Quo vadis Slovenian architect
On the state of mind in Slovenian architecture with three renowned architects.
On Prešeren Day, culture has once again been given a voice and some importance in society. There are no architects among this year’s Prešeren Prize winners, similar to the year before, and the laureates of the Prešeren Prize from this fieald are not the most frequent – although, due to the nature of their work, they are constantly in the public eye. Does our architecture not deserve it, or are architects just overlooked? Is our architecture up to contemporary challenges or is it anachronistic for our times? This time, three established and renowned architects, representatives of three generations, are helping us find answers to these and other questions of contemporary Slovenian architecture. Andrej Kalamar, Anže Koren and Dominik Košak, all three collaborators and fellow members of Inštitut Naprej.
With the awarding of the highest national prizes for artistic achievement for 2024, the society remembered the artists who were most prominent last year, and through them all the others who have always worked at the frontier where the known and the unknown, the routine and the visionary meet. This is how the Chairman of the Board of the Prešeren Fund, Dr. Jožef Muhovič, described their work. Art, he added, is a rite of passage into another state of affairs because of this existence in a border space.
“Today’s ideas are far too short term oriented to be set in stone.”
– Andrej Kalamar
The nature of individual expressions of art is such that some find it easier and others more difficult to penetrate its vaguely defined boundaries, we should add. Architecture is certainly a science, often called a profession, where the fluidity of artistic expression is undesirable, as it must take into account the practical and technical requirements of safety, functionality and sustainability of the designed objects. Nevertheless, it is often counted among the arts, since it involves designing and creating spaces that are not only functional but also aesthetic. Architects are concerned with aesthetics, design, detail, compatibility with the environment and the cultural significance of their work. The spaces they design also influence the feelings and experiences of the people who inhabit or visit them, which is one of the key characteristics of art or culture.
In the February days of the Slovenian culture celebration, we talked to the above-mentioned trio of architects about the state of our contemporary architecture, who view their profession and its engagement with contemporary Slovenian society from different generational and experiential perspectives, but who in many ways share similar thoughts about the state of our architecture and its relationship to culture, politics and society.
Kalamar: Architecture is the most politically and capital-dependent art. To make something very good, there is much more to cover than in the case of the intimate creation of any other art. So far, there is very little really great internationally comparable architecture in this country. We are facing a new challenge – communications and technology have made the world, and therefore architecture, very small. Online help can come in handy, because as a guild we have not been able to provide ourselves with adequate financial and time frames to create – instant samples beckon, generics have become acceptable.
Koren: Architects still make an important contribution to culture and society, as our work shapes the spatial and social environment in which we live. It is true that we may be less visible in the media today, but that does not mean that there are no outstanding achievements in architecture. Awards are not the only indicator of success or quality – many successful architects and practices produce excellent projects without being recognised by awards. Awards are sometimes just one form of recognition, but they do not necessarily reflect the real picture. It is also good to see that in recent years more and more Slovenian architectural practices have been recognised with awards and prizes from abroad, which proves that architecture in Slovenia is still at a high level.
Košak: The role of the architect in society is really losing its importance in a way, which is a result of the constant conflict with other industries and changing social values. Architects are often just an instrument for investors to realise their wishes. Architecture, which is a responsible activity towards society, the environment, the economy and culture, must fulfil this responsibility in a prudent and comprehensive way, not just through partial aspects. Despite all this, I remain optimistic. For the profession of architecture to remain relevant in the future, architecture, like other socially responsible functions, needs to be continuously built upon, reinvented, and more intensively integrated with other disciplines.These are industries dealing with environmental issues, sustainability, social sciences and, increasingly, artificial intelligence, which is penetrating virtually every pore of our society.
Kalamar: The fascination with architecture has always helped the elites – it was easier to follow an idea if you stood under the rosettes of Chartres Cathedral. Brasilia was the poster child of the new Brazil, even Miterrand had the Bibliotheque Nationale built. The new communication systems provide the necessary persuasive effect with much less. Today’s ideas are far too short term oriented to be set in stone.
”The national monuments should be on the west side of Slovenska street – there is the country, here is the happy city.”
– Andrej Kalamar
Koren: I partly agree that today’s political elite is not as focused on architecture as the previous one, which often used architecture as a tool to express power, ideology and national identity. During socialism, architecture was used as a tool to create social and political symbols, whereas today political decisions are more focused on one-term problems and quick results that allow them to be re-elected. They deal with short-term and pragmatic issues such as infrastructure, transport or the economy, while architecture is often not at the centre of their attention, except when it comes to the shortage of dormitory beds, housing, kindergartens, hospitals.
Košak: Perhaps this is due to mutual mistrust.
“In socialism, architecture served as a tool to create social and political symbols; today, political decisions are focused on one-term problems and quick results that promise re-election.”
– Anže Koren
Kalamar: There is almost no relationship – our political system has created so much infighting that it has no time for architecture.
Koren: Politics today is not so focused on monumental and symbolic projects, whereas architecture is more in tune with the needs of society than with ideological goals. This is also helped by the fact that many institutions were built in the previous system, but today this building stock is being preserved and adapted to new standards, which means that the political elite is less focused on architecture as a tool for expressing power or identity.
Košak: Architecture is often the scourge of politics, but the reverse is also true, that politics is the scourge of architecture. And yet they have to coexist. Only when there is mutual understanding and enabling can social surplus be created.
Kalamar: The culture of living was created together with the neighbouring environment, so it was a little bit Slavic, a little bit Germanic and a little bit Latin. High culture moved from top to bottom – first there were churches, then castles and palaces, then there were town houses along squares and streets, villas and finally houses. The environment accepted what was good – architecture as culture created the most beautiful necklace of Venetian towns from Koper, Izola, Piran, Novigrad, Poreč, Rovinj, Vodnjan, it created medieval squares like Slovenska Bistrica, exceptional views of churches, it created Dornava, Zemona…
Koren: Architecture shapes and supports culture by creating spaces for everyday activities such as schools, museums, sports facilities and squares. These spaces ensure the identity of a nation and the accessibility of culture. Beyond functionality, architecture influences our experience of the world and the relationships between people. Modern approaches include the use of new technologies for efficiency and sustainability, but architecture must maintain a connection to local culture, history and nature. Architects strive to go beyond global trends and create unique buildings tailored to the needs of users, but they also need the right support to preserve traditions and values for future generations.
Košak: Architecture supports culture most directly within the walls of cultural institutions, but it also has a wider impact on culture, whether at the scale of the detail, at the scale of the city, at the broadest scale of the cultural landscape. Slovenia has unique cities with rich histories and exceptional natural features that together form a harmonious cultural space. Virtually every architectural period has left a remarkable mark on our area, from anonymous vernacular architecture, Baroque, Art Nouveau, Modernism, right up to contemporary architecture. All of these works speak of the values of an era, while at the same time creating a varied cultural context on which we build today.
”Slovenia has unique cities with rich history and exceptional natural features that in combination create harmonious cultural spaces.”
– Dominik Košak
Kalamar: Architecture is guaranteed a key status as a creator of the environment, no matter how rich or poor it may be. It is a visible part of culture, because it surrounds us everywhere. There are times when architecture is less questioned about interventions in space, but these are mostly poor times that leave little good or bad behind. In good times, architecture repairs the damage of poor times and creates new values.
Koren: Architecture and culture are inextricably linked, because the space we live in shapes our perception of the world. Good architectural solutions are not just functional, but must raise the aesthetic value of a space. In Slovenia, architecture has an important status, but its influence often depends on recognition by professionals and politicians. Existing challenges, such as the lack of funding for heritage conservation and the quality of contemporary architecture, call for greater recognition of architecture as an art. Despite constraints such as legislation and economics, some architects are successfully overcoming these barriers to create innovative and socially connected projects.
Košak: Architecture is culture. But its status is never taken for granted, it is even extremely fragile. Architecture, as well as culture in a broader sense, must be sustained by the constant collective effort of each generation. We can only maintain it as a rational society with noble values.
Kalamar: In the village, someone always knew not to build there and there because it would flood. The building material was always from the nearby nature. Building has reached a high level of dialogue with human genius, which is evident in the thinly sensuous solutions of rural architecture (the goat house). The modern era brought universal and cheaper building techniques, which found their way into the natural environment through dispersed construction. Our generation is correcting this.
Koren: Architecture must seek a proper dialogue with nature, especially in Slovenia, where nature is a key part of Slovenian identity. We Slovenians have a deep connection with the environment that surrounds us, and good architecture not only reflects this relationship, but also strengthens it.Slovenian architecture often shows respect for nature by adapting to the specific geographical, climatic and cultural characteristics of a place. For example, buildings in the Alpine regions are designed quite differently from those in the coastal region, taking into account the local weather conditions and using local materials such as wood and stone, which organically integrate with the environment. In addition, contemporary architects are increasingly looking for ways to create sustainable architecture that minimises the impact on the environment. This includes harnessing natural resources such as solar energy, local materials and natural ventilation, cooling and heating.
Košak: The decision to have a respectful dialogue between nature and architecture is a prerequisite for good architectural work. Architecture can never be the result of the spontaneous creative inspiration of an individual or a collage of striking images, but a direct response to the natural and cultural context in which it is situated. This is mirrored through its placement, appearance and materiality.
Kalamar: Successful dialogue is established with architecture on a scale that is specific to the environment – in the case of residential and also agro-business construction, the rules have been successfully set. The problem arises when a school or factory has to be built in a village. The example of the school – the rules of ‘green building’ require volumes to be as small as possible, but it is the articulation that ensures that a flat-roofed square in the middle of the village does not result. As a rule, large squares grow between single-storey houses and church spires all over Slovenia. Mastery rarely happens here.
Koren: Examples of architectural solutions such as buildings that integrate into the natural environment, green roofs, transparent materials that allow natural light, and designs that allow a seamless transition between indoor and outdoor spaces, demonstrate that architecture successfully communicates with nature and its elements. Architecture must seek an appropriate dialogue with nature, especially in Slovenia, where nature is a key part of Slovenian identity. Slovenians are deeply connected to the environment and good architecture not only reflects this relationship, but also strengthens it. Slovenian architecture often shows respect for nature by adapting to the specific geographical, climatic and cultural characteristics of a place. For example, buildings in the Alpine regions are designed quite differently from those in the coastal region, taking into account the local weather conditions and using local materials such as wood and stone, which organically integrate with the environment.
Košak: As spatial planners, we are constantly faced with the question of how to establish an appropriate link between existing structures, new developments and nature. Space is becoming more and more saturated and complex, and architecture has to constantly respond to this. Its task is to ask the right questions, to which it responds with multilayered answers that are mirrored in readable spatial solutions. In our space, we find many quality works that are not only inextricably woven into the cultural landscape, but also enrich it. These are architectures that do not compete for attention and exclusivity, but are in dialogue with their surroundings and the real needs of society.
Kalamar: New concepts come with “new times”. The twentieth century was in many ways a new time, and revolutionary ideas came to fruition. Then postmodernism happened and we returned to calmer evolutionary currents. Even the cities emerging from scratch among the sands and seas of the Middle East are being modelled on European urbanism. It used to be said that “there is nothing new in the west”, and the same applies to the east. Urbanism in the age of neoliberalism finds it difficult to develop new patterns – money sticks to tried and tested patterns.
”Architecture must seek an appropriate dialogue with nature, especially in Slovenia, where nature is a key part of Slovenian identity.”
– Anže Koren
Koren: Today’s architectural profession is still facing the challenges of urbanism, spatial planning and missed opportunities. In addition, it has often been neglected or left to the initiatives of individuals and subordinated to capital interests in the past decades. Spatial planning is an ambitious undertaking, involving many different professional disciplines, and it cannot be a hasty response to the needs of a capitalist society or an individual, but must be a coordinated, professional, considered and, in some cases, political undertaking. This involves the need for consensus, support and, above all, a clear vision that cannot be changed by any single individual. For all these reasons, spatial planning is a social consensus that can only be brought about by clear visions and the strong support of society as a whole.
Košak: Society is moving towards more and more individuality, which is also reflected in the design of residential neighbourhoods. We are becoming overly dependent on the comfort of private space and instant mobility, which translates directly into space. Architecture and urban planning have enormous potential for community building, but it will take a tectonic shift in thinking, and perhaps in legislation, to realise this potential again.
Kalamar: The house that has been home for three generations is no longer relevant. The children are at school and at the piano, the elderly are in homes, and the carrying generation has no time for either. The creation of intergenerational buildings will have to be explored, where three generations live in one complex – separately enough to maintain the functionality of the new time, but together enough to maintain proximity and thus the exchange of wisdom, of energy. The second pattern of research would be to encourage physical communication – to create meeting centres. We have to believe that our purpose is more than just survival – coming together around culture, education, sport, religion creates new ideas, love – creates a more prosperous society.
Koren: By developing community-oriented architecture, neighbourhoods where public spaces are key and encourage interaction, cooperation and inclusion of different social groups; by densifying settlements with energy-efficient and not too large houses and opportunities for work and employment in this environment. In cities, it would make sense to pursue the concept of the “15-minute city”, where compact settlements facilitate access to public services, public transport and green spaces, while reducing the need for urban sprawl. The integration of nature into the urban space through green roofs, gardens, trees and water areas is also important. In houses or apartments where the architect has a major influence, flexible living spaces are key, allowing changes in the functionality of spaces according to the changing needs of the occupants.
Košak: The built environment affects us more than we might realise. Some cities are becoming increasingly experientially impoverished, especially by interventions beyond human scale, lack of quality shared space and saturation of images. A striking example can be found on the south-eastern Ljubljana entrance road, Dolenjska cesta, where a battle of different scales, images, content and infrastructure is taking place. Such a space is extremely opaque, unreadable and unpleasant for the user. This leads to a general numbing of society’s perception of physical space, and our patterns of living are becoming increasingly blasé. In his essay, the German director Wim Wenders compares the art of film with architecture. He argues that the city is defined much more by empty spaces than by filled ones. He says that some films are like closed walls, there is not a single gap between their images that allows the observer to see anything other than what the film shows.Architecture, like film, can open people’s eyes or close them, it can leave them deceived or stir their imagination. I believe that the mission of architecture is also to create spaces that arouse the desire to explore, to educate and to provide a safe haven for the individual mind.
Košak: Modern society has extremely heterogeneous interests, which makes it more difficult to reach a consensus on what our common values are, which are also reflected in important architectural works, in monuments. The last major collective effort of our country in the field of cultural consciousness was the construction of Cankarjev dom, which took place almost half a century ago. Apart from a few mid-scale exceptions, there has been a kind of ‘cultural vacuum’ up to the present day, which was, however, interrupted by the construction of NUK 2 and the renovation of the National Theatre Drama.
Kalamar: We have been a country for thirty years and, apart from the motorway cross, we haven’t created much of significance. In a young democracy, everything happens in the rhythm of elections, polarisation is constantly cancelling projects for “the others”. When we as a society are mature enough to understand that what we really need is a new theatre or a new square or a new clinical centre, to secure the funding and to put in place the team to get the project done, regardless of the ruling colours, we will have worthy monuments left behind. The monument to the victims of all wars at Congress Square in Ljubljana is telling, with its two concrete monoliths – the authors’ explanatory note explains this in depth, but in the end it is the two monoliths that say that we will not forget. The monument is only there because the government had a car park there and, as a result, the land is state-owned. State monuments should be on the west side of Slovenska Street – that is where the state is, that is where the happy place is. Laying a wreath in the company of loud Chinese tourists is a unique experience.
Koren: Certainly, our architecture today has the potential and the ability to be a fitting monument for our times. But the question is what is a monument today and to whom. While past periods, especially in the imperial and post-war periods, often created monuments that symbolised the victories, the great men, the political, religious or cultural values of the time, today the question is whether, with all the technology and information, this is even necessary. Today’s monument should probably reflect contemporary values such as progress, global connectivity, sustainability, while being inclusive and not necessarily monumental, but more connected to society, everyday life, technology and the environment.
Kalamar: Architecture is a complex composition of many material and spiritual components. Any architecture could touch art, but it touches art only insofar as the architect is able to create poetry out of profane vocabulary. Leonardo da Vinci wrote: painting is the highest form of science (not art). In all our actions, we make decisions on the basis of what we have admired, learned. When we have mastered matter so completely that we can trust inspiration, we are well on our way to creating art.
Koren: It’s true that architecture is very much dependent on the individual architect, his way of thinking, his creativity and his level of cultural sensitivity and responsibility. Architecture certainly touches on art, especially in the design of spaces and building sets that serve as the “backdrops” of our lives. They are not only functional but also aesthetically rich and shape our experience of space. Architects often collaborate with artists from other disciplines to incorporate sculptures, art installations or innovative design solutions to create unique and expressive cultural spaces.
Košak: Art and architecture are inextricably intertwined, co-creating and reinventing each other. Architecture is the art of everyday life.
Kalamar: The School of Architecture in Ljubljana, with its rich foundation in technical and humanistic skills, produces perhaps one excellent architect per year and many intellectuals who easily find a place under the sun. There are a few thousand of us architects, and you can count the architects who create and design by the hundreds. You can count the top artists in dozens.
Koren: The answer to this question is not clear-cut. A university education as an architect gives you breadth and access to different fields, because today’s society demands interdisciplinary work. The traditional role of the architect has changed in recent decades, and many have broadened their skills and activities. However, market conditions, responsibilities and legislation have also changed, affecting the profession. Lower salaries have led many architects to move into related fields such as design, industrial design and interior design, where responsibilities are fewer but still based on an architectural background.
Košak: Slovenia has a number of outstanding architects whose quality can match the most prudent architectural practices abroad. I should mention that no less than seven Slovenian architectural works have been nominated for the highest architectural prize in the European Union – the Mies van der Rohe Award for 2024, two of which have been shortlisted.
”Architecture is culture.”
– Dominik Košak
Andrej Kalamar (1966, Murska Sobota) entered the field of architecture with the founding of the Slovenian state, when there was very little need for architecture. But he says he was lucky that he was soon entrusted with working on larger projects, which gave me the confidence that anything was possible. Given the small size of the Slovenian market, he decided never to specialise – he takes new subjects as a challenge every time, because every new programme gets his blood pumping.
He builds churches and factories, goat sheds and, if he has to, a house.
Anže Koren (1986, Celje) has been working at the Faculty of Architecture since 2007, first as a technical assistant, and since 2014 as an external assistant; since 2011 he has been a member of the organising committee of the Piran Days of Architecture and since 2012 he has been running the Studio.a+v architectural office together with Viktorija Žavbi, which has several completed, some of them also winning, projects at home and abroad. In 2014, he received the Perspective in Architecture Award at the Design Month.
Dominik Košak (1991, Ljubljana) graduated from the Faculty of Architecture in 2019 and has been working as a technical assistant during his studies and as a practitioner since 2020. He is the co-founder of the architectural practice ELEMENTARNA and has received several national and international awards and nominations as co-author, such as the Piranesi International Prize 2023, the Golden Pencil 2024, and the EU Mies Award 2024. He is also active in the field of graphic design, including the design of the two-row commemorative coin (NUK) for the Bank of Slovenia in 2024.
Author: Brane Maselj
Inštitut NAPREJ d.o.o.
Stegne 23a
1000 Ljubljana
T: +386 (0) 30 484 488
Registration number: 9509283000
Tax number: 23813806
We are not liable for VAT.
TRR: SI56 6000 0000 1309 765, odprt pri Hranilnici LON
