Workshop Leader: Tomeu Ramis, UPC-BarcelonaTECH, Flexo Arquitectura.
Part #1 participants: Evgeniya Vasilyeva (architect), Elvira Gizatullina (geographer), Maria Demidenko (architect), Nikolay Pashkov (developer), Evgeniya Lopatina (architect), Daria Tabachnikova (economist), Danil Voronin (architect), Maksim Shpakovsky (economist), Valentina Lysenkova (architect), Yulia Slav (political consultant), Olga Ponomareva (architect), Anna Griffith (designer).
Part #2 participants: Evgeniya Vasilyeva (architect), Daria Tabachnikova (economist), Evgeniya Lopatina (architect), Olga Ponomareva (architect).
Duration: 2 months.
Building on the previous workshops, the main focus of workshop is to comprehend the perils and potential for transformation that recent areas such as Parnas can have, and the necessity to urgently address their shortcomings.
Goals of Workshop¹
- To think about the dialectical relationship of the new and what came before, and the process by which innovation can be achieved. One particular focus may be on landscape and its relationship with the building.
- On the theoretical level, students probe into the relationship between reflexivity and value (via Giddens and Habermas), and symbolic power (via Bourdieu). This power constitute people (urbanites) through making them see and believe, conform and transform visions of the world, and therefore the world itself by virtue of a specific effect of mobilization. They thus challenge not only societal ideals of contemporary architecture and its relationship with the life-world, but also, and foremost, their own professional standing.
¹ Taken from Master Program direction brochure ‘Building the City Now© – Workshops+Modules’.
Polifunctionalism: Productive Parnas.
Parnas is currently a residential monoculture, umbilical connected to the rest of the city by a single metro station. It is a de facto dormitory satellite town, although sold as a Parnassian paradise. Which new conditions arise when we inoculate new functions in the existing buildings of Parnas? How will it change not only mobility patterns, but activity within the neighborhood? How will it affect the otherwise monotonous housing typologies?