WOLF, T. Architektura průměrnosti [online]. Brno: Vysoké učení technické v Brně. Fakulta architektury. 2025.
Tomáš’s research extended beyond literature reviews and desk studies. He also impressed me, and my co-tutor Kacper Kępiński, with his investigation into the recent history of squatting in Warsaw, particularly the peak of this phenomenon in the 1990s and 2000s. While this phenomenon remains underexplored in Poland, Tomáš's inquiry and findings are highly valuable. It is also clear that the student was inspired by anarchist zine and poster aesthetics, which he incorporated into his own graphic design, making his publication both coherent and outstanding. It is difficult to offer a concise review of the student’s theoretical findings because, as mentioned earlier, the research is somewhat broad, and its structure is not entirely linear. However, since Tomáš refers extensively to postmodern theorists, this approach does make sense within the context of his thesis. The reader simply needs to navigate through these Thousand Plateaus. Tomáš focuses on the concept of non-valuable architecture, mediocrity, or vernacularity. I would argue that not everything he describes falls under these categories. In addition to bottom-up practices addressing basic needs such as housing, food, or shelter, and reclaiming what has been appropriated by capital, he also discusses art in public spaces and creative initiatives. In my opinion, Tomáš classifies these initiatives as “mediocre” merely because they emerge from grassroots efforts and lack support from major capital and institutions. While I accept this classification, I would like to see the student elaborate further on how he envisions the strategies of resistance for grassroots art cooperatives, especially when faced with the financial seduction of corporations eager to exploit their enthusiasm – or not compensate them at all (as seen in the case of street art mentioned in the thesis). I am also aware that this focus on art stems from the student’s personal passion, so I would appreciate it if he could explain why he places art at the center of social support and intervention and how his approach differs from gentrification. In the transition from research to design, I expected the student to develop a sort of manual for small interventions, hacking, or appropriating urban spaces and profit-driven artifacts for social purposes. Tomáš even proposed such an anarchistic strategy toward advertisements, which I find creative and clever, and I hope that, before defending his thesis, he was able – or at least attempted – to put this idea into practice. Since bottom-up initiatives were of particular interest to the student, he decided to work on a larger scale and proposed the adaptation of the vacant Františkánský Klášter in the heart of Brno. Is the historic monastery architecture “mediocre”? In terms of heritage value, it definitely is not. However, the student points out the poor, nearly ruined condition of the building, its lack of repair, and the lack of vision for the building and its surroundings. Given its prime location, the municipality, as the building's owner, could see potential for financial profit. Tomáš proposes that, instead of privatizing or renting it out to a major market player, the building should be transferred to a bottom-up cooperative, similar to the former Kaznice prison. Unlike the squats in Warsaw that Tomáš analyzed, Kaznice functions within a legal, institutional framework. A similar model is proposed for Františkánský Klášter. I am pleased that, in addition to the cultural center functions, Tomáš also envisions temporary accommodation units for people in need, a community kitchen, and a spa – which is a highlight of the project. I find the fully public swimming pool in the monastery courtyard and the saunarium in the cellars to be very democratic concepts, effectively materializing Tomáš’s theoretical findings. It is clearly evident that Tomáš is a skilled designer and executed the project very well. He was initially hesitant to move into the design phase because he had delved so deeply into research, but thankfully, we managed to overcome this unnecessary fear together. If he had moved into the design phase earlier, the project might have been better, especially in the public square area. To sum up, without a doubt, Tomáš has produced remarkable work, which is worthy of recognition. We would like to thank Tomáš for his constant dedication, even in moments of doubt. Thank you very much also for your participation and the organization of the exhibition in Warsaw this semester. I would encourage you to dare to be even more radical! Please explain, what would your strategy of resistance be if the municipality decides to go fully neoliberal and no longer wants to collaborate or fund your community center? Proposed grade: A (91 points)
| Kritérium | Známka | Body | Slovní hodnocení |
|---|---|---|---|
| Přístup studenta ke zpracování | A | Tomáš Wolf makes an ambitious attempt to conduct a comparative analysis of the manifestations of capitalistic and non-speculative, bottom-up approaches in cities. From the outset of his thesis, it is evident that the author is conscious of the complexity of the issue at hand. He does not limit his considerations to material phenomena but delves deeper into the forces and vulnerabilities behind them. Tomáš highlights issues such as the commodification of urban spaces and the exclusion of society’s most vulnerable members. The theoretical framework of the author is broad, and, in my opinion, could benefit from narrowing its scope. On the other hand, it is particularly engaging to read through this comprehensive review of urban phenomena, analyzed through the lens of major capital appropriating grassroots initiatives and trends, as well as the strategies of resistance that emerge. Without a doubt, the author's arguments are underpinned by a strong theoretical foundation. Tomáš has demonstrated particular inquisitiveness in familiarizing himself with the literature, including numerous classics of leftist philosophy (Marxist, neo-Marxist, anarchist) and postmodern art and culture theory. His references include Paul Ricoeur (History and Truth), Hal Foster (The Anti-Aesthetic), Pierre Bourdieu (The Rules of Art), David Harvey (A Brief History of Neoliberalism), as well as Friedrich Engels (Housing Question) and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (Property is Theft). In addition to the classics, Tomáš is also well-versed in recent publications in the field, such as Miguel A. Martinez (Squatters in the Capitalist City; Urban Commons from an Anti-Capitalist Approach) and Ruben Paten (CAPS LOCK: How Capitalism Took Hold of Graphic Design, and How to Escape from It), among many others. As an academic teacher in the field of architecture, I must admit that such a theoretical foundation in philosophy and criticism is often overlooked in general study programs in Poland and the Czech Republic. During my studies in Delft, the Netherlands, as an architecture student, I had access to numerous theoretical seminars, which proved to be an important and eye-opening experience in my education. I am pleased that today, as a mentor, I can implement this approach in the design studio. Tomáš’s individual track was especially rewarding because he demonstrated a genuine interest in the subject, was not only open to our recommendations, but was also proactive and enthusiastic in his own theoretical explorations. |
This diploma project offers a really intriguing and deep analysis that challenges how we look at cities and urban space today. The conceptual and theoretical part is very strong — it’s full of important questions about capitalism, public space, exclusion, and the quiet ways in which power shapes our cities. What makes it especially inspiring is how the author manages to connect complex theoretical ideas with clear and critical observations about real places. There’s a strong research drive here, and you can tell the author put a lot of thought and care into understanding the bigger picture. The urban design approach is sensitive and thoughtful, and the functional program is adequate — especially the choice to introduce functions like a community center or elements like the salt cave, which add a playful and human touch to the overall vision. The idea of reusing forgotten spaces and treating them as valuable social assets is powerful and timely. That said, there’s a bit of a gap between the theoretical strength and the architectural expression. The architecture itself feels more reserved and not quite as bold or radical as the ideas behind it. There’s a small sense of wanting more detail on how this vision could actually be implemented — especially since the research part is so rich, it feels like the project could have benefited from pushing the design side further to match that level. Technically, everything seems to be well organized and presented clearly. The graphics are clean, and the formal level of the work supports the content well. It’s easy to follow the logic of the project and see how the different layers connect. All in all, this is a very valuable and thought-provoking thesis. The research is excellent, the questions it raises are important, and the overall attitude of the work is serious, curious, and committed. While the architecture could go further in expressing the core ideas, the project as a whole definitely deserves recognition. I recommend this thesis for defense.
eVSKP id 167708