Ardeth #5: INNOVATIONNo 05
(Spring 2019) | RIGHTSNo 04
(Fall 2018) | MONEYNo 03
The discussion of architecture, with all the visibility of its objects, tends to downplay the invisible flows of money that sustain its production. It is as if the dependency on economic forces is too much to face up to; better then to celebrate the catalytic genius of the architectural hero and then the glorious outputs, and try to ignore everything else that goes on in between. This issue intends to probe the in-between space of the operations of architecture, examining the intersection of the projects of architecture with economies, and with it their associated social and political contexts and implications. It is only through a better understanding of the way that contemporary economics cut across architectural operations that one can learn to deal with these dominant forces in a resistive and transformational manner.
(Spring 2018) | BOTTEGANo 02
In the last fifteen years we witnessed a new ethnographic wave of studies that focused on practising architecture. This body of research aimed at grasping the socio-material dimension of architectural practice. They all relied on the assumption that architecture is collective but it is shared with a variety of nonhumans. These “new ethnographies” generated “thick descriptions” of the knowledge practices of different participants in design. This issue of “Ardeth” collects contributions that will address the ecology of contemporary architectural practice, scrutinizing it as involving actors with variable ontology, scale and politics; exploring empirically different formats of design and reflecting on the importance of ethnography for understanding contemporary architectural practices.
Unlike the many magazines that revolve around the architectural world, Ardeth concerns neither with outcomes (architecture) nor with the authors (architects). Ardeth concerns instead with their operational work, i.e. projects. The shift from subjects (their good intentions, as taught in Universities and reclaimed in the profession) to objects (the products of design, at work within the social system that contains them) engenders an analytical and falsifiable elaboration of the complex mechanisms that an open practice such as design involves. Through a process of disciplinary redefinition, Ardeth explores the falsifiability of design hypotheses as the object that allows the project to scientifically confront errors and approximations.
For the call for paper clic here: