just the area's interstitial spaces like it happened in the Roman temple, and those interstitial spaces are given the rest of uses, you can have it here, like bedrooms, some blessing rooms, and therefore keeping the canoes, well, some gymnasium, but the real thing we were doing was this big room, this kind of cover, a square where people were able to train with the canoeing, so in this section, this model you can understand the position of our building, that strange shape in the middle of nowhere, close to the lake, close to the water, and the city of Alange over it. So we thought that the building has to be a very low rise building, so the more interesting thing in the town that it was that views were not interrupted by our project. So we got this very classical section, we are talking just about a platform and this building over it, but important and interesting point is that the classical section is not working in a classical way. What I mean is that the structure that we have over the platform, it is not over it, it is, let's say you can see here, sorry very much, you have this different metal trash, metal trashes that are supporting all this big room behind it, so the structure, the heightness of the structure is necessary to have completely, to have all this open space completely free for work, for being using the different canoeing, so here you have section, the big room, of course connected with the outside area and interstitial spaces around it. Now we have some pictures of the construction where you can recognize a big square, a big area, and just technical plan of how that trash becomes the more important element in the project. If in the water tank we were just working with holes, here we were working with the structure and the structure should be strong enough not only to support and to hang, we could say, this big room behind it, but also to give the character and the entity to the building. So in the end this is our facade, not too much more, just this element and of course again when it starts to get in use it changes completely. Let's say that we have all the situations, different views, when we start to use that space, again we use that big shadow under the trash, under the ceiling, under this element, that at the same time it will produce the entrance of the building. Here you have a final image of the project. In the edge of the platform we didn't want to have any element. We just made a very longitudinal grade where the child can sit down, can be on the border, different. And they can see the competition, the training, everything. So we don't break the contact with the landscape. Here you can see of course this big trash is, allow us to entrance by this ramp, hanging on it, on them, and the big room with the different element. We wanted to have a very, I mean these people are exposed to the sun all day, just sailing, sorry, just rowing. So we thought here the lights should be very, very, very, nobody much light, the sun is almost not going in. And we wanted also to have a very low rise room. It's a big room but without a big dimension. Maybe the room is like this. So how is that kind of public space, again, open public space, release, whatever, no? It's a void. You enter us like that. Throw the structure. And this is the last image you are, like I explained to you, you had the possibility to sit on the edge. So I also think it's important when you have a commission or you win a small competition, you have to give something else that they are asking for. In the Roman temple they were asking for a building. And I think what we thought in that moment that it was more important, more important to think in the public space, in the facilities. And here's how we create a new square for this little village, where people can see it. I mean, it can be used even if the Roman center is closed or it's not in use. The next project is, the first time I explained it, is a factory, a factory that has to be with electrical elements. And again, we are working with geometry in this way, in different way. This is the situation plan. You have an industrial park, no interesting a lot, nothing interesting, like you can see, divided in different plots. And we had that plot. The starting point in this case was not the holes, was not the structure, infrastructure. It was the track. After talking with the property, we understood that tracks have to be going inside of the factory very often. They have to move in the factory and the rotations of tracks that in the end we decided it was going to be 30 meters diameter. It was important for us. So we said, okay, why not industry have a big coger, this big square made by 30 meters per 30, it's a little bigger than the row in pavilion. So the track can move extremely free in your factory. And then we have another square in 45 meters square. And the important point here, it was that both squares are displaced. That display allowed us to work with six meters bay and nine meters bay. So in this very simple way, we managed to solve all the program. In the, let's say, shorter bay, we have the private part of the program, like offices, what you will see now. And in the other bay, in the bay with nine meters wide, we will have the factory and the storage and so on. And always in the center, the capacity to turn with tracks. Also, we thought it was very important for ventilation so on to have these areas, no? A little more, well, low rise in the corners. Again, we work with very low technology, just some metal structure. And here you have some images of the construction where you can start to understand how again the geometry is changing the landscape, the geometry is changing the territory. And it's giving a new order to a very anodine space. Here you recognize three, sorry, two sizes of the, two sides of the, of the square. And here you have both the four sides. Again, the geometry that we need, so tracks can be inside of the factory. So here you have the plants, like I already told you. The two, the two geometries, this plight one to each other on diagonal, with the factory itself and with the offices and how tracks are able to move around. Just some drawings with this sample structure. It's a very economist. I mean, we did with not so much money. And here you have the result. In terms of construction, we, like I said, we use a sample, a steeling beams. But then we were just working with one material, one material in all the project. We were working with this metal, well, metal panel. I don't know how to spell it in English very well. But this is the typical one you use in industry. Just that we use it in, I don't know the term in English in Galvanizado. So you have some bright, some colors and things change during the day. The light, it depends on the light, you have different situations. Even in these big windows, that of course in Extremadura, the sun is very hard and we have to protect from it. We use the same panel again, the same, but just, well, made by holes. So you control in this way the light. I mean, it's just a factory, no, too special. But here you understand what I explained about how the tracks are moving. And in the end, we have a little sketch, a little diagram on the patio. But like I explained before, we are using the same material outside, the same material inside, and the same material inside of the culture. So again, we are talking about that first section that we saw in the water tank, that first picture that was talking about these different activities that get a common background, but that they are different, it depends where they are going on. Again, each facade is the same, but this facade is different. And in the same way that in the Roman temple of Vienna, we were working with that longitudinal building, linear building that it was sewing, the irregular border. Here we're working with this rigid geometry, but that is answered into the different part of the program. It depends on the situation of the position of it. I like this picture. Here is interior space. This is the patio, the culture. But we work in the same way with both spaces. So you have this confusion. You don't know very well if you are inside or outside. The light coming from that big window I already show you. Here we are finishing. We just finished the project some months ago, so I don't have pictures of how it is used right now. And the last project that is following with the same questions. Maybe you get bored because we do every time the changes, we change the way we work. But that is important to realize which are the right conditions and the right strategy. This is an international center for sports innovation that is called the ring. And you will know why. Again, we have a wonderful site. It was a beautiful lake. But in this case, instead of having 180 degrees in front of us, we have almost 360. The site is here around. It is almost an island. Sometimes we can like that. When the water goes up, it is not a real lake. It is a reservoir. So the water changes very much. Here you have a person fishing. So you understand that the landscape, again, is talking about this linear condition. First with the mountains surrounding, then with the water bank. So you have this situation. It was a very beautiful landscape. And here it is a project. The point with the project is that the only way to see all the projects of the building once, it is from there. So we came up to take pictures of the building because it was not possible to see it when you are on the site. Well, I will try to explain all the projects from this image and then I will show you some more details. So we started to work with these lines. The traces that the water leaves when it goes up or down. Right now the water is on the mountains. So we have low, we don't have so much water. But after summer, the water goes here and it goes up. So we wanted to create a new border. But in this case, of course, we have to make a regular border that will answer to these traces and that will allow that each part of the building, it was again a big megastructure. We should understand that this is 200 meters. The diameter is 200 meters. So if you take a walk from the roof around the building, it is more than half a kilometer. It is 628. So the facade are 650, 628 square meters long. Of course the topography changed. But this is also an important issue that I didn't explain in our project. You have a persistent, that persistent is already there. There are some rules. You should understand the rules. And afterwards you take a decision, a clear decision. And in my opinion, the goal with the project of the more interesting point is that working with the same geometry, with the model is the same shape and the same answer in each point. The relationship that appear with the topography is completely different. So depending on the point that you are situated in that moment, your experience is different. You have the feeling that you are in different building being in the same one. So in this size, the building is going, well, you only have one level of the building. So there are some areas where the distance from the ground floor is quite much, like 5 meters and some others where the building is very close to it. So like I told you, you are not allowed to, you can't see the building just in once. You just see part of it because the rest, it disappear between the vegetation and the topography. But of course, a piece of it is explaining all the building itself. And of course, we try to integrate the building with the landscape by this system of introducing an artificial element. All of it made in metal. That's how they, this character of, like if it would be a device, like an object that doesn't belong to this site and you have the feeling that in whatever moment you can change and you can remove from it and carry it to somewhere else. These metal panels, we are talking about 5 meters high. Here you have 7 meters wide, 7 meters wide and 50 centimeters, panels of 5 meters and 50 centimeters. So when we need a window, we just take away one of the panels. In this way, it's very easy to compose all the facade and to be able to make such a big building. Of course, a building with this dimension, it is not possible to be used with an interior corridor. So we have to get different elevators, different stairs case to go up to the roof so you can go up and go down in the different patios or even you can cross in diagonal from one point to another. In the same way that is happening in the Roman temple of Diana, it is a megastructure that incorporates different buildings. In this case, it was 12 different departments from different sports, sports like sailing, rowing, sorry, mountain, whatever, triathlon activities, always activities and sports that have to be with nature. So each one could choose the position, the better position on it because of course you have all the orientations on the building. So in each moment of the day, you have different lights and different, like I explained, it was not easy to find the right position. Again, we knew the rules, we knew the strategy, but until we were not in the moment of the construction, like it happened with the Roman temple, we couldn't decide the final precise position of the piece. In this way, each department has its own water bank, they can, sorry, I will go back. So each one can have an access to the water and the 6,000 square meters, all of them will have a privilege to have access to the water and to be able to use the surrounding. In this case, the geometry help us to organize all the programs. Between each department, we have avoid an area that allows, like I already explained, have a contact to topography and to the site. Some of them are smaller because they need so many square meters and some of them are much bigger. They have freedom for organizing in their way. Here you have the facade of more than 650 meters. And like you can see, the different contact with the topography. Here you go closer, but always the building is not touching the floor. Just this pillar, each 7 meters, are having the contact with the site. If in the first project, we were just working with holes, let's say that we didn't have enough material there. In the second one, in the Roman temple, we were working with a massive project, made in concrete, like we're thinking, like in artificial stone, with that big cantilever. Here we are working metal. All of it can be removed and the project has this character. So we prepare the different pillars. We carry them to the site. We started to make different models. And we start the construction. It was quite funny because we made it in seven months, all the project, the building was built in seven months. So let's say that, and that is just important for me to explain to the students. If the Roman temple of Diana, it took from the competition 2005 until the end of the construction, 2011, it took almost six years. This project was made the competition and the construction in less than one year. So during that process, that the Roman temple, what's going on? We made this project, we decided, we designed it and we built it. So this project is thought after the temple of Diana. And I think quite many of the decisions of the temple of Diana are already here. But we finished it before. That is something that happened in architecture. And for that reason, I'd like to say to the students that you have to find which are your interests. And as soon as you find them, as soon as you can start to create your own research line, your own working line. And in that way, when you finish a project in one studio, in another studio, you are not finishing something. You are improving on this personal line that will form you, that will, like architect. In that way, when you lose a competition, that happens very often, you are not losing time. You are not wasting time. You are putting time on a very clear line of research, of working, of interest that go on, go on, and that can be useful for the next competition, for the next commission, or for the next research. At least that is the way I like Tonistar architecture. Anyway, we were building very fast. And once I asked to the constructor, to the people who were building it, are you sure it's going to close in the end? Because it was so big. And they were not very secure. But anyway, it was very exciting when we, again, we found the shadow. Again, the geometry is not there, but the mark of it, that this shadow itself is dividing. It's dividing the site, it's dividing the territory. A new geometry creates a new order in the site. And it was exciting. We have already the horizontal plan. Maybe, I don't know, this is difficult to say here, but maybe the horizontal plan is the starting point of everything. Talking about architecture. We need an horizontal plan. We need a flat plan. There is that everything. It was beautiful because you could walk on it, very comfortable, with clean shoes, coming from the city, and the surrounding, the territory, the vegetation, all was there. But you understand in different ways. Of course, different to go up to the roof, because then the platform, it is in another level. So you don't have connections with the trunk of the trees. You have it with the ceiling or whatever. And this is a wonderful picture because I would really like to stop on this moment. I'm not sure that happened to some of you. When you are in the middle of the process, when you are building something, you say, oh, this is the moment, but you should stop. Usually, the client doesn't accept it. Anyway, here you have some images. I think the more beautiful experience is like I already told you. The relationship between the landscape, between the topography, between the persistence, in this case, trees. It doesn't matter if the persistence are trees or it's a Roman temple. You have to talk, you have to dialogue, to discuss with the persistence, with the center's platform. Or here, when the building goes closer to the site, but never touching it. Here, when we take away one of the panels and we have a window. Well, I have a lot of images. Just we open a big window and we have a roof for protecting the window and the glass from the sun. Different views. Each point of the project is different because I repeat again, I am very heavy, but the relationship between the landscape, the persistence and the building is the key of the question. You should also know that every open space is just waiting for being used in whatever way. Now, it is not so clean, but somehow it's a little factor, it's a little hunger to be used in one way or another. But we were always in this case with the same material, just in different situations. I like this picture. I think you can understand how we are talking about an object that doesn't belong to this place. It will never belong to that place. I think that is also interesting in my opinion. Here, to understand the project, somehow like a land art piece that is dividing into the territory. These trees that we protect in the middle, the water, the bank and the mountains and the new geometry that changed the rules of the site. Now again, different activities. There was a three-hour long competition. I like because suddenly the new geometry is used by then. Even the boat that is recording is following the ring. Architecture can change, so I have it. And that's all. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for this wonderful project you showed us. It's fantastic. I hope there are some questions in the audience. You told us about the project around this temple. I would like to know what the use is of this building because you said that you were supposed to make a building, but you didn't actually. You made a wall with rooms. What was the program? How did you solve that point? Yes. Like I told you, the process of the project took like five years, six years even. That means that this time, in my opinion, during that time, and the time that whatever project takes, you have to deal with different situations. In the competition, of course, we were doing a project somehow. We have to answer, let's say, to the question. But we knew that it was not the proper one. It was not the beta answer. It was not the... So for example, it was necessary to make some use, some part of the program. It was on the ground floor. And we thought it was not possible to use. It was not a good position for the program. We thought that the ground floor should be as empty as possible. What I mean is that how you manage to do that. Well, architecture also has to be with policy. We have to manage to find the instrument, of course, explaining right way, discussing, but to explain what we think is better. And they understood that in an archaeological place, in an archaeological place, it was not right to have a restaurant or to have a shop or to have sunspaces on the same level, on the same ground level than the tent itself. But it's also true that even they didn't want to tell us which was the program. The program, it was a mix between some restaurants, some commercial buildings and commercial modules, we could say, and some cultural areas for showing the rest of that archaeological area. So in that mix, what we tried to do was to be as neutral as possible so they could decide in the end the percent of one part of the program or the other. But we convinced them that all that should be on the first floor. It should be on this platform, on this new layer that we added to the site, but at the same time we were respecting in that way the ground floor. So it was a building. Yes, it's a building, but it was not completely a building in the way they thought. So after developing the building, they understood it and they agreed. So I don't think also the client always is someone that wants to force a situation or a close situation. It was just in that way. Very simple. Thank you very much for your lecture. It was a great pleasure to be taken through these five projects. I would like to go back to your question at the very beginning. Are we modern? Have we ever been modern? You never addressed the question mark, so maybe you could say something about that. We were already talking about that. I don't know if we are modern or not. In my opinion, modernity had been almost in every period of the history. Of course, we could discuss what is the term modernity, if we are modern or not. But maybe the starting in Reina-Santh period, by sugar, in that moment that the man realized that he can manage by himself without anything else. But I think modernity has to be with the right use of the technology and the technique in each moment of the history. In my opinion, we are still modern. If we are answering to our time with the right technology, with our technology, our way of technique. In my opinion, modernity has to be with technique. At least how we understand it. But I'm not an expert on that. Thank you. I think it was the first time I heard a really good answer about the topic of the series, or we're still modern. Your project shows it's possible and how it's possible. I think it's very impressive that you can show this with four or five projects. It's very few, but very powerful. I have two questions. The one I already did in my introduction, a Spanish one. Where would you place yourself between these poles of the abstractism of Delasotta and the pictorial power of Oissa? That's the first question. The second would be, I think why you used the geometry that was clear, but what I think is also very strong in your projects are the emptiness, the power of the empty space, which I guess has really something to do maybe with the landscape, but not maybe not only. How do you deal with what meaning has for you this power of empty space? Okay, answering the first question, well, it's difficult to compare with both of my masters, like Oissa or Delasotta. Let's say that maybe our architecture is closer to Delasotta, maybe in terms of construction or in terms of, let's say, naked. I remember that I was talking about naked architecture in the way how we work. Maybe it's more pure in that point of Delasotta following his way. But I would like to think that in that way that Oissa had of answering architecture in his way that he was looking for the opportunity. That's more genius. Let's say that Oissa has knowing that I would like to think that we get sometimes that opportunity that we really look for it. We think and we talk in our office very often about which is our opportunity with this project. I already told you that small surface outside of the rowing center, I think it's a new opportunity to that village. Maybe that opportunity has to be with the void, have to be with the empty space that Annette was asking for. So how we try to decide as a strategy to find which should be the rules, which should be the decision where we can start to build this strategy and always respecting as much as we can and giving as much open space as possible thinking in the future use and the freedom of the people who will use the building. It's true that we really like to work with territory because I don't like to use the word landscape. I think territory in the way I understand the word, I think it's very proper, have inside of it not only an escape but also human space, also archaeological spaces, different situations, different, yeah, that different persistence. So let's say that from that way of understanding persistence, we really balance very much the decision of where is the real point where we actuate, we concentrate, what is the place that we have to concentrate a program, we have to densify our architecture and how much and where it is in balance that the space that we leave completely void, the emptiness of the project. I think that balance maybe is the question of maybe is the link between our architecture and projects, that sentence of never to be built on that already was stamping on the plan of Bath for me it's important to realize where we should, let's say we should work on it and how much and where it is much better to just leave it like it is already there. Of course at the moment that you are working on a site you are changing completely the rules of it. So the project is not only what you build, like we talk about that very often in the studio, it's not only what you build, it's also the space that you don't touch but that now after that intervention you have been changing completely. Thank you. I would like to address on how the question from Mark when you talk about the task to do with technology or the means that we have today for building and also the one that Spiro already said that this kind of openness. I've seen from your project, correct me if I'm wrong, the light in the way of designing how you make it in this openness is very clear. Use light, the contrast between the light and shadow is very powerful as a reading in your design. What is it in your design, when it comes to your mind in the moment that you decide to implement light in your projects? I don't know if I understood completely well the question. Can you repeat the last part please? How I implement? In your projects the light and shadow is very intense, it's super powerful as I can read it from your project. When you really think about these spaces in this contrast between light and shadow and when they come to your mind because for me they are very powerful. Well it came from when I was a child and it was so warm in my place that you have to fluke for the shadow. It's not a joke, you go and you take a walk on our land, every animal, everyone is just protecting from the sun. I think that is one of the problems when in Spain it was not well understood the modernist and the rationalist architecture because Spain sometimes is very warm. I think this is a really good question because contemporary architecture we don't talk so much about shadow mainly in, of course it's important in maybe Tehranian countries but this is more important in tradition but not so much in modern architecture. It is very, very important. I also think the shadow is something great because it's free. You are outside, you are in a square and you can spend time under a shadow for free. So I really like that. I didn't explain well because it was so fast. But in the Roman temple in the shadow we don't, we not only have the shadow, you look at the plant section we create a kind of patios in between the shadow and the main square. So you also have cross ventilation. I mean we really think very much in the public space. Maybe that emptiness that you were asking for it has to be with that condition. I would give that shot trying to be as public as we can. Maybe it's a private commission but we want to look for that extra that I think architects will give with architecture. I don't know if I answer you. Any questions? Other questions? Okay, hello. Thank you for your wonderful lecture. It was really inspiring. I have one question also regarding to the first, are we still modern? You talk that technology is very much, relates very much to modernity. I wonder because you are always reacting with very modern industrialized materials to your spaces. Do you think that modernity is linked to material or do you also think that you can make a modern or is it linked to material or more to the way to express the architectural language? Could you make a modern building also with a very old material? Are you thinking that, are you choosing deliberately a very conch fairy material to the old spaces or to the old structures or just wondering? Well, I think so. I don't know if I was to you. We try to do like that. I think the material, I don't know. We use the technique and the technology that we think is proper for each one of our buildings. So I don't even answer the question. What I mean is that we don't have a language, only a language itself for answering to its situation. We don't think it's possible in our opinion. Maybe modernity had it, more clear this. I don't know. But we really think its, probably have a deeply research and deeply question that it's not only, it doesn't have to be only with the program. I don't know, I think to find the right technology to apply to each project, material at least is part of our discussion and our idea. I don't know if I answered you. I don't think so. I don't think so. Okay, I ask again. In wood. I don't really know what this is. For example, if you used, for example, timber or rent earth or like this old Roman concrete like this Pozzolano or Traslam, would it be as strong? Do you think as a counterpart? Okay, that was my question. No, for me it's interesting because I'm working with probably the oldest material that we're like earth and earth instructors and I'm always asked if I want to send people back to Stone Age and I wonder why this question is coming up from architects because I think modernity is not a question of a material, of how old the material is. Of course, the material can be as old as you can but the technique, I am quite sure. Let's say we want to be very, like a sion, let's say that material is more or less always there but you can use whatever material, old material or tech, whatever. But I think what is interesting for me is that you are using the last technique, sorry, the last technology of that material. Yes, I totally agree. That is the point of, it might be that is the modernity. Absolutely, I agree. I think modernity has to be with technology and technique and maybe even technology more because we can use an old technique but with a new technology. I think that is interesting. Yes, I'm improving now about this question. Okay, got it. Thank you. Thank you, Anna. Maybe last or second last question. Then, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
 So, dear guests, dear colleagues and dear Jose, before I introduce our guests I would  make a very short remark because the lecture today should have been the third one in the  series of department lectures. Unfortunately today it's the first one because two of the  four invited speakers cancelled their lecture, Eduardo Sotomore and Kenneth Frampton, and  they cancelled it at the time when it was too late to invite other guests. I was very  disappointed and I would like to apologize to those who came in vain. But now the positive  all the more I'm very glad to welcome Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia. He is here and it's even  better. He's not only here this evening but every week. Since February he's the visiting  professor at our department and I think it's a great gain and a big luck for our department  for the students of course as well. Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia is by far the youngest guest  in the lecture series and I guess that his relation to modernism isn't the same as ours.  The older generation who was raised with modernism as a universal doctrine. It's his love to  geometry that made me speculate about his relation to the topic of the series, always  still modern. But who is this young architect who dares to build a circle in the two days  time? A circle the most absolute of all forms. It needs more courage to set a clear geometrical  form than a free shaped one. An absolute geometrical form can be judged stricter than others. It  can be judged on a clear and absolute scale. A free form first has to please whereas a  geometrical one has a precise meaning and brings the whole history of architecture into play.  Who then is this fearless architect? Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia was born in 1975 in Don Benito  in the province Extremadura. Comes therefore his carriage. This Spanish region was the native  country of the conquerors of the new world. From there they departed, there they returned.  One can see this still today in the splendid architecture of their old palaces. I know  this landscape well. I can't count the times I made the journey through the Portuguese  border through endless scenery and their atorate sun. For hours and hours, nothing than cork  oaks, in their shade, small black peaks. Probably the only happy peaks in the world.  And then suddenly a lonesome building comes inside. A small arena, white and red, carefully  embedded in the yellow earth. A perfect circle. The round form belongs here to the typology  and this old to the function of the bullfight. If anybody wishes to learn more about the  fascinating architecture of the Plaza de Toros, the Spanish architect Guillermo Vasquez Consuegra  has dedicated to it a wonderful book with the same title. Jose, you know all this much  better than me. Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia has graduated in 2002 at EZAN, the Polytechnic  University of Madrid. In 2006 he founded his own office in Madrid. Soon he received different  prices and distinctions. There are so many that I can only mention a few of them. 2009  he received the architecture review award of emerging architecture, the design Vanguard  award, the Philippe Rotier award, all three in the same year. 2011 follows the first  prize for young architects at the Spanish Biennale and the first prize at the Latin American  Biennale. He was on the shortlist of the Mies van der Rohe award, the Piranesi prize in  Rome and many others. From 2007 to 2008 he received the scholarship from the Royal Academy  of Spain in Rome. He taught and gave lecture at different universities at Cornell, at the  Riba Institute, at the Navarra Architecture School and he was associate professor at EZAN  at the Polytechnic University in Madrid. In 2014 he received the BSI Swiss Architecture  Award and was guest professor at the Uzi Mendrizio. In a few weeks he will initiate his contribution  to the Venice Biennale. Why I have mentioned the landscape of Extremadura so in detail,  it's not only the place Jose Maria Vospaun, it's also the place where he has built his  first most important works. The environment of the Roman Catholic, of the Roman Diana  Temple in Merida, the Sports Innovation Center in El Anillo, El Anillo means ring in Spanish  in Granadilla, the Rohing Center in Alanque and last year an industrial building for electrical  elements in Don Benito. When I did my internship in Spain there were two positions among the  architects. Either one was a follower of Alejandro de la Sota or of Francisco Javier Sainz de  Risa. Both with big influence on generations of architects. If I tried to place Jose Maria  Sports Center in between the fundamentally different positions of the two masters, it  would lay somewhere in the middle. The archaic gesture of the geometric form recalls Sainz  de Aizos, the Uisa's strong pictorial language. The non-pathetic character and the lightness  of construction however refers to the de la Sota's Mesian minimalism. Wherever we place  Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia's work, his reference to modernism has the rationalistic spirit  of the Latin modernism which was less ideological than the Norse one and merged easily with  traditional architecture. Spanish architecture had to integrate so many different cultures  along its history. Another piece in the puzzle is the topic of Jose Maria's doctoral thesis.  It's here. It's about the architecture of the city of Bath in England, another circle.  After all these evidences, I'm not so sure anymore if the references to modernism that  I implied are still valid. Should I better refer to other ones, to Palladio maybe? One  thing is sure. Whether we take the Renaissance architects, the classicists in Bath or even  the master of modernism, the source is always the same. It lies in the beginning of architecture  in its elementary prototypes. Coincidentally or not, Stonehenge is in the neighborhood  of Bath as well. So Jose Maria Sanchez Garcia's work is maybe more than anything else an answer  to the question how to transform universal themes through history and confront them with  an existing territory and vice versa. Please welcome Jose Maria Sanchez.  Can you hear me? It's amazing. Thank you so many thanks to Professor Espiro. They were  so kind of your words. I don't know if I will try to do as soon as I can, but I think the  words were much better than our work in my opinion. Anyway, from me it's a great pleasure  to be here today, to be teaching during this semester in Eteha. It's a great experience.  It's a beautiful opportunity and I hope some of our students, I don't know if some of  them are here, but I hope we will manage to do a good course. I will try to explain how  we work. Of course our projects are how talk, explain what we are, always in the studio.  We talk to the students in that way. I think your project has to be your visiting car.  So how your project is an extension of yourself. I believe that architecture is coming from  the person itself. I suppose some of your experience, your childhood, your interest,  of course, should be always on your work. In that way I will try to explain our work  and I will try to explain that term, so that it is that question that we have on the table  when we are working and when we are reading and when we are writing also. It's important  to understand in that context, like I explained today, our work.  So thinking of modernity, I was writing some words. Let's say that seven strategies are  following our work and I hope some of them will be, well, I hope you will understand them  through our work. Concentrate and release, dynamic centrality, symmetry per compensation,  gravity as balance, linear configurations, technology as device, theoretical practice.  Our first work, it was this space for giant creation. It was a water tank and of course  a water tank didn't have any entrance, any gate. So we made a hole, the first hole for  coming in and after it we made different holes. So many perforations as we need. Holes on  the roof for leading light coming inside, holes around the thickness walls, the thick  walls for passing from one part of the tank to the other part for crossing the main walls  and even walls. Right? No. That's a problem. Please.  No, it's okay. It's okay. It's okay. Yeah? It's okay. Yeah? It's okay. My English is  not so good so it's better to look at the images. Okay. So somehow our strategy was very clear.  We didn't have too many, let's say we took a decision and we were working with the geometry  trying to give a new use to this old water tank. This was the original plan. You can  see the two different water tanks and this tower with the gene systems on and we just  try to live free all this void almost untouched just changing the conditions by this system,  by this number of different perforations in every wall, even some staircase coming up  to the roof, different gates to have the possibility to divide and at the same time we just concentrate  all the program, let's say the server area with some photography picture developers and  music cabins and different areas. We just concentrate all there and we release as empty  as possible the rest of the plant. This was the only decision we took on this space. So  it was this persistence building and all different holes. We just systemized all these situations.  So in the end we had to paint it in white. It was like that. They needed a very neutral  space for, I don't know, I was playing in the beginning for young creation, for painting,  for dancing, for everything that young people could do on the space and the light becomes  something very powerful. Suddenly it changed completely. It offered the character of this  element. Just some furniture. And this is an interesting point. When the building starts  to reuse, when this background, very neutral background made by an old architecture that  has been changed, used by a new strategy, suddenly become alive. I really like this picture.  You can, it is a picture but it's almost talking about a section. You have four different situations  that have to be with the two, with the four base, dome base, no, made and how in each  space is going on a different activity. So without having a real need to divide in a  physically way different spaces, we managed to organize several activities at the same  time. Even how the user started to customize the space. So let's say that this is not a  coincidence that some years later when I started my PhD, I had all those questions in my mind.  Somehow the same strategy applied to the first project I showed to you. It was a special  one and I wanted to explain how I started. Somehow the same strategy was applied to this  theoretical research. We are talking about the heavy PhD. And it came all of it from  a sentence. A sentence that said never to be built on. Let's say that all this research  starts with this old plan from the city of Bath in England. I could say that this is  the sentence that forced and that preserved all this big field in front of this building  during time. That sentence said that never to be built on. In my opinion, at least the  hypothesis that the thesis tried to explain, establish, and a protection of the space and  a protection at the same time of the building itself. So in the end, all the situation,  it became a unique element. It is so important. This emptiness around the royal crescent,  then the royal crescent itself, like a very compact, linear, but compact neoclassical building,  a building we could say. In the 18th century, the city of Bath experiments a great growing  due to the interest of the British high society in its hot waters. In this particular situation,  the architect John Wood develops a unique architecture that based on speculation as a way to gain  access to projects, six more ambitious aims. This extraordinary series of projects that  they think they were doing by John Wood and his son during 60 years, in my opinion, it  is only one building, all of it, that conforms Queen Square, King Circus, and royal crescent  established the beginning of a new dealing typology that will extend throughout England.  The way this architecture dialogues with the territory and the compactness of these constructions,  searching for the maximum freedom of the public space, answer to a very singular way of thinking.  When I realized we were working, I hope we are working on similar topics, like I would  like to explain during the lecture. I would like to start explaining this building that  somehow after winning it, it was the building that allowed me to start with the office. This  is Merida, this is the temple of Vienna, more important Roman temple in Spain. All this  was surrounding that it was nothing good, it was just some different plots of lands that  have been void during different years. The question of the competition was to create  a new building around the Roman temple and at the same time, of course, we understood  that we had to give an answer to the fabric. It was a disaster, it was not a very new situation.  We started trying to understand the different façades, different rare façades of houses  and how this chaotic skyline could have a new audience. Here we can see some drawings  from different, well, the recreation of archaeologists of how they thought this was this space in  Roman time. For us, it was very important to realize that the only way that the Roman  temple will get the right position was trying to answer to the old traces, to that old fabric  that were not existing anymore, as you can see now. But in our opinion, they were still  the importance around it. You can see how it was this Roman forum, also the city of  Merida in Roman time with this very classic order of Cardus and the Gumanos. It was how  the forum was on the heart of the city. Of course, how you can see on this engraving  from the Renaissance period, the reason why the Roman temple is still there, it is just  because another building, another layer was using some parts of it. I can touch it like  that. We will see in a trip to Cordoba, the reason why the Mesquita in Cordoba is still  there, it's just because a cathedral, a baroque cathedral was built inside of it. I think  this image was very important for us to understand in which way we could dialogue with the Roman  temple. So we started to apply different strategies that we understood that were necessary for  creating a new surrounding for giving a new order to that void around the temple. So we  started with that irregular border, trying to put order on it and in the end we got this  shape. We were quite nervous because we didn't like it. We thought it was not a nice building.  We didn't have a reference similar to it, but somehow it was the result of applying  a strategy and if our basic laws were right, we should finish. The shape and this image  is the result. After that we were working for several years because it took like three  years before starting with the construction. In the end it was a period of six years where  we were drawing, sizing. I went for a year to the Spanish Academy in Rome to study Roman  architecture and the result of the project you have here. We have to deal with the chaos,  with the anodine irregular border and with the regular order that has to be with all  buildings. So I think that is the more important point that both geometries, a very regular  geometry and a more or less a sorrow geometry gave in the end the result of a new shape,  we could say. That mixture of geometry that I already explained were not answering to  the actual and the contemporary fabric of the city, but it was really answering to  that sort of situation. Let's say that overlapping traces with actual traces and the old ones  have to deal and just from the situation we could answer to the project. So here you have  a situation planned with the final solution where still you can recognize some Roman streets,  but how in medieval period the street changed on the Roman side and suddenly we had even  a street crossing outside, this one in front of us and we have to deal with that. So we  have to change laws, we have to change some rules. We have to follow with the building  over the street and we have to change the exactly geometry of the site. It was necessary  because we were not answering to the existing site, to the site we were not answering to  today, we were answering to a place from some years ago, from some thousand of years ago.  Here you have the result, that is our project. Here you have, I hope you will recognize the  museum of Rafael Monal, of course, and our building is answering to these old traces  and not so much to the new ones. So we are just, we just get a new layer, a layer that's  how it was not a building, we were not answering proper to the question of the competition.  We were answering how to that old engraving, the old picture that reminds us why the Roman  temple is there because this old Renaissance house was using its structure. So how we use  again not the structure but the void, the old void that it was necessary to recuperate,  to have again a good position for the temple and to reload somehow the fabric of the old  marita. We started to work on model, we knew, which was a strategy, we knew our system but  we were not sure about dimensions, about geometry that was after six years when we were already  in construction. I really like these two images because you have just a plan from a model,  a model made in the studio where you can recognize the final plan, the final structural plan.  So they are not the same, I'm sure if you analyze it carefully, it's not the same shape  but they are talking about the same. I think that is important. Maybe there are five years  between these two documents but they are the same, but they are not the same shape. Okay,  I will not explain the construction. So here you have again the same strategy that you  could see in that small water tank where we release a big void and we just concentrate  on the linear, very dense building that is answering to all the different situations  and giving a new background, a new order to the Roman temple. Of course, it is a new public  square, it is a new space to marry that but also we have to keep that archaeological character  that the building has around. We work with the ground floor on the same material that  we had just on Earth and we work with a white cement and concrete made by the white cement  and the same sand that we have on the side. The building is just going on like a platform  that keeps the different functions on it, functions that were not completely decided  in the competition, they wanted to have the capacity to change it and just like a megastructure  able to change time with two entrances, both of the edges and an open circulation around  it. So in the end, of course, all the construction, the architecture that was already there still  assists and we are not going to hide it. We just try to put order by geometry, we just  try to give, like you can see in the work, we just try to give a new answer to Roman  temple. Here you have this cantilever of five meters that create this platform that allow  you to have a view of the temple and to have a view of all the different rooms that of  course we keep it at the same position. Here you have this little street that is crossing  outside like I already explained how the building is going over it, sorry, or even how the buildings,  we left them in the same position and of course in the same situation that they were. We don't  touch the persistence because that was part of the history, maybe not a very good one,  but it is so important for us that the Roman temple is gone. So the building is just made  of very basic material, just a big shadow all around it, important in Spain. On the ground  floor, this square is open as possible so you can cross through the Roman temple like  you did in Roman time. Well, these underground spaces were also kept in the same way, just  leaving natural light to some rest and again the space changed completely when it, and  it became alive when it is in use. Next project, this is a small pavilion, a Roman pavilion  made on this site in front of a lake, and well this is a smaller scale project, but  somehow still we were working with the same instrument. It was quite strange because the  site was like that and it was a strange rule that forced us to use all the site, to use  the geometry for your building. In the end, we didn't do like that, we just wanted to  create a main room with that dimension, 21 meters plus 21, that will allow us to use  the different canoes, different elements. The rest, this is just the area's interstitial  spaces like it happened in the Roman temple, and those interstitial spaces are given the  rest of uses, you can have it here, like bedrooms, some blessing rooms, and therefore keeping  the canoes, well, some gymnasium, but the real thing we were doing was this big room,  this kind of cover, a square where people were able to train with the canoeing, so in  this section, this model you can understand the position of our building, that strange  shape in the middle of nowhere, close to the lake, close to the water, and the city of  Alange over it. So we thought that the building has to be a very low rise building, so the  more interesting thing in the town that it was that views were not interrupted by our  project. So we got this very classical section, we are talking just about a platform and this  building over it, but important and interesting point is that the classical section is not  working in a classical way. What I mean is that the structure that we have over the platform,  it is not over it, it is, let's say you can see here, sorry very much, you have this different  metal trash, metal trashes that are supporting all this big room behind it, so the structure,  the heightness of the structure is necessary to have completely, to have all this open  space completely free for work, for being using the different canoeing, so here you  have section, the big room, of course connected with the outside area and interstitial spaces  around it. Now we have some pictures of the construction where you can recognize a big  square, a big area, and just technical plan of how that trash becomes the more important  element in the project. If in the water tank we were just working with holes, here we were  working with the structure and the structure should be strong enough not only to support  and to hang, we could say, this big room behind it, but also to give the character and the  entity to the building. So in the end this is our facade, not too much more, just this  element and of course again when it starts to get in use it changes completely. Let's  say that we have all the situations, different views, when we start to use that space, again  we use that big shadow under the trash, under the ceiling, under this element, that at the  same time it will produce the entrance of the building. Here you have a final image of the  project. In the edge of the platform we didn't want to have any element. We just made a very  longitudinal grade where the child can sit down, can be on the border, different. And  they can see the competition, the training, everything. So we don't break the contact  with the landscape. Here you can see of course this big trash is, allow us to entrance by  this ramp, hanging on it, on them, and the big room with the different element. We wanted  to have a very, I mean these people are exposed to the sun all day, just sailing, sorry, just  rowing. So we thought here the lights should be very, very, very, nobody much light, the  sun is almost not going in. And we wanted also to have a very low rise room. It's a  big room but without a big dimension. Maybe the room is like this. So how is that kind  of public space, again, open public space, release, whatever, no? It's a void. You enter  us like that. Throw the structure. And this is the last image you are, like I explained  to you, you had the possibility to sit on the edge. So I also think it's important when  you have a commission or you win a small competition, you have to give something else that they  are asking for. In the Roman temple they were asking for a building. And I think what we  thought in that moment that it was more important, more important to think in the public space,  in the facilities. And here's how we create a new square for this little village, where  people can see it. I mean, it can be used even if the Roman center is closed or it's  not in use. The next project is, the first time I explained it, is a factory, a factory  that has to be with electrical elements. And again, we are working with geometry in this  way, in different way. This is the situation plan. You have an industrial park, no interesting  a lot, nothing interesting, like you can see, divided in different plots. And we had that  plot. The starting point in this case was not the holes, was not the structure, infrastructure.  It was the track. After talking with the property, we understood that tracks have to be going  inside of the factory very often. They have to move in the factory and the rotations of  tracks that in the end we decided it was going to be 30 meters diameter. It was important  for us. So we said, okay, why not industry have a big coger, this big square made by  30 meters per 30, it's a little bigger than the row in pavilion. So the track can move  extremely free in your factory. And then we have another square in 45 meters square. And  the important point here, it was that both squares are displaced. That display allowed  us to work with six meters bay and nine meters bay. So in this very simple way, we managed  to solve all the program. In the, let's say, shorter bay, we have the private part of the  program, like offices, what you will see now. And in the other bay, in the bay with nine  meters wide, we will have the factory and the storage and so on. And always in the center,  the capacity to turn with tracks. Also, we thought it was very important for ventilation  so on to have these areas, no? A little more, well, low rise in the corners. Again, we work  with very low technology, just some metal structure. And here you have some images of  the construction where you can start to understand how again the geometry is changing the landscape,  the geometry is changing the territory. And it's giving a new order to a very anodine space.  Here you recognize three, sorry, two sizes of the, two sides of the, of the square. And  here you have both the four sides. Again, the geometry that we need, so tracks can be  inside of the factory. So here you have the plants, like I already told you. The two,  the two geometries, this plight one to each other on diagonal, with the factory itself  and with the offices and how tracks are able to move around. Just some drawings with this  sample structure. It's a very economist. I mean, we did with not so much money. And here  you have the result. In terms of construction, we, like I said, we use a sample, a steeling  beams. But then we were just working with one material, one material in all the project.  We were working with this metal, well, metal panel. I don't know how to spell it in English  very well. But this is the typical one you use in industry. Just that we use it in, I  don't know the term in English in Galvanizado. So you have some bright, some colors and things  change during the day. The light, it depends on the light, you have different situations.  Even in these big windows, that of course in Extremadura, the sun is very hard and we  have to protect from it. We use the same panel again, the same, but just, well, made by holes.  So you control in this way the light. I mean, it's just a factory, no, too special. But  here you understand what I explained about how the tracks are moving. And in the end,  we have a little sketch, a little diagram on the patio. But like I explained before,  we are using the same material outside, the same material inside, and the same material  inside of the culture. So again, we are talking about that first section that we saw in the  water tank, that first picture that was talking about these different activities that get  a common background, but that they are different, it depends where they are going on. Again,  each facade is the same, but this facade is different. And in the same way that in the  Roman temple of Vienna, we were working with that longitudinal building, linear building  that it was sewing, the irregular border. Here we're working with this rigid geometry,  but that is answered into the different part of the program. It depends on the situation  of the position of it. I like this picture. Here is interior space. This is the patio,  the culture. But we work in the same way with both spaces. So you have this confusion. You  don't know very well if you are inside or outside. The light coming from that big window  I already show you. Here we are finishing. We just finished the project some months ago,  so I don't have pictures of how it is used right now. And the last project that is following  with the same questions. Maybe you get bored because we do every time the changes, we change  the way we work. But that is important to realize which are the right conditions and  the right strategy. This is an international center for sports innovation that is called  the ring. And you will know why. Again, we have a wonderful site. It was a beautiful  lake. But in this case, instead of having 180 degrees in front of us, we have almost  360. The site is here around. It is almost an island. Sometimes we can like that. When  the water goes up, it is not a real lake. It is a reservoir. So the water changes very  much. Here you have a person fishing. So you understand that the landscape, again, is talking  about this linear condition. First with the mountains surrounding, then with the water  bank. So you have this situation. It was a very beautiful landscape. And here it is  a project. The point with the project is that the only way to see all the projects of the  building once, it is from there. So we came up to take pictures of the building because  it was not possible to see it when you are on the site. Well, I will try to explain all  the projects from this image and then I will show you some more details. So we started  to work with these lines. The traces that the water leaves when it goes up or down. Right  now the water is on the mountains. So we have low, we don't have so much water. But after  summer, the water goes here and it goes up. So we wanted to create a new border. But in  this case, of course, we have to make a regular border that will answer to these traces and  that will allow that each part of the building, it was again a big megastructure. We should  understand that this is 200 meters. The diameter is 200 meters. So if you take a walk from  the roof around the building, it is more than half a kilometer. It is 628. So the facade  are 650, 628 square meters long. Of course the topography changed. But this is also an  important issue that I didn't explain in our project. You have a persistent, that persistent  is already there. There are some rules. You should understand the rules. And afterwards  you take a decision, a clear decision. And in my opinion, the goal with the project of  the more interesting point is that working with the same geometry, with the model is  the same shape and the same answer in each point. The relationship that appear with the  topography is completely different. So depending on the point that you are situated in that  moment, your experience is different. You have the feeling that you are in different  building being in the same one. So in this size, the building is going, well, you only  have one level of the building. So there are some areas where the distance from the ground  floor is quite much, like 5 meters and some others where the building is very close to  it. So like I told you, you are not allowed to, you can't see the building just in once.  You just see part of it because the rest, it disappear between the vegetation and the  topography. But of course, a piece of it is explaining all the building itself. And of  course, we try to integrate the building with the landscape by this system of introducing  an artificial element. All of it made in metal. That's how they, this character of,  like if it would be a device, like an object that doesn't belong to this site and you have  the feeling that in whatever moment you can change and you can remove from it and carry  it to somewhere else. These metal panels, we are talking about 5 meters high. Here you  have 7 meters wide, 7 meters wide and 50 centimeters, panels of 5 meters and 50 centimeters. So  when we need a window, we just take away one of the panels. In this way, it's very easy  to compose all the facade and to be able to make such a big building. Of course, a building  with this dimension, it is not possible to be used with an interior corridor. So we have  to get different elevators, different stairs case to go up to the roof so you can go up  and go down in the different patios or even you can cross in diagonal from one point to  another. In the same way that is happening in the Roman temple of Diana, it is a megastructure  that incorporates different buildings. In this case, it was 12 different departments  from different sports, sports like sailing, rowing, sorry, mountain, whatever, triathlon  activities, always activities and sports that have to be with nature. So each one could choose  the position, the better position on it because of course you have all the orientations on  the building. So in each moment of the day, you have different lights and different, like  I explained, it was not easy to find the right position. Again, we knew the rules, we knew  the strategy, but until we were not in the moment of the construction, like it happened  with the Roman temple, we couldn't decide the final precise position of the piece. In  this way, each department has its own water bank, they can, sorry, I will go back. So  each one can have an access to the water and the 6,000 square meters, all of them will  have a privilege to have access to the water and to be able to use the surrounding. In  this case, the geometry help us to organize all the programs. Between each department,  we have avoid an area that allows, like I already explained, have a contact to topography  and to the site. Some of them are smaller because they need so many square meters and  some of them are much bigger. They have freedom for organizing in their way. Here you have  the facade of more than 650 meters. And like you can see, the different contact with the  topography. Here you go closer, but always the building is not touching the floor. Just  this pillar, each 7 meters, are having the contact with the site. If in the first project,  we were just working with holes, let's say that we didn't have enough material there.  In the second one, in the Roman temple, we were working with a massive project, made  in concrete, like we're thinking, like in artificial stone, with that big cantilever.  Here we are working metal. All of it can be removed and the project has this character.  So we prepare the different pillars. We carry them to the site. We started to make different  models. And we start the construction. It was quite funny because we made it in seven  months, all the project, the building was built in seven months. So let's say that,  and that is just important for me to explain to the students. If the Roman temple of Diana,  it took from the competition 2005 until the end of the construction, 2011, it took almost  six years. This project was made the competition and the construction in less than one year.  So during that process, that the Roman temple, what's going on? We made this project, we  decided, we designed it and we built it. So this project is thought after the temple of  Diana. And I think quite many of the decisions of the temple of Diana are already here. But  we finished it before. That is something that happened in architecture. And for that reason,  I'd like to say to the students that you have to find which are your interests. And as soon  as you find them, as soon as you can start to create your own research line, your own  working line. And in that way, when you finish a project in one studio, in another studio,  you are not finishing something. You are improving on this personal line that will form you,  that will, like architect. In that way, when you lose a competition, that happens very  often, you are not losing time. You are not wasting time. You are putting time on a very  clear line of research, of working, of interest that go on, go on, and that can be useful  for the next competition, for the next commission, or for the next research. At least that is  the way I like Tonistar architecture. Anyway, we were building very fast. And once I asked  to the constructor, to the people who were building it, are you sure it's going to close  in the end? Because it was so big. And they were not very secure. But anyway, it was very  exciting when we, again, we found the shadow. Again, the geometry is not there, but the  mark of it, that this shadow itself is dividing. It's dividing the site, it's dividing the  territory. A new geometry creates a new order in the site. And it was exciting. We have  already the horizontal plan. Maybe, I don't know, this is difficult to say here, but maybe  the horizontal plan is the starting point of everything. Talking about architecture.  We need an horizontal plan. We need a flat plan. There is that everything. It was beautiful  because you could walk on it, very comfortable, with clean shoes, coming from the city, and  the surrounding, the territory, the vegetation, all was there. But you understand in different  ways. Of course, different to go up to the roof, because then the platform, it is in  another level. So you don't have connections with the trunk of the trees. You have it with  the ceiling or whatever. And this is a wonderful picture because I would really like to stop  on this moment. I'm not sure that happened to some of you. When you are in the middle  of the process, when you are building something, you say, oh, this is the moment, but you should  stop. Usually, the client doesn't accept it. Anyway, here you have some images. I think  the more beautiful experience is like I already told you. The relationship between the landscape,  between the topography, between the persistence, in this case, trees. It doesn't matter if  the persistence are trees or it's a Roman temple. You have to talk, you have to dialogue,  to discuss with the persistence, with the center's platform. Or here, when the building  goes closer to the site, but never touching it. Here, when we take away one of the panels  and we have a window. Well, I have a lot of images. Just we open a big window and we have  a roof for protecting the window and the glass from the sun. Different views. Each point  of the project is different because I repeat again, I am very heavy, but the relationship  between the landscape, the persistence and the building is the key of the question. You  should also know that every open space is just waiting for being used in whatever way.  Now, it is not so clean, but somehow it's a little factor, it's a little hunger to be  used in one way or another. But we were always in this case with the same material, just  in different situations. I like this picture. I think you can understand how we are talking  about an object that doesn't belong to this place. It will never belong to that place.  I think that is also interesting in my opinion. Here, to understand the project, somehow like  a land art piece that is dividing into the territory. These trees that we protect in  the middle, the water, the bank and the mountains and the new geometry that changed the rules  of the site. Now again, different activities. There was a three-hour long competition. I  like because suddenly the new geometry is used by then. Even the boat that is recording  is following the ring. Architecture can change, so I have it. And that's all. Thank you very  much. Thank you very much for this wonderful project you showed us. It's fantastic. I hope  there are some questions in the audience. You told us about the project around this  temple. I would like to know what the use is of this building because you said that you  were supposed to make a building, but you didn't actually. You made a wall with rooms. What  was the program? How did you solve that point? Yes. Like I told you, the process of the project  took like five years, six years even. That means that this time, in my opinion, during  that time, and the time that whatever project takes, you have to deal with different situations.  In the competition, of course, we were doing a project somehow. We have to answer, let's  say, to the question. But we knew that it was not the proper one. It was not the beta  answer. It was not the... So for example, it was necessary to make some use, some part  of the program. It was on the ground floor. And we thought it was not possible to use.  It was not a good position for the program. We thought that the ground floor should be  as empty as possible. What I mean is that how you manage to do that. Well, architecture  also has to be with policy. We have to manage to find the instrument, of course, explaining  right way, discussing, but to explain what we think is better. And they understood that  in an archaeological place, in an archaeological place, it was not right to have a restaurant  or to have a shop or to have sunspaces on the same level, on the same ground level than  the tent itself. But it's also true that even they didn't want to tell us which was the  program. The program, it was a mix between some restaurants, some commercial buildings  and commercial modules, we could say, and some cultural areas for showing the rest of  that archaeological area. So in that mix, what we tried to do was to be as neutral as possible  so they could decide in the end the percent of one part of the program or the other. But  we convinced them that all that should be on the first floor. It should be on this platform,  on this new layer that we added to the site, but at the same time we were respecting in  that way the ground floor. So it was a building. Yes, it's a building, but it was not completely  a building in the way they thought. So after developing the building, they understood it  and they agreed. So I don't think also the client always is someone that wants to force  a situation or a close situation. It was just in that way. Very simple.  Thank you very much for your lecture. It was a great pleasure to be taken through these  five projects. I would like to go back to your question at the very beginning. Are we  modern? Have we ever been modern? You never addressed the question mark, so maybe you  could say something about that.  We were already talking about that. I don't know if we are modern or not. In my opinion,  modernity had been almost in every period of the history. Of course, we could discuss  what is the term modernity, if we are modern or not. But maybe the starting in Reina-Santh  period, by sugar, in that moment that the man realized that he can manage by himself  without anything else. But I think modernity has to be with the right use of the technology  and the technique in each moment of the history. In my opinion, we are still modern. If we  are answering to our time with the right technology, with our technology, our way of technique.  In my opinion, modernity has to be with technique. At least how we understand it. But I'm not  an expert on that.  Thank you.  I think it was the first time I heard a really good answer about the topic of the series,  or we're still modern. Your project shows it's possible and how it's possible. I think  it's very impressive that you can show this with four or five projects. It's very few,  but very powerful. I have two questions. The one I already did in my introduction, a Spanish  one. Where would you place yourself between these poles of the abstractism of Delasotta  and the pictorial power of Oissa? That's the first question. The second would be, I think  why you used the geometry that was clear, but what I think is also very strong in your  projects are the emptiness, the power of the empty space, which I guess has really something  to do maybe with the landscape, but not maybe not only. How do you deal with what meaning  has for you this power of empty space?  Okay, answering the first question, well, it's difficult to compare with both of my masters,  like Oissa or Delasotta. Let's say that maybe our architecture is closer to Delasotta, maybe  in terms of construction or in terms of, let's say, naked. I remember that I was talking about  naked architecture in the way how we work. Maybe it's more pure in that point of Delasotta  following his way. But I would like to think that in that way that Oissa had of answering  architecture in his way that he was looking for the opportunity. That's more genius. Let's  say that Oissa has knowing that I would like to think that we get sometimes that opportunity  that we really look for it. We think and we talk in our office very often about which  is our opportunity with this project. I already told you that small surface outside of the  rowing center, I think it's a new opportunity to that village. Maybe that opportunity has  to be with the void, have to be with the empty space that Annette was asking for. So how  we try to decide as a strategy to find which should be the rules, which should be the decision  where we can start to build this strategy and always respecting as much as we can and giving  as much open space as possible thinking in the future use and the freedom of the people  who will use the building. It's true that we really like to work with territory because  I don't like to use the word landscape. I think territory in the way I understand the  word, I think it's very proper, have inside of it not only an escape but also human space,  also archaeological spaces, different situations, different, yeah, that different persistence.  So let's say that from that way of understanding persistence, we really balance very much the  decision of where is the real point where we actuate, we concentrate, what is the place  that we have to concentrate a program, we have to densify our architecture and how much  and where it is in balance that the space that we leave completely void, the emptiness  of the project. I think that balance maybe is the question of maybe is the link between  our architecture and projects, that sentence of never to be built on that already was stamping  on the plan of Bath for me it's important to realize where we should, let's say we should  work on it and how much and where it is much better to just leave it like it is already  there. Of course at the moment that you are working on a site you are changing completely  the rules of it. So the project is not only what you build, like we talk about that very  often in the studio, it's not only what you build, it's also the space that you don't  touch but that now after that intervention you have been changing completely.  Thank you. I would like to address on how the question from Mark when you talk about  the task to do with technology or the means that we have today for building and also the  one that Spiro already said that this kind of openness. I've seen from your project,  correct me if I'm wrong, the light in the way of designing how you make it in this openness  is very clear. Use light, the contrast between the light and shadow is very powerful as a  reading in your design. What is it in your design, when it comes to your mind in the  moment that you decide to implement light in your projects?  I don't know if I understood completely well the question. Can you repeat the last part  please? How I implement?  In your projects the light and shadow is very intense, it's super powerful as I can  read it from your project. When you really think about these spaces in this contrast  between light and shadow and when they come to your mind because for me they are very  powerful.  Well it came from when I was a child and it was so warm in my place that you have to  fluke for the shadow. It's not a joke, you go and you take a walk on our land, every  animal, everyone is just protecting from the sun. I think that is one of the problems when  in Spain it was not well understood the modernist and the rationalist architecture because Spain  sometimes is very warm. I think this is a really good question because contemporary  architecture we don't talk so much about shadow mainly in, of course it's important in maybe  Tehranian countries but this is more important in tradition but not so much in modern architecture.  It is very, very important. I also think the shadow is something great because it's free.  You are outside, you are in a square and you can spend time under a shadow for free. So  I really like that. I didn't explain well because it was so fast. But in the Roman temple  in the shadow we don't, we not only have the shadow, you look at the plant section we  create a kind of patios in between the shadow and the main square. So you also have cross  ventilation. I mean we really think very much in the public space. Maybe that emptiness  that you were asking for it has to be with that condition. I would give that shot trying  to be as public as we can. Maybe it's a private commission but we want to look for that extra  that I think architects will give with architecture. I don't know if I answer you. Any questions?  Other questions? Okay, hello. Thank you for your wonderful lecture. It was really inspiring.  I have one question also regarding to the first, are we still modern? You talk that  technology is very much, relates very much to modernity. I wonder because you are always  reacting with very modern industrialized materials to your spaces. Do you think that  modernity is linked to material or do you also think that you can make a modern or is  it linked to material or more to the way to express the architectural language? Could you  make a modern building also with a very old material? Are you thinking that, are you choosing  deliberately a very conch fairy material to the old spaces or to the old structures or  just wondering? Well, I think so. I don't know if I was to you. We try to do like that.  I think the material, I don't know. We use the technique and the technology that we think  is proper for each one of our buildings. So I don't even answer the question. What I mean  is that we don't have a language, only a language itself for answering to its situation. We  don't think it's possible in our opinion. Maybe modernity had it, more clear this. I  don't know. But we really think its, probably have a deeply research and deeply question  that it's not only, it doesn't have to be only with the program. I don't know, I think  to find the right technology to apply to each project, material at least is part of our  discussion and our idea. I don't know if I answered you. I don't think so. I don't think  so. Okay, I ask again. In wood. I don't really know what this is. For example, if you used,  for example, timber or rent earth or like this old Roman concrete like this Pozzolano  or Traslam, would it be as strong? Do you think as a counterpart? Okay, that was my  question. No, for me it's interesting because I'm working with probably the oldest material  that we're like earth and earth instructors and I'm always asked if I want to send people  back to Stone Age and I wonder why this question is coming up from architects because I think  modernity is not a question of a material, of how old the material is. Of course, the  material can be as old as you can but the technique, I am quite sure. Let's say we want  to be very, like a sion, let's say that material is more or less always there but you can use  whatever material, old material or tech, whatever. But I think what is interesting for me is  that you are using the last technique, sorry, the last technology of that material. Yes,  I totally agree. That is the point of, it might be that is the modernity. Absolutely,  I agree. I think modernity has to be with technology and technique and maybe even technology  more because we can use an old technique but with a new technology. I think that is interesting.  Yes, I'm improving now about this question. Okay, got it. Thank you. Thank you, Anna.  Maybe last or second last question. Then, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Are_We_Still_Modern_2_0_347.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_348_1403.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_1404_3767.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_3768_11675.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_11676_14099.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_14100_17903.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_17904_18299.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_18300_18911.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_18912_18959.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_18960_19463.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_19464_19511.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_19512_19571.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_19572_20195.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_20196_20483.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_20484_25295.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_25296_25439.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_25440_25571.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_25572_25931.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_25932_26279.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_26280_27107.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_27108_27515.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_27516_28067.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_28068_28151.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_28152_28235.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_28236_29051.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_29052_29687.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_29688_32159.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_32160_33767.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_33768_36551.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_36552_38471.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_38472_39059.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_39060_40235.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_40236_41171.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_41172_42347.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_42348_45539.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_45540_49811.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_49812_50711.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_50712_51239.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_51240_52475.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_52476_52799.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_52800_52943.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_52944_53159.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_53160_53939.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_53940_57011.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_57012_58607.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_58608_62735.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_62736_63647.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_63648_63971.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_63972_65099.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_65100_68135.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_68136_69191.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_69192_70835.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_70836_71123.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_71124_71699.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_71700_73499.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_73500_74543.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_74544_75239.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_75240_75311.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_75312_76115.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_76116_79967.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_79968_82415.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_82416_85319.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_85320_85811.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_85812_87719.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_87720_89159.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_89160_91679.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_91680_91859.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_91860_93791.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_93792_94187.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_94188_95171.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_95172_95351.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_95352_95675.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_95676_96335.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_96336_96407.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_96408_96611.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_96612_96743.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_96744_97667.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_97668_97787.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_97788_100559.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_100560_100751.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_100752_101927.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_101928_102251.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_102252_102323.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_102324_102467.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_102468_102875.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_102876_103463.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_103464_105287.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_105288_105539.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_105540_105779.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_105780_105923.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_105924_110195.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_110196_114251.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_114252_114767.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_114768_114863.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_114864_114983.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_114984_118607.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_118608_119099.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_119100_119951.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_119952_121871.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_121872_122231.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_122232_122915.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_122916_123215.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_123216_124991.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_124992_125471.png Are_We_Still_Modern_2_125472_126084.png