Brief
A municipal project made to host the dead, a constant tribute to the existence and transcendence of humans, from both spiritual and biological points of view, the project is a building + park, where life can coexist with death, at the same time trying to solve the pragmatic issue of burial space limitations, introducing a new mourning system, mindful of tradition but conscious of contemporary limitations.
*This is not for commercial purposes, it's a design exercise.This is an advanced proposal from the one Thumb created years ago, it was not contracted by the company.
I live in a place with traditions and practices rooted in faith, which I consider a part of culture. My position in society is crucial, and I cannot be passive. When asked to contribute to my project space for wake, chapel, or cemetery, I can agree, but I don’t think I’m just going through the motions.
The issue is bigger. Architecture can stop a self-destructive culture, both physically and symbolically.
The social vision of death is terrible. Society invests resources, effort, and time in making patches to fulfill our responsibility as family members and friends.
How does society reward an economic effort of a few days to seal the memory of a human being? How does it deliver huge spaces of land for this purpose and even worse, ensure its persistence? How can an architect propose that space be condemned to decay so that people feel comfortable with their irrational position? A body in a state of putrefaction doesn’t deserve the same respect as a human being who feels, enjoys, and acts.
There’s a latent sensitivity in the image of the body that takes meaning on that life. Therefore, I believe that the preservation of memory can have a place, but it should be rational and prioritize the living first, then the dead. I envision a society where the body has a more technical, functional role, and its legacy is the judgment and glory of people.
I haven’t found a solid reason to prefer a closed space for graves over an open space where people can live with their relatives’ memories.
When asked if a country’s culture will change, I say yes. A self-destructive attitude isn’t a culture, and other global facts are maintained for “cultural reasons.”
As a designer, I work with people’s needs, not my whims. I can’t afford to be selfish and take away space from human life for the sake of a myth.
Johnattan
