By Matías & Mateo Pintó
Architects
In regards to the recently awarded prize to the Urban Think Tank
at the Venice Biennial, numberless articles, blogs and letters in Venezuela
comment and condemn their cynic view point that simplifies, banalizes and
sensationalizes the subject of poverty and marginalization. They object to the
fact that this is even apprised and celebrated. We will not even tag this work
as polemic, since this will attribute level and seriousness to it. That prize
is simply a bad joke.
In Venezuela we actually denounce and alert
from multiple sources the impunity with which the Urban Think Tank has been
consistently steeling and misusing real and serious work that belong to
others. This group has invaded spaces,
projects and ideas achieved by others packaging it as its own to establish
themselves, running over talented and noble people, taking shortcuts to avoid
doing any work and just selling smoke.
An evil formula that has endorsed them cleverly a spot in the global
scene that unfortunately buys smoke either by equal wickedness or by rampant
stupidity.
The characters in question are probably excited
with such a temporary popularity but we trust that the number of voices now
pointing at them will finally put them in evidence internationally as they so
like it. They will likely defend themselves claiming that they have activated a
debate. But we want to bring to that same debate what many fail to mention.
We attempt to briefly summarize the main facts
of our own story, a story more than 10 years long that does not fit in so few
lines and truly wears us off personally. These facts backup the immense and
collective rejection towards the Urban Think Tank in defense of all the
affected and finally make justice.
About the Community
House (La Vega, Caracas, Venezuela)
In 2001 the Project of
the Community House of La Vega was awarded on the Socio-Cultural category at
the X Architecture Biennial in Caracas, Venezuela. This project materialized
after several years of working with Architects and Urban Designers Federico Villanueva
and Josefina Baldo responsible of the creation and implementation of the master
plan for the Urban Renewal and Upgrading Program for the Shantytowns in Caracas
while in charge of CONAVI the National Housing Authority of Venezuela.
Departing from a
meticulous observation of the unique solutions on improvised and informal
buildings of collective use where the scarce available space is multiplied by
growing in height, the Community House of La Vega established a typology and
shaped a solid posture to overcome similar problems.
During those years we
explored and defined novel architectural solutions fed by the deep knowledge of
the most experienced “barriologos” or shantytown experts. Pedestrian connectors, housing solutions on
steep slants and buildings integrated to the new street mapping sought to
become adaptable systems able to adjust to any urban intervention of the Urban
Renewal and Upgrading Program for the Shantytowns.
After only two years
the Urban Upgrading Program is interrupted.
The paradox on how Politics allow the abandonment and destruction of all
that is on the right path. An estimate
of two hundred and fifty projects where frozen amidst an explosion of National
competitions. For those of us who took part of the originating efforts it meant
above all the inability to realize at least in only one case the validity of
all that projected with such determination.
About the Vertical
Gymnasium (Chacao, Caracas, Venezuela)
In 2001 Hubert
Klumpner, had just arrived to Caracas. Having close friends in common he finds
his way to us demonstrating great interest in the work we had been developing
in the Shantytowns and suggests we make a joint project for the Municipality of
Chacao in Caracas. Within the evident interest on the Community House of La
Vega and with it as a model, we end up being awarded the design and
construction of a similar method, a building with the same characteristics: the
Vertical Gymnasium of the Barrio La Cruz. An open air sports court is occupied
by a building of collective use with different facilities in each level and
crowned by a sports court at the roof. The Urban Think Tank never had anything
to do with this project, let alone Alfredo Brillembourg.
The success of the
Vertical Gymnasium in Chacao is evident by its acceptance by the community once
completed in 2004 regardless of few interruptions during the construction.
Similar projects are discussed in several occasions but these intentions never
crystalize. The Municipality of Chacao, who commissioned the project,
recommends the transfer of rights on the project - addressed to Architect
Matias Pinto as its author- alleging their intention of establishing it as a
prototype to be installed in other locations and Municipalities throughout the
City. An agreement on this was not reached, no handover was ever executed.
Not long after the
opening of the Vertical Gimnasium we issue a letter to the Municipality of
Chacao were we clearly state the technical data of the project and the credits
of the project team. In this written collaboration agreement we recognize Mr.
Klumpner as co-author and collaborator in the team. For Klumpner having responsibilities beyond
our agreement was impossible because at that time he had no local architecture
license has neither legal relation to the project. Alfredo Brillembourg visits the site with
Klumpner and is very well impressed…
Sometime later we learn
that the Urban Think Tank registers the Vertical Gymnasium as a Trademark
looking for a way to pledge ownership and reproduce as its own. A stellar
project, they publish it over and over again as versions to be installed in
different sites using images of the original. They devote all their energy to
promote our built project as it were the initial prototype of a series of
vertical gyms of their authorship. Publications such as Harvard Review, Dwell
Magazine, amongst many more are prey of their tireless marketing and publish
this lie. The cynicism is limitless, to the point where the images they sell
for each version are made with images of the original without considerable
modifications. We are excluded as authors and in the best of chances appear as
collaborators. Moreover as if we were hired as local architects to comply with
local requirements in association with an international architectural firm.
They even denounced us
before the disciplinary court of the Architects Association in Venezuela,
claiming that we had wrongfully published the credits of the project. We
replied with a crushing dossier of proof that we had purposefully been
collecting to denounce their actions.
The Architects Association deliberated and concluded that the credits
are to be respected as reflected in the contract and as agreed on our original
collaboration agreement. They indicate that regardless of the shared authorship
between the three collaborators the legal responsibility and authorship belong
to Architect Matias Pinto who signed the project. This has not stopped the
Urban Think Tank from publishing and using the project. This has even become an
obstacle for us to present and publish our project with the correct
credentials.
Since the Urban Think Tank
has no other project of interest to show is the Vertical Gymnasium,
inappropriately claimed that under very suspicious actions secures them a spot
at the Venice Biennial in 2006 as part of the exhibition Cities, Architecture
and Society.
We invite everyone to
review in detail the website of the Municipality of Chacao where the Vertical
Gymnasium with the appropriate credits is referenced. And to then visit the
website of the Urban Think Tank were inexplicably the Vertical Gymnasium in
Chacao appears as one of their projects and Brillembourg as one of its authors.
And almost all of the later versions which are basically digital simulations
are ambiguous variables of the same project in places like Jordania, United
States, Brasil, Netherlands or Venezuela. Some of them, like the one in Sao
Paulo, have more similarity with the Community House of La Vega than with the
Vertical Gymnasium in Chacao.
“Tell a lie a thousand
times and it will be true”
The Urban Think Tank
manages to return to Venice in 2008, 2010 and finally in 2012. More of the same
but with recognitions already collected like the Gold HolcimAward for Latin
America. Just looking at their website is enough to sense that winning the
Golden Lion at the Venice Biennial would be at their reach after so many
attempts. We tend to have bad memory for many of these things but if try hard
we may find that some of the names of the curators or judges in some of the
occasions can be tracked to seemingly favor
the Urban Think Tank’s sick practice.
The prize is truly the
least important of all. That Lion is not of gold, it represents and insult to
the reality of a country and miserable proceeding. It will very likely be
defended by the organizers with arguments that we prefer not to discuss in
depth, just because their nothing but the result of a banal and distant
observation that avails a mediocre discourse. This deficit benefits the
opportunistic that sell to the world the image of the missionary supported by
recognized institutions and companies of the so called developed countries. And
to Europe and the United States depict the brave explorer willing and able to
represent our exotic reality.
It is a true shame that
the project of Angela Bonadies (with whom I studied in Universidad Central) and
Juan Jose Olavarria, would find itself buried by the wrongful actions of the
Urban Think Tank. The work of the first ones is serious and meticulous; it
portrays, denounces and invites provocation. Yet the later are wicked and
probably identified in this work a new opportunity. What is unheard of is that
again they take advantage of someone else’s work that has already been
published, it been recognized and has its own life. The media reach of a prize
like the one of the Venice Biennial leaves Bonadies and Olavarria in a very
similar situation to ours. It cannot be described with words. Is absolute
disconcert and indignation. And of course we do not envy the new
recognition that the Urban Think Tank has received taking advantage of so many.
It makes us sad, because all we have is our work and is hard to share it when
you have to explain so much.
We want to finish by
underlining the truly aggravating of this situation. That in Venezuela nothing is done to
recognize the extensive and intensive serious work developed by the true
experts in shantytowns, those who were able to identify innovative outcome to
long discussed problems while involving everyone and anyone that could make a
contribution. Those who made visible the invisible of the informal settlements,
those who for the first time made the shantytowns appear on the maps (and
thoughts of all). Knowing from experience that the results of such projects
would have to be refined over time, that there would be no shortcuts and for
sure no heroes able to address it all. They had the intelligence and the
ability to transfer their knowledge of decades to young professionals like us
to even discuss and reevaluate their own ideas. They recognized that there was
no better way to work than integrating professionals of diverse disciplines and
backgrounds and treating the communities as true clients.
They supported the need
of allowing the recognized and deciphered problem become an opportunity; from
an absolutely nontraditional focus, different from the simple and traditional
response of massive public housing constructions. They plead for a political
decision that got burnt quickly. They believed in the long and hard path, but
very likely that of a true solution. And
above all in silence, being shadowed, with integrity and humbleness.
Translation
from:
Pintó Matías & Mateo, 2012. León de chOro, Weblog. La Torre
de David, http://latorrededavid.blogspot.com/2012/09/leon-de-choro.html
September 13,
2012
Shared indignation
Abstracts
and quotes of the National reaction from the professional community in
Venezuela for the prize awarded to “Torre de David”
“It
is of my understanding the you (Alfredo Brillembourg) are one to the promoters
of this exhibition. I am very sorry to hear you are involved in the discredit
of Venezuela’s architecture and to contribute on the destruction of this great
building (…) Bad predictions for you “Think Tank”. I regret the path you have
taken in your profession guided by your desire to show off.”
Jimmy Alcock
Alcock
Jimmy, Carta de Jimmy Alcock a Alfredo Brillembourg y su
"think-tank", La Torre de David, Weblog. September 13, 2012
“With
much reason the Biennial is being tagged as populist. It is said that they
prize misery, which in our case - as Venezuelans - couldn’t be more accurate.
But the most significant thing is that it has unveiled the hypocrisy that
reigns in these spaces, the ignorance, and the frivolity. But this is not new. News to me is at least
to see it so clearly”
Oscar Tenreiro
Tenreiro
Oscar, El triunfo del cinismo, Weblog. September 1, 2012
“The
ArchitecturalAssociation of Venezuela firmly repudiates the frivolous and
distortive behavior of those who have sought, by whatever means, the doubtful
honor of being recognized in the “star system” of international awards. And
declares that the crude manipulation of an invaded building and that of
thousands of refugees does not account as a valid objective for our profession
yet only serves to prove, nationally and internationally, the deep
decomposition well, anarchy and lost values in which our country finds itself
in present times.”
Colegio de Arquitectos de Venezuela
Junta
Directiva Nacional del CAV (Colegio de Arquitectos de Venezuela), Declaración
sobre La XIII Bienal de Arquitectura de Venecia, Website, September 7, 2012
"But
there is more, the group of Think Tank Brillembourg-Klumpner and Justin McGuirk
they is being accused in Venezuela of having used, for their presentation of
the Project “Torre de David” at the Biennial, the documentation work developed
by other professionals before. Specifically, the work of Angela Bonadies and
Juan Jose Olavarria that have collected throughout several years photographic
material to systematically document the case of the “Torre de David”. They even
presented their work in New York and in Madrid in 2010, in Caracas and Dubai in
2011 as stated in the long interview published last year in April on the
Venezuelan newspaper “El Nacional”.
Enrico Tantucci
Tantucci
Enrico, La Torre de David indigna a Venezuela y compromete a la bienal, Di
Venezia e Mestre La Nuova, September 8, 2012
“The
architects that put forward the “Torre de David” in Venice acted as publicist.
They saw an extraordinary opportunity to claim international recognition and
acted deliberately and with the opportunism of those who manipulate
advertisement; because the “Torre de David” is an architectural phenomenon,
urban and human as excessive as the resources that made it possible. In it one
could find all that we are short off and all that we have in excess, our
neglect and false promises, our blindness and stupidity, the despair and
imagination of the weakest.
In
the presentation of these architects there is no evident intent or interest in
any social interest, architectonic or moral. It is only about the use of an
image and certain circumstances. If opportunity is bold, this one has its
brains exposed…”
Federico Vegas
Vegas
Federico, Venezuela en Venecia, Prodavinci, Weblog, September 10, 2012
“We used the colloquial
name of the tower to title the blog and a research Project that we have been
developing for the last three years with a very different approach to that
stated by the Urban Think Tank. We center in the visualization and discussion
around a subject that we consider it cannot be limited to mere formalities or to
an exotic discourse about popular creative, or more appropriately poverty in
which is present a repetition of vertical schemes of power and submissiveness.
And the ethical distance discussed by Serge Daney: if we cannot do something to
improve the situation of people we should focus on the problem so it becomes
visible and discussed”.
Ángela Bonadies & Juan José Olavarría
Bonadies Angela & Olavarría Juan José, Estimados lectores:, La Torre de
David, Weblog, August 30, 2012
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario