sng_2016-05-12_high-single-crop_k3

Recommendations

Info

and demolished this square. (...) I would, however, rather look at the circumstances in which this work was created. High façades were built in the direction of the waterfront – the Devín hotel block – and in the rear there are restaurant areas situated in lower positions whose scale is nearer to the older housings. Dedeček actually did the same. When I look at the reconstruction of the Carlton Hotel, the impression you get from behind the gallery is much bigger in silhouette than the gallery. That is why these arguments are not so convincing. (...) The concept of this object [SNG] is exceptional because it has been a source of discussion from the beginning. I suppose in twenty years, when we search for objects whose concept is characteristic of the 1960s and 1970s, this building will be proposed as a national cultural monument. Maybe some people do not like to hear this but I think it is hard to assess the architecture of this period today.” 38 the curator of the document exhibition Dr. Alexandra Kusá, architects Jaroslav Liptay, Marin Mašek and Peter Žalman as well as the director of the Slovak Architects Society Peter Mikloš commented on the history and future of the SNG building in the magazines Projekt and Arch. 39 Architect Imrich Vaško compared Dedeček's extension to the late-modern gallery institutions in the USA. 40 in April – May, the journal Bratislavské noviny published a series of articles regarding the question of the SNG bridging. They included opinions from invited participants and were published under the name “Premostenie galérie by malo nahradit’ niečo, s čím sa stotožní väčšina Bratislavčanov (diskusia)” (Gallery bridging should be replaced by something that most citizens of Bratislava can identify with (discussion). 41 Ministry of Culture spokesperson Juraj Puchý: “The most acceptable alternative, for now, seems to be to maintain the SNG bridging. The College of the Ministery of Culture has recently discussed this question. They have recommended 108
not only to reconstruct the whole object but also to rebuild it so that it can best suit its purpose. It means not only to fix its state of disrepair, the leaks and similar deficiencies but also to make the bridging or the whole building operational. The details of how it could be done are still being discussed.” 42 Štefan Holčík, the director of the Archaeological Museum of Slovak National Museum, supported the possibility of tearing down the bridging, while also accepting a rebuild: “... If I had the power, I would have the extension of the Slovak National Gallery, the so called ‘bridging’, demolished without further obstructions. But I understand the viewpoint of the SNG director who fears the gallery would lose the storage and exhibition spaces that it needs. However, the ‘modern’ south wing, which is the sticking point, can be adjusted, rebuilt, humanized. We can find plenty of examples of this in Europe.” 43 The demolition was consistently supported by Professor Štefan Šlachta, although in a much sharper way than in the recent personal discussions in SNG, as a then member of parliament (1998–2002), under the text he was credited 38 Ibidem, p. 7. 39 See KUSÁ, Alexandra. K výstavbe Slovenskej národnej galérie. (Výber z faktografie). Projekt. Revue slovenskej architektúry, 43, 2001, No. 2, p. 17 and aedem. Vladimír Dedeček – rekonštrukcia a prístavba Slovenskej národnej galérie. Projekt. Revue slovenskej architektúry, 43, 2001, No. 2, pp. 18–19. See also LIPTAY, Jaroslav. Potrebujeme národnú galériu? Pokus o premostenie problémov “premostenia.” (SNG). Projekt. Revue slovenskej architektúry, 43, 2001, No. 3, pp. 68–69; MAŠEK, Martin. Prístavba SNG kontra katalógový gýč. Arch, 6, 2001, No. 3, p. 2; MIKLOŠ, Peter. Ako Slovenská národná galéria získala svoje sídlo. Projekt. Revue slovenskej architektúry, 43, 2001, No. 3, pp. 66–67 and ŽALMAN, Peter. Niekol’ko poznámok k aktuálnej téme SNG Bratislava. Projekt. Revue slovenskej architektúry, 43, 2001, No. 2, p. 19. 40 VAŠKO, Imro. Paralely. New Ends alebo Čo nového v New Yorských [newyorských] chrámoch umenia... a na Slovensku... (Boom galerijného Disneylandu). Projekt. Revue slovenskej architektúry, 43, 2001, No. 2, pp. 20–25. 41 Premostenie galérie by malo nahradit’ niečo, s čím sa stotožní väčšina Bratislavčanov (diskusia). Bratislavské noviny, 4, 19 April 2001, No. 8, p. 6. 42 Ibidem. 43 Ibidem. 109
Page 1 and 2:
CARE (SORGE ) FOR ARCHITECTURE mari
Page 3:
15. Mostra Internazionale di Archit
Page 7 and 8:
01. Statement p. 6 marián zervan 0
Page 9 and 10:
Architecture must never lose its pr
Page 11 and 12:
The SNG building/area has long been
Page 14 and 15:
02. ON THE SLOVAK NATIONAL GALLERY
Page 16 and 17:
investor : Povereníctvo pre škols
Page 18 and 19:
Building(s) and spatial relationshi
Page 20 and 21:
the arcaded palace with a “cour d
Page 22 and 23:
give the quarter a new scale and ex
Page 24 and 25:
founded earlier. Therefore construc
Page 26 and 27:
in 1968) in 1966-1967 with the gall
Page 28 and 29:
with its central square, to a field
Page 30 and 31:
thing that had been outlived in the
Page 32 and 33:
The commission discussed these expe
Page 34 and 35:
In late 1969, i.e. after Czechoslov
Page 36 and 37:
The ceiling is of waved metal plate
Page 38 and 39:
The architect’s second alternativ
Page 40 and 41:
unbuilt stages III and IV. The (fut
Page 42 and 43:
“Doch gerade durch diese brachial
Page 44 and 45:
associated project of reconstructio
Page 46 and 47:
[1] [2]
Page 48 and 49:
[4] [5] [4-5] Vladimír Dedeček, S
Page 50 and 51:
[9] [10] [9-16] Vladimír Dedeček,
Page 52 and 53:
[18] [19] [18-23] Vladimír Dedeče
Page 54 and 55:
[26] [27] [26-29] Built edifices of
Page 56 and 57:
03a. TEXTUAL INTERPRETATION OF COMP
Page 58 and 59:
The Slovak National Gallery area si
Page 60 and 61: was that either to allow for or to
Page 62 and 63: The administrative building’s ter
Page 64 and 65: Indeed the amphitheatre clusters ev
Page 66 and 67: locked it in places (the Water Barr
Page 68 and 69: 03b. ARCHITECTURAL INTERPRETATION O
Page 70 and 71: [d—02] Built SNG edifices {red} i
Page 72 and 73: [d—04] Paths of movement {red lin
Page 74 and 75: [d—06] Clusters of SNG “agoras
Page 76 and 77: [d—08] SNG interior “amphitheat
Page 78 and 79: C A B [d—10] Two introductory pro
Page 80 and 81: [d—12] Superimposition of 1 st an
Page 82 and 83: [d—14] Relationships of module fi
Page 84 and 85: [d—16] 1 st subterranean level wi
Page 86 and 87: [d—18] 2 nd level of administrati
Page 88 and 89: [d—20] 4 th level with paths of m
Page 90 and 91: [d—22] 6 th level with paths of m
Page 92 and 93: [d—24] Facade rasters {according
Page 94 and 95: [d—26] Built edifices of SNG area
Page 96 and 97: 04. CHRONOLOGY monika mitášová,
Page 98 and 99: 1961 the director of the SNG Dr. Ka
Page 100 and 101: 1969 a new initial project for the
Page 102 and 103: pressing. The architectural works t
Page 104 and 105: for Cultural and Educational Buildi
Page 106 and 107: 1987 journal Výtvarný život publ
Page 108 and 109: south Danube wing (closed due to it
Page 112 and 113: not as an MP but as “the former d
Page 114 and 115: [is] a need to build any more so ca
Page 116 and 117: in Bratislava was announced. The ju
Page 118 and 119: down and changed the character of c
Page 120 and 121: totalitarian style haunting Europea
Page 122 and 123: Illah van Oijen prepared the first
Page 124 and 125: Arts Council to appreciate the valu
Page 126 and 127: Selected works of Vladimír Dedeče
Page 128 and 129: on 14 th March, the Týždeň magaz
Page 130 and 131: 05. PROJECT DESCRIPTION marián zer
Page 132 and 133: This project The Care for Architect
Page 134 and 135: The entrance wall in-between contai
Page 137 and 138: Metal exhibition model variants in
Page 139: Metal exhibition model (1:17,78) of
Page 143: 140 | 141
Page 146: This publication was made possible
show all

sng_2016-05-12_high-single-crop_k3

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?