recommended reading By the end of World War II Alberto Pirel

By the end of World War II, Alberto Pirelli ordered the construction of a modern skyscraper in an area near the main train station in Milan. This building would serve as a corporate symbol of his family׳s rubber company. Immediately, the building became the symbol of the new postwar city and of the national “economic boom” development at that time (Tafuri, 1989). The above text was taken from Giò Ponti׳s artistic manifesto, Amate l’architettura (In Praise of Architecture in English, 1960). This manifesto describes why each part of the skyscraper, such as the structural and fixture systems, was designed as part of a unique architectural work of art. Gio Ponti believed that architecture should result in the harmony of form and function. He described the Pirelli Tower as a large “diamond shape”, a finished work of art that needed no perfecting. The refined structural system (i.e., a very narrow recommended reading supported by concrete piers that decrease in size toward the top of the building) was planned by another Italian master of modern architecture, Pier Luigi Nervi (1963), who is one of the greatest engineers of his time who specialized in concrete structures. Therefore, the structural system constitutes an important part of the tower and the entire system of the curtain wall façade. His work is the first successful example of Italian post-war period architecture, in which elegant design is combined with futuristic technology choices.
Methodical approach The guidelines for the project were based on the firm belief that the conservation of “new” architecture is similar to other restoration work, except for the closeness in time to the original architecture and sometimes with its creator (Pergoli Campanelli, 2005). This topic is interesting, complex, and stimulating, especially as new and rapidly evolving technologies raise a number of questions. If we accept a principle of unity for all the masterpieces of human intellect and a criterion of respect for all historical evidence, we do not have to deal with the “restoration of the new” and ancient architecture from different methodological perspectives (Carbonara and Pergoli Campanelli 2003). The Technical-Scientific Commission developed the methodological criteria for intervention. The commission performed conservative intervention for all choices with respect to the historical and cultural values of the building. The elaboration of the preliminary and final designs was conducted by the Renato Sarno Group of Milan and the atelier Multari+Corvino of Naples (Corvino et al., 2009). This project is a case promoting the importance of preservation as potential historical testimonies, even the very technical errors that only the authentic object is capable of transmitting. Thus, modern epistemology teaches that the only truly scientific information of a theory is the type that is tied to its own fallibility (Popper, 1959).
Conservation project Interventions on glass tesserae, which were previously made safe with unsightly metallic nets, were designed based on the same conceptual line. These features were considered as valuable “ancient” surfaces with detachment maps, performed using manual beating with a rubberized hammer of all 12,000m2 of the outer surface and careful removing of dirt that consisted of a layer of materialized dust and smog that adhered to the surface (Crippa, 2007; Pergoli Campanelli, 2005). The studies performed during the restoration of the Pirelli Tower identified the outstanding technological and representative quality of the Italian production of curtain walls between the 1950s and 1960s, which were not less than the coeval international productions (Salvo, 2006). This condition was a surprising observation, considering that the major experts on curtain walls usually come from the USA (Kelley and Johnson, 1998). This observation justifies the predominantly conservative approach taken in restoring the skyscraper and the particular efforts exerted in planning the work.