X, 2009/1

Editorial

It's been some time now since we've been in touch: there is so much to do in less and less time... Meanwhile, we have acquired some new collaborators, developed collaboration on interstate projects with authors from previous numbers, and young prospective experts are emerging, developing fresh and as yet relatively unknown areas. But their turn will come in the next number of AR. Let me present the articles in this number.

Valon Gërmizaj is a young colleague from Kosovo introduced by Dr. Uroš Lipušček, the rector of the university there. In his article Views on Deconstructive Architecture, he considers the causes for the uncertainties and confusion surrounding its definition contained in buildings created in the past. While Classical architecture celebrated human craftsmanship, Modernist architecture has done as much for machine technology; each had similar and repeated aesthetic languages which were visible throughout the architecture of its time. This aesthetic resemblance is not present in Deconstructive architecture. Because of the absence of a common visible architectural language, the present study attempts to discover how our colleague sees it, and what Deconstructive architecture means for him and the environment in which he works.

Manja Kitek Kuzman and Vladimir Brezar consider the intelligent renovation of the building stock and upgrading activities that make use of wood, in line with the principle of "minimum cost to residents on account of new marketable floor areas". The presented scenarios of building upgrades and their evaluation should encourage us to adopt advanced solutions, while examples of good practice should serve as expert guidelines. We will see.

Aleš Golja, Špela Verovšek and Tadeja Zupančič write about the reorientation of the Upper Soča Valley towards ecotourism. The issues discussed are tourism and ecology, primarily in terms of preserving the authenticity of space and dynamic balance of sustainable cultural spatial development. This area is one of the most attractive in Slovenia for leisure in the natural environment. However, from the perspective of the ecosystem, social environment and architectural heritage, it is an area of great vulnerability.

Alenka Fikfak discusses urbanised countryside and small non-agrarian settlements. This is a problem which developed after World War II, and it has recently shown its effects along with the recession. This is why this article is so timely. These are small settlements divided according to their development policy into agrarian and non-agrarian (largely urban) settlements. Among the latter, we classify rural settlements of mixed activities, hamlets, tourist resorts and areas of holiday houses. These are settlements in urbanised countryside lying in the wider hinterland of cities. As to their shape and content, they integrate all the advantages of living in a natural environment, including (allowing) the city way of life (new urban rurality). Urban elements prevail over rural, despite the fact that the cultural landscape of which they are part is given over to intensive agricultural exploitation. In the case of small settlements, individual spatial interventions need to be managed in a reciprocal relationship with the comprehensive, visual and functional image of the settlement because of the typological and other particularities attached to a limited number of structures and public spaces.

Gregor Čok raises the less discussed subject of industrial architecture or, more precisely, its accommodation into economic zones. It all seems to be a matter of industrial frameworks into which architecture has to be accommodated in compliance with two sets of requirements. The article concerns the flexibility of spatial implementation acts which have to provide for appropriate planning conditions that enable maximally unhindered accommodation of structures, in accordance with the known or changeable operating needs of individual economic actors. In this context, the issue of overly vague regulative instruments within vast areas of economic zones is being posed, as it may also result in undesired effects on space.

Because of their size, the visual impact of their edge facades and a vast array of internal activities, economic zones are not negligible entities and need to be appropriately integrated into a given spatial situation.

Martina Zbašnik Senegačnik and Ljudmila Koprivec introduce a new term - 'biomimetics'. This relates to biological systems which have evolved on Earth over millions of years and made it possible for organisms to take their shapes, adapt and survive, and which possess the highly optimised characteristics required today for the contemporary, sustainable development of our society: they are energy-efficient, in balance with the environment and morphologically effective. Detailed observation of natural processes and their properties has triggered an interest in new directions in research, associating natural sciences as well as 21^st century technologies, which opens up new, controlled approaches to the shaping of the future: biomimetics. Biological models may be emulated, copied, learnt or taken as starting points for new technologies. Through studies of biological models new forms, patterns and building materials arise in architecture. Because of their properties, biomimetic nanomaterials, biomimetic technical textiles and biomimetic self-curing materials usually outperform conventional materials and constitute future challenges for architecture. This is what the author claims, what the future has in store for us remains to be seen.

Edo Wallner tackles the issue of the passive house as a constructor. The design of a passive house is very similar to the design of a seismically isolated building. In both cases the structure of the building is isolated from the foundation. Nearly all buildings are constructed with a solid wall system, regardless of the type of construction material used. This means they are very rigid in the horizontal direction, and when a seismic event occurs, they are subjected to a considerable load which, however, may be efficiently mitigated by the incorporation of an earthquake protector.

Peter Marolt again dwells on the symbolism of the Far East, naturally, in the design of space. He links eastern cultures and religions and applies them to the design of space, including ours. An interesting theme, although somewhat foreign to our space and profession.

Lara Slivnik wraps up the issue of art pavilions with an interesting example: the Jakopič Pavilion, which stood in Tivoli Park in Ljubljana, exactly where it is about to be reconstructed. She discusses pavilions in general, and reveals some details from the history of the Jakopič Pavilion; finally, she raises the question of where, why and whether we need it at all.

There are quite a few articles in this number with multiple authors.This raises numerous problems or concerns. At the begining of their course, I encourage and require team work from students – which is particularly important for architects who are highly introverted – but an article by an accomplished expert is an authorial work. A mentor may direct, help, improve, but must not interfere with the work as author. The mentor's task is to lead a young expert towards responsibility, which has to be borne by him or her alone. I am confident that my young colleagues will agree, although through gritted teeth, that the use of a mentor's name ensures more respect for an article - although theoretically, it should not have any influence whatsoever.

For this reason, an ensuing issue will be dedicated to the young who are entering the profession, and whose articles might not yet be so excellent as to receive universal praise. But we all have to start somewhere.

Editor