The global economy is accentuating the effects of the dominant architecture,
the type that claims "we don't need context".
And yet debate on this galloping frenzy does not exist: architectural criticism,
invoking the limits of the discipline, is content with aesthetic and stylistic
reflections devoid of any analysis of the real, and ignores the crucial historical
clash that - more insistently every day - sets a global architecture against an
architecture of situations, generic architecture against an architecture of
specificity.
Is our modernity today simply the direct descendant of the modernity of the
20th century, devoid of any spirit of criticism?
Does it consist simply of parachuting solitary objects on to the face of the planet?
Shouldn't it rather be looking for reasons, correspondences, harmonies,
differences in order to propose an ad-hoc architecture, here and now?
