Extra Corpus


What if you just changed the context?

Today most of the museums are tombs of furnishings. The objects are quickly reduced to pieces from collections and are preserved with all the dusty eternity of useless ornaments.

If we enter a deserted room, it often happens that the statues appear to us in a new aspect; they come under different metaphysical aspects. If we find them suddenly on the road, in a scenario where we are not accustomed to, they appear in a new light, gathered in a strange solitude.

A profound impression can then arouse the monuments transplanted into a desert landscape. In contrast, even the natural environment around it assumes a strange first appearance.

We propose a visit without a lot of encumbrances, where objects are only memories, choices, light thoughts, claims of truths, peaceful coexistence between things, time, places and people.

Objects à reaction poetique, catalysts of actions, such as meteors, fallen rocks, celestial bodies exposed to veneration or mystified by the overlapping of different levels of experience. Stimulus not for professional actors but for everyone.

We use perfect technicians – anonymous surgeons of a sophisticated team, specialized in delicate replacement and grafting operations of revitalizing mechanisms, in the opacious body of architecture -, and white tees that make the object even more outstanding.

Our graphic proposal intends to translate well-known works into contexts totally alien to them. The Colosseum, normally surrounded by a thick and historic urban fabric, is now seen in a desolate setting, with the water inside as if it was ready for a Naumachìa. Ancient statues positioned in crossroads, with dense New York traffic that contrasts with the “white” tranquility of a patinated museum. And again Venice, where – instead of water – the canals are navigable as in a desert. What if also the Wright-Guggenheim were transported in the space?

How does the perception of these places change? Could we perhaps appreciate them more unconditionally?


Who influences you graphically?

The main reference is surely the work of Superstudio and of Architettura Radicale, although today they represent perhaps an anachronistic vision. However, the power of that image remains still today very significant.

What is your take on the architectural competition?

Every time we start a project, we like to discuss what we really want to achieve with this kind of representation between reality and imagination. It is also a very funny moment, which allows us to think without limitation. A contest like the one of Non Architecture is definitely a place to give free rein to your creativity, even beyond the concrete realization.

To what extent does its strict format limit or liberate the representation of the project? 

The limitation might be that you have to use (not always, but often) only existing images, so research becomes a fundamental step. But, at the same time, we are pushed to think beyond what can represent the abstract or imaginary.

What defined the choice of the individual objects you choose to transplant? 

De Chirico, in Statues, meubles et généraux (1927), was the starting point:

«It has been observed more than once the curious aspect that beds, cupboards, mirrors, sofas, tables can achieve, when we suddenly find them on the road in a scenario where we are not used to seeing them: as in occasion for a move, or in certain neighborhoods where merchants and retailers expose the main pieces of their merchandise out of the door, on the sidewalk»

We wanted something sacred to be nearly desecrated. The provocation must be evident, so we chose the musts of architecture, from small scale to the urban one.

We wanted to overcome the conventions, create new temporary patterns of behavior.

How was the montage the perfect medium to reveal your provocation? 

Although we believe in a measurable representation and in the use of these powerful tools such as Photoshop only in the final refinement phase, sometimes recourse to photomontage and collage allows you to recreate something absolutely realistic from an outright imaginary. It’s a powerful communication, capable of making something very naive credible.

If you could explore the provocation further, what would you do?

It would be interesting to have the opportunity to enjoy the beauty of these places under a tease that has another kind of meaning: it does not shield some object from the dust, but it transports it to another context and thanks to this gesture gives it an exceptional perception out of the common place, from where it comes.

With our dreamy images we try to give an answer to that fantasy.

We do not need museums, we need to shake what’s around us.

What is the effect and purpose of the GIF compared to the static drawing?

The gif allows you to recreate in a very communicative and equally immediate way the idea of time and movement without having to resort to the video. It has almost the sense of a cartoon in itself.