Landscape as a support for collectivity on the different scales of inhabitation

Luis Miguel Cortés Sánchez; Javier Terrados Cepeda; Panu Savolainen

doi:10.22616/j.landarchart.2024.24.05

Authors

Luis Miguel Cortés Sánchez University of Seville https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5876-6971
Javier Terrados Cepeda University of Seville https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2141-8225
Panu Savolainen Aalto University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8473-6255

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22616/j.landarchart.2024.24.05

Keywords:

historic landscape design, spatial composition, collective housing, 20th century, Finland

Abstract

The landscape is not merely a backdrop to our urban environments, but plays an intrinsic role in fostering collective identity and cohesion. This hypothesis serves as the basis for the research, which aims to investigate how architectural design can not only reflect but also enhance the formation of collective identity. In order to substantiate this hypothesis, an examination will be made of built architectural experiences that have previously addressed this approach. An illustrative example is the Suvikumpu housing complex designed by Raili and Reima Pietilä in the late 1960s in Espoo, Finland. The analysis of the project examines the three scales at which the community shaped the architectural design: the landscape, the neighborhood and the dwelling. This study has shown how the project, as documented in the original graphic design held by the Museum of Finnish Architecture (MFA), begins with the appropriation and reinterpretation of the landscape and its constituent elements, resulting in a design that supports collective living.

Author Biographies

Luis Miguel Cortés Sánchez, University of Seville

Master in Architecture, PhD Candidate, Department of History, Theory and Composition, School of Architecture, University of Seville (Spain).

Javier Terrados Cepeda, University of Seville

PhD, Architect. Professor. Department of Architectural Design. School of Architecture, University of Seville (Spain).

Panu Savolainen, Aalto University

PhD, architect. Assistant professor. Departament of Architecture, Aalto Univeristy (Finland).

References

1. Aragón Rebollo, T. Reconfiguración del paisaje desde lo común: una perspectiva ético-estética. Enrahonar, 2014, No. 53, p. 43-61. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/enrahonar.185

2. Augé, M. Los “no lugares”, espacios del anonimato. Una antropología de la sobremodernidad. Barcelona: Gedisa, 1993

3. Brinckerhoff, J. Discovering the Vernacular Landscape. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1984.

4. Castells, M. La era de la información: economía, sociedad y cultura. Vol. III, Fin de milenio. Madrid: Alianza, 1998.

5. Clark, P. The European city and green space: London, Stockholm, Helsinki and St. Petersburg, 1850-2000. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006.

6. Connah, R. Writing architecture : fantomas, fragments, fictions : an architectural journey through the 20th century. Helsinki: Rakennuskirja Oy, 1989.

7. Council of Europe. (2000). European Landscape Convention. https://rm.coe.int/1680080621

8. Egarter, L., Depellegrin, D., Misiune, I. Conceptualizing Human–Nature Interactions – An Overview. In: Human-Nature Interactions: Exploring Nature’s Values Across Landscapes. Springer International Publishing, 2022, p. 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-01980-7_1

9. Gehl, J.. “Soft edges” in residential streets. Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research, 1986, No. 3(2), p. 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/02815738608730092

10. Giles, S. Espacios de relación y soporte en la vivienda colectiva moderna: realidades y utopías. Buenos Aires: Diseño, 2021.

11. Giudici, M.S. Counter-planning from the kitchen: for a feminist critique of type. Journal of Architecture, 2018, No. 23(7–8), p. 1203 – 1229. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602365.2018.1513417

12. Häkli, J. Cultures of demarcation: territory and national identity in Finland. In: Nested identities : identity, territory, and scale. Rowman & Littlefield, 1999, p. 123–149.

13. Hautamäki, R., Donner, J. Modern living in a forest – landscape architecture of Finnish forest suburbs in the 1940s–1960s. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 2022, No. 104(3), p. 250–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/04353684.2021.1989320

14. Maderuelo, J. El paisaje: génesis de un concepto. Madrid: Abada, 2005.

15. Matrix. Making Space: Women and the Man Made Environment. London: Pluto Press Limited, 1984.

16. Nikula, R. Construir con el paisaje: breve historia de la arquitectura finlandesa. Helsinki: Otava, 1998.

17. Nogué, J. El retorno al paisaje. Enrahonar, 2010, No. (45), p. 123–136. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/enrahonar.224

18. Nogué, J., Vicente, J. Landscape and national identity in Catalonia. Political Geography, 2004, No. 23(2), p. 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2003.09.005

19. Peñín, A. Estructuras del habitar: colectividad y resiliencia como estrategias de proyecto. Proyecto, Progreso, Arquitectura, 2017, No. (16), p. 88–101. https://upcommons.upc.edu/handle/2117/106106

20. Pietilä, R., Pietilä, R. Identidad entre lugar y naturaleza. Decomo la arquitectura deviene contextual con la naturaleza. Fisuras de la cultura contemporánea. Revista de arquitectura de bolsillo, 1995, No. (2), p. 30–35.

21. Soga, M., Gaston, K.J. The ecology of human–nature interactions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2020, No. 287(1918), p. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.1882

22. Soga, M., Gaston, K.J. Towards a unified understanding of human–nature interactions. Nature Sustainability, 2022, No. 5(5), p. 374–383. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00818-z

23. Soler, A. Consideraciones acerca del concepto de flexibilidad: el hogar como sistema emergente. ARQ, 2023, No. (113), p. 4–16. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-69962023000100004