Exercise in Modernity
Paulo Mendes da Rocha
EXERCISE IN MODERNITY
The Third World is, in general, the hope of the world. This is precisely the place where the disastrous image of colonialism has been revealed. And the Third World’s reaction is the hope of everyone, including the First World. It is we who will have to touch the Earth, in a new way, inaugurating. No degradation; the population properly distributed; seeing the landscape in a new way.
The idea of modernity is completely linked to our awareness of ourselves. Artistic manifestation is a condition of the human species alone. And it is the condition of our existence. In other words, man is his own invention.
Urban is nothing. Urban is a state of mind. Urban is man. We are the urban. And urbanism is our story. A new story among those living in cities. And that, in my opinion, is what urbanism is. The existence of an urban being who lives in trust, in hope, in solidarity with the other.
What will this House be, where children can go happily to school, together, on foot, past landscaped areas, where trees and birds can thrive, where you can sail down rivers and drink their water? The rivers are polluted because the city started by using them as natural sewers, and now here we are. We have, however, the resources to turn those rivers - I'm not saying back to how they were – but actually, I think, into something even better. Imagine an unknown river, suddenly discovered, in natura. All right, it may be a beautiful river, with its fish, its crystal clear water, its shining sands, but what if it runs through a city. A river with its quays, its bridges, like the Seine in Paris, is much more beautiful than a river in natura, of course. A river where you can see a vaporetto coming from another country, crossing its waters. Of course, this can't happen with our Tietê, but imagine a land like Brazil, with wide stretches in natura, and certain parts of its landscape constructed like cities for the people. It certainly is a new landscape.
I don't have professional but rather a citizen’s dreams. Whether you’re a sculptor, an engineer, a doctor, a railway worker, that dream is common to us all. Now you can split tasks. So, this city architecture, we architects will do it. As expected. I would like the population to expect us to do it, and say, “Then do it, while I have something else to do.” For the architect, this task is not exhausted in quantitative work. On the contrary, it translates into form. After all, we do not live without form. A house has a shape; a simple pot handle has a shape; a cigarette has a shape. I mean, our world is a formal world. A world that demands forms. A door, a knob, a train, a viaduct, a house ...
Architecture is no more than that: you satisfy your need for shelter, cross a river with a bridge, and you do this work in ways that tell your story. It is not for nothing that you discover an unknown city, as happens in archaeology, and manage to interpret the history of that people by the forms discovered there, recording its life. This is our condition.
Form reveals part of a project; in other words, the desire for other forms. When you say, “This form is typical of such and such a time,” you’re not just saying you recognize the kind of house that existed then, but also what people of that era thought about the future of the house.
There is something positive in the so called postmodern movement: its idea of reviewing. I think reviewing is very interesting. However, I know pretentiously postmodern works that are horrible, and where nothing has been reviewed. They are doing collage, pure and simple. If you don't change projects in their essence, you only change the form. Simply changing the form isn't enough. It’s a purely commercial idea of the profession, a medieval idea of the professional who is competent in order to please the ruling class. If you want to change the type of jacket, you now want it to have two buttons or three, the guy does it, but it's always the same jacket. What we want is to change clothes.
Nothing today comes from outside anymore. Where outside could it come from? Only if it comes from another galaxy. Today, we know the world so well that nothing comes from outside. The question of the national, which is roughly what you want to raise in relation to another country, can no longer be seen this way. We’re all inside. I’m not referring to the idea of a global village, which I think is naive, but to the idea of what is particular to us; what is ours, what must be treated with great affection for the other to see. The richer humanity is in its diversity, the better. In this diversity, we will not have to see conflict, but rather the areas of our solidarity. One of these areas is the question of universal patrimony. The problem of the monumental heritage of a city like Venice interests us as much, today, as Ouro Preto, Recife or Olinda should interest the Venetians. What I mean is, establishing a universal consciousness. It isn't enough to solve the problem in this country, if it isn't solved in the other. For the world to be as we want it, we must look after Ouro Preto as the Italians must look after their Venice. In that way, the bitter relationship between “rich” and “poor” countries will begin to break. When it comes to solidarity and awareness, we're all equal.
The urban man is not necessarily a man of the great metropolis, but a man with a modern way of life, which is a privilege of this age and presupposes many cities. That is why Brazil will have to modernize all its cities, towns and villages, discovering a new city design. I think São Paulo’s growth will not be solved by prohibiting migration, but by creating conditions for you to choose “x” cities where you can live, work and dream. Maybe we’ll make a new Venice in the Pantanal, a freshwater Venice in the Amazon, floating cities near the Tocantins, in the Araguaia, near the great rivers, like the São Francisco, and beside the mineral reserves. After all, who said that Serra Pelada or Carajás and other iron mines would have to be construction or mining camps? Whether or not to carry out these projects is now a political problem. I’m sorry to say this as if it were easy. On the contrary, it’s very difficult, but we are already resolved to fight for it. This is a new age.
The role of the architect? I don’t know why the architect should have a role. The one with a role in this process is the politician, the man of the polis as such. The architect is one of them. The architectural issue is something else. There’s an idea of challenge in this picture: a great challenge for artists, and for architects in particular. We must know what forms we will give to this world that is beginning now. In terms of mentality and ideology, we should have the vision of modernity. As for the forms, however, we don't know what they will be yet.