This post is dedicated to the blog ARCHITETTURACATANIA that in one of his post talks about "false history " in relation to that type of architecture that is advocated here and that once again the tradition and classicism as one of the options of modernity.
Here we talk about in defense of false architecture which I consider one of the founding principles of the framework. E 'therefore a provocative post, including repentance and irony, and for that I will begin with a picture of one of the most famous and celebrated historical fakes exist, the bell tower of San Marco which as everyone knows has been rebuilt the same as before (in this sense it is wrong) after a morning woke the Venetians and the bell was a pile of stones and bricks.
guess you think that if they rebuilt in steel, such as the Eiffel Tower, or if they have not rebuilt at all it would have seemed more real !
will show, however, also "false " current, perpetrated with impunity by architects who employ them successfully and to the satisfaction of their customers, architects studying the canons of classicism and the building of a local, that before start a project take a look around, che partecipano ai concorsi sapendo di non avere alcuna speranza di vincere.
Sfortunatamente non è molto facile reperire foto di questo genere di progetti perché non sono troppo rappresentati nel giro dell’editoria specializzata e modaiola, conscia questa del fatto che ciò che non appare non esiste; e invece esiste, eccome, ed è più diffusa di quanto non si creda, e mi riferisco a quella di qualità, non certo ai diffusi scimmiottamenti di archi e colonne grossolanamente sparpagliati nel corpo o fuori dal corpo dell’edificio di cui abbondano le nostre periferie (anche se i nostri amici modernisti dovrebbero porsi il problema che, se questa degli archi è un’esigenza così forte cui si risponde in modo un po’ crude, it is worth being able to respond more cultured and correct, but they know that is not their architecture that can satisfy that need).
rating of "false history " is a recurrent theme in the criticism against the classical architecture or the vernacular and the point is, not infrequently, brandished like a sword with a certain snobbish contempt anthropological superiority , considering a lack of thought in relation to an alleged weakness "theoretical".
I believe instead that reality is exactly opposite in the sense that it is a large part of the critical modernist "architecture to be no fundamental theoretical elements, except the worn out and worn reference to a modern generation (1), adherence to the" values \u200b\u200bof society, "or better in their absence (see Space junk Koolhaas) and the integration between architectural research and technological development (2). Talk about false
inevitably means starting from the aesthetic theories and the theory of restoration. The origin of the debate and the different positions can be traced back to Ruskin and Viollet le Duc, each with its uncompromising vision of restoring the monuments and not let them fall back to a part of nature from which a concezione frutto di profonde e rispettabili convinzioni personali ma difficilmente praticabile; l’altro con l’introduzione del restauro stilistico che ammette, quando non vi è sicurezza dell’originale, l'aggiunta cercando di interpretare le intenzioni autentiche dell’autore o, addirittura, l'invenzione , cioè il massimo del “ falso ”.
Ma è la Carta di Atene che istituzionalizza il concetto di falso , stabilendo che laddove vi è la necessità di inserire nuovi elementi, questi dovranno essere chiaramente leggibili, per riconoscerne l’epoca e per non creare, appunto, falsi.
Questa è theory that has dominated the twentieth century and the working method of the Superintendent, but in transforming manual politically correct architecture, because, with time, this is transmigration, by osmosis, from the restoration project, with the so that the "old" has been finally fixed and fossilized at the time of membership and, by analogy with the theory of restoration, the new one should express the forms and materials of his time so he is determined paradoxical situation is that everything old is untouchable, but when you must act next to old buildings or in the historical town is admit to anything, as long as "modern .
E 'from here that was born the commonplace and the injury of lout = false; but I say that counterfeiting is a key architectural and this in complete harmony with the Vitruvian triad, with many of the aesthetic theories that have occurred through the ages.
So clearly, if the architecture had only a purely utilitarian purpose (utilitas) to protect humans from natural events (3), to fulfill what it takes very little: four solid walls and an equally solid roof (firmitas) .
Not so, not it never was, from the history of man. How many and what were the different forms that have taken over the homes of man and their collective buildings since the beginning of the story! Impossible and unnecessary to list them here because it is known to all.
Why, limited to our continent and a very short historical period in time scale, we moved from Romanesque to Gothic? Maybe that's Romanesque buildings were rather weak? Maybe it rained on us too much while those at much less than Gothic? Obviously not.
So, if there is only a utilitarian principle, what is the spring that has always driven the transformation of the architecture of many characters, the greater or lesser presence of ornament, of the difference, for example, within the sacred space between the Christian figurative art and abstract geometric Islam?
The reasons are traced to cultural factors that is " that complex that includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other skills and habits acquired by man in As a member of society "(Tylor E. ).
The man gives the home a symbolic value that goes far beyond mere utilitarianism and wealth or appearance, as Mark writes Romano, in building his house there is, at the individual level, a precise aesthetic intention. Same going the community of men and women of a city given to those buildings that were collective, in which the civitas recognize a "collective subject".
E 'is this collective aesthetic value (not referring to the architect and specialist) that was given to private and public buildings, to give strength to the fact that architecture is not just " more or less complete identification of beauty with the type of construction and the performance of the objective "(Rosario Assunto) but something much more that does not belong to the intrinsic qualities of the building but the expectations of those who dwell in respect of who will look at that building , that is the owner in respect of nationals.
architecture communicates information that the owner, public or private, would have it, it communicated to those who passed by: in this sense, for all matters concerning the symbolic aspect of architecture is the appearance that counts and the building is also shown himself regardless of relationship to form and function.
In this sense a large part of the architecture is fake because there is a symbolic part of it which is a quid plus compared to the Vitruvian triad .
La storia dell’architettura è una lunga storia di “falsi ” che hanno determinato capolavori assoluti. Si pensi alla cortina di facciate lungo il Canal Grande, a Venezia, che, in moltissimi casi, sono pure scenografie che cambiano completamente aspetto se si gira l’angolo.
Gli edifici, che siano temi individuali o temi collettivi, hanno spesso e intenzionalmente un nobilissimo prospetto principale lungo strada mentre gli altri fronti sono assolutamente ordinari (a meno che non affaccino su una piazza o siano in angolo tra due strade gerarchicamente simili) perché la parte che fa mostra di sé alla città deve avere un aspetto performed and representative of the family or community , as in the Palazzo Medici Riccardi in Florence, where the front end side of the building deliberately over the body for use by a fifth, while in the rear elevation is completely different theme and decoration disappears.
A similar attitude has changed for the same internal and between the public and private, between the floor and the floor! It could be argued that the hierarchy between the plans is the representation of a social difference, then meets form and function, but are concerned with utilitarian function but not cultural or social. Much of the architecture is dominated by this function cultural and, in this sense, is false , is a symbolic coding built by the man himself to satisfy their inner needs as they were transmitted by the culture environment in which they live.
If this is true, if the architecture must not carry out the purposes of mere efficiency, the division has no sense of ancient architecture and modern architecture, giving the first negative value and the second positive (or vice versa) because the man is a complex interweaving of nature and culture is one of the alternative architecture that best meets this complicated mix and one that opposes it.
Now There is no doubt that, at the popular level, the model is "old" who wins, and in this sense, those who design in this model would be successful but they are not for reasons of power that determine the balance of power is not totally comparable.
After showing the "false" tower of San Marco, visited by thousands of tourists every year, now show a number of other false fellow architects of a more or less famous and some fake "authentic".
The following is a home to about 4 or 5 years ago on a hill in the immediate vicinity of Arezzo, my city, designed and directed by Roberto Verdelli of Arezzo.
The structure is made of reinforced concrete and the whole "dress" exterior is therefore "false". 
The owner, however, thinks that's true because he knows that when a passer-by looks up and looks at his house, his friend exclaims:
"What a beautiful house, and renovated as well! Of course our old built better than we are ... and look how well that hill! Do not waste at all. Who knows how much money they will cost, but if I had the way I'd do. "
So our passing has taken some aspects of this building:
- beauty
- the recognition of a traditional style
place - respect for the natural
- wealth (or wealth) of the owner
- recognition of the absolute value of the property.
architecture is to be asking for more?
And to think that it is a fake! Almost makes you call the Gabibbo!
This other project of an architect of Parma, Andrea Pacciani (which I did not ask permission and I hope you do not get angry) and was performed in collaboration with the architect best known Pier Carlo Bontempi. 
Here the false moves from the countryside to the village but I can comment just because they belong to a reality that I do not know well, having seen only once. But I think the 'image is more than adequate to illustrate the high quality of the intervention. I will now
another colossal fake, this one perpetrated in my home town and a symbol of it: Piazza Grande (or Piazza Vasari). 
This is a false and completely aware of institutional child because of power, especially the fascist power, which launched a law specifically for the "stylistic restoration." The Mayor called a talented architect of Arezzo, Giuseppe Castellucci , and these, together with others, rebuilt, in some cases invented a whole series of monuments, including some buildings in the square, 
now are the icons of this city, that no one would dream of demolishing Arezzo to return to the previous condition, which certainly are not works of history of architecture, rather than the many that are located in the city, but have the advantage of highlighting the historical center.
Finally a few words about another kind of forgery: the outlets vernacular.
As many know there is a chain of outlets that adapts its architectural image to where it is located, that are used in Tuscan architectural elements of the Tuscan village, Lombardy Lombard ones, etc..
Here the problem arises in a different way: first of all we must say that the logic is exactly the same as planning any other outlet or supermarket, that is, the sprawl, the spread in the territory of specialist facilities for sale, with no relation to the city, and in fact are the usual white elephants. Moreover, the elements are juxtaposed with vernacular building types clearly different from the original, so you have a giant forms suitable for buildings with completely different size ratios. In short, this effect is absolutely Disneyland. 
That however are the "modernists" is to criticize one of their many cultural and inconsistencies, allow me, theoretical shortcomings, since they very much like the architecture-image advertising, and these belong to exactly that vein.
However it must be said that compared to similar shopping centers, they are infinitely more pleasant and enjoyable by consumers for both the exterior form to the effect that the village that makes it less tiring to the rite of purchase. Not only that, it is frequently the case to inform visitors that if the houses on the upper floors (there are but there seem to be) are available for sale.
This is also a symptom of a need for tradition, ancient, belonging to the places that architecture "modernist" rarely fails to satisfy, and that many architects "modernists" obstinately persist in denying and to oppose, as if it was up to them to decide not only what is right is wrong and Co in architecture but also what must please people.
(1) On modernity see a mention of Lucien Steil
(2) On the latter claim, however, suspend the proceedings, until I read the essay "Technology and Architecture" by Emanuele Severino, Routledge , € 12.50, if they manage to understand each other enough.
(3) I obviously made a huge simplification because utilitas grip is also a building for the purpose for which it is born, ie the distribution features. But this is not an essay, is a post, and some carelessness gotta admit.
