What is the first memory that comes to your mind related to the Faculty of Architecture of Pescara?

I was called to the faculty in 92-93 after winning the national competition for prof. Associate. I came from Rome "La Sapienza" after long years of teaching training with Ludovico Quaroni and Carlo Aymonino. I remember Pescara as a very lively faculty, where important international architects were invited and students met even in the evening, in parties organized by them, with food cooked by distant families or the first fruits brought back after returning home. Most of the students came from outside; many from Puglia and Marche. The courses were crowded, there was still no limited number; but in the crowd the desire to do well and to emerge was stronger.

Comparatively I remember, among many, many more high-level students than today.

It is the beauty competition!

One of the phenomena that has affected the Faculty of Architecture of Pescara since its origins has been that of TREND. What is TREND? and what did it represent for you?

When I arrived in Pescara the trend, which has now become routine, overcome by its best exponents and represented by minor characters, had already been removed from the Faculty by a Dean whom we tend to underestimate but who has had a very profound impact on the current teaching structure; and in my opinion in a positive sense.

I therefore did not participate in that season. Instead, I lived it in Rome reading Aldo Rossi, a little less Grassi and appreciating some moments of their research of which, apart from some exceptions, I did not follow the design conclusions.

Talking about trends today is part of the revival with all the interest in revivals, for how they were born, for their reasons.

But it's about revival!

What do you think you have left in this faculty?

I am very proud of the courses I have taken, of the students I have met, of the many degrees that I have followed.

But I am especially proud of the building of the new laboratories that I designed and built for Pescara. The way of working in the Faculty has changed. I believe it is an important improvement.

Contributing to the improvement of the environment in which you live, work and study is the best that a teacher can wish for in his career.

It is a thank you for what I also received while teaching in Pescara.

I have always been very autonomous in my cultural and research choices. Among these, I am happy to have brought to the fore the theme of the Mediterranean and the Arab-Islamic city, with nationally funded research, doctoral theses, degree theses, agreements with Mediterranean countries. To date, this research constitutes one of the main themes of the former Faculty-Department, one of its moments of recognition and identification.

In his career he has faced different academic realities. Are there any distinctive features that can be recognized in the various universities? If yes, what are they?

I believe that each Athenaeum has its own particular history, its own identity different from the others. This depends on many factors: the cultural, social, economic environment in which one operates, the quality of the teachers who teach and do research, the organization of teaching and organizational structures.

We often speak of Schools, not in the sense of the Gelmini law, but in a deeper sense: when the various components that operate in the university environment reach an integration and an agreement on the training system developed, which makes it stand out from the others. There has been talk for years about the School of Venice… But it is not easy to achieve this goal, especially at a time like this, in which the centrifugal forces are much stronger than the unifying ones.

If you were to return to teaching in Pescara, what experiences would you try to introduce into the reality of the Department of Architecture?

There are many things that after a long period of teaching you would like to change and introduce in the Department of Architecture. Some are already being done, albeit with a lot of effort.

We could talk about it for a long time. But at this moment I am very interested in the planning dimension of training. I believe that you do not work sufficiently on the awareness that the student should have in making a project. Awareness in the analytical premises, in the development of the idea through precise techniques and appropriate linguistic tools, oriented to the production of meaning.

This is a theme that also needs theoretical premises that we are unable to cover up to now.

We'll see…. inshallah