Architektura osmozy – estetyczny łącznik między przeszłością a przyszłością

Romuald Loegler

doi:10.37190/arc250315

Streszczenie

Zmiana wyglądu powierzchowności formy oznacza transformację, a bazą dla transformacji jest synonim greckiego pojęcia metamorfoza.

Transformacja opisuje stan przejściowy, momenty towarzyszące przemianie, spełnianie się akcji, rozgrywania się procesu, dokonywania się przemiany danego przedmiotu lub podmiotu.

Metamorfoza zdaje się być lub jest nawiązaniem do czegoś, wspomnieniem, aluzją do procesu, który jest autonomiczny lub endogenny – pochodzący z wnętrza, wywołany przez wewnętrzne czynniki.

W tym stałym procesie przemian architektura może być porównana do żywego organizmu, który także podlega wewnętrznej przemianie, który stale podlega procesowi wewnętrznych przeobrażeń.

W niniejszych rozważaniach kluczowe jest wykazanie, że transformacja i metamorfoza to dwie drogi do eksplorowania jednego z najważniejszych wytworów cywilizacji, jakim są nasze miasta, że rezultaty transformacji konkretnych fragmentów miast to wyniki projektowych procesów opartych na idei kreacji formy w procesie jej uwalniania w uwarunkowaniach istniejącej rzeczywistości.

Słowa kluczowe

osmoza, idea, forma, kontekst, kreacja

Słowa kluczowe:
osmoza
idea
forma
kontekst
kreacja

Podgląd pełnego artykułu jest możliwy wyłącznie na większych ekranach.

2025

3(83)

DOI: 10.37190/arc250315

Published in open access. CC BY NC ND license

Abstract

Changing the appearance of the superciality of a form means transformation, and the basis for transformation is synonymous with the Greek term

metamorphosis.

Transformation describes a transitional state, the moments that accompany transformation, the fullment of an action, the playing out of a process,

the accomplishment of the transformation of a subject or object.

Metamorphosis seems to be or is a reference to something, a memory, an allusion to a process that is autonomous or endogenous – coming from

within, triggered by internal factors.

In this constant process of transformation, architecture can be likened to a living organism that is also subject to internal transformation, that is

constantly undergoing a process of internal transformation.

In these considerations it is crucial to show that transformation and metamorphosis are two ways of exploring one of the most important creations

of civilisation, which are our cities, that the results of the transformation of specic fragments of cities are the results of design processes based on the

idea of the creation of form in the process of its release in the conditions of existing reality.

Key words: osmosis, idea, form, context, creation

Introduction

Experiences of the past inspire the architecture of to-

morrow – this universal truth is borne out in the records of

architectural history, experiences that are often hidden or

underestimated.

In these considerations it is crucial to show that transfor-

mation and metamorphosis are two ways of exploring one of

the most important creations of civilisation, which are our

cities, that the results of the transformation of specic frag-

ments of cities are the results of design processes based on

the idea of the creation of form in the process of its release

in the conditions of existing reality – ideas that should grow

out of Albert Einstein’s beautiful sentence: Enough for me

the mystery of the eternity of life, and the inkling of the mar

vellous structure of reality, together with the single-hearted

endeavour to comprehend a portion, be it never so tiny, of

the reason that manifests itself in nature (Einstein 1949, 5).

In the context of this statement by Einstein, delighting in

the beauty of the world, transformation and metamorphosis

can also be understood as “the magnicence of building of

reality” (Zamorska-Przyłuska 1997).

To be the architecture of tomorrow, the “other” – is not

an architectural design philosophy. An architecture that is

“dierent” means striving to consider the fundamental prob-

lems of knowing the essence of architecture, and through it

to understand the overall universal urban image and to seek

“certainty in its creation”.

* ORCID: 0000-0002-0434-4658. Faculty of Architecture and Fine

Arts. Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Kraków University, Poland, e-mail:

oce@loegler.com.pl.

Design Philosophy

Romuald Loegler*

Osmosis architecture

– an aesthetic link between the past and the future

154 Romuald Loegler

Fig. 1. Jewish Museum Berlin (designed by Studio Libeskind).

A symbol of the integration of citizens of Jewish ancestry expressed by

the contradictory autonomy of architectural forms – “the old and the new”

(photo by Guenter Schneider, source: https://www.german-architects.

com/en/projects/view/jewish-museum-berlin)

Il. 1. Muzeum Żydowskie w Berlinie (proj. Studio Libeskind).

Symbol integracji obywateli żydowskiego pochodzenia wyrażony

sprzeczną autonomią architektonicznych form – „starego i nowego”

(fot. Guenter Schneider, źródło: https://www.german-architects.com/en/

projects/view/jewish-museum-berlin)

Architecture surpasses “ordinary” art, it stands in opposi-

tion to prevailing fashion.

It is not only about shapes and skin – the façade shell.

Architecture embodies a culture derived from the past,

but concerned with the present and future. It is to address

contemporary, up-to-date attitudes to life, “improved” by

the past in the use of space, materials and technology, and

the perception of beauty and balance of values perpetuat-

ed in noniconic buildings – less exciting but cleverly made

– friendly to people and the environment, realised not just

for their original form or pioneering engineering, but creat-

ing a new generation of architecture emerging by osmosis.

The interpenetration of experiences from the past with a vi-

sion of the architecture of the future, which is the setting

for life events for generations to come. It does not matter

how creative or experimental a single building is – it al-

ways changes the whole city! Paying attention to the fact

that architecture is always created in a specic context is

part of the essence of where it is built and the awareness

that it assimilates elements from the wider world, entering

into a relationship with what is local. If architecture draws

exclusively on tradition, if it merely repeats it, it deprives

the community in question of its reference to the world and

its emanation of the contemporary. On the other hand, if the

created architecture “duplicates” and quotes directly from

the global visions, it does not allow the specic values and

importance of what is local to resound in the specic place

of its creation, thus depriving the local community of the

sense of its rootedness in the built environment.

The conviction that, in the rst instance, contemporary

architecture is to be experienced as a physical and phenom-

enological encounter also has the potential to evoke trans-

mitted meanings, interpretations and readings. Its aesthetic

autonomy liberates architecture from its traditional meta-

physics and symbolic content, often geared towards produc-

ing striking and memorable images. Instead of an existen-

tially grounded plastic and spatial experience, architecture

has adopted the psychological strategy of advertising and

instant persuasion; buildings have turned into image prod-

ucts detached from existential depth and sincerity (Pallasa-

maa 2005, 30).

In this context, these reections are another voice in the

debate on architectural innovations for the improvement of

living conditions conducive to the enjoyment of the beauty

of the world and the armation of “cosmic religiosity” – the

eternal law of order of the universe, by releasing the forms

of what exists, forms trapped in the matter of the place of

our future construction. Forms found, not invented, a priori

imposed, giving an impression of completeness and peace,

creating harmony of all manifestations of life!

Vitality of cities

Urban development, an ongoing process accompanying

the vitality of cities, situates society as a great laboratory

in which new solutions and meanings are created and ex-

perimented with, generating practices and relationships in

constant transformation that shape its spaces. A key role in

their creation is played by people in the various manifesta-

tions of their lives. Their inuence as a community on future

urban scenarios is done through initiatives and acting as me-

diators. The two decades of the 21

century have clearly

revealed the disharmony of ambiguity, the collapse of all hi-

erarchies ordering reality and the order of nature, and often

the compromise of humanity. It seems that for the order and

peaceful fullness of life – also in architecture – there have

been years of social processes involving a decline in the liv-

ing standards of individuals and collectives testifying to the

need for an intensied dialogue of the new with the existing

natural, material and historical environment.

The architecture of tomorrow should arise from the os-

mosis of the new through the lter of the experiences and

values of what exists, of what is perpetuated by history,

the myth of place, the experiences of people and tradition

(Fig. 1). The architecture of tomorrow, in opposition to the

theory of chaos, should believe in the harmony of the con-

struction of the world, in nature, striving to realise what is

mathematically the simplest – the beautiful and astonishing

harmonia mundi. The beauty that remains in close connec-

tion with mathematics, the numerical laws of architecture

and the subjective power of emotional impact.

Harmonia mundi: sounds vivid and present, enlivens

the imagination, acts on the intellect, stimulates thought

about architecture. It opens up broad perspectives for re-

ection on the meaning and essence of architecture itself.

Har monia mundi does not refer directly to a world that is

be coming, disintegrating, only to be reborn again – it re-

fers to the constant yardstick and pattern of all immediate,

currently happening reality. The desire for harmonia mundi

by projecting the horizon of our dreams for the creation of

architecture and design of the future, responsible for main-

taining the balance between the natural and the man-made

environment – should underline the strong attachment to the

vision of a harmoniously built world and become a message

Osmosis architecture – an aesthetic link between the past and the future 155

Fig. 3. Metropol Parasol Sevilla (designed by Jürgen Meyer).

As a place of collective memory with an archaeological site, the new

contemporary centre, a unique space of urban activity, demonstrates

a new way of interpreting the urban landscape (photo by David Franck,

source: https://jmayerh.de/metropol-parasol/?n=2083)

Il. 3. Metropol Parasol Sevilla (proj. Jürgen Meyer).

Jako miejsce zbiorowej pamięci ze stanowiskiem archeologicznym,

nowe współczesne centrum, wyjątkowa przestrzeń miejskiej aktywności,

demonstruje nowy sposób interpretacji miejskiego krajobrazu

(fot. David Franck, źródło: https://jmayerh.de/metropol-parasol/?n=2083)

for the creation of an aesthetic order of architecture in its

image. This desire is not accidental, it lies deep within us,

because harmony is synonymous with beauty! Beauty is not

an abstract concept. It is commonly associated with the idea

of goodness, with morality, identied with perfection – it is

a set of qualities that make us like something, also that it has

a positive aesthetic quality of being.

A view justied by the implication of social circles con-

rming that the well-being of cities depends on the quality

and diversity of the systems of public spaces, the physical and

social infrastructure animating urban space and urban life.

Therefore, the vitality of the city, its attractiveness to chang-

ing generations of inhabitants, needs the identication of gen-

eral criteria and universal design solutions, based on which

the quality of existing public spaces can be shaped or rede-

ned in terms of both its physical and social charac teristics.

The threat to the preservation of order and harmony in

urban space stems from the tendencies of modern civilisa-

tion, whose vision of chaos devoid of beauty prompts close

observation of the landscape of modern cities, often lled

with volumes of anonymous buildings devoid of individual

expression and human scale.

Accompanying city centres is the growing disorder of

the periphery – areas often turned into a dump of haphaz-

ard forms on a scale of ugliness that threatens the cultural

landscape. This state of degradation stands in opposition to

the role of architectural form, which Alvar Aalto

dened:

The form is a mystery that [...] gives people a feeling of

pleasure [...] (Alto 1997, 179). In this vein, form was under-

stood by other Finnish architects, recognising that the archi-

tectural landscape that surrounds humans should give them

a sense of well-being oering people inspiring spatial expe-

riences and experiences with architecture that is respectful

of its surroundings, expressed in a contemporary language

devoid of pride and lust for showiness.

The eminent architectural critic Alain de Botton, in his

book The Architecture of Happiness (Botton 2008)

, observes

that order is fundamental to the objective beauty of geome-

try – a means of defending against the over-complication of

the built environment, whose order of space should result

from the eect of subordination of the parts of the whole.

The validity of this view is justied by the timeless beauty

of the architecture of ancient Greek civilisation (Figs. 2, 3).

Context

In his discussion of contextualism, Vittorio Gregotti refers

to the “reconciliation” of values between completely contra-

dictory ideas that the word “context” has taken on in its cur-

rent pluralist understanding (Gregotti 1992, 111) (Fig. 4).

Paolo Portoghesi notes, […] that the word “context” has lit-

tle value if it is not considered in a broad sense. This means

not limiting it to “the surroundings”, but extending it to in-

clude the whole continuum of values covered by the bound-

Alvar Aalto (1898–1976), Finnish modernist architect esteemed

for his humanist approach to architecture.

The bestselling author considers how private homes and public

buildings aect how people feel and how housing can be built to pro-

mote a sense of happiness.

aries of a neighbourhood, a city, a region […]. Portoghesi

notes the need to […] free the doctrine of contextuality from

a limiting understanding of it, which is deeply relevant to the

dreams and desires of our time … and the resulting peaceful

coexistence of tendencies that use entirely new languages

– the scenery and spirit of our time (Portoghesi 1992, 116).

In the ongoing game of the city, shaping our future, new

ideas and trends should be a reection of the position, action

and individuality of the creative architect, who, in creating

the new, […] performs an act of creation and reaction, thus

Fig. 2. Dolne Młyny Kraków (designed by Romuald Loegler).

The search for aesthetic harmony through urban-architectural osmosis

expressed in a dialogue with local conditions, a preservationist-

protected industrial past with new, exclusive residential development

(source: http://loegler.pl/uzytecznosc-publiczna/)

Il. 2. Dolne Młyny Kraków (proj. Romuald Loegler). Poszukiwanie

estetycznej harmonii w drodze urbanistyczno-architektonicznej osmozy

wyrażającej się dialogiem z miejscowymi uwarunkowaniami,

konserwatorsko chronionej przemysłowej przeszłości

i nową, ekskluzywną zabudową mieszkaniową

(źródło: http://loegler.pl/uzytecznosc-publiczna/)

156 Romuald Loegler

crossing the boundaries of architecture as he discovers its

new areas (Loegler 2019, 123). By creating new situations

that respond to current needs, they induce changes in our

behavioural patterns while giving meaning to future life

Fig. 4. Musical Theatre in Poznań (designed by Romuald Loegler). The distinctiveness of

the contemporary, iconic architectural

composition, whose

originality and

aptness in relating to the surrounding

buildings results in a shape that fits in innovatively with the panorama of the downtown district

(source: http://loegler.pl/uzytecznosc- publiczna/)

Il. 4. Teatr Muzyczny w Poznaniu (proj. Romuald Loegler). Wyrazistość współczesnej, ikonicznej architektonicznej kompozycji, której oryginalność

i trafność odniesienia się do otaczającej zabudowy skutkuje kształtem bryły wpisującej się w nowatorski sposób w panoramę śródmiejskiej dzielnicy

(źródło: http://loegler.pl/uzytecznosc- publiczna/)

situations. Urban and architectural design as a function of

the city – […] result-of-innovation-and-experience-of-tra-

dition, the architect’s innate ability to think at a human scale

(Loegler 2019, 123) – naturally locates the problem an-

Osmosis architecture – an aesthetic link between the past and the future 157

Fig. 5. Jams Simson Galerie Berlin (designed by David Chipperfield).

Combining the old and the new created on the basis of classical

principles and rules of beauty (photo by Simon Menges,

source: https://davidchipperfield.com/projects/james-simon-galerie)

Il. 5. Jams Simson Galerie Berlin (proj. David Chipperfield).

Łączenie starego z nowym kreowane w oparciu o klasyczne zasady

i reguły piękna (fot. Simon Menges, źródło: https://davidchipperfield.com/

projects/james-simon-galerie)

chored in the idea of contextualised architecture. As in her-

meneutic philosophy, a contextual attitude in architecture is

meant to stimulate reection on the time-bound existence of

architecture and its rationality (Loegler 1992; 2011).

The contextual attitude has inuenced and continues to

inuence much of contemporary architecture, whose cre-

ators refer to regionalisms or postmodern presence in the

past. Contextualised architecture is identied by architects in

the relationship between the “old” and the “new” , whereby

the “new” is stimulated by technical and cultural advances,

often to the exclusion of an in-depth analysis of the interac-

tion of the “new” with its place of origin. The great diversity

of the language of newly created architecture raises doubts

as to whether the notion of contextual architecture is not,

above all, a convention intended to ensure the coexistence

of the various options of contemporary pluralism – a kind of

rhetoric that ends up equating the discourse on contextual-

ism with a critique of technological civilisation and a way of

seeking to rediscover local colour and roots (Fig. 5). How-

ever, it is impossible to ignore the reection on architecture

and urbanism in the context of cultural and civilisational

change. Today’s time locates contextualised architecture

in an area of theoretical, geographical and regional partic-

ularisms arising from modes of construction, specicities of

urban culture and traditional typologies. Today’s time adds

new “tools” – contemporary means of construction and ma-

terials that provide a guarantee of authenticity, and it means

creating a present that accepts the need for the “new”, both

from the point of view of the requirements of contemporary

urban planning and in response to current social needs for

universality and comfort in urban life.

Defining the value of a place

In order to function in the “labyrinths” of our cities, it is

necessary to control their forms, which, pushed beyond their

existing boundaries, come into contact with the surrounding

context. The architecture of contemporary buildings often

makes no attempt to t into the public space, failing to es-

tablish the desired relationship with the city. It conrms that

the CITY is unaware of the importance and rank of archi-

tecture. This unawareness manifests itself through signif-

icant slip-ups, which are always committed as a result of

erroneous spatial policy and planning errors stemming from

the city’s lack of the need to achieve contextual coherence,

including a moral context implying a specic treatment of

the role of architecture in the development of modern (con-

temporary?) societies. Its development should be shaped by

the conditions of human activity, not the other way around.

As modern, architecture should be an environment for real-

ising the aspirations of the individual and the community,

an environment whose quality is created by a broadly con-

ceived contextual attitude.

Understanding of context in urban and architectural cre-

ation is subject to the individual viewer. The generalisation

of the understanding of context leads to multiple interpreta-

tions, despite the fact that it is obvious to almost everyone

that any creation – a new architectural intervention – should

be the result of structural regulations occurring in the place

designated for it.

The contextual existence of the “new” is complicated by

the fact that architects have little say in choosing a location

to determine whether it is suitable so that the programmed

“intervention” can be adapted to its surroundings and thus

given the right emotional content.

Understanding of context is most often made through

direct spatial experiences found in the existing, histori

cally shaped architectural setting. Fewer experiences are

provided by a processed environment that adequately meets

the needs of the present day, using the imagery and architec-

tural language of the present day, not least because contextu

alism has for many years been, or perhaps still is, dismissed

as a criticism of technology and civilisation. In the belief of

many, contextualism could only be realised through a nos-

talgic return to an existence before the technical revolution.

Summary

The postmodern period has developed almost a stereo-

type of thinking about context, based on the conviction that

the historical fabric of streets and squares denes the basis

for new interventions, and not only with regard to recon-

struction or the reproduction of urban form, not infrequently

with the recommendation to “copy” the historically stylistic

architectural application of buildings found in the vicinity

of the site of the new intervention. The past in terms of the

geometry of space and often also function is also referred

to in completely new urban creations. The question arises,

however, whether the mere fact of subordinating oneself to

the regulations found at the site makes the individual ob-

jects or complexes a fully-edged creation? Is not it more

important how they – the new creations – use the context to

nd their individual expression?

There is certainly no need for the “new” to lead to the

devastation of the old. This does not mean that the place of

158 Romuald Loegler

Fig. 7. Łódź Philharmonic (designed by Romuald Loegler). The architectural composition emphasises the context of the venue

with a neutral, contemporary form expressed in a subtle, tactful and elegant architectural language

(photo by Wojciech Chryński, source: http://loegler.pl/uzytecznosc-publiczna/)

Il. 7. Filharmonia w Łodzi (proj. Romuald Loegler). Architektoniczna kompozycja podkreśla kontekst miejsca neutralną, współczesną formą,

wyrażoną subtelnym, taktownym i eleganckim językiem architektonicznym (fot. Wojciech Chryński, źródło: http://loegler.pl/uzytecznosc-publiczna/)

Fig. 6. Manggha Museum of Japanese Art and Technology in Kraków

(designed by Arata Izosaki). Visible from the terrace of Wawel Hill,

integrated into the meanders of the flowing Vistula River, its

undulating lines create the geometry of the building’s roof structure,

which does not disturb the long-lasting genius loci of its location

(photo by J. Ochoński, source: https://dzieje.pl/wystawy/manggha-

przygotowuje-szesc-wystaw-na-temat-buddyzmu)

Il. 6. Centrum Sztuki Japońskiej w Krakowie (proj. Arata Izosaki).

Widoczne z tarasu Wzgórza Wawelskiego, wkomponowane w mean-

dry płynącej rzeki Wisły, jej sfalowanymi liniami tworzy geometrię

konstrukcji dachu budynku, niezakłócającej trwającego od dawna

genius loci miejsca jego lokalizacji (fot. J.Ochoński,

źródło: https://dzieje.pl/wystawy/manggha-przygotowuje-szesc-

wystaw-na-temat-buddyzmu)

contemporary intervention cannot remain what it was be-

fore the intervention, before the appearance of the “new”,

retaining its character but enriched with a new quality that

builds the geological value of the living place and its com-

munity. When analysing the phenomena of architectural or

urban creations, it must be objectively stated that they are

created on the foundations of the past. For each place of

“new construction” is not an abstraction, a utopia, but a real

complex whose recognition and appreciation of its value al-

lows for its development and modication.

Can architectural ideas, then, as a collective legacy, be

separated from the culture of a particular time? Does such an

intellectual stance, which allows architecture to be designed

rooted in its location, mean that it has to give up its own

contemporary face?

Answering these questions is not easy. The denition of

place-related values and the pursuit of the “appropriate form”

should not be the result of the individuality or originality of

the expression of the architecture created, nor should it be

limited by the obligation to speak only with quotations from

the past!

Context – an important aspect of architecture – in the ab-

sence of any binding style rules, should be understood ideo-

logically, politically, historically and culturally – in a word,

broadly! The criterion of harmony of the world – beauty, is

to dene the value of a place as the contextual conditions

for a new architectural or urban creation based on the rela-

tionship between the “old” and the “new” and on reection

on the periodic nature of architecture, which a priori denies

a nostalgic return to the past, sanctioning the existence of

the “new”: a formally dierentiated architectural substance

while maintaining a uniform, equalised degree of aesthetic

quality (Fig. 6).

This understanding of the contextual creation of architec-

ture, of its contextual being realised by the unity of the aes-

thetic level: the found and the new, which is, above all, the

Osmosis architecture – an aesthetic link between the past and the future 159

Aalto, Alvar. “Between Materialism and Humanism.” In Alvar Aalto in

his own worlds, edited by Göran Schildt. Rizzoli, 1997.

de Botton, Alain. The Architecture of Happiness. Vintage Publishing, 2008.

Einstein, Albert, The World As I See It. Translated by Allan Harris. Phil-

osophical Library, 1949.

Gregotti, Vittorio. “The Vices of Architects.” Lotus 74 (1992): 112–3.

Kosiński, Wojciech. Paradygmat miasta 21 wieku: pomiędzy przesz łoś

cią “polis” a przyszłością “metropolis.” Wydawnictwo PK, 2016.

Loegler, Romuald. “Dening the Value of the Site.” Lotus 74 (1992):

118–20.

Loegler, Romuald Maksymilian. Miasto to nie architektoniczna zabawa.

RAM, 2011.

Loegler, Romuald Maksymilian. “Miasto dzisiaj – miasto jutro.” Pań-

stwo i Społeczeństwo 19, no. 3 (2019): 121–31. https://doi.org/

10.34697/2451-0858-pis-2019-3-006.

Pallasmaa, Juhani. The Eyes of the Skin. Architecture and the Senses.

John Wiley and Sons, 2005.

Portoghesi, Paolo. “Setting and Spirit of the Time.” Lotus 74 (1992):

116–8.

Zamorska-Przyłuska, Ewa, ed. …wspaniałość budowy tego, co istnie-

je… O architekturze Romualda Loeglera / Der wunderbare Bau des

Seienden… Über die Architektur Romuald Loeglers. Translated by

Lesław Michalus, Rafał Wędrychowski, Marcin Przyłuski. RAM,

1997.

Fig. 8. Scientific Information Center and Academic Library (CINiBA)

Katowice (designed by Dariusz Herman, Piotr Śmierzewski).

With its architecture, its individual language of architectural form,

the library has become the catalyst for a new redevelopment plan

for the university campus – a new time of university expansion

into the life of the city and the region (photo by Jakub Certowicz,

source: https://analog-architecture.com/2002-ciniba/)

Il. 8. Biblioteka Akademicka Katowice (proj. Dariusz Herman, Piotr

Śmierzewski). Biblioteka, swoją architekturą, jej indywidualnym

językiem architektonicznej formy, stała się katalizatorem dla planu

przebudowy kampusu uniwersyteckiego – nowego czasu

uniwersyteckiej ekspansji w życie miasta i regionu (fot. Jakub

Certowicz, źródło: https://analog-architecture.com/2002-ciniba/)

References

result of the ability in the creative process to dene values

in relation to place, to fully experience, understand and ac-

cept it. Neither the so-called “accidents” nor regionalism or

other possible attitudes oer the possibility of objectifying

the contextual being of architecture. Neither does tradition

understood as a value that is not subject to evolution, nor

does the postmodern presence in the past certainly do so.

Architecture, after all, also has its reality in aesthetic terms,

in beauty, which is not a “quality of things” but a human

reaction to them, to the architectural character, to the good

or bad measure of it in relation also to the urban or natural

environment (Figs. 7, 8).

There are many places that conrm the thesis that the

coherence of the architectural quality of the “new” creates

a new value of the contextual setting – an image of the past.

There are many places that prove that the contextual exis-

tence of architecture is conrmed not by stylistic homoge-

neity, tradition or regionalism, but is expressed by the ap-

propriateness of the aesthetic quality of architecture existing

side by side. It is architecture, […] unusual, original urban

composition – immanent, […] but artistic, constituting its

own aesthetic entity dierent from others […], according to

professor Wojciech Kosiński, that is the fourth factor of the

city’s originality (Kosiński 2016, 19).

There are many places demonstrating that relating and

subordinating architecture to the local landscape only

through structural mechanisms does not automatically solve

the problem of the quality of its contextual occurrence.

Contemporary architecture is not meant to deny the roots

and traditions of its place of origin. It has the right to con-

sciously distance itself from the classical tradition… When

creating an aisle of tradition, it is essential to be aware of the

need to accept the valuable things that belong to the past.

Awareness of this fact also means that contemporary archi-

tecture cannot be built according to “yesterday’s” standards.

Its very existence as a genuinely contemporary architecture

must be sanctioned by the right of the “new” to constitute

the present while respecting the authentic values of the past.

Translated by

Jan Urbanik

160 Romuald Loegler

Streszczenie

Architektura osmozy – estetyczny łącznik między przeszłością a przyszłością

Zmiana wyglądu powierzchowności formy oznacza transformację, a bazą dla transformacji jest synonim greckiego pojęcia metamorfoza.

Transformacja opisuje stan przejściowy, momenty towarzyszące przemianie, spełnianie się akcji, rozgrywania się procesu, dokonywania się przemia-

ny danego przedmiotu lub podmiotu.

Metamorfoza zdaje się być lub jest nawiązaniem do czegoś, wspomnieniem, aluzją do procesu, który jest autonomiczny lub endogenny – pochodzący

z wnętrza, wywołany przez wewnętrzne czynniki.

W tym stałym procesie przemian architektura może być porównana do żywego organizmu, który także podlega wewnętrznej przemianie, który stale

podlega procesowi wewnętrznych przeobrażeń.

W niniejszych rozważaniach kluczowe jest wykazanie, że transformacja i metamorfoza to dwie drogi do eksplorowania jednego z najważniejszych

wytworów cywilizacji, jakim są nasze miasta, że rezultaty transformacji konkretnych fragmentów miast to wyniki projektowych procesów opartych na

idei kreacji formy w procesie jej uwalniania w uwarunkowaniach istniejącej rzeczywistości.

Słowa kluczowe: osmoza, idea, forma, kontekst, kreacja