59 for many twentieth-century architects was a moment to check and verify in reality what had been anticipated in design. While it is customary to note modifications and discrepancies among the various design forecasts, in the work site documents and at times in the completed work (to return to Scarpa, in the case of the Brion Tomb, for example)1, the discrepancy between design and development is quite strong, because it was precisely during construction that the phase of experimenting with and reinventing forms, materials, and their mutual relationships – on top of the other extraordinary qualities of the Venetian architect’s design – took place. In this case, the reconstruction of the work site − the privileged place for Scarpa’s technological experimentation −, alongside the design drawings, becomes indispensable for understanding the idea and for retracing its progress or ultimate solution, at times completely ex novo as took place in certain parts of the Brion Tomb. The linkage between archives, architectural work, and restoration is therefore a clear one, and remains a central factor for the disciplinary setting that looks to the protection and conservation of the modern and contemporary architecture within which the restoration of the modern is placed. A few words must be devoted to introducing the various connotations underlying the «restoration»/«modern» duality. «Restoration» is a term that comprises many categories of intervention, in addition to the various ways in which it is legitimately achieved: conservative restoration, or restoration for reintegration, reconstruction, functional requalification, and so on. «Modern» is likewise a Carlo Scarpa, Tomba monumentale Brion, 1968-1978, pianta e studi prospettici della struttura dell’arcosolio, S. Vito D’Altivole (TV), courtesy MAXXI Museo nazionale delle arti del XXI secolo, Roma, Collezioni MAXXI Architettura, Archivio Carlo Scarpa. Carlo Scarpa, Tomba monumentale Brion, 1968-1978, studio prospettico della struttura in calcestruzzo dell’arcosolio, S. Vito D’Altivole (TV), courtesy MAXXI Museo nazionale delle arti del XXI secolo, Roma, Collezioni MAXXI Architettura, Archivio Carlo Scarpa. very broad term, although its use is restricted to the post-industrial revolution – a departure from the historiographical orthodoxy that sees the discovery of America as the start of the modern Era. The adjective «modern» referring in our case to the architecture of the Modern Movement, was then considered more broadly for the twentieth-century architecture that used innovative materials and technologies, in comparison with historical construction in masonry. In this sense, the complete conservation of the documents held in architects’ archives is particularly useful, since they retrace the processes (photographic documentation at the work site) or the new materials and industrial products that have at times fallen into disuse (documented by technical data sheets and terms of contract). The great size and heterogeneity of post-industrial era construction then raises a series of questions that, although to some extent included in the conceptual framework of restoration applied to the antique, in turn raise even more and not easily solved questions. The debate and the increased awareness of the value of the modern heritage, the experiences of the final glimpse of the twentieth century, the restorations made, the technical reflections, and the analyses done, have on the one hand underscored the great opportunity offered by the presence of design documentation, while on the other hand raising some problems specific to modern buildings. In their broad features, these problems may be ascribed to the techniques and materials used in construction that had often seen little experimentation, and therefore to buildings with construction
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTExODM2NQ==