{"id":24659,"date":"2014-07-25T16:01:59","date_gmt":"2014-07-25T14:01:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.area-arch.it\/a-a-m-larchivio-non-segreto-di-francesco-moschini-nessun-dorma-2\/"},"modified":"2016-03-08T18:31:39","modified_gmt":"2016-03-08T17:31:39","slug":"a-a-m-larchivio-non-segreto-di-francesco-moschini-nessun-dorma","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.area-arch.it\/en\/a-a-m-larchivio-non-segreto-di-francesco-moschini-nessun-dorma\/","title":{"rendered":"A.A.M. l\u2019archivio non-segreto di Francesco Moschini. Nessun dorma"},"content":{"rendered":"

A.A.M. The non-secret archive of Francesco Moschini.
\nNone shall sleep.<\/p>\n

\u201cOne of the problems of cultural life is that of establishing a contact between art and public. Considering this to be, essentially, a question of education, we believe it must be dealt with already in the years of early youth, so that art does not become an abstract and intellectualistic experience, but a direct relationship of exchange between Man and the objects created by him\u201d.
\n(BBPR, 1954)<\/p>\n

Around the mid-Thirties of last century Luciano Anceschi tackled the problematic issue of the \u201cautonomy of art\u201d based on the concept of an \u201ca-priori aesthetic synthesis\u201d to overturn its meaning within a process in which the transition from a unidimensional systematicness to a pluridimensional systematicness marked the modernizing of a disciplinary integration within an extreme figure, as that of the notion of \u201cpure poetry\u201d.\u00a0 Anceschi practically continued the liberation of art from doctrinal mystics and dogmatic cages (which Antonio Banfi, his teacher, had already begun more or less ten years earlier in his treatise \u201cThe transcendental principle of the autonomy of art\u201d in \u201cLife in art\u201d – 1924) to stress the canons of a composition which, by grafting the English aesthetic thought dating from the Eighteenth century onto the American Nineteenth-century culture, is based on an unusual association, on \u201ca sudden enchantment\u201d, on accidental manipulation and on the surprise effect in order to form the general foundations of an aesthetic of the anti-gracious and the anti-intellectualistic.
\nIn the same years, even if with implications more expressly oriented towards the educational function of civil society, a similar anti-classical heritage aimed at going beyond a mere contemplative ecstasy of Nineteenth-century origins, became part of the Anglo-American informative spirit, above all thanks to the efforts of John Dewey (Art as Experience \u2013 1934), whose philosophical thought aims at a concept of art as an experience to be lived actively, according to a pedagogic perspective capable of steering clear of the shoals of an exclusively visual approach as outlined in the wake of the theoretical arguments of\u00a0 of Konrad Fiedler and Heinrich W\u00f6lfflin. This debate resurfaced in the late Forties thanks to Argan, to favour a highly democratic transmission of art and to accompany that fundamental junction centring on the museographic design and restoration which was such an important element of Italian architecture in the years after World War II, through the work of Albini, Gardella,\u00a0 Scarpa and the BBPR team.
\nNow, against the setting of this brief chronological reconstruction centring on the confrontation between different artistic disciplines, \u201cintegration\u201d is therefore the term explored by Anceschi which enthused and inspired Francesco Moschini in the by now thirty years of his direction of the A.A.M. Architettura Arte Moderna: a place where the two areas referred to in the acronym may reach a synthesis, an interaction between expressive potentials, with the objective of creating a mental space through which the instruments, the materials and the architectures contribute to reinforce the relationship between art and architecture through a procedure of mutual observation which explores the contiguity, as well as the significant interactions, to succeed in breaking down the barriers between the languages. Indeed, it is precisely in this key that the various activities conducted by A.A.M. are to be interpreted; generally speaking they challenge the presumed autonomy of each artistic manifestation. Furthermore, the heritage of the Modern Movement which promotes the mutual semantic exchanges between the disciplines, emphatically projecting them in an interaction between art and science, is studied in depth. In particular, on the basis of a corpus of more than 2,500 drawings, catalogued in the course of a fervent and compulsive desire to accumulate, A.A.M. builds a mosaic of the confrontation between art and architecture, within which one may distinguish the environments related to the sections of history, architecture, painting, sculpture, theatre and design, and the task consists of tracing a map in progress to verify, through an incessant retroductive rearrangement aimed at casting light on the research of artists and architects. In this sense, the \u201cDuets\u201d section has already since 1980 aimed at comparing, on the basis of an angular and incisive comparative interpretation, an architect and a painter whose works feature tacit poetic affinities, similar figurative debts, evident formative intersections, in order to build an encyclopaedia of knowledge which, while bearing witness to the peculiarities of the authors, reveals the play of the play of the sidelong glance. And so Enzo Cucchi and Dario Passi, Alighiero&Boetti and Ettore Sottsass, Costantino Dardi and Giulio Paolini, Luigi Ontani and Alessandro Mendini, as the case may be \u2013 among others \u2013 have been invited to figuratively render the icons of a personal compositive procedure, to reconstruct the stages of a trajectory in \u201cborderlands\u201d, or in other words in the intermediate area where the paths of their own history touch on signs that lead to an understanding of the other, a sharing of memories, a planning of places where it is possible to \u201cpoetically inhabit\u201d the interstitial places of the common \u201cfixed idea\u201d.
\nNot only. As some of the exhibitions reveal, there is a desire to reinforce the dominion of the conceptual borrowings, of the references and appropriations, to build a \u201cparallel tale\u201d of the events. This is, for instance, the approach inspiring the memorial homage to the figure of Costantino Dardi, whose imaginary spirit, migrant in three different venues, retraces the contribution made at one point for the movie \u201cThe belly of an architect\u201d, once again centring it on a reinterpretation of Rome as filtered through the models of Boull\u00e9e: a true generative arsenal for a focused vision of the city, reconstructed on the traces of Nolli\u2019s Plan. The same thematic area is, for that matter, also explored by the solo shows dedicated to Alberto Burri and to Vito Acconci. The former, ideated in the mid-Eighties, is a new overview of Burri\u2019s work since the Seventies, through a succession of original sketches for the cycles of paintings, within the limited and intentionally cramped space of the venue. The sketches, aligned like the disconnected panels of an incomplete mosaic, project from the wall inside the wooden model of the Orsanmichele in Florence, to capture the relationship between the work conceived for a place and the place itself. The latter, especially in the photographic section of the monumental works realized by Acconci in different sites in the United States, represents a more direct sounding of the relationship between sculpture and architecture, contributing to provide a key of interpretation for the resolutions of a part of contemporary architecture which is often prey to an easy identification between building and sculpture object. Finally, among the initiatives of A.A.M. we would like to mention their projects for Ferruzzi, where they have cooperated with artists and architects for various reasons, within the context of an interdisciplinary relationship indispensible for an understanding of \u201cmodern\u201d. In particular, the comparison between different artists has been subject of an important exhibition at the Palace of Arts and Sports of Ravenna, where a juxtaposition of\u00a0 heterogeneous and consensual experiences have been staged. Some of the most significant works shown here comprise the \u201cGreat R Iron\u201d by Burri: two large metal hands that surface from the ground, to hold space in a controlled embrace; Giuseppe Uncini\u2019s sculpture in concrete and iron, whose continuous development stages a progressive dematerialization of the surface and a skeletal exhibition of the metal shell in tension and, finally, the tabula of crossing paths followed by Alighiero Boetti, who irradiates the traces of a fabulous transhumant bestiary on the mosaic on the floor.
\nThis consensual relationship also surfaces in other comparisons promoted and backed by A.A.M. They comprise the exhibition-consultation proposed for the National Gallery of Modern Art – which has seen the contribution of six architects and six artists, chosen on the basis of a specific generational approach, who have measured swords with the rests of Luigi Cosenza\u2019s work \u2013 and the sophisticated artistic intervention of Elvio Chiricozzi within the context of the CdP (Compagnia del Progetto) project for the planning of all areas of the Hospital of Salonicco, where the figures which transmigrate from one wall to the other create a circular continuity which progressively closes itself within the visual bezel in the background.
\nIn short, even this brief overview reveals Moschini as a tireless athlete who strives to recompose the pieces of a fragment and dissonant whole, to inscribe them within a historical tale that is with some difficulty extracted from the material of his confessed desire: that of overcoming the circumscribed limits of the disciplinary autonomy to unite, in the renewed \u201cmystical union\u201d between art and architecture, theory and practice, analysis and action, tradition and progress.<\/p>\n