Urbanizar favelas implica, partiendo de la estructura del lugar y de la “escucha” de las demandas interceptadas con los datos derivados de los estudios socio-económicos y culturales forzar el caos hasta convertirlo en forma (JÁUREGUI, 2012, p.118).

Figure 1

Contemporary art has contributed enormously to question the possibilities of appropriations within the public space. Readings of site specifics (KWON, 2008) works unravelling insurgent spaces of mappings ‘that resemble a net that gradually connects points and formalizes a collection of relations’, making ‘elements that juxtapose, contrapose and imply one another’ appear, formalize a specific structuralist configuration contained in one place, that which Foucault calls heterotopology (FOCAULT, 1984). According to Jáuregui this heterotopology manifests itself in architecture as a form of art that demands the intertwinement of the visual, the conceptual, the sensorial, the accidental and the social, trying to achieve tiny bits of order in an infinitely disordered context. (JÁUREGUI, 2012).

As heterotopologies, Jáuregui’s diagrams inscribe a ‘fragmentary sequence of events and narratives’ of the experiences’ interaction, the architect and the community, with the place where the urbanization projects will be set up in the future. This process, as a dissident vector of the urban practice dissected by Kevin Lynch in his book The Image of the City (1960), composed by the mapping of the perception of elements that structure the images of cities, grouped in five types - paths, edges, districts, nodes and landmarks - permeates the configuration of places. This configuration does not differ much from the remarks of American artist Robert Smithson, one of the pioneers of site specific. His work, “taken to dismistify distinction between theory and pratice from ways on ensuring aesthetic experiences as the dimensions of time and space, evaluates a dialogical relation betrween thinking, object and place”⁴(PÉREZ-ORAMA, 2012, online, tradução do autor) that becomes part of a place and restructures its organization in conceptual terms and in the field of perception.

In Jáuregui, this procedure became the means to process the ‘perceived space’ - mediated by the simultaneity of ‘looking while walking’-, telling stories and revealing fabrics, intrinsic as it is to the investigations that the architect relativizes the inability of avoiding maximizing the space of his natural tendencies towards the community. In this order, Járegui exposes the city to the facing of its traumas and affirms that “a new connection of the whole urban structure, enabling the articulation of differences when those become intolerable” is plausible. Conflict is a positive work agenda and the slam is the place of the pure becoming! Powering the use of a space within the interaction of formal and informal, leaving new meanings adrift, translates the ‘art-architecture integration’ set in motion by states of ambiguity the architect sees as an ‘aesthetics that unites fragments’. These considerations foster Jáuregui’s participation in Kassel’s Documenta 12, 2007, entitled The migration of forms, invited by the curator Roger M. Buergel, to expose the aesthetic experiences of spaces/times dimensions that originate from his diagrams.

Kassel’s Documenta 12 consisted of discussions on the transfiguration of forms taken by the production of visual culture and humanity’s history in other shapes, that accommodated different contexts and purposes allured to by the History of Art discipline. Curatorship revealed content intersections and resemblances with its focus on the contemporary implicit process of new interpretations, which promotes unexpected situations, shedding light on new relations among works of different historical periods. These similarities and intersections predispose the migration of aesthetic forms throughout moments and cultural boundaries (12° DOCUMENTA DE KASSEL, 2007).

For Jáuregui, projecting has always implied in this perspective. The mixing of themes and perceptions would be the most important component in the backbone of a project whose inter-disciplinarity permeates the experiences intrinsic to the routine practices of the Urbis. The latter compose, at each moment, adverse situations of experience and readings that fuse rationality and intuition.

Would Jáuregui’s architecture be Hélio Oitica’s environmental art, one that the artist conceives as a sensorial collection ordinated according to a ‘order hierarchy’ - all directed towards the creation of an environmental world? (PEDROSA, 2004). Diagrams as articulations between organic expressions and forms in the order of establishing relations among art, architecture and history would serve, at its very least, as correspondences with Alberti’s assumptions, providing the real world with the possibility of being the expression of its own spacialization.

The advice offered by the renaissance painter - “as we paint we should be opened to all that see and to each one to hear”⁵(ALBERTI, 2014, p.139, tradução do autor) -builds up a strong dialogue with the architecture of the senses advanced by Jorge Mário Jáuregui.