I was deeply moved by Yara Sharif and Nasser Golzari’s lecture and their powerful reimagining of Gaza’s ruins as sites of memory and resistance. Their critique of colonial spatial practices, particularly the rejection of ‘emptiness’ narratives in favor of material and communal reclamation, is both urgent and inspiring. The way they center Palestinian agency, turning rubble into a political and architectural resource, challenges not just physical erasure but epistemic violence. I’m especially struck by their collaborative approach, working with Gazans to reconstruct rather than impose. I can’t wait to experience their installation at the biennale and see how these ideas translate spatially.
The lecture threw light on a very important aspect of architecture, which is the impact of architecture without building. The key interesting work presented by the presenter was their development of an abacus of materiality for the people of GAZA to choose from to rebuilt their narrative of their household as per their own interests and choices. These materials were built from the memory of the place, by including the ruins of the place, which included not just the architectural ruins, but the ruins of the people that died during the war. The idea that just removing the ruins was not limited to cleaning but was making the place devoid of its age-old cultural history. The idea was to read Palestine as not just planning proposal, but in section, understanding the surface, air and underground of what GAZA/ PALESTINE was. They proposed to adapt ruins as the skin of the new architecture. The key idea was to not redo what had happened in the white city where 4M of top layer sandstone was removed from the city which made the city away from its cultural identity and roots. In the end, the beauty of their idea is that just by developing the abacus of materiality, they propose to leave it to the people of GAZA to rebuild their lives with their own narratives using this atlas if they wish. Seeing this, I actually felt like sometimes ‘less is more’.
This lecture was really eye opening for me as it made me reflect on the role of architecture in such difficult contexts. This idea centered on the local voice and challenging the colonial narrative and the hierarchy of knowledge production is really important to make a statement. I really liked how they value the ruins, looking at them as a narrative of the place, something that needs to be captured instead of cleared. They gave us the background context of the White City and how it was a “fancy dress”, dressing to be someone else, this imaginative geography. This helped me to understand the impact of colonization in Palestine and why they need now to reclaim the land.
The lecture for me was a lesson on how to approach and rethink the ruins, making the locals the protagonists of the place and giving them the opportunity to choose how they want to write this new narrative. Having the skin as a metaphor, an interchangeable mechanism while the bones are up to the people.
Yara Sharif and Nasser Golzari’s lecture enlightened me in many ways. What struck me the most was the idea that ruins hold more than just physical remnants (materials) but they carry emotional and historical memory. Their approach, that is influenced by Edward Said’s “imaginative geography” made me reflect on how colonization often begins not just with land, but with the erasure of imagination. I found the concept of creating an “Atlas of Deconstruction” powerful in the sense that it transforms destruction into a tool for healing and redefinition. The notion of a “permeable skin” over ruins, acting as both physical and symbolic marker, stayed with me. It’s a subtle but radical act of reclaiming space, asserting presence in a landscape repeatedly denied identity. I believe the most compelling part is the emphasis on the people of Gaza being the only ones who can rebuild their home. It’s not just about reconstruction, it’s about restoring ownership of memory, identity, and hope.
During the lecture presented by Yara Sharif and Nasser Golzari, I was particularly drawn to the topic of “the White City” and how, in 1930s Tel Aviv, modernist architecture was used as an erasing tool on Jaffa’s territory. The architects brought attention to how this story is repeating itself today, as the oppressor tries to scrape away Palestinian culture from Gaza.
4Gaza Architects are proposing a solution that re-draws Gaza’s destructed landscape, while embracing its original soul and cultural heritage. Interestingly, this is done through the use of ruins, which are seen as traces of life—both metaphorically and literally, as many Gazan victims still lie beneath them. The Atlas of Destruction, which includes various building strategies, is used by the architects to create “shells” for the reconstruction of the affected region.
I found the lecture emotionally inspiring and distinct from typical architectural discussions. Here, the emphasis was placed directly on Palestinians and their belonging to Gaza, which is beautifully memorialised through original design strategies.
Yara Sharif and Nasser Golzari recast Gaza’s shattered landscape as a living archive, rejecting colonial narratives of “emptiness” by treating rubble as both material resource and vessel of memory. Their “Atlas of Deconstruction” and abacus of reclaimed fragments invite Gazans—not outside experts—to stitch new dwellings from the bones of the old, turning ruins into a permeable skin that honors lives lost while resisting erasure. By reading territory in section—surface, air, and underground—they expose how modernist “white-washing,” from 1930s Tel Aviv to today, weaponizes architecture to rewrite identity. Instead of imposing form, their practice foregrounds local agency, transforming destruction into a collective act of healing and re-imagining space where memory, resistance, and hope can take root.
I was deeply moved by Yara Sharif and Nasser Golzari’s lecture and their powerful reimagining of Gaza’s ruins as sites of memory and resistance. Their critique of colonial spatial practices, particularly the rejection of ‘emptiness’ narratives in favor of material and communal reclamation, is both urgent and inspiring. The way they center Palestinian agency, turning rubble into a political and architectural resource, challenges not just physical erasure but epistemic violence. I’m especially struck by their collaborative approach, working with Gazans to reconstruct rather than impose. I can’t wait to experience their installation at the biennale and see how these ideas translate spatially.
The lecture threw light on a very important aspect of architecture, which is the impact of architecture without building. The key interesting work presented by the presenter was their development of an abacus of materiality for the people of GAZA to choose from to rebuilt their narrative of their household as per their own interests and choices. These materials were built from the memory of the place, by including the ruins of the place, which included not just the architectural ruins, but the ruins of the people that died during the war. The idea that just removing the ruins was not limited to cleaning but was making the place devoid of its age-old cultural history. The idea was to read Palestine as not just planning proposal, but in section, understanding the surface, air and underground of what GAZA/ PALESTINE was. They proposed to adapt ruins as the skin of the new architecture. The key idea was to not redo what had happened in the white city where 4M of top layer sandstone was removed from the city which made the city away from its cultural identity and roots. In the end, the beauty of their idea is that just by developing the abacus of materiality, they propose to leave it to the people of GAZA to rebuild their lives with their own narratives using this atlas if they wish. Seeing this, I actually felt like sometimes ‘less is more’.
This lecture was really eye opening for me as it made me reflect on the role of architecture in such difficult contexts. This idea centered on the local voice and challenging the colonial narrative and the hierarchy of knowledge production is really important to make a statement. I really liked how they value the ruins, looking at them as a narrative of the place, something that needs to be captured instead of cleared. They gave us the background context of the White City and how it was a “fancy dress”, dressing to be someone else, this imaginative geography. This helped me to understand the impact of colonization in Palestine and why they need now to reclaim the land.
The lecture for me was a lesson on how to approach and rethink the ruins, making the locals the protagonists of the place and giving them the opportunity to choose how they want to write this new narrative. Having the skin as a metaphor, an interchangeable mechanism while the bones are up to the people.
Yara Sharif and Nasser Golzari’s lecture enlightened me in many ways. What struck me the most was the idea that ruins hold more than just physical remnants (materials) but they carry emotional and historical memory. Their approach, that is influenced by Edward Said’s “imaginative geography” made me reflect on how colonization often begins not just with land, but with the erasure of imagination. I found the concept of creating an “Atlas of Deconstruction” powerful in the sense that it transforms destruction into a tool for healing and redefinition. The notion of a “permeable skin” over ruins, acting as both physical and symbolic marker, stayed with me. It’s a subtle but radical act of reclaiming space, asserting presence in a landscape repeatedly denied identity. I believe the most compelling part is the emphasis on the people of Gaza being the only ones who can rebuild their home. It’s not just about reconstruction, it’s about restoring ownership of memory, identity, and hope.
During the lecture presented by Yara Sharif and Nasser Golzari, I was particularly drawn to the topic of “the White City” and how, in 1930s Tel Aviv, modernist architecture was used as an erasing tool on Jaffa’s territory. The architects brought attention to how this story is repeating itself today, as the oppressor tries to scrape away Palestinian culture from Gaza.
4Gaza Architects are proposing a solution that re-draws Gaza’s destructed landscape, while embracing its original soul and cultural heritage. Interestingly, this is done through the use of ruins, which are seen as traces of life—both metaphorically and literally, as many Gazan victims still lie beneath them. The Atlas of Destruction, which includes various building strategies, is used by the architects to create “shells” for the reconstruction of the affected region.
I found the lecture emotionally inspiring and distinct from typical architectural discussions. Here, the emphasis was placed directly on Palestinians and their belonging to Gaza, which is beautifully memorialised through original design strategies.
Yara Sharif and Nasser Golzari recast Gaza’s shattered landscape as a living archive, rejecting colonial narratives of “emptiness” by treating rubble as both material resource and vessel of memory. Their “Atlas of Deconstruction” and abacus of reclaimed fragments invite Gazans—not outside experts—to stitch new dwellings from the bones of the old, turning ruins into a permeable skin that honors lives lost while resisting erasure. By reading territory in section—surface, air, and underground—they expose how modernist “white-washing,” from 1930s Tel Aviv to today, weaponizes architecture to rewrite identity. Instead of imposing form, their practice foregrounds local agency, transforming destruction into a collective act of healing and re-imagining space where memory, resistance, and hope can take root.