Italian Fascist Architecture

Alice Davis Hitchcock Award for 1992, Society of Architectural Historians.
Most Outstanding Book in Architecture and Urban Planning, Professional and Scholarly Publishing Division, Association of American Publishers, Inc., 1991.
International Architecture Book Award, American Institute of Architects, 1992: "This is magisterial history with a grand sweep, an eye for detail and a determination not to simplify.  If Modern architecture in Italy over five generations was complex, paradoxical and full of counter-tendencies in any one architect, then these are lovingly pulled apart and exposed.""

This paper describes the different ways of commemorating the fallen of World War I in Italy between 1918 and 1940. From the collection of examples emerges that there was no homogeneity in the forms of remembrance during these two decades. Rather, we find both a continuous renewal and overlapping of different kinds of commemorative forms. Right after the end of World War I, a spread of spontaneous local monuments is discernible, though the many small war cemeteries rising near the former battlefield areas were already beginning to be perceived as a problem. Shortly before World War II, the construction of huge ossuaries and, later, war memorials was fostered by the Fascist Regime which availed itself of the fallen for ideological and political purposes. Between these two extremes, also other forms of commemoration such as parks or avenues of remembrance were realized. This paper tries not to force coincidences between history and the history of architecture; nevertheless, it understa...

Nel volume a cura di Alberto Articoli e Gian Carlo Borellini si pubblica questo saggio che si concentra sulle case unifamiliari di Giuseppe Terragni che vengono analizzate attraverso il dispositivo del telaio. Sotto questa luce si coglie con particolare evidenza la forte originalità che di Villa Bianca, l'ultima villa costruita da Terragni e un suo capolavoro.

Central to debates about “heritage” is concern over what “deserves” to be preserved for the future and why, and also over the consequences or effects of defining a particular body of material or intangible culture as “heritage”. This chapter asks what is involved in, and what are the effects of, defining totalitarian architecture and other physical remains of totalitarian eras as heritage. through doing so, it highlights concerns over the performative dimensions of heritage listing and the kind of worth that this is usually seen to bestow. In addition, it shows how “heritage” is not a fixed category but one that undergoes transformations in definition and operationalization.
Beginning with the most internationally prestigious form of heritage listing – that as UNESCO “World Heritage” – the chapter seeks to highlight frictions, unease and tactics involved in listing material culture remains of Totalitarian eras as heritage. In doing so, it also identifies certain directions of ongoing change. It includes discussion of the criteria and contents of the list, as well as some landmark inclusions, especially that of Auschwitz concentration camp. I then turn to an ex- amination of the recent attempt by the City of Nuremberg to have some of its spaces associated with Nazi crime entered into the list, and its more general re- framing of itself as a birthplace of Human Rights, considering these also against a longer history of different forms of heritage listing – and contests over, and effects of, these. e chapter concludes by considering whether we might now be ap- proaching a time when Totalitarian architecture might more readily be officially listed as heritage, and, if so, with what effects.

The study of empires in general, and the Roman empire in particular, may seem only remotely relevant to our understanding of present international politics and their ideological motivations. However, behind their diverse technologies, institutions and symbolic facades, the empires of the past responded to conditions and situations that on a more general level also unfold in our contemporary world.
Empires aim to establish control over vast tracts of space. Their purpose includes making place by, economically, militarily and ideologically controlling their populations and resources. What marks the empire in particular is its scale, and often its heterogeneity. In this sense empire is place-making on the grandest scale. This paper investigates certain aspects of how empires, particularly the Roman, succeeded or failed to expand and uphold the imperial space as an integrated yet diverse hierarchy of places. It is a hierarchy organised in ways that would facilitate the flow of resources into the imperial centre, while also producing and projecting power and policy from the centre towards the periphery, in an effort to uphold the overall system. I will argue that Rome has served as a model for conceiving and an analysing later imperial projects, and that this "imperial mirror" strongly characterises Roman heritage in the present. The heritage of the Roman Empire has contributed to the symbolic repertoire of later imperial projects precisely because its ruins, monuments and history could demonstrate so aptly how imperial power was and is symbolised as place.

Il Corso della Libertà a Bolzano è un particolare condensato cittadino di storia, cultura, economia e politica. Nato nel periodo fascista quale asse monumentale della “Grande Bolzano” immaginata dal regime, il Corso ha acquisito la sua vera funzione di motrice urbana solo nel Dopoguerra, cambiando faccia. In questo volume "La Fabbrica del Tempo" indaga genesi e vicende di un elemento centrale della storia bolzanina, alla ricerca di una sua nuova identità.
Bozens Freiheitsstraße ist ein besonderer Mix aus städtischer Kultur-, Wirtschafts- und Politikgeschichte. Entstanden als monumentale Magistrale des vom faschistischen Regime gewollten „Groß-Bozens“, erwachte der Straßenzug erst in der Nachkriegszeit zu neuem Leben und rückte nun zu einer urbanen Meile auf. Mit diesem Band möchte die „Zeitfabrik“ die Biografe eines Bozner Boulevards vorlegen, der sich auf der Suche nach neuer Identität befindet.

The article is dedicated to the history of reconstruction of Rome during 1920s-1930s in the time of the government of Fascist party and Benito Mussolini in role of Prime Minister of Italian United Kingdome. The article aims to analyze the reconstruction of the historical part of Rome and discover, under the fascist propaganda interpretation of the realizations, the common international trends in urban-planning. The research treats the Masterplan of Rome, approved in 1931, its previous projects and its development. Projects of masterplans, elaborated since 1909 to 1931 and realized urban interventions are studied in the context of urban planning practice and theory in Europe, actual for that time, as well as their international influence.

The article is based on the research dedicated to two masterpieces of the Twentieth-century architecture: the Novocomum
residential building in viale Giuseppe Sinigaglia in Como (Italy) by Giuseppe Terragni (1904–1943) and
the Zuev Workers’ Club in Lesnaja ulitsa in Moscow (USSR, now Russia) by Ilya Golosov (1883–1945). Both designed
and built at the same time — between 1927 and early 1930, two buildings have a similar solution of the corner
part — expressive glass cylinder. Although realized in different countries and circumstances, they become for years
a case for comparisons, and a cause for suspicions in plagiary. Despite the case is noticeable in history of modern
architecture, it becomes for the first time the case for specific study.

By now, in Rome, public buildings realized in the 1920-1940s, according to Italian heritage legislation, are becoming protected monuments and require conservation and restoration. The implementation of that, however, leads to a number of problems of very diverse nature; be both technical, social and cultural. This paper describes the basic features of protection and restoration of interwar heritage and analyses how they have been assessed and used both by the professional community and the general public.

Il saggio – che riprende e amplia l’intervento intitolato “Il piano regolatore, gli sventramenti, le scelte urbanistiche e le modalità realizzative che portarono alla costruzione di piazza della Vittoria” presentato al ciclo di conferenze “Non solo ’Bigio’. Piazza Vittoria, Marcello Piacentini, Arturo Dazzi, arte di regime e patrimoni dissonanti” (Brescia, Associazione Artisti Bresciani, 8 settembre 2017) – si configura come sintesi critica dei principali studi condotti sul tema delle trasformazioni dell’area nota come “quartiere delle Pescherie”, abbattuta alla fine degli anni Venti del Novecento per la realizzazione di piazza della Vittoria a Brescia.

The idea that architecture has such a relevant influence on
people’s lives and decisions, lead philosopher and sociologist
Henri Lefebvre to affirm that architecture could easily become a
means of power, since “we shape our buildings; thereafter they
shape us”6. This conclusion was also made by the leader of the
fascist movement Benito Mussolini, who gathered the most
renowned architects to redesign the city of Rome in order to
propagandize his regime. Traces of this can be largely found in
the E.U.R. residential and business district, where we can notice buildings such as the Palazzo della
Civiltà Italiana and the Palazzo dei Congressi, that are both characterized by a sense of modernity,
but at the same time commemorate the ancient Roman Empire, symbolizing the fascist ideology.

Die von Carl Kraus und Hannes Obermair kuratierte Ausstellung auf Schloss Tirol zerpflückt die Mythen des deutschen und des italienischen Faschismus. Hitlers und Mussolinis Unrechtsherrschaft wurde ganz maßgeblich von Künstlern und Künstlerinnen mit Bildern und Narrativen bedient. Auch in Südtirol, in Nord- und Osttirol und im Trentino. Einige wenige stemmten sich dagegen, und ihre Werke wurden als „entartet“ verfemt.
Die systemkonforme Kunst entwarf Heldenbilder, beschwor Blut und Boden, rückte „Führer“ und „duce“ ins rechte Licht und verkitschte die „Heimat“ selbst dann noch, als von den Diktatoren die Aussiedlung der Bevölkerung beschlossen wurde.
Die Schau „Mythen der Diktaturen“ ist eine Wende für die regionale Kunst- und Kulturgeschichte. Viele ihrer Kapitel müssen neu geschrieben werden. Doch die Ausstellung öffnet auch den Blick auf aktuelle autoritäre Verführungen und deren ästhetische Strategien.

La mostra a Castel Tirolo, cuarta da Carl Kraus e Hannes Obermair, esamina accuratamente e decostruisce  i miti del fascismo italiano e tedesco. Il dominio illegittimo di Hitler e Mussolini fu ampiamente servito dagli artisti e dalle loro opere figurative e letterarie. Anche in Tirolo meridionale, settentrionale, orientale e in Trentino. Solo in pochi si opposero ad esso e le loro opere furono bandite e definite “degenerate”.
L’arte conforme al sistema produsse immagini eroiche, evocò sangue e terra, mise il Führer e il Duce nella “giusta” luce e svendette il concetto stesso di “patria” quando i dittatori decisero il reinsediamento della popolazione.
La mostra Miti delle dittature segna un punto di svolta nella storia artistica e culturale dell’intera regione. Molti dei suoi capitoli andrebbero riscritti, ma la mostra offre anche uno sguardo sulle attuali seduzioni autoritarie e sulle loro strategie estetiche.

Генеральный план Рима 1931 г. стал одним из первых генпланов крупных городов, утвержденных в Ев ропе в ХХ в. Градостроительство еще с середины XIX в. стремилось решить проблему мегаполиса, и на основе этих разработок в начале ХХ столетия были составлены проекты реконструкции основных крупных городов Европы и Америки, в том числе и Рима (1909 г). После Первой мировой войны формиро вались новые механизмы планирования. В новом генеральном плане Рима 1931 г. отразились не только устремления фашистского режима, но и тенденции итальянского и мирового градостроительства тех лет. Ключевые слова: градостроительство, фашизм, тоталитарная архитектура, 1920-1930е годы, ге неральный план A. G. Vyazemtseva MASTERPLAN Of ROME-1931 AS A REfLECTION Of THE MAIN TRENDS Of THE URBANISM BETWEEN TWO WARS The masterplan of Rome-1931 was one of the first big city masterplans approved in Europe in the 20 th century. Since the 19 th century the urbanism tried to resolve the problem of the metropolis. The results of this research were used for the masterplans of European capitals at the very beginning of the 20 th century. After the WWI, new ways of city planning were elaborated. The new masterplan of Rome-1931 reflected not only the aspirations of the fascist propaganda, but also the new trends of the Italian and International urbanism of that time.

La storia della borgata fascista di Segezia, in Puglia, raccontata da epistole collocate nell'intero arco del novecento, indirizzate e scritte dai personaggi di diverse estrazioni sociali coinvolti negli avvenimenti storici dell'epoca.
Progetto realizzato nell'ambito del corso T.A.P., modulo di Storia e Geografia, prof. A. Palazzo. Università degli studi Roma Tre, dipartimento di Architettura.

In PBSR 88 (2020)
Ephemeral architecture was the antithesis of the permanent buildings typical of the 'Fascism of stone', and yet many architects took advantage of this paradox to create an imaginary Rome. A widespread use of ephemeral structures was made around 1938, during the Mostra Augustea della Romanità and Hitler's state visit to Italy, in order to support a political programme that marked the totalitarian turn in the Fascist regime after the foundation of the empire and aimed at strengthening the alliance between Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. Relying on methodologies of particular relevance to Roman art history and on various sources unknown to date, this paper investigates the relationships between ephemeral architecture and romanità. The case study is a monumental tribune built in via dei Trionfi that inevitably suffered a damnatio memoriae: a combination of classicizing and futuristic decorations, it looked back at ancient Rome and, at the same time, highlighted the Fascist regime's aspirations for might and modernity.

L’indagine documentata in queste pagine prende spunto da un interessante complesso di documenti inediti riguardanti il Palazzo del Governo di Taranto. Un sostanzioso numero archivistico che, tra documenti grafici e cospicui documenti scritti, raccoglie ciò che resta della complessa fase di elaborazione ed esecuzione di un progetto commissionato dalla Provincia di Taranto ed eseguito dall’architetto Armando Brasini. La ricostruzione storica proposta intende inquadrare questa vicenda all’interno del complesso quadro di eventi che travalicano le tematiche strettamente relative all’architettura e alla sua costruzione, fino a coinvolgere aspetti relativi a questioni economico-finanziarie e, soprattutto, sociali e politiche che, pur frequentemente tralasciate nelle ricostruzioni storiche, spesso risultano determinanti per la realizzazione di un’architettura. Trattandosi del più importante edificio governativo di una città che ha una rilevanza strategica militare fondamentale rispetto alle mire espansionistiche della Nazione, lo sguardo si è dunque spinto fino a toccare una serie di relazioni connesse ad un programma urbanistico ben più complesso all’interno del quale, questa architettura, assume progressivamente un ruolo centrale, fino ad incarnare le aspettative di divenire un «Palazzo Statale che dovrà rappresentare un’epoca».

Durante il ventennio le compagnie assicurative furono coinvolte al governo Mussolini  nelle politiche di risanamento dei centri storici. Tra i protagonisti di queste complesse e ambiziose operazioni vi è Marcello Piacentini che in diverse occasioni si trovò a operare per conto delle Assicurazioni generali di Trieste, dove in piazza della Borsa realizzò un intervento  (1935-1939) che diventò il modello di riferimento per gli altri edifici che sorsero accanto. La consultazione della documentazione d'archivio conservata presso le Assicurazioni Generali, il fondo Piacentini alla Biblioteca di architettura dell'Università di Firenze e le fonti documentarie nell'Archivio generale del Comune di Trieste, ha permesso di ricostruire una fase importante delle trasformazioni urbane facendo riemergere intrecci e relazioni che spaziano in tutto il territorio italiano.

"Rom-Berlin" is a historical study that investigates the competitive relationship between Nazi Germany and fascist Italy in the field of architecture between 1936 and 1942. Written in Italian, it presents the results of the archive research carried out in Berlin, Munich, and Rome from May 2019 to March 2020.

This essay serves as an executive summary of the entire research project, providing a step-by-step recapitulation of all the central topics which have been developed. The relevant potentialities in terms of urban space qualities of the public housing areas are analyzed, in terms of city image, cultural heritage, as well as for their economic value. Although a significant role in the renovation of these neighborhoods is played by non-architectural factors such as social inclusion, the importance of spatial transformation is discussed both in relation to other disciplines and in terms of stand-alone interventions. Analytical methods are reviewed, including spatial analysis, subjective and objective analysis, the pinpointing of distributed vs. concentrated criticalities, and the relationship between analysis and project within the design process.
The role of the urban and architectural project is defined, both in terms of potentialities and of shortcomings. Importance of general vs. local issues, and the way they intersect within the design process is analyzed. The different “fields” of transformation and their various peculiarities are discussed: the territorial level, where public housing neighborhoods connect to the surrounding urbanization and to existing ecological networks; the neighborhood’s urban space, in particular the redesign of collective spaces; the boundaries between public and private spaces, and the connections between them; the internal spaces of buildings, in particular relating to the renovation of the individual residential units; finally the building shell, in terms of sustainability and architectural configuration.
Three distinct modes of intervention are highlighted: correction, where the new intervention totally or partially substitutes the existing situation, without establishing a dialectic relationship with it; palimpsest, where the new architectural objects are added as a collateral system in relation to the existing spaces; and finally modification, implying an intervention on material or immaterial aspects, where existing objects are critically transformed with or without adding new built volumes.
A working methodology intended to guide the entire transformation project from the analytical to the design stages is proposed. The main aim is that of sectioning the synthetic, general character of the architectural designs into a set of simple, primary transformative actions, to be used for both analytical and design purposes. In conclusion, governance and assessment tools are discussed, proposing possible strategies for the implementation of transformative actions.

Piazza Augusto Imperatore rappresenta un caso emblematico di uno spazio “artificiale” nel cuore di Roma, ideato dal fascismo negli anni Trenta per isolare due monumenti quali l’Ara Pacis Augustae – ricostruita arbitrariamente a ridosso del lungotevere – e il Mausoleo di Augusto,  spogliato dei rivestimenti che lo avevano trasformato in una sala da concerti. I due monumenti, come hanno chiarito studi precedenti (Kostof 1978; Visser 1993) hanno subìto un processo di “risemantizzazione” a fini ideologici: celebrare il paragone tra “Augusto fondatore dell’Impero romano e il duce fondatore dell’Impero italiano”, come si intitolava un libro pubblicato in occasione del Bimillenario di Augusto nel 1937.

The classicist projects designed by Ludovico Quaroni for E42 in 1937, along with Francesco Fariello and Saverio Muratori, surprised and disappointed some of their main supporters such as Carlo Belli.
The criticism, starting from Manfredo Tafuri in 1964, has often interpreted those projects as an attempt to realize a monumental architecture, as the the fascism regime required, through an escape in the Scandinavian neoclassicism and mostly in the works of Erik G. Asplund.
The unpublished sketches, stored in Quaroni's archival fonds, reveal that their design references came from a largest classic background, learnt in the Scuola Superiore di Architettura of Rome, that they attended from 1928 to 1934. The method taught in the school, especially in the classes run by Vincenzo Fasolo, Enrico Del Debbio, Gustavo Giovannonni, extracted planning models from historic architecture, useful to shape the students' design abilities. Thus, the built architecture, mainly the Roman and the Renaissance ones, became a complex living schoolbook, that students had to draw and re-elaborate, in order to absorb its formal and constructive rules.

The subversive architecture of Giuseppe Terragni - Politicization of architectural discourse in Fascist Italy


Introduction - The architectural discourse in Fascist Italy
A new building typology: the Casa del Fascio
Giuseppe Terragni’s Casa del Fascio in Como
Socio-cultural excursus: architecture and politics in
post-World War I Italy
Futurism and Novecento (1914-1930)
New architecture and the Regime
Rationalism and the “gruppo 7”
Conclusion - A universal poetry

La ricerca ripercorre il sodalizio di Gio Ponti e Bernard Rudosky sotto il tetto di Domus, il cui culmine è raggiunto nella costruzione di Villa Oro di Luigi Cosenza (che risente particolamente del dibattito e dei temi dello stesso Rudofsky). Ci si sofferma poi sulle evoluzioni personali del discorso sulla casa iniziato negli anni Trenta in Italia: da un lato su alcune realizzazioni di Ponti negli anni cinquanta (Villa Nemazee, Planchart e Arreaza), dall'altro sulle pubblicazioni americane di Rudofsky, basate su di una continua "pratica della critica culturale".