IX, 2008/1

Editorial

While I was writing the present preface, I received news of a prestigious award granted to my colleague Peter Fister. It was the Stele Life Achievement Award and was granted by the Association of Conservators of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia. It is right, we will say, that it was given to an architect, and it is right that it was Peter Fister who received it. Both facts occur quite rarely, but it is beyond doubt he has absolutely earned it. An architect in the conservation discipline sets frameworks and directs all work flows. Not that it makes him the most important figure: the most important are the results. Providing there are any.
As to the colleague Fister, there are quite a few: not only in our country, but also beyond the borders. Primarily beyond the borders. And it is very usual in view of our circumstances. I will not be exaggerating if I say that they are the fruit of ignorance, unprofessionalism, envy, and the imperviousness of professions, organisations, policies, or, if I put more simply, of fear of quality. 'Beyond' Prof. Fister's solutions have always been appreciated, even more than that – they are being used. What more could we wish for?
Years ago, following a suggestion of Prof. Dušan Moškon and the then Chancellor of Ljubljana University, Prof. Jože Mencinger, I penned a proposal for a state award. The proposal was not understood, but its content is still valid. Let me repeat some of the thoughts:

'Professionally Prof. Fister deals with the development of architecture, renovation and remediation;, his work is particularly important in the field of the harmonious development of the countryside, as well as in the field of vernacular architecture. Since the very outset, he has been a regular lecturer on the International Conference on Vernacular Architecture ALPS ADRIA (ARGE Alpe Adria, Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Slovenia), i.e. since 1991, when he managed to secure the regularly neglected vernacular architecture the status it deserved. This architecture is a product of unskilled, but not stupid people, who acquired their knowledge in the form of 'informal education', through heritage. It is an architectural discipline which enjoys increasing esteem across Europe and around the world: after all, it is being taught at more and more universities – which also is a result of Prof. Fister's systematic work.

In respect of the comprehensive work of a scientist, teacher and architect, Peter Fister, in the fields of his profession, teaching and science during the past few decades, a proposal for the award is more than grounded. The reasoning behind it is not based on 'some' professional field, but on the sensitive thematics of the history of architecture, and thereby on the cultural level of Slovene identity, which we need more than ever after acceding to the European Union. We need it not only as the Republic of Slovenia, not only as an architecture or a cultural category, but as a cultural value which needs to be fostered, and especially when a nation is as small as ours. In order to foster a cultural value, we must first put it together, recognise, record and understand it - if we want to present it as a characteristic of our cultural realm and Sloveneness in general – with one purpose only, to carry on our culture.'

Well, the proposal is still on the table: compliments go to the results. Heritage, informal education, the memory of Europe, cross-border cultural dialogue, are not merely flowery phrases taken for granted. These are not just the words and ideas of Professor Fister: this is his work.

It is also right to allow Dr. Fister to speak. On the occasion of the conferring of the award, the journalist Milan Vogel asked him something like this: It seems that the function of preserving monuments has been overwhelmed by capital or political decisions. Does it need to be reorganised? Prof. Fister's answer is typical of him, and not at all to the liking of some:

'Right now we are in a process of great changes regarding various professional functions and also their legal frameworks. This fact points to the necessity for changes, and time will soon show whether the changes will bring about improvements or if professional opinions will be heeded to an even lesser degree. It should be pointed out that the development of the goals of safeguarding cultural heritage across the world and our adjusting to these changes require from all those who intervene in the cultural heritage to re-qualify themselves or – which would be even better – to become subject to compulsory upgrading of their knowledge as is the case in the medical profession. Unfortunately, it has already been stated that many among us have not followed the changes and are therefore no longer qualified for the new mode of work and ethical commitments towards the safeguarding of cultural heritage as a public good. (Delo, 31-03-2008, p. 9).
An unkind, but real dilemma. Many will not accept it, but tomorrow it will come as a fact. Let it be a compliment to Professor Peter Fister.

Welcome to the first regular volume of AR in the year 2008.

Alongside the regular columns such as 'Reports on Research Tasks' and 'Congresses' (as many as our colleagues have prepared in the form published here: but this is sometimes a very difficult task), we also have quite a few articles featuring a variety of contents: from philosophical to technical to reviews, to archeology and projects. Each of them is interesting in its own way.

My colleague Zbašnik writes about large passive structures, which are becoming ever more interesting and important for architecture.

A trainee researcher, Jaka Bežan, suggests a uniform solution for small public structures in city centres, Ljubljana included.

Dr. Lah reflects on ecomuseums, which increasingly involve the local population and become their livelihood.

My colleague Wallner improves on my field: hayrack. He conducts an analysis of some elements which I did not manage to elaborate on.

Dr. Kuzman conducts an analysis of timber construction criteria. It is closer to timber studies, but does not diminishes its interest to an architect.

Prof. Domen Kušar elaborates upon fire-fighting security; Dr. Peter Marolt reflects again on Far East and its philosophy - this time the case study is about the Slovene poet Srečko Kosovel.
A trainee researcher, Matevž Juvančič, and Prof. Tadeja Zupančič write about conceiving digital tools for architectural education, while considering the influences of the characteristics and elements of educational interfaces.

Dr. Benjamin Štular is a special guest who as an archeologist spreads out the ground plan of Mali grad Castle in Kamnik and opens up completely new problematics which we architects will also have to consider.

My colleague Slivnik introduces a new column entitled 'Problems', with the issue of architectural competitions continued and actualised by our colleague Glažar with the case of the siting of the new courthouse in the area of the Passenger Centre Ljubljana. Interesting.

Congratulations to Professor Fister.

And pleasant reading to you.

Editor