In continuity with the previous edition, commissioned by
Alejandro Aravena ("Reporting from the front") - which invited to monitor and investigate the relationship between architecture and civil society, drawing attention to the project and the social role of the architect - also this edition focuses on the
"desire for architecture" at the service of the community; an option that allows us to wait, if not a decisive turning point, at least in a way that goes in the direction that marks the end of what the American critic Rosalind Krauss calls
"the aesthetics of the proper name", in which, the central and dominant role of the artist (or architect, "archistar "in this case) prevails over the dramaturgy of forms.
"Freespace" represents the generosity of spirit and the sense of humanity that architecture places at the center of its agenda, focusing attention on the quality of space - say the curators in its Manifesto
- raises the question of free and open space, that can be generated when the project is inspired by generosity. Generosity that the cultural and institutional team of a community must be able to recognize, request and promote; the free space is a sign of the highest civilization of life, an expression of will and hospitality.
With these "high" premises, centered on the public interest of architecture in promoting the recognition of its social value to improve the quality of life of people, it disorients the Golden Lion assigned to the Swiss pavilion, blowing into smithereens (especially the Manifesto) the main ideas of curators.
The installation of Switzerland "Switzerland 240 Casa Tour", in fact, awarded with the following motive "
for a pleasant and attractive architectural installation, but at the same time deals with the key issues of the scale of construction in the domestic space"
is pure entertainment, a game of scale jumping, which is addressed to an architecture student on the first day of class in the first year of university. On the other hand, the pavilions that have interpreted the theme "Freespace" with very interesting results, are - among others - that of
Korea ("Sprectres of the Vanguardist Estate"), which reveals to the public of the Biennial the complex relationship between Architecture and State; placing at the end of the 60s the origin of Seoul's urban identity between the political and the avant-garde vision. Follow
the Chile pavilion with "Stadium", which offers the powerful and evocative image of the Stadium: space and theater of three historical events that have marked the country.
The Pavilion of Italy ("Italy Archipelago") rescues the last three modest editions, with a research theme through five prototype projects from those areas far from the imagination of the metropolis that put Italy in a break with the European urban armor. Finally,
the British Pavilion - Island - shows the gap generated by the Brexit, anticipating the departure of a year from Europe: dismantling the pavilion and creating a square "island" on the roof. Special mention to the National Participation. Yes, deserved.
