Since Vitruvius, it has been inevitable to separate the study of architecture into three main themes: firmitas, utilitas, and venustas. In this way, we have focused on understanding that every human-made construction must have a structure, a use, and an aesthetic. In David Delgado’s lecture, these three parameters take on great importance and are enriched when combined with other variables such as history, culture, and geography. Two new factors emerge: sustainability and human comfort within the building.

In his lecture, David Delgado revisits the criteria that have traditionally been considered key to creating good architecture and discusses what is important to add in the contemporary world to ensure a future. He begins by emphasizing the important relationship that has always existed between architecture and human beings: traditions, culture, ritual, as well as with nature and climatic and geographical conditions. These can be seen as themes, and thus the theme that involves society in a geography—understood as culture—is form. What is truly interesting about this is seeing how cultural traditions and ritual have directly impacted architectural typologies. An example that illustrates this is the bonfire that brings people together around a center, in the same way as a courtyard typology. In this case, the site acquires a spatial connotation, while the ritual acquires a temporal connotation.

Although we are accustomed to understanding the site on a horizontal plane, we must not forget that there is also a vertical relationship since, as Heidegger suggests, dwelling is above the ground and under the sky. Here, where humankind’s relationship with nature seems to take place on an infinite plane, architecture comes to delimit space, in the same way that our body is delimited and protected by skin. In a certain way, architecture fulfills that role as human skin, and as architects, we must guarantee not only its protection but also its comfort. To do this, we must understand which variables are interrelated. For example, light varies according to activities, temperature varies according to culture and geographical location. Furthermore, we must keep in mind that, as a sign of evolution, not all human beings are governed by the same standard of comfort, since, for example, some are more resistant to cold or noise than others. To achieve this, in addition to the need to study bioclimatics, we must understand each civilization and its specific conditions. Likewise, each building must have its own unique character that contributes to this comfort: shape, orientation, and materials.

The issue of sustainability is directly related to nature, which, as Le Corbusier suggests, has taken on an antagonistic role and, instead of helping humans, is killing them.

Finally, he addresses the specific case of interventions in the historic center of Cartagena. In this regard, he emphasizes the importance of understanding the cultural and geographical past to shape it into a beautiful future that generates an act of community. Regarding typology, he invites us to value the emptiness above all else, since we tend to always focus on the full.

Regarding the three T’s: tectonics, technology and technique, it is important that the materiality, measurements and use of resources act together to guarantee the functionality, structure and aesthetics of the building, as well as its comfort, which directly impacts its happiness. Likewise, the future of both the city and the building must be considered, and for this, it is key that the modulation of the structure, being the only unchangeable element, allows above all for flexibility.

MAIN IDEAS

Regarding light conditions, we speak of lux, and it varies according to activities. Temperature varies according to culture, and acoustics is spoken of in decibels. It varies according to the acoustic impact and the activity. There is a transformation of activity according to space; this has to do with limits. The limits are the cell, the skin, and even clothing; this defines a specific site and its activities. After clothing comes almost architecture (roofs, walls, and floors). Thus, one protects the home or the fire, according to Semper, so one protects oneself from water from the ground, another from the wind, and another from the rain.

There is no separation between architecture, climate, tradition, etc. I believe that all of this is what makes our architecture what it is in our time.

What I believe is that the theme comes from before; there is a theme that has to do with nature, represented by the circle. This has a relationship with humans; that relationship is architecture; it has become a problem in our time. Nature essentially becomes what we cannot control and is variable, while humans try to be stable, with all their regulatory processes (homeostatic processes).

A physical and metaphysical question: How can humans reach a site and turn it into a place? Site understood as a geography located in a planetary context. This natural preexistence with a cultural basis is essentially the city, humanity’s oldest project; it is then the idea of ​​society placed in a geography, that is, a culture: that is the theme of form in architecture.

According to Armesto, formality is what unites humankind and nature. The site has a specific form (geography, climate, isolation, etc.), and humankind has not only a physical form but also rituals. According to Martiaris, in The Variations of Identity, he speaks of the type that determines architecture as a form that is neither in humankind nor in nature; it is a form of ritual that arrives at a site and acquires a specific spatial composition. He says that even the ritual comes before the site: the ritual around a bonfire is related to the cloister.

Nature, which is called site, the activity becomes the ritual; the way in which the ritual becomes the site and the site becomes the ritual has to do with the form of architecture. As Heidegger says, dwelling is above the ground and under the sky, which is a horizon that defines a specific place. The point is that geography becomes a vertical issue when the single upright man appears, standing between the sky and the ground, the form of human activity.

The sun and planet Earth revolve around it in an ellipse. It’s important to remember that site is a spatial connotation and ritual is a temporal connotation; we’ll have to see how architecture unites this. There is, then, a short time (day and night) and a long time (seasons). This happens because the planet is rotated 23°, and a different atmospheric condition is created thanks to the sun; this is where life is. The solstices are farthest away, and the equinoxes are closest.

It’s becoming important where we are on the planet, speaking specifically of Bogotá: this planet has a strip in the middle called the equator; it has a point where the sun hits it in one way or another (winter and summer). Together with the sun’s equinoxes, the intertropical convergence zone is generated. This is the zone with the greatest radiation throughout the year and, therefore, the greatest diversity, but above all, it has a very specific climatic condition, different from the rest of the planet: there are no strong seasons. Being constantly warmer, it has a low pressure zone, and the Earth’s rotation generates trade winds. The map of Colombia shows that it is a territory with three mountain ranges that define two large valleys: the Magdalena Valley and the Cauca Valley. Bogotá is located at 4.3° North Latitude, above the equator; at 2,600 m.a.s.l., in a location defined as having a temperate-cold climate.

Armesto says that architecture is the art of delimiting space, setting limits on things: how much cold, how much sun, how much wind, how public and how private. Delimiting space is a delimitation of activity.

Bringing the above together, the cell has a limit; the skin is the limit of the human body; it gives it shape and regulates thermal energy. Especially if we know that the sun has waves, and those waves are defined as light, temperature, and acoustics. Under certain parameters, the union of these three components makes humans feel comfortable. It’s a psychophysiological concept where humans don’t waste energy and feel calm.

-We’ve been doing this for over 10,000 years, from one era to the next; but a while ago, there began to be an excess of energy consumption and CO2 emissions associated with humankind due to industrialization, capitalism, etc. An imbalance then began to develop, where nature had always functioned before and now it’s in crisis. According to Le Corbusier, nature is the antagonist (it’s killing humankind); to ensure that nature doesn’t affect human life, bioclimatic studies are conducted, which basically study the climatic conditions in a specific life. It then reaches comfort, and thus this is close to the concept of beauty; if one isn’t suffering, it gives the opportunity to think about other things; it allows for a first ideal state.

So, it’s about ensuring that this character (humankind), by being comfortable, isn’t killing nature by excessively consuming its resources and risking its future, and this is where sustainability is born. It’s a back-and-forth given by the spatial limit (architecture).

• Serra, in his book “Architecture and Natural Energy,” begins to demonstrate, from a physical perspective, the energy exchange with the environment. The difference between the conditions of buildings; it speaks according to the site, responding to environmental conditions.
• The architect must understand the laws of physics, the environment, and biology to be able to create architecture. It’s not about inventing new relationships; they already exist (speaking of the position of facades to the sun according to their use).
• The difference between shape and form emerges. It has to do with a deep and logical structure; shape is static, and form is dynamic. Le Corbusier says that for architecture to exist, there must be beauty; anyone can build, but if it doesn’t touch the heart, it’s not architecture. In my opinion, the beautiful relationship of architecture isn’t in the limit, it’s in how a way of life is generated between the two (nature and man). It’s the origin, like the current fashion of being original, but in reality, it’s about returning to the origins. It’s about knowing how to interpret this delimitation of architecture, it’s about creating a beautiful balance. It’s the beautiful way of being, also mentioned by Heidegger, who asks for the poetic sense of architecture; beauty is the only thing they ask of it.
• Bioclimatic isn’t something of our time; it always goes hand in hand. Man must look to the future while taking the past into account; the architect is the connecter, shaper, and transformer. Creating a common union between nature and man; intervening in a historic center means having a clear horizon, the cultural and geographical past, shaping a beautiful future. Being able to understand a landscape and culture so that it is beautiful, bringing it together in an act of collectivity.
• The point is not to generate a limit but to create thresholds between nature and man. Being able to approach nature, recognize it, represent it as art does, bring the past into the present so that it becomes a possible future. It’s not a purely physical issue; it originates in a physical problem. What happens is that this problem, when it is placed in time and territory, begins to change because the city grows; It becomes a metaphysical theme; it doesn’t become a question of being but of doing, or both. The landscape is not what we see but what we are.

DISCUSSION

This question concerns Salmona and the connection and ritual that exists within a city between nature and human beings. In one image, the sun is seen between the towers of the park. How does this begin to become a ritual and connect with nature?

DD: The towers of the park are a beautiful example because the meaning lies in the form, not in the material of the brick. There is meaning in their form and a relationship with nature as they allude to the concavity of the hills and participate with nature in this composition. The form has to do with the landscape that frames them, hence the staggered shape and the position of the sun that changes throughout the year. Additionally, from the house, it begins to propose an idea of ​​landscape. The emptiness of the Bogotá landscape, both far and near, is what makes this space valuable. Whether viewed from the squares or from the Seventh Street, where the buildings complement the landscape and don’t obscure the hills, as many other architectural styles do.

Emptiness is the theme in this composition, as in Cartagena. David Delgado invites us to contemplate the emptiness in Cartagena, rather than the fullness. This is understood from the street, the plaza, and especially the courtyard.

Humanity hasn’t been as aware of its impact on the world as it is now, which is why the topic of sustainability has become somewhat of a trend. We must be critical. How can we be critical of this issue?

MJ: On the subject of sustainability, Antonio Manrique insists that it is at the origin of architecture. Resources were respected and architecture was built with nature, not in opposition to it. Sustainable architecture is one that works intelligently and with the instruments of the discipline itself, and not with things exogenous to it (such as certain technologies). These exogenous things are understood as parasites, which is why Armesto asserts that architecture is sick.

DD: Architecture, from its origins, must consider sustainability and not resort to it as an accessory once the building is already designed. In this second case, this is where crutches appear in architecture, which are not inherent to the discipline.

If architecture improves the site and the ritual, it is a great project, in any era.

We cannot turn a blind eye to technology.

MJ: Technology must be used, but with care. To be original is to go back to the origin, to the depths of the discipline.

The technical act is the foundation of architecture. This is understood not as technology, but as the use and understanding of resources such as the sun, wind, humidity, etc.

DD: There is a theme of technology, tectonics, and technique. Tectonics: the material condition that supports the building. Structure: Technology: Studies and measurements. Technique: since Heidegger, it has to do with letting things be in the world. Since Kahn: Technique is the process of giving form to intuition.

In many cases, technique has been forgotten, disguised in a technological form, where the most obvious is ignored. The example of the Biblioteca España in Medellín is cited for this postulate. Technique is a subject of thought, more primitive and profound than technology.

MJ: Antonio Manrique maintains that the origin of the word TEKNE has to do with logic, ethics, and aesthetics. Ethics understood as doing to others what I want them to do to me, and beauty as a result of architecture that occurs when many factors come together and the heart of the viewer or inhabitant is moved.

Architecture and beauty are not a priori related to the place, and this is the problem that has arisen in many cases today, where architects have fixed ideas about aesthetics and try to apply them whenever they have the opportunity, wherever it may be. The case of the España library is cited again.

DD: The fact that architecture moves has to do with understanding, which is based on information. This information has to do with Form, which is the theme in architecture: endowing form with knowledge.

MJ: What is contemporary architecture, or what should it be, with respect to time and durability?

DD: For contemporary society, this durability can be understood as flexibility of spaces, so that change can fit within the building and the building will serve for many years. To achieve this, the building’s structure and its modulation must be carefully considered, as this is the only thing that cannot be changed. Look for a modulation that can accommodate different uses. The issue lies in FLEXIBILITY, beyond the material or the idea of ​​a solid or demountable building.

MJ: How can a flexible building be designed to meet the light and comfort standards for different uses?

DD: As simple as it may seem, the answer lies in the furniture and the individual’s location in the space. The issue lies in the human being as an inhabitant, and to the extent that architecture is designed to make them happy, it begins to be beautiful architecture. Understanding architecture as a way of life. This logic must be considered in Cartagena.

Problem: Heat. Strategies: Minimum direct radiation, humidity, and maximum ventilation. Operations: ailerons, cross-ventilation with air intake at the bottom and air outlet at the top for air exchange, high thermal masses that prevent heat from entering the interior.

MJ: Any projects to look up to as examples for this climate?

DD: – Le Corbusier in India. These buildings are examples of how to create space and how to create space from the place. – Doshi in India. He interprets the climate. – Charles Correa. – BRAZIL: Joao Vilanova Artigas, Paulo Mendes da Rocha, Lina Bo Bardi. – Solano Benítez in Paraguay. – Glen Murcutt in Australia. Place understood as a cultural fact, not just a geographical one. – José Antonio Coderch in Catalonia. Understanding the blind and habitable architecture from an object. – These latter achieved a kind of traditionalization of modernity, and that’s where their value as architects lies. – Seeing the indigenous architecture of the site and understanding why it is the way it is.

Intermediate spaces are very important. A kind of naturalization of the human and humanization of the natural. These are the spaces that allow the body to move from one extreme to the other without a collision. They allow the body to slowly adapt between two extreme conditions.

MJ: What position should we take regarding the context, and to what extent does context and the language of the architect represent it?

DD: When the fabric is used for housing, a serene action must be taken to become part of a whole. When it comes to a facility or a larger-scale building, some logic must be reorganized.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we must understand that beyond what we logically need for a building to function and not collapse, there are intangible variables such as location, culture, history, and the conditions that generate human comfort that must work together to ensure good architecture and respect for nature. Humankind has increasingly broken this bond and acted selfishly, almost causing a war against nature instead of an ally in its favor. Sustainability calls on us to rescue this symbiosis between humans, buildings, and nature.