Born to last either physically or as collective memory, the very essence of architecture engages in a (titanic) survival endeavour. Yet, in an era anchored to the myths of perennial youth, shall we also allow the right to be forgotten? Where is the right to mutation and to decay until the appearance of ruin, a sign of an eternal past, that Augé defines as “pure time”?

Starting from these assumptions, the issue of “Ardeth” on Time seeks reflections on the implications that the notion of time generates on architecture, caught between an idea of immortality on the one hand and its material corruptibility on the other.

This call intends to explore the different critical stances that the project (of architecture, restoration, landscape) takes when it interacts in the present on objects that come to us from the past or aspires to confront the future.

This thematic issue thus proposes three blocks of questions: the first concerns the ambiguous boundary between historical time and present time; the second considers the project as an inter-temporal practice between short and long duration; the third, finally, looks at how, through the architectural project, we think about the future.

The project between historical time and the present time
The museum is an institution and the architectural place responsible for institutionalising time. In architecture, historic houses, or “house-museums”, combine the material shell with historical content, making the container and the content coincide. Even ancient cities often present themselves as enormous “house-museums” to some extent. Ancient cities serve as “showcases” of tangible and intangible heritage. However, must a significant gap exist between past and present for an architecture, place, or landscape to be accredited as heritage?

The case of Ville Savoye, which became a national monument when its architect was still alive, reminds us that the present often has the strength to impose itself on the collective consciousness.

Is an extended notion of heritage possible, capable of considering the present as memorable? We certainly cannot forget how contemporary values, expressed today, struggle to assert themselves as ancient values do. The recognition of the present as a historical time concerns the question of value judgement, as Alois Riegl stated at the very beginning of the last century. However, there are significant differences, on which “Ardeth” invites reflection, among cultures and specialised practitioners, linked to the notions of authenticity and reproducibility. If, with emphasis on the first concept, the ostentation of the patina from ancient times on the bare matter runs the risks of aestheticising the past, the latter one potentially generates old “brand new” monuments.

How far should the project intervene in existing contexts without resulting in embellishment? Expanding on the two notions of authenticity and reproducibility, the way the project unfolds may emphasise specific periods over others.

Is that power of perpetuating pre-existing narratives or prioritising a specific time frame a dimension of the “power of the project” worth further investigation? Also, should the project always conform to praising the oldest vestiges?

The project between short and long term
The project is a deferred and inter-temporal procedural practice driven by textual and relational dynamics. It unfolds in the present, integrating concepts and contextual data from the past, focusing on the future.

With this premise in mind, “Ardeth” raises the following questions: how can the project reconcile the short time of intuition with the lengthy process duration required to complete the work?

Can the future be incorporated into the project, planning the entire life cycle of a work or a landscape to arrange architectural modifications over time? Could we consider, within the ecological realm of construction, the idea of designing ruins, as depicted in Joseph Gandy’s images of Sir John Soane’s Bank of England? Alternatively, must we acknowledge that the “life of forms,” as described by Focillon, is inherently unpredictable in the long term, akin to any living organism?

Furthermore, fashion stands in contrast to architecture’s inclination for longevity. Simmel indeed defined fashion as antithetical to teleology. How does fashion influence architectural styles, museum displays, and the preservation of history? How is duration manifested in temporary installations or projects geared towards temporary uses?

The concept of cyclical time has frequently been integrated into architecture. Examples include sundials, the rotating volumes inside the Tatlin Tower, the rotating studios in Sacripanti’s project for the expansion of the Italian Parliament, and the circular movement of Villa Girasole by Angelo Invernizzi near Verona. Are these simply uncommon experiments, or can these projects still function as devices capable of representing time?

Thinking about the future through the project
The entire epistemology of the Modern Movement reflects a deep-rooted belief in the “magnificent and progressive destiny” of humanity, with the Corbusian main ouverte is the powerful symbol of the optimism of modern architecture, serving as a powerful symbol of the optimism of modern architecture. In contrast, contemporary architects operate in an era of rapid scientific and technological advances. Paradoxically, they seem somewhat uncertain about progress, if not openly hostile to it.

To describe this condition, Bauman coined the term “Retrotopia:” forced to confront a future that seems out of reach, the Angel of History is driven by the wind toward the past, which becomes an obsession.

In light of this, “Ardeth” raises the question: how is the idea of the future manifested in architectural and landscape design during this challenging time?

In short, can there still be room for the avant-garde project in our weak time? In other words, how can we think about progress in architecture beyond the obvious implementation of component and material technology? Is it possible, for example, to overcome the idea of architecture as a static form through adaptability?

Adaptability concerns flexibility of use and the concept, codified by Jullien, of “availability” to changes. Adaptability introduces the fourth dimension of time into architecture, in addition to the three spatial coordinates. Adaptability, then, brings new possibilities for responding to users’ needs, such as temporary occupants and non-conventional uses. In the project, will this require assuming a “specific neutrality” posture, as suggested by Atelier Kempe Till in the Manifesto for New Collective Housing?