thank you ippo
for having us here at the russian
pavilion in the venice architecture
finale
please tell us how general theme of the
vinale
is present here so the
open it’s the name of the russian
pavilion of the 17 architecture biennial
curated by ashin sarkis
and it’s a two year long exploration of
the role public role social relevance of
cultural institutions in times of global
crisis
within and beyond the venice biennium
and in a way given the context in which
we are we thought it was natural to
actually
start from dissecting the politics and
mechanics of institutions
and to start that from the pavilion
itself so
the object of open is the pavilion as
architecture and as institution
everything started in 2019 when we
launched an open call
to young russian architects we have
received multiple entries entries over
100
eventually the open call was won by a
russian japanese office called kazan
and then few months later through the
eruption of the pandemic
the banu was postponed and we brought
let’s say our project online
we wanted to keep our voice alive and
keep on reflecting on institutions
and use this year as a year of
reconstruction
and by doing that we found the testing
grounds to
in a way explore our journey and to
continue our journey
in the sort of in-between space or
nebulous space between the digital and
the physical
around the website that we launched a
community of
interdisciplinary thinkers and
practitioners
grew in parallel to the redefinition and
reconstruction of the architecture
in a way it was in this in between space
that we
gave a tentative answer to
the prompt of this year biennial how
will we live together
on the website we can find a very
diverse type of
content around the scene from djs to
architects to artists to
video game designers how was that
process of the open call how how wide
was it and what did you discover from
all the people that were
sending these ideas around the open
the open concept well the open call was
uh targeting the architectural
transformation
um what happened around the open call
when we migrated online is that we
wanted to
abandon the centrality of a single
disciplinary approach
we wanted to reflect on a temporality
that was different from the temporality
of a biennium so this is a project that
is not really about the specifics of
this biennium it’s actually projecting
itself into the future it’s an act of
reconstruction
basically and yes i mean the invitation
was open
when we invited people to contribute to
our digital platform
which became basically an editorial
platform in a way
we we wanted to engage a conversation
that would not be
stuck within the architectural discourse
but rather try to multiply the point of
views in order to understand
what a cultural institution can do in
the crisis
the multiple crisis that we are actually
living today and this is possible if you
involve
politicians artists architects curators
journalists
scientists djs technologies
and so forth it’s really difficult to
reduce the complexity of the moment to
one single
one single approach and the book that is
on show here
it’s in a way the echo of the
architectural project
the dialogue was really vast the book in
a way formalized that dialogue into a
product that is ready today
but it’s a dialogue that will continue
afterwards this is a project that will
extend
beyond this biennial and it will
continue into the next art by angle and
so forth
well also the project to
remodel the building is for the future
this this is a very
significant structure in the giardini
absolutely and
the concept of open that you know it
comes from your
your call how is it represented in the
architecture that we find here
the architect who designed this building
alexey joseph the building was opened in
1914
conceived it as a sort of portal system
the idea was basically that this was
supposed to be
an architecture in dialogue with the
giardini the lagoon
definition ecosystem at large it was not
just looking
inward into itself not inward into the
biennial
but rather it was trying to establish a
connection
between the built environment people and
ecosystems alike
so what we did on one side was to open
back up all the windows and visual
connections that the pavilion was
actually
characterized of and then of course
because
things have changed and cultural
productions as hybridized and it’s much
more
let’s say complex and layered we have
turned the building
where we could into sort of theatrical
device something that can adapt to
different artistic and cultural needs so
there are two
double heights that can be established
or not
so two spaces that connect and
disconnect so it’s a building that poses
challenges for the future but as you say
this is a process of reconstruction that
is looking to the future editions of the
banyon but most importantly is looking
into
what a national pavilion can be in a
moment in which
cultural production is not necessarily
national any longer
70 percent of the people that
contributed to this project
either toward the architecture either to
the larger conversational line
are non-russians well also this pavilion
happens not in the middle of a pandemic
but of a global
need for change and it’s also a question
that has appeared in russia
it’s everywhere and do you think that
in the around the community from this
call with the content
is that represented somehow it is
definitely represented
the point of views are of course very
different
but we have addressed
this pavilion to a younger generation
of let’s say architects
and ordinary architects in russia and
it’s a generation that is
looking with a lot of hope to
the future so to say
and to wrap up
what would you expect that the people
that come to visit this pavilion and
that also consume the content of the
ones
of the website live with in their minds
i mean i i try to explain this not as a
show but rather really as a reflection
on on institution per se and i think to
talk today about the
politics of institution in this moment
it’s an extremely crucial
question and to also to talk about it
within the cultural context
to reassert a form
of uh let’s say to reassert the politics
or to assert a political dimension
it’s it’s very important um uh if not
crucial
um what i think it’s what i think people
will take from this is that
eventually they will consider the
biennial
not just a temporary show
but that is something that can be built
on
let’s say more solid ground and
over a longer time span so to basically
position this project tries to position
itself
outside of this kind of bulimic rhythm
of content consumption
in a way and even our let’s say
jump into the digital environment is
part of the discussion we are not
interested
we were not interested in showcasing
live events
uh we were not interested to bring
quickly people around
a moment specifically but rather use a
game
as a platform for social and political
exchange
and the fact that the game happens
within the pavilion and its premises
is in a way acting makes it
almost like a digital counterpart or a
reincarnation of the same process that
we would like the pavilion
to enable in the physical
thank you thank you