This edition's competition, like previous years, was held in two stages. In the first stage, conducted as an elimination round on September 1st and 2nd, out of 215 projects that had submitted their documentation in four categories -- Individual Dwellings, Apartment Buildings, Renovation, and Public Buildings -- 49 projects advanced to the semifinal round. The second stage of judging took place on September 27th and 28th, where 23 projects advanced to the final round, from which 12 projects were selected as winners.
The jurors for this edition of the Memar Award were Sirous Bavar, Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari, Reza Habibzadeh, Mohammad Arab, and Nashid Nabian.
Those who attended the Memar Award ceremonies in previous years witnessed that in some years, on various occasions, short films about architects, urban spaces, and other topics were screened. These included films on Abdolaziz Farmanfarmaian, Kamran Diba, "Suspension," "From Hosseinieh Ershad to the British Embassy Garden," and others. On the occasion of the publication of Memar 123, which focused on vernacular and local architecture of Iran (Gilan), a film about Gilan had been produced and was screened at the beginning of this edition's ceremony.
Judging Criteria
- Creativity and innovation in design, and innovation in the use of materials and building technology
- Creative confrontation with the project's specific challenges, including: economic constraints, particular site conditions in terms of dimensions and proportions, legal regulations and procedures (especially in cities), technical difficulties, and so forth
- Precision and innovation in detail design
- Attention to the surrounding environment and climatic conditions, environmental values, and social commitments
It goes without saying that the final judgment of each project is not made by assigning scores for each of the above criteria and averaging them, but rather by judging the project in its totality.
Judging Program and Methodology
Projects are divided into four categories -- Apartment Buildings, Individual Dwellings, Public Buildings, and Renovation -- and the following stages are carried out for projects in each of these four categories:
1. All projects within the same category are displayed together for the jurors to observe, so that after viewing all of them, projects that all jurors unanimously reject are set aside. Even if a single juror supports keeping a project, it will not be eliminated.
2. From among the semifinal projects, each juror selects their preferred projects, without ranking and using their own personal label. The selected projects are considered finalists.
3. Each juror independently selects their first through third place choices from among the finalists. Three points are awarded to first place, two points to second place, and one point to third place.
4. Jurors may designate some finalists as deserving of special commendation.
Individual Dwellings Category
Reza Habibzadeh: Let us have a general discussion about this category. In any case, a villa project, while it has a specific client, represents for every architect an opportunity to challenge the fundamental issues of architecture -- whether in terms of construction technique, concepts of home, or spatial organization. In the apartment category, the architect always hides behind limitations, saying "I had every kind of constraint but managed to salvage this," and that "salvaging" becomes a value for both the work and the juror. But in villas, the architect confronts themselves. You have a piece of land, generally without constraints -- so what do you have to say? The regulatory constraints present in apartment buildings do not exist in villas. Truthfully, for me as an architect, villa design is harder than apartment design. The smallest achievements you make hold value for yourself and for others too. And this is an opportunity where you can be a little more experimental. Yet in this category of the Memar Award, we rarely find even a project where the architect has managed to maintain a coherent and consistent design language.
Nashid Nabian: In the global context, the villa is a laboratory for practicing new ideas in the discipline of architecture. This is due to various reasons that you also mentioned. One is that it is among the few cases where the commissioner, the user, and the resident are all the same person in the role of client. Therefore, the architect finds a better opportunity for negotiation, because instead of mediating conflicts of interest and ideas among several parties, they enter into dialogue with a single person. As a result, a large number of the foundational diagrams of our discipline, especially in its modern or contemporary condition, have emerged from this typology and the experiments conducted within it. Therefore, in this category, we expect to encounter more experimental, critical, or radical approaches. The fact that, despite the potential this typology creates for experimentation, the number of projects that have utilized this potential in the collection we reviewed is very small.
Mohammad Arab: In the individual dwellings category, we encounter two building types: villas in open, natural settings and single-family residences in dense, compressed urban contexts, where more complex parameters such as building coverage, visual oversight, plot rights, and so forth come into play and can somewhat change the discussion. For this reason, I see part of the conversation as more focused on the villa category.
Reza Habibzadeh: In any case, the villa category can create pathways out of the deadlock for our architecture, but this potential has not been utilized. Following the argument that Nashid Nabian was making -- that we must change our situation in the current conditions of society -- in my opinion, one way is for architects to become their own villa clients, to experiment with new spaces, and they can even create breakthroughs in architecture.
Nashid Nabian: I completely agree that self-commissioned projects are a highly potential-rich area of architectural practice. Architecture is a discipline that on one hand deals with reality and its prevailing limitations, and on the other hand is a field where there is no ceiling for creativity. If in any way the limitations of practice lead to the limitation of the creative act, the result of architectural action is a fruitless pragmatism, limited to producing good buildings with high efficiency that are successful in terms of the real estate market economy. Meanwhile, architecture has other dimensions that these laboratory experiments -- including self-commissioned projects or projects without clients that are never built, the so-called paper architecture -- provide a suitable ground for practicing. A radical idea practiced in self-commissioned or paper architecture can, elsewhere, be re-practiced within the framework of a project with a third-party commissioner and in negotiation with the client, with less intensity. The result of this process is the transformation of the self-commissioned laboratory prototype into a fully-realized product that can be presented to a specific target market.
Villa Madi, Dida Architecture Office, Masoud Hatami
Nashid Nabian: In the individual dwellings category, this is the only project that, in my view, practices a recognizable diagram. However, I cannot defend the claim that the architect remained faithful to this initial diagram in developing it into a design. I know that there are parallel, multiple, and diverse discourses about the relationship between a diagram and the space resulting from its development. I am influenced by a school of thought that sees this as a direct relationship and feels it should not be compromised. In this project, the initial diagram is a collection of sections expanded along an axis. When we arrive at the interior space, we encounter suspended spatial envelopes hanging from the ceiling that do not correspond to this initial diagram and whose formation is not necessarily along the trajectory of the initial diagram. It appears that the architect has failed to develop the project along the initial diagram. Despite the designer's failure to develop the architectural design in line with the initial diagram, this project, compared to the other projects, is worthy of reflection. Among the project's positive aspects is the architect's skill in the final refinement of space.
Sirous Bavar: This project has one positive point: it has brought water into the project space and used it. But it also has a negative point -- in the composition of interior spaces and the composition of windows, the architect has used both arches and concrete or steel lintels above windows. That is, the architect has treated some windows as rectangular and others with arches. In some places we see tall, narrow rectangular windows, and in others, arches rising above. Which of these is it? You are either in favor of arches or in favor of rectangular windows. The architect has mixed these together. It is quite possible this was the client's influence. If the architect truly wants to introduce a new idea into their architectural project that extends to the rest of their work, or to become recognized so that others also benefit from these fresh and new ideas, the architect must have the power to deceive the client -- to do something where they say, "Fine, I'll apply your opinion," since the client does not come every day to inspect, and then execute their own design. In the end, what happens? When the client sees that what they wanted has not been done, they may withhold the final payment, but in exchange, the architect has implemented what they wanted in the project.
Reza Habibzadeh: I understand this diagram and this plan -- a body of water has been brought to the center and essentially creates a spatial quality within the building. But after this diagram, the project has fallen apart. It has created such a space, then placed a brick wall beside it and closed it off. The language of expanding this diagram is a compromised language and a combination of several different languages. However, the project has a good diagram and plan and contains some interesting spatial moments. For example, the two rooms that are suspended in a large space are quite compelling.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: From my perspective, this work has a historical reference to the Qajar period. This space that Reza describes -- its physical form relates to the quarters where women would go upstairs, with latticed openings overlooking the space below.
Reza Habibzadeh: If we convert this to a diagram, it is a compelling diagram. In those initial lines and strokes, I perceive a sense of space. Even with the plan we see, we sense a pleasant space. But when the project develops, it becomes weaker.
Mohammad Arab: If I looked at each of these presentation sheets as just one project, it would make sense to me. But when I see all five sheets together, I feel the architect lacked the necessary boldness to remain faithful to the initial idea and concept, and the additional embellishments have diminished its purity. For example, the approach to the structure of the design, the solid-void relationships of spaces, and the types of openings do not follow a unified language, although individually, each could have been sufficient for this project. But when placed together, they fall into an eclectic language, which essentially returns to the argument Nashid Nabian made at the beginning -- that the architect has not remained faithful to the project's diagram.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Allow me to offer an interpretation of the signs in this project. I will begin the project from a personal perspective with a very positive approach, starting from the narrative it tells. The architect says that the client asked for a building designed so as not to have much outward display, not to be conspicuous -- and this is contrary to what the culture of today's wealthy testifies. As it happens, this is among the afflictions that also characterized the Qajar era. The cultural coordinates of our time are trending toward alignment with the Qajar era in many indicators -- in terms of popular culture, literature, politics, and power. It is here that you see that complex and multilayered diagram transforming into a practical strategy. I do not know if this is my interpretation or whether the architect also had this in mind. In my view, we are faced with one of those architects from the direct lineage of Iranian architects who tried to steal signs from before the "closed open eyes" and to embed and conceal things within an architectural shell that can only be found with a discerning gaze. You know that a major portion of our painting and sculpture heritage, after the proscription of these two fields in the Zoroastrian period -- meaning their prohibition -- was embedded in architecture. It went into architecture, and architecture accepted them, and our architecture from this time became formal and full of motifs and patterns. This treasure of art, especially painting and sculpture, later in the modern painting era provided the ground for the emergence of the Saqqakhaneh school -- meaning the artists of this period went and extracted these motifs and forms from within architecture and transformed them into an authentic style of painting and sculpture. I think we are dealing with an architecture that can reconstruct such a reading of contemporary times in the form of the very flaws you mentioned -- complexity, multilayeredness, lack of unified language, and all those formal references to the Qajar era. I see this effort as the concealment of signs of the kind I mentioned within the architectural space. Its virtue is creating an architectural space proportionate to the contemporary social and political space -- a complex, opaque, sometimes hidden, contradictory space that simultaneously possesses those elements of ostentation and codes borrowed from Qajar architecture: those same lattices, windows, and partitions that have one foot in Europe and one in Iran. We may be dealing with an architecture that is consciously applying this theme. I think the part where the architect stated the client wanted this building not to have an outward display, and this building should be prestigious and elegant, should meet all the desired capacities, but not be seen.
Nashid Nabian: I wish the architect had truly thought about everything you said. In my view, you have theorized very well how this project is a representation of a collection of contradictions existing in the current state of the country. But whether it was conscious or not, I do not know. However, I agree with the architectural discourse that you have just produced, using this project as a pretext. Your reading was a Foucauldian approach to the relationship between the structure of power, contemporaneity, history, and how a building, at the unconscious level, becomes the site of manifestation of these internal contradictions of society, and then how these contradictions are not just of this time and place but have a historical extension. But whether the author of this work was also aware of these matters is not evident from the text or from the architectural drawings representing the project.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Even if it is unconscious, one cannot say the person was not the author. Sometimes artists create something without knowing where it came from or how it took shape. But when you critique or interpret it, it becomes clear what it is.
Nashid Nabian: In my opinion, it is commendable that you used this opportunity to place your interpretation onto the project. For me, this is an example of using a building to produce a text in the field of architecture, and it need not necessarily play a role in the evaluation of the work.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: In the course of this very conversation, I was thinking about Mithraic architecture, whose signs I cannot help but see in this work. Mithraism is one of the most mystery-laden religions of our culture. Signs play a major role in it, and it is a highly esoteric ritual. You know that many of the behaviors of Freemasons, pagans, and similar rituals in Europe are also based on Iranian Mithraism, or the Cult of Mehr. In our architecture, these signs are very abundant, but they have been hidden from the view of many -- like what Da Vinci and Michelangelo did during the reign of the Church in their paintings. The commissions came from the Church, but they spoke their own truths in the form of codes and mysteries. Only those who recognized these signs understood the references. These signs in our contemporary architecture had greatly preoccupied someone like Farhad Ahmadi -- he paid great attention to this subject. He was very interested in these Mithraic signs -- water, Anahita, and so forth -- and tried to embed them in his works. Of course, there are more architects of this kind in our architecture. Most are unconscious about it, meaning they typically use these forms unconsciously. And then suddenly a painter comes along and extracts the Saqqakhaneh style from within these -- Tanavoli, Arabshahi, Roohbakhsh, and others extracted those motifs from the Saqqakhaneh shrines, from Shah Abdol-Azim. Motifs that had been embedded in architecture for thousands of years and repeated. The most important movement of our contemporary art is still the Saqqakhaneh school. On this matter, in my opinion, whether it is conscious or unconscious makes little difference. This architect has succeeded in doing this work. I suspect this is a conscious approach.
Mohammad Arab: I do not see this as particularly conscious, and I have issues with applying contradictory principles in this reading, because the architect has not been able to create this contradiction in the overall spatial totality. With all this transparency combined with various colors and glazes, what is it set in contrast against? Where is the opacity being created against this transparency? I feel it has fallen more into a state of disorder.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I want to strongly emphasize that you should take this matter seriously. The bringing of water into that space, in this way combined with life, is a profoundly Mithraic sign -- it comes from the school of Anahita. The path and flow of water, the streams -- you have exactly this space in Niasar.
Mohammad Arab: I still emphasize that this project is full of extraordinary moments. If I had been presented with a project showing just these three images, or similarly with these other three images, I naturally would not have continued this discussion. But when I look at the totality of these and even the contradiction referenced in the project text, I do not sense it in the overall macro-organization of the project. The project seems to have encountered a problem where, in the details and the continuation of the design process, it loses its macro vision.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I cannot consider all these signs coincidental. The night view of the entrance is the entrance of a Mithraic cave; on the other side, you place a flow of water, which is the temple of Anahita. In my view, this project, because it is so open to interpretation, is exceptional. And in terms of signs, it is highly discussable. Signs need not necessarily be unified. These signs are not meant to deliver a manifesto, nor to convey a specific message to you. When you see the cruciform or swastika motif -- a design from the third-millennium BC ceramics in Espidezh in Bazman, Baluchistan, that has been repeated in our geometric lattice patterns right up to the present day. This is a 5,000-year cycle of Mehr, meant to express the incomparable role of the sun in our lives. But it does not necessarily carry a specific message; rather, it is the life of signs, in the civilization of signs. Our country and culture are heirs to a civilization of signs. For example, the motif and form of the serpent, from women's jewelry to pharmacy signs, everywhere finds a trace and connection to health. When someone falls ill, we say they are "bi-mar" -- without serpent -- meaning they have lost their serpent. A single word, a single sign that is inscribed on even the most remote pharmacy, all traces back to the Epic of Gilgamesh and the search for the Water of Life. But the ordinary person, and even the specialist pharmacist, does not know where this motif came from, and it does not matter whether they know or not. But this sign is present in all our lives. The word "bi-mar" in our language still keeps that half-supernatural dimension alive, but this complexity only becomes visible in the semi-magical epic -- only to one who possesses the eyes of a semiotician.
Pishva House, Ali Haghighi Architecture Office, Ali Haghighi
Nashid Nabian: This category is for individual dwelling buildings, which includes villas and single-family residences built in urban contexts. It appears that one of the areas of mass architectural production within our urban settlement paradigms, especially in cities with lower density, is still these single-family buildings.
Mohammad Arab: What I find important in this project is the significance of addressing the concept of home -- a place where the home serves as an effective agent in producing a sense of belonging to place. For a client grappling with the dilemma of leaving or staying. I believe that today in our society, the loss of this sense of belonging is one of the most important social issues we face. In my view, architecture is one of the factors that has contributed to the loss of this feeling, and one of the factors that can strengthen it is architecture. I think this project can be significant from this perspective.
Reza Habibzadeh: Because of its claim? Or because of the project itself?
Mohammad Arab: I do not see this as a claim -- I see it as a question that the architect addresses. The architect raises the importance of home as a place for being, which in my view is not merely a claim but a real issue in our present society.
Nashid Nabian: I understand that this is an issue. But how has this issue found expression in the final product of the architectural intervention? In the renovation category too, we reflected on a number of projects because their questions seemed precise and relevant to us. But in evaluating executed projects, is merely posing a thoughtful question sufficient?
Mohammad Arab: No, I see this as a question -- a challenge -- that the architect addresses. What you raise can be answered by looking at the project's result.
Nashid Nabian: I had not looked at the project from the perspective of creating a sense of place attachment. But now that I look at the perspectives and results, I feel the project can be examined at two scales: one, in its orientation toward the neighboring context -- meaning this incision that appears to create a distinct axis for the project, establishing a critical distance between the project and its neighbor, and giving rise to a collection of spatial experiences through this single decision. At the level of strategy, I see this incision and the distancing from the property line as a value for the project. Second, in the subsequent stages of design development, what I find noteworthy is that the project, while creating diverse spatial moments, has not departed from a unified architectural vocabulary. Each of the moments the architect has selected to present the project has its own spatial quality, yet the vocabulary remains consistent, and this can be considered a value of the project.
Reza Habibzadeh: Its consistent language, compared to Villa Madi, is evident. But the incision it has created, which could have been the project's strong point and generated a compelling sequence, has not been continued. This incision is closed off in the middle of the project, whereas if it had continued, it could have created diverse spaces. Another compelling sequence is the composition of the courtyard and the neighbor's wall. This too is a place where, by reinforcing it, the architect could have created an architectural space, but the architect has created this moment yet not made use of it. In my view, these two parts are the potentials of this design that the architect themselves created but did not bring these ideas to completion. Regarding the photograph showing the building in a distant view amid the city, I have no opinion, and it remains more as a question in my mind -- whether this is a good and valuable image or not.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Of course, the architect has converted that incision into an incision of light, and it has become a good one.
Sirous Bavar: That incision was placed to capture western or eastern light. I have something to say about the notion of place attachment. I am not particularly attached to the concept of place attachment, because I believe place attachment creates a kind of egoism in people. In contrast, those who, even without having place attachment to a family space or a tree in their living environment, have more of a feeling and concern for society and people -- they do not have that self-aggrandizing quality. Place attachment always binds me to something from which I cannot escape. In architecture, it may tie me to Qajar architecture, it may tie me to First Pahlavi architecture, it may lead me to architectural symbolism. But when I do not have these attachments, or at least reduce their proportion, and instead refer myself more to society and the trajectory of society and improving its condition, then place attachment holds no sway over me.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Of our lives too, only a memory remains, and that memory must be preserved.
Sirous Bavar: In architecture, if we want to apply this place attachment to space, our architecture reverts to the past and forward-looking vision is lost.
Mohammad Arab: Perhaps a misunderstanding is forming around the term. I am actually raising this subject from the very perspective you are speaking of -- that is, with attention to the future. I consider place attachment as one of the factors that produces social participation, when this attachment can be shared among a group of people. One of the reasons we have become so indifferent to matters beyond ourselves is that we have lost our shared attachments, which today we mistakenly try to reproduce through a nostalgic approach.
Katouzian House, Mohammadreza Marashi
Sirous Bavar: This project has one merit: it has attempted to align the project with the axis of the site. There is an axis at an angle of, say, thirty degrees, or that portion of the project parallel to the axis has been taken as the primary starting element and executed parallel to it. Then a rotation has been made in the plan to be parallel to the other axis. So vertically we have both, and the staircase has been placed in the middle, which is the merit of combining these two axes. Now, regarding the north-south orientation of this site -- none of these projects showed the north axis, and this is one of the flaws, because the issue of sun exposure in summer and winter has not been calculated. Tehran is situated at the 35th degree latitude, and the difference between the summer sunrise angle and winter sunrise angle is about sixty-some degrees. If this had been observed, perhaps our various projects would have found a primary orientation. In any case, what is seen here is that the main axis -- the starting point of the project -- follows the site boundary line, and the architect has solved the central triangle well. The spaces also seem interesting to me.
Nashid Nabian: Everything Mr. Bavar said is correct. But when I look at the villa as a laboratory of architecture, I feel this project does not contribute to producing or practicing new ideas. I do not look at the villa as simply a good place to live. Therefore, when I sit on the Memar Award jury, a space for living is the baseline demand. The project must say something new beyond that. It is acceptable to have some spelling errors, but it must speak. Because if it does not, we fall into mannerism. We fall into repeating ourselves, and I consider this neither in the interest of our own generation nor of future generations.
Reza Habibzadeh: Do you find this villa suitable as "a place for living" or not?
Nashid Nabian: In my view, that question is entirely irrelevant to the Memar Award jury. From my perspective, the subject of the Memar Award, in the only typology that is supposed to serve as the laboratory of our discipline, should be the articulation of new questions and the bold communication of daring answers.
Mohammad Arab: This project is in a way the product of the issue you were discussing -- that today we are under the domination of images.
Nashid Nabian: Nader Tehrani said somewhere that the era of the domination of images results in the mediocrity of the products of the discipline of architecture.
Three Lives Three Courtyards House, Navid Golchin
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This is one of those projects that, at the local scale, has been able to convey the intended qualities -- both in creating interstitial spaces and in reinterpreting some of the ornaments or architectural embellishments that, as you can see, are absent in many of our projects. The tiles that have been used remind me of the works of Mr. Foroughi during the Pahlavi era, which were a kind of modern narrative and reinterpretation of our historical architecture. These decorations, in an architecture that has such a rich heritage like Iranian architecture, are sorely missed. In the discussion Nashid Nabian raised about image-fixation, we have neglected this extremely rich aspect of Iranian architecture, which is the use of pattern, color, and tile. I did not see this kind of attention to architectural ornament in the other projects. The architect has contemporized a layer of architectural ornament while also maintaining the standard spaces found in other projects.
Nashid Nabian: I accept the decorative layer. But alongside it, the sectional diagram of the project seems to me to be an attractive and complex cross-section that creates a variety of spatial qualities. However, I have some difficulty in reading the project. I do not understand how this drawn section has manifested in the reality of the project. Also, the solid-void relationship in the project seems to me an interesting one. This relationship has been skillfully resolved in a small-scale architectural exercise. At the same time, I have issues with the project's details.
Reza Habibzadeh: For me, the diagram is compelling. Apart from that section and the exercises in solid-void space, it has nothing new to say.
Nahal House, Ivan Architecture Studio, Amir Afghan
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The project's section is one of its positive aspects, and this type of transferring the cuts to the facade -- meaning the facade line has emerged from the solid-void section -- gives a particular character to the facade.
Sirous Bavar: It is not a particular artistic work -- it has emerged from the functional plan. Overhangs project over the ground floor and upper floor, and the ground floor casts shadow on them. As it rises, these spaces become smaller, creating terraces that have disappeared in today's architecture, but here the importance given to terraces has created open space for residents. The materials are also very well known and have existed from the past until now. My view is very positive about this project.
Mohammad Arab: I see the distinguishing feature of this project from the previous one (Three Lives Three Courtyards House) in that, whereas in the previous project the organization is based on the section and the placement of courtyards, in this design the organization is influenced by its relationships. It has clearly left its mark on the spatial organization, becoming the primary element that gives order to the project and drives it forward. Overall, I see this project as more serious than the previous one in terms of fidelity to what it defines as its concern and remaining faithful to it to the end.
Nashid Nabian: One point that I am not sure whether colleagues have noticed: the staircase coordinates shift from plan to plan. This play with the staircase, where the stair does not merely move vertically but also moves in depth, seems interesting to me. And it does this with great skill.
Apartment Buildings Category
Reza Habibzadeh: In the apartment category, creativity is a difficult task. Housing has a way of dealing with people's habits, and you are dealing with a general concept of home, along with municipal regulations. This category was one of the weakest sections of this competition, and this weakness has been present in the projects of recent years of the Memar Award as well. This is due to the nature of this typology, where creativity is difficult and people's habits cannot be easily changed. The projects that have been submitted appear to be projects that have tried, despite all these limitations, to discover potentials for a new organization and a fresh perspective on lifestyle. In my view, a fundamental problem we have in these residential projects is the problem of discourse and initial thinking, and the question of where creativity should actually occur. Considering the projects selected for the finalists, the idea has been that creativity is not only about aesthetics, form, figure, and materials. Rather, we need this creativity to manifest in the organization of spaces and the proposed way of living, and for this we need to understand our current life and propose new relationships within spaces accordingly.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The point you raised -- the decline in the architectural quality of residential projects -- is something that, through repetition and becoming cliched, risks becoming a blight on this type of project. I accept the considerations you mentioned -- that municipal regulations, people's habits, the market-oriented view, and the trading of these apartments cause all these opinions to be taken into account. But as evidenced by two projects in this collection, limitations in this category have also always driven some forward-looking movements and creativity. The reason this field has experienced stagnation is, in my view, partly due to the economic and social conditions of recent years. I believe the five works that have been submitted represent several types of thinking in this building and housing industry, which is the most active sector of the country's industry and the only area of investment where the government has very little role and people can invest. Therefore, in my view, offering some specific opinions in this area can help the audience more than in other areas.
Mohammad Arab: The apartment category is the most important product of the "capital as commodity" approach to architecture. This approach, especially since the 1990s, established certain subjects as values and principles, resulting in our confrontation today with a rigid set of preconceptions. Sixty percent building coverage, repetition of floor slabs along with stairwell placement -- these are preconceptions that, once the building permit is issued, architecture only begins from there. I believe the architectural community has been overpowered by the market, and naturally, change in this structure is not possible overnight or with a single project. Therefore, change in this paradigm comes through the repeated production of projects that can chip away at this rigid view and its principles, and show greater boldness in changing what currently shapes the housing paradigm.
Sirous Bavar: In apartment construction, I do not put much faith in municipal regulations, because the municipality fundamentally does not have very specific regulations. They have set a meaningless sixty-forty percent that, at high elevations, the forty percent turns into a pit. Municipal regulations should be much more precise and detailed than these two numbers. The municipality still, when we look, not only lacks specific regulations, but even the small ones it has have all been eliminated. That is, in urban plans, if a neighborhood has low density, they have built high-rises in it. During these several decades in which we have lived and worked, everything has been destroyed, everything has been produced according to tastes and connections. Now, amid these inconsistencies -- both from the disarray of municipal regulations and the great pressures of illiterate clients -- I see the architect or designer as an intellectual, because they always look forward, toward progress. Those who look backward cannot be architects, because they repeat all the works of the past, with no innovation in their work. So if we accept that the architect is an intellectual and that architecture is an intellectual endeavor, if we want to take people's tastes into consideration, we cannot accomplish any progressive work, because people's tastes are also related to the past, to tradition, to a way of life that has been transmitted through different periods to the present day. The architect must do the work that advances the culture of society's life, even gradually changing it. In this architectural chaos that has emerged especially in Tehran, I see young people doing valuable work. I greatly respect them and value their work, their thought, and their boldness -- that in this backward cultural situation, they are doing new things. Consequently, what I value in architecture is, first of all, the plan -- that the plans are truly well-resolved in terms of distribution -- and secondly, that we can transform this plan into an interesting architectural form and volume. I do not believe that architecture should harmonize with its surroundings where it is built. It fundamentally should not harmonize, because if it harmonizes, we look to the past. We must see the future, so it can be completely in contrast. If modern architecture in Europe had been meant to follow the past, that architecture would never have come into being. They created it in contrast with a new culture. Here too, in apartment living, it is very difficult to make each apartment conform to the tastes, culture, or lifestyle of its inhabitants. The architect also creates culture. Therefore, the valuable works are those in which we see innovation.
Nashid Nabian: The way our cities have developed in the modern era has gone in a direction where infill development -- which results in this apartment building category -- shapes the urban dwelling paradigm. This, in my view, is influential in two areas: in the private sphere and lifestyle on one hand, and in the production of the urban fabric on the other. Specifically, in typological terms, the apartment unit differs from the individual residential unit in that its connection to the ground is severed. In such conditions, redefining the relationship between inside and outside becomes the subject of architectural action. Another point that is important to me is the search for semi-private spaces in multi-unit complexes. In a context like Iran, users of space lead parallel lives -- meaning that because the public sphere is ideologically controlled, a portion of social activities enters the domain of private discretion. Consequently, the role of semi-public and semi-private spaces in the daily life of Iranian citizens is a peculiar one. Interestingly, despite the need for these semi-private spaces where ideological control does not exist, the pressure of the real estate market over the past forty years has been toward eliminating these spaces. In this collection of projects produced in recent years, we see the semi-public and semi-private. Perhaps the traces of these semi-private and semi-public envelopes are no longer visible. Perhaps this trend is the result of the architectural discipline's resistance against the pressure of the capital market, in order to respond to these needs.
House Number Six, Sara Kalantari, Reza Sayadian
Nashid Nabian: I feel the project has conducted good exercises along three axes. First, proposing a dual settlement pattern. In the conventional vocabulary of architecture, we speak of "housing patterns." However, in my view, the architect in the current conditions should not propose a housing pattern but rather a settlement pattern. What is the difference between a settlement pattern and a housing pattern? When you design housing, you are essentially producing a space for spending. Then the question arises: where is the income-generating potential of this space? For example, in this project, a workspace has been allocated for each residential unit. Now, it is not clear whether this physical program is the result of interaction between the client and the architect or was the architect's proposal. We do not know. But in any case, in my opinion, it is an interesting pattern that deserves attention. The next point is proposing open spaces at height. These are shared spaces. These elevated spaces also benefit from a visual privacy boundary. My critique of the project is that the residential spaces do not look onto these semi-private spaces. These events are happening behind the circulation axes. Perhaps the result of this architectural exercise would have been better if these semi-private spaces at height had more interaction with the reality of residents' circulation. Specifically, due to the shape and location of the plot, the project is not a typical example of infill development. The architect has tried to negotiate with the regulations and invest in all existing facades and the relationship of all aspects of the project with the city. Therefore, unlike many apartment projects, the project has no unfinished facade. At the same time, the eloquence of its author in using a consistent architectural vocabulary in the treatment of space is noteworthy and deserves mention.
Mohammad Arab: The designer himself has emphasized the two points that Nashid Nabian mentioned -- one, the project's program and moving beyond mere habitation, and two, the third space that takes shape, which the designer strongly emphasizes. You mentioned three points as parameters worthy of attention in this arena: one, lifestyle; two, the effect on the urban fabric and relationship with the city; and three, the production of interactive zones. Let us examine the project and its third space from these three perspectives. In terms of its impact on interior life, due to the positioning of the rigid stairwell and elevator core, the connection between the unit interiors and this space has been reduced to a minimum. Therefore, it has no impact on the interior space. In terms of impact on the urban fabric, due to the building's solid volume, it is very minimal. And from the most important perspective -- producing an interactive zone -- the point is that a liminal space can become interactive only when it moves beyond being optional and enters into the unavoidable domain of daily life. The increasing density of cities, the extensive presence of cars, and so forth have caused us to lose the most important interstitial space of cities -- the neighborhood. Following this need, today we frequently use this keyword -- interactive zone -- but the important point is that we must be able to attend to its function and its relationship with ordinary, everyday life.
Reza Habibzadeh: In my view, you are making an error somewhere, because this space is not semi-private -- it is semi-public. A workspace and a living space have been designed on one floor. Then the architect has taken what appeared to be a dead space and created a semi-public space. The architect probably did not use solid building materials for the floor so it would not count toward the density -- placing translucent material instead -- probably to be able to negotiate with the municipality about this space. That is, it is an intermediary space between the workspace and the living space. When you are in the residential space, that space can relate solely to the workspace without becoming overly involved with the residential section. In my view, it is among those spaces where many things can happen, without having a specific name. That is, precisely because it has no specific function and no specific title, the likelihood that life happens in it is much greater. The choice of function type is up to the residents themselves.
Nashid Nabian: You are saying that precisely because these spaces have not been over-programmed, they function like a theater stage that allows different stories to be performed on it. I agree with this. The point that Mohammad Arab and I are trying to make is about the relationship and orientation of this space with the circulation axes. Specifically, the elevator and staircase have turned their backs to these spaces.
Mohammad Arab: The point Reza Habibzadeh is making -- that the designer has resolved a dead space -- in my view should be stated differently: this space was not imposed on the project. The creation of this space is the product of the designer's organization, not an external factor.
Reza Habibzadeh: It is possible that the permitted density gave the architect a light well, and the architect essentially transformed the light well into a living space.
Mohammad Arab: In my view, what can be read from the project is that there is no external compulsion in this organization -- it is the designer's choice that pushes this to the corner. And precisely from this perspective, the designer has turned it into an inactive space, which is my critique.
Nashid Nabian: A point that Reza Habibzadeh raised, which I think reads the project correctly and I share the feeling, is that the material and material choices for this space are aimed at negotiating and finding a way to achieve the goal despite the regulations. Let me add another point. In my view, in multi-story projects, the architect's skill in establishing a connection between the ground level and lower floors in section is an area that should be considered when evaluating architectural experiments and interventions. When you look at this project's sections -- specifically the one that places the project in its urban context and compares it with conventional sections -- it has attended to this point. The points I am making are not necessarily for or against any particular project. I agree with colleagues that for various reasons -- including real estate market pressure, regulatory limitations, or simply the capacity of all of us as architects -- this typology has moved somewhat toward emasculation. At the same time, there are points in this project that, at the macro level when we discuss this typology, are worth reflecting on.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The points colleagues made were positive, and I accept them. But if we review Dr. Sirous Bavar's remarks about the intellectual role of the architect, one of whose important aspects is courage and accepting the cost of offering new solutions, I do not see this in this project. I found the work to be very conservative, trying to create openings within the existing framework. If we return to the initial conversation, we need certain boldnesses in this area -- boldnesses that can help us move slightly beyond the existing condition. Let us not forget that the development that occurred a decade ago, which caused these semi-open, semi-private, semi-public spaces to be attached to apartment architecture, is now among our assumptions. In fact, the private sector has more or less accepted this and now considers it part of a building's qualities, and that quality is becoming annexed to the economic real estate market. As you can see, given the boom that has occurred through new media in terms of international communication and the possibility of viewing spaces and experiences that people have created in other places -- despite the dominance of the policing atmosphere you mentioned that even intervenes in the private sphere -- we are witnessing public spaces returning to cities and neighborhoods, even public spaces that were once frequently seen in buildings. The issue of the balcony, which was once essentially a sharing of private life with public space -- you see this important element abundantly in buildings from the 1950s to 1970s. Today, it seems that with the changes that have occurred in people's lifestyles, it is going to manifest in buildings again. I think more boldness was needed in this building, and I did not see it being able to provide this opportunity for residents and take one step further. I would have liked very much to see what was done on the rooftop -- the roof, for such a project, is lost space. No particular idea was visible there, given the special emphasis on public and private space.
Sirous Bavar: When we say semi-private, we look from inside to outside. When we say semi-public, from outside to inside. As was mentioned, the issue of balconies, terraces, and so forth -- these solid-void spaces in architecture have disappeared due to the pressure of a cliche that has been placed before us according to which we must live. Today's society does not include semi-open spaces -- balconies -- in their architectural ensemble. The next issue is that architecture has been drawn into economics. When art acquires an economic dimension, its artistic value diminishes, and they calculate by the centimeter -- that the space that becomes semi-public or semi-private, or balcony space, reduces the price by that much, because the municipality calculates it differently, not counting it as floor area. These issues tie the architect's hands. And in society too, because of the veiling that has been imposed, people do not use terraces and balconies. Swimming pools have gone underground for the same reason, because they cannot have them in open space. But a swimming pool should be in sunlight so that the skin absorbs the sun's energy and vitamins. When it goes underground, it becomes a pool -- the kind of pools found in old bathhouses. The negative point I see in this work is on the facade. I give great importance to facades, to volumes. Here I do not see that harmony. The windows continue rhythmically, but the wall between windows has been scored in one place, closed in another -- there is no consistency. This issue needed to be resolved, not abruptly cut. On one side there is one facade ideology, on the other side a different facade ideology, and no harmony is visible between them. This is one of its weak points.
Apartment No. 74, Platform Tehran Architecture Office, Mehran Davari, Elmira Shirvani, Niloufar Najafi
Sirous Bavar: When limitations arise, they cause inventions to take place or innovation to emerge. Here it is very difficult -- on a 5.5 by 13 meter plot. Truly, in these dimensions, nothing can be done except give a new idea. The plan is very well resolved. For the distance, no other possibilities existed. Here the plan is open, the kitchen is open -- everything is open because in a 5.5-meter width, if I wanted to put walls between spaces, it would become a honeycomb. Only the sleeping area is enclosed. This plan is very good. Better things could have been done with the facade -- that is a matter of taste -- but the facade is also adequate. This facade has in any case departed from the very traditional and ordinary state, and with elements on both the south and north facades has tried to show that this building belongs to today while the neighboring buildings belong to yesterday. The project, given the plot size -- which naturally relates to the owner's economic situation -- is acceptable.
Reza Habibzadeh: The fact that in a deteriorated fabric, on a narrow and long plot, a residential project has been created that observes standards and is sound and has a relatively clean language -- these are significant merits, and the project is commendable for having managed to accomplish this in a deteriorated fabric. But when you tell an architect that they cannot use expensive materials, that they do not have large square footage available and must design small units, all these limitations can make the architectural question more serious for the architect. In effect, a situation is created where the architect confronts the architectural question without being entangled in luxury and other peripheral concerns. An inexpensive building is not necessarily a lower-quality building. Also, a small building does not simply have the same organization as a large building at a smaller scale. These have different languages. But the architect of this project did not enter this territory to create a new organization -- to create fresh spatial potentials that would add value to this land and deteriorated fabric. The architect did not do this, but was able to produce a sound, neat, and orderly work. However, the architect did not step into unknown territory.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This statement sits at the opposite pole from what we discussed at the beginning -- that sometimes these limitations are so overwhelming that the architect capitulates. I have several points about this project that I think distinguish it. Unlike the previous project, which left its stated question unanswered, this project has posed a simple and honest question. The architect was asked to design a project that could be easily sold. In this fabric, where we know that due to low property values, the neighborhood, and a troubled area, designing and building a structure that can be easily sold on the housing market and yield significant added value is very difficult. But now, looking at the finished result, we all agree it can appeal to many who appreciate architecture. This project, in my opinion, is very important because the architect has been able to satisfy the client's desire in such an area. The other point, which is the most important discussion to attend to, is that the architect did not pursue the conventional approach of working in deteriorated fabrics -- that is, plot consolidation. The architect tried to create architecture from this very limited and small project, something that today has been experienced in many important cities around the world where land is either scarce or very expensive. For example, in Amsterdam you see canal houses -- narrow houses that are actually quite attractive in their composition. Or in Tokyo today you see many narrow houses like this, or in Venice as well there are many examples of this design approach. Imagine if the architects of buildings in this fabric had this perspective and such buildings were lined up next to each other, creating a pattern of shell and plan -- we could have had such attractive fabrics here. Without needing only to rely on consolidation and those urban regeneration strategies that ultimately conclude with scraping the entire fabric and building a series of towers. In my view, this project should receive great attention for having offered the valuable work of proposing a practical pattern -- one that, incidentally, is not the result of government regeneration policies but has spontaneously formed in agreement and cooperation between client and architect. In my view, it scores very well on these grounds.
Reza Habibzadeh: Look at the interior spaces of this building -- it is heading in the direction of a neat, uptown project. But due to budget constraints, it cannot work the way it should. Whereas when you have a small budget, you should choose a language proportionate to the budget and project conditions, so as not to compete with a luxury project.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: In this project, where one cannot produce much public and private space, every centimeter of each floor matters. After all, how many square meters does one have on a single floor to make such use of? As you said, the options for diversity in apartment space become very limited, and one of them is precisely these high-quality executions. Like the issue of the lower class looking up to the upper classes, today this is among the values being transferred from the upper class to the middle class, and from the middle class to the lower class, which seems like a very good thing. The demand for quality is being transmitted even in the form of materials.
Mohammad Arab: Continuing Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari's remarks, I want to offer a critique on this subject. Many of the issues in this project are the product of the plot's dimensions, not the product of the architect or architecture. The fact that the plot has not been consolidated, or that it has proportions worthy of architectural attention, already exists as a given. What is important to me in this type of project is the organization of the interior space. In projects of these dimensions, precisely because of spatial compression, the contribution of producing open space is much more serious, and therefore there is a serious need to change the preconceptions we use in other apartment typologies. Producing small and affordable housing is an important issue in our current conditions, and if we want to reach an appropriate solution, it demands more boldness and courage.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Here, every square meter matters for the owner and for buying and selling. Neither density nor even spatial quality can be discussed here. I think in dealing with fabrics of this kind and regeneration discussions, we should not expect that owners with such small properties should bear the burden of public or private space. That is the responsibility of specialized parent organizations that have been formed to pursue regeneration. They should open up part of the urban space so it becomes the government's contribution for units like these that cannot have their own private open space -- like what you see in Venice, where the urban fabric is very dense but at regular intervals you see small squares where people can gather or engage in social activities. And similarly in Amsterdam. In fact, if we want to tell the Urban Regeneration Company something about this project, it is that this pattern shows the company that instead of those projects you have seen built in the usual way, it can work with existing plot widths, as this example demonstrates. This is the solution the architect has offered -- this width can also work, provided regeneration companies invest in urban public spaces and provide these kinds of spaces for neighborhoods, with appropriate openings for diverse social activities. I find your critique of this project valid, but given that the architect in such dimensions must also wrestle with urban regulations, and in such a fabric all balconies and projections are prohibited based on municipal rules -- buildings become simple cubes, and if private open space is to be incorporated, it must come from the base floor areas, meaning a severe reduction of the owner's already limited wealth. In your terms, here too the cost of urban public space must come from the owner's pocket, and this is not fair or right at all. It is true that these days, in a certain class, the desire for spatial quality has led owners to forgo, say, fifty square meters of usable floor area to have a private courtyard. But you cannot expect the middle or lower classes to give up that floor space to provide a courtyard for the family. Unfortunately, today spatial quality is like a luxury good, available to the upper classes.
Mohammad Arab: My argument is not about carving from the building and giving to public space. The importance of open space is about achieving lightness and greater fluidity. I mean, we cannot say that a 45-square-meter unit does not need open space from 120 square meters upward. Open space is a life necessity.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Under these conditions, what solution do you propose?
Mohammad Arab: In your remarks you referred to Amsterdam. There are numerous examples of this same scale in that city where, precisely due to compression and the issue of quantity, the presence of open space is more visible.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: In my view, you are making a disproportionate comparison -- you are talking about a country where that semi-open space is part of ordinary city life. The difference in living standards here cannot be ignored, even though land in Amsterdam is extremely expensive and anyone living in these houses is residing in one of the most expensive residential areas in the world. Yet they want that open space for part of their daily life. It is the different lifestyle of those people compared to ours that makes having an open space necessary despite its high cost. Now, in a dense neighborhood in central or southern Tehran where, due to demographic and cultural composition, society is conservative and traditional, a visible open space cannot be considered popular. This must be added to the economics of space that I mentioned earlier.
Nashid Nabian: The reason I personally brought this project forward was not about achievements in architecture as a discipline. I am thinking that millions of square meters are built in this city without an architect's intervention. In fact, in this segment of clients, there is a resistance to the architect's involvement -- because they do not equate the architect's involvement with achieving quality; they see it as an increase in construction cost. Therefore, I thought to bring this project forward not in defense of the project but in defense of the potentials of architects. But if we want to speak from the perspective of architectural discipline and the achievements of applying architectural knowledge, I agree with Mohammad Arab, and to some extent with Reza Habibzadeh, that this project does not have a disciplinary achievement. Why? Because I think architectural agency is partly about articulating new lifestyles. We have, for example, the micro-unit typology in high-density cities like Manhattan, Tokyo, and Taiwan, where a four-person family lives in 18 square meters -- and that is a lifestyle. Therefore, if such a project wants to have such an achievement in the domain of architectural disciplinary agency that can be discussed, it must fundamentally think about redefining lifestyle. The fact that this has not happened in this project is not necessarily due to the architect's capacity but to the dynamics of the client-architect relationship, and I am not in a position to judge. But I think this project should have been brought forward and discussed.
Emarat-e Nazar, Mian Architecture Office, Abouzar Salehi, Mahshid Karimi
Sirous Bavar: I like this project very much, because it has resolved many issues in an uneven terrain through split levels -- one part goes down, another part goes up with a ramp. The movement of the car entering this space has been separated from the pedestrian entering it. Today in many of our projects that have become common in the city, these two movements are mixed together -- it is dreadful that a person enters the stairwell and elevator lobby through the parking garage. Here the issue has been resolved. With these level changes going up and down, it has also disrupted that ordinary or conventional quality and created volumes in a way that makes one curious -- what is the part that went down? What is the part with the tile going up? The wheelchair issue has been resolved. The entrance steps differ in dimension from the interior stairs, because the entrance steps, if you walk normally, each stride is about 70 centimeters. Here the entrance steps have come that way, because if they had been the same as interior stairs, one would suddenly look down. Looking at the facade, it is varied. You do not see a solution in the facade that has been repeated -- each level has its own particular form. And the plan, which has been generated by this facade, has indentations that depart from the box form common today. It precisely shows that art in architecture and technology in architecture are not subject to economic regulations -- though urban economy has been achieved. Urban economy is different from the science of economics. Looking at the other facade too, variety exists. In the plans, variety exists. Work has been done on this project -- even in the brickwork, so that the brick surfaces would not be too monotonous, some offsets have been created in the brick, producing lines.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The project, in its diagram and the creation of private spaces like courtyards on upper floors, is like everything seen in other projects. Good things have happened in this project. But in my view, it has a strategic flaw that we should discuss -- and that is contemporaneity. In my opinion, this is the most important principle of architecture in any era. You are working in a city where Safavid-era buildings reached such heights in their time, so pioneering and contemporary for their age, that their architects appeared as far as the Indian subcontinent. In my view, the project, while like the two previous projects we discussed in trying to balance a look at the past and present, has fallen much further behind them -- precisely because it has not been able to be contemporary to its own time. Especially in some parts of the submitted materials, there are references to historical architecture like the Khaju Bridge that, in my opinion, do not correspond to the presented space and project.
Mohammad Arab: Let me mention a point regarding the project's location. The project is situated along the banks of the Zayandeh Rud in Isfahan, which in terms of economic value is among the most expensive parts of Isfahan. A place where in the past few decades, single-story villa plots have been one by one replaced by multi-story apartments with high density and overcrowding. If we look at the project from this perspective, what has occurred in its spatial organization is the creation of three different residential types at three levels of the project, where a considerable share of space at each level has been allocated to void areas. That is, the lower level is connected to a sunken garden, the ground level to a central courtyard, and the upper level to another courtyard with an open pool positioned in one corner. Each level has been designed based on its own possibilities and situation. In my view, this is one of the few projects that has shown the necessary boldness in hollowing out and reducing mass. This is where, compared to the projects we have seen and the discussion we had about the previous project (Apartment No. 74), I do not see this boldness and necessity as merely the product of the plot's area, but also the economics of the land and how much boldness and ability an architect has to change prevailing patterns. In my view, this project, setting aside the aesthetic perspective where I completely agree with Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari's remarks that it perhaps could not access a contemporary language and vocabulary -- but I also see it as a positive point in that it distances itself from today's prevailing cliches -- setting aside this aesthetic perspective, in my view its most important achievement is in its organization and the definitions it has created.
Reza Habibzadeh: The project had an architect who knew their craft and was able to design a relatively good plan and produce good semi-open spaces. Regarding the lack of a contemporary style, I am not very concerned, because I always say we need architects who know their craft, who know how to design properly and build cleanly. Sometimes we talk so much about creativity that we forget that before being creative, architecture is a profession and we must know this profession. In my initial remarks, I said creativity, especially in housing, is not easy work -- meaning not every architect can turn everything upside down from the very start of their career. Being ordinary is also very good -- meaning being ordinarily good. Meaning knowing their craft, knowing details, bringing work to fruition, knowing materials. I think this is an ordinary, neat, and good work. But its weak point is the interior -- the interior language does not have the coherence of its exterior. The forms used especially in the interior parts lack consistency. I even think perhaps the interior designer was a different person. The coherence I see on the outside is not present inside -- it somewhat departs and lacks a consistent interior language.
Nashid Nabian: I agree with much of what was said regarding the inconsistency of the interior and exterior vocabularies of the project and the non-contemporary nature of its architectural language. But I want to emphasize one positive point that Mohammad Arab also mentioned. In this particular architectural exercise, it appears that a superimposition of three types of typology has occurred: the sunken garden, a type of one-sided central courtyard, and then a residential unit alongside a balcony at height. In one of the project's sections, the relationship between these three approaches to open space has been depicted, and from this standpoint it is a project worthy of reflection.
16 Minutes, Pi Architecture Studio, Hossein Ebrahimzadeh, Mohammad Ebrahimzadeh
Sirous Bavar: When I look at this project's plan -- I start from the plan and work forward -- I see that those solid and void spaces that take the project out of a cubic state are not seen in this project in that manner. Of course, I also attend to its placement within the plot subdivisions on a street, where when subdivisions are placed before us, our hands are tied. We have either one facade or possibly two. Looking at the plan on the lower floor, the bedroom row is placed to the south and the living room to the north. One of this project's merits is that it has placed the vertical movement of elevators and stairs in the center, and this makes work easy, because when you come up to the center, one side becomes the daytime space and the other the nighttime space. But in the volume -- which I consider important as an architectural sculpture -- the solid and void spaces are not much visible, technique is not visible, many things are not visible. The project seems ordinary to me.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: It seems the project's strong point is its interior spaces more than its exterior. For me, the primary goal of residential building design is creating attractive, varied, and suitable interior spaces. I think this is a positive aspect of the project that can be further emphasized. It has been able to create integrated spaces, sometimes combined with greenery and sometimes alone, that have an acceptable level of quality. But ultimately, as Mr. Sirous Bavar said, the project is ordinary.
Reza Habibzadeh: The strong point of this project is its section. Within a fixed total height -- which is essentially eight floors -- with the breaks it has created and the play it has made in section, it has produced spaces with tall ceilings. In an infill project -- meaning a project with buildings on both sides and a fixed number of floors -- the architect has not repeated a single plan. Rather, through creating breaks in section and playing with heights, the architect has produced, for example, a duplex space of 80 meters or a void with great height. In my view, this effort, though it has not yielded major results, is commendable. Its weak point is that the effort made in section and plan does not show in the facade organization, and the project has a dual front-and-back facade. The rear facade, in my view, is more attractive -- because it shows the efforts made in the project's section. If the architect had brought this same rear facade to the front, the work would have been more attractive and more consistent.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The front facade has been designed for the city, the rear facade for the family. It appears that in the south facade there is also access to the shared courtyard. This feature is also distinctive -- a point for which the project receives acceptable value.
Mohammad Arab: The project internally possesses a complexity that the designer desired, and this development has reached interesting results in resolving the project's internal issues. Apart from the fact that through changes in section it has achieved somewhat more diverse spatial qualities, it has also disrupted the prevailing pattern of repetitive floor slabs, arriving at non-uniform plans. The facade issue that was mentioned -- the fact that the north and south facades do not follow a unified language -- may be a negative point. But on the other hand, one can approach the matter differently: the part of the project facing the city is not meant to display the complexities, and the architect has tried, through certain devices, to achieve a simple and structured facade in relationship with the city. For this reason, I see this different language in the project as conscious.
Nashid Nabian: I agree with colleagues that the project is not fully resolved. But a decision regarding these breaks has become a defined problem for the architect, and then there is a consistent skill in solving this problem on all fronts. Meaning, for instance, in the staircase and how units gain access, it has had an effect; in making the elevator two-sided, it has had an effect; and in the architectural vocabulary through which these level differences and breaks are resolved in the facades, it has had an effect. From this standpoint, the project is consistent, and I see this as a sign of the architect's skill in solving the problem that they themselves introduced.
Packet Residential Building, Roydad Architects, Zahra Armand, Mostafa Omidbakhsh
Sirous Bavar: These interlocking volumes create a play on the staircase. In the main plan too, the movement of the stairs is present, with white and blue colors that may captivate everyone with these movements, shadows, and the blue and white. But overall, looking at the plan and facade, I fundamentally disagree with facades that artificially throw a unified skin over the building, concealing what happens behind it. I do not agree with all this technology that dresses the facade in beautiful clothing, because initially it may be interesting, but after a few years it is unclear what that wire mesh thrown over the facade will look like -- and it is not part of the architecture at all. In the whole project, there is nothing interesting to me except for these interlocking and winding staircase volumes.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I would like to challenge Mr. Sirous Bavar on this project. In my view, this may be one of the best projects we have seen throughout this period, and I want to examine it from several angles. One is that this project, like all projects, has had the common and primary issue of contemporary life in a form constrained by regulations, conventions, and external oversight, but has managed to answer it in a different way. The discussion we are having about this project is that even if we are forced to experience stagnation in residential architecture -- as we see in this edition's works -- it is possible, from time to time, to re-see these available and repetitive patterns in different ways. We see this in various architectural styles too, where conventional solutions, when presented again in a different form, gain freshness. Another point is that this project is, in my opinion, among the best projects that has executed craftsmanship -- one of the inseparable qualities of architecture -- at the highest level. If you had paid attention to this metal skin that Mr. Sirous Bavar objects to and examined its details, you would see it is a modular system with dry connections. It reminds me of the experience our architecture has in building orosi windows -- three-paneled, five-paneled, and multi-paneled. Skins built with fine wooden pieces without a single nail being used. From here I enter the second discussion: the building, while being contemporary, pioneering, and counter to the prevailing convention, is deeply connected to Iranian architecture. The lapis lazuli color, in a form similar to the use of lapis lazuli and turquoise tiles in significant parts of the building, has been employed, while it does not smell of antiquity at all -- it is a new narrative. The evidence for my argument is that geometric lattice pattern visible in the divisions of the south-facing skin -- the same second skin of the building -- which is repeated in other places as well, even in the mirror-work in the interior. In my view, this type of narrative and this type of connection with historical Iranian architecture is a mature, correct approach without tired and repetitive references. This project has achieved this success, and I was pleased to see such a project in this edition's collection.
Mohammad Arab: Given the project's location, in Isfahan there is a regulation called "visual oversight" -- meaning that on all facades other than the south, if facing a neighbor, windows and openings must be placed above 175 centimeters. In this project, the designer's solution has been to hollow out a portion of the northern mass, redirecting the interior light wells toward the project itself.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This too is a very important point. We do not view the window merely as a light source -- it must also be used for looking at the view. When, given current limitations, a woman cannot stand full-height behind a window, I prefer my windows to face inward so that this opportunity is equally provided for everyone. The fact that this building has also attended to this issue is, in my view, worthy of commendation.
Mohammad Arab: I want to mention several points about this design. One was discussed in relation to House Number Six, and I believe addressing it today is a necessity -- namely, the production of interactive and liminal zones between private and public realms. In this project, by freeing the staircase space and removing it from repetition, it is in my opinion one of the best examples that has succeeded in this, because today we have accepted stairs and elevators as a closed, rigid space -- one of our preconceptions -- and this project, with this boldness and emphasis, is actually disrupting this structure and has created a semi-open zone in effective connection with the project's interior. Another positive point is the project's consistent language. It was among the few projects in the residential section that, both outside and inside, proceeds with a unified language and vocabulary, without falling into disarray. However, I consider the skin to be the Achilles' heel of this project. I think both in terms of material and even in terms of references, it is the project's weakness. Moreover, the gap created on the north side also exists on the south, and the addition of the skin has actually diminished it. Another point we should note about this project: it ultimately produces two residential units, which is among the factors that gave the designer more freedom in organization. But I think this pattern could have been responsive even if four more units were added.
Reza Habibzadeh: In my view, it is a good project. Among the projects we have seen, this is a project that has well understood its needs and limitations -- for example, those 170-centimeter windows -- and has been able to provide an architectural response. With the void space created in the center, it has given a distinct quality to the staircase space. It has not imposed aesthetics on the project but rather made its initial concept explicit and emphasized it. That is, if the staircase space matters to the architect, the emphasis is placed there. The only place that bothers me somewhat is the skin on the rear facade, which in my view is entirely superfluous and has only made the work dual-natured. For instance, there are two windows on this facade, and I do not understand why one should be covered with a metal skin while the other is not. If both windows had been treated with a single vocabulary, the facade would have been healthier -- meaning that solely for the sake of facade aesthetics, one is closed with metal skin and the other left open. I think a more consistent approach to the project would have been better. But the project is creative and of value.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Of course, one should consider the facade composition. This is a point that should follow from what Dr. Habibzadeh also mentioned -- meaning attention to the building's form. From this perspective too, this composition must be considered, and in my view the architect has been able to do this -- both in the south facade, which is usually the secondary facade, and in the main facade.
Nashid Nabian: In the multi-unit category, we had much debate, and what I want to say does not diminish the values of this project. From my perspective, and probably that of some colleagues, there is a significant gap between this project and the other projects. This unique exercise may not, in its current state, be easily transferable to other exercises. But that is not important at all. However, as a radical experience, I would have preferred that this orientation toward one of the fundamental elements of architecture, in its post-modern paradigm, happened much more explicitly and boldly. Like Mohammad Arab and Reza Habibzadeh, I do not see the addition of techniques related to the courtyard-side facades as necessary for the project. Truthfully, this idea is not within my realm of taste. But I am not saying that I like or dislike this vocabulary or composition. In my view, it is not within the juror's domain to discuss composition. My concern is where the combination of ideas should stop, so that the central idea of the architectural intervention is not weakened. I feel that the intense introversion present in the entrance wing of the building should have extended to the other wings as well. But in any case, this minor critique does not diminish the project's values. The project has a significant distance from its competitors.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Of course, I do not think discussing composition undermines the judging discussion. Discussing the aesthetics and composition of the facade is also part of the established vocabulary of architectural criticism.
Sirous Bavar: We must see what this project's architect values when presenting the project -- first, the plan is precisely shown, then the volume is discussed, then circulation, and so forth. In this project, the architect, forgive me, has tried to fool the jury with these colors and the variety created in the staircase. When we look at these five sheets, the one that catches our eye is the one about the staircase, the staircase colors, the blue and white. When we get to the plan, we see a small, modest plan placed in the corner that the architect does not even give importance to. Here the architect raises two things: one is the issue of cultural identity imposed on us today -- that the window at 170 centimeters means I imprison myself inside a space. When I place a window, it is not just for light. It is for the connection between the person inside and activities happening outside. When I place the window at 170, it means I lock myself within a space.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: In Isfahan, neighbors complain about any adjacency, and in this city there is a serious financial market for satisfying neighbors' concerns about potential visual oversight.
Sirous Bavar: Such ideas exist not only in Isfahan but in other cities too, like Shiraz, Kerman, and others. But as architects, if we want to consider those issues and work that way, we are not architects. We become executors of our clients' backward ideas. Here this architect fools me with these exaggerated images placed before me, and then places a small, independent plan there saying this is the plan. I accept that this gap has been created, that the staircase has been placed here, and the architect says this is my primary view of the project, with windows placed accordingly. I ask: why were windows not placed facing the street? That is, introversion has been emphasized more than extroversion. I do not believe in introversion at all. In the past, our architecture was introverted, and people lived in their own small worlds. Modernism pulled this curtain aside and opened society to an infinite world -- not just to the city but to galaxies and everywhere -- and freed thought from being fossilized within itself.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I think the idea that the architect wanted to deceive us is far-fetched, because first the architect would have had to deceive their own client in Isfahan, who certainly approaches every measure with great scrutiny. Therefore, I consider this discussion beside the point. Second, regarding the point about introversion -- we agree that such a view is not a valuable outlook for human life. But look at the kind of environment we live in. In such an environment where private life is subject to critique, investigation, and scrutiny, what should one do?
Sirous Bavar: We change the living environment.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I think you have a somewhat idealistic view of the architect's possibilities that differs from society's reality. Here the architect has found a way to equally bring the family to a view behind the window.
Nashid Nabian: In any case, reading, understanding, and judging an architectural work is a subjective matter. That is precisely why you and I find ourselves in disagreement. For instance, I say that as a juror I am not in the domain of commenting on composition; you say composition is part of aesthetics and therefore a subject of evaluation. My reaction is that I understand but disagree. These are two approaches based on different schools of thought and different lenses for looking.
Renovation Category
Shavan Residential Unit, Pragmatica Design Office, Mohammadreza Mohebali
Nashid Nabian: The renovation category is a highly challenging one. In this category, on one hand we deal with renovation projects in the sense of restoration and conservation, on the other with projects involving physical intervention for change of use, and finally with interior projects. Therefore, it has always been a question for me by what criteria these three subcategories should be compared. I tried, in each of these subgroups, to select projects of significance and potential for discussion for the next stage. My selection was not necessarily for comparing them, since they are sometimes incomparable. But I wanted at least to have the opportunity to discuss successful exercises in all three groups. In the interior design subgroup, this project in my view is an interesting exercise. The architect has created a perceptual height code in the interior space, and the project has been produced in the upper and lower portions of this height code with two different languages -- as if the project has been created from the superimposition of this dualistic, contrasting, and parallel spatial pairing.
Sirous Bavar: I think in terms of renovation, very good provisions have been made in the interior space, for whatever use they want. But the division between larger spaces and smaller spaces and spaces where one can move, gather, then observe, look at the object to be displayed or created here -- all of this has been done very cleanly.
Reza Habibzadeh: I look at renovation projects in the sense of revitalization -- meaning how an architect can discover the potentials of a renovation project and create a new organization, breathing new life into it. Not merely using a technique -- like the technique of removing or adding -- and simply adding new aesthetics to the project. This project has used two different languages: a very clean, polished language at the first level and a relatively rough language at the second level, placing these two side by side, which takes boldness. But what has been achieved by juxtaposing these two? Has the new function of the house led the architect to this dual result, or is this merely an aesthetic technique the architect has adopted? Does this exposing of steel beams and placing tunnel lights at the second level serve merely as an aesthetic technique, or has it contributed to the continuity of life in this project? I cannot quite understand this, and I do not have a clear understanding of the project's duality. If it is only technique, the project remains at the level of taste, and I too can say this project is not to my taste.
Mohammad Arab: The reality is that I also could not connect with this project, because I could not properly understand its problem. The architect has not helped either -- I think the architect has tried more to arrive at a technique and perhaps to employ a contrasting and different language against the classical structure of the building. In my opinion, there is even weakness in the presentation. In renovation, what matters is what happens. Was a portion of this renovation quality, which occurs in the project's section, present before the intervention, or is it the product of the designer's intervention?
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Two points. First, as Nashid Nabian said about categorizing projects -- in the Memar Award competition we do not have an interior design category. In the renovation category, we must actually examine all current categories and more. As an architecture project, both exterior and interior space, even the techniques and the area the architect has been able to revitalize, are of interest. Regarding what Reza Habibzadeh said about revitalization -- this project was already a living one. It was apparently a residential house. When we say revitalization, we mean bringing an abandoned, derelict project back to life, which has not happened here. On the other hand, in my opinion this project is fake -- in the sense of being phony. From that column where they have scraped off the plaster to reach the brick, to the approach with these tunnel lights and so forth, in a building that is one of today's classical buildings -- it is all fake. In renovation, the architect's action and intervention, given the building's previous characteristics, acquires some historical and identity weight, and we try to be committed to the building's past and, without exaggeration, ostentation, and especially fabrication, narrate the building's past. From this perspective, the project has been limited to a skin -- the architect has only seen the skin and done facade work, taking a taste from a restoration project into a neoclassical building without thinking about the exterior at all. I imagine that this project, had it been honest, would have taken what it did inside to the exterior shell and thereby clarified its position toward this architecture. Why was this approach not taken to the courtyard facade? This shows the owner and architect wanted to preserve the classical facade while using pseudo-restoration exposed brick inside. The building maintains the same fashionable exterior display of luxury on the outside. That is fine from my point of view, but such a project cannot offer a new approach in renovation. At most it could have been presented for its interior design -- a pseudo-restorative and fake interior design. The direction the project has chosen is wrong, in my opinion. In the renovation category, where history, identity, and documentation also come into play, this project does not speak truthfully.
Lilac House, Rashed Azizi
Mohammad Arab: What I find important in this project is the project's premise. This project has answered an important question simply: a single-story house that for whatever reason needed to expand its floor area, and the solution has been achieved by adding a new level. This may seem obvious, but today the answer to this question comes through partnership with another person, resulting in a multi-story building and an unjustified increase in density. Given Iran's current economic conditions, I see this as a very serious pattern for the continuity of architecture and our solution for development and density increase in urban fabrics. I consider this premise worthy of discussion, given that today this approach has, for various reasons, faded from the minds of both architects and clients, and our regulatory structures struggle with this issue.
Nashid Nabian: You mean you see incremental densification as one of the urban solutions for the near future of our major cities?
Mohammad Arab: Yes. Given that current economic conditions will push us in this direction, I therefore see this project as having value from the standpoint of its premise. But in terms of the language and vocabulary with which it has arrived at its answer, the reasons for the level of contrast in its production, and the approach to juxtaposing old and new or what spatial qualities it produces -- these are actually the issues where I find this project weak.
Sirous Bavar: The architect has created a contrast in that existing fabric, and created the contrast interestingly -- meaning this contrast does not strike the eye like a diamond. In this spatial addition, the architect has implemented an interesting and proper technique, and has also selected a material that does not make itself too conspicuous against the existing fabric. In terms of technique, span, and everything, it is harmonious. The contrast is volumetric, but in terms of color, form, and so forth, it is not disturbing. The point made earlier about adding a space here -- the issue has been correctly addressed and properly resolved.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I find Mr. Mohammad Arab's point correct. But a higher quality of addition and more intervention was expected from the architect. The architect had this capability.
Reza Habibzadeh: In my view, what is evident is the social mission this work has taken on and the impact it has had on the fabric. One can imagine that repeating this approach would elevate a fabric. Compared to its old photograph, something very good has happened. The materials have also been correctly chosen -- not overly polished materials to build a chic building or ones requiring great craftsmanship.
Ivy Cafe, Neda Mirani
Mohammad Arab: I did not vote for this project, because it belongs to the type of projects that are certainly interior design in approach. Clean projects, proper executions, but no concerns are raised in them.
Nashid Nabian: The method of architectural intervention in producing space through a comprehensive investigation of the capabilities of a building material has been practiced in this project. The architect has conducted a focused design research on the potentials of a specific building block, and the entire space has emerged from the combinations and superimpositions of these identified potentials.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I voted for this project because I thought it would be a project worthy of discussion -- the very point Nashid Nabian mentioned in the previous discussion, that there is a unified language in the project and it was part of the design strategy. The architect went toward selecting an element that could yield different uses from it, and this is one of the qualities that distinguishes any architecture. This project has been able, while being economical, to also provide the necessary variety in interior space. But as discussed in the first project too, this work remains at the level of an interior project, and in a category like renovation where we encounter a wide range of projects, it can be appreciated for its interior design capabilities. You see, there is a truth in Iranian architecture that pursues an outlook akin to alchemy -- the ability to create great added value at low cost. I think this project has been a suitable experience in this regard.
Nashid Nabian: Let me add one sentence. Developing material capabilities as a tool for producing space is among the positive aspects of this project. That is, moving beyond materials as mere finishing, toward materials as a tool for producing spatial qualities -- this is part of the research of the architectural discipline, and this project is an example of such an exercise.
Reza Habibzadeh: In my view, precisely for this reason, the project is more than just telling the architect "good job." Actually, my critique of this project is: why did the architect not take this idea further? For example, why not use this technique in lighting? Or in the tables and chairs or in the plant boxes?
Sirous Bavar: There is an issue here. This is a space that has been renovated for a prominent purpose -- a place where many people come, gather together, and create a social space. The material chosen for the decor and spaces is the best material -- a type of porous cement brick that does not close off the space. That is, this space, given the porosity that exists and its connection to subsequent spaces, does not feel suffocating in a small space. The furniture -- I am not particularly concerned with what type of tables and chairs were chosen, as those are very much a matter of taste. But the composition of space with this material for an interior, for a gathering and social place, is its positive point.
Reza Habibzadeh: My point was that this same block can be more than something you just place objects on. It has potentials of its own -- for instance, it has a hole that could be used instead of the planters the architect placed in the space, or it could be used in making tables and chairs.
Mohammad Arab: I agree that this is one of the important issues in renovation. But what answer are we getting from this project? Nothing beyond two appended skins that are not organizing but attaching, producing two surrounding textures on the walls.
Nashid Nabian: I have no disagreement with you. I also selected this project to reach this stage because I found the premise worthy of reflection.
Amjad Villa, Hossein Namazi
Mohammad Arab: This project is one of those that for me embodies the concept of "spatial recycling." Its subject is the recycling of a building from four or five decades ago, and without wanting to concern itself with the old-versus-new dilemma or the building's history and nostalgia, it completely recycles this existing structure in a correct, contemporary manner with new organization and programming. Apart from the architectural qualities it has created within the project, it also brings the project close to a contemporary language and vocabulary. This is the type of project that, given our current high percentage of so-called "demolition-ready" buildings from forty to fifty years ago, could be optimally reused through a recycling approach. This is one of the most important paths our renovation can take, which is why it is a very valuable project for me.
Nashid Nabian: The category of material recycling exists in renovation and restoration. But you used a word combination -- spatial recycling -- that refers to the possibility of recycling architecture itself, not the materials that form it. This project recycles or up-cycles the architecture itself. I even go one layer higher and say that this project has up-cycled the architecture to something better than its pre-intervention state. That is, in the process of recycling, it has arrived at an upgraded space, and from this standpoint, in my view, the lens through which the architect has looked at architectural intervention is a lens worthy of significance and reflection.
Sirous Bavar: I also see this project as one of the very interesting works. When I look at what existed before and what has been created afterward -- both from the standpoint of exterior architecture, meaning the architectural space and architectural use, and from the standpoint of interior spaces and bringing water inside, which can separate day and night spaces -- a half-level arrangement has been created. In terms of plan it is very interesting and has resolved the issue; in terms of volume it is very interesting and has resolved the issue; and in terms of the roof slope -- the gentle slope given to the roof -- it is not disturbing. From all perspectives, I see a complete project.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I think this is the perfect example of what Reza Habibzadeh said about revitalization projects. This project is a genuine revitalization. Look at the previous images -- the project was abandoned and lost. This level of project elevation is at the level of alchemy -- meaning something has been transformed, at a reasonable cost, into a distinguished building for the affluent class. I believe that in the renovation discussion, we deal with different social classes. We must seriously pursue renovation within affluent circles as well, to help wider areas of built and abandoned spaces return to life. In my view, it is very good that the architect has been able to accomplish such an undertaking within affluent circles, and from this standpoint this project is truly a successful one.
Nashid Nabian: Despite finding the project commendable in its macro strategies, I do not agree with some of the interventions at the detail level.
Reza Habibzadeh: In my opinion, this is a first-rate project, and as Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari said, it is at the level of a miracle to transform that building into this project and discover new spaces within it -- meaning to see the spatial potentials and make them visible. I have absolutely no issues with these aspects and completely agree. My only note is that the architect of this project should work a bit better on the materials used and on their architectural technique.
Emarat-e Jan, Tehran Associates Architecture Office, Alireza Tahmourthi
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: I think in the renovation category, given the conservation concerns that cultural heritage represents, this project is a good conservation-restoration solution. The project has minimal interventions while not diminishing spatial quality. When it does add or remove areas, these are deeply engaged with the building's design. Take these ceilings whose undersides have been opened -- Arash Mozaffari had something similar at the Qasr Prison, but this experience is one that has been truly successful in the separation of materials, quality, and giving the building's history a chance to express itself. I think it is among the projects that, if I wanted to reference cultural heritage, could serve as a good example in the area of technical conservation and committed restoration to the original.
Nashid Nabian: This project is my favorite in this group. Because in this genre of upgrading existing space -- that is, recycling architectural space -- the project's architect has both the right lens and, relative to the previous project, their skill in final finishing is commendable. Specifically, this particular approach the architect takes with the existing ceiling condition shows an internalized deep understanding of this architectural element. That is, a spatial condition that in its pre-contemporary era had merely protective and structural functions has, through a very intelligent intervention, been transformed into the dominant aesthetic of the interior space. And this, in my view, in addition to the correct technique and correct lens, is fundamentally an intelligent architectural composition as well.
Mohammad Arab: Let me make a point in comparison with the previous project (Amjad Villa). It concerns the existing building, which in my view -- whereas in the previous project we were dealing with a mediocre building devoid of quality, where ultimately only its skeleton remained -- in this project we face a very serious model with a noteworthy language and vocabulary. The architect, with boldness and skill, has completely extracted themselves from the field of play of the existing condition and, with a bold and intelligent idea, created a contemporary, new space. Therefore, regardless of any other issues, the pure quality of the space produced in this project is very valuable to me. A new experience of being under a pitched roof.
Nashid Nabian: A very contemporary experience, because this structural element is seen from another perspective as a spatial condition.
Mohammad Arab: One can both climb up and, through the gaps that have been created, experience the space -- which is certainly a new experience of being present in this type of space. Of course, Aires Mateus has a similar experience in the House in Azeitao project. But in any case, in this project the architect has not only managed to preserve the building but has ultimately created an exceptional quality with a new language.
Nashid Nabian: That is, something that could have been merely a trigger for nostalgia has been transformed into an unparalleled experience.
Sirous Bavar: In the pitched roof section, the architect has not touched it -- meaning the roof with its timber has been exposed. But in terms of the technique of pitched-roof construction, no intervention has been made. It has only been exposed.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This project is a successful renovation experience. It has been able to completely preserve the shell while even putting the roof membrane to use and having a program for it.
Nashid Nabian: Skillfully, boldly, and creatively.
Reza Habibzadeh: In renovation projects, we generally see that a technique has been used -- for example, they start stripping the project to reach the brick underneath and keep it, and the entire project is just that. We have had many such projects. But here the architect has transformed this technique into a spatial experience, bringing the old ceiling with its own wooden structure into the architectural space. Even through slits created in the first ceiling, we feel the presence of this old ceiling on the ground floor as well.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This is a project that has not defined what you call subtraction merely as stopping. It has also considered the portion of the client's expectations in this category that required a series of suitable spaces. I think this very point is very important for the sustainability of this project.
Reza Habibzadeh: When it stops at the level of technique, it becomes fashion. In the renovation group, projects are generally like this. These fashions become widespread every so often. For example, whitewashing everything becomes a fashion. Whereas you whitewash the project entirely to make a larger idea prominent and legible -- not just to have whitewashed. This project has gone beyond this framework.
Art Residency Seh Bar, Mohsen Khazdouz, Adib Iravani, Hossein Panjehpour
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Despite the project having started to subtract from the building, it follows a procedure that has become fashionable and is practiced in some other offices -- an adaptation of certain experiences from European countries. But if this approach lacks narrative and story, it no longer works. It is a type of meaningless and dysfunctional adaptation, remaining at the level of today's media-consumption fashion. In my view, the space for living in this project has become very personal. This approach cannot become generalized in the renovation category and turn into a pattern that can be developed and extended to the market of renovation projects. But regarding the technique of the work, the fact that the architect has been able to create a different space is noteworthy. However, what we are looking for in renovation, given the large volume of buildings in this arena, are patterns with generalizable functions. In my view, this pattern is not generalizable, but it can still be appreciated as an artistic exception.
Nashid Nabian: This is an art residency. Every intervention must be evaluated in the context of that intervention. This is a distinctive project and points to a specific approach in renovation projects that severely limits the extent of intervention.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Given the conditions necessitating the renovation of a vast volume of urban fabrics, these types of experiences are also economically debatable. In my view, the merit of an experience in the renovation arena lies in the generalizability of the experience. About the uniqueness of this project, I completely agree with you -- I have no argument.
Nashid Nabian: In this project, we are dealing with a type of brutal minimalism in altering the existing condition. In my view, given the prevalence of projects produced in a similar era with the same set of materials and construction techniques, this project can be a suitable model for renovating them to different functions as well.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This is now a style. As you said, if the architect wanted to use this fabric and give some atmosphere to that ceiling -- against that flat surface I would have no objection. But now this approach is a recognized restoration style, and this project connects itself to it, placing itself within that aesthetic and approach through which the Palais de Tokyo in Paris was restored. This approach is the result of a series of different and highly radical interventions that acquire more of an artistic dimension and may be right in their own context. I have no argument about that. But if we discuss concern-mindedness, this approach does not solve the problem of our historical fabrics. And this approach, due to its radicalism, is not recommendable to the Ministry of Cultural Heritage either, because the Ministry, which already does not look favorably on change, addition, and conversion, if it were to adopt this tested approach, would lose even the small chance for change and conversion of works. Meanwhile, what we want to ask of the Ministry of Cultural Heritage is to allow historical buildings to shake themselves and change for the life of new generations.
Nashid Nabian: I completely accept your point and know your concerns. Both your expertise in applying knowledge and your managerial experience are in this field. But I say that ultimately this is the Memar Award, and in the domain of the Memar Award we must examine architectural interventions.
Reza Habibzadeh: For me, the sunken garden that has been created is compelling, and this is the same discovery of spatial potential by the architect. The rest of the project is a matter of taste.
Public Buildings Category
Hormuz Presence, ZAV Architects, Mohammadreza Ghodousi, Fatemeh Rezaei Fakhr Astaneh, Golnaz Bahrami, Soroush Majidi
Sirous Bavar: I do not view this as a single unit. Along the 1,500-kilometer or more coastline of the Persian Gulf, we have only a few stopping points -- one is Bushehr, one is Asaluyeh, one is Bandar Abbas, then Konarak and Chabahar. There is not much to say about Asaluyeh, as it is an oil region. But before Asaluyeh we reach Siraf -- why have we forgotten Siraf, which is a very ancient complex that foreigners excavated? Along this same route, there are many cisterns that are just a dome on the ground, and the dome is shaped exactly like a sugarloaf. This project has drawn from that same form to create a complex. We see this abundantly in Africa too -- these circles that emerge around these sugarloaf forms are their residential centers, and inside is their communal courtyard. In my view, the idea is attractive. In places where the sun is very intense, the colors are bold, because under that intense sun, we perceive bold colors as muted. In Africa, clothing is like this. In Minab, Iran, the color of women's clothing is vivid. In Manujan, clothing colors are vivid. Here too, that same vivid color has been used so that in sunlight it has a muted quality. All the issues raised here -- both the individual sugarloaf forms and how one lives inside them, and as a whole -- have created a complex that is a unique ensemble of their own nature and climate, and for me this is very valuable. When you go to Tabriz and visit Kandovan -- well, what is in Kandovan? Kandovan is also a series of carvings in the mountain that everyone loves. This too is in nature, on a flat terrain, but it has that quality -- meaning it departs from the ordinary natural state.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This project is repetitive in several respects. First, before this project we had the Qaleh Ganj project in Kerman province in the Bashagerd region, which was inspired by the indigenous kapars with the same spatial pattern, and like this complex is used as an eco-lodge -- as Dr. Bavar said, we do not have many lodgings along this route. In my view, that work was much more authentic, but unfortunately it later became a repeated cliche for many lodgings along the southern coast. In Baluchistan alone, in Chabahar, I can show you three complexes of these kapar-style lodgings that were built as exact copies of Qaleh Ganj. In the poverty of ideas that exists in these regions -- because no new ideas reach there -- successful ideas of this kind get repeated, and when they become cliches, they are destructive. This project does not even earn points for technique, because it uses Nader Khalili's superadobe technique rather than local architecture. It claims, through an intermediary, to have arrived at Khalili, but this is a technique that has become kitsch in our country -- in earthquakes they go and build a few domes using superadobe, in floods likewise, and then abandon them, because it has not been able to provide proper answers either. Another aspect concerns color. Dr. Bavar noted that this color is the natural and local color of that place, and more importantly, Hormuz itself has colored soil -- that is true, but this was an idea first employed by Nadalian, the contemporary sculptor. Nadalian, who has international fame, lived for a long time in Qeshm and I believe in Hormuz as well, and taught local children to paint. They painted walls and neighborhoods with the colored soils. In that regard too, Nadalian is in my view the originator of the matter. Therefore, I think if the project had referenced these precedents, it would have been much more honest. To present these as achievements of this project without clear references is, in my view, not right. Ultimately, the project has become repetitive in the southern region.
Mohammad Arab: I want to look at this project from another perspective -- not the project itself, but the subject of the project. If we look at the current conditions of Hormuz, it is an island of about five to six thousand inhabitants that, in recent years, thanks to its diverse spatial attractions and qualities, has become a tourism destination. In some months, several times the population of Hormuz visits as tourists -- from groups that stay on the island for several weeks to those who make a brief stop at Hormuz alongside their trip to Qeshm. This status as a tourism destination will certainly become more prominent over time. Therefore, the issue is that in Hormuz we are confronting the infrastructure of development. One approach to development is this type of project, which looks at development from outside the existing social context -- here the issue of scale arises, and in my view it can disrupt the order of development flow. Why do I say this? Because currently, as a result of this traffic, attending to tourism has become a very serious source of income for the residents of Hormuz. This certainly cannot be the answer for the future, and we need infrastructure development, but how much are we paying attention to the social capacities of this context? I do not consider this a new issue in Iran -- unfortunately, for the past hundred years we have pursued development in purely physical terms. From past to present, our attention to concepts like context and environment has been solely physical and objective. Where do social contexts actually influence the capacity assessments of projects, and where do we measure the effects that our physical interventions have on existing social structures? For example, in one of this project's presentation sheets, individuals who are not going to be stakeholders in this project's future have been introduced. What effect this project will have on the lives of these individuals in the future is, in my view, worthy of discussion. But if I want to look at the project and its characteristics, I disagree with Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari, because I think that by virtue of the diversity of form and space that is the product of its organization -- and which is certainly one of its positive points -- this project can become a tourism destination. Unfortunately, this is something we have lost our share of in our contemporary architecture. Today, our tourism capacities in the domain of architecture are created solely by historical buildings, and this is one of the rare projects that can attract tourists by virtue of the building itself. But ultimately, the important issue in this type of project, for me, is how we can achieve social development alongside tourism development.
Nashid Nabian: Your sensitivity regarding questioning the social agency of this project is certainly justified, and the very fact that this particular type of agency is being questioned means the project possesses potentials in this domain. Evaluating the extent of the project's social impact will naturally be possible with more information about the project's performance in its own context. At the same time, we have conditions where capital development is happening simultaneously from both the private and public sectors on the islands. We have seen conventional examples of physical development on Kish Island. In recent years, characterless multi-star hotels and even more characterless shopping malls of tens of thousands of square meters have been the dominant paradigm of physical development on the islands. Now, in such a context, an architect enters and proposes an alternative intervention outside the norm, and in realizing this idea also engages the island's residents. This in itself will bring about a kind of social impact in the project.
Mohammad Arab: I completely understand. But at one point you said that we, on this platform, must judge the architect, not the architecture. We judge architecture in interaction with its context.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The architect, as an intellectual and a citizen, is not separate from the cultural context of their own time.
Nashid Nabian: Just as much as we examine the project in its social context, that same degree of engagement with the project must come from the domain of architecture.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The discussion that Mohammad Arab raised is the issue of tourism-friendly cities the world over, not just here. In Barcelona too, tourists are dealt with seriously, because the tourist brings an external culture and consumes the culture of that place. I understood Mohammad Arab's point as being that the architect here must strive toward localizing and drawing out local capacities, rather than shaping a quality or a space to host those who are coming in the guise of a Disneyland. Of course, I am not saying this is a Disneyland -- it has only tried to bring out the color of Qeshm and the color of Hormuz.
Mohammad Arab: Here too I am looking at it the same way as in the renovation section. If I see renovation as the future of architecture, I see tourism as the future of Iran's economy. Whether we want it or not, I think it is our only path and option, and this is where the position of the architectural community vis-a-vis an important trend for the future must be clarified. This project is very important, which is why I look at it from this perspective. The discussion around this project can have impacts on the future of our architecture in relation to the subject of tourism development.
Sirous Bavar: Let us also look at the other side of the Persian Gulf and see what they have built -- that is the part where the wealthy go. On this side, we are developing this. A kind of climatic architecture. When you go to Hormuz, all the houses have flat roofs. Well, a flat roof obviously absorbs more heat than a dome, which always has one side in shade and also creates air circulation. It is very much in harmony with the issue of climate.
Mohammad Arab: None of what I said was a critique of the project. I see this as a broader trend, because in Isfahan and other areas of tourism interest, one can see examples of this type of approach.
Nashid Nabian: I suggest that for a few minutes we step away from the project's context and attend to the project itself. When we talk about architecture, what are we talking about? Perhaps we can begin with the organizational logic of the project. Here I have a serious disagreement with the example you cited. The Qaleh Ganj project in Kerman province has no connection to this project. In morphological terms, that project has an organizational logic and a pattern of repetition based on a specific geometric structure, and the kapar typology has no affinity with the base typology of this project. This project has a non-geometric logic and its development pattern more closely resembles biological structures. In this architectural intervention, the author has produced a collection of spatial packets that are typologically of the same family. These typologies are combined with one another based on entirely negotiable development rules that are not geometric at all, and because the project's development pattern is a negotiable and flexible one, the various combinations of the primary modules have the capacity for superimposition according to the topography and conditions of the site. Then the question that arises for me in the context of the Memar Award jury is: if we wanted to reproduce this same non-geometric and non-linear development pattern in other geographical contexts, what changes would the primary module need to undergo? For example, in the villages of the northern regions of the country, or on the edges of the central deserts, or in Yazd and Kashan and other cities -- is this physical development pattern, this thick ground, replicable? The result of this exercise is a thick ground. Thick ground has always existed in the urban planning tradition of desert regions and arid lands. The entirety of the city of Yazd is a thick ground or matte urbanism. Beyond the fact that my view may differ from the author's, I do not consider the project's reference to be the berkeh. The berkeh is a single building, whereas this project creates a networked condition between spatial packets that is entirely evident in the organizational diagram presented. Of course, I have no doubt that the choice of the unit module form, which has visual references to the berkeh form, has been effective in the social acceptance of the project among the residents.
Reza Habibzadeh: Can you give an example from contemporary architecture as well?
Nashid Nabian: Certainly. The Venice Hospital by Le Corbusier, an unbuilt work, is another example of producing thick ground or matte urbanism. In one of the serial publications dedicated to this project, it is stated that, by Le Corbusier's own claim, the sunken garden courts that create the base module of this networked condition were influenced by Islamic-Iranian schools.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: If I had not seen the Khalili experience in this project, which has been so heavily emphasized, perhaps I would not raise this objection.
Nashid Nabian: In my view, someone who has addressed the Khalili reference with such precision has no fear of presenting other references. I do not find your objection valid.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Someone who has those berkehs in Bandar Abbas that could be the source of the project's form and function but does not refer to them shows that they have not understood the region. The assumption has been that an international formula can be applied everywhere.
Nashid Nabian: It has been referenced. But the tradition of our land's pluralistic constructions with multiple organic units has always produced thick ground. In the choice of construction technology as well, the architect has turned to a technology that, in my view, was a thoughtful and interesting exercise in its time. The architect has revisited this construction technology and used it to produce a new form in the service of a different function, and has practiced with courage in disseminating it to various scales and dimensions. The project's final language, while being exotic, shows contemporaneity and at the same time is believable and sits well in the project's natural context.
Sirous Bavar: Hormuz is a coral island -- meaning its ground is hard.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Our land provided the possibility of habitation in limited quantities at specific points, and this does not mean that those habitation points can expand infinitely -- now, in Nashid Nabian's terms, with a biological pattern. Settlement points in areas suitable for living on our plateau naturally do not exceed the scale of a village. Iran is a mosaic of approximately 140 thousand habitation points connected to one another -- one becomes Ardakan, one becomes Meybod, one becomes Yazd. What happened in Tehran, reaching a population of twelve million and not functioning for that very reason, is unnatural, because throughout our entire history the population of the great Iranian plateau -- including all that has today been separated from it -- never exceeded twelve million at its best, and this means that growth on this plateau has limits. If this is what Nashid Nabian means by thick ground, I understand it.
Reza Habibzadeh: The claim that the project itself makes is that it wants to pursue a process in which design is not the priority. That is, the architect has not come as a designer to build a building and then design each detail individually. Rather, in pursuit of the goal, instead of one large building, the architect has fragmented the spaces and entrusted them to a number of smaller building forces, accepting the role of coordinator. These actions have been in the direction of the major initial decision that was made. But for example, an architect like Hassan Fathy, who pursues building with the people, cannot advance his work beyond a certain point -- because there is no intersection with the contemporary condition. When you say this idea can be taken elsewhere, that is not the case. You can take an idea elsewhere and generalize it only when you can separate it from the project and use that idea in a project, say, in central Tehran. But this architect's mode of reference and the approach adopted are specific to this very land and the expanse available. I would have learned more if the architect had combined this idea with the contemporary condition, so that the idea and this reference to architecture could be considered expandable and generalizable. For example, one area where the architect could have intervened is the negative spaces of the project. The spaces between buildings -- that is where the architect could have been more impactful. In the summer and intense sun of Qeshm, these spaces are unusable. This is where the architect could have had an impactful presence. When an architect goes to a village and builds small structures side by side with the local soil, how can that be generalized? Where is the contemporary architect's presence here? How can this contribute to our present condition? This work, like Hassan Fathy's -- who went to a village and built structures with the people there -- is very valuable, but ultimately it is a dead end. For instance, if the architect did not have this expanse of land to spread the project so freely on the ground, what would they have done? My point is that if the project were to expand, would it simply consume more land in the same fashion?
Nashid Nabian: There is no necessity for a solution offered for a non-urban context to also work in high-density urban contexts.
Reza Habibzadeh: The architect's approach in dealing with the project -- fragmenting it and entrusting it to smaller building forces -- is very creative. Even the project's aesthetics emerge somewhat spontaneously, and this is in line with that initial decision. That is, the architect does not impose an aesthetic on the project but rather lets the aesthetic be finalized in the process of the project's formation. Although this approach could have gone further -- for example, the paintings on these structures could have been entrusted to local painters.
Nashid Nabian: Is there a top-down control over the project? One of the project's essential diagrams, which is a drawing of the complex's plan, has addressed this top-down control.
Reza Habibzadeh: I do not see this issue as a flaw of the project. I see it as follows: if this project had been integrated with contemporary conditions and issues, it would have opened a path for us and become more than a hotel project in Hormuz. If someone told me these were structures left from five hundred years ago and an architect had renovated them, I would believe it. The project's merit is that the architect did not apply pre-given answers for a hotel. It is experiential, and the chosen path is bold and risky. But for me as an architect, it would have been more attractive if it had also created an opening in our contemporary architecture. It is confined to itself.
Mohammad Arab: If we look at this project apart from the aesthetics and morphology, certainly this type of organization can be generalizable -- as Nashid Nabian noted, it can very well be a contemporary approach.
Reza Habibzadeh: It is generalizable if we go, say, to villages and build in this manner. It is not generalizable within the discipline of architecture.
Nashid Nabian: Do you know of a solution that is generalizable across all domains of disciplinary intervention?
Reza Habibzadeh: Yes.
Nashid Nabian: For example, Villa Savoye -- as a diagram of a modern archetype -- is it generalizable to all situations of architectural intervention?
Reza Habibzadeh: As an idea, it is in fact tied to the land, and as an architectural idea, it is separable from the building itself.
Nashid Nabian: So you are saying that this project is not capable of being theorized and turned into a lens?
Reza Habibzadeh: I am not saying this approach does not intersect with our contemporary condition. I am saying the architect of this project has not made an effort in that direction and has not shown us a path. Or at least I do not see it.
Mohammad Arab: I still believe that from the perspective of organization, it has the capacity for generalization. Since I consider the project's most important feature to be its structural system and mode of organization -- in that we are dealing with a kind of organization that arises from cellular multiplication, is unpredictable, is process-driven, and is the very thing that created the structure of all our historical organic cities -- therefore, given this very example, I believe it can be generalizable to many patterns.
Reza Habibzadeh: We had this. We were forced to abandon it because of our contemporary life.
Mohammad Arab: No, I do not at all see the issue as contemporary life. In my view, we fell into a misreading of our past -- we looked at the past from a modernist perspective. For example, for years, everywhere I have seen or read material about Isfahan, Isfahan has been viewed through the lens of its Safavid-era armature, whereas that is not so important. The primary cell has been the basis, along with the factors affecting it, which in the course of development shaped that structure. This is what can now serve as the basis for discussion regarding this project -- what factors are driving this structure to be process-oriented? What are the parameters that affect the process? Here the architect is separating themselves, relinquishing their sovereignty over the project's product, yet I still do not see what parameters other than the architect's own gaze are influencing this structure.
Nashid Nabian: I think this project is entirely capable of being theorized. In my view, cellular multiplication as a biological metaphor for theorizing the project is a precise metaphor. In cell division, you do not have rules -- you have process-based structures. Therefore, in confronting the characteristics of any given context, you as the architect, instead of having a single outcome, have a diverse set of outcomes. But this does not mean the authorial dimension of the design is called into question. The diversity of spatial situations is clearly evident in this project. This genetic code, while offering spatial diversity, provides the possibility of physical development based on principles decided by the author. At the same time, the rules of multiplication are negotiable, and therefore the spatial condition resulting from the development process is not a homogeneous condition but rather a heterogeneous spatial network. In the interstitial spaces between the unit modules, we have diverse and multiple situations -- from seating spaces to open public areas to micro-spaces with greenery. It is as if the unit module and the paradigms of its combination with other modules act like a genetic code. This genetic code allows for re-iteration, but iterations that each have subtle differences from one another. Alongside this genetics-based technique for producing spatial diversity and multiplicity, the project attempts to update a construction technology introduced by a preceding architect, in order to make this technique disseminable to situations beyond the one for which it was originally proposed. Moreover, in the domain of materials as well, the architect has consciously decided to use the colors and textures native to the region, so that this strange and extraordinary whole also carries familiar signs of its own context. Therefore, this project is capable of being theorized as a lens for architectural interventions, and its achievements have the capacity for dissemination to other sites and other projects. Of course, Reza Habibzadeh has an issue with the project's large central open area in climatic terms. That may be a valid critique. But the question is what share of the overall assessment should be allocated to this issue.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: You too, like me in the case of Villa Madi, are presenting your own reading of this work, while this project does not claim any of these things at all.
Sang-e Siah Boutique Hotel, Ali Soudagaran, Nazanin Kazerounian, Mohammad Amin Nejabat
Nashid Nabian: We moved this project from the renovation category to the public buildings category. The story of our interaction with the project must be documented. After reading the text, we realized that this project is a new building, but it is in the service of revitalizing a neighborhood. In my view, this raises a very interesting question: is restoration, renovation, and revitalization limited only to individual buildings, or if new construction occurs with a view toward revitalizing a broader context, does this too fall under restoration, renovation, and revitalization?
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This is a catalyst project -- a fabric catalyst -- and it claims as much. But we do not know what will happen in the future. It seems that this complex could later acquire some of the neighboring buildings and connect them. In that respect, its claim seems feasible.
Nashid Nabian: In this domain that we are discussing, this should not become a criterion for voting. But it is a subject of the discipline of architecture that should be discussed at the Memar Award. It is an attractive topic, and Mohammad Arab had discussions about this matter during the jury days. I think the project is a good pretext for us to talk about it.
Mohammad Arab: The reality is that the historic fabric of Shiraz is a relatively intact fabric -- a fabric that has undergone social changes, gentrification. Following events in the past seven to eight years, attention to this center has become more serious -- historic buildings are being purchased and restored. The point that unfortunately we face in these fabrics can be critiqued from several perspectives. One is that unfortunately what is happening is entirely based on a specific hegemony that seeks historicization and the creation of the nostalgic in architecture -- something that over time becomes a threat to these fabrics. What I found attractive about this project is that the architect has consciously acknowledged this point, and the project's subject, while situated in a historic context, is not a return to historical forms. The attention is to the infill fabric that sits between these historical elements -- the fabric that no one pays attention to, or if attention is given, it is with a nostalgic approach. The architect here raises the necessity of contemporaneity -- a contemporaneity that can both present its own time and also establish a connection and harmony with its surroundings. This project is important from this perspective. One of our problems in engaging with historical buildings and sites relates to our mistaken understanding of the concept of history -- we have reduced history to slices of time, whereas history can be equated with continuity, and when equated with continuity, today I as an architect am not supposed to cut a slice from time that suits me or can satisfy my aesthetic gaze. Of course, I think this project, in its development, has encountered problems and has not arrived at a consistent language and vocabulary. As much as it acts progressively from the outside and raises the issue of distinction very seriously, it encounters problems on the inside. Its engagement with the central courtyard as the primary ordering element has not been able to create a contemporary experience of solid and void -- indeed, the placement of a series of elements alongside one another, such as iwans and the connecting staircase in relation to that central courtyard, has even deprived the project of the purity of its ordering element.
Nashid Nabian: I am an architect whose domain is not conservation and restoration. For that reason, I defer to you. But if I want to speak about the project in the domain of intra-disciplinary discussions, I too find the vocabulary used inside and the archetype employed in producing the project to be nostalgic. However, on the exterior of the project, something has happened in the decision-making that is significant and valuable. The context in which the project has occurred has a traditional architectural vocabulary. Although conservation and restoration is not my specialty, I understand the tension between old and new in the interaction between the project and its context. In my view, this project, in its external architectural decisions, while taking a critical distance from the archetypal representations it has followed, has a contemporary vocabulary and stands on a delicate edge -- being conspicuous without being exotic. This, in my view, comes from the architect's skill.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The part envisioned as a development strategy -- with the hope that this project could create movement in the fabric -- even the hope and aspiration itself is, in my view, a positive point. We need these kinds of aspirations and these kinds of buildings that set such goals in these types of fabrics. It is not clear which building will provide the catalyst, but these efforts can be valuable, and even thinking about it is commendable. But one point that in my view troubles the building is that while the architect has designed a very dynamic and vibrant shell, inside they have become trapped in a kind of rigidity. In my view, while thinking about the sunken garden or courtyard inside, the architect could have also created a connection with the exterior shell.
Nashid Nabian: Meaning that just as the exterior has been contemporized, this archetype too should have manifested in a contemporary way in the project.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: In none of the other domains -- not even in the floor ornaments -- do you see even a minimum of dynamism. The rigidity of this symmetry is intensely dominant, and this is a negative point in the design, whereas on the exterior, despite all the constraints, the architect has been able to give good movement to the shell -- movement that is fresh and of today. You know that in infill buildings, the most difficult part of our work is the exterior shell. This project has done well there, but inside, where it actually had more freedom and could have channeled this dynamism inward -- and where it had even created an expectation of it -- it suddenly takes us to that same rigid spirit of official history. This is strange. Let us attribute it to a duality in the design -- I do not know what else to attribute it to.
Reza Habibzadeh: I try to put myself in the architect's place. I have a project in a fabric where, as the designer says, buildings from different historical periods stand beside it. The site is an empty space within this historical fabric. The question raised in the project and the architect's approach are infinitely attractive. That is, the architect designs an "infill" that will then connect to houses that will later be purchased and renovated. In other words, the architect defines an unfinished project that can be completed over time. But the architect's response and manner of approaching the project keeps everything within the circle of conservatism and satisfies everyone -- those seeking a contemporary language, those who believe that in a historical fabric one must use the same language, and the choice of materials. I too would probably choose the same brick, because this choice saves the project from failure. If we too declare this project the winner, no one will fault us, because everyone agrees this project has value. The architect knows the craft and has given answers that have been previously tested, knowing how far they can go and give answers that no one will challenge -- not engaging with history and choosing conservative solutions. We too, if we select this project, no one will grab us by the collar. The architect has not taken a risk, and this risk-aversion reaches its peak in the interior spaces.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: And in this respect it is not of our time, and despite managing an exterior space well, it tells us something different inside. We enter the building with a certain motivation from the outside, but then realize we have been deceived -- that facade was a storefront meant to draw us in, not a program to lead us into the reception of energetic and fluid forms and spaces.
Reza Habibzadeh: Of course, I also understand the architect's position. Taking risks in such a fabric is very difficult work -- it requires great skill and experience. The architect has dealt much more skillfully with the exterior, but the interior is something else. For example, regarding the interior spaces, my question is: why has the architect covered the interior ceilings with brick cladding? This language is constantly repeated in our contemporary architecture, and this risks becoming a fashion. A ceiling that should be light, and that you could easily cover with a material like plaster and keep light -- why should it be laboriously clad in brick? This conservative approach is a danger and may lead thought to a dead end. This use of a single material is now becoming a technique and a fashion that I do not fully understand. Why must a ceiling that is a ceiling, a floor that is a floor, and a wall that is a wall -- each with different roles and functions -- all be covered with the same material? Then this issue extends to the point where, in order to see a sloped wall and ceiling in the same material, you also clad the sloped ceiling in stone. A sloped ceiling should be light -- its definition is something else. But in order to create a good image, you take the same material up to the ceiling. In my view, these are dangers that, within a limited time, afflict architecture and quickly pass -- their moment fades. If this were done in the service of showing me a bigger idea, so that I would not get caught up in these details of ceiling and material diversity, I would understand. But when I see that it does not show much more than this, I do not understand this approach.
Mohammad Arab: I think the truly most important issue I have with this project, given the skill the architect has employed in producing it, is that I wish the experience of mass and space in this project had also been subjected to transformation. This is an issue we have been grappling with for a hundred years. Part of it goes back to the fact that we have made our issues into binaries -- when we talk about the past, we only address introversion and extroversion, whereas we are dealing with far more complex parameters that require attention, understanding, and the creation of new experiences. Ultimately, the architect here falls into the very trap that they have critiqued in their macro engagement with the subject -- critiquing neighboring projects, critiquing details -- but in the structuring and organization of the project, they have themselves succumbed to it.
Aptus Factory Office and Exhibition, Hooman Balazadeh
Nashid Nabian: What I found attractive about this project is that the architect, starting from a generic structural system that conventionally produces generic spatial qualities, has been able to produce different spatial qualities. That the architect suspends the preconception that the structure creates and thinks about different physical patterns, while remaining faithful to that structural system, is in my view worthy of recognition.
Mohammad Arab: This project is important to me from two perspectives. One is the macro and strategic perspective -- it answers the question it poses simply and without verbosity. Given the project's location in the north, it does not want to impose itself on the green context around it but rather enters into an intermingling and ultimately brings the project to a balance that, in my view, is very successful in this regard. The product of this strategy is the production of diverse spaces, both from inside and outside the project. The second noteworthy point is the discussion that Nashid Nabian raised about one of the renovation projects, Ivy Cafe. In this project, the architect has been able to proceed with an experiential approach and ultimately has reached a correct balance between exterior and interior -- succeeding in finding an answer from both perspectives.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: That you engage in a kind of bravado and, with very, very simple materials -- perhaps out of the spotlight -- manage to create such spatial diversity and quality in the midst of modesty: I connect this to the tradition of Iranian architecture. The correct narratives of Iranian architecture are of this kind. You see that with raw mudbrick, the most magnificent buildings of this country have been built, and a simple, seemingly worthless structural element has been able to achieve diversity, multiplicity, and grandeur. In my view, this type of narrative -- which speaks to the architect's maturity and their courage in employing this element -- is among those experiences that should be disseminated, and young architects should be encouraged to revisit these and see that the discussion is not merely about materials. Materials can be employed in correct ways such that, in the most complex, attractive, and at the same time most modest and people-oriented form, a novel creativity also comes into play. The photograph presented is, in my view, a very eloquent image -- a group of simple workers are passing through without feeling alienated by the space, without the space imposing itself or showing off its quality or in any way belittling them. We do not see these things in this project. I have seen many such projects in Bangladesh and India. In Bangladesh and India, you see good projects that have served ordinary people very well. This project, as you said, is a very good one.
Nashid Nabian: I only find that in the design development, the technique for producing the open-air gallery in the project's grounds is not aligned with the technique chosen for the project as a whole, and the project suffers from a duality in architectural language in this part.
Reza Habibzadeh: This project can be a model in several respects. On the site where it works, instead of building one large-scale structure, it has been able to create spaces at a human scale with small buildings and to integrate the project's land with the built form. Also, in the approach taken to materials -- using the factory's own blocks and eliminating finishes -- it has effectively created architectural space with the bare minimum. In fact, what the architect has not done is as valuable as what has been done. In my view, this project, apart from its buildings, is a way of seeing, and this perspective can be a model and is generalizable.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: It has produced a kind of exposed-structure architecture. For example, when you walk through a bazaar, you see the brickwork of the ceilings -- they have been laid in such a way that the charm of their patterns is not concealed.
Reza Habibzadeh: Of course, some things are still the force of the image. When you build a sloped roof and leave the blocks exposed alongside the rain of the west, life tells you the roof should have some overhang to block the rain. But the beautiful image says no -- the roof must match the volume of the building below. In this project, the western rain, probably because there is no finish or bitumen coating, will damage the building and cause trouble for the users.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Of course, since neither side of the wall has a finish, you may see a patch of moisture, but the moisture, given the materials and construction technique, is not such that it would damage the building. You see exactly this in the Bangladesh experience quite often.
Reza Habibzadeh: My only critique of the project is that the architect's mental image has dominated the project. The project could have been freer.
Steel Form Showroom, Admon Design and Build Studio, Shabir Mousavi, Amirreza Fazel, Mehdi Kolahi
Nashid Nabian: For me, this project is one situated in an existing fabric, and it has one positive point and one negative point. The strategy of drawing the public realm into this semi-public space is an initial decision that is bold and attractive. But at the same time, I find the manner in which this transparent layer interacts with the exterior context problematic at the stage of spatial refinement. For example, in the initial diagram, the project's claim is that the building is meant to become a spatial void or an active void. But this diagram has not been realized. It is true that transparency has been used as a tool for producing a condition of void, but the final partition separating outside from inside in this project is intensely present. Therefore, this partition and the design of its details undermine the claim of the initial diagram. That is, as much as I find this decision correct and bold, I find the manner and mode of its expression in the project subject to literal errors.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: But note this point: in such a dense fabric, giving this kind of transparency in this way is tantamount to an invitation into the private domain of the space. I mean, this is a point you should see in the context of composing the right of property ownership.
Nashid Nabian: This is a radical spatial diagram. But I am saying this diagram has been undermined in the process of developing the idea into a project.
Mohammad Arab: I agree exactly. Because I think the reading of this diagram should be an experience of movement and presence, not merely a visual experience. But ultimately this experience has not been realized, and we have only a view into the interior.
Reza Habibzadeh: But notice one thing -- the project has stood by the concept it had. Its original idea was an empty space, and how intelligently the glass has been taken from floor to ceiling -- as if you have a series of walls in an empty space that are closed off with glass panels, so that I cannot easily distinguish where this space is enclosed and where it is open. The architect has combined these intelligently. Also, the technique used -- holding these walls at one height line and essentially turning the ceiling into a volume, bringing it down -- all of this is in the service of the architect's strategy and original idea.
Nashid Nabian: I agree with you on the architect's skill. Their method of developing the project may not be entirely to my liking. I am one of those architects who say that in a project, with a singular and decisive stance, the architect must remain completely faithful to the initial diagram. When I entered the Memar Magazine office, this diagram caught my attention. For an architect to say that in such a fabric, I will build an architecture whose aesthetic is an aesthetic of void -- that is quite a statement. This diagram is excellent. I say this project would have been perfect if this diagram had been translated into the project without compromise. I say the project's subject, after this diagram, becomes a matter of refinement: how to have an architectural boundary that, while serving the function of a boundary, does not undermine the void aesthetic targeted in the diagram. Of course, it is a difficult task. Perhaps I myself could not follow the prescription I am writing.
Reza Habibzadeh: I agree, but the decision the architect made and carried to a certain point is a very bold decision -- to build a void and an empty space instead of a building.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: Of course, the project does not allow the interior section to extend into the exterior space. If that shell had been designed like the old darbands -- which created a kind of private alley -- that sharing of space would have occurred. But this project could not realize that idea. It shows visual continuity but does not allow use. Of course, it is clear that this was not possible for the architect, so they settled for this much.
Mohammad Arab: I say let us move beyond the discussion of materials and look at the diagram from the perspective of behavioral studies. Here, whether it is glass or metal, when you move along this path, there is nothing that makes you feel comfortable going all the way to the end of the project. So what is presented in the diagram -- drawing the alley into the project -- has not been achieved, because the project's refinement presents this character and programming, and this completely works against the diagram or at least weakens it.
Prensa Commercial-Office Building, Dot Architects, Arash Pirayesh, Mehran Haghbin
Reza Habibzadeh: It is a very large project in the Shoush fabric, and an architect with great skill has solved a large problem very correctly. It has a correct and orderly plan, has tried to observe all codes, and has not said much in the facade. In effect, the architect solved the project in the diagram, plan, and initial strategy, and erected exactly that. We have few architects of this kind -- architects who know their craft as a profession, do not say too much, and transparently carry a decision through to the end.
Nashid Nabian: I have a strategic problem with the project. This office tower is not situated on an urban plaza. This is an office tower on top of a Walmart or a very large mall. And an office tower on top of a Walmart is not a contemporary solution for producing public space. The result of repeating this pattern in a city is a city without urbanity. I understand that this project is one with good engineering and high standards. But a public building must establish a proper relationship with urban public realms.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: But it does not have that density. This project's difference from other projects is precisely this -- it has been able to leave such spaces open. I think it has connected the entire first floor to the city.
Nashid Nabian: If my assumption is wrong, please correct me. I do not know the urban context in this part of Tehran. Are these corridors, once development is complete, urban boulevards? In that case, this project, instead of functioning as infill development of the city, functions like a mall, and the relationship of its commercial section is severed from the city. I see the mall-ification of public space as being in serious conflict with urbanity. An example of repeating such a type along urban boulevards can be seen along Sheikh Zayed Road, which connects Dubai to Abu Dhabi.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: In Tabriz, there is a mall called Laleh Park -- people go and stroll, they do not shop. The first time I was invited to this stroll, I thought we were really going to a park. Let me relate this to your point: I do not see this mall like the Sheikh Zayed mall. This is a different kind of space -- one can consider it a space of civic resistance.
Nashid Nabian: In my view, keeping alive the space of movement corridors in the city is an important matter, and the reproduction of such enclosed spaces, while these spaces become arenas for civic resistance, does not help create a sense of belonging to the city. Typologies that connect this lower commercial space more to the city are, in my view, more appropriate for such projects.
Mohammad Arab: I very much agree -- you have convinced me. Let me add one point: in the project's text, it references the bazaar, and this is one of our issues. We lay claim to urban space, while urban space has certain characteristics, one of the most important of which is being lost through projects like these and through arcade-building. That characteristic is the occupation of space under a specific ownership that makes the space entirely controllable -- creating a structure from which the issue you mentioned results: a space that is controllable, where your entry and exit times are set, and so forth. Whereas the importance of the bazaar as a completely public realm lies in its maximum connection to the surrounding urban spaces.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: The loosening of the grip of official ideological control in these kinds of spaces is also due to their historical ties with the bazaar. Nashid Nabian drew my attention to this discussion. I had not seen the project this way -- perhaps I had not seen malls this way either. I knew them, but the idea that they have become a space for civic resistance is very interesting. This helps us take seriously spaces created with this quality in the urban fabric. If these are going to proliferate, I prefer that they proliferate with patterns similar to this one.
Sharif Office Building, Hooman Balazadeh
Nashid Nabian: In my view, there is no doubt about the architect's eloquence and fluency, both in the overall composition of the project and in its details. The architectural details have been resolved so systematically that they are already reproducible as an industrial product. At the same time, I do not see the footprint of the innovation ecosystem that is in motion in the city -- and which is referenced in the project's explanatory text -- in the way the project has been shaped.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: As Nashid Nabian said, these kinds of good and flawless projects in terms of technique have already become a product -- a product that can also be mass-produced. It appears that the brick company, through its collaboration with the architect, has arrived at a product that can be serialized and used elsewhere as well, and that is perfectly fine -- high-quality works are created. But this has already happened before. The architect has not gone beyond what they previously created in the dimension of architecture and spatial production, and what can be seen in this work compared to similar past works is merely a bit of formal play and the solid-void volume that has emerged. In my view, the architect here has not surpassed themselves.
Reza Habibzadeh: I want you to note that this is a project whose structural frame was pre-existing, and the architect has created such a thing with an existing frame. Of course, I am aware that the project's main intellectual burden is carried by a single element, and this element has shaped the facade -- and in some places the facade has also influenced the interior space -- but it does not go further than this and does not create a challenge in the project's interior spaces. But to elevate a pre-existing frame to this degree requires great skill.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This is a product that has been produced and is of very high quality, but in my view it is moving away from progressive and experiential architecture.
Nashid Nabian: Today, as we are talking about work, its paradigms are changing. I do not see a paradigm shift in redefining work space, especially in the domain of professions related to the innovation ecosystem, in this project. But this in no way diminishes the architect's skill, eloquence, and fluency.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: This is a very good building, but it is not a bold and transformative one.
Tehranpars Exhibition and Store No. 2, Tajrobeh Bonyadeen Architecture, Arash Nasiri, Ensieh Khamseh
Reza Habibzadeh: This project, as it itself states, was originally built in 1393 as a car showroom. Then, for whatever reason, the owner of that showroom sold the building to a restaurant, and the restaurant applied a different language -- one that was fashionable at the time -- to this project two to three years later. The owner of the original showroom purchases a larger piece of land in the same area and again commissions the same architect to build a showroom, and the architect repeats the same idea at a larger scale. The entire sequence of events that has occurred is itself a phenomenon. Of course, this project, apart from this matter, has a very clean and clear language. It has turned the facade into a cavity, and everything in this project serves to reinforce this cavity. The direction of the ceiling, the direction of the wall, and a transparent layer placed in the facade, and the continuation of this movement in the interior space and interior ceiling -- all draw your attention inward, and this movement is in the direction of the project's subject, which is a showroom. Instead of simply designing a facade, the architect displays a depth, and keeps everything simple in order to emphasize this depth.
Nashid Nabian: This project is a narrative of the resistance of the contemporary architectural movement, and a commendable one. Why? Because all of us architects whose architectural practice occurs under contemporary paradigms -- it vindicates us against the pressure of popular taste. It resists against a contemporary architectural vocabulary. All of us architects who practice under contemporary paradigms are addressed by it. And then, as if the reproduction of this vocabulary in 1399, within a short interval from the original 1395 project, in the domain of defending the contemporary movement, occurs. But to be honest, this project has already received an award on the Memar Award platform. Therefore, I do not think we need to discuss the building's architectural values once more. The social action of this architect in reproducing the project has in a way produced an architectural text, and this text should be recognized -- not the architectural work. The architectural work has already been recognized, and the project is a flawless, first-rate one. My suggestion is that the project be recognized in its category.
Mohammad Arab: We are talking about an architectural action based on a proposition -- namely, that architectural media stated that "the failure of this architecture is the failure of progressive architecture," and now "its rebuilding is the victory of the progressive movement." I think neither was the alteration of the previous project a defeat of progressive architecture, nor does its return constitute a victory. That is, you are framing the matter in terms of a sheer binary.
Nashid Nabian: The discussion is about the resistance of architecture and the contemporary architect against a current that calls the nature of both into question.
Mohammad Arab: Fine. The architect's resistance is a response and reaction to this proposition.
Nashid Nabian: I understand that this is a singular and probably non-replicable spatial-temporal juncture -- that is, neither its problem statement nor its architectural response is disseminable to a larger landscape. I see this project as a critical installation.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: We do not know -- perhaps the very fact that this architect was the first to shape this resistance is noteworthy. What I take from Nashid Nabian's remarks is that this architect is among the first to show this courage and lay the groundwork for this development, and the architect himself makes no claims about it.
Reza Habibzadeh: I completely understand Mohammad Arab's point that this project is not representative of our progressive architecture, but this act is one that cannot be ignored.
Nashid Nabian: It is possible that this act will not continue at all and will remain only as a unique historical juncture. But in this domain, it must be documented.
Kambiz Moshtagh Gohari: We have understood something new -- perhaps it will even influence our previous decisions. Why not?