House Number 3: New Work of Mehrdad Iravanian

Mehrdad Iravanian, born in Shiraz in 1336 SH (1957), graduated from the Faculty of Architecture at the University of Science and Technology (U.S.L.) and after a period of work and experience, began organizing architectural exhibitions in Shiraz. The first of these was "The Gate" (Darvazeh). Some of his works in urban landscape design were introduced in Memar 7, and it is worth noting that one of his projects, Darvaze Quran, was recently awarded the first prize in the Italian Stone Industry competition in the urban landscape category. It should be mentioned that Iravanian's work was first introduced through architectural exhibitions in Shiraz and in the early projects of this architect in that city.

Iravanian's outstanding characteristics are his independent approach and heedlessness of architectural fashions. His efforts to satisfy his own aesthetic aspirations have led him to the threshold of sculptural tendencies. His disregard for classical forms and for well-established architectural conventions is accompanied by a free-flowing, joyful, and ironic creativity rather than by geometrical riots. This creative sensibility, in its most refined form, is far removed from the works of classicists and bears no resemblance to any particular style. From this perspective, his work can be discussed in terms closer to the architecture of North America and the SITE group in the contemporary art world.

In any case, it can be said that Iravanian's works, regardless of their artistic merits, are independently worthy of study and analysis, and many of the ideas expressed in them are valuable and meaningful. His most recent work, House Number 3, tries to make visual capabilities of architecture violate aesthetic boundaries through shaking established aesthetic principles: architecture as a means of protest. His work, however, is full of original ideas and artistic creativity. He is among the most successful Iranian architects in combining architecture and visual arts. He struggles against the false pretension of abstract architectural retirements, showing that the essence of architecture is objective and that creativity and spontaneity play a crucial role therein.

The work of Iravanian presents itself to the city, and from this very angle examines its relationship with the urban elements of its context. It manifests its presence in the city and simultaneously, with complete awareness, the function of the building and the physical capabilities are considered. Factors of the fourth and fifth judgment criteria (civic function and urban issues) are pertinent here. For organizing this building and its form according to the methods of controlling construction administration, a brief overview has been compiled and presented as a short work.

When we look at what Iravanian has achieved, we find his attention directed at spaces and spatial values — yet he never loses sight of us. The spaces that Iravanian creates all have independent spatial richness and recognizability, something to be noted. His careful use of the section, as in his earlier works starting from House 7 and onward, shows that Iravanian's architecture is fundamentally experimental, and in this experiment, a remarkable talent has emerged, especially in the realm of his creations after the lessons he learned from his earlier work.

Working with these kinds of diverse surfaces and methods, the interplay of materials such as concrete, wood, and metal creates a Pop Art-like quality. His architecture, from this dimension, explores something of a workshop examination, and the essence of his architecture is its modernity and its opposition to conventional norms, and one can see an important role played by intuition in it.

The work presented in this issue of the magazine, with all its complexities, possesses certain qualities that deserve attention. We can attest to a deep intimacy with the workings of both the material and spatial dimensions. In this new work, the juxtaposition of various elements — wood, stone, glass, ceramics, metal piping, concrete, and raw earth — makes the surfaces and textures feel authentically Iranian. This quality is most evident in the way these materials, from smooth stone to rough-hewn timbers, from polished brickwork to raw industrial elements, are placed alongside each other in unexpected combinations.

The house, seen from the exterior, reads as a series of interlocking volumes — each pushing against its neighbor at unexpected angles. The canopy, extending outward with its rough-hewn timber beams, creates a dialogue between the refined plastered surfaces and the raw natural materials. Inside, the spatial experience is sequential and episodic: curved walls guide the visitor through a series of discoveries, while the play of light through strategically placed openings transforms the atmosphere throughout the day.

In the final analysis, it must be admitted that Iravanian has been able to establish for himself a distinctive personal and artistic style within the body of existing architecture. In this work, by mixing materials, confronting textures, and juxtaposing diverse construction methods, he has achieved a language and vocabulary that is uniquely his own. His use of Iranian culture and traditional craftsmanship demonstrates that he seeks to use cultural efforts toward growth and improvement, and at the same time toward transformation, and that this path may prove useful and viable.