It's great to have you all again here. I'm
certain that you um came last night. Uh I had
a revelation population that it was an extraordinary event. It is
something that moved us deeply. They made beautiful arguments that they
about artification with a number of institutes, a number of
institutions, a number of schools that have marked the history of
Virginia Tech, but also the history of educational architecture. And suddenly he moved us into talking about
not so much about the authors, but also about the architecture
and certainly the life [inaudible] has participated in
certainly most of you have some affiliation, some knowledge, read some of his books [inaudible]. So I'd like to basically
open them up to the audience today. I don't
have very many questions but maybe if I may
start with just one here. And I'm sure
you know, the Foundation of Modern Art by Ozenfant. And
my question that I asked of myself because there is um
a fascination with this school, with not only architecture
but its lineage with the Bauhaus and so with the
school of [inaudible].
So I'll just read here from the book the Foundation of Modern Art by Ozenfant
The distinguishing feature of great beauty
is that first it should surprise to an indifferent
degree, which, continuing then augmenting , is finally changed to wonder
and admiration. My question is, can we still
think of buildings that way today? Because you mentioned
um often have [inaudible]
[inaudible] century. I would like
to know today how our buildings approach. Is it
uh slow maturation and acceptance and suddenly wonder? Or is
it, wow, this is a great building and we move on by
the way to the next one. Okay, ooh, so
should stand up? Um, maybe I prefer to
stand up, I think ah yeah, you know,
I think [inaudible] start to sort
of start to one side of the question, which
is in a yes, [inaudible] building way of thinking there's a
[inaudible] from [inaudible] what are poets for in a destitute time?
And I think it could be translated into architecture
quite easily. What are architects for in a destitute time?
And that's one thought in reaction to that.
The other thought is um you know, you can't
make good work if the client doesn't desire something,
if the client just wants to make money or the
client is bureaucratic and it's all cost benefit or something
like that, then already ones not in a good
position because there's no real desire for something of,
of cultural quality and significant. That's the second thing
I would say. Then, I think the third
thing is that although we live in the destitute time
with barbaric production all over the place, above all in
China, but everywhere, of course, at the
same time, there's the paradox that there is,
I think very refined work being done everywhere. And
and part of that, I think that part of
the benefits of the bump of pre-internet even,
of information and communication etcetera etcetera, is that provinciality
doesn't well provinciality only exists in
the negative sense, you know, particularly maybe in
New York that thinks of itself as the center of
the world from time to time, but, you
know, that's already disastrous fixation, I think.
And if you look with wide open eyes, there
is work of quality being done everywhere. And then
one comes to a Montesquieu quote, because I think
that this quality that Montesquieu describes is only possible when
there is desire on the part of the client,
when the the situation or the location, you know,
creates an environment in which that can this condition
of beauty, let's say, which I never talk
about beauty, which is that's an embarrassing term,
I think. And uh and I think I you
know, it's unfortunate. One doesn't from everyone,
you know, that's a difficult term to use,
but maybe the term form could be used more overtly
than I've ever used it. And then also the
question of, you know, what, what do
we mean by that, etcetera, form, and so on.
But I think I think that that's possible.
What I'm trying to in a circular way, get
out, you know, in unexpected places and unexpected
moments, more limited situation and and yeah, fragile
limited situations. But I mean, you know,
I think like we never talk about it, or
at least when I say we I mean, you
know, the well, anyway, my circle in
Colombia doesn't talk about it, which is, you
know, Australia, for example, you know,
Sydney in particular, I mean, an extraordinary culture
of architecture in Sydney, of course, we do
know about glen market, but there are many other
figures. No, Yes, and also Melbourne,
you know, anyway, in Australia, all together
, you know, there is this culture of architecture
which in a way, I mean my colleagues anyway
, don't have anything, nothing to say about Australia
too far away other than Glenn market. That is
, who is of course, very distinguished. Um
for example, you know, or for me,
Dublin also has a very beautiful, still very vibrant
cultural arctic and, and for me, more important
than London for example, although there is of course
very talented architects in London. I'm not just talking
about talented artists. I'm talking about a culture of
architecture, you know, where perhaps this question of
scale and so that this question of wonder and yes,
I mean, that's possible. I think under
those conditions, so not really nothing. Yes,
related to that. Towards the end of your lecture
, you presented this ethical dilemma uh specifically called out
these two mega projects in China CCTv and the Beijing
stadium. And I'm curious if you feel is it
possible for a mega project to get this is the
Beijing airport project or even going back, you know
, to a similar building boom in Japan, the
airport. No, mm hmm. Yeah. Well
, first of all, I think it's got to
do with the use of material. So, the
, I mean the cancer airport makes an intelligent use
of steel as a structure, structural materials and it
is a kind of poetic of construction, which is
also related an economy of construction. It is an
articulate no work. It's an articulate built, constructive
work. I would very refined details and so on
. And it's not flagrant, excessive indifference. And
I think, you know, CCTV is a total
flagrant no, yeah, more or less mindless use
of the material to do. I don't know what
to create an image and packed with steel. It's
a bit like Zahar's early building for Vitra, This
so called fire station, you know, which is
packed with steel. So you can hardly get the
concrete into it, you know, And, and
so it's another, you know, it's a much
smaller scale. But yeah, it's kind of unethical
I think, and also horrific and and also a
useless fire station. They could never use it as
a fire station. They have to use it as
a rather unfortunate furniture museum, you know, horrible
work and and uh, you know, yeah,
well, you should have very beautiful paintings at the
beginning and so on and anyway, I don't want
to get sidetracked into that. But so I think
, you know, well, Kansas Airport, I
think it is a but as far as I'm concerned
, it's ethical, within the limits of of the
fact that, you know, international travel, jet
aircraft, etcetera, part of our way of life
. And therefore, I think it's a responsible work
and yeah, so I think, yes, I
would say it is possible, it's a question of
attitude. You know, I actually, over lunch
of it, Reagan asked me about this practice in
now, I can't remember. It's obviously Freudian repression
. Neither the the name of the little town north
of Barcelona nor the name of the architects they practice
under the name RCR and they are very, you
know, their minimalist, they're very sensitive. They
, you know, in a way ostensibly they do
good work. But then I was supposed to write
a piece about them and I went through all the
work and all the rest of it for the magazine
. Well cock tease. Then I as I went
on seeing the work, I realized they use steel
as though as though it's nothing, they don't use
it in the same flamboyant, irresponsible way of those
two buildings in Beijing. But nonetheless use steel,
they use it on the floor, use it all
over the place. And I came back to new
york and I had to write a letter to al
cookies and to them saying I can't write this piece
because I can't take it is used to this material
in this fanatical fashion. You know, apart from
the question of expense and all that, you know
, it was kind of, what does that mean
using this material? I found it. So it's
not only an ethical question, maybe follow up,
are you suggesting that good buildings carrying cultural control the
expression of them all structure and building? Yeah.
The promises. Mhm. I mean, you know
, if you look at all those villa Maria,
well, for that matter, if you look at
yes, I have had a colleague friend yes,
caught up who actually tried to do a thesis.
Did in fact write a thesis interpreting the work of
from the sort of tectonic standpoint? That was rather
difficult. You know, because so I don't think
one can just become fanatical about that issue. I
mean, I or if you think about us villa
Maria for example, the structure of the columns are
expressed. But you can't you know, it involves
both expression and suppression. And so I don't think
one can say, well, I only I'm only
interested in an architecture which is totally, you know
, like the Gothic expressive of the structure. In
any case, of course there never can be totally
absolute pure. Well, except in the most simple
buildings imaginable. Uh you know, direct literal expression
. Structure as a virtue in and of itself.
You know, I think I actually I coined these
terms and studies in tectonic culture of differentiating between what
do they call it now. I can't even remember
I tried to distinguish between. Yes, I think
yes, between ontological tectonic and representational tectonic because if
you think of a Doric column, you know that
too simplistic but made out of these separate cylinders and
tapered and all the rest of it, you know
, then the flutes have a function to produce the
representation of the colony without the flutes there's no no
column. Right? And if you think of a
japanese house where the where the structure, you know
, that could be other structures of course primitive agricultural
buildings, where the structure is the structure ontological tectonic
, there is no representation, it is what it
is. But I think that you know, the
culture of architecture is runs this full range of the
culture of architecture. Building runs this full range,
you know, and you would be primitive, not
too, you know, recognize this this aspect.
You know this question of cladding addressing of the you
know, all that. Mhm. Okay. Question
about the use of steel and Blumhouse Seattle library.
Yeah, well that's a that's a horrifying building altogether
. I've been to it twice. It's just you
know, it's a nice place to read a book
, I don't think so. You know how to
get into that building and what kind of I mean
you live in a weird world, you know that
building, you know, it's so valued and I
don't know, it's just painful, very painful work
and With a lot of energy and enthusiasm on the
part of their clients and novelistic actually the client originally
wanted two boys Stephen Hall, she had a condition
which of course wasn't met anyway she said I want
you that you will give, you won't delegate that
you will give this building your total attention. Right
. And so ren told her something sort of course
he didn't. I mean someone picked up the pieces
of course, so you know, steve was steve
wouldn't guarantee, I think it's the story of whole
wouldn't say give it to his absolute total hands on
that. So she dropped Stephen went to Poland but
she's a very intelligent and I don't want to malign
her. She's a very intelligent, brilliant, amazing
person, you know, great. But that's the
amazing thing I think also is the way in which
clients, you know, even good clients. I
mean that more and more recently I I feel you
know that you have this funny thing, you encounter
people who are really, really bright and really intelligent
and then as clients for buildings, do you know
make crazy decisions, you know, or they let
the architect do what the hell he wants. You
know? I think that's another thing, I think
there's dialectic between the clients a desire and an architect
that is also you know, difficult, right?
That kind of I think the client is important to
the client that wants something and understand, you know
, wants to try to understand what the architect wants
to do and vice versa and it's not an easy
game, but I think that it's very disappointing when
clients of major buildings and you left afterwards thinking well
why did the client even let the architects do that
, you know, I mean what kind of responsibility
is that as a client? And you can say
, well they don't know anything about that. But
you have to be really dumb. You know,
you can see that the building doesn't work for the
program. It was ostensibly meant I mean I'm thinking
about the Barnes collection where the entrance to the Barnes
collection, not understandable designed by the architect, but
then the client let them do that entrance. You
know and the client is smart, you know,
so I don't can't figure it out. You know
what is it what happened exactly? Because you know
, you've got crowds of people coming into the building
a little entrance. You know if it's bad weather
, you have to go downstairs to dump your coat
and come back up again. So it's the architect's
fault, you can say but it's also the client's
fault. How could the client accept that? So
I don't understand, I don't understand that. And
you can't say what the client, you know,
it doesn't understand architecture that's just useless. What is
that doing anything? How can that be? Professor
Professor. Um My question is can architecture become more
important? And I want to clarify that a little
bit, which is you and I many people in
this room live in a, You know, I
didn't know the 2% world. So so yes.
How how how can architecture, how can is there
any way to to spread this this germ to a
larger proportion of our culture. Yeah. You see
, I mean, you know, I that's why
I started with this thing of holden in, you
know what the poets for in the best time because
I think, you know, we do live in
a very not destitute, extremely difficult time. And
I mean like we believe in democracy, right?
But you know, do we have a democracy?
Yeah, it's everything is a difficult question. I
mean, I think the power of international corporations for
example, you know, and the the driving force
of global economy, international corporations, all of that
. You know, it's part of this panorama of
this moment of history and for architecture of equality to
find its place in the panorama. I don't think
it's so so you know, it's not easy to
see what could it be, what can it give
to this? So you can stay on the one
hand like Renzo building cans, i is working at
that kind of level, you know? Okay,
now it's possible maybe in that sense, high tech
came closer to meeting that answering that at his best
, but you know, but it also has its
limits and I think that, I don't know,
I think one of the situation that there are many
different ways to practice up. I mean it's clear
that, you know, architecture schools produce people and
they find their different way to be and exist and
etcetera. But I think it was something about the
sudden um I don't refinement, you know, maybe
that's only possible here and there small scale city social
, you know, maybe an intelligent school district or
you know, here and there something can be done
, you know. But the bigger picture, I
think it's very difficult. Mm hmm. What you're
saying in some sense, there's a need for the
architect to be an educator in a professional sense.
I mean he has to in a sense present the
alternatives to his client and given the means to judge
them. Thank you. And we all have that
role. We can't just some of our ideas on
someone. We expect them to understand why we do
it. Yeah, something like that. Yes.
I mean, you, you were talking about Brendan
before. Uh, one of our students once worked
in office and actually it was sort of the key
guy in the office and he showed me one of
the projects that one was working on at that moment
that I was there. It was A gigantic about
160 story mushroom. Mm hmm. That was going
to be built in one of the major american of
eastern city. And uh, and uh, yes
, when it suits their model, you know,
I couldn't believe it. I mean, who would
want to, who would want to wake up in
the morning and see a big mushroom. Even if
it's not a cloud over his head. Uh,
it was just absolutely amazing. And when I,
when I try to describe it for people, I
guess being partly that educator, I put guide wires
down from it and thought that, well, they
could be, they could be transport system to get
people and goods and things up into that mushroom.
Oh and well, maybe the mushroom can have a
nice observatory and something good on top, you know
? But there is that that role, Don't you
think that the architect really has to be an intelligent
educator and bringing his client into a realization of what
the possibilities are without find a reasonable preference. Yeah
. Yes. But you know, it's always those
things so why do something and why not do it
? You know, I mean what? No,
or scratching ones left here with one's right hand,
that kind of perversity. Why, you know,
what's the problem? You know, why make all
this, you know, what is all this effort
about? Like CCTV? You know, I mean
, what's the why do it, why do it
? What is the raison D tre behind that?
You know, I mean between poetry and reason has
to be, I mean, I think There's two
aspects of human being and with two you have to
be brought in relation to each other somehow. I
think that is what is this game is about and
this, you know, the drive to prove oneself
, you know, to be original to be an
artist that drive, you know, to to make
this, you know, And so the society will
notice and and then, you know, you'll become
a brand and off you go, you know,
all of that is a is, you know,
crude motivation, encouraged of course by the society that's
not at the highest level of development either. And
um, you know, it's it's a killer,
you know, in terms of what it produces environmentally
, but also maybe even in the human life sense
. Also earlier you mentioned economy and economy of construction
. Yeah, I'm thinking about the days of the
middle Ages when they were building with people that didn't
seem to be a value in those things. In
other words, if you build that people really cheap
and did it in a week and a half,
you wouldn't brag about it, right? You would
brag about how much time is how much money he
spent. It seems that that in the 20th century
, that's very different. It seems fundamentally different in
that we actually see economy as a good, what
would be your reaction? Well, that's when we
look at the the if we think of everything in
terms of production and consumption, you know, that
the building then is a commodity, you know,
so we we got away with it and we produced
it and we think of it already as an noticeable
like, you know, it's a good bargain and
it will wear out and who cares? Anyway,
we'll move on. I mean, it's got this
attitude of commodity, right? That's that's the problem
, I think, you know, modification, modification
, you know, and, and you know,
I mean, I think if we think that,
you know, architecture is the kind of world creation
, micro, small microcosmic creation of a world,
you know, that should have a certain um,
yes, aspiration to durability, then it's not,
then that attitude already isn't the attitude of commodity,
but if we're talking about cost benefit, rock bottom
, you know, I mean, it's already a
commodity. So we we are lost already the society
, the client, the architect, the whole lot
is lost in the in this maelstrom of Yeah,
that kind of calculation. Yeah. Right. Well
, the idea is you could, you should consume
everything, right? Human beings, everything. That's
the idea, you should consume everything. Yeah,
that's a horror. Of course we're stuck in it
. That's my question is that a lot of economies
and a lot of clients sophisticated or not, are
kind of demanding these kinds of buildings, bigger buildings
. And so it strikes me when I see you
present last night, these two larger scale call them
civic or negative projects or whatever they are, compare
them with some other uh smaller scale works, which
are making a very interesting link between tradition and innovation
and I'm, I guess I'm looking for uh similar
to maybe the first couple of questions, are there
some specific examples of larger scale projects that you believe
are either successfully doing what the other two aren't on
a large scale or, and or making that kind
of link between tradition and innovation. Now, you
know, there's a building I greatly admire in Barcelona
which is called L. A. Block which was
designed by Antonio and by manual the solar morality and
was and was paid for its investment by winter tour
insurance company. And it's a long block that runs
along the side of the avenida diagonal in Barcelona.
And uh, it is basically a office building with
that I think a small hotel, integrated schools at
the back small school. I think, I don't
quite know where it is, but the basic thing
is that the in the core of the block grade
there is a shopping mall galleria galleria and then there
is a shopping frontage on the avenida diagonal and that
shopping mall galleria of course sustains economically the shopping front
from the avenues of the canal and underneath there's quite
a Remember for probably eight clause of pocket. The
building made a huge impression on me also as a
program, but also as a solution, it permits
, you know that it touches the in chances of
the the the gridded city. And it's possible to
of course to gain access from that city to this
building, you know my bosses and etcetera etcetera,
but also the out of chaotic suburbs that surround Barcelona
. Then people can drive in and go into this
parking lot and then I think, you know,
well I greatly admired this building and then the the
architecture isn't kind of exquisite architecture, other zumthor or
or whatever, you know it it's not it's not
manet at his most refined but it is very intelligent
. It actually has a profile that steps you know
, so it also is a kind of landmark.
So from outside of the city you can see this
form and the and the building is punched with square
windows. And I've always thought that there is no
text to support this, that if you couldn't rent
it these offices anymore, you could quite easily converted
to apartments because it isn't the problem of the deep
span off deep yes, deep office buildings with curtain
wall. I mean that's very difficult to anyway to
cut a long story short, I think that the
this invention of this type but it's you know one
offer you'd like to say unfortunately, but you know
it is a kind of exemplary type in that it
tries to transform the the economic reality into a into
a new kind of synthesis irrespective of the higher refinements
of the game. You know it the program is
a big issue with the invention of the program.
And I think when you think of all these provincial
american towns, you know where the these developer guys
of course bought land cheap because of the suburban development
and then they put the you know black top down
and built the shopping center with the cheapest possible investment
commodity by definition and the people come there and park
their cars and go in and buy the stuff and
go out also consuming. Of course that's it.
It's an entire exercise in that game. And the
provincial town which it has been built outside of is
destroyed, so is gone. And all of us
. And of course, if we had any sense
, we would have forced them politically, but we
don't have any sense politically democratically that they should build
the just the dropping facility close to the old town
, then there would be a kind of a kind
of symbiosis. But I'm giving this thing because I
think that's a very good question. But then I
think this question of program and invention is what is
at stake. You know, and I think this
question of the land settlement, because we we are
completely out of our minds about that, you know
, we feel we can go on doing suburbs,
suburbs forever even now, but we clearly can't maintain
this infrastructure, it's gonna fall apart, then we
will abandon it. They're used to anybody. Can't
grow phone can't grow food anymore on that land.
It's already gone. I mean, we don't know
that's a sad fact that, you know, we
like to think we have progressive, we have a
modern vision that we have modern people etcetera, etcetera
, but we don't know where we're going. Do
you have any idea? You know, he produced
Children etcetera, etcetera and we love our Children etcetera
. But we don't want to do anything about the
obvious, you know, obvious future that's sitting there
. You know, even the immediate we apparently it's
amazing situation. Not very one should discontinue discontinue this
discourse because it's too heavy would you say etcetera.
What do you mean? In relation to what?
Thank God. Yes. Can you go a little
further? What do you? Well, you know
, I think it's quite what it seems like.
You're you're still writing the history of the moment that
you're speaking. And you know after this meeting you
write the history of what we've talked about. You
have some sense of what might happen in the next
three or four second. Mm hmm. No,
I mean who knows. I can't answer that.
Would you ask you asking me a question? He
said we could have a longer. You know,
we could have a correspondence about this, but I
mean, I don't know except we could do a
lot with this etcetera. I think yes, I
have a question about your previous visits. Did you
meet Charles Worley when you're here perform. You studied
with a quick story in reference to your tubing hothouse
Charles. Worley. Who is a faculty member here
for a long time, studied with armor institute in
first when it was the armor institute? Yes.
And he said that really? Yes to the students
said after seeing this shot of the marble table with
the columns saved as the columns of the house holding
up the table said maestro question please, you told
us that things should fit the function. This chrome
columns hold up the house. Why did you use
the cross section of the same column to hold up
the table? Said it was the best we could
do that day. Yeah, that's a good answer
, isn't it? He was good at that.
Yeah, he was good at that. What do
you think about? Well, where would you begin
today? You know, you're a friend of mine
. I thought yeah, right. I prefer when
you stay with etcetera. Yeah. Mhm. No
, it's not, it's not an easy issue.
That's why I you know, when I was given
this when I said I would do this talk.
You know, then if I were to teach you
architecture is a little bit, it's always been on
my mind that you know that when the thing ends
, you're growing bored organizer, not a stylist.
And I don't know, it's very difficult I think
. How do you how do you approach this?
Well, one thing I think is for sure maybe
you do this here, but we don't do it
in Colombia. But you know, Colombia is its
own Magical scene. But you know, one thing
which I talked about is that and that's still there
from the 60s. That in the first semester of
the second year, students designed housing, right.
But in the first, in the first year,
in the first two semesters, they do not design
a house. Yeah, it never designed and you're
like, it's too corny to design a house right
here and so on all, you know, And
this whole question of how big is anything within a
given culture, how big is a table, how
big is it share all that business of the dimensions
of things and to the body in relation to things
and all that. It's a sort of old way
of beginning, but I still think it's very valid
and the fact that maybe here it it still goes
on, but the fact that it doesn't go on
in, let's say Columbia and I don't think it
really goes on in jail either. I don't really
know what happened at Harvard, you know, that's
all, we don't do that, right? And
I think it's that will start, you know,
And I also think that typology altogether is part of
culture and ought to we ought to have a go
to kind of be closer to topology in a way
, you know, and mhm. It's also part
of the tradition, you know, with Adrian.
Yeah, I mean some, somewhere like that would
be one aspect of trying to ground to school,
I think with the President's with modernity is part of
that program. Well, it's a bit difficult to
avoid modernity. Yeah, of course. Um It's
such a difficult, it's very difficult. I find
it difficult to answer the question because I think it
is really a difficult moment and coming here, you
know, I see things happening here that you know
or in Alexandra for example, which to me to
be also still very valuable and yeah, rich in
a way and that doesn't happen in or any way
not in the same way in Yale or Columbia.
I mean they keep on talking about Yale and Columbia
because there are two schools I know best. But
recently I went to cooper Union show, you know
and the first year, the second half of the
first year and the and the second year were taught
by young faculty which was sort of abstract, constructive
work somewhat after you know folks old business of nine
squares and so on, but very much influenced by
by neoclassicism and modular geometry. Mostly orthogonal, very
complex obviously enriched by digital manipulation. All of that
work was very impressive. Then I then I go
through the rest of the years and it gets worse
and worse and worse. And you have this feeling
that you know, even people that you think of
you have to have experience and intelligence reform, you
know, I don't really know what they want anymore
. You know they I mean the teachers don't know
what they want and and they they I mean it's
sort of kind of scandalous for me to say this
but I I think that's the feeling I had that
like Diane lewis who is a very intelligent person that
took there for a lot. I mean I looked
at the work, you know, which was so
mannerist IQ in terms of its presentation apart from anything
else. I thought what is this, what what
happened exactly? Why does someone with that experience and
intelligence end up with this mannerist IQ productive? What
what is it? It's like a kind of okay
, here's a related question. Before the war.
He was a bauhaus mechanism, right. I mean
uh that statement all of the houses a machine for
living in then he disappeared during the bar. Not
exactly, but anyway he came out and suddenly he's
doing great grand caid ever dark chapel with the light
of immune and thresh ist commodity. But you know
, you don't know the work well enough because if
you look at ah you see after you come in
the very year that he completes the white present and
all that. He does the Bill of errazuriz in
chile, you know, which is using rubble stone
construction, undressed timber. Malevich rules roman tiles.
I mean, he already has second thoughts about the
manifest destiny of modernity, you know, and that
question with mediterranean and the mediterranean vernacular and vernacular altogether
is present. And if you come to the maison
weekend, which I think is a little brilliant piece
that was never uh has been no longer existed,
you know with this combination of shell boat a ruse
and wow, advanced breakfast, concrete. Shell ball
construction. But I'm sure, you know, it
mixed with, you know, delicate concrete blade supports
, but also then with rubble stone wall supports and
then with plate glass framed in stainless steel, but
rubble stone walling painted white on the interior with,
you know, industrial produced plywood on the, on
the sockets of the vaults and, and grass over
the top. I mean, here there is a
subtle, yeah, brilliant synthesis of, of the
, you know, modern technology with archaic ways of
being and building, you know, brought together in
an extraordinary year. The only synthesis and this is
the, this is 1935. So when, you
know, it's not, it's not. So,
as you say, you know, he doesn't come
out of the war. You know, it is
the continuity of this. He's already involved with,
you know, a reinterpretation of the archaic because the
The Tent 1937 votes is what could be more archaic
than a tent. But it's reinterpreted, I think
, uh, this new questions that launched the vitamin
that I'd like to really pull up that completes his
work when it comes to new york wise, loving
people worldwide. And then without south America and you
suddenly see the incorporation of the horizon in this work
. How is that Southern partner? Did you start
singing legislations a lot of inhabitants. That's only the
other things is there is this notion of improvising infrastructure
. Right? How legitimate. I think it's so
one of the um, economic graffiti on books.
Mm hmm. Yeah. You know, well I've
been there is that public for Buenos Aires which shows
the towers, right? Yeah, I don't know
what to say. Ah yeah, I mean,
I mean the three million inhabitants anyway is 1922 and
the horizon is already there. You know, the
interesting thing is and of course we're not able to
do that either. Which is that um, 1937
There is this project for paris which is in the
center of paris and you know he has these Cartesian
skyscrapers I think four or six, I can't remember
which he builds, you know next to Notre dame
and so on and so on. You know it's
a beautiful sketch. And one of the things that
is obviously implicit is that you, if you built
to a new standard height you will create a new
data, you know and yeah, good, nice
to meet you. Yeah. So you've established anything
and what No one did it except in stock room
I think. Okay, thank you. In uh
, in new york city, I think they are
close to completing a complete reconstruction of the U.
N. Headquarters. Um, and it seems to
me it's a little sad that that instead of that
they couldn't make it any better. They just have
remade it exactly the way it was except for some
technical stuff. You have an opinion about it's not
so easy to make a thing like that better,
you know? Uh Yeah, so I went over
it very recently less than a week ago. Um
yeah, you know, I don't know what to
say, you said it. No, I don't
know what to say about it because you know it
is what it is and it's unfortunate. I can't
give you one thing which you know, you could
say making it better because I noticed something that what
is it blocking his neck. Um Yeah, Harrison
, Right. Yeah. Harrison really, in the
end details the whole thing, you know that in
the fluid public space there are these concrete columns but
they are appears they're rectangular. And when you walked
it just struck me as we walked there, you
think, what does this guy understand about anything?
Because you know, why aren't they cylindrical columns?
Because it's clear that the cylindrical columns in terms of
their appearance, but also in terms of what what
they imply, you know, facilitate both visually and
otherwise fluidity of space and then and the rectangle that
comes to the complete opposite. They killed the space
. There's it is still there of course, but
it doesn't have the same feeling at all. And
you know, just in that one detail of these
columns is the total, you know. MS comprehension
of Harrison in relation to or for that matter the
school of it's very hard to fix that kind of
thing, you know, because it's deep, you
know, and uh could be worse. I think
they built it anyway and sort of function which was
with the League of Nations was not able to.
I really do. Thank you. Yes. Oh
, adam you were speaking earlier that having Children acceptable
and we're not sure what we're doing and something is
obvious, but exactly that like we were really sure
what we were doing and seeing that we know what
is obvious than other cultures and generations after deciding it
wasn't obvious at all, it was actually all wrong
. Um, so what are the things that you
involve obvious um, in architectural elsewhere that you know
, we could have in your opinion consensus on.
Yeah, I mean, well, I just think
that the scale of the, of the challenges so
much bigger and in different practices other than that there's
a kind of crisis in a way. I mean
, I think agriculture for example, I think there
are two fields in some funny way, I think
are linked to our one is medicine and one is
agriculture, I think in both these areas, there
are lots of, you know, ah traps.
You know, economic traps, maybe more more economic
traps than anything. But when you think of the
relationship of the influence business to pharmaceutical companies to the
delivery of medicine in relation to the population, you
look at that very closely, you find it it's
full of Catch 22 All over the place and and
it's difficult to step outside of it. I mean
for the society to step outside. Yeah. And
and if you think of agribusiness for example and all
the things that go on with agribusiness, you know
, it's the same story really and the forces that
work are enormous, you know, And that that
wasn't the case I think in 1935, 1945.
So that the scale has changed things. The scale
of the of the of the non correspondence between um
conditions of existence and and yes and certain practices.
It's more supposed to in your life about repetition and
difference. You're right. It's this is well there
is this idea of the origin of that. Yeah
. What is his name? Famous semi petition okay
, blocking his name but it's no, no it's
oh God Writing Degree zero and elements of yes Bart
uses that term repetition different and I think it's it's
an interesting term, you know, Visa be tradition
innovation and so on repetition. Different. I don't
have too much to add to it. Yeah,
because we always struggle how were influenced by the work
of architecture. It seems to be a very to
speak about yes. Yes. Right. Well I
mean yes, I mean there the circumstances anyway,
you know bring you to well maybe then you know
in the end it has to only could be a
different repetition rather than a copy. Yeah, but
still the reference can be made and made to be
alive. Right? I think you can well,
you know, in traditional cultures where in particularly vernacular
then That's the famous now out of loosening architecture 1910
where he asked the peasant, right? Uh so
it's it's a beauty isn't a beautiful roof or an
ugly roof, and he says, I don't know
, it's the roof. Like my father built the
roof, my grandfather built the roof. It's a
roof. You know, that's the vernacular. Of
course, the issue doesn't simply arise. It's pre
aesthetics, you know, But we are we are
we don't have that public. Right? So,
yeah, so we are in a different situation,
I think. Okay. Mhm. Just to come
to a smaller scale, I was struck last night
, you were showing the house and bought a house
in the sketch. You made the statement that we
couldn't make that sketch today. Right, What are
you getting at there? Yeah, I know it's
a feeling I have about it. Maybe more than
um Actually it would be interesting to look at Potter's
work at the last 20 years or post this house
come and find sketches that that have the same feeling
, not only graphically, but in sort of intention
, because there's a concept there as well as the
delicacy of the graphic and I suppose what I'm getting
at is that since that was done, I think
, you know, Ticino has, you know,
more and more houses have been built. Probably more
and more farms have been abandoned etcetera, etcetera.
And maybe that because I see that image as kind
of the a sort of late modern resistant gesture.
You know that it's that the building is built to
establish a boundary at some distance from a pre industrial
village with the agricultural land behind it, you know
, And it kind of rhythmically the marks the different
, you know, somehow. Yes. It's a
marker and the kind of implies or seems to be
a sort of metaphor of defense or resistance. And
but I think now it's difficult to perhaps think like
that because things have have gone yes. You know
, maybe you can't find that village anymore or I
don't know. I mean it's an intuition really rather
than I can't prove it, you know? But
even if there's an offense wouldn't it still be worthy
to have ideas like that? Even today. You
know, I think that I don't wish to suggest
that it's not an aspiration one should have. You
know, I just wanted to say that when you
look at it, you think of it's something very
beautiful about it and very clear, you know,
very someone lucid and I just wonder, you know
, well even, you know, is better able
to think like that now. You know the question
. Mhm. Um um on you what you have
to I guess one day awesome. Yeah. one
more coming from this. Yeah. And more than
legal. Mm hmm. I don't know. I'm
not thought about it too much money for example.
I mean, I have reservations about the later work
of water. You know, I think that,
I mean, he's a brilliant person. He's very
skilled. Okay. Or does he know what he's
doing? You know? But um, perhaps too
well. And so I don't find the work,
the later work very interesting. You know, I
think this Mario, I don't quite know what to
think about it. Um, I mean, if
we're talking about, you know, some illusion to
another moment in history, maybe medieval. I prefer
the church of sumter for example to, you know
, the wooden structure. But I don't know how
to, I don't know more than that. I
don't know what to say. I mean, I
think that, you know that it's a very delicate
thing because if you, um, step too far
, I think towards uh, an avocation, but
you, the detailed expression comes to um, sensational
on the edge of kitsch, you lose it,
you lose the point. You know, you know
, the whole thing becomes too sentimental. That's the
risk. I think with, you know, like
when he was using these diet concrete blocks somehow.
I think it was more primitive and maybe this,
the fact that could could sustain no the bandit business
when the bandit brickwork gets repeated and as in tonight
, um, you know, so you end up
with a decorative thing and then you don't quite know
what you've got, really, I think I feel
that everybody's working away. He's very gifted, very
talented, but probably it may be too successful.
Came out in the habit. Yeah. What do
you think about Mangus Church in Tokyo and Belushi's Church
in san Francisco? Yeah, well, you know
, it's gone forever, but I mean, well
, first of all, I have to confess,
I don't know that, you know, you know
, that's the problem right here I am etcetera,
I don't know, Baluchi church in san Francisco,
so I can't uh comments, you know, I'm
not too happy with church in Tokyo either. I
don't think that's tanking at the best. Anyway,
I think when it comes to certain kinds of educational
spirituality, let's say, think, ando it more
refined work than hanging in that area. Um Henke
was an unbelievably brilliant architect that's still probably undervalued today
, but that church is not not the great work
. Yeah, yep, students, suburban placeless situation
, Yeah, parties and it seems that all sort
of stances in certain you wanna play, but also
to recruitment functionally, that every situation is just up
for grabs and every position and we sort of sort
of take our fathers in a sense, it seems
that it's very hard to unique and cold, my
favorite can continue speaking out of this situation. Good
night. Yeah, but, you know, since
you were brought up in the suburbs, I mean
, I think, and actually at lunch talked about
it a little bit and I also showed Harlan,
you know, last night. And um, I
think this business of people living together, you know
, closer together is a, is a real issue
. You know, also economically also from Portugal's infrastructure
, um, energy also culturally, you know,
I think that that that in a way, you
know, maybe your generation does have a chance to
with the right small developers and of course you have
to persuade local authorities to buy it as well because
they that would be a fool to think that the
building regulations are neutral. They're they're designed to produce
the suburbs. That's what the building relations regulations designed
, you know, so you have that not to
crack, you know, because that's the racket basically
shooting the oil companies, of course, etcetera,
right? I can't believe it anything else. And
, and so I think, you know, people
living closer together would be something to work for,
you know, um, and also to use less
land, well, all of them. And and
the difficulty is of course, how to, how
to invent that that still gives people a feeling of
possession and Oh yeah, bubble, I mean that
I think is an issue, this problem of how
to make collective housing, which can still give to
an ordinary person a sense of home, no,
of rootedness of protection, you know, of a
value. You know, that's that is a real
challenge for how to do that, you know?
And but that's what I think your generation could work
with. And then, you know, it doesn't
matter all the other stuff modern, postmodern, all
that. It's all I mean, you have to
start from the program. Thank you again. Mm
hmm. I really can't do. Okay. Yeah
, processing. And I feel like shadow points and
that was part of I want to market architecture,
the development cycle. And she Yeah. Well,
first of all that jury must be something, you
know, because, you know, the shard is
, what can I possibly say about the shot.
You know, it's just, you know, it
will not only give it a prize because you know
, it's what the tallest building in europe or isn't
that great London is now the all that I mean
, it's really primitive to give that building the prize
. I don't think it does piano in his service
to the building. But anyway. And then the
credit thing. Well, I'm not okay. But
I mean, what about, you know, these
two buildings? Pretty weird I think. And then
you have to come back to the jury and to
media and to conformity and you know, I mean
, the article review which is edited by Catherine Slesin
, which isn't bad, but there's no position,
he never takes a position, you know? Not
really. Um, yeah, so and two,
it's something you'd be upset me actually by telling me
that fact. Alright. God, Okay. Um
, I was struck last night when you mentioned that
you thought that the avant garde had essentially folded at
the beginning of the spanish civil war, because it
got me thinking, um you know, most of
for many of the well known early modernists, projects
that we have were projects that were connected with commerce
, They were stores, cafes, factories, et
cetera. Um I guess can we regard those projects
as I've off guard for one, So kind of
, how are you categorizing it? And then secondly
, um can the avant garde exist within the capitalist
mechanisms? Yes. Well, you know, is
there is the term I haven't got, you know
, is it still helpful? I don't know.
I'm not sure it is anymore. And but I'm
glad you raised that issue about the powerful story,
because in another moment of marketing, department stores were
definitely sort of micro cosmic semi public institutional buildings,
right? With one of the most beautiful buildings that
kind ever was Do Dogs. I was buying Colt
building. That was after the second one was half
demolished in the the Second World War. And they
demolished the other half and they built Boyer, not
very impressive replacement of that. And that building really
worth looking up because that building, you know,
it has the most beautiful, well, you know
, the whole question of relations in the restaurant and
and the basic marketing space and and the place of
the building in the city. And what the the
way the building was conceived in relation city, they
would never gave a kind of commerce a sort of
institutional ah president. And I think in other departments
, those you can pick it up also as being
part of the program and part of the general idea
of what was the department. And you're like,
I don't even know this peter jones department in Sloane
square in London. Yeah. Which is has this
kind of quality of the cotton wool. That's something
that the scholars. Yes. So that was I
suppose the department stores were the the Epitome of modernity
as opposed. And that's all. That's very interesting
because the first department store in 1853, Ico invents
the bon marche a in 82 it's it's everything under
one roof, fixed price, no haggling. You
know, that was the concept and that spread all
over the world and um and it was a modern
idea and it would go it would maintain itself until
Well, you know, into the 50s, I
suppose. And even sort of in new york anyway
, still and maybe a few other things I suppose
, you know, factories also were seen as having
that. Yes, also having that kind of meaning
, I suppose, you know, where modernity in
say had a kind of value, right, modern
production modern. But I don't think that that in
either case where the really the subject matter of the
kind of avant garde, I would look well,
I suppose, you know, the avant garde in
the sense that, I mean, it is connected
to a kind of Socialist project really, basically.
And um yeah, and I want to say the
spanish civil war because I think, you know,
the Socialist Project and particularly one thinks of that,
that phrase that is outmoded socialism with a human face
, that I think that disappears in the spanish civil
war. And it um and after the war,
you know, it's not possible to pick up the
pieces anymore and or have that suspension of disbelief about
modernity. I think it changes. Yes. In
your arguments for critical regions, you spoke of how
architecture might be able to draw on the culture of
being, I think one of the mythology, the
traditions of particular regions as a way of um at
least resisting the uniform contingencies of growth. And I
think examples that we've seen most of those that we
discuss are drawn from regions uh which may be provincial
or they may be uh they they have a very
, very old tradition, certainly not just that we're
how do you feel and live with this? Places
that seem to not have that, where everything that
might be local and specific has been somehow subside within
this all embracing and globalist culture in those situations?
What might we be able to draw on heart with
architecture that might put us in that position of resisting
this kind of globalism performance. Yeah. You know
, there is a very, very sensitive and and
also the rigorous critique of the whole critical weakness by
FREDRIC Jameson in a book called the seeds of time
. It's quite a severe also makes the same question
, but it's also the deal, could you?
Um but it's very expensive. Mhm. Anyway.
Uh Yeah, well, you know, I think
universities theoretically should be places of of culture, right
? They they think of themselves like that and they
ought to be like that. And um and to
some extent they have succeeded, but it's not,
you know, it's called a foregone conclusion, I
mean, to, to continue with universities as centers
of culture, you know, you it means it
means it means that the body of the university has
to also have this is the project and two,
and to really have a self conscious attitude towards it
. And maybe that's the problem. I mean,
if universities can't do it, what can Yeah,
or of course small municipalities, maybe even not so
small municipalities, you could also you can also be
see that core in life, that's what you're alluding
to in a way. And, you know,
recently, for example, in Montreal, you know
, the cat cow architect built this, they won
this competition for the Quebec library and they built the
library and so on with great difficulty by the way
, you know, as an inter professional level,
but they did it in the end. And I
think it's a beautiful building and you know, you
can associate it with the city of not sure how
the government works, whether it's Montreal or whether I
don't quite know how that was done. Whether the
Quebec state the funding, that thing was to make
library, it's very interesting that I do know the
details about the competition because um I did was in
that competition and Bernard Tschumi wanted her deed to get
that. And someone called George who was the head
of the school, the school in uh the university
Rebecca Montreal, you know, I was able to
struggle against that and and then give it the prize
to the, you know, and Packer used half
the site. No, so it was also more
economical and yeah, but that was, that was
a story with a happy ending, but I remember
a story which was absolutely inconceivable to me, I
Stephen, okay, calm down, University school of
Architecture talk to the university into a new school,
they will write the program to the new school,
why they do that, then they will choose the
architects to compete for the design of the new school
. But they do that and 14 steven Holl,
I was like, and then they hold a public
jury or rather the people come and they explained that
the project to a public meeting, then there's a
jury of which I was a member and a unanimous
vote for Stephen House building and within a week the
School of architecture says we're not going to do that
, We don't want to do that. And the
university, to its total shame in my opinion,
let them get away with that junk, you know
, that's okay. I mean, I find the
irresponsibility of university central administrations with regard to their faculties
, you know, inconceivable because they think this idea
, while everyone, every ship on its own bottom
, these faculties should be left alone. I mean
, but in this is a very extreme case of
leaving them alone. Right. It's incredible I think
. And they then built this piece of this work
by Rem, which is just another knock off,
you know, because he's a famous architect and moisten
can't think of anything better but to give him the
job, you know, it's a horrible look horrible
and and that's it. It's finished, The money
is spent, it's done. Yeah. Yeah.
If you're on another asset. Yeah. You listed
regional architecture, wonderful architecture. Oh my God,
it's very incredible architects, I don't know, you
know, everywhere. Right. You know, Australia
Canada, I mean, are they are they are
different. Are they really critical reasons, I mean
, you know, but would I yes, I
mean kind of an anthropological game would you, who
would you include? And I can think of,
Yeah, Shim Sutcliffe and that's brian Mackay Lyons and
and blake Flatow and what's his name, Bolin Yes
. Right. And yeah. And also uh yes
, no, no Chipperfield maybe, I mean,
you know, it's a big, certainly irish to
me, a donald grafton Architects Change of Black,
you're black. And then Mark. Um, yeah
, I mean it takes a while but thank you
, you know, did do a fairly nice little
library building in Holland. Right. About the time
he got started with his practice. Beautiful little place
. Where is that? Mm hmm, mm hmm
. It's a nice building. It seems like so
many architects are falling into that. That mode expanded
. Yes. Yes. It is something that's gonna
get published. Yeah, that's it, of course
just that, yes. Uh, yes, you
mentioned a few times the word micro sorry, you
mentioned the word proposals. I would like to ask
do you think in the work of Mies van der
Rohe in the many buildings that he built? That
is true. And how much the program is a
driving force there? The last part of the program
program isn't driving force clearly think, you know,
make sure apartments, National Gallery in Berlin and a
few other buildings. That's a that's a that's a
tough question because you know, then Visa be,
you know, there's a very good book, you
know, which is this fritz, Nomar's the word
and in that book there is this reference to um
Ramana martini who was a Jesuit philosopher and you know
this speaker and and He had been taken as a
two year old or something from Como to Berlin.
And there is a 1937, he publishes a set
of letters called Letters from Como in which he um
, you know, contrast, you know, he's
still existing agrarian society of como to the massive the
techno scientific industrial city of Berlin. And then he
has a statement about modern technology, about how we
don't have a choice but to embrace modern technology.
But we have to, as he puts it in
any way, an english translation, we have to
say yes to it, but we have to do
that aware of everything that is dangerous in it.
You know, this is the way he put it
. And I think this was very influenced by this
guy. I think that in my opinion, the
somewhat enigmatic character of meat is full of illuminated by
this book of mars where he reveals the importance of
Gardini in the thinking. It was not only Gardenia
because I think more than anybody else, probably german
philosophers and Germany altogether maybe had to deal with with
the onslaught of technology or they were aware of it
more maybe more self conscious, then let's say english
or american. Okay, Yes. And and then
part of mrs kind of um silence is, you
know that if you make the space big enough society
will just do what they want. And there's no
problem because there's sort of ultimate flexibility. And so
in that sense, of course, because I think
that's where your question is coming from. The program
program doesn't really play a big role because kind of
accepted either. Well, if it's an apartment building
, of course it's sort of fairly normative. I
mean he tried of course in the living dining kitchen
arrangement in the original lecture to create some fluid space
, not unlike, you know, the broken heart
or or the Berlin building exhibition, but of course
he can't do much of that. And even I
think in the ideal projects were not carried through exactly
as he wanted in any case. And but you
know, it was kind of the terra terra steel
frame construction, green green hold as a developer client
. It was absolutely not sentimental in any way whatsoever
. And it's modified in a very subtle way.
The relationship between the the fireproof steel frame and glazing
and Yeah, so I mean I kind of answered
the question I suppose or not answer this. I
mean, um not since you know miss uh what
how did where do you go with it? You
know, I mean it is what it is is
a kind of answer a Architecture degree zero answer two
building. But I don't think, you know,
is that really something we can develop? Thank you