>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. WE ARE NOT EXPOSING BUILDINGS BUT CONSTRUCTION.
In this exhibition the visitor will not find buildins nor innovative dwellings concerning space, form, technology or management. There is no type of material construction as we all are used to see. We talk about the real special construction constituted by the refuge of a belly capable of sufficiently sheltering life within an adverse environment. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. WE PRESENT NO OBJECTS BUT INTANGIBLES FACTS.
The objects used in the exposed events have no novelty, which is instead present in the intangible conditions then generated. The proposal invites the visitor to comprehend this other value while giving a glimpse of its importance for architecture. There is no novelty in what is shown; neither facades nor plans. There is no pursuit of the surprising sections or preconceived esthetic principles conditioning the formal resolution. Ultimately there is nothing that we have learned as architecture in this exhibition, but just fields of interest for the array of the symbolical and real space. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. THERE IS NO OBVIOUS BEAUTY… but instead the one of “the casual encounter between an umbrella and a sewing machine over a dissection table”.* Therefore the visitor of the uruguayan pabillion or the catalogue reader shall not search for technical nor conventional interest within the grimy spatiality of a “tatusera” [tupamaros’ hiding place], a “berretin” [tupamaros’ hidden arsenal], of a “carcel del pueblo” [tupamaros’s popular jail]. Neither in the wrecked fuselage of an aircraft difficultly used as an improvised shelter after a brutal accident. Instead the visitor shall get involved in the exhibition building his own decoding and understanding strategy while generating his own relationship between the presented events and the discipline. Every new relationship created will give sense to this exibition. * Isidore-Lucien Ducasse (4 April 1846 – 24 November 1870), a French poet born in Uruguay. His only works, Les Chants de Maldoror and Poésies, had a major influence on modern literature, particularly on the Surrealists and the Situationists. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. THERE IS NO COMMON SPACE BUT COMMON CONSTRUCTION. At the times there was no relationship between the two experiences. Although their protagonist were peers living in the same small city —Montevideo—, but they didn’t know each other. They lived in the same years such major life experiences that contemporary influenced them and the society they lived in, but still there was no direct connection. By collectively exposing them is part of a new construction of relationship which invites to conceptualize those events under a different light than the one used at the time. This artificial construction of relationships throughout architecture ends up defining a new field of study. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. WE ARE NOT EXPOSING ARTISTS BUT ART. There is no artistic will in the exposed experiences but rather an infinite series of actions readable as artistic creations. The artistic aura comes from the cultural construction or from its narrative. Although the protagonist are not responsible for the events’ free interpretation made after 45 years by this curatorial team, to all of them goes our gratitude for sharing, in an infinite series of events and publications, their rich experience, which enables us today to read the experience from an architectural perspective. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. WE DON’T CLAIM CERTAINTIES BUT CONCERNS. We invite the XV Venice architecture biennial’s Uruguayan pavilion exhibition’s visitor to clear out his certainties while getting in touch with other possible expression of the architectural. We propose to appreciate and learn from human construction’s richness that is capable of creating sense of belonging to a place —even the most inhospitable— or to a collective —even the most disincorporated—while using other resources beyond those that we traditionally handle as architects. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 7. WE ARE NOT EXPOSING SPACES BUT FORCEFIELDS. The interest of what is being presented is not in the accomplished space quality nor the technical deployment that is used to build. It’s more about understating the accomplished power of those constructions cemented on the human spirit’ conviction and strength, which managed to bend contingent adversities. They are works capable of generating specialties simply defined by the use of waste and auras. Human ties and allegiances are their solid defense walls. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 8. WE ARE NOT EXPOSING PERFECTION BUT CONVICTION. This exhibition exposes human being’s creative capacity when confronted with environments recognized to be superior. It concerns the weaks’ strategy and strength. It talks about the “art of possible” not as a passive acceptance of adversities but instead about the power of subversive conviction against them. In those constructions there is no search for perfection, always elusive, as architecture is obsessed by. There are no buildings conceived to represent god, power or to redeem social imbalances. We would say —without fear of being mistaking— that we are exposing the other extreme within the spectrum of human constructions. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 9. THESE ARE NOT “CONCRETE” WORKS BUT WORKS OF “CONCRETIONS”. This exhibition does not concern tectonic nor what is generally assumed to be architecture. Instead it deals with intelligent and efficient human constructions unchained by extreme survival’s adrenaline. Therefore it brings us back to immemorial times as much as towards the future. We are not concerned with spatial tectonic or quality. Starting from the rich human experience’s recognition, this exhibition finds motivation in the fervent hope of extending the architectural and architect’s interests limits. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 10. IT WAS NO POSSIBLE. This exhibition was not designed nor executed by scenographers, the translations were not made by translators, the presented ideas and concepts were not investigated by full time academics either. All was elaborated and put together by the curatorial team and a handful of friends in little more than a month, after work hours, and with scant resources (The budget Allocated for the Uruguayan exhibition —albeit being a major effort for the country— is quite small compared to the other national Venice Architecture Biennale and specific exhibitions). That is why this exhibition and representing catalogue are themselves a metaphor for what they exhibit: with ease of manner they celebrate the art of the possible. We should not be here but, as Obdulio Varela said at the 1950 World Cup final of Maracaná, where he probably shouldn’t have been either: “los de afuera son de palo” (That means outsiders are nobody or better: outsiders do not play).
Commissioner: Miguel Fascioli. Curator: Marcelo Danza. Exhibitors: Antar Kuri, Borja Fermoselle, Diego Cataldo, Facundo Romeo, Federico Parra, Jose de los Santos, Marcelo Danza, Marcelo Staricco, Mateo Vidal and Miguel Fascioli.Venue: Giardini