Department of Engineering, piazzale Tecchio e via Claudio

By Giovanni Menna

The Engineering Department building in Piazzale Tecchio represents the most significant accomplishment in Naples after World War II by Luigi Cosenza, the most important Neapolitan designer of the twentieth century, and one of the most relevant public works ever built in the city from the 1950s onward. The work comes at the end of a most tormented process, in which one could even trace the history of the Modern in Naples, since the debate on the new location for engineering studies— which had always been housed in the heart of the historic center, in Santa Maria di Donnaromita— had produced a series of proposals that remained on paper from the nineteenth century through the core of the twentieth century. From Raffaele Folinea's project in Capodimonte (1890), to Gastone De Martino's Politecnico Mussolini for the Fondazione Politecnica per il Mezzogiorno d'Italia (1935), passing through Girolamo Ippolito's proposal (1941), which definitively established the location in Fuorigrotta until the Cosenza-De Martino plan (1946–1947), when Cosenza entered the scene, who, called by Adriano Galli to teach Architecture, would be the sole protagonist from this point on. Cosenza came up with an interesting design (1948–1950) for a complex made of pavilions in a rationalist style immersed in a network of green pathways. This design revealed a sensitivity to the relationship between the artificial and nature, which during these years drew him ever closer to the Association for Organic Architecture (Apao), which was led by Bruno Zevi. Zevi published the project in Metron (1950), and this sensibility would find its highest expression in the Olivetti factory in Pozzuoli. The unavailability of allocated land—which had been earmarked for a new municipal stadium—led to continuous redrawing of the project, which resulted in a total of eleven versions between 1950 and 1951. The deadlock, exacerbated by further use of land for the stadium parking, was finally resolved with the special law no. 297, 1953, which allocated funds for university construction in Naples. This allowed Cosenza to eventually settle on the definitive version, approved by the Civil Engineering Corps in 1955, and the construction site opened in January 1956. Despite setbacks and interruptions, including the termination of the contract with the winning bidder—who offered a substantial discount—and a new tender in 1961, work resumed and was eventually completed, including the execution of the final artistic works, which began in 1963. The inauguration took place on 11 March 1965. As opposed to a pavilion-style layout, Cosenza chose an urban building layout with a square courtyard. The design includes a large internal courtyard enclosed by three lower volumes and a prominent structure at the head of the magnificent hypostyle reception hall. This design connects the open space of the city with that of the garden, naturally drawing inspiration from the Italian tradition but also from late medieval communal buildings like the 14th-century cloister of the University of Krakow. Compositional-wise, the dominant theme lies in the internal dialectic that the building seems to engage with itself, repeatedly challenging the principles it adopts at each turn. This includes the constant quest for an opening that neutralises the effects of introversion, allowing the work to gather upon itself. There is also the bending or tilting of surfaces—for example in the tapered height of the tower, the façade, or the truncated spindle-shaped structure on the opposite side—with a finesse reminiscent of Greek architecture, which distorts, fractures, and enlivens the apparent categorical orthogonality of the layout. Other aspects include asymmetry, deviations, or misalignments in relation to a layout anchored on axial longitudinality, the pursuit of fluidity and continuity within a rigorous hierarchical organization of spaces (education, research, administration, etc.), and the careful sizing and shaping in relation to equally rigorous functional and distributive requirements. Furthermore, the design incorporates the permeability of pilotis (columns) and porticos that break the solidity of the tower and blocks, as well as the pronounced horizontal alignment of all building components to balance the tower's soaring presence. Lastly, the richness in semantics and chromatics of artworks and finishes contrast with the repetitive module that organizes the tower's façade, adding depth and character to the building's appearance. Although this work is accomplished and self-referential, it acquires further significance when related to the context. First and foremost, it connects with the urban space and the primary features of the fragment of the city to which it belongs—the Mostra d'Oltremare, the San Paolo stadium, public housing, the square, the tree-lined avenue, and the Domiziano axis. In fact, it contributes to shaping the identity of a thoroughly modern city. Furthermore, it engages with nature: the nature of the expansive garden, the natural landscape enjoyed from the tower, and even the nature that infiltrates the surrounding built-up environment, as seen in the artfully arranged trees in the square, which are an integral part of the design. The dialectic between the constructed environment and nature also inspired the design of the second important Engineering campus, which was begun from 1972 onwards on a large expanse of land between via Terracina, via Marconi, and via Claudio. Built over different periods and subject to additions and modifications over time, this campus reverts to the original pavilion-style typology with a series of articulated ‘T’-shaped buildings separated by pathways and trees. On one hand, they adequately meet specific functional requirements, on the other, they naturally cannot exhibit the compactness and visual strength of the nearby Tecchio campus. Nonetheless, these buildings should be considered in conjunction with the other campus as part of a broader, intricate, complex, and diverse organism: a true politecnico that demanded a polyphonic plurality of themes and scales, ranging from the urban to the artistic. This experience was indeed an extraordinary work of synthesis, not only from the perspective of the various areas of expertise that Cosenza was able to merge but also in terms of the multiple disciplines involved in the project. These encompassed fields ranging from the science and technology of construction to urban planning (involving figures such as Michele Pagano, Marcello Picone, Luigi Tocchetti, Corrado Beguinot, and others), landscape design entrusted to the mastery of Piero Porcinai, and the decorative programme that engaged high-profile artists from the Neapolitan scene, including Domenico Spinosa and, in particular, Paolo Ricci. The painter and critic Paolo Ricci stands out as an exemplary figure of an engaged artist, sharing communist ideals with Cosenza and the workers of Bagnoli who created Eugenio Carmi's steel sculpture, symbolising the mutual "live and free cultural exchange" between the school and society, aiming to establish a genuinely working-class university. On one hand, the objective was to offer every individual who desired or was capable the opportunity to acquire knowledge of the highest form, as well as an understanding of the cultural and scientific issues of the time. On the other, it aimed to receive from society the significant and irreplaceable incentive for knowledge provided by the indication of data, trends, and issues resulting from historical and social experience. (Cosenza 1965, 6).

From the volume "Passeggiando per la Federico II" (second updated edition) edited by Alessandro Castagnaro - photographs by Roberto Fellicò - FedOAPress