• Non ci sono risultati.

A COEVOLUTIONARY APPROACH TO THE REUSE OF BUILT CULTURAL HERITAGE

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Condividi "A COEVOLUTIONARY APPROACH TO THE REUSE OF BUILT CULTURAL HERITAGE"

Copied!
30
0
0

Testo completo

(1)
(2)

Finito di stampare nel mese di giugno 2019 Presso Imoco Industrie Grafiche – Treviso - Italy

35° convegno internazionale Scienza e Beni Culturali

Collana Scienza e Beni Culturali

Volume.2019

ISSN 2039-9790

ISBN 978-88-95409-23-8

IL PATRIMONIO CULTURALE IN MUTAMENTO.

LE SFIDE DELL’USO

Bressanone, 1 - 5 luglio 2019

In questo volume vengono pubblicati i contributi estesi che sono stati sottoposti a double blind peer review da parte di esperti dello stesso settore.

THE CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE PROCESS OF

CHANGE. THE CHALLENGES OF USE.

Bressanone, 1 - 5 july 2019

This volume includes extensive contributions (Full-paper) that have been subject to double-blind peer review by qualified referees.

Tutti i diritti riservati,

EDIZIONE ARCADIA RICERCHE Srl Parco Scientifico Tecnologico di Venezia Via delle Industrie 25/11 – Marghera Venezia Tel.:041-5093048 E-mail: arcadia@vegapark.ve.it www.arcadiaricerche.eu

È vietata la riproduzione, anche parziale o ad uso interno o didattico, con qualsiasi mezzo, non autorizzata.

Le riproduzioni a uso differente da quello personale potranno avvenire, per un numero di pagine non superiore al 15% del presente volume, solo a seguito di specifica autorizzazione rilasciata dall'editore.

(3)

IL TEMA DELL’USO NEL RESTAURO DELL’EDILIZIA

STORICA E MONUMENTALE ATTRAVERSO L’EVOLUZIONE

DELLECARTEDELRESTAURO

S. Gizzi ... 1

IL PATRIMONIO CULTURALE IN MUTAMENTO TRA

RIGENERAZIONEURBANAETUTELADEICENTRISTORICI

C. Crova, M. Eichberg, F. Miraglia ... 13

ACOEVOLUTIONARYAPPROACHTOTHEREUSEOFBUILT

CULTURALHERITAGE

S. Della Torre ... 25

RI-USAREPERCONSERVAREEPERCONOSCERE.

S. Pesenti ... 35

CONSERVAZIONE NELL’USO E NEL RIUSO DELLE

COSTRUZIONISTORICHE

D. Pittaluga ... 45

BEYOND MUSEUM / NEW STRATEGIES OF PRESERVATION

APPLIEDTOOVERSIZEDARCHITECTURES

E. Vigliocco ... 59

QUANDO L’USO NON CAMBIA. QUESTIONI APERTE SUL

RESTAURODELLA NEUENATIONALGALERIE DI MIESVAN

DERROHE

G. Danesi, S. Di Resta ... 69

ANTICHE STRUTTURE PER NUOVI USI (CONDIVISI):

“RIEMPIRE SPAZI E TEMPI” PER UNA CONSERVAZIONE

INTEGRATA

F.Ottoni, S. Celli ... 81

ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND RETROFIT MEASURES:

THE IMPROVEMENT OF BUILDINGS PERFORMANCE

THROUGHPASSIVECOMPATIBLESTRATEGIES

M. De Vita ... 91

“VA E RIUSA LA MIA CASA” CHI E COME: RUOLO E

COMPETENZE DEL GESTORE DEI BENI CULTURALI,

RIFLESSIONITRATEORIAEPRATICA

A. Pili ... 101

LE TRASFORMAZIONI DELL’ABITARE. IL CASO DEL

QUARTIERESTADERAAMILANO(1929-2018).

(4)

THE COMPLEXITY OF CONSERVATION OF OUTFITTING,

HISTORICSITESANDBUILDINGSUNDEREVERYDAYUSES.

E. Rosina, M. Suma ... 123

VALORIZZAZIONE DEL PATRIMONIO STORICO:

ESPERIENZE DI COLLABORAZIONE PUBBLICO-PRIVATA

NELLA GESTIONE DEL CASTELLO DI BRIVIO COME POLO

ATTRATTIVODELSISTEMACULTURALEDELTERRITORIO

LECCHESE.

L.Cantini ... 133

“NUOVA VITA DELLE AREE INTERNE”. UN ESEMPIO DI

VALORIZZAZIONE DEL PATRIMONIO IDENTITARIO DEL

TERRITORIO, PROMUOVENDO MODELLI DI RECUPERO

MULTIFUNZIONALEEPARTECIPATO

B. Scala ... 145

IDENTITÀ, COMPATIBILITÀ, CONSERVAZIONE.

RIFLESSIONI SUL RAPPORTO TRA RIUSO E TUTELA NEL

PORTOVECCHIODITRIESTE.

V. Peron ... 157

ESQUILINO CHIAMA ROMA! STRATEGIE PER UNA

CONOSCENZA CONDIVISA E APPLICATA VOLTA ALLA

RIGENERAZIONE URBANAATTRAVERSO LA FORMAZIONE

DIUNAHERITAGECOMMUNITY

M. Magnani Cianetti, P. Petraroia, S. M.C. Salvo ... 169

SANTA MARTA AL COLLEGIO ROMANO. RESTAURO

APERTO. UN PROGETTO DI RECUPERO E RIUSO PER LA

PUBBLICAFRUIZIONE.

A. Rorro, C.Udina ... 181

THE CREATION OF A PUBLIC SPACE WITHIN A PRIVATE

COMMISSION: THECASEOFTHE FONDACODEI TEDESCHI

INVENICEANDITSCHANGEOFUSE.

C. Boniotti, R. Codello, S. Della Torre ... 191

PAESAGGIO COSTIERO: PRESSIONE ANTROPICA E

TURISMO

G Cacudi, M Catalano ... 201

RIGENERAZIONE URBANA E CONSERVAZIONE DELLE

SUPERFICIARCHITETTONICHE:ILCASODELLAGALLERIA

PRINCIPEANAPOLI

(5)

IL MOORISH KIOSK NEI GIARDINI BOTANICI HANBURY:

L’ANIMACELATA

F. L. Buccafurri, M. Abbo, C. Pilati ... 223

GIARDINI STORICI: DA LUOGHI DI LOISIR A MUSEI EN

PLEIN AIR PER IL GRANDE PUBBLICO. QUALI INDIRIZZI

PERUNASOSTENIBILEFRUIZIONEEVALORIZZAZIONE?

M. Ferrari ... 233

ROMAELAREALTÀDELTURISMO

C. Bellanca, C. Frigieri ... 245

ALTA VAL BREMBANA BETWEEN PAST AND FUTURE.

UNDERUSED HOLIDAY HOUSES AND SLOW TOURISM AS A

POSSIBLESTRATEGYFORREPOPULATION

B. Silva ... 255

RIUSO COMPATIBILE ED OSPITALITÀ SANITARIA: UNA

PROPOSTAPERVILLALAUDANI(CT)

A. Lo Faro, A. Salemi, G. Laudani ... 265

TERRITORI FRAGILI TRA SPOPOLAMENTO E

SOVRAFFOLLAMENTO TURISTICO. IL CASO DI PYRGOS A

SANTORINI(GRECIA).

C. Circo ... 275

RECUPERARE IL SENSO DEL LIMITE? BUONE PRASSI E

QUESITIAPERTI

G.Battista, G. Campanini ... 285

UN APPROCCIO METODOLOGICO AL TEMA

DELL’INTEGRAZIONE DEGLI IMPIANTI NELLE

ARCHITETTURE STORICHE: DALL’ANALISI

DELL’ESISTENTE ALLE PROPOSTE DI SOLUZIONI

COMPATIBILIPERL’ADEGUAMENTOEILRIUSO

C.Aghemo, M. Naretto, R. Taraglio, L.Valetti ... 295

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY

IMPROVEMENT OF LISTED HISTORICAL BUILDINGS

THROUGHSHALLOWGEOTHERMALSYSTEMS

G. Cadelano, R. Pasquali, N. O’Neill, F. Becherini, F. Cicolin,

G. Mezzasalma, G. Dalla Santa, G. Emmi, A. Bernardi ... 307

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY IN ADAPTIVE REUSE:

RESPECTINGAUTHENTICITYANDINTEGRITY

(6)

CHALLENGES OF SUSTAINABLE REUSE. A

RESILIENCE-BASEDAPPROACH.

M. Morandotti, D.Besana, C. Cecchini, A. Chiesa ... 331

RILEVARE UN’OPERA CINETICO-PROGRAMMATA PER

GESTIRELESUETRASFORMAZIONI

A. Devecchi, F. Gasparetto, L. Baratin ... 343

TRA CONSERVAZIONE E RIUSO, LE SFIDE DEL

MUTAMENTO: IL RESTAURO DI ARCHITETTURE

RAZIONALISTEINROMAGNA

G. Favaretto, M. Pretelli, A. Zampini ... 355

FERRARA.CASTELLOESTENSE–LETTURADELTEMPO

CONSERVAZIONEEDIVULGAZIONENELLA

CONTEMPORANEITÀ

A. Ugatti, E. Goberti, B. Pazi, M. Beltrami ... 367

RIFLESSIONI SU POSSIBILI MODALITÀ DI SALVAGUARDIA

DEGLIALLESTIMENTISTORICI.LAPINACOTECADIBRERAE

ILRECENTEINTERVENTODIRIALLESTIMENTO(2015-2018)

G. Di Gangi ... 377

IL MOLINO SCOPPETTA DI PULSANO (TA), DALL’ARTE

MOLITORIA ALLA GASTROSOFIA, PER UN PROCESSO DI

RIAPPROPRIAZIONEDELBENEDALLACOMUNITÀ.

F. Lupoli, A. Monte, C. Sasso ... 387

RE-USETHEELECTRICITYHERITAGE

M. Mattone ... 399

RE-USEOFAMEDIEVALTOWERBETWEENCONSERVATION

ANDTRANSFORMATION

F. Fratini, M. Mattone, S. Rescic ... 411

THE FRIGORIFERO OF FRIULI: CHARACTERISTICS AND

REUSEPOSSIBILITIES

V. Foramitti ... 421

IL RIUSO DEI MERCATI COPERTI DEL NOVECENTO A

GENOVA:TEMIEPROBLEMI

L. Napoleone, R. Vecchiattini ... 431

THE VALORIZATION PROCESS OF THE BASILICA DI SAN

LORENZO IN CREMONA: FROM STATIC DYSFUNCTION TO

NEWREUSE

(7)

STRATEGIE DI VALORIZZAZIONE CULTURALE E

PAESAGGISTICA DELLA CAVA PONTRELLI ANCHE DETTA

“DEIDINOSAURI”ADALTAMURA(BA)

A. Disabato ... 453

FIRENZUOLAELAVALLEDELSANTERNO.TRACCEPERUN

VIDEODIPAESAGGIO.

P. Ricco ... 463

LA STORICITÀ DELLE MUTAZIONI DEL PATRIMONIO:

STUDI PER UN PROGETTO DI VALORIZZAZIONE DI

PALAZZOBORGHITROTTISEDEDELL’ARCHIVIODISTATO

DIFERRARA.

F. Mainardi, F. Babbi ... 473

BOLOGNA IL RIUSO DELL’EX-CONVENTO DELLA SS.

ANNUNZIATA COME POLO PER I BENI CULTURALI. LA

SFIDA, LE RAGIONI E I CARATTERI DEL PROGETTO DI UN

NUOVOUSO

F.Tomba, E.Pozzi ... 485

MEMORY AS TOOL FOR TRANSFORMATION: THE

REGENERATIONOFURBANSPACESINTHECASESTUDYOF

PASTUROINVALSASSINA–LECCO,ITALY

L. De Stefani, A. Tognon ... 495

MILANO: LE DUE “MANICHE” DI SMISTAMENTO DELLO

SCALOFARINIEILLORORIUSOASEDEDELL’ACCADEMIA

DIBRERA

G. Guarisco, L. Monica ... 507

LE CAVALLERIZZE DEL MUSEO NAZIONALE DELLA

SCIENZAEDELLATECNOLOGIADIMILANO:UNPOSSIBILE

DIALOGOTRANUOVOEARCHITETTURASTORICA

D. Lattanzi, F. Conte, P. Savio ... 519

ASYSTEMICREUSEFORITALIANANASHOUSES

C. Bonaiti, A. Silvetti ... 531

DALL’ABBANDONO AL RIUSO SOSTENIBILE: IL CASO DEL

KURSAALDIBARI

(8)

VALORI E VALORIZZAZIONE: UNA PROPOSTA METODOLOGICA PER LA CONSERVAZIONE DEGLI EDIFICI STORICI ABBANDONATI

R. Moioli, S. Capolongo, S. Della Torre, M. Dell’Ovo, M. Morandotti, L. Sdino ... 551

RIUSO DELLA PERSISTENZA A RUDERE DEL FORTE DI

VALLEDRANEATREVISOBRESCIANO

O. Longo, D. Sigurtà ... 561

MORANO CALABRO: IL SILENZIO DI UN BORGO.

UN’ESPERIENZADIRICERCAPERLACONSERVAZIONEEIL

RIUSODIUNPATRIMONIOINDISUSO

B. Canonaco ... 571

IL CINEMA IMPERO A ROMA: ESISTE UN FUTURO PER I

CINEMATOGRAFI?

M.G. Ercolino ... 581

LA SOLITUDINE DELLE ARCHITETTURE DISMESSE.

PROIEZIONI IMMAGINATIVE PER IL PATRIMONIO

CARCERARIOSTORICOINSARDEGNA

G.B. Cocco, C. Giannattasio, F. Musanti, V. Pintus ... 591

APASSOD’UOMO.USOEVALORIZZAZIONI DIMANUFATTI

ALLOSTATODIRUDERELUNGOILTRATTOAPPENNINICO

DELLAVIAROMEADISTADE:ILCASTRUMPLANETTI

E Ceccaroni, L Salina, A Ugolini ... 605

STRATEGIE DI VALORIZZAZIONE E RIUSO DEL

PATRIMONIO RURALE: ESPERIENZE DELL’AREA

METROPOLITANAMILANESE

R. Laviscio ... 615

CONTRO L'OBLIO. PER IL RIUSO DEL PATRIMONIO

DELL'ARCHITETTURARURALEDELLELEOPOLDINE.

B.G. Marino, I. Nocerino ... 627

RI-USARE PER RI-VIVERE. PARADIGMI PER IL RIUSO DI

ARCHITETTUREMINORIINABBANDONO

M. Bellomo, A. Falotico ... 637

IL RIUSO DEI COMPLESSI ABBANDONATI NEI PROCESSI

BOTTOM-UP:PROBLEMATICHEERICADUTEINTERMINIDI

CONSERVAZIONE

(9)

MANAGEMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY, THE CASE

STUDYOFLECCO

A. Silvetti, M. Alberganti ... 659

RESTAURO E NUOVE OPPORTUNITÀ URBANE DEL

PATRIMONIO INDUSTRIALE: IL CASO DELL’EX FORNACE

SIECIASCAURI(LT)

L. Cappelli, E. Fiore ... 673

LA DISTILLERIA NICOLA DE GIORGI A SAN CESARIO DI

LECCE. DA "FABBRICA DI SPIRITO" A "FABBRICA PER LA

CULTURA"

A. Monte ... 685

LACARTIERA DUCALEDI FERMIGNANO NELTERRITORIO

MARCHIGIANO: UN ESEMPIO DI PATRIMONIO

INDUSTRIALE TRA RESTAURO, RECUPERO, RIUSO E

VALORIZZAZIONE

L. Baratin, A. Cattaneo ... 695

DALMINE: IL RIUSO CONTEMPORANEO DELLA COMPANY

TOWNDIGIOVANNIGREPPI

A. Cardaci, G. Mirabella Roberti, A. Versaci ... 707

LA “CITTÀ SOCIALE” E L’AREA DELL’EX LANIFICIO

MARZOTTO DI MANERBIO: UN PATRIMONIO

ARCHITETTONICOEURBANOARISCHIODIDISSIPAZIONE

C. Coccoli, G. Cavagnini, S. Mondolo ... 717

USE AND ABUSE OF THE INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE

ARCHEOLOGY.COMPARINGEXPERIENCES

L. Serafini, S. Cacamore ... 729

ARCHEOLOGIA INDUSTRIALE: IL RIUSO DI EDIFICI

DISMESSI A FUNZIONE “CRUDA” TRA MEMORIA E

INNOVAZIONE

C. Campanella, M. Suma, C. Dell’Orto, L.M. Sanchez Jimenez ... 739

ILRIUSODELLEAREEMILITARIINITALIA:ESPERIENZEDI

RICERCA E DIDATTICA PER LE CASERME DI BOLZANO E

CAGLIARI

D.R. Fiorino, P.Iannotti, P.Mellano ... 749

STRATEGIES FOR DISMANTLED MILITARY SITES AND

BUILDINGS OF THE COLD WAR: EXPERIENCES FROM

EUROPE

(10)

RE-USESTRATEGIESANDCONSERVATIONPRACTICESFOR

THE FORTIFIED ARCHITECTURE. AN EXAMPLE FROM

LIGURIAREGION:FINALEANDITSFORTRESSES

E. Brusa, C. Stanga ... 773

BUONE PRATICHE DI RICONVERSIONE E RIUSO DEGLI

AEREOPORTI MILITARI STORICI: UN CONFRONTO

INTERNAZIONALE

D. R. Fiorino, M. Vargiu ... 785

PAESAGGI FORTIFICATI IN TRANSIZIONE. IL CASO DEI

CASTELLIMEDIEVALIINSARDEGNA

V. Pintus, M. S. Pirisino ... 799

CONTINUITÀ D’USO E RESILIENZA DEL PATRIMONIO

MODERNO. L’"UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASÌLIA" DI OSCAR

NIEMEYER

R. Maspoli ... 811

RIABILITAZIONE E CAMBIO D’USO DEL PATRIMONIO

COSTRUITO. RIFLESSIONI SULL’ESPERIENZA DELLE

POUSADASINPORTOGALLO.

E. Fantini, T. Cunha Ferreira, A. Ugolini ... 821

SPAZI MUSEALI E PREESISTENZA IN OLANDA

SPERIMENTAZIONIECASISTUDIO.

G. Proto ... 831

OPEN-AIR ARCHITECTURAL MUSEUMS: CULTURAL

FRUITION,USEANDREUSEOFBUILDINGTYPESINJAPAN

F. Gotta ... 843

ABBANDONO E RIUSO IN ARCHITETTURA. L'USO

TRANSITORIO COME PRATICA DI CONSERVAZIONE IN

ULSTER.

G. De Martino, R. Scognamiglio ... 855

NON-FINITO ED ESERCIZI NOSTALGICI TRA REMAKE

RESTAUROENUOVIUSIPERLEARCHITETTUREEFFIMERE

S. Caccia Gherardini ... 865

IL MONITORAGGIO MICROCLIMATICO NELLE AREE

ARCHEOLOGICHE: DALLA PROGETTAZIONE ALLA

FRUIZIONE. PER UN SISTEMA CULTURALE NELLA

NECROPOLIDITUVIXEDDUACAGLIARI

(11)

INDOOR MICROCLIMATE MONITORING: USE AND ISSUES.

THECASEOFTHEREALMOFVENARIAREALE.

A. Bonora, K. Fabbri, M. Pretelli ... 885

L’INTERFACCIA-SUPERFICIE COME FATTORE DI

VALUTAZIONE DELLA COMPATIBILITÀ DI UN

INTERVENTO. PROBLEMATICHE SPECIALISTICHE

RIFERITEALL’USO.

S. Massari, M. Pretelli ... 895

ADAPTIVE CLOISTERS BETWEEN NEW FUNCTIONS AND

EFFICIENCYSTRATEGIES

E.Petrucci, R. Cocci Grifoni ... 907

T'ERA PARK:UNCATALOGODI STRATEGIEPOSSIBILIPER

LEMEMORIEDELLEETEROTOPIEDINAPOLIEST

G. Vannelli ... 917

PROPOSAL OF AN EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH FOR FIRE

SAFETYCOMPLIANCEINPALAZZOVECCHIO

T. Giusti, P. Capone ... 927

ECONOMIA CREATIVA PER IL RIUSO E LA

VALORIZZAZIONE DEL PATRIMONIO CULTURALE IN

MUTAMENTO. 10 LABORATORI APERTI PER 10 CITTÀ

STORICHEDELL’EMILIA-ROMAGNA.

C.Mariotti, L. Signorelli ... 937

USO E STRUTTURA NEI CENTRI MINORI ABBANDONATI:

SICUREZZAVSCONSERVAZIONE?

A. Donatelli ... 951

IL MARE NON BASTA PIU’. LA TUTELA DEGLI

STABILIMENTIBALNEARI:INDAGINIECASOSTUDIO

S. G. Florea ... 965

LA FERROVIA ROMA FIUGGI: L’ARCHITETTURA

DELL’UTILE

V. D’Ettore, M. Floridi ... 977

DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES FOR SMALL HISTORIC

CENTERS. USE OF CLARENTANO PALACE IN RANDAZZO

(CT)ASAHALTINANURBANMUSEUMNETWORK

(12)

LE COSTRUZIONI STORICHE DI LEGNO STRUTTURALE

PORTANTE. UN CONTRIBUTO AL RIUSO. LA SCHEDA DI

CONOSCENZAEVALORIZZAZIONE

D. Pittaluga, G. Stagno, L.Secondini, C. Marvaldi ... 997

ARCHITECTURE AND CINEMA: NARRATIVE AND

ECONOMICTOOLSFORURBANREGENERATION

A. Lancellotti ... 1007

USO, DISUSO, ABUSO: LA TUTELA DEL PAESAGGIO

MONTANOEL’ADEGUAMENTODEIRIFUGIALPINI

C. Bartolomucci... 1017

HYDROELECTRIC POWER PLANTS AS A SUBJECT IN THE

RE-USEOFINDUSTRIALHERITAGE

N. Kuban ... 1027

ATTUALITÀ DEL PATRIMONIO CULTURALE COSTRUITO E

STRATEGIE PER UN RIUSO COMPATIBILE: RECENTI

INTERVENTIINITALIA

V. Bernardini ... 1037

DELL'UTILITÀEDELLAROVINADELMODERNO

A. Canziani ... 1047

LA “SPETTACOLARIZZAZIONE” DEI BENI CULTURALI: IL

RESTAURODELLAFIUMARAD’ARTE

C. Accetta ... 1057

DIGITALANASTYLOSISOFFRESCOESCHALLENGE(DAFNE)

V Cantoni, L Lombardi, G. Mastrotisi, A. Segimiro, A. Setti ... 1067

STUDIPERILRIUSODELLAFORESTERIADELL’ABBAZIADI

CHIARAVALLEMILANESE

G. Guarisco, N. Lombardini, D. Oreni ... 1077

ILPATRIMONIOARCHITETTONICODELLACITTÀSTORICA

DICORALGABLES,FL:CONSERVAZIONE,USOERIUSO

S. Aimar ... 1089

L'EX NOVIZIATO DEL SAN NICCOLÒ DI PRATO:

CONOSCENZA,CONSERVAZIONEERIUSO

M. Lazzari ... 1099

ISTANZE STRUTTURALI NELLA DEFINIZIONE DI USI

COMPATIBILI: UN CASO STUDIO NEL COMPLESSO

MONUMENTALEDELLAPILOTTA

(13)

LA TRASFORMAZIONE DEI BENI PAESAGGISTICI

INTERPRETATA COME GRAVE COMPROMISSIONE O

DEGRADO: UN MODELLO DI LETTURA CONDIVISO TRA

MI.B.A.C. E REGIONE TOSCANA PER IL RECUPERO E LA

RIQUALIFICAZIONE DEI VALORI IDENTITARI NELL’AREA

METROPOLITANAFIORENTINA

G. Nannetti ... 1121

THESYSTEMICAPPROACHFORNEWUSESOFIHATURBAN

SCALE,THESTUDYCASEOFLECCO.

R. Pivetta, M. Alberganti, E. Rosina ... 1133

PERMANENZE NEL PATRIMONIO DI ARCHEOLOGIA

INDUSTRIALE DELLE MARCHE: IL RICONOSCIMENTO

DELLADUPLICEVALENZAESTETICAEPAESAGGISTICAAI

FINIDIUNACORRETTASTRATEGIADIVALORIZZAZIONEE

RIUSO.

D. Bravi, D. Licastro ... 1143

ARCHITECTURES FROM ARCHITECTURES. THE REUSE OF

HERITAGEINABANDONMENT

C. Verazzo ... 1155

PROPOSTEPERLARIGENERAZIONEDELL’ANTICO BORGO

DIQUERONELLAPROVINCIADIBELLUNO.

E. Pietrogrande, A. Dalla Caneva ... 1165

RE-USE AND ENHANCING PLANNING OF THE “MADNESS

SPACES”.MEMORYANDFUTUREOFTHEROYALHOUSEOF

LUNATICSINAVERSA.

M. D’aprile, L. Lanza ... 1175

RESTAURO E PROBLEMI DI CONSERVAZIONE: LA VALLE

DELBELICEINSICILIA.

A. Versaci, A. Cardaci ... 1185

CONTINUITÀ D’USO E TRASFORMAZIONI NEGLI EDIFICI

RESIDENZIALI PROGETTATI DA GIUSEPPE TERRAGNI A

COMO

M. Casanova ... 1195

LA STREET ART COME STRUMENTO DI RIGENERAZIONE

URBANA?

(14)

MODALITÀ DI INTERVENTO PER IL RIUSO DI AMBIENTI

STORICIINSTATODINONUTILIZZO:PALAZZOBELLISOMI

VISTARINOAPAVIA

E. Doria, M. Morandotti ... 1215

PALAZZO DUCALE DI SASSUOLO: VICENDE DI

TRASFORMAZIONI DA DELIZIA ESTENSE A SALUMIFICIO.

RIFLESSIONIPERILPROGETTODIRESTAURODELFRONTE

MERIDIONALE.

E. Fain ... 1225

IL SITO DISIDI HARZEMDI JEANFRANÇOIS ZEVACO ELA

DIMENSIONEDELCONSUMOTURISTICO

F. Pisani ... 1235

PMM: DALLA SPOLVERATURA ALLA GESTIONE DELLA

COLLEZIONEMUSEALE.

E. Antonelli, E. De Marsico ... 1245

RESTORATIONOFNAVIGATINGBOATS. ACHALLENGETO

MAINTAINUSABILITYOFOURNAUTICALHERITAGE

G. Zappia, M. C. Morozzo Della Rocca ... 1257

USO ED ACCESSIBILITÀ: COLLEGAMENTI VERTICALITRA

NORMAEARCHITETTURA.

C. Campanella ... 1267

INDIVIDUAZIONE,CONSERVAZIONEEVALORIZZAZIONE

DELLEBOTTEGHESTORICHE,DEILOCALIDITRADIZIONE

ERIFLESSIONIPERUNUSOCOMPATIBILENELTEMPO.

SPERIMENTAZIONEECASISTUDIOAGENOVAESESTRI

LEVANTE.

C. Pastor ... 1279 “UNNATURAL” MATERIALS FOR COATINGS IN THE

RESTAURATION PROJECTS.

G. Marsili, A. Gutierrez, U. Dainese ... 1291

FIRENZE,VIADELLACOLONNA.DAICAVALLIALTROTTOAI

CAVALLIAMOTOREDEGLIAUTOBUS:LESTESSEPIETREPER

UNASTRADATUTTANUOVA

G. Signori, M.Deganutti ... 1305

DAREUNFUTUROALLAMEMORIA-RESTAURO

CONSERVATIVODELSACRARIOMILITAREDIREDIPUGLIA

80ANNIDOPOLASUAINAUGURAZIONE

(15)

SCIENZA E BENI CULTURALI.2019

A COEVOLUTIONARY APPROACH TO THE REUSE OF

BUILT CULTURAL HERITAGE

STEFANO DELLA TORRE

Politecnico di Milano, Dipartimento di Architettura, Ingegneria delle Costruzioni e Ambiente Costruito

stefano.dellatorre@polimi.it

Abstract.

The reuse of existing buildings has been often described as the adaption to an evolving environment and the related needs. Coevolution is a metaphor coming from biology science, related to Darwinian processes affecting species, which have strong relationships with each other. Coevolutionary models have been applied outside the biology field, namely in economics, aiming at the development of models for change management. The proposed implementation of a coevolutionary approach enlightens the potential influence that the presence of heritage produces on the environment and the society. The author’s thesis is that all the choices in conservation and reuse processes can be seen under a different perspective, after the step from “adaptation” to “conservation of the coevolutionary potential”. The awareness that the presence of an historic building or its features could produce future benefits going far beyond its mere use values, gives more reasons for conservation and/or modifications that are evaluated on the long terms and not just for the present needs. The expected change should concern the attitude to choice and the awareness about the reason why something has to be conserved instead of being sacrificed. On the other hand, in this perspective reuse becomes a tool for a richer evolution and changes, which are not necessarily negative for the historic building. The ultimate target of the paper is to clarify the benefits, which conservation discipline could get by opening the mindset to a wider variety of theoretical sources.

Keywords: Reuse, Coevolution, Circular Economy, Planned Conservation, User

(16)

Introduction

Architectural reuse has been the topic of an extremely wide debate over the last decades. Besides being somehow present in the classical books on the art of building, it is an old problem connected to the long durée of the built environment. Reuse and rehabilitation were a hot topic in Italy in the 1980s, when books still deserving to be carefully read were written (Di Biase et al. 1981). Also at international level the issue became more and more central as outside Europe the awareness of the cultural and identity values of urban artefacts arose. A huge mass of experiences and studies has therefore been produced searching for methods and decision criteria.

Perspectives surely changed: nowadays reflections are framed into the vision of Circular Economy and a more mature understanding of sustainability. Decision making became then more complex, because the problem is no longer the comparison between the net actual value of the investment in the reuse operation and that of the new construction on the area. Now decision has to take into account also social, cultural and environmental issues on the long run.

Therefore, new issues are introduced in the discussion about conservation and reuse, which has seen also a large and undeserved fortune of the theme as the object of a research by design often devoid of any epistemological foundation.

The coevolutionary approach

Coevolution is a powerful metaphor that helps to understand issues related to time and changes. It comes from biology science, related to Darwinian processes affecting species, which have strong relationships with each other. However, coevolutionary models have been applied in many fields outside the sciences of life, as at the epistemological level they offer a powerful logic for transcending any determinisms and developing cross-disciplinary approaches in the study of different systems.

The implementation in cultural anthropology, archaeology and human history to explain trends and changes was quite obvious, as it was a way to enrich the understanding of evolution processes, in which the Darwinian thinking could clearly help (Ames 1996; Mesoudi, Whiten, Laland 2006). The implementation in economics has been more similar to the problem we deal with. Coevolution has been invoked to explain trends in ecology and resources (e.g. Norgaard 1994, Kallis G., Norgaard 2010), to investigate reasons for location competitive advantage, and above to develop models for innovation and change management

(17)

SCIENZA E BENI CULTURALI.2019 27 (e.g. Van den Bergh, Stagl 2003). These studies tried to understand changes as the results of forces often antagonist to each other, and of events that sometimes are definitely random. However, some authors observed that while it is possible to describe coevolution processes, which are definitely emergent from the complexity of the systems, in other processes coevolution is somehow guided by external actions (Cuervo-Cazurra A., Martin de Holan P., Sanz 2014).

Among the fields, in which the concept of coevolution has been used as an interpretation tool, the cultural landscape sector is maybe the closest to historic preservation. In Italy the “territorialist” approach used to treat the territory as a highly complex living system, developing sophisticated methods to deal with ecosystems (Magnaghi 2017). The definition of cultural landscapes as complex adaptive systems encompasses both the concepts of emergence and coevolution (Rescia et al. 2012). Implementing the concept of “extended evolution” (Laubichler and Renn 2015), Niles and Roth propose to understand traditional agriculture landscapes as “living knowledge systems”, to be preserved not as the relics of a time gone by, but as resources for development through the interaction with new actors and societal processes (Niles, Roth 2016). They observe that preservation of cultural heritage looks simpler, even if the relationship between the conservation of tangible and intangible heritage does not yet look perfectly working. What we are proposing in the present paper is that built cultural heritage as well should be understood as a living knowledge system. Just 20 years ago, at the Bressanone conference on maintenance, a first draft of an epistemological foundation of conservation was proposed, referring to the coevolution concept and to the cognitive step “from being to becoming” (Della Torre 1999). It is worthy notice that Coevolution and Coevolutionary Economy have been inspiring for modelling preventive conservation as a system (Della Torre 2010; Vandesande 2017), while the concept of historic buildings as living knowledge systems is fundamental to the debate on traditional techniques vs. new technologies, which should not be a comparison of ideologies, but a positive opportunity for the development of a coevolutionary work (Vandesande et al. 2018).

Coevolution vs Adaptation

To apply the coevolutionary metaphor to historic preservation and reuse in the field of the built environment it is necessary to compare the concept of coevolution with another concept, that is adaptation. Adaptation is a more trivial word, whose meaning is clear to ordinary people, but it has as well a technical meaning in the

(18)

scientific field. In general, according to a popular English dictionary, adaptation means the process of changing to suit different conditions; but in biology it means the process in which a living thing slightly changes over time, to be able to continue to exist in a particular environment. So we see two kinds of evolution processes, differing because of the action an evolving thing produces on the environment: in adaptation the thing has no influence on the environment, in coevolution the environmental evolution is influenced by the presence of the living thing.

Are words like stones? Does the choice of words matter? If it does, the adjective “adaptive” should someway qualify a process, telling its special character: not simply a reuse, but an adaptive one. The word refers to adaptation and compliance, putting the emphasis on the capability to adapt, suit, comply with changing conditions, not on the capability to influence the change. Put otherwise, if someone tells me that a reuse operation is adaptive, I understand that the performance standards required by the new function are implemented in the existing building without any debate, as the building will be modified in order to suit the new needs. Otherwise, if the new utility is chosen on the basis of the performances the building can provide, minimizing the change and taking into account the recognized values, the word “adaptive” does not fully describe the process, as the building is influencing the process and the change happens both in the building and in the requirements: then the correct metaphor is not adaption, but coevolution.

Historic examples of adaptive reuse

In the huge existing literature, “adaptive” reuse is advocated as always carried out in the history of architecture. This is true, and we are often happy to see the complexity born by the insertion of new functions in reused buildings. The gothic Cathedral of Nicosia turned into a mosque, or the Doric temple of Syracuse turned into a Christian Cathedral are fascinating examples, often cited, but maybe they are so outstanding that cannot be really useful to the reasoning we are developing here. Instead, if we look at the generalized process of reusing convents and monasteries in the age of Empires, and we exclude exceptions, we can observe that buildings belongings to the same typology, similar to each other, were turned indifferently into schools, military barracks, factories, prisons, warehouses, the choice depending less on the features of the buildings than on the location in the urban context. The only recognized value was the use value, as the building technologies were not changed yet, so that spaces and loadbearing walls could be used in a very

(19)

SCIENZA E BENI CULTURALI.2019 29 economical way. The change was therefore not so disruptive, it is perfectly possible to recognize what we call the “historical thickness” of the structures, and in many cases further change of the functions turns into celebrated recovery restorations.

These examples show what we could correctly call adaptive reuse: operations carried out almost unthinkingly, on the basis of the ignorance of all the historic values apart from use value, triggered by scarcity of resources that leads to prefer reuse to demolition and new construction. Nowadays, in the frame of lifecycle thinking and circular economy, these kind of processes could find a new actuality: the choice of reusing could be evaluated because of environmental and economic reasons, calling societal and cultural arguments to strengthen operational strategies, more than to inspire architectural design (Fusco Girard, Gravagnuolo, 2017).

Evolving significance

Historic reuse produced many fascinating buildings, which during their “life” (keeping into the metaphor) faced many changes and were used for different purposes. Sometimes they were just adapted to the new needs, in some cases their strong character was considered and the required changes were adapted to the pre-existing structures. We have to look not only at the carried out alterations, but at the evolving significance of these complex buildings: we are referring to the concept of significance, but adding the adjective evolving. Therefore, we are introducing a very important step from an expert-centred to a user-centred perspective.

The problem is twofold: the role of material conservation in the perception of historic buildings, and the role of users in defining the significance. How far did they conserve the original sense of place, how far the place got a new sense, how much the survived material traces enable to understand the historic complexity?

To take an example, the convent of the Serviti in Koper (Capodistria) after the suppression was turned into the maternity hospital of the city. The physical alterations were heavy, but did not erase the Venetian character of the building; nevertheless, the relationship of the building with the local community life became so strong thanks to this function, that the next change of the function will face a difficult alternative in identifying the significant elements to keep and valorise (Čebron Lipovec 2015; Čebron Lipovec et al. 2017). We are moving the focus from what happened in the past and what happens in the phase of the reuse design, to what happens on the long run, when diverse and evolving communities will be

(20)

called to inhabit the reused building, change their needs, and ask new adaptations. Shall the reused building bring a message to future users? Will it be able to influence the needs?

Coevolutionary thinking has undoubtedly an effect on the understanding of the past, fuelling a taste for hybrid, complex and layered images, just the ones that traditional restoration tended to simplify choosing the “right” phase. Paradoxically, the experts who decide to simplify the text use to say that such action aims at presenting to the public something ordinary people can understand. It’s the climax of the expert-centred, or top-down approach. Instead, a community-centred approach works on the user’s background to build an experience that could be more intriguing just playing on the richer keyboard constituted by the legacy of a deeply investigated evolution.

But the awareness of the evolving and dynamic character of significance does not only reshape the understanding of the past, it is also a very important reason to implement a responsible attitude toward the future. Once the reuse operation is based on the recognition on several values beyond the use-value, also in the frame of circular economy vision, the principle of responsibility entails an attitude, both in decision making and in designing the interventions. The latter will surely put in the forefront the nonmaterial issues (Fiorani 2014), but not in the terms of identifying an “immaterial significance”, which should hold forever as interpreted by an architectural design based just on the methodology of “research by design” (Plevoets, Prina 2017). As Pietro Matracchi frankly wrote, “It is naïve to think that

some particular sensitivity might emerge, nourished by mysterious knowledge and skills deriving from newly imagined design principles, that could (eliminating uncertainties) introduce changes into our architectural heritage, bringing it into a better future” (Matracchi 2017, pp. 189-190). It seems incredible that such a naïve

and unthinkingly methodology could have been proposed as an emerging autonomous discipline (Plevoets, Van Cleempoel 2013).

The approach to places with values exceeding the availability for use should overtake the expert-centred approach and its authorized heritage discourse, to get aware of the central role of users and their diversity. Significance is not an immutable attribute of things and places, nor can it be defined by a hegemonic statement. Instead, it is continuously re-produced through users’ experiences. Cultural significance is emergent, and the designer’s responsibility is to keep and enhance the potential of historic buildings for co-creation of meanings in the future.

(21)

SCIENZA E BENI CULTURALI.2019 31 The coevolutionary reuse

The sense of place is and will ever be changing and emerging, so the aim of keeping it must be dealt with by the designer paying the highest attention to the different experience components. The often alleged necessity to keep the same function in order to maintain the spirit of the place leads into unsolvable problems, because the functions through time tend to increase the requirements. For instance, the microclimate requirements for a dwelling house or an office are today definitely higher than in the past, so that if the same function is kept an upgrade of the building performance is required, which could be devastating for the historical components. Therefore, the reasons of material conservation require the introduction of a new different utility in the building, whose requirement should be compliant with what the building can give with regard to its testimonial values.

The question then moves to the possibility of perceiving the authentic values of an historic building not through the original use, but through a different one, given that architecture is not understood by the sight, but living the spaces. It is not an easy question, as really the number of the publics opens to a diversity of experiences, which cannot be ignored.

Lucina Napoleone suggested not to overlook the theme of aesthetics, pointing out that mere conservation risks to turn into a flee from responsibilities, and referring to the interesting concept of “trace” as introduced by Maurizio Ferraris (Napoleone 2008; Napoleone 2016). But which times are required for a correct perception of interiors bearing traces of previous uses? How many users/visitors could be engaged in an experience of the place pivoting not on distraction but on the investigation of the traces? And how tourists perceive a monumental church or a mosque, seen as mass tourism destinations?

The point is that the designer of the reuse operation does not control the processes that are going to emerge in the future. If coevolution can be guided, or at least influenced, certainly the reuse project has the possibility to orient the possible forms of future co-creation of contents, simply deciding whether some features of the building will be maintained or given up. Therefore, the designer has the responsibility of limiting or widening the freedom of the future coevolution processes. The target should be to respect and not to reduce, but to enhance the complexity of the place, through investigation aimed at multiplying the approaches and the interpretations.

When Lucina Napoleone asks what to conserve, my answer, given twenty years ago, is “the coevolutive potentialities”. This means to avoid any reduction, to take

(22)

care of the imperfection of objects, as in a Darwinian logic diversity and imperfection are the foundation of a new ecology, new ethics, new aesthetics (Bocchi, Ceruti 2004, p. 171), and the lack is a generative condition (Varchetta 2002, pp. 92-93). These epistemological reflections may seem loose from practice: instead, they have already found applications, clearly identified in the last years.

Conclusions: Coevolution and the long-term vision

The expert’s (i.e. the architect’s) role is definitely new in the perspective of a community-centred or user-centred design of the future use of historic premises. The task is no longer the recognition of those values, which can inspire the project and the culturally correct understanding of the place, but the investigation of the multiple approaches that legitimate the diversity of the possible recognitions. Besides the sustainable compliance with the requirements related to the chosen function, the success of the reuse project will be demonstrated by the richness of the co-creation actions, in which different communities will be keen to be involved. Also in the research on tourism co-creation has been identified as a key factor for the satisfaction of the users, in the logic of the experience economy (Pine and Gilmore 2008). Even if heritage users should not be thought as customers but as citizens, there is something to be learnt from the research on user’s experience and satisfaction (e.g. Buonincontri et al. 2017). The suggestion that the experience should mix the four E (Education, Aesthetics, Entertainment, Escapism) could explain why we can find intriguing unusual distance points produced by added floors, which traditional restoration would remove for pure architectural reasons (see the example of the frescoes in the Jesuits’ College in Genoa quoted by Musso 2017, p. 219).

On the other hand, it is necessary to include in the agenda the availability of digital tools and the opportunities given by performing arts for community engagement, working out the idea that “aesthetic perception and creation of

architecture cannot be achieved without the inclusion and application of digital interactive technology” (Pekol 2009). The ante and post intervention management,

including both planned conservation and the promotion of smart valorisation activities, is crucial to make these kinds of contamination possible. Thus the reuse operations should be framed into a sound management plan in order to have a complete vision of the intervention on the long run, also in the perspective of opening to a free coevolution in the future (Della Torre 2014).

(23)

SCIENZA E BENI CULTURALI.2019 33 Bibliography

1. Ames K., Archaeology, Style and the Theory of Coevolution, in Maschner H.D.G., Herbert D.G. (eds.), Darwinian Archaeologies, New York, Plenum Press, 1996, pp. 109-131

2. Bocchi G., Ceruti M., Educazione e globalizzazione, Milano, Cortina, 2004

3. Buonincontri P., Morvillo A., Okumus F., Van Niekerk M., Managing the experience

co-creation process in tourism destinations: Empirical findings from Naples, “Tourism

Management”, 62, 2017, pp. 264-277

4. Čebron Lipovec N., ‘I’m Telling the Story of the Town’: Places in a Contested Space, in Hrobat Virloget K., Goussef C., Corni G. (eds.), At Home but Foreigners,

Population Transfers in 20th Century Istria, Koper, Annales, 2015, pp. 189-207

5. Čebron Lipovec N., Kavur B., Osojnik M., Zanier K., Rosina E. (eds.), The convent of

the Servites. An architectural and archaeological monument in the heart of Koper,

Milano, PoliScript, 2017

6. Cuervo-Cazurra A., Martin de Holan P., Sanz L., Location advantage: Emergent and

guided co-evolutions, “Journal of Business Research”, 67 (2014), pp. 508–515

7. Della Torre S., “Manutenzione o “Conservazione”? La sfida del passaggio

dall’equilibrio al divenire, in Biscontin G., Driussi G. (eds.), Ripensare alla manutenzione, Venezia, Arcadia Ricerche, 1999, pp. 71-80

8. Della Torre S., Preventiva, integrata, programmata: le logiche coevolutive della

conservazione, in Biscontin G., Driussi G. (eds.), Pensare la prevenzione. Manufatti, usi, ambienti, Venezia, Arcadia Ricerche, 2010, pp. 67-76

9. Della Torre S., La programmazione degli interventi: qualità, modello di gestione,

riconoscimento delle esternalità positive, “Materiali e strutture”, n.s., anno III (2014),

5-6, pp. 87-97

10. Di Biase C., Donati L., Fontana C., Paolillo P.L., Riuso e riqualificazione edilizia negli

anni '80, Milano, Franco Angeli, 1981

11. Fiorani D., Materiale/Immateriale. Frontiere del restauro, “Materiali e strutture”, n.s., anno III (2014), 5-6, pp. 9-23

12. Fusco Girard L., Gravagnuolo A., Circular economy and cultural heritage/landscape

regeneration, “BDC”, Vol. 17, 1/2017, pp. 35-52

13. Kallis G., Norgaard R.B., Coevolutionary ecological economics, “Ecological Economics”, 69, 2010, pp. 690–699

14. Laubichler M.D., Renn J., Extended evolution: A conceptual framework for integrating

regulatory networks and niche construction, “Journal of Experimental Zoology (Part

B, Molecular and Developmental Evolution)”, 324 (7), 2015, pp. 565-577

15. Niles D., Roth R., Conservation of Traditional Agriculture as Living Knowledge

Systems, not Cultural Relics, “Journal of Resources and Ecology”, 7(3), 2016, pp.

231-236

16. Magnaghi A., La storia del territorio nell’approccio territorialista all’urbanistica e

alla pianificazione, “Scienze del territorio”, 5, 2017, pp. 32-41

17. Matracchi P., Changes and Continuity in material and immaterial Values: Experiences

of accidental Conservation, in Fiorani D., Kealy L., Musso S.F. (eds.), Conservation-Adaptation, EAAE Transactions on Architectural Education n. 65, Hasselt, EAAE,

(24)

18. Mesoudi A., Whiten A., Laland K.N., Towards a unified science of cultural evolution, “Behavioral and Brain Sciences”, 29, 2006, pp. 329-383

19. Musso S.F., Permanencies and disappearances, in Fiorani D., Kealy L., Musso S.F. (eds.), Conservation-Adaptation, EAAE Transactions on Architectural Education n. 65, Hasselt, EAAE, 2017, pp. 217-226

20. Napoleone L., Che cosa conservare? L'oggetto del restauro, tra opera d'arte,

monumento, bene culturale, ambiente, in Casiello S., Pane A., Russo V. (eds.), Roberto Pane tra storia e restauro. Architettura, città, paesaggio, Venezia, Marsilio, 2010, pp.

145-148

21. Norgaard, R.B., Development Betrayed: the End of Progress and a Coevolutionary

Revisioning of the Future, London, Routledge, 1994

22. Pekol B., Interactive bodily Experiences of Architectural History and its Perceptual

Implications, in Spurr S. (ed.), Spatial Phrases, Sidney 2009, pp. 140-148

23. Pine B.J., Gilmore J.H., The Experience Economy, Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 2011

24. Plevoets B., Van Cleempoel K., Adaptive reuse as an emerging discipline: an historic

survey, in Cairns G. (ed.), Reinventing architecture and interiors: a socio-political view on building adaptation, London, Libri Publishers, 2013, pp. 13-32

25. Plevoets B., Prina D.N., Introduction, in Fiorani D., Kealy L., Musso S.F. (eds.),

Conservation-Adaptation, EAAE Transactions on Architectural Education n. 65,

Hasselt, EAAE, 2017, pp. 1-8

26. Rescia A.J., Perez-Corona M.E, Arribas-Ureña P., Dover J.W., Cultural landscapes as

complex adaptive systems: the cases of northern Spain and northern Argentina, in

Plieninger T., Bieling C. (eds), Resilience and the Cultural Landscape. Understanding

and Managing Change in Human-Shaped Environments, Cambridge University Press,

2012, pp. 126-145

27. Van den Bergh J.C.J.M., Stagl S., Coevolution of economic behaviour and institutions:

towards a theory of institutional change, “Journal of Evolutionary Economics”, 13,

2003, pp. 289-317

28. Vandesande A., Preventive Conservation Strategy for Built Heritage Aimed at

Sustainable Management and Local Development, PhD. Dissertation, KU Leuven,

2017

29. Vandesande A., Van Balen K., Della Torre S., Cardoso F., Preventive and planned

conservation as a new management approach for built heritage: from a physical health check to empowering communities and activating (lost) traditions for local sustainable development, “Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable

Development”, 2018, 8(2), p. 78-81

30. Varchetta G., Cambiamento organizzativo e istituzioni della cultura e dell’arte, in Morelli U. (ed.), Management delle istituzioni della cultura e dell’arte, Milano, Guerini, 2002, pp. 85-94

(25)

TESTI DI Abbo M. 223 Accetta C. 1057 Acri M. 319 Aghemo C. 295 Aimar S. 1089 Alberganti M. 659, 1133 Antonelli E. 1245 Babbi F. 473 Baratin L. 343 Baratin L. 695 Bartolomucci C. 1017 Battista G. 285 Becherini F. 307 Bellanca C. 245 Bellomo M. 637 Bernardi A. 307 Bernardini V. 1037 Besana D. 331 Bonaiti C. 531 Boniotti C. 191 Bonora A. 885 Bravaglieri S. 761 Bravi D. 1143 Brusa E. 773 Buccafurri F.L. 223 Cacamore S. 729 Caccia Gherardini S. 865 Cacudi G. 201 Cadelano G. 307 Cadetti A. 1205 Campanella C. 739,1267 Campanini G. 285 Canonaco B. 571 Cantelli M. 367 Cantini L. 133, 443 Cantoni V. 1067 Canziani A. 1047 Capolongo S. 551 Capone P. 927 Cappelli L. 673 Cardaci A. 707,1185 Cardani G. 443 Caruso L. 987 Casanova M. 1195 Catalano M. 201 Cattaneo A. 695 Cavagnini G. 717 Ceccaroni E. 605 Cecchini C. 331 Celli S. 81 Chiesa A. 331 Cicolin F. 307 Circo C. 275 Cocci Grifoni R. 907 Cocco G.B. 591 Coccoli C. 717 Codello R. 191 Coïsson E. 1109 Conte F. 519 Crova C. 13 Cunha Ferreira T. 821 D’aprile M. 1175 D’Ettore V. 977 Dalla Caneva A. 1165 Dalla Santa G. 307 Dainese U. 1291 Danesi G. 69 David G. 1315 De Marsico E. 1245 De Martino G. 855 De Stefani L. 495 De Vita M. 91 Deganutti M. 1305,1315 Dell’Orto C. 739 Dell’Ovo M. 551 Della Torre S. 25, 191,551 Devecchi A. 343 Di Gangi G. 377 Di Resta S. 69 Disabato A. 453 Dobričić S. 319 Donatelli A. 951

(26)

Doria E. 1215 Eichberg M. 13 Emmi G. 307 Ercolino M.G. 581 Fabbri K. 885 Fain E. 1225 Falotico A. 637 Fantini E. 821 Favaretto G. 355 Ferrari M. 233 Fiore E. 673 Fiorino D.R. 749, 785 Florea S.G. 965 Floridi M. 977 Foramitti V. 421 Fratini F. 411 Frigieri C. 245 Gasparetto F. 343 Giannattasio C. 591 Giusti T. 927 Gizzi S. 1 Goberti E. 367 Gotta F. 843 Guarisco G. 507, 1077 Guarnieri A. 541 Gutierrez A. 1291 Iannotti P. 749 Jokilehto J. 319 Kuban N. 1027 Lancellotti A. 1007 Lanza L. 1175 Lattanzi D. 519 Laudani G. 265 Laviscio R 615 Lazzari M 1099 Licastro D. 1143 Lo Faro A. 265 Lombardi L. 1067 Lombardini N. 1077 Longo O. 561 Lupoli F. 387 Magnani Cianetti M. 169 Mainardi F. 473 Marino B.G. 627 Mariotti C. 937 Marsili G. 1291 Marvaldi C. 997 Maspoli R. 811 Massari S. 895 Mastella M. 367 Mastrotisi G. 1067 Matta P. 875 Mattone M. 399,411 Mellano P. 749 Mezzasalma G. 307 Mirabella Roberti G. 707 Miraglia F. 13 Moioli R. 551 Mondolo S. 717 Monica L. 507 Monte A. 387,685 Morandi E. 367 Morandotti M. 331,551,1215 Morozzo Della Rocca M.C. 1257

Musanti F. 591 Nannetti G. 1121 Napoleone L. 431 Naretto M. 295 Nocerino I. 627 O’Neill N. 307 Oreni D. 1077 Ottoni F. 81, 1109 Pagliari F. 1109 Pasquali R. 307 Pastor C. 1279 Patruno A. 541 Peron V. 157 Pesenti S. 35 Petraroia P. 169 Petrucci E. 907 Pietrogrande E. 1165 Pilati C. 23

(27)

Pili A. 101,875 Pintus V. 591,799 Pirisino M.S. 799 Pisani F. 1235 Pittaluga D. 45,997 Pivetta R. 1133 Pozzi E. 485 Pretelli M. 355,885, 895 Proto G. 831 Rescic S. 411 Ricco P. 463 Romoli E. 875 Rorro A. 181 Rosina E. 123,875,1133 Salemi A. 265 Salina L. 605 Salvo S.M.C. 169 Sanchez Jimenez L.M. 739 Sanfilippo G. 987 Sasso C. 387 Savio P. 519 Scala B. 145 Scognamiglio R. 855 Sdino L. 551 Secondini L. 997 Segimiro A. 1067 Serafini L. 729 Setti A. 1067 Signorelli L. 937 Signori G. 1305,1315 Silva B. 255 Silvetti A. 531, 659 Stagno G. 997 Stanga C. 773 Suma M. 123,739,875 Taraglio R. 295 Tognon A. 495 Tomba F. 485 Treccozzi D. 211 Udina C. 181 Ugatti A. 367 Ugolini A. 605,821 Valetti L. 295 Vannelli G. 917 Vargiu M. 785 Vecchiattini R. 431 Verazzo C. 1155 Verde D. 649 Versaci A. 707, 1185 Vigliocco E. 59 Zampini A. 355 Zappia G. 1257 Zenoni E. 111 Zoli M. 367

(28)
(29)
(30)

Riferimenti

Documenti correlati

Fideicommissarios et executores distributores et errogatores presentis nostri testamenti et predictorum nostrorum iudiciorum et legatorum relinquimus esse volumus atque

Questa duplicità di registro si svilupperà in parallelo nel corso dei decenni, per evolversi infine verso l’autobiografismo sempre più introspettivo e la ri- flessione

Mi limiterò quindi a chiudere questa introduzione formulando, a grandi linee, le domande che insieme ad Aline Pons abbiamo formulato – e rivolto agli studiosi

Es sei also darauf aufmerk- sam gemacht, dass der Bezug Seilers auf Defoe nicht nur der oberfläch- lich-abenteuerliche von Schiffbruch und Insel ist – die Kritik tendiert da- hin,

The publication is realized with PRIN 2015 “Adaptive design e innovazioni tecnologiche per la rigenerazione resiliente dei distretti urbani in regime di

Exercise during pregnancy has been shown to be associated with different benefits, 2‐6 including a significantly higher incidence of vaginal delivery and a significantly

Three instantaneous flame fronts referred to each of the operating conditions discussed here (from left to right, λ = 3.60, 3.25, and 2.90, respectively) are depicted as an example

Perciò la sua egemonia andrebbe scardinata innanzitutto tentando di riscrivere i manuali, in modo tale da renderli maggiormente corrispondenti al modo in cui