Scenario: You have 8-9 days to travel in Europe (leaving and returning from Genoa, Italy) and document contemporary architecture. Funds are of limited concern, thus flying is an option but train is preferred. What cities do you visit and for how long? (weigh options, quantity vs quality, is Biblao worth going to see? its kind of out of the way, Paris London Brussels triangle?, things of this nature)
Unless you spend a bit of time in one or two cities you will get no more that the tourist postcard view. Add to this the travel time to get to Amsterdam etc and you be an expert in nothing more than the transport infrastrucute of Europe - no light topic for study in itself!
3 cities max Millan, Turin, Nice although my preference would be for a study of the famous hill towns of northern Italy. A facinating architectural journey that will need a car to get to (amazing driving experience to boot if you can get something sporty). Little contempoary there but architectural quality in abundance.
I like the Basel, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, triangle. Flying back to Genoa from Copenhagen. I didn't mention that Ive already done trips all through Italy, thanks though BOTS. holz.box would you not substitute Zurich for Basel?
How about Berlin, Copenhagen, Amsterdam
For clarity, by contemporary I mean modern, new, etc.
Agree with BOTS that with only 8-9 days you are very limited to seeing only the "postcard" view of any place you go. I spent about 4 weeks doing those three cities several years ago and still feel like I missed out on quite a bit.
For contemporary architecture Berlin has a wealth of "new" stuff. Some good, some not, but since reunification they've had a building boom unmatched in Europe, so you can see quite a bit in a few days. Guess the "Info Box" is now gone. I'd like to get back and see the finished city as last time I was there we counted dozens of cranes across the skyline.
There are some real architectural gems in Vienna and Prauge, but moreso than the architecture, both are great cities and worth the visit for the culture alone. If over there I'd suggest checking out anything by Adolph Loos. Great modernism of the early 20th century.
And, from my experience in Europe... the farther east you go...the cheaper the prices get.
if between basel and zuerich then no, basel has more projects than zuerich, plus oodles of diener + diener, morger + degelo and h&dem. it's also easier to get around.
copenhagen has a lot of strong recent work, berlin is great as well - cheap food.
you might be better off just sticking around switzerland...
genoa-basel-zuerich-chur-lugano-genoa might be a good way to go as well.
Any of these cities named above are fantastic. Anywhere that you have never been before is full of novelty. I like novelty. I also love London, but I wouldn't suggest that either are reason enough for a trip.
Add some narrative: Follow a trail. pick an Architect, or a movement, a sculptor or landscaper, a building type or historical canon and tour a few of them. You'll enjoy the research, it'll take you to out of the way places and tourist traps, you will have a memory of learning and appreciation that is coherent.
Me? I try to go to sculpture parks. Others make pilgrimage to Zumthor's buildings or Corbusier, exponents of De Stijl, magnificent relics of Fascist regimes, masterplanned cities, walled towns with medieval beamed marketplaces, harbours and marinas, cities with festivals, bookshops of underground repute, nightclubs of glamour and dirt, museums but only for the facades...
It will make your photographic record more interesting, it might develop a genuine knowledge. It will give you a timeline, or point in time from which to reference the rest. This will in turn expose economic and political history, social and cultural cusps.
I wouldn't rush things. It's really no use racing all across Europe to see a whole bunch of great cities - and completely missing the point of your travel. For instance: the triangle Basel-Amsterdam-Copenhagen sounds great and all, but you'd have to deduct at least three days for traveling.
I'd personally go for a smaller selection of cities that are closer together and really get to know the cities. Not just the architectural highlights, but also the lesser known gems and the culture of the place.
For instance: if you start in Genoa (but already traveled through Italy a lot), you might go for a nice Switzerland and Austria-trip. Both countries have a bunch of interesting cities with interesting architecture, both new and old. So maybe a Zürich/Basel - Vienna - Graz roundtrip?
Prague, Berlin, Copenhagen, London, Amsterdam, Barcelona... all great cities, but just a bit too far away for the limited amount of time you have over here. I'd save that for the next time, and really get to know a selected area a bit better.
and, in case you do wish to travel across europe by plane: you can see which flights are the cheapest on www.skyscanner.net
why did you decide to use genoa as a hub? Besides Piano's office, theres not much there.... If I only had a week, I would rent a car. It is very difficult to see Corb and Zumthor things since they are remote and away from main public transportation. If you go this route, I would buy or borrow a GPS as it will save significant amount of time. If a car is a no go... I would stick to major cities, definitely go to Verona to see Scarpa. Paris or Barcelona would be good too but impossible to do both from Genoa. There is an overnight train to Paris from Milan but getting to Barcelona from Genoa via train is impossible.
Genoa/Genova is worth exploring for a few days - renzo has made some great public spaces/architecture. Then head west to Nice (not much for the architecture but great food); visit Le Corb's house on Cap Ferrat (sic) where he died along the way into Monaco's post-romantic wedding cake meets hong kong architecture. (Genova to Nice is a long day's drive - the train is much faster)
or just do genova and milan. that would be worth a full week of life in italy....
why no planes? budget travel around europe using things like easyjet can be WAY cheaper and WAY faster than the trains. worth looking into at least.
you don't get quite the terrestrial view, but i did orkney, london, paris, florence that way. 14 days and quite exhausting, but damn i had a great trip.
A little over a week? Wouldn't be enough time for me. If I had a week in that part of the world, I'd likely get a good feel for Genoa for a few days then I'd make my way to the islands of Greece, sail between a dozen islands, study the vernacular, dock in Santorini or Mykonos, and sip your drink while you watch the sunset over the Aegean from the terraced whitewashed buildings (preferably with a significant other).
Then when you have a good month, hit up Rome, Paris, Dublin, London, Amsterdam, Berlin, and Madrid.
I'd second Psyarch's plan. Ultimately there's loads of stuff to see and without a reason for picking cities/sites/sights over others you may end up overwhelmed or disappointed. Remember everyone's response to a place is different, anonymous advice is helpful but is best when focused in regards to what you want to get out of your time there. If you're there to pursue a specific line of inquiry, your schedule would be very different than if you're looking for a tan and photos of some icons.
I completely agree with usernametaken – don't take in too much. I did way too much on my first visit and still regret it. Limit your travels and expect to go back in the near future. My favorites include Amsterdam, London, Rome & Milan. Throw in France to visit any of the wine caves and I'm a happy camper.
If you're there in April, 16-21 to be precise, head for the Salone del Mobile in Milan. FurniPorn central. I'll be filling my boots.
The ryanair/easyjet route is cheap, true, but even on a one-hour flight you have to get to the airport, to the airport way ahead of departure time, to the way-out-of-town airport way ahead of departure time, and then fight your way into your destination town from the out-of-town destination airport. You'd be lucky to see anything of note from the plane itself, except the vomit-proof plastic chairs, and the plastic-induced sweat-stains of your co-travellers, and your palms as you cry into them at the horror of the non-stop perfume/scratch card/advance rail ticket/shit sandwich selling that goes on during your one-hour flight.
That said, I'll be taking a £12+taxes flight to Milan for the Salone, via RyanAir, but I have less time constraints, and a strong stomach. If you feel you must fly, this site screenscrapes (mostly British-based) cheap flight providers: flightchecker
I'm sure there are Italian providers that go in and out of Genoa, but this site lists none...
Again, be sure and walk slowly, and enjoy.
Note also that in Italy if you stand for your coffee they must charge you the government stated rate of €0.80ish, whereas if you sit they can charge what they like.
"Note also that in Italy if you stand for your coffee they must charge you the government stated rate of €0.80ish, whereas if you sit they can charge what they like."
I've never heard it, really, where this news comes from?
I'm italian, born and raised, and the price is different for bar to bar and from city to city.
In Milan the average price for an espresso is 0.90€, in Genoa is 0.95€, in Rome is 0.75€.
Matteo,
perhaps these things are not apparent to the local! My good friend, seven years an immigrant resident in Milan pointed it out. From the smartest bar to the stinkiest caf, an espresso when standing up is the same price. Perhaps it does vary by city.
Feb 17, 08 1:31 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
One week in Europe
Scenario: You have 8-9 days to travel in Europe (leaving and returning from Genoa, Italy) and document contemporary architecture. Funds are of limited concern, thus flying is an option but train is preferred. What cities do you visit and for how long? (weigh options, quantity vs quality, is Biblao worth going to see? its kind of out of the way, Paris London Brussels triangle?, things of this nature)
Ok, discuss!
bilbao - out.
my advice:
train to basel/weil am rhein (vitra): 2-3 days
train to copenhagen: 2-3 days
train to amsterdam: 2-3 days
all three cities are very dense, offer lots to see.
Unless you spend a bit of time in one or two cities you will get no more that the tourist postcard view. Add to this the travel time to get to Amsterdam etc and you be an expert in nothing more than the transport infrastrucute of Europe - no light topic for study in itself!
3 cities max Millan, Turin, Nice although my preference would be for a study of the famous hill towns of northern Italy. A facinating architectural journey that will need a car to get to (amazing driving experience to boot if you can get something sporty). Little contempoary there but architectural quality in abundance.
Just a thought
I like the Basel, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, triangle. Flying back to Genoa from Copenhagen. I didn't mention that Ive already done trips all through Italy, thanks though BOTS. holz.box would you not substitute Zurich for Basel?
How about Berlin, Copenhagen, Amsterdam
For clarity, by contemporary I mean modern, new, etc.
Thanks
Rotterdam has an Architectural museum... Don't know much more than that.
barcelona, valencia, madrid... if you want to see some amazing works of contemporary architecture. And spain is great on a budget!
I'd go east. Vienna, Prauge & Berlin.
Agree with BOTS that with only 8-9 days you are very limited to seeing only the "postcard" view of any place you go. I spent about 4 weeks doing those three cities several years ago and still feel like I missed out on quite a bit.
For contemporary architecture Berlin has a wealth of "new" stuff. Some good, some not, but since reunification they've had a building boom unmatched in Europe, so you can see quite a bit in a few days. Guess the "Info Box" is now gone. I'd like to get back and see the finished city as last time I was there we counted dozens of cranes across the skyline.
There are some real architectural gems in Vienna and Prauge, but moreso than the architecture, both are great cities and worth the visit for the culture alone. If over there I'd suggest checking out anything by Adolph Loos. Great modernism of the early 20th century.
And, from my experience in Europe... the farther east you go...the cheaper the prices get.
Maastricht
if between basel and zuerich then no, basel has more projects than zuerich, plus oodles of diener + diener, morger + degelo and h&dem. it's also easier to get around.
copenhagen has a lot of strong recent work, berlin is great as well - cheap food.
you might be better off just sticking around switzerland...
genoa-basel-zuerich-chur-lugano-genoa might be a good way to go as well.
Paris, Barcelona, Amsterdam
Any of these cities named above are fantastic. Anywhere that you have never been before is full of novelty. I like novelty. I also love London, but I wouldn't suggest that either are reason enough for a trip.
Add some narrative: Follow a trail. pick an Architect, or a movement, a sculptor or landscaper, a building type or historical canon and tour a few of them. You'll enjoy the research, it'll take you to out of the way places and tourist traps, you will have a memory of learning and appreciation that is coherent.
Me? I try to go to sculpture parks. Others make pilgrimage to Zumthor's buildings or Corbusier, exponents of De Stijl, magnificent relics of Fascist regimes, masterplanned cities, walled towns with medieval beamed marketplaces, harbours and marinas, cities with festivals, bookshops of underground repute, nightclubs of glamour and dirt, museums but only for the facades...
It will make your photographic record more interesting, it might develop a genuine knowledge. It will give you a timeline, or point in time from which to reference the rest. This will in turn expose economic and political history, social and cultural cusps.
Most of all, walk slowly. And enjoy.
I wouldn't rush things. It's really no use racing all across Europe to see a whole bunch of great cities - and completely missing the point of your travel. For instance: the triangle Basel-Amsterdam-Copenhagen sounds great and all, but you'd have to deduct at least three days for traveling.
I'd personally go for a smaller selection of cities that are closer together and really get to know the cities. Not just the architectural highlights, but also the lesser known gems and the culture of the place.
For instance: if you start in Genoa (but already traveled through Italy a lot), you might go for a nice Switzerland and Austria-trip. Both countries have a bunch of interesting cities with interesting architecture, both new and old. So maybe a Zürich/Basel - Vienna - Graz roundtrip?
Prague, Berlin, Copenhagen, London, Amsterdam, Barcelona... all great cities, but just a bit too far away for the limited amount of time you have over here. I'd save that for the next time, and really get to know a selected area a bit better.
and, in case you do wish to travel across europe by plane: you can see which flights are the cheapest on www.skyscanner.net
why did you decide to use genoa as a hub? Besides Piano's office, theres not much there.... If I only had a week, I would rent a car. It is very difficult to see Corb and Zumthor things since they are remote and away from main public transportation. If you go this route, I would buy or borrow a GPS as it will save significant amount of time. If a car is a no go... I would stick to major cities, definitely go to Verona to see Scarpa. Paris or Barcelona would be good too but impossible to do both from Genoa. There is an overnight train to Paris from Milan but getting to Barcelona from Genoa via train is impossible.
Clemson's study abroad program is in Genoa.
Genoa/Genova is worth exploring for a few days - renzo has made some great public spaces/architecture. Then head west to Nice (not much for the architecture but great food); visit Le Corb's house on Cap Ferrat (sic) where he died along the way into Monaco's post-romantic wedding cake meets hong kong architecture. (Genova to Nice is a long day's drive - the train is much faster)
or just do genova and milan. that would be worth a full week of life in italy....
why no planes? budget travel around europe using things like easyjet can be WAY cheaper and WAY faster than the trains. worth looking into at least.
you don't get quite the terrestrial view, but i did orkney, london, paris, florence that way. 14 days and quite exhausting, but damn i had a great trip.
A little over a week? Wouldn't be enough time for me. If I had a week in that part of the world, I'd likely get a good feel for Genoa for a few days then I'd make my way to the islands of Greece, sail between a dozen islands, study the vernacular, dock in Santorini or Mykonos, and sip your drink while you watch the sunset over the Aegean from the terraced whitewashed buildings (preferably with a significant other).
Then when you have a good month, hit up Rome, Paris, Dublin, London, Amsterdam, Berlin, and Madrid.
I'd second Psyarch's plan. Ultimately there's loads of stuff to see and without a reason for picking cities/sites/sights over others you may end up overwhelmed or disappointed. Remember everyone's response to a place is different, anonymous advice is helpful but is best when focused in regards to what you want to get out of your time there. If you're there to pursue a specific line of inquiry, your schedule would be very different than if you're looking for a tan and photos of some icons.
I completely agree with usernametaken – don't take in too much. I did way too much on my first visit and still regret it. Limit your travels and expect to go back in the near future. My favorites include Amsterdam, London, Rome & Milan. Throw in France to visit any of the wine caves and I'm a happy camper.
If you're there in April, 16-21 to be precise, head for the Salone del Mobile in Milan. FurniPorn central. I'll be filling my boots.
The ryanair/easyjet route is cheap, true, but even on a one-hour flight you have to get to the airport, to the airport way ahead of departure time, to the way-out-of-town airport way ahead of departure time, and then fight your way into your destination town from the out-of-town destination airport. You'd be lucky to see anything of note from the plane itself, except the vomit-proof plastic chairs, and the plastic-induced sweat-stains of your co-travellers, and your palms as you cry into them at the horror of the non-stop perfume/scratch card/advance rail ticket/shit sandwich selling that goes on during your one-hour flight.
That said, I'll be taking a £12+taxes flight to Milan for the Salone, via RyanAir, but I have less time constraints, and a strong stomach. If you feel you must fly, this site screenscrapes (mostly British-based) cheap flight providers: flightchecker
I'm sure there are Italian providers that go in and out of Genoa, but this site lists none...
Again, be sure and walk slowly, and enjoy.
Note also that in Italy if you stand for your coffee they must charge you the government stated rate of €0.80ish, whereas if you sit they can charge what they like.
"Note also that in Italy if you stand for your coffee they must charge you the government stated rate of €0.80ish, whereas if you sit they can charge what they like."
I've never heard it, really, where this news comes from?
I'm italian, born and raised, and the price is different for bar to bar and from city to city.
In Milan the average price for an espresso is 0.90€, in Genoa is 0.95€, in Rome is 0.75€.
I would take the train heading west to Nice, Marseille, Barcelona, Valncia, Sevilla, Madrid and back to Genoa.
Matteo,
perhaps these things are not apparent to the local! My good friend, seven years an immigrant resident in Milan pointed it out. From the smartest bar to the stinkiest caf, an espresso when standing up is the same price. Perhaps it does vary by city.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.