The "Glass Revolution" in Italy between Autarky and Foreign Relations

The central problem in defining design choices when restoring and reusing buildings in which glass plays a key role seems to be how to identify the different materials that are grouped under the general term “glass” as material evidence of the past. In Europe there are profoundly different ways, some of them even ambiguous and contradictory, for dealing with this problem. On the one hand glass surfaces appear expendable for the sake of comfort and energy saving. On the other they are perceived as a highly distinctive part of architecture. A very common way to solve the problem, perhaps the most instinctive, is based on the observation that if something does not work, or works only in part, the most immediate solution is to replace it. All too often, unfortunately, the replacement of these glass façades is not seen as a loss, perhaps because of they are regarded as “non-material” due to their transparency and inherent fragility, with the overriding factor being to im-prove their specifications. Many have tried to deal with this problem in more or less convincing ways. What I would like to stress here is that the most interesting solutions have been found by adopting an approach that does not involve replacing the old façades – no longer able to give us what we expect from them - with new façades that are completely different in appearance or others that become a sort of “ghost” of the previous ones by imitating their forms. When the question of how to reconcile the permanence of these artefacts – even in their material component – with the regulatory requirements of energy saving, is viewed in the more general context of conservation and reuse of the architectural heritage, one realizes that no single recipe can be applied to all situations. Each building is a case apart and should be treated as such. Moreover, the crucial issue for a correct treatment of the problem is not to separate this point from the more general use of spaces which the façade itself helps to determine. Finding ways to cope with the problems of decay, while complying with planning standards and the new requirements for reuse is the challenge that confronts design sensitive to the material qualities of architecture. In short we have to find a solution to the perennial conflict between the need to preserve the material object, which embodies many layers of significance,51 with the pressure for improvements. A thorough knowledge of these materials, the ways they were produced and how they spread, can help bring out the plurality of meanings they convey not only in relation to architecture but also culturally, politically and economically. This specific knowledge can help reveal their richness and complexity in terms of material culture, encouraging us to expand reflection on design so as to unite, wholly or in part, our efforts at conservation with the many issues bound up with the use of space.