sign in sign up
<<
Home , Milan

Daniel Grünkranz Impressions of Milan – Principles of a Modern

The has shifted the attention of the global public once more to Milan, being already a world city of commerce, and . This event provides at the same time an opportunity to reflect on the modern Italian city of which Milan is an exceptional example. In the exhibition innesti- grafting at the 2014 Biennale of Architecture curator Cino Zucci introduced Milan as a “laboratory of modernity” emphasizing a number of territorial transformations, which changed Milan’s urban structure over the past 100 years. Its urban mutations and architectural manifestations were generated within an experimental field constituted by multiple forces of social and political change, economic interests, and artistic movements. Today, Milan confronts its inhabitants and visitors with a variety of architectural forms. Yet, it seems that these distinct elements are not without relations to more extensive systems, which are traceable in the urban configuration. This text will sketch some of these situations detectable in the urban core of Milan.

A set of forces Being an important link between Northern and Southern , Milan had become the leading economic center of by the end of the 19th century. At that time, a first master plan was developed to meet the problems associated with population increase, the growth of the city, and its mutation into a modern . This plan from 1884 was drafted by municipal engineer Cesare Beruto, “later reworked by a commission headed by rubber manufacturer Giovanni Battista ,” and finally “approved in 1889.”1 Substantial and prevailing principles of the plan were the concentric expansion of the city – circumscribed by a new – and the insertion of straight axes into the “tangle of ancient streets” – leading to the city’s monuments. But in addition “the Pirelli Commission altered the plan […] to create greater opportunities for profit” through speculation.2 At the beginning of the 20th century, a number of major Italian industries established new factories outside the border of the historic city whereas central Milan “became the domain of the city’s financial and commercial institutions.”3

The increasing industrialization and urbanization of Milan was accompanied by tensions within the population that erupted partly in violently led class struggles. In the turbulent rebuilding phase after the First World War, co-founded the fascist movement in Milan and led the later constituted to national power in 1922. Due to its symbolic meaning for the fascist movement, the city became the iconic site of fascist rule in Italy and a center of fascist administration and propaganda activity. For 20 years the National Fascist Party was determined to impose its notion of a new order also onto the urban fabric of Milan. But despite centralizing tendencies, the authoritarian regime was still challenged by a “range of opinions and priorities” and

1 Maulsby, Lucy: , Architecture, and the Claiming of Modern Milan, 1922-1943. University of Press, 2014, pp. 18-21. 2 Ibid., p. 20. 3 Ibid., p. 23. 1 by the fact that “local narratives often took precedence over national ones,” which “affected individual architectural and urban projects”.4 Moreover, regardless their idealization of the rural community, the fascists had to deal with a solidly evolved and dynamic urban complex.

Part of this dealing was Cesare Albertini’s master plan of 1934. The plan substantially reflected the political standing of the party; the close ties between the party and its supporters from the emerging middle classes and the economic elite, which feared the socialistic revolution. Albertini’s plan “helped to establish a structure of growth in which the urban core would become the exclusive domain of the middle and upper classes and the institutions they operated and patronized.”5 The plan forced “low-prestige institutions” out of the center to gain space for the implementation of the major institutions “of the modern (and capitalist) city.” Land speculation “was intended to help offset the cost inherent in [Albertini’s] proposal.” “Large mixed-used buildings – with shops and services on the ground floor and residences above (for the anticipated wealthy patrons) – and office buildings” began to dominate the renewal of the city center.6 At the same time, fascist organizations were keen to occupy prominent sites in the city, like corner blocks of intersections or plots along main arteries, in order to demonstrate their presence through architectural signs and built propaganda. Next to new monumental buildings like the Palazzo del Popolo d’, which housed the political newspaper and the official party organ of the same name, it was the case del – local party headquarters – that apparently embodied the presence of fascism. Serving as contact point between the population and party officials, the fascist houses were developed to feature particular typological characteristics like conspicuous towers, to underline the party’s claim to power, and well placed for addressing the crowd.

Since the 1930s a new building type, the high-rise building, transformed the urban life and image of Milan. It was also the high-rise buildings – the torri or grattacieli– which contributed not only to the metropolitan being of Milan but evoked notions of a futurist city. In his text Meaning and Vision in Looking to the Future: The in Milan Scott Budzynski explains how these vertical structures generated an imaginative space that found its expression in movies like Antonioni’s film La Notte from 1961. Budzynski refers further to “a type of architectural Narcissus of the modern city.” It “entails a fixation [of the high-rise city] on its own reflection” appearing in the shiny facades of its buildings.7 But the reflections in the façade of the Grattacielo Pirelli in the opening scene of Antonioni’s La Notte do not just show a modern city in its genesis. They also mirror its fractions and heterogeneities; a recurrent discontinuity between the city’s elements as between solitary architectural objects as well as between their surrounding area and intervening spaces. This is for example still sensible in Milan’s old business district Centro Direzionale, which was developed from the 1950s till the 1960s between the central station and railway station. Here, the

4 Ibid., p. 8. 5 Ibid., p. 35. 6 Ibid., p. 35-36. 7 Budzynski, Scott: Meaning and Vision in Looking to the Future: The Skyscraper in Milan. In: STUDIO Architecture and Urbanism Magazine, Issue 3, ICON, 2012. 2 massive structure of the Torre Servizi Tecnici Comunali, built in 1966, sits surrealistically next to a rural field that separates the Centro Direzionale from the new business district .

Fig. 1. Torre Servizi Tecnici Comunali far opposite the Bosco Verticale by Boeri Studio and in the background the Tower, Italy’s highest skyscraper.

Sometimes a site is defined by a number of buildings, which date from different decades but which were designed by one architectural practice over time. Such a set of buildings may reflect an architectural development that adds to the characteristics of Milan. It concerns the rivalry between the Novecento movement and the architectural rationalism that occurred in the period between the two World Wars. This antagonism involved a number of the local architectural elite like Giovanni Muzio (1893-1982), (1891-1979) or Guiseppe Terragni (1904-1943) and the Gruppo 7. The Novecento movement was conservative by tendency and it rejected the European architectural avant-garde. Its revolutionary paragons resided in the 19th century and it was hiding modern indicators behind classicistic inclinations or a plastic traditionalism. By contrast, the rationalists were committed to the modern reformulation of architecture. The Novecento movement was absorbed into the nationalistic alliance Mussolini had created. But also rationalist architects like Terragni developed an ambivalent mental relationship between the architectural razionalismo and the socio- political fascismo as both tendencies were perceived as the relevant revolutions of that time. The rationalist involvement in connection with fascist rule became later the issue of controversial discussions in which Terragni was sometimes presented as tragic figure that finally shattered as he faced the falsities of fascism and the consequences of militarism.8 Over the period of the interwar years, many representatives of the Novecento movement became gradually influenced by rationalism. This lead also to the creation of a kind of Milanese style, a local architectural variation opposite the International Style, and which became especially noticeable shortly after the Second World War.9

8 Cf. Zevi, Bruno: Guiseppe Terragni. Triangle Architectural Publ., 1989. 9 Berizzi, Carlo: Architectural Guide Milan. Buildings and Projects since 1919. DOM Publishers, 2015, p. 15. 3

A range of impacts are accountable for the shaping of Milan’s urban configuration and architectural structures. Beyond this dynamic, the following paragraphs will try to unveil some principles of the system, which is the built environment of Milan. More precisely, we will talk about three kinds of situations. The first is the juxtaposition principle. It entails a local conglomerate of distinct buildings – often evolved over time and representing an array of styles – which constitute specific situations. The second principle is that of a timeline. This means the arrangement of a set of buildings, dating from different periods, in a particular and definite situation of urban planning. The third principle concerns urban networks. This means the relationships between structures beyond local formations generating more extensive systems within the urban fabric. All three principles can be construed as autonomous, but they also have the tendency to overlap each other in creating a specific situation.

The juxtaposition principle At the crossing of the Via della Moscova and the Via , which generates a small square, sits a building complex with grotesquely historicizing façades. The complex consists of two building units: a linear one and a courtyard block. Both units are connected by a monumental arch, which spans over the gateway to an internal residential street. This so-called Ca’ Brutta or the “Ugly House” was designed by Milanese architect Giovanni Muzio, at that time a representative of the Novecento style, and built between 1919 and 1922.

Fig. 2. Ca’ Brutta, Giovanni Muzio, 1919-1922.

The building is a testimony to the frictions occurring within the accomplishments of the modern society after the First World War. The Ca’ Brutta housed condos for an emerging middle class. It was constructed with reinforced concrete, the condos were technically equipped with installations for heating and water supply, and it had elevators and an underground car park. While the economic, technical and functional aspects of the building units were progressive, the appearance of the complex culminated in a mannerist eclecticism. Internal modern on the one hand, the outward 4 appearance of the Ca’ Brutta represents on the other hand the approach to a moderate regeneration or to a new kind of order through a fictitious classicism. However, principles of the Ca’ Brutta – the alignment of solitary buildings towards a private residential street within the city’s fabric, the setback of the upper floors from the public street, and the creation of penthouse situations with assigned terraces – are again perceivable in close-by housing areas at the Via della Moscova, which were erected 40 to 50 years after the Ca’ Brutta.

Opposite the southern end of the Ca’ Brutta sits the imposing Palazzo Montecatini – an office building designed by Gio Ponti in the mid-1930s. It represents noticeably the mutual influence of Novecento tendencies and architectural modernization. In contrast to the Ca’ Brutta, the building links an austere classicistic order with principles of rationalistic architecture. The inner technical sophistication of this „office-machine“10 is also reflected to a certain degree by the exterior of the building. Its modern appearance concerns mainly the consistent façade layer of and marble cladding, the formats, and the aluminum window frames.

Fig. 3. Palazzo Montecatini, Gio Ponti, 1935-1936. Fig. 4. Secondo Palazzo Montecatini, Gio Ponti, 1947- 1952.

15 years later, a second Palazzo Montecatini – also designed by Ponti – was constructed next to the older building. For its design Ponti followed principles similar to the first building. But Ponti integrated further a glazed post-and-beam construction into the main façade of the convex shaped tower unit opposite the Ca’ Brutta and hereby contributed to the manifestation of Milan’s architectural Narcissus.

10 Ibid., p. 99. 5

100 meters north of the Ca’ Brutta, the Via Filippo Turati is flanked by two towers, which face further on the Piazza della Repubblica. The first of the two Torre Turati was designed by Luigi Mattioni and constructed between 1958 and 1960. The second tower, built in the late 1960s, was a later work of Giovanni Muzio. Muzio’s 17-storied tower rises above a glazed two-floor base that defines the corner of street and square. The relief-like long site of the tower follows the street. At the upper levels the punctuated façade gets wider. This presented the possibility to integrate loggias into the narrow edge of the tower in variation with window areas, which gave Muzio’s Tower its individual look. Both Torre Turati are significantly higher than the adjacent buildings in the street and contribute to the heterogeneous appearance of the short passage of the Via Filippo Turati.

Fig. 5. View alongside the Via Filippo Turati including the Ca’ Brutta, the La Serenissima building and Luigi Mattioni’s Tore Turati.

The situation in the Via Filippo Turati is an example emanated by the juxtaposition principle. It generates locally intensive spatial and architectural experiences by including buildings of different scales, periods and styles. But what sounds like a formula for contradiction is rather able to create iconic situations, which contribute simultaneously to the metropolitan being of Milan. As for another example: Walking along the Corso Italia from the north, past the richly decorated houses of the bourgeoisie, one passes a slender section of a building that cuts like a white colored blade through the building blocks and into the space of the street. It is part of an office and apartment complex designed by in the early 1950s. The building complex does not only strike by its extraordinary layout, it also co-constitutes an iconic situation. This situation is generated for one thing by the side by side of Moretti’s building and the neighboring structures, but furthermore by the monumental Torre Velasca, which sits in the background but which becomes part of a more extensive urban system of iconic meaning. This meaning is also represented in probably countless photographs taken from this location. The reproductions of these photographs can be found for instance on historic picture postcards or in contemporary architectural guides.

6

Fig. 6. Uffici e abitazioni Corso Italia, historical picture post Fig. 7. Uffici e abitazioni Corso Italia today. card. http://www.postalesinventadas.com/2010_06_01_archive.html

The timeline principle The urban fabric of Milan frequently features spots, which are characterized through architectural diversity that occurs locally but that is arranged within larger urban alignments or networks. Local urban systems can take on the characteristic of an apparent timeline or time-spectrum in terms how a definite situation of town planning is chronically constituted by a set of buildings.

One of the major landmarks of the city center is Vittorio Emanuele II, a roofed shopping mall designed by Giuseppe Mengoni and built between 1865 and 1877 as an expression of Milan’s bourgeois culture of the later 19th century. Its main passage connects two important squares: in the north the square in front of the opera, in the south the square – it’s today’s outline also dating from a design by Mengoni. Walking from north to south, the end of the view axis through the galleria is dominated by a modern tower – the so called Martini Tower designed in 1953 by Luigi Mattioni. Only stepping out at the southern end of the galleria through the triumphal arch onto the cathedral square reveals the full scope of local city planning and the timeline principle.

7

Fig. 8. North-south passage of the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II.

From the galleria, the axis crosses the spacious square (the ancient cathedral on its left) towards a palazzo, which frames again Mattioni’s tower. The two-part Palazzo dell’Arengario flanks the southern end of the cathedral square. Its Novecento-oriented design originated from a competition held in 1937 to complete the architectural frame of the square. The palazzo was part of the fascist building program. Equipped with a and a perron the left building should have served Mussolini as stage for political rallies.

Fig. 9. Palazzo dell’Arengario

8

However, the events of the Second World War suspended construction and the war-damaged building was finally finished in 1956. From the palazzo the axis continuous into the Piazza Armando Diaz and is concluded by Mattioni’s tower. This situation reflects a chronically inflicted chain of reaction: Mengoni developed the north-south passage through the galleria reacting on the strict east-west alignment of the cathedral and connected the cathedral square to the surrounding. A half century later, the architects of the Palazzo dell’Arengario (Enrico Agostino Griffini, Pier Giulio Magistretti, Giovanni Muzio, Piero Portaluppi) created an analogy to the capital southern opening of the galleria on the opposite site of the square. Through the division of the palazzo, they framed and prolonged the axis at the same time. And Mattioni was able to occupy with his tower the most prominent site of the axis, namely its ending, giving subtly the impression that everything was just constructed to frame and to lead to the tower, being the last element of the time line.

Urban Networks Principally, we talk about urban networks when distinct structures are put into relations with a more extensive system beyond local formations. These systems effectively contribute to the shaping of the city and they have an impact on the personal experience of the city. Residents continuously generate own networks by the way she or he takes possession of the city; by the way how places and buildings are particularly put into relations through actions and movements whereas others are neglected. But urban networks can have an impact on the spatial order (in which activities unfold) in such a way that they are able to generate something like a collective memory. These networks are often created by the monuments and landmarks of a city as well as by routs connecting these elements.

The 19th century Beruti plan reworked some of these networks by introducing a new hierarchy of routes in the city. As for the fascist rebuilding of Milan, the “use of architecture and urban planning as means of transforming Italian society […] not only gave the city a fundamental new aspect but also changed the way residents moved through its streets, altered the kinds of activities that took place in its public spaces, and disrupted the traditional hierarchy of the urban core.”11 The fascists inserted their own landmarks and constituted new urban networks first and foremost through the regional fascist party headquarters – placed at prominent spots, major arteries or crossings in the city – in order to increase the impact on the diverse population groups. “Case del fascio served as an expedient means of communicating fascism’s political success and […] they represent a crucial component of the party’s effort to intensify its influence among the general population […].”12

In the early years, the fascist party and its neighborhood groups often occupied quarters in existing buildings adapting them for administrative and representational use. Over time, the fascists developed a program concerning characteristics the case del fascio had to feature. Key buildings like Terragni’s fascist headquarter in as well as “the top entries from the 1932 competition for a 'typical' casa del fascio” – won by the later highly seminal architectural firm BBPR – contributed to an

11 Maulsby, 2014, p. 11. 12 Ibid., p. 109. 9 architectural offensive to build a number of new local headquarters across the city.13 In further consequence, “these buildings served as backdrop for the party’s ritual activities […]. Shared architectural features – such as towers and balconies – were a consequence of party leader’s efforts to centralize control of the building process and of an emerging agreement about what the architectural character of case del fascio should be.”14 Architectural-rationalistic tendencies complied with “the need for familiar and unpretentious buildings to be designed as identifiable civic symbols, as town halls and churches had been in the past.”15

Fig. 10. Casa del Fascio of the Fabio Filzi group close to Milan’s central station. A glimpse of the Grattacielo Pirelli becomes visible in the background.

The fascist houses are immersed into a network role through the organizational structure the party established across the city by means of these houses. Furthermore, features like the balcony or the conspicuous tower associated the individual buildings and locations “with neighborhood groups throughout the city”.16 Elements of this network constituted by the fascist houses are today still detectable, but the meaning of this network deteriorated with the fall of the fascist regime. It was superseded by other networks of the modern city. Prominently, in Milan such a system is constituted by the incorporation of the high-rise buildings. For example: Both Torre Turati at the end of the Via Filippo Turati contribute to the juxtaposition principle. But while the towers might appear in connection to the local neighborhood as alien element because of their dimension, they are immediately part of a larger urban alignment. On the one hand, both towers on the south side of the Piazza della Repubblica correspond with the Torre Breda (1950-1955) at the other side of the square. Each tower marks the passage of the axis coming from the central station and crossing the square. On the other hand, viewed from the direction of the central station, the towers effectively create a successive gate situation with the Torre Turati finally leading straight into the district.

13 Ibid., p. 106-109. 14 Ibid., p. 110. 15 Ibid., p. 111. 16 Ibid., p. 126. 10

Fig. 11. Situation constituted by the Torre Breda and the two Torre Turati viewed from the north.

The constant addition of , of office and apartment towers, to the texture of the city creates an ever more complex network by the interrelations between the towers as well as between the towers and the city itself. Due to their dimension, the skyscrapers are recurrent immersed in visual relationships and incorporate themselves in various perceptible contexts. Through emerging point of views across the city center, the network of places and streets – consisting of different directed grids and crossing diagonals – capture the skyscrapers again and again like a spider web.

Fig. 12. View towards the 2012 finished Unicredit Tower from Via della Moscova.

11

Fig. 13. View towards one of the towers of the Solaria e Aria tower complex finished in 2014.

Fig. 14. The Torre Servizi Tecnici Comunali seen from one of the streets in the Garibaldi district.

Closing remarks This text covered some of the principles (such as juxtaposition, timeline, urban networks), which are represented by situations perceptible in the urban core of Milan as some of the city’s quarters still undergo renewals or constant changes. It traced back experiences of the city to some of its inherent systems. This account is a response to the confrontation with various urban settings and architectural forms appearing in Milan, but beyond the apparent, it was eager to describe some of the complexity of the city that evolved through a manifold of forces.

12