The dissolution of boundaries: landscape strategies applied to the Dipoli case

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22616/j.landarchart.2024.25.04

Keywords:

Pietilä, landscape design, nature, materiality, Finland

Abstract

The relationship between architecture and nature has always been one of the key topics of interest in architectural debate, even more so in the present day. Among the architectural approaches commonly described as “natural” and “landscape-oriented,” the work of Raili and Reima Pietilä stands out for the radical nature of its proposals in pursuit of an architecture that could be understood as inspired by natural forms in a specifically balanced manner, avoiding both the mere imitation of natural shapes, bordering on caricature, and illegible abstract interpretations. This article is based on the analysis of the design and construction of the Dipoli Centre (1961–66) as a paradigmatic example of this way of generating architecture inspired by the landscape or, in the words of the architects themselves, as an “extension of the landscape”. Through a detailed exploration of the graphic documents produced by the architects during the design and construction process of Dipoli, preserved in the archives of Arkkitehtuurimuseum, Museum of Finnish Architecture (MFA), as well as their conceptual descriptions and project reports, and an analysis of the built work itself, this article reveals the strategies and formal mechanisms through which the architects manage
to present their architecture as a clear ‘continuation’ of nature, as a cultured extension of the Finnish landscape. These strategies can be encompassed within the concept of “dissolution of boundaries,” which manifests both in the architects’ metaphorical descriptions of the project and in the morphology of the building itself. The building is presented in such a way that no clear perimeter can be defined, but rather a diffuse, ambiguous territory of fragmented exchanges between exterior and interior. This idea is also reflected in the selection of construction components and basic materials —stone, concrete, wood, and copper—  arranged in an innovative manner for its time, still unmatched today. In this approach, it becomes difficult to clearly define the boundary between the natural and the artificial, the preexisting and the superimposed, the interior and the exterior, and between the environment and the architectural artefact.

Author Biographies

Luis Miguel Cortés Sánchez, School of Architecture, University of Seville, Spain

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

Javier Terrados Cepeda, School of Architecture, University of Seville, Spain

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

Panu Savolainen, Department of Architecture, Aalto University

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

References

1. Algarín Comino, M. (2006). Arquitecturas excavadas: Elproyecto frente a la construcción de espacio. Fundación Cajade Arquitectos.

2. Cano Lasso, J. (2021). Los detalles humildes. In I. E. Maluenda & E. Encabo Seguí (Eds.), Julio Cano Lasso. Naturalezas (p. 108). Ministerio de Transportes, Movilidad y Agenda Urbana.

3. Capitel, A. (1999). Alvar Aalto: Proyecto y método. Akal.

4. Connah, R. (1994). Tango Mäntyniemi: The architecture of the official residence of the president of Finland = Tasavallan presidentin virka-asunnon arkkitehtuuri. Painatuskeskus.

5. Connah, R. (1998). Reima Pietilä: Centro studentesco Dipoli, Otaniemi. Testo & Immagine.

6. Cortés Sánchez, L. M., Terrados Cepeda, J., & Savolainen, P. (2024). Landscape as a support for collectivity in the different scales of inhabitation. Landscape Architecture and Art, 24(24). https://doi.org/10.22616/j.landarchart.2024.24.05

7. Cuellar Jaramillo, Á. R. (2017). El bosque habitable: La experiencia de construir ciudad paisaje en Finlandia [Tesis doctoral, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya]. https://upcommons.upc.edu/handle/2117/112426#.Y-0qQKfyzdY.mendeley

8. Fernández Villalobos, N., & Jiménez Sanz, A. (2020). The tree in Alison and Peter Smithson’s architecture. VLC Arquitectura. Research Journal, 7(2), 59–89. https://doi.org/10.4995/VLC.2020.11862

9. Fernández Villalobos, N., & Jiménez Sanz, A. (2021). La disolución de los límites en el espacio religioso: La Capilla del Bosque de Heikki y Kaija Siren. Estoa. Revista de la Facultad de Arquitectura y Urbanismo de la Universidad de Cuenca, 10(19), 22–43. https://doi.org/10.18537/EST.V010.N019.A02

10. Forty, A. (2012). Concrete and culture: A material history. Reaktion Books.

11. Harki, I. (1977). Otaniemi oli - Teekkarikylä tehtiin. Otakustantamo.

12. Kari, V., & Fager, N.-E. (1961). Teknillisen Korkeakolun Ylioppilaskuntatalon suunnitelukilpailu. Arkkitehti, 4, 35–42.

13. Liesto, M. (1988). Teknillinen korkeakoulu 1908–1988. Teknillinen korkeakoulu.

14. Livady OY, & Maisema-arkkitehtuuri MM. (2014). Otaniemen keskeisen kampusalue: Kulttuuriympäristöselvitys. Espoon Kaupunkisuunnittelukeskuksen Julkaisuja.

15. Maruenda, J. C., Cabodevilla-Artieda, I., & de la Torre Fornés, I. (2024). The dissolution of limits through photography: Transparency strategies in the work of Alejandro de la Sota and Alberto Campo Baeza. In L. Hermida González, J. P. Xavier, I. Pernas Alonso, & C. Losada Pérez (Eds.), Graphic horizons (pp. 11–17). Springer Nature Switzerland.

16. Nikula, R., & Binham, T. (1993). Architecture and landscape: The building of Finland. Otava.

17. Otaniemen asemakaavakilpailu. (1949). Arkkitehti, 9–10, 131–138.

18. Pietilä, R. (1966). Dipoli. Rakennustekniikka, 9.

19. Pietilä, R. (1976). Suomi/Finland. Arkkitehti, 7–8, 74–75.

20. Pietilä, R., & Norri, M.-R. (1985). Architecture and cultural regionality: Interview with Reima Pietilä. In M.-R. Norri & R. Connah (Eds.), Pietilä: Modernin arkkitehtuurin välimaastoissa: Intermediate zones in modern architecture (pp. 6–32). Suomen Rakennustaiteen Museo.

21. Pietilä, R., & Palacios, D. (1995). Misuka. Fisuras de la Cultura Contemporánea. Revista de Arquitectura de Bolsillo, 106–117.

22. Royo Márquez, M. (2018). Raili y Reima Pietilä: El proyecto de Dipoli. Suomi Arkkitehtuurimuseo; Instituto Iberoamericano de Finlandia; Serie ACTA Iberoamericana Fennica.

23. Vesikansa, K. (2014). Constructing identity: The competition for the Dipoli student union building in 1961-62. In L. Volker & B. Manzoni (Eds.), 5th International Conference on Competitions 2014 Delft (pp. 416–434). Delft University of Technology.

Downloads

Published

30-12-2024

How to Cite

Cortés Sánchez, L. M., Cepeda, J. T., & Savolainen, P. (2024). The dissolution of boundaries: landscape strategies applied to the Dipoli case. Landscape Architecture and Art, 25(25), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.22616/j.landarchart.2024.25.04