Provider: - Institution: - Data provided by Europeana Collections- Extended description:
Ljubljana: gradnja stolpnic in železniških nadvozov na Titovi in Celovški; stolpnice, avtobus mestnega ...prometa, ulica (Linhartova), zapora za promet, gradnja nove Celovške ceste, izkop, vrtanje s kompresorjem, odstranjevanje granitnih kock, promet (fičoti) čez železniški prehod, nov asfalt od Delavskega doma proti Šiški, promet, Savsko naselje, novogradnje (tudi nova ulica), prejšnje križišče na prehodu iz centra v Šiško, zaprto križišče in nova obvozna cesta za Šiško.
V petnajstih letih povojne obnove in izgradnje je Ljubljana prerasla samo sebe. Življenju vertikal in vse hitrejšemu naraščanju motorizacije, horizontale že davno niso več kos.
Prvega aprila so – tokrat brez šale – rdeči prometni znaki zaprli dostope do železniških prelazov Titove in Celovške ceste. Za gradnjo podvozov je vse pripravljeno.
Prva pnevmatična kladiva že pojejo nad površino starih cest. Delavci pospešeno odkrivajo asfalt in kocke, da bi pripravili teren strojem, ki bodo poglabljali cestišče.
Med tem se odvija vse promet po obvoznih cestah. Zlasti ozka Parmova cesta, ki služi za obvoz Titovi, je močno preobremenjena. Bolje je na prelazu Celovške ceste, kjer je bilo mogoče v ta namen zgraditi lepo obvozno pot.
Obenem z urejanjem glavnih prometnih vozlišč, razširjajo tudi nekaj drugih predmestnih cest in križišč. Nova podoba ljubljanskih ulic pa ne bo samo pospešila prometa, ampak bo tudi v okras našemu mestu.- Original language summary:
Ljubljana - gradnja stolpnic in železniških nadvozov na Titovi in Celovški cesti.- Ljubljana: Building high-rises and railway overpasses on Titova and Celovška Roads.- All metadata published by Europeana are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. However, Europeana requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources including Europeana
Provider: - Institution: - Data provided by Europeana Collections- Extended description:
Tik pred koncem starega leta se je Ljubljana poslovila tudi od najstarejše slovenske likovne galerije, leta ...1909 zgrajenega Jakopičevega paviljona. Stara stavba, eden najlepših spomenikov secesijske funkcionalne arhitekture pri nas, delo znanega arhitekta Maksa Fabianija, se je morala umakniti prestavljeni železniški progi in je tako pomagala rešiti naš stari problem, ljubljansko železniško vozlišče. Sicer pa ne bo tako dolgo, ko bomo gledali razstavo že v novi stavbi z istim imenom.
Jakopičev paviljon je bivša galerija (v secesijskem slogu), ki jo je leta 1908 postavil slikar Rihard Jakopič po načrtih arhitekta Maksa Fabianija; to je bilo prvo namensko zgrajeno umetniško razstavišče v Sloveniji. Paviljon je stal na začetku Lattermanovega drevoreda v Parku Tivoli (Ljubljana). Vse do druge svetovne vojne je bil paviljon osrednje razstavišče slovenske likovne umetnosti, kjer so razstavljali slikarji, kiparji in fotografi sodobne umetnosti. Jakopič je sam financiral gradnjo objekta, saj je bil prepričan, da umetnik potrebuje stalen stik z javnostjo. Fabiani mu je zastonj naredil načrte, medtem ko mu je mesto Ljubljana za sedem let dalo zemljišče v najem po simbolični ceni. Paviljon je imel preddverje z veliko dvorano, na levi strani se je nahajala soba za stalne razstave in mali atelje in na desni strani od vhoda pa se je nahajala risarsko-slikarska šola. 12. junija 1909 je potekala slavnostno odprtje paviljona s 3. slovensko umetniško razstavo; sodelovalo je 22 umetnikov s 172 slikami in 20 kipi. Naslednje leto je Jakopič v paviljonu organiziral pregledno razstavo 80 let upodabljajoče umetnosti na Slovenskem. Zaradi pomanjkanja denarja je leta 1923 paviljon odkupilo mesto in ga namenila za društvo Narodna galerija. Leta 1954 so paviljon prenovili. V decembru 1961 in januarju 1962 so paviljon, kljub protestom, zaradi gradnje železniške proge porušili. S tem je Jakopičev paviljon ostal brez prostorov; novembra 1962 so ga preimenovali v Mestno galerijo ter pričeli z gradnjo novih prostorov na Mestnem trgu 5. Na paviljon danes spominja kip Riharda Jakopiča, delo Bojana Kunaverja. (Vir: Wikipedija)- Original language summary:
Ljubljana - podiranje Jakopičevega paviljona.- Ljubljana - the demolition of the Jakopič Pavilion.- All metadata published by Europeana are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. However, Europeana requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources including Europeana
Arhitektonsko-urbanistički projekt novosagrađenog dijela Splita (1968. – 1979.) uobičajeno se naziva SPLIT 3. Urbanistički projekt djelo je slovenskih arhitekata (Vladimir Mušič, Marjan Bežan, Nives ...Starc), a arhitektonske projekte zgrada i ambijenata izradili su splitski arhitekti (Dinko Kovačić, Mihajlo Zorić). Članak Dinka Kovačića dokumentira vrijeme i koncepciju urbanističkog i arhitektonskog oblikovanja grada, s osvrtom na tradicionalne kvalitete zavičajne arhitekture interpretirane suvremenim arhitektonskim vokabularom.
Provider: - Institution: - Data provided by Europeana Collections- Plečnikovi stebri so pred postavitvijo na Navju leta 1952 podpirali balkon na zgradbi Glasbene matice, vendar so balkon med ...obnavljanjem pročelja odstranili. Navje je s stebri pridobilo prijeten estetski poudarek. (Povzeto po: M. Piškur, S. Žitko: Ljubljansko Navje. Ljubljana, 1997.)- All metadata published by Europeana are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. However, Europeana requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources including Europeana
Provider: - Institution: - Data provided by Europeana Collections- All metadata published by Europeana are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain ...Dedication. However, Europeana requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources including Europeana
Provider: - Institution: - Data provided by Europeana Collections- All metadata published by Europeana are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain ...Dedication. However, Europeana requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources including Europeana
Provider: - Institution: - Data provided by Europeana Collections- The subject of this research is the methodological concept of architectural
critical practice: its theoretical postulation and ...historical examination
through the study of the critical discourse of modern architecture in
Yugoslavia. Its main objective is to examine modern architecture in
Yugoslavia in the theoretical context of critical thinking and to explain its
specificities within the frame of reference of the critical architecture of
modernism in an international context. In a broader sense, the particular aim
of this research is to gain scientific insights into the possibilities and
principles of establishing architectural critical discourse, and thus to make
a contribution to the contemporary theoretical debate on the role, forms and
scope of critical thinking in architecture. The first section of this
dissertation establishes the theoretical framework of the research, examines
referential concepts of architectural theory and critical theory and situates
the subject of investigation in the geographical and historical context. The
second section is conceived as historical-interpretative research composed of
four case studies in which previously postulated theses are examined in
specific historical circumstances and theoretical models of architectural
critical practice are constructed based on research results. The theoretical
framework is set up through the examination and systematization of key
notions: critique, critical theory, critical architecture, practice,
theoretical practice and architectural critical practice. The hypotheses
proposed in thus formed glossary are further tested through a critical
analysis of referential texts from the fields of architectural theory,
aesthetics, philosophy and social theory, among which the works VI of
Manfredo Tafuri and Theodor Adorno stand out as the main theoretical points
of reference. The concept of architectural critical practice is theoretically
explained as a term broader than the concepts of architectural criticism and
critical architecture, which were explicated by Tafuri in his book Theories
and History of Architecture Teorie e storia dell’architettura (Bari:
Laterza, 1968) and theoretically developed in the 1980s by K. Michael Hays.
The problems of critical discourse are viewed in the context of the current
debate on the role of critical thinking in architecture, as one of the most
significant topics of contemporary architectural theory. Throw the notions of
the postcritical theory, presented in the work of Michael Speaks, Sarah
Whiting, Robert Somol, Stan Allen and Silvia Lavin, the major problems of
radical criticism, i.e. problems of negativity, destruction and inhibition,
are identified, and a key question of this theoretical research is raised:
can an efficient remedy be found within the framework of the very concept of
criticism? On the assumption that the philosophical concepts of the Frankfurt
school are relevant to understanding the phenomena of modern art and
architecture and that the thesis about the double character of art, put
forward by Adorno in his Аеsthetic Theory Äesthetische Theorie (Frankfurt am
Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1970), has the capacity to unify different forms of
critical thinking through a unique conceptual mechanism, a secondary research
hypothesis is postulated. It argues that the critical discourse in
architecture is determined by the continuity of the principle of critical
ambivalence (i.e. of the double character of art, as both autonomous and fait
social) and by the changeable position of the subject, object and devices of
criticism. Furthermore, it is established that the changeability of the
critical positions is conditioned (prompted or inhibited) by the changes of
the historical, cultural, and socio-political context. In keeping with the
ideas of the philosophy of practice, explained in the works of Louis
Althusser and the Yugoslav philosophical group Praxis, architectural critical
practice is defined as a field of broad professional activity which entails
qualities of a general, social practice. Underscoring the conceptual shift
from the singular VII architectural building as an instrument of criticism to
a complex methodological apparatus in which different forms of theoretical
and design work are understood as an extended medium of architectural
critical thought and activity, we point out the basic characteristics of this
concept and, relying on Pierre Bourdieu’s research of social practice, we
identify its specific features: situational logic, dispersedness and
adaptability. The theoretical concept thus established is examined through a
historical analysis of the key examples of critical discourse of modern
architecture in Yugoslavia. The principle of contemporariness is singled out
as the basic critical paradigm and, based on the theses advanced in Tafuri’s
theory, elements of transcendent (avant-garde) and immanent (experimental)
criticism are identified in individual examples of architectural practice.
The study shows that Tafuri’s theory is not fully applicable to the Yugoslav
cultural context and points out the specificities of the Yugoslav critical
discourse. On the margin of the Tafuri’s critical opposition between the
avant-garde and experimentalism, four separate historical situations,
subjects of the second part of the research, are identified as precedents
indicating the possibilities of transforming, extending and opening up
critical discourse in architecture. The first critical model is structured as
a study of early projects of architect Nikola Dobrović (1897-1967). The
object of this analysis are his first constructed buildings, built in Prague
between 1927 and 1934, among which Antonin Jindrak’s house stands out (Krč,
1928). The particularity of his critical position is viewed in the wider
context of Central European architectural avant-garde and theoretically
explained as latent criticism. The second model is conceived as a case study
of the design and construction of the Yugoslav Journalists’ Association
Center in Belgrade (1930-1935), by architect Ernest Weissmann (1903-1985).
This research focuses on the problem of the critical reception of
architectural avant-garde and examines the process of its mediation through
the construction of this building. The construction of the Museum of
Revolution in Belgrade (1961-1982), based on the designs of architect
Vjenceslav Richter (1917-2002), is the subject of the third critical study,
which explores the phenomenon of interrupted criticism and points out the
inconstancy, changeability and VIII transformability of critical discourse in
architecture. The last critical model analyses the work of architect Milan
Zloković (1897-1965) on the design and construction of the Tourist Settlement
in Ulcinj (1961-1964). Through a study of the basic characteristics of
Zloković’s design method, in relation to the particularities of the specific
cultural context, the problem of establishing the appropriate critical
distance is questioned and analysed. In each of the these cases a complex
critical attitude towards the existing social reality and the unique critical
moment of emancipation is recognized. The research shows that the concept of
architectural critical practice is founded on the principle of the double
character of architecture and it involves invention, construction and use of
diverse critical instruments of architectural and urban design, as well as
the critical methods of the history and theory of architecture. Through the
study of the unique experience of the Yugoslav modernism, by shifting the
focus from the critical architecture to the extended field of architectural
critical practice, the further possibilities of opening up contemporary
critical discourse in architecture are conceptually indicated.- Tema ovog istraživanja je metodološki koncept arhitektonske kritičke prakse,
njegova teorijska postavka i istraživanje kroz studiju kritičkog diskursa
moderne arhitekture u jugoslovenskom kulturnom prostoru. Njegov osnovni cilj
je da se moderna arhitektura u Jugoslaviji sagleda u teorijskom kontekstu
kritičkog mišljenja i da se odrede i naučno objasne njene karakteristike i
posebnosti. U širem smislu, cilj ovog rada je sticanje naučnih sazananja o
mogućnostima i principima uspostavljanja kritičkog diskursa u savremenoj
arhitektonskoj teoriji i praksi. U prvom delu istraživanja postavljen je
teorijski okvir rada, analizirani su referentni koncepti arhitektonske
teorije i kritičke teorije, i problem istraživanja je situiran u
prostorno-vremenskom kontekstu. Drugi deo disertacije je koncipiran kao
istorijsko-interpretativno istraživanje koje se sastoji iz četiri studije
slučaja u kojima se prethodno postavljene teze ispituju u konkretnim
istorijskim uslovima i, na osnovu rezultata istraživanja, konstruišu
teorijski modeli arhitektonske kritičke prakse. Teorijski okvir je postavljen
kroz ispitivanje i sistematizaciju ključnih pojmova: kritika, kritička
teorija, kritička arhitektura, praksa, teorijska praksa i arhitektonska
kritička praksa. Hipoteze postavljene u pojmovniku se dalje proveravaju kroz
kritičku analizu referentnih tekstova iz oblasti arhitektonske teorije,
estetike, filozofije i društvene teorije, među kojima se, kao glavna
teorijska uporišta izdvajaju radovi Manfreda Tafurija (Manfredo Tafuri) i
Teodora Adorna (Theodor Adorno). Koncept arhitektonske kritičke prakse je
teorijski objašnjen kao širi pojam u odnosu na koncepte arhitektonske kritike
i kritičke arhitekture, koje je u svojoj knjizi Teorie e storia
dell’architettura (1968) objasnio Tafuri, i 1980-ih godina teorijski razvio
Majkl Hejz (K. Michael Hays). Problemi kritičkog diskursa su posmatrani u
kontekstu aktuelne debate o ulozi kritičkog mišljenja u arhitekturi, kao jednog
od najznačajnijih pitanja savremene arhitektonske teorije. Kroz studiju ideja
postkritičke teorije (Michael Speaks, Sarah Whiting, Robert Somol,
The Baroque fortifications of Osijek, the largest fortified complex built in Croatia in the eighteenth century, were constructed from the end of the seventeenth to the end of the eighteenth century ...in four major stages that differed in plan and conceptual approach. These differences were largely linked to changes in political and/or broader historical circumstances, with the participation of a number of different key historical protagonists and the designers they engaged. The city, which is located at an important strategic crossing over the River Drava, was at a later stage of the Great Turkish War transformed into a city-fortress with new bastion fortifications. Designed by Mathias von Kaisersfeld, they were executed in 1692 in preparation for the Battle of Slankamen in 1692, in which Louis William, Margrave of Baden-Baden, won an important victory, and they were also to serve for the continuation of the war after this battle until the Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699. Besides Petrovaradin, whose construction began one year later also to the design of engineer Mathias von Kaisersfeld, Osijek was the first new city-fortress built in the newly-liberated territories, on the new frontier with the Ottoman Empire. Its design was very similar to that of Kaiserswerth, the fortress of the Diocese of Cologne on the Rhine; it had three landward-facing bastions and two demi-bastions facing the River Drava. The construction featured earth embankments excavated from a wide trench into which water from the Drava could be let. Construction stopped after the peace treaty was signed and resumed in 1710, when the fortifications were clad with bricks because Prince Eugene of Savoy and Emperor Joseph I concluded, in 1709, that there was danger of the Ottoman Empire becoming involved in the War of the Spanish Succession between the Alliance and France. In the same year, Prince Eugene started to build, to the design of his architect Lucas von Hildebrandt, his bastioned castle in Bilje on his Belje estate near Osijek, as the centre of his demesne. The castle was built for defence against the Hungarian rebellion, but was also to serve as his future personal headquarters in preparation of a new war against the Ottoman Empire. A new plan for the modernization of the Osijek fortifications was drawn up in 1712 for the same purpose. It was an integral plan for the layout of the cityfortress combined with the final design for a Baroque city with a new square (Paradenplatz) in the centre and a new arrangement of city streets to replace the inherited, older, urban tissue. The plan was designed by engineer Jean Petis de la Croix, and it became a model for the entire future system of new city-fortresses whose construction Prince Eugene of Savoy organized and headed after the war. At that time Petis de la Croix also made the plan for Szeged, and the construction of a new fortress in Slavonski Brod began in 1715 in preparation for the war. In the same year engineer Visconti made a plan for Carlsburg, the main fortress in Transylvania (Alba Iulia). After the triumph in the war of 1716-1718 and the conquest of Timişoara and Belgrade, Prince Eugene of Savoy proposed, in a memorandum to Emperor Charles VI, the construction of a large system of fortresses on the new south-eastern border, with Belgrade at its centre. It was to be composed mostly of old historic cities located at key strategic sites and interconnected by large, navigable, Pannonian rivers, and partly also of new city-fortresses planned between them on the remaining particularly prominent sites. To this end, even before the peace treaty was signed, the modernization began of Belgrade’s old Citadel at the mouth of the Sava into the Danube, and then the construction of new city fortifications to the design of engineer F.N. Sully, but after complaints that construction according to this plan was too expensive, in 1722 a new design was selected by engineer Nicolas Doxat de Démoret, who had previously designed new Timişoara. The following year, Prince Eugene appointed engineer Doxat as Chief Planner of Belgrade, as well as of all the other new fortresses on the Frontier. Originally Swiss, born in Yverdon, Nicolas Doxat de Démoret trained in the Netherlands as a fortification engineer, and then participated in the rebuilding of Mannheim in the service of the Prince Palatinate. To the project of Menno van Coehorn, this town was transformed from a late-Renaissance to an oval Baroque city-fortress. After that, he entered the service of General Mercy, who became a successful Governor of the Timişoara Banat. Following his appointment as Chief Planner of all the fortresses, in the next less than a decade-and-a-half, Nicolas Doxat realized, with the full support and confidence of Prince Eugene of Savoy, a great and remarkable architectural oeuvre and become the Austrian “Vauban”, a builder and designer not only of Belgrade and Timişoara, but also of most of the other major city-fortresses in the whole new system. However, due to a series of adverse circumstances, his oeuvre has to this day largely remained forgotten and disregarded, and partly overshadowed by his unwarranted death sentence and execution in the new war against the Ottoman Empire in 1738, following an intrigue by von Seckendorf. By designing and systematically supervising the construction of the fortress system as a whole, and after designing and monitoring the construction in its middle and the east wing, after 1727 Doxat especially devoted itself to new projects in the west wing of the system, in Slavonia and Croatia. First he designed the modernization of the Brod Fortress (Slavonski Brod) in 1728 at the invitation of the Commander-in-Chief of the Slavonian General Command John Joseph O’Dwyer, and next year he completed a plan to modernize the Osijek fortifications. There Doxat developed the basic design of the Osijek engineer von Haisse into a completely new concept of fortifications along the River Drava, which we can look on as a separate, third stage and the culmination in the development of the Baroque fortifications of the Osijek city-fortress. The landward fortifications were strengthened by additional fortified accesses to the fleches placed at the top of the double glacis, the new casemate bastion of St Eugene was built into the previous riverbed, and a new, seventh bastion of St Elizabeth was added. Between them, Doxat designed an intricate and original system of canals and embankments with a separated redoubt, designed as a fleche but as big as one of the bastions, extending deep into the riverbed. This complex was a kind of architectural mechanism for filling the fortress moat with water even when the water level of the river was low. Together with the double trench around the crownwork on the opposite side of the river, it enabled water management for the purpose of defence, but also served for continued navigation on the river even at low water levels. The project was completely executed in the next few years in the last period of Prince Eugene of Savoy’s life, and in 1731 it was supplemented by one of Doxat’s architectural “miniatures” in the form of a reduced lunette in front of the Water Gate, which cleverly resolved access to the gate during different water levels. In the second half of the century, under the reign of Empress and Queen Maria Theresa, the Osijek fortifications were once again reconstructed to the design of engineer Johann Philip von Harsch. In that last, fourth stage of development, the landward fortifications were reduced by eliminating the double glacis, and during the reign of Emperor and King Joseph II, a passage was opened through the until then impenetrable hornwork directly into the Lower Town suburb, but the fortifications on the Drava remained unchanged.
Kontinuiranim angažmanom na valorizaciji, kategorizaciji i zaštiti zagrebačke graditeljske baštine Gradski zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture i prirode u Zagrebu nastoji biti ustrajan u zaštiti ...najvrjednijih arhitektonskih ostvarenja svih povijesnih epoha.
Ovim su radom obuhvaćeni primjeri zagrebačke graditeljske baštine s područja stambene arhitekture recentno pojedinačno zaštićene rješenjima o utvrđivanju obilježja kulturnih dobara. Pojedinačno su pobrojeni primjeri zagrebačkih obiteljskih kuća i višestambenih građevina koje su se neupitnom vrijednošću uvrstile u Listu zaštićenih kulturnih dobara, upisanih u Registar kulturnih dobara Republike Hrvatske. Načinjen je potom pregled prijedloga rješenja o utvrđivanju obilježja kulturnog dobra za deset stambenih građevina, izrađenih u Gradskom zavodu za zaštitu spomenika kulture i prirode, koje je potom potvrdilo Stručno povjerenstvo za utvrđivanje obilježja kulturnog dobra Ministarstva kulture.
Znanstvenom elaboracijom, s detaljnim kronološkim historijatima i opisima predmetnih kulturnih dobara, razlaže se njihova visoka vrijednosna kategorizacija i uvrštavanje među najznačajnije građevine stambene namjene na području grada Zagreba. Predmetne su građevine obilježjima i kvalitetom redom značile novost i mijenu u vrijeme nastanka, u hrvatsku su arhitekturu unosile obilježja novoga vremena, a skladom i kvalitetom izvedbe osigurale su opstojnost do danas. Pri izradbi elaborata valorizacije, revalorizacije te kategorizacije zagrebačke stambene arhitekture rečeni su se primjeri iskristalizirali nužnima za zaštitu jer su potvrda kontinuiteta opstojnosti kvalitete zagrebačke graditeljske prakse tijekom prve polovice i sredine dvadesetog stoljeća.
Objašnjeni su konzervatorski principi i sistematizacija zaštite, kojom predmetne stambene građevine, sukladno svojoj „arhitektonici”, podliježu i različitom konzervatorskom sagledavanju te, sukladno tomu, i uspostavljanju mjera zaštite. Ovim radom Gradski zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture i prirode u Zagrebu predstavlja kontinuirani angažman na zaštiti najznačajnijih primjera povijesno važnih arhitektonskih razdoblja zagrebačke kulturne baštine.
Članak donosi pregled idejnoga rješenja oblikovanja liturgijskoga prostora buduće solinske bazilike odabrane kao najbolji rad na natječaju koji je u ožujku 2009. raspisala Splitsko-makarska ...nadbiskupija. Riječ je o interdisciplinarnome radu u kojem se susreću arhitektura i teologija u razmatranju i realizaciji liturgijskih formi. U prvome dijelu članka ukratko su ocrtana idejna polazišta te su razložene postavke i logika pristupa projektiranju. Drugi dio pokušava pružiti opisni presjek i hermeneutsku podlogu iščitavanju idejnoga projekta. Kroz tri naznačena okvira - »oblikovanje liturgijskih žarišta«, »opna forme« i »svjetlo i voda« -autori razrađuju nosive elemente arhitektonsko-liturgijskoga jezika te obrazlažu temeljne postavke idejnoga rješenja. Treći dio članka iznosi perspektive idejnoga rješenja.
