Interview with Francesco Venezia and Nigel Ryan 

NR. In the last ten years or so there has been a proliferation of the use of stone by architects, 

most especially marble. Indeed architects have again resorted to painting the effect of stone. 

However you have been critical of the recent use of stone, perhaps you might like to articu-

late your opinion. 

FV. Post-modern architects in my opinion do not use stone very well because the starting 

point for their use of the material is not constructive. You might say that they use stone in 

an ideological manner, against the aesthetic of modern architecture. Post-modern architects 

use stone in protest, in a polemical mode and without a sense of art. I believe that for the 

most part post-modern architecture is of Beaux Arts origin and of course the Beaux Arts are 

not very constructive. In fact neo-classicists use stone in a very decorative manner, not in a 

structural way. 

I have my own ideas for the use of stone. I was always surprised by a feature of classical 

architecture (by classical I refer to Greek and Egyptian) which I believe to be very important. 

207 



Francesco Venezia 

There is an antagonism, a battle between the integrity of the form and the way in which this 

integrity is reached, its construction. It is within this conflict between the integrity of the 

form, and the apparent disorder of the pieces forming the whole when viewed more closely, 

that the strength of these buildings resides. When you first view a classical building, you 

gain the impression of something very compact and united yet upon approaching the build-

ing one can appreciate that the unity is achieved by a certain movement. 

Neoclassical walls have no such movement; the stones are very regular and "designed". Of 

course in classical architecture one can find some regularity, but this is not usual. 

In the most evolved phase of architecture, an attempt was made to reconcile the contrast 

between an ideality and actuality; between integrity of form and that which is necessary for 

its construction. It is a pleasure to see such architecture. An example is an Egyptian relief 

where the figure is cut at the head and at the groin: the whole is composed of two or three 

blocks of stone. From a distance the silhouette of the human figure is strong but upon 

approach the cuts become apparent. The Egyptians used to cut the stone at these specific 

points, which were controlled casualties. The division of the stone was necessary as to work, 

install, one block of stone would have been impossible. 

Similarly Etruscan terra-cotta sarcophagi were made in two pieces as a piece of terra-cotta 

2m-2.5m long could not be fired as one. Therefore there is always this extraordinary conflict 

between the unity of the form, the reclining figure, and the fact of the cut. A further example 

is that of an ancient classical column. The structure of a column is a unity, but it can be seen 

that the cylinder is cut just above the base and also just below the capital. The apparent 

structure is base, cylinder, capital, but the capital is made of a stone which is also partially 

part of the cylinder. 

This absence of coincidence between form and construction is very important. In a classical 

208 



Ni gel Ryan 

building, the door and windows do not coincide with the systems of the stones, but always 

cut through the lintel. The same thing is found in old Norwegian wooden architecture. The 

door frame cuts into a big piece of wood. Similarly in Egypt. There is always this method 

of conflict; of putting things against things. 

In much contemporary architecture, for example that of Ungers or Mies, there is always a 

coincidence in the geometrical system and the geometry of the material components of the 

material elements. In a building by Ungers the form and geometry of the material compo-

nents coincides perfectly with the form of the building. Thus if the building is divided into 

squares, everything is a square and the square windows do not cut the system of the other 

squares. In a pavement, the small squares are all sottomodolo of the larger squares. And the 

squares in a metal net/ grid are also sottomodolo. This destroys architecture because it is a 

system in which there is no interference-the main module is divided in four and those units 

are then divided in four. This is an elementary way to use geometry rather than a complex 

cultivated method. Within five seconds of viewing the building you understand everything 

and you are totally annoyed because you have captured everything in an instant. When I see 

these buildings I cannot understand how such mindless things are created after our great 

heritage of the art of building. I am sorry to say that this tendency, this way of producing 

architecture began with Mies van der Rohe. 

I do consider Mies van der Rohe to be a great architect. Nonetheless he initiated this method. 

The National Gallery in Berlin, which I believe has a beautiful form is one of the strongest 

designs using Frank Lloyd Wright's influence. It is very strong, a true temple. However the 

ceiling inside is in the form of squares which are a sottomodolo of the main square. This is 

a pity because the strength of the square is a little weakened by the obsessive repetition of 

squares; in granite blocks, in the pavement, in the ceiling; everywhere. The square lives 

when it is made of figures which are not necessarily squares. 

209 



Francesco Venezia 

The German school of Ungers has banalised that which in the great tradition of Mies was 

just a detail but has now become everything. The small perhaps wrong detail has become 

the architectural system and I do not agree with this position. My response to this kind of 

architecture stems, perhaps, from my direct contact with ancient architecture, without read-

ing it through Beaux-Arts architecture. 

NR. I would have thought that this tendency, which in one way is but a manifestation of the 

conditions that regulate modern production, would have begun with the inauguration of 

"designed" architecture, with the very beginning of modernity, with the architects of the 

Renaissance, with Alberti. 

FV. Yes but Alberti used two co-present systems. You are right, Alberti and Palladio too, 

both used a very regular system but both used a constructive system in which the compo-

nents are very irregular in relation to the regularity of the formal pattern. If you get close 

to the wall of Palazzo Rucellai you can see that this Albertian system conflicts with the 

artisan's system. There is a medieval construction system where the stones are all of differ-

ent sizes. These stones are inscribed, cut with a formal system that is very abstract. Today 

there is none of this co-presence. When one is in a building of Ungers, one is not in a 

building of Alberti. 

NR. What you are discussing here with the examples of Palladio and Alberti may be said 

to have been not so much the result of architectural principles than a casualty of history: of 

the meeting of designed architecture with pre-design building techniques: there was a his-

toric conflict between architectural culture and the building industry. To use a phrase of 

yours, you have discovered "a happy accident", that the economic contingencies of the 

constructive aspect of architecture can produce an interesting result. 

FV. Yes perhaps you are right. For example Palladio's Palazzo Thiene. You note in the corner 

210 



Nigel Ryan 

he uses brick together with stone-for economic reasons. This was because the stone used 

in this period was white Istrian stone and very expensive because !stria was controlled by 

Turkey. Therefore it was difficult to import stone from Dalmatia. Likewise with Alberti: he 

had intended that the Tempio Malatestiano in Rimini to be constructed totally in white stone 

from Dalmatia, but was forced to complete it with Byzantine marbles from Ravenna. There 

is, therefore, a strange conundrum between the white stone and the veined stone. The latter 

is not classical at all, in fact it is decadent. The Greeks never used marbles as they wanted 

to use pure colours. Occasionally they applied stucco to the stone as they could not tolerate 

the figuration. 

NR. Here you are hinting at another conflict; an interior conflict within materials themselves, 

between their substance and image. For example figured stones, especially when polished, 

function in much the same way as do the painter's materials. In one sense stones thus treated 

are dematerialised pure image. 

Moreover it is a quality that forms a principal component of an architectural tradition that 

is different from that about which you have been speaking. A tradition which you might say 

is decorative rather than constructive; perhaps even a tradition of de-materialised architec-

ture. I am thinking here of the thematic treatment of stone by Mies Van der Rohe and Adolf 

Loos or Alvaro Siza for that matter. Also and perhaps more significantly the Venetian tra-

dition which of course is ultimately Byzantine and therefore Roman. 

To what extent are you interested in the figurative quality of stone or perhaps better are you 

interested in setting up a play between the tectonic properties of stone and its figurative 

properties? 

FV. At this point let me stress that I believe that good architecture can be attained with any 

material; that every material can give great satisfaction to the architect. 

211 



Francesco Venezia 

With concrete too it is possible to obtain a complexity very similar to that of stone. I believe 

the complexity and intricacy of masonry construction can be utilised with other materials. 

Architects have had most experience with the stone system because as a material it coincided 

with the great period of architecture. Thus a stone system can aid architects to reach com-

plexity in other materials too. And so it is with normal concrete which can be used in a 

complex manner. 

For example in the house "L" in Lauro I used stone trying to effect a rhythm-using two 

different sizes of stone and two different treatments of the surface texture. It is the same idea 

the same system with two very different materials. 

Using all that stone has taught us and all its complexity we can use another material in a 

manner analogous to the ancient Greeks who took the principles of building in wood and 

applied them to the building of stone temples. That was a case of using the grammar and 

syntax of wood, changing the material and translating it into a very new system. Indeed we 

must not forget that all the great stone architecture in the Mediterranean area was derived 

from wooden architecture. Therefore the technology of wood is present in the grammar and 

syntax of all classical architecture. Classical buildings cannot be thought of, understood 

without wood: they are petrified wooden buildings. 

, 

And when I went to Norway I found no great difference between its tradition of wooden 

architecture, totally wooden architecture and the architecture of ancient Egypt. I think that 

stone and wood which appear to be so distant are in fact the same material. 

NR. You have been speaking of a conflict between form and its construction which you 

consider to be essential to architecture. Viewing your work, another conflict is evident. It is 

a conflict of geometrical systems or perhaps better an interplay of different figures. For 

instance you project for Salaperuta. 

212 



Nigel Ryan 

FV. This is a project which I designed at a moment when I was very interested and involved 

in the idea that a building may coincide with a body, which is of course a very well known 

architectural tradition. This is particularly so in the Renaissance from which period there 

exist many drawings showing a human body incorporated in the form of the church. How-

ever I was more interested in the Egyptian rather than the Renaissance approach to this 

problem, as whereas the latter is somewhat static, there is the idea of movement in the 

Egyptian tradition. 

Some Egyptian buildings have deformations but these deformations do not stem from an 

inability to build, as the Egyptians had an exemplary capacity for achieving precision. There 

is the idea of movement in objects, of a "growing up" of forms. Take for example the well 

known question of the rhomboid pyramid. Some people explain the deformation as evidence 

of the Egyptians being incapable of building to their initial design and having to change the 

form in the middle of the building process. I do not believe this is the case. I think they 

wished to express double form. 

Some Egyptian buildings have a deformation in the plan which is derived from this idea of 

relating the building to the growth of man-this idea is found in the building's proportional 

system and its systematic deformation. The system of proportion is not static but relates to 

a growing figure: it is very complex. It is the highest point of complexity reached by archi-

tecture and never afterwards achieved. 

The project for Salaperuta was an experiment with this architectural tradition. It is a building 

in which everything is continually deformed using a strategy of Egyptian architecture-that 

is-a distortion of the right angle so that it is not exactly 90°-a technique called 

rhomboidalisation-transformation of the square to the rhomboid. Of course the distortion 

is very subtle-almost, but not quite a square. This is a technique the Greeks inherited from 

the Egyptians and used in mouldings, thus always avoiding using right angles. They sharp-

213 



Francesco Ven ezia 

ened the corners. Due to this point which was not static but in tension, their architecture 

became more dramatic. Moreover the difference of light, the play between light and shadow 

is stronger because the shadow is deeper. 

I have often been to the archaeological museum in Palermo which houses the gigantic 

fragment of the Selinunte Temple, in which I have a great interest. Normally there is a great 

distance between the object and the viewer and the latter can sense but not see a certain 

tension. When viewing this fragment one can at last discover the reason for the tension in 

the mouldings. There are also sections as the blocks are cut so one can appreciate the whole 

system. It is most interesting and whenever I am in Palermo I try to visit the museum. 

NR. There is also a strong Greek presence here in Naples. It was after all a Greek colony. 

Nonetheless it would seem as if a tradition has developed here that could be best described 

as Neapolitan, that is neither Greek nor Roman. 

FV. Here in Naples there is a strong presence of the earth in buildings-a co-presence. It is 

always difficult to perceive, to feel the point at which nature stop s and the building material 

(the tufa) and the artificial action of the building begins. Everything is very connected. For 

example an architecture which consists of a substance of artificial ground and then a house 

above this structure. There is always a joke-having something on the earth which is the 

earth, etc. I believe that from this point of view Naples is extraordinary. Rome for example 

is very beautiful but in Rome there is not such a strong presence of the earth as there is in 

Naples :-Of course in Rome there is the extraordinary presence of the seven hills which 

ensures that the city gently undulates; which is a very beneficial form from an urbanistic 

point of view. In Naples there is a strong connection between the city and the landscape. 

NR. Here in Naples and for that matter right around the Bay, there is an extensive tradition 

of excavated architecture, of an architecture that is cut out of the stone. It is an architecture 

214 



Nigel Ryan 

of which you have written. Moreover I believe that in your work there is a sense of the 

subterranean, of the underworld. What precisely for you is the value of the underworld? 

FV. In Naples the idea of excavation is very important. There is the building itself naturally 

but there is also the idea that the building comes directly from this excavation. There is the 

need to excavate, to produce a building. In Naples the interest is in the "co-presence" of 

underground quarries and buildings on the ground. Naturally there is a similar phenom-

enon in all towns but the two elements are usually separate. 

Quarries were dug when towns were being established. An example is the Selinnute Tem-

ples in Sicily. Five to ten kilometres away from these temples are the quarries, where one 

can find abandoned pieces of column-very interesting to visit. But these elements are apart 

from each other. In Naples, however, you have, you perceive, you feel a simultaneous action. 

The quarrying and building are executed through a vertical axis. The constructive process 

can be seen and felt all in an instant. I do not like strange words but it is "synchronic" . The 

other situation is diachronic-there is a transfer of the materials for five, ten, one hundred 

kilometres . Here in Naples it is immediate- you excavate and you build. And in the build-

ing can be felt the presence of the building's "mother". This is so in many Neapolitan 

buildings. Often the excavation is used as a storage room, other times it is transformed into 

215 



Francesco Venezia 

an annex of the house. 

I was recently asked to design a house in Palazzolo Acreide, Sicily, on a site where there 

were small underground caves. I decided not to locate the house in the logical/practical 

position but directly above the caves, in a difficult position, in order to create this axis. This 

is the Neapolitan section. This is the relationship between my observation and the actual 

work which I always employ. 

In another sense this section 

old Roman house: is an explora-

the houses in Pompeii and 

a relationship with the sky. That 

there is the excavated impluvio. 

Underground there is a small (1.5-

same concept. I have written a 

usque ad coelum. This is the 

erty. Upon purchasing a piece of 

extended up to the stars and 

tried to express this right in their 

atrium, that is a windowless space 

the world is with the sky and the 

idea of house this is probably one 

This sectional idea is often present 

makes reference to the idea of the 

tion of this idea of house. From 

Herculanium one can experience 

is not the case in this house but 

2 m) reservoir, not a cave, but the 

small article, usque ad infera 

Latin definition of private prop-

land in Roman times, your rights 

down to the underworld. They 

houses with the construction of the 

in which all communication with 

earth. Together with the Gothic 

of the strongest notions of house. 

in the architecture of Le Corbusier 

... who visited Pompeii on his early travels. However the use of the idea and form are of 

course peculiar to Le Corbusier, complex and not an imitation of the Roman house, but the 

concept is the same, containing the presence of the sky. 

216 



Nigel Ryan 

NR. Another important aspect of the history of Neapolitan architecture is the Baroque which 

exhibits a complex geometry. I can see, however, that you are not especially enthusiastic 

about the Baroque. 

FV. I do not like the Baroque particularly. However the transition between the Renaissance 

and the Baroque is very strong. It is a moment, a terrible moment in which everything 

explodes. It is not a moment for normal architects. Michelangelo was the only great Baroque 

architect because he brought the explosion under his control. When the explosion becomes 

virtuosity, it becomes boring, becomes only a complicated game. However the moment of 

its creation is a great drama. But from the signs of this great drama, it becomes rhetorical 

and the Baroque which we know. 

NR. How does this interest or rather belief in a necessary conflict inform the process of your 

work? 

FV. Each project I do is different from all the others. I do not use a technique such as that 

used, for example, by Mario Botta. You know the sort of thing he will do before he does it-

approximately of course-because he has a very clear, very consolidated language. In my 

work I prefer to "experience a way for each project." It is a method by which I can still be 

a student. My interest necessarily coincides with the nature of the work. When I have a 

particular project to work on I inject some of my current interests into that work. For exam-

ple, three or four years ago I was in Chicago and there I very much appreciated the buildings 

of the Chicago School, Louis Sullivan etc. I was also very interested in the connection be-

tween the Chicago School and the architecture of Adolf Loos because I'm sure that Loos took 

to Europe that which the States had understood of classical architecture. 

There had been a major experiment in the United States adapting classical architecture to 

commercial necessity, that is to capitalist cities and of course Chicago was more advanced 

217 



Francesco Venezia 

in this area than any European city. I believe that Loos-but before Loos, Schinkel-started 

with this ability to transform the classical heritage to something which can be adapted to 

contemporary needs. Now in Tokyo I have a commission for some urban development and 

in this work I tried to explore this idea, to adapt all the traditions of the classical world as 

seen by the architects of modern industrial cities, Chicago and then by Loos in Vienna. 

Another of my current interests is the pyramid. I must tell you that I was shocked when 

Bruno Zevi declared that the pyramid was not architecture. It is architecture. It is an exces-

sive architecture. It is an architecture in which the interior space is tremendously small in 

relation to the wall-the mass . There is something extra-ordinary in the relationship between 

the penetration system and the form. 

I am exploring the architecture of the pyramid in a commission for a new large open air 

theatre in Gibellina. The programme demands a very long stage and I have given it the form 

of a boat. The section of the entrance however recalls the section of the pyramid. The con-

structive system is gone. It is a pyramid built in a system different from that used by the 

ancients but the idea is the same. In this case I have the idea and not the constructive system. 

It is a project of course very different from others. There is a possibility of using a consoli-

dated language so that as soon as a client asks you to design a building you can use the 

linguistic solution. I do not like to work in this manner. I prefer to use the occasion, the 

project as an opportunity to "climb through architecture" and to reach a point possibly far 

removed from or near to architecture. In this case-3,000-4,000 years-but it is not a prob-

lem. Architecture is always the same. I try to take an idea and place this idea in relation to 

the different moments in which the idea appeared in the history of architecture. The pyra-

mid is present in our work at the same moment as the Chicago buildings. 

218