The Architecture created by Bjarke Ingels emerges from his careful analysis of how life constantly evolves and changes. His Architecture is a combination of exploring living, leisure and working, which collectively test the balance of programmatic mixtures on the triple bottom line. His work focuses on smaller details that exist within the “big picture”.
As an Architect with a mission to prove that its okay to wear t-shirts and sneakers and that you don’t have to be over 50 to be recognised; he is a huge inspiration.
Interviews Bjarke Ingels
1. Which of your projects has been the most rewarding and why?
BI: It is very nice to see your efforts get realized. Once you interact with reality and the full spectrum of forces in the world including the turmoil of political, economical, technical, social, ecological and legal influences then they begin to let loose on a project and start to evolve it in unprecedented directions. The true creative moment is when a big idea interacts with these uncontrollable but at times navigable forces of society.
I like the idea of architectural evolution in a Darwinian sense; that the forms and shapes (designs if you like) of the biosphere have evolved through millennia-long selection processes – various lifeforms (design attempts) have encountered the forces of the nature (society) and have been edited to become what they are today. So for me the projects that have made it to their final stage – where they start to inhabit our planet and accommodate our lives are by far the most rewarding. Unfortunately way too many of our projects die at infant stages or prenatally.
2. BIG recently won first prize to build the Shenzhen International Energy Mansion. What aspects of the competition proposal do you think contributed to its success?
BI: At our first meeting with the clients they said: We don’t want a landmark – we want a sustainable building. The masterplan dictated a relatively basic volume of 2 towers – 100 and 200 meters tall – leaving almost only the facade open for interpretation – so we asked ourselves – why don’t we revisit the facade of the skyscraper and see if we through a rethinking of the envelope can evolve the skyscraper into something new.
The facade is rippled like a pleaded dress – blocking off all direct sunlight while opening up towards the soft light from the north. The closed part consists of a design which evolved in collaboration with Trans-solar that deploys solar heat collecting glass tubes that through an ingenious use of thermal draft, active salt and osmosis dehumidifies the air – reducing the buildings energy consumption by 70 percent. Architecturally the pleaded dress is manipulated to create main entrances, urban squares, panoramic meeting rooms and so on. As a result the architecture of the towers is like a subtle evolution of the classic highrise from the 30’s, evolved to be both economically and ecologically sustainable
The International Shenzhen Energy Museum (images from Archdaily)
3. How do you think architecture will change in the next 50 years?
BI: It will evolve into something that is both completely different and also exactly the same as today and the built environment (our cities) will most likely be completely recognisable and also surprisingly new.
4. What changes would you like to see in the Architectural profession?
BI: Bigger budgets, cheaper materials, braver clients, more elastic building regulations and more tolerant neighbors.
5. Do you think that Architecture tends to be trendy today?
BI: We don’t concern ourselves with being trendy, in general we tend to study the works of our dead ancestors rather than our contemporaries – first of all they have often dealt with similar issues but in times with dissimilar techniques and possibilities. Such research means we lean a lot but we might have new materials at hand and new techniques to allow us to go beyond. Secondly the dead don’t complain when you ‘steal’ their ideas ;- )
6. What would students learn from reviewing the body of architectural projects you have completed? Do you have any advice for upcoming students?
BI: You don’t have to look to French philosophy or the Kabala to make architecture interesting – the right mix of practical and everyday ingredients such as inexpensive apartments, the desire for a house with a garden, the need to resolve parking and the optimal orientation for daylight and views can turn in to a potent mixture of architectural alchemy, creating (if not gold) added value and new forms of architecture.
Rather than choosing between the practical or the ideal – we strive towards a pragmatic utopian architecture that turns making the world a better place into a practical objective.
7. What are you most proud of in your career or any aspect of life?
BI: Before starting on our own I had been shopping around probing the work environment and atmosphere in different places who’s work I admired. Before going independent i promised myself that I wanted to prove that it was possible to make interesting and intelligent work in a happy environment with a positive and collaborative atmosphere. I am actually proud to say that BIG is the best place I’ve ever worked – with the coolest and most brilliant colleagues I’ve ever worked with ;- )
8. Who do you think is the most overrated architect, and who do you think deserves more credit/recognition?
BI: Philip Johnson – to both questions
I always hated Philip Johnson – until he died and i discovered that he actually did a lot of great work – i just recented his often cynical quotes and seemingly soulless eclecticism which bordered on promiscuity. However I realised that it also gave him an openness and receptiveness to new ideas that allowed him to be an agent of change and a protagonist for the next generation rather than a fossil fighting to fend off the future.
Apart from that i have an army of architectural heroes that all deserve a lot of credit and probably more than they already get. Like they say – the best way to learn a language is to get a girlfriend that speaks it – the best way to learn architecture is to fall in love with architects that do it well (and their work.)
9. What aspect of Architecture do you find most important? What is fundamental to your practice and your design process?
BI: Architecture is the art and science of continually refurbishing the surface of our planet so it fits to the way we want to live. As life evolves – our buildings and cities should evolve also, so we have a physical framework tailored to our ideal lifestyles – rather than being forced to to live in ways imposed upon us by outdated structures of the past. Architecture is not the goal – but a bridge to reach the goal. The goal is to maximise the potential for unfolding human life to the fullest. And in our own humble way – that’s what we try to do ;- )
10. What inspired you to become involved in Architecture? What inspires you now?
BI: I wanted to become a graphic novelist – but in the lack of a comic book academy I enrolled at the Royal Art Academy’s Architecture School, i did this to enhance my drawing skills and move from there towards comic books which is where I wanted to be. Instead I got derailed and grew a passion for architecture.
Lately science fiction writers such as Ian M Banks and thinkers such as Kurzweill and magazines such as WIRED are a significant source of inspiration
11. What other interests do you have?
BI: My favorite Film is Adaptation /Kauffmann/Jonze. My favorite book is The neuromancer trilogy /Gibson. My favorite Philosopher is Nietsche. My favorite Music is Bjørk/ Kraftwerk/ The Knife. My favorite Comicbook is The Dark Knight Returns / Miller.
12. What is your favourite time of the day, and why?
BI: Anytime of the day!
13. What would be your ultimate design project?
BI: I’d love to make a house for and with Charlie Kaufmann – in a way i think his work as a scriptwriter is what we aspire for in architecture. To make a complex work unfold from a simple idea.
14. What are you doing at the moment?
BI: We are involved in a film called “My Playground” about urban movement with documentarist Kaspar Astrup Schrøder and the Parkour team Jiyo. It portrays the appropriation of our work by freerunners and traceurs. It will be our contribution to the Shenzhen Hong Kong Bienale 2010.
And then we are attempting to keep up with the speed of construction in Kazakhstan – attempting to make the construction drawings for the National Library of Kazakhstan before the building is completed!
15. Who would you most like to work with on a project?
BI: Right now id like to do something with Stefan Sagmeister who I recently had the pleasure of meeting. Apart from being incredibly talented and insanely nice to hang out with, he also has his heart in the right place. A designer that talks about uncool things like ‘happiness’ and ‘design that touches the heart’ are a rare species – designers as well as architects have a lot to learn from that.
Also I’d like to work with Kauffmann on our new book – a quid pro quo – we do his house with him – he does our plot with us!
The Danish Pavilion, Shanghai EXPO 2010
Tallinn City Town Hall in Estonia
I’d like to thank Bjarke for participating in the interview, it was a pleasure. If you’re interested in getting in touch or finding out more about his projects, e-mail BIG at [email protected]
Also, it’s worth grabbing a copy of his book – Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution
If you are interested in being interviewed and featured on Archi-Ninja, please contact me.
Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution
Gerard has taught and lectured at schools of architecture in Australia and Europe and regularly writes and commentates on architectural issues, which has led to various forms of recognition inside and outside the profession. TERROIR were the creative directors of this year’s Parallax 2009 National Architecture Conference in Melbourne, inviting thinkers and Architects to conduct a series of lectures and discussions.
I have attended many of Gerard’s lectures and I find them to be very captivating and motivating for me as an emerging Architect.
Interviews Gerard Reinmuth
1. Which of your projects has been the most rewarding and why?
GR: I think for me there are two ways of answering the question. In terms of built projects, I think Peppermint Bay remains a highlight given its contribution to a small region in both cultural and economic terms. It is simply a great feeling to see people enjoying a place that you have worked hard to create. I am hoping that our George Street project in Sydney will also come into its own as it will finally be occupied soon.
The other answer would be to say that TERROIR is a project in itself and working on this as an endeavour continues to be rewarding. This project could be said to constitute the writings, lectures, teaching, competition entries and other things that make up our world here at TERROIR. The joy in this is both the discoveries we have made and the personal ties that underpin it all – not only between Scott, Richard and myself but of course a team of others who have committed years to the TERROIR project and who’s loyalty to our project is appreciated far more than I probably think to tell them.
2. Your recent project, Smith St (ware)house, was named the winner of the Tasmanian Architecture Awards Residential Architecture. What aspects of Smith St (warehouse) do you think contributed to winning the award?
GR: Well this is unusual, as I would normally not be able to tell you due to the post-natal confusion that accompanies the completion of a project which results in a complete inability to judge whether it is good or not. But this is Scott’s own house and so I could just sit back and watch, more as a tourist, than being directly involved.
It’s a classic TERROIR project in its blunt exterior (provided here in situ by the existing warehouse which, as an aside, used to be called Gerard Industries, which I find constantly amusing) and a quite wondrous and unexpected interior, consisting of an extremely judicious series of adjustments, with a directness of detailing which is quite astounding at times.
The whole thing is resolved with an extreme level of rigour, there is simply not one “blooper” detail, and this is typical of Scott. So, I think it’s just an amazing house to visit, both as a rigorous piece of architecture and as a place which houses a family in surroundings which challenge typical preconceptions about domesticity. The jury’s reason for giving it an award was that “the architect has made the most of the opportunities that presented themselves throughout the construction process. The ability to be open to discoveries and integrate them in the overall design, achieves unique results.” which is probably a fair assessment.
3. How do you think architecture will change in the next 50 years?
GR: I have written previously that the profession needs to change if it will survive, particularly in regards to the sustainability project. We have to overcome the current fascination with propellers and mechanised systems as a first order response and consider things instead on a more global level. For example, a new 6-star building takes 50 years to repay the carbon debt from demolishing the existing building on the site, even longer if the existing building was instead refurbished to a basic level in regard to energy measures. Once we get our head around this we have to reconfigure how we charge fees, which I have also touched on before. We have to get to the point where advice to do nothing is valued and paid properly.
4. What changes would you like to see in the Architectural profession?
GR: I think Leon van Schaik is spot on in suggesting that we stuffed it up over two hundred years ago by professionalising the wrong body of knowledge. This has left us marginalised as bad builders as opposed to experts in spatial configuration, which we are. Our pragmatically-inclined post-colonial condition restrains us from fully exploring this potential.
An increased confidence in what we do and its value would then result in better advocacy I think, for we should be far more aggressive advocates than we are. We see the RIBA considering whether it might sue the Prince of Wales while in Australia we fiddle around in the back corridors constantly worried that we will upset someone. But sometimes people need upsetting. I wish for a vigorous and unafraid form of advocacy – one that comes from a deep confidence in the value of what we do.
My problem is that I am idealist and my favourite people in history are those idealists that effected great change – think Martin Luther King, think Emmeline Pankhurst. Closer to home (in the world of architecture) think Michael Sorkin. They upset a lot of people. I like the visibility of public advocates and the effect they have because of this visibility, while I despise the idea that things only get worked out between blokes in suits wandering the corridors of power. All this means that Sydney is probably the last place I should be living and working.
5. Do you think that Architecture tends to be trendy today?
GR: Whether the current wave of excitement about architecture has happened for the right or wrong reasons, I hope this is the start of a more permanent condition – the entrenchment that Andrew referred to in your interview with him. It is interesting that in Denmark the title of architect is not protected because the respect for the profession is deeply embedded in society already.
My main concern here would be that if architecture has become trendy it is because of a new athleticism in form-making and representation which seemed to accompany the surge of projects in developing countries. The true architectural project for me is absolutely political in terms of the decisions you make, when you say no, what society you want to create for and what you want to create in it. Then, the project shifts gears as we use our spatial skills to try and explore the poetics in the circumstance that you have created out of these greater ambitions.
6. What would students learn from reviewing the body of architectural projects you have completed? Do you have any advice for upcoming students?
GR: The projects are outcomes of a research project which is TERROIR. This is not to dismiss them, but to understand that they do not exist as some novel form of activity in and of themselves. Central to the creation of the projects is a research project founded in debates about why a project should exist and how one might go about entering the design process to ensure that these ambitions are then deployed.
So I would not want to think that our projects have inherently profound lessons within them but that simply they are an example of what sort of production might be possible as the result of a research-driven agenda. You could say that the interest in our practice is out of step with the modest little output we have managed in terms of built projects, so the lesson here might be that by investing substantive research and critical activity in each project is a sort of guarantee that your work might speak to other people in some way. This is a quite a different approach to relying on scale or novelty to engage with others, which might be a more fleeting form of interest.
7. What are you most proud of in your career or any aspect of life?
GR: I am very proud of the office actually, its ambitions, its people and some of the outcomes. Equally then, I am very proud to have around us a group of brilliant people such as Richard Goodwin, Adrian Lahoud, Leon van Schaik and others who constantly keep us in check and with whom we test ideas and propositions. Without these people we would have no idea how we are going and would probably freeze due to a lack of confidence.
8. Who do you think is the most overrated architect, and who do you think deserves more credit/recognition?
GR: I would say that much of the work for developing countries has been highly overrated if you assess these projects via any methodology other than formal inventiveness. I am constantly dumbfounded by the benign and unquestioning way in the Trojan Horses within which these projects appear – in the form of supposedly sustainable agendas for example – are accepted by the profession. Are we really so incapable of critical thought? It’s so dumb its embarrassing.
I think the media system is quite good at recognising talent actually, as most good people seem to register somewhere. The problem for me is the lack of opportunity for some of the best people to build more. I think that way too much work is held between a very small number of large practices, while profoundly good architects like Durbach Block might do two buildings a year. And I think this is our loss. Imagine if the Sydney CBD was full of buildings by DB, Choi Ropiha, and Lacoste Stevensen? Now that is a place I would like to be.
9. What aspect of Architecture do you find most important? What is fundamental to your practice and your design process?
GR: The most important aspect of architecture to me is the potential to create places that increase opportunities for the inhabitants or society in the place they are located. Architecture should not be focused on rationalising or simplifying but about opening up opportunities and potential.
10. What inspired you to become involved in Architecture? What inspires you now?
GR: There are no architects in my family but am still one of those odd cases that just wanted to be an architect since I was 6, having won a “design a house” competition in grade two. I just never looked back.
11. What other interests do you have?
GR: Tasmanian wilderness anywhere, anytime, Wineglass Bay (Tasmania) on December 28, Bornholm (Denmark) in summer, anything by Bjork or The Knife/Fever Ray or Nick Cave, any book by Murakami, any building by Le Corbusier.
12. What is your favourite time of the day, and why?
GR: 7am, Bondi Icebergs Pool or if the swell allows it on a bodyboard in the surf. Does it need further explanation?
13. What would be your ultimate design project?
GR: I think we tend to focus really hard on the project at hand, no matter what it is. We have also been fortunate to work on a couple of quite large projects which have been no more or less pleasurable than smaller ones and which confirms that enjoyment for the project can be quite unrelated to scale – unless your ego is nourished by that in itself.
I would say then, my ultimate project would be to work on more public projects, as each situation has its own political and cultural story to tell and these are the problems that I find most nourishing and most worthwhile. And in turn, it would be good if these projects had curious and generous clients. It really does make all the difference.
14. What are you doing at the moment?
GR: We are going through a bit of a competition frenzy this year. My other current task is establishing TERROIR Denmark.
15. Who would you most like to work with on a project?
GR: Andrew referred to Matthew Barney and Bjork which sucks as it would have been my choice (no joke, those who will have seen me give lectures will confirm the Bjork overload!). So he and I will have to collaborate on that one.
I would also like to make a more significant contribution to the place I grew up (Tasmania) but more and more it seems that is unlikely and interesting projects will be elsewhere.
UTS Broadway Design Competition
I’d like to thank Gerard for participating in the interview. If you’re interesting in getting in touch or finding out more about his projects, use the following:
If you are interested in being interviewed and featured on Archi-Ninja, please contact me.
]]>
Interview’s Andrew Maynard
1. Which of your projects has been the most rewarding and why?
AM: The stand outs for me have to be CV08 and the Styx Valley protest shelter. Both unbuilt concepts, but both have a broad social and ethical agenda that simply does not translate to my built work with the same intensity.
Left: CV08 – The Suburb Eating Robot, Right: Styx Valley protest shelter
2. Your recent project, Vader House, recently won the 2009 Vision Award. What aspects of project do you think contributed to winning the award?
AM: I lose all objectivity about a project by the time it is complete. I can’t place it or measure it when its finished. I have received a lot of great feedback about Vader house, which is always very important for your self confidence as a designer. Vader was one of the first projects I designed over 6 years ago [when I was 28], however it was shelved for a long time while the client got their finances in order. I am a very different designer now and I am quite sure that I would tackle the project differently if I were to do it again. To me Vader often feels like it has a different author.
3. How do you think architecture will change in the next 50 years?
AM: Augmented realities are going to change architecture radically. I believe that we will soon describe architecture as pre augmented realities and post augmented realities. A few of videos worth checking out are : http://bit.ly/4s2kxH and http://bit.ly/aToJf and http://bit.ly/HGbDs . I think that the implications for architecture are very exciting. The idea of user driven content in architecture is also a wonderful way of democratising our profession. The blurring of boundaries between the real and the virtual is already happening and it may prove to be another missed opportunity for architects to lead in the creative implementation of this technology and ideas. There is a real threat that our constructed environment will start to be designed by companies like Apple rather than our profession.
4. What changes would you like to see in the Architectural profession?
AM: A new basis for fees would be fantastic. Linking fees to budgets creates distrust in clients and also discourages architects from arguing for a reduced scope of works. One of the most powerful ESD weapons an architect has is to convince a client not to change parts of their buildings, to simply accept what they have. Knocking down and starting again can give an architect great freedom and increases their fees however there is a broader ethical, environmental and professional obligation that is missed by assuming that this is always the best course of action for a client and a site.
5. Do you think that Architecture tends to be trendy today?
AM: Architecture is definitely very present in the popular media at the moment. However I do not think that this is a trend. This attention will concrete architecture into the public consciousness and I hope will create broader links between popular culture and architecture. This is something that we are very interested in at AMA. Resisting, or denying a link with high culture and instead making architecture not only accessible by the mainstream but furthermore making it culturally entrenched with the mainstream is part of our goal.
6. What would students learn from reviewing the body of architectural projects you have completed? Do you have any advice for upcoming students?
AM: AMA is still in its infancy and as such I am not convinced that there is anything to learn from our built work. However I think that AMA as a practice is a very interesting vehicle for students to learn from and research. Peter Eisenman once said that you must be very deliberate and strategic when you start an architectural practice. He says that if you do not start your firm with a deliberate direction and agenda then your clients and other external factors will set the course for you and this is a very difficult position to steer away from or reorient.
I was very strategic in the way that AMA was set up; 1.Concepts were more important than built projects 2.Engage with the broader architectural discourse 3.Engage with new media 4.Survival is a priority, profit is not. This simple set of rules has created a practice that has some plasticity to it and importantly, because there are few financial pressures I am free of the stresses of the month to month billing grind. I think that this is important for students to see. You don’t need to fit into standard practice models. There are choices and you can invent your future without becoming a slave to the ubiquitous corporate model of architectural practice.
7. What are you most proud of in your career or any aspect of life?
AM: I am most proud of the Styx Valley Protest Shelter. The Wilderness Society is doing an amazing job to defend Tasmania’s old growth forests from logging. Styx was my small effort to help draw attention to the work of the Wilderness Society. The project received [and still receives] a amazing amount of press which drew international attention to the Styx Valley. I have always been amazed by how effective Styx was and furthermore it is evidence that “paper architecture” can be effective, not simply on an academic level, but also on a broader social stage. It is also evidence that architectural practice does not need to be based on a purely capitalist model of operation. It can be a hybrid of your choosing.
8. Who do you think is the most overrated architect, and who do you think deserves more credit/recognition?
AM: After the last interview I did, for a UK mag, I honestly believe that I am the most over rated. The journalist attempted to describe people like Shigeru Ban and even Renzo Piano as my contemporaries which of course is completely ridiculous. I seem to attract hype. At the moment I mainly design small houses and when you compare my work to the amount of media attention I have received it is verging on the offensive. I’m not complaining of course and I am not resistant to the attention as it does lead to more work, however I increasingly feel that there is an unrealistic expectation on my small firm. I believe that AMA has the potential to contribute some important ideas to architecture and the broader community at some stage in the future, however building up an expectation is not helpful.
The most underrated architect would have to be Jo Noero. Not only does he selflessly contribute to academia and social programs, his architecture is a stunning example of how architects can positively effect the lives of those in need. Students need to spend less time studying Star-chitects and more time studying the work of architects like Noero.
9. What aspect of Architecture do you find most important? What is fundamental to your practice and your design process?
AM: To answer this I offer a quote:
Thom Mayne of Morphosis on teaching architecture, and a bit more: “The key thing is that architecture is a discipline where it’s impossible to escape values. It’s radically value-laden. I think it’s possible that you can become a designer – an architect – and see it as somewhat autonomous and not as a political act, which is just totally incredibly naive. I try to make [students] aware of the radical, political, cultural, social nature of our work and how it’s impossible to escape those responsibilities.”
10. What inspired you to become involved in Architecture? What inspires you now?
AM: I don’t remember why I wanted to be an architect, however I made the choice at a very early age and never even considered anything else.
11. What other interests do you have?
AM: Computer games [esp first person shooters], comics, books. I love the fact that vast numbers of japanese architecture students end up in the computer games industry. My favourite movie is Brazil, by Terry Gilliam. My favourite TV show is Good Game. Best album ever is Going Blank Again by Ride. Favourite authors are Author C Clarke, Azimov, Douglas Adams and Philip K Dick [to name a few]. At the moment I am reading Mother Tongue By Bill Bryson [I loved his book A Short History of Nearly Everything]. I love reading anything from Black Inc Publishing and there website Slow TV is amazing. My favourite place in the world is on top of Mount Oakleigh [facing west].
12. What is your favourite time of the day, and why?
AM: 6pm ….. because the Simpsons is on. And yes, I am home before 6pm each day. Working late is for suckers.
13. What would be your ultimate design project?
AM: As I have said in the past to Gina Morris of THE AGE, all architects want to build museums and libraries and I am no different. However, I’m pretty keen to build the Millennium Falcon. And I don’t mean a replica, I mean the real thing with warp speed and a wookie.
14. What are you doing at the moment?
AM: After spending the last 2 years concentrating on getting some structures built, I am currently refocusing back on comps, concepts and products.
15. Who would you most like to work with on a project?
AM: I have always fantasised about doing a house for Matthew Barney and Bjork.
Left: Cog House, Right: Corb v2.0
Left: Essex St House, Right: Tattoo House
I’d like to thank Andrew for participating in the interview. If you’re interesting in getting in touch or finding out more about his projects, use the following:
If you are interested in being interviewed and featured on Archi-Ninja, please contact me.
]]>