ABSTRACT
Great architects elaborate their own personal repertoire more or less consciously, but the attention to the geographical nature of places, to the form of the terrain, and to the topographical singularities is not mechanically translated into built form, neither is it easy to establish the mediating moments. Furthermore, even critical analysis, which mostly deals with the link between ground and artefact in terms of poetic vision or architectural language, does not always place these elements in relationship with the built solutions, which are invented or readapted case by case. The notion of topography they are referencing is the process of construction of the landscape and not its formal image. Every place is now understood as a landscape, whether natural or artificial, and landscape is no longer the neutral background against which architectural objects stand out, but is the subject itself of its transformation.
