Hans Ibelings Just the Way It Is Contemporary Architecture in

Scientists have tested the visual-motor coordination of ath- letes by enclosing them in a dark room and then throw- ing them a ball, while lighting the space for no more than a single second. It was found that even this instant of vis- ibility sufficed for a well-trained athlete to determine the speed and direction of the ball and catch it in the dark. The architectural critic from abroad is, essentially, in a situ- ation very similar to that of the tested athletes, being asked to There exists a highly apt tautology that claims architecture to judge, from a sample of architecture in a certain situation and be what it is seen by people who understand it. This is essentially time, its dynamics and trajectories of development. This brief a variation of the definition of art offered by Howard Becker, who essay is, in fact, an attempt of this kind to determine where con- describes the art world as “all those people whose activities are nec- temporary architecture in Slovakia now stands. I do not intend essary for the creation of characteristic works, which this world and to assert that there is a similar form of talent inherent to archi- perhaps even others define as art”.1 Architecture is what the world tectural criticism, but to be able to write down what one seed of architects (and perhaps even others) define as architecture. does in fact require some degree of visual-motor coordination. The editors of this publication, as is evident, are active in the If the present moment is understood simply as the “now” architectural world, and thus their selection reflects and contrib- and Slovakia as the “here” (to avoid all extensive digressions utes to what is understood as architecture. Even if some of their on whether Slovak architecture as a national form can or even choices, or some of the choices they did not make, could be sub- should exist), there still remains but one question: What archi- ject to question, the viewer can be certain that this yearbook in tecture do we talk about when we talk about architecture? total encapsulates architecture as we generally understand it. Of course, architecture has a wide variety of forms: it can This selection can be viewed as the starting point reflecting the be a design, theory, project, idea, sketch, concept, book, draw- approach of many architects listed in this publication, who in their ing, sculpture, memory and even more, though this publication work start from the conditions and circumstances “as they are”. concentrates on architecture as a building. It need not be said Possibly it will seem a generalisation, but architecture in Slovakia that architecture is not the domain of every building, just as not is perceived as an ordinary environment, with an unusual, some- everything painted on canvas is a picture or even an artwork. times even self-denying informality. We should not understand Similarly, what is built is not always a building, nor is every build- this – erroneously – as a lack of ambition or talent, but instead as ing always perceived as architecture. This has nothing in common proof that contemporary Slovak architects do not focus on the with the alleged categorical difference between, say, a cathedral exceptional, whether in material, form or typology. Put generally, and a bicycle shed – to cite the renowned introduction by Nikolaus in place of a desire for originality, their architecture frequently Pevsner to his Outline of European Architecture – but as changing reveals a surprising directness, and perhaps, if the possibility were criteria of what, in the world of architecture, is willing and capable there, a privileging of Pevsner’s bicycle shed over the cathedral. of being included under the concept of architecture. This year- They suffice without ostentatious display of innovative tech- book, for instance, contains several single-family selected nologies, surprising materials, expansive forms or ostentatious from a long list of freestanding and duplex residences. But even uniqueness. If the projects in this book are in any way exceptional, this longlist provides only a tiny fraction of all of the residential it is in the intelligence of the design and the joyful thoroughness, projects built in recent years in Slovakia. While any private not the arbitrary difference from everything that surrounds them. can be understood as an expression both of Slovak and contempo- Many projects reveal what the Dutch architect Gerrit Rietveld rary culture – in the anthropological sense of the culture of hous- has termed the “luxury of sobriety”. These include, e.g. the cot- ing – only a few of them have been chosen as suitable for inclusion tage in Vojka by Peter Jurkovič or the hunting lodge in Kuchyn among contemporary Slovak architecture in a publication like this. from Atelier Pantograph, which provide unassuming comfort, or the urban plan for the square in Prešov by Zerozero, which provides cultivated dignity to the everyday environment. These are examples of architecture that appear deceptively simple and self-evident, yet nonetheless show how surprisingly little it takes to achieve a surprising effect. On the other hand, they implicitly reveal the wretchedness of the great mass of thoughtlessly designed page 29 material environments – a fact not only limited to Slovakia. Najlepšie rezidenčné projekty na Slovensku nenápadne ukrý- vajú svojich obyvateľov, najzreteľnejšie v Dome v dome od Martina Jančoka v Bernolákove alebo v rezidenčnom komplexe navrhnu- tom ateliérom what architects, ktorý potláča individualitu bytov. Najlepšie monumenty relativizujú monumentalitu, ako v prí- pade lávky a vyhliadkovej plošiny na vrchole kopca Straník, ktorá nie je ničím iným než bežným orientačným bodom v krajine. Tie najlepšie premeny existujúcich budov rešpektujú to, čo tam už bolo. Doslova to prijímajú tak, „ako to je“, čo potvr- dzujú aj obnova funkcionalistického kúpaliska v Košiciach od Ladislava Hanuliaka, elegantná premena Mozartovho domu v Bratislave ateliérom Skoček + Skoček alebo prag- matická krása konverzie bývalej továrne od GutGut. Vzhľadom na súčasný dôraz na priamočiaru skromnosť je architektúra Slovenska v mnohom v súlade s vývojom inde v Európe, či už ide o zdržanlivý modernizmus, ako práce ate- liérov Sergison Bates alebo Caruso St John vo Veľkej Británii, sofistikované brikoláže z bežných prvkov v dielach architek- tov De Vylder Taillieu Vinck a niekoľkých ďalších z Flámska, racionalistickú nostalgiu školy San Rocco v Taliansku, alebo remeslo práve vznikajúcej „generácie tkáčov“ v Holandsku. Na Slovensku však chýba koordinované skupinové úsilie situo- vať svoju architektúru v rámci medzinárodného kontextu, kam by patrila, aj keď nemá porovnateľnú osobnosť, chytľavé motto či emblematický projekt. Alebo by sme skôr mali povedať: ešte ich nemá. Očividná absencia vlastnej propagácie v určitom zmysle pristane skromnosti slovenskej architektúry. Mnohí európ- ski kolegovia hlásiaci sa k podobnej prostote sa však nestránia vyvolávania záujmu o svoju prácu a idey. Slovenskí architekti svoje diela možno podceňujú, keď nezdôrazňujú silu myšlie- nok a návrhov podobne ako ich súčasníci kdekoľvek vo svete. Hoci je každý z projektov v tomto výbere jedinečný (pozo- ruhodnou výnimkou je len prefabrikovaný Arkshelter od De Backera, Mikovčáka a Senkowského), možno ich vnímať aj v inom svetle – ako exemplárne svojím prístupom, napríklad ako premeny existujúcich budov, citlivé intervencie v prírod- nom prostredí či starostlivé vstupy do mestskej štruktúry, alebo ako prototypy s latentným potenciálom stať sa typmi ako mnohé rodinné domy. Aj keď sa to nikdy nestane, aspoň teoreticky by mohli byť východiskovým bodom metódy, res- pektíve modelu, čo možno opakovať, napodobňovať a sta- vať na ňom tak, že by sme si mohli hypoteticky predstaviť inverzný svet, v ktorom takmer dve desiatky nových projektov v ročenke už nebudú tými výnimkami, ale stanú sa pravidlom.

strana 30 BECKER, H.,1982. Art Worlds. Berkeley: University of California Press, s. 34. The best residential projects in Slovakia unassumingly hide their residents, most visibly in the “Dom v dome” by Martin Jančok in Bernolákovo, or in the residential complex by the atelier What!, which reduces the individuality of the flats. The best monuments relativise their monumentality, as in the case of the footbridge and viewing deck at the peak of the hill Straník, which is nothing but an ordinary mark in the landscape. The best transformations of extant buildings respect what was there before. Literally, they take it “as it is”, confirmed by the restoration of the Functionalist swimming baths in Košice by Ladislav Hanuliak, the elegant transformation of the Mozart House in by the atelier Skoček + Skoček, or the pragmatic beauty of the conversion of a former factory by the studio GutGut. Considering the emphasis now placed on directness and simplic- ity, the architecture of Slovakia is in many ways fully in harmony with developments elsewhere in Europe, whether the apparent Modernism of the work of Sergison Bates or Caruso St John in Brit- ain, the sophisticated bricolage of common elements in the work of De Vylder Taillieu Vinck and others in Flanders, the rationalist nostalgia of the San Rocco school in Italy, or the craftsmanship of the emerging “weavers’ generation” in the Netherlands. What Slova- kia lacks, though, is a coordinated group effort to situate its archi- tecture within the framework of this international context, where it belongs, even if it has no specific personality, striking motto, or emblematic project. Or perhaps we could say instead: it does not have them yet. Indeed, the absence of propagation is in a definite sense an admission to the modesty of Slovak architecture. Many of its European colleagues who declare allegiance to a similar simplic- ity are, though, not ashamed of calling attention to their work and ideas. Slovak architects may well give their work less value than it deserves if they fail to accentuate the strength of their ideas and designs as is the case of their contemporaries almost anywhere else. Even though each project in this selection is unique (one striking exception being only the prefabricated Arkshelter by De Backer, Senkowski and Mikovčák), they could be viewed in a different light as exemplary in their approach – as e.g. the transformation of extant buildings, sensitive interventions in the natural environment, and careful changes to an urban structure – or could be regarded as prototypes with a latent potential to become standard, as in many of the single-family houses. And even if this does not happen, at least theoretically they could become the starting point for methods or models to be repeated, imitated, and built upon such that we could, hypothetically, imagine an inverted world where these new projects in the yearbook do not form the exception, but instead the rule.

page 31 1 BECKER Howard, 1982. Art Worlds. Berkeley: University of California Press, p. 34. Ročenka slovenskej architektúry 2016/2017 Slovak Architecture Yearbook 2016/2017

Žilina

Nitra

Bratislava

Y zaradené dielo / selected work Y sídlo architektonického ateliéru / architecture studio location od sídla ateliéru k realizovanej stavbe / from studio location to selected work Revitalizácia verejného priestoru nákupného strediska Centrum, Prešov Revitalisation of the Public Space of the Centrum Shopping Centre, Prešov zerozero Castellum Cafe, Castellum Cafe, Nitra Martin Dulík, Marek Šumichrast, Lívia Dulíková Mestské kúpalisko, Košice City Swimming Baths, Košice Ladislav Hanuliak Nová synagóga, Žilina The New Synagogue, Žilina PLURAL Mlynica, Bratislava Mlynica, Bratislava GutGut Event House, Žilina Event House, Žilina Juraj Hubinský, Peter Kuklica, Martin Smerek Fach, Bratislava Fach, Bratislava Iľja Skoček, Martin Skoček Dostavba areálu Ministerstva zahraničných vecí a európskych záležitostí SR, Bratislava Addition to the Slovak Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs, Bratislava Ján Pavúk, Iľja Skoček Prístavba školy, Bratislava Prešov Addition to the School, Bratislava RAUM3 + Peter Jurkovič Obytný súbor Plzenská, Prešov Residential Complex Plzenská, Prešov zerozero Košice Obytný súbor Nova Village, Dunajská Streda Residential Complex Nova Village, Dunajská Streda what architects Obytný súbor Condominium Devín, Bratislava Residential Complex Condominium Devín, Bratislava PMArchitekti Rodinný dom T, Stará Ľubovňa Family House T, Stará Ľubovňa Martin Boleš, Aleš Berec, Erika Bányayová Dom v dome, Bernolákovo House within a House, Bernolákovo PLURAL Dom pri jazere, Vojka nad Dunajom House by the Lake, Vojka nad Dunajom Peter Jurkovič Poľovnícky dom, Kuchyňa Hubalová Hunting Lodge, Kuchyňa Hubalová Pantograph Arkshelter Arkshelter Michiel De Backer, Martin Mikovčák, Jakub Senkowski Lávka a prístrešok, Straník Footbridge and Shelter, Straník LABAK + 2021 Revitalizácia verejného priestoru nákupného strediska Centrum Revitalisation of the Public Space of the Centrum Shopping Centre

Námestie biskupa Vasiľa Hopka, Prešov Architekti / Architects: zerozero, Irakli Eristavi, Pavol Šilla Spolupráca na architektonickej štúdii / Assistance in the architectural study: Martin Jančok Projekt / Project: 2005 – 2014 Realizácia / Realisation: 2014 – 2016 Foto / Photo: zerozero

Situácia / Site plan

Prešovské Sídlisko III patrí medzi najvydarenejšie urbanis- tické koncepcie bytovej výstavby realizovanej v 20. storočí na Slovensku. Jasná urbanistická štruktúra rozprestiera- júca sa na pravom brehu Torysy s vysokým podielom zelene a s priamym napojením na mesto je v mnohých ohľadoch dobrým miestom pre život. V severnej časti tohto sídliska sa nachádza areál občianskej vybavenosti obchodné stre- disko Centrum, ktoré postavili koncom sedemdesiatych The Prešov housing estate Sídlisko III ranks among the most rokov minulého storočia podľa návrhu Juraja Oswalda. successfully planned urban conceptions of mass housing realised Klaster siedmich samostatných, prevažne prízemných objek- in the later 20th century in Slovakia. Its transparent urban struc- tov jednotlivých obchodných prevádzok, domu služieb a knižnice ture, spreading along the right bank of the river Torysa with large je sústredený okolo centrálneho voľného priestranstva námestia. quantities of vegetation and direct connection to the town makes it, Objekty vzájomne prepája krytý chodník, ktorý lemuje námestie in many respects, a pleasant residential locality. To the north of the zo západnej a z južnej strany. Mestský charakter prostredia estate is a complex of public facilities, the Centrum shopping centre, donedávna dotvárala fontána s meditačným jazierkom a ume- constructed at the end of the 1970s to the design of Juraj Oswald. lecké dielo s motívom matky od akademického sochára Fran- This grouping of seven independent, primarily single-storey tiška Patočku. Priestranstvo však dlhodobo trpelo zanedbanou volumes for individual retail functions, a service block and a public údržbou aj chronickým znefunkčnením jeho jediného archi- library is grouped around a central open space, essentially a square. tektonického prvku – fontány. Mesto Prešov preto na riešenie All the buildings are linked by a covered walkway, surrounding tohto problému vypísalo v roku 2005 architektonickú súťaž. the square on the west and south sides. Until recently, the urban Víťazom sa stal, v tom čase sa ešte len etablujúci, prešovský character of the environment was shaped by a fountain with a small ateliér zerozero. K realizácii revitalizácie verejného priestran- lake, and a sculpted composition of mother and child by the sculptor stva Centrum došlo až v roku 2016, o viac než dekádu neskôr. František Patočka. The area, however, had long suffered insufficient Nové námestie nie je evolučným zlepšením pôvodného maintenance and chronic breakdowns of its sole aesthetic focus, the verejného priestranstva, na aké sme zvyknutí pri väčšine fountain. As a result, the town of Prešov in 2005 held an architec- udržiavacích alebo rekonštrukčných činov v iných mestách. tural competition for addressing this problem. Its winner was the Ide o revolučné prehodnotenie pôvodného priestoru, ako then still emerging Prešov atelier zerozero. Realisation of the public aj prehodnotenie chápania priestorového obsahu skrýva- space of Centrum took place only in 2016, over a decade later. júceho sa pod pojmom verejné priestranstvo. Výsledkom je The new square is not an evolutionary improvement of an extant prísny a radikálny návrh, ktorý však do tohto priestoru pri- public space, as we might expect from the majority of revitalisation náša nielen slobodu pohybu, ale aj slobodu programu. or reconstruction actions in other towns. It is a revolutionary reval- Aktuálny projekt námestia možno charakterizovať troma uation of the space as it was: a new evaluation of the sense of the pojmami: topografia, geometria a materialita. Pôvodný nerovný spatial content hidden beneath the idea of public space. The result terén architekti prekryli novou vrstvou jednoliateho betóno- is an exacting and radical design, which brings to the space not only vého povrchu, ktorý zmeny úrovne prekonáva pomocou trian- freedom of movement, but more importantly freedom of program. gulácie a teselácie. Nová topografia betónového koberca pri- The new square could be conveyed through three concepts: náša podnety najmä mladšej generácii, ktorá v priestore našla topography, geometry and materiality. The original sloping ter- ideálne podmienky na skateboarding. Biely betón poskytuje rain was covered with a new layer of uniform concrete surface, miestu svetlo a vizuálnu modernitu, ktorá sídliskám, para- which overcame the irregularities in level through triangulation doxne, vždy tak trochu chýbala. Ďalšou novou charakterovou and tessellation. The new topography of this concrete “carpet” is črtou priestranstva sa stal pravidelný raster osadenia stromov particularly inspiring for the younger generation, who can find it v zmysle rovnoramennej trianglovej teselácie s hranou šesť an ideal site for skateboarding. Additionally, the white concrete metrov. Vďaka tomu sa podarilo umiestniť na námestí až štyri- fills the space with light and visual modernity, something that dsaťtri nových stromov. Tento prírodný element súčasne pred- the estate paradoxically had always lacked. Another new char- stavuje dokonalý argument proti sporadickým kritickým hlasom acteristic trait of the space became the regular grid of planted obyvateľov sídliska, komentujúcim novú betónovú plochu. trees, in the sense of tessellation in equilateral triangles with Oddychový mobiliár námestia dopĺňa sedenie pod stro- edges of 6 m. Through this method, it was possible to add to the mami a tri jednoduché vodné dýzy, ktoré sú zdrojom zábavy square a full 43 new trees. At the same time, this natural element najmenších návštevníkov Centra. Pevná plocha v tieni stro- forms a strong argument against the occasional critical voices mov, v noci podsvietená štyridsiatimi tromi zemnými svetlami, from estate residents in relation to the new cement surface. je priestorom na širokú škálu kultúrnych a spoločenských Relaxation furnishings in the square are provided by benches podujatí či spontánnych stretnutí. Ako sa to pri nekonform- under the trees and three simple water-spouts, much appreci- ných riešeniach často stáva, verejnosť prijala nový priestor ated by local children. The solid surface shaded by trees, and skôr rezervovane. Fungovanie námestia a jeho dopad na during night-time hours illuminated by 43 below-ground lights, okolité prevádzky však jasne ukazuje, že sa mu aj za krátku is a space for many different cultural or social events, or sponta- existenciu podarilo v tomto periférnom prostredí inicio- neous meetings. As is often the case with non-conformist designs, vať fenomén mestskosti vo všetkých jeho aspektoch. |} the public greeted the new space with many reservations. Yet the functioning of the square and its impact on the surroundings have now made it clear that in the brief period of its existence, the new design has succeeded in creating in this rather peripheral local- 36 ity a phenomenon of true urban identity in all its aspects. `{ 37 38

Castellum Cafe Castellum Cafe

Námestie Jána Pavla II. 10, Nitra Architekti / Architects: Martin Dulík, Marek Šumichrast, Lívia Dulíková Stavebnotechnické riešenie / Structural-technical design: Marek Šumichrast, Martin Dulík Statika / Structural engineering: Daniel Kóňa Stavebník / Client: Rímskokatolícka cirkev Biskupstvo Nitra / Roman Catholic Bishopric of Nitra Projekt / Project: 2012 – 2014 Realizácia / Realisation: 2015 – 2016 Foto / Photo: Dano Veselský, Martin Dulík, František Rišiaň

Situácia / Site plan

40