Does contemporary architecture still go on the same evolution line of the modern movement or have taken certain characters that diverge from the masters lesson? The ideological position from which come these works could be summed up in an attempt to provide an answer. These projects take their clear architectural references in the works of Mies and above all, in the Wright’s works, interpreting them in a contemporary manner to try a fusion with the contemporary objectual language .
From this perspective, the projects are the result of a research toward the drawing of an architecture with a great expressive freedom and, at the same time, perfectly consistent with the values of modernity. The language used is inspired from different distant fields from each other, evoking images of engineering or nature but, beyond of the language, the shapes are fractured and, in spite of this , they look for a higher whole order.
The architectural wrapping fragmentation is taken as a strategic choice able to donate a calibrated relationship with the human scale. The spaces are propagating; they flow freely and are defined and organized by the opaque shell in an autonomous way respect the geometry of the transparent diaphragms that materially divide the “inside” from the “outside".
In other words, the surfaces that define the architectural shape assume the role of containers of perceived space and psychological limit that doesn’t coincide anymore with the physical boundary between inside and outside .
In consequence of this space's opened organisation, are generated environments generally lacking of a rigid functional destination that are aimed toward a natural livability. These contemporary refuges are architecture with their protective attitude, subtly intended to evoke the unconscious memory of the ancestral refuge that dwells in every human being, acting to a deep level of perception, in an attempt to delineate the characters of a natural architecture strongly linked to human spirituality.
