Anastomosis or About Today's Cities and One Rose…

Archiweb: How would you characterize your exhibition?
Petr Hájek: It represented a certain summary of the last two years of our school studio. I co-lead it with Jaroslav Hulín and we are engaged in research in the field of urbanism. The goal of our work was to test a new method for urban development planning on specific situations, which we later called anastomosis.

What led you to choose the Latin name?
I was looking for a term that would best express the essence of our thinking about the city. The idea of connecting the city came to mind, but we needed something that would offer a certain transcendence and was not just technically descriptive. I recalled a debate among doctors in a hospital, where the word anastomosis caught my attention. When I asked about its meaning, I learned that it involves connections in an organism. But I also found another interesting connection in it: it sounds a bit like metropolis, suggesting a relationship with the city. And in our reflections, we often use the analogy of the city as an organism. So it all makes sense.

You speak of your new strategy for urban development planning. Could you elaborate on it?
The historical center of Central European cities is gradually becoming depopulated and turning into a museum for tourists and luxury addresses. Residents are moving to cheaper outskirts, and the city is dramatically expanding, consuming the surrounding landscape. One way to face this situation and limit this stretching is to densify cities. Simply put, to bring these edges back inward. However, that still means building new and more structures. This time, in our considerations, we've taken the opposite direction. We do not want to costly reconstruct the city but to activate its internal reserves through targeted interventions.

What is your concrete vision then?
We somewhat provocatively start from the fact that the city is so-called evolutionarily frozen. From an urbanism and infrastructure perspective, it is firmly defined. It already contains everything its inhabitants need for life: theaters, cinemas, schools, parks, squares... and it simply does not utilize this offer and potential sufficiently and effectively. As a result, it seems that the city is ceasing to function as a whole. Its disconnection is sometimes caused by topography, other times by political borders, etc. We are trying to change this situation precisely by using the method of connecting what the city already has. Connection allows us to invigorate and utilize the city as a single, integrated organism. In short, we want to initiate a regenerative process through connections – anastomosis.

Could you illustrate this connection with a specific example?
Between Žižkov and Karlín, there is a tunnel through which four to eight thousand people pass back and forth... About twelve thousand people live in Karlín, and fifty thousand in Žižkov, so the tunnel is an important link. Personally, I find it not very pleasant, but many people are even afraid of it. Especially at night. So a certain type of services that Žižkov residents could use in Karlín will not be utilized. At the same time, we know that both Karlín and Žižkov are continually building new retail spaces. They usually require no windows and occupy large building volumes. Imagine that the tunnel became a commercial passage or underground street along the route from Karlín to Žižkov. So you could walk through it 24 hours a day and the tunnel would not just be used as a connection from point A to point B. At the same time, this would free up space for urban functions that cannot do without natural light. Not only would you activate the connection between the two districts and allow their residents to more conveniently use offerings in various parts of the city, but you would also enhance the connection itself. Or the planned bridge from Karlín to Holešovice at the site of Štvanice Island. They talk about a bridge, which is an investment possibly in hundreds of millions. But it's essentially about connecting two shores, and that can be done, for example, with a much cheaper ferry...

LOCAL GOVERNMENT TODAY

Allow a detour: what is the reason that such things do not get realized?
Perhaps it is that this direction is not considered and sought after. And that is why we, among other things, held the exhibition. To open a discussion. And to draw not only the public into it but also politicians who have a mandate to address these topics. But perhaps it is a naive idea, since mainly the public visits the exhibition and we have not recorded much interest from politicians. The exceptions are Prague Mayor Bohuslav Svoboda and his deputy Tomáš Hudeček, and Petra Kolínská, a councilor from Prague 6.



Doesn't the more general reason lie in the weakening of social agreement within the community?
Perhaps we are witnessing a gradual depletion of the relationship to the city. Maybe we spend our free time more intensely in the mountains or by the sea. That is, rather outside of the city. And that is the logic of the whole thing. Because if my goal is not to spend time in the city but somewhere else, then my relationship to the city is given: I am not interested in it, but I am only interested in the means by which I can buy time somewhere else...

SCHOOL

Let's return to the exhibition, or rather to your school studio. Are you considering offering these designs to the city for implementation?
Certainly not, that is not our goal. We operate in an academic environment and our intention is to examine and verify the topic. We deal with our themes purely at an ideational level and perceive their significance in finding a path to solving problems. We also use them as a tool for teaching the method of thinking.

However, do students also explore the feasibility of their designs in terms of costs? That is, the financial demands of hypothetical implementation?
Considering the economic balance is one of our criteria in proposal creation. Unfortunately, to tell the truth, we do not systematically dedicate ourselves to it for all projects. We try at least to find a similar project and subsequently compare its financial costs. That is, those whose costs, i.e., economic balances, are known… But we also delve deeper, especially with questions directed during the design process. So, in the case of the bridge, for example: Why a bridge? Are there no other more effective solutions? What about using a cable car?



Examining the task is certainly a significant intellectual contribution of the architect… On the other hand, it may happen that a student in your studio avoids designing a bridge, which, I assume, is a significant part of the typological knowledge of a graduate...
Our goal is not typological exercise. We assume that students will study the typology for their program on their own. It is the same as in practice. You cannot go through training for all types of buildings. What matters is the method you propose and the result of your work.

Still, by the principle of questioning the task, it seems you are actually suggesting: do not build! However, isn't the fundamental essence of architecture precisely building or reconstructing?
Not exactly. We are looking for the best possible answer to the task. Our anastomosis is also about building. Its impact mainly affects the surrounding area. We address the tunnel but influence the entire territory of Karlín and Žižkov. To exaggerate, with one building we want to achieve what ten could. We are aiming for a significant reduction through targeted building interventions.

LEA

You mention a scientific approach; at the exhibition, you announced the establishment of the Laboratory of Experimental Architecture. Could you explain the idea of an architectural laboratory?
We began to suspect with colleagues that we lacked a theoretical background for the topics that interest us. Thus, the platform LEA – Laboratory of Experimental Architecture was created. I originally aimed to establish it at the faculty, but in the end, we had to set it up outside of the school. It helps us long-term define the areas of issues we want to address... And ultimately helps define the task itself. So it is something like basic research that predetermines topics for school tasks or my design studio. We are dealing with topics like spectrograph analysis, so-called invisible cities, quantum city, border houses, and now also the Vltava River. This is, among other things, the task for our school studio for the next three years.

Where do you utilize the results of your research?
Partly for the needs of my work in my own studio, but some issues are also monitored by our school studio. Students examine these questions based on specific locations and specific tasks within applied research. Ultimately, in the exhibition at DOX, you seem to observe certain samples – much like in a factory where you see product tests. From those that succeeded to those that did not. However, it hones the problem.
LEA attempts to create a theoretical background for what we test at school on specific tasks and assignments. And through what we test at school, we get back to theory. One influences the other.

By the way, how do you view the eternal dispute between proponents of architecture as art and those who consider it a science?
I do not know if it's true, but I have heard the story that when Watson and Crick were searching for the structure of DNA arrangement and it was not known how it looked, they invited a sculptor. Because they suspected that the thing has its internal beauty like everything created by nature. They approached the sculptor to help feel the missing pieces of the mosaic. In my opinion, science is a principle or method to achieve a goal. We do it the same way. We work and allow ourselves to be inspired by other fields. In my opinion, it is a mistake to reduce architecture solely to construction. The term frozen evolution was borrowed by us from science, specifically from biology.

Can you elaborate on that?
It comes from a beautiful book that has this term in its title. The book Frozen Evolution was written by Jaroslav Flegr and offers a certain critical view of Darwin's theory. He does not deny it but essentially says that things might be a bit different. He states that biological species reach a phase after a certain time when they evolutionarily fix – freeze. They can no longer evolve.
I think this also applies fundamentally to the city. After a certain phase of development, it ceased to be flexible.



In one breath, you talk about both your faculty studio and your private studio. Do you see a difference between the systems of their operation?
Personally, I do not see it. Basically, our working methods in the practical and school studios do not differ. The proposals arise as a joint effort. Occasionally, of course, I encounter the opinion that students should come to solutions on their own… That the teacher should throw them into the water and let them swim. But in my view, no teacher can teach a student more than they themselves know and what they can inspire him or her to. I went through training with Alena Šrámková and Emil Přikryl. And with them, I always felt that we worked together on things. It was not about whether one thing is right and the other wrong. It was about how this thing is formed, how it is honed, and how it is questioned. Just like when one imagines Petri dishes and scientists who have bacteria and are looking for an effective substance to stop their growth. They have to try various types of solutions. Similar to us.
Our other goal is for students to become passionate about the profession and to love it. And to be able to dedicate a significant part of their lives to it. Because only then can they do it well. The rest are just means.

How do you achieve that?
First of all, we give them a lot of work so they can truly devote themselves to architecture. So when we load them with work, they can almost do nothing else. (laughs) Sometimes it also somewhat changes...

What should the reader envision by that?
In other words, it changes their value hierarchy. Their life preferences change. And the investment into what is perhaps the most valuable thing a person has. And that is the time they have available in life. So in the end, they invest it into work. As Exupery wrote, it is the time I dedicate to that rose; that is why I love it so much.

Thank you for the interview.
Jiří Horský