Fernando Távora can be considered one of the most important exponents of
contemporary Portuguese architecture; he symbolizes the deep cultural renewal that has gradually allowed Portugal to again play an important role in European architecture. His poetical language is the fine result of a particular cultural background that has led him to create a new Portuguese architecture based on a careful dialogue between modernity and tradition. Most of his works show that he has explored new paths to enhance the traditional values of rural Portuguese architecture: Each project evokes the past, but his designs follow principles of modernity, including functional spaces, accurate details, refined shapes, perfect integration to natural sites, and traditional materials. In other words, Távora’s architecture is not “something different, special, sublime, but work made for man by man.” Thanks to his long teaching experience (university professor, Faculty of Architecture in Oporto and Coimbra), he has become one of the main reference points for a new generation of Portuguese architects.
Fully aware of architecture by Le Corbusier and Mies van der Rohe, Távora sought ways to blend traditional Portuguese architectural forms with those of the modernists. In 1947 he wrote an essay titled “O problema da casa portuguesa” (The Problem of the Portuguese House), in which he explained his point of view for reinvigorating Portuguese architectural language: “The typical house will provide us with many important lessons when properly studied, since it is the most functional and less fanciful; in short it comes closest to the new intentions. ...In contemporary architecture, a promising consistency is looming on the horizon...with which Portuguese architecture should merge, without fear of losing its identity.... It does not fade away like so much smoke; if we do possess this individuality, nothing will be lost by studying foreign architecture.” However, in the works of this period (1947–52), Távora appears not yet to be able to adapt these principles to his projects.
Távora’s efforts to combine modernity and tradition show promise in one of his first
public projects for Oporto, the Municipal Park of Quinta da Conceiçao (1960), which included the simple Tennis Pavilion, his first masterpiece. The park shows elements of its past: an old monastery, founded in the 15th century. In the quiet landscape of the old cloister, the chapel and the pools fit well with the elegant design of new modernist spaces. Távora himself describes the Tennis Pavilion as the work of “a young architect torn between reality and dream, the local and the international, the model and the history.” The design recalls traditional elements of Portuguese rural architecture and Japanese religious structures. With its balanced proportions and the use of traditional materials (wooden trusses and white concrete), the small pavilion “contains a certain remote oriental influence, as does traditional Portuguese architecture from the sixteenth century onwards.”
Távora’s experiments continue to blend different elements, modern and traditional, in the Summer House (1958) in Ofir. Placed in a Mediterranean pine grove, the house is divided into three functional blocks (living room area, services, and bedroom area) connected by a large covered passage. The whole building evokes local rural architecture with its geometric white surfaces, wooden trusses, red-tiled roof, paved loggias, and colored chimneys.
Throughout his career, Távora has incorporated modern and traditional Portuguese forms to create simple and clean spaces where various cultural references coexist. His literary discussion about architecture carries on and generates other complex works, such as the Gondomar Convent (1971), the Convent of Santa Marinha da Costa Inn (1984), and the Agriculture High School Refoios do Lima (1993). They highlight the evolution of his thinking about traditional and modern architecture in Portugal.
The Gondomar Convent is articulated into various blocks, each fulfilling a different function (dormitories, chapel, meeting rooms, and refectory). Linking buildings with the site, Távora arranged the blocks to follow the natural slope of the landscape. Materials (gray granite, white concrete, and red-tiled roofs) recall local rural architecture and enhance a critical reuse of Portuguese architectural values. The conversion of the 18th- century Convent of Santa Marinha da Costa to a pousada (the typical Portuguese inn) allowed Távora to further develop his principles. This project is not a mere restoration of the old walls of the convent but rather a subtle attempt to insert modern structures in an architectural continuity. The conceptual methodology adopted in the restoration of the convent is clearly explained by Távora himself: “The general criterion used was to carry on innovating the already long life of the old building, by preserving its most important areas and creating spaces of quality resulting from the new functional use introduced.” The new bedroom section is not a simple addition of forms but rather represents the continuous transformation of the whole building. Popular forms of rural architecture inspired the design of the new parts of the convent: the integration between the old and the new suggests continuity more than rupture. A similar conception was successively adopted for the Refoios do Lima Convent’s conversion to the High School for Agriculture (1987). The interior values of the existing structures are unchanged, and the yellow ancient walls are carefully linked with the new buildings.
In summing up Távora’s contribution to 20th-century architecture, it is useful to conclude with the words of the critic Manuel Mendes. He asserts that “Távora’s architecture is not influenced by any particular architect, by any one particular school or period, it encompasses the whole dimension of memory: his work in its apparent simplicity, is the most original and erudite stylistic research carried out in recent years in Portugal.”
STEFANIA ATTI
Sennott R.S. Encyclopedia of twentieth century architecture, Vol.3. Fitzroy Dearborn., 2005.
|
