The People's Architects by Lieketseng

THE PEOPLEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S ARCHITECTS: BJARKE INGELS AND SHIGERU BAN

Lieketseng Lerato Tlali

Faculty of Arts and Humanities School of Art and Design Coventry University

Module Leader: Selma Porobic Date of Submission: February 09 2017

Abstract The question of whether architecture should be critiqued and awarded purely on its aesthetics and forms, or as a medium for addressing socioeconomic issues, is not a question that strictly has to arrive at one conclusion. Rather, as proven by Bjarke Ingels and Shigeru Ban, the role of architecture is to blur the boundaries and to create a world where empowerment and sustainability go hand in hand with innovation and ingenuity. By going against the grain and paying less attention to architectural styles and movements, and being more concerned with the people who inhabit their spaces and architectureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s responsibility to those people, Shigeru Ban and Bjarke Ingels have managed to create buildings which in their simplicity; are highly functional, in their sustainability; are highly sophisticated, and in their innovation; are at their core â&#x20AC;&#x201D; for people.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract Report Conclusion List of References Bibliography Appendices

page page page page page page

3 6 16 18 19 21

LIST OF FIGURES

fig 1. ‘Alvar Aalto: Through the Eyes of Shigeru Ban’ Exhibition fig 2. Cardboard Cathedral fig 3. 8 House

page 8 page 11 page 15

he question of whether architecture should be critiqued and awarded purely on its aesthetics and forms, or as a medium for addressing socioeconomic issues, is not a question that strictly has to arrive at one conclusion. Rather, as proven by Bjarke Ingels and Shigeru Ban, the role of architecture is to blur the boundaries and demonstrate that sustainability and innovation are parallel. Shigeru Ban, Pritzker Architecture Prize Laureate 2014, has garnered attention and risen to acclaim in the world of architecture for his use of paper tubes as structural elements and for his Pro Bono work designing for the dispossessed and disadvantaged. He has experimented with and advanced the use of humble and unconventional everyday materials. Born on August 5th 1957 in Tokyo Japan, his father Mitsuaki Ban, was an executive at Toyota, and his mother Sachiko Ban owned a couture fashion boutique. He grew up in a mixed Japanese and Western style wooden house, and was enthralled by the traditional carpenters who would often work on renovations in his house. Traditional Japanese carpentry does not make use of power tools or machines, but rather everything is crafted with hand tools, and this remains true today. The precision and perfection that the carpenters exerted in their craft is what intrigued Ban the most. Young Shigeru Ban would use cast aside pieces of wood to make his own models and wanted to become a carpenter. He excelled in arts and craft classes, and in junior high school when given an assignment to design a simple house and make a model of it, Ban designed a house with a sloped roof and a garden and engineered his model so that when he turned a tree, lights went on in the house. The ingenuity of his design amazed, and was displayed for the whole school. This was the point at which his dream moved from carpentry to architecture. His mother’s eye for fashion and designs didn’t do much in influencing his aesthetics, but because she often travelled to see shows in Europe, this sparked his curiosity about studying abroad. This curiosity grew further when he came across John Hedjuk in a special 1975 issue of the a+u magazine. John Hedjuk was a member of the New York five, and Shigeru Ban was attracted to their works “which showed their common commitment to elevate the idea of modernist architectural form” (Goldberger, P. Feb 11 1996). He wanted to study at Cooper Union where the members of the New York Five had either been students or teachers. However, the school did not accept foreign students unless they were transferring from another US institute, so in 1977 Ban decided on the Southern California Institute of Architecture and studied there for two and a half years before transferring to Cooper Union, where John Hedjuk taught at the time. From Hedjuk, young Shigeru Ban learned a highly-disciplined approach to basic geometric and compositional elements – the fundamental elements of form. This influence would later come through not only in his use of form, but in the use of materials as well.

Ban graduated from Cooper Union in 1984 and returned to Japan where he briefly worked in the offices of Arata Isozaki. His propensity to save materials at a young age and transform them into ingenious creations of his own stayed with Ban and went on to be among the most noteworthy aspects of his career. He experimented with using atypical materials such as beer crates, shipping containers, cardboard, and even mud and sand, to create economically and ecologically viable structures. However, the material with which he has experimented the most extensively and with which his name is now synonymous — is paper tubes. Just after he set up his own practice in Tokyo in 1985 he worked on designing installations for three exhibitions at the Axis Gallery with the help of Isozaki. The exhibitions catalysed a chain of events that led to his experimentation and innovative implementation of paper tubes in his designs. One of the three, was an exhibition on Emilio Ambasz. Ban admired Ambasz’ work, who was a graphic and industrial designer as well as an architect, and who believed deeply that the real task of creating was to satisfy behavioural and functional needs, referred to as “functional duality” (Jodidio P, 2015). Ban came across and used a transformative material for the Ambasz exhibition and once the fabric had been hung, what remained was paper tubes. “Instead of throwing them away,” Ban says (Jodidio P, 2015), “I brought them back to my office”. The second exhibition he designed at the Axis Gallery, was for the works of Finnish architect Alvar Aalto. Ban had already become a big fan of Aalto when he visited his architecture on a trip to Europe as the assistant of architectural photographer Yukio Futagawa. He went on to use the paper tubes he saved from Ambasz’ exhibition very soon after, for the second exhibition he designed at the Axis Gallery which was for the works of Finnish architect Alvar Aalto, shown in fig. 1. The paper tubes were his innovative answer to the challenges posed by a limited budget and finding an alternative to wood, which despite being a favoured material of Aalto, was unsuitable for a temporary exhibition. He was surprised by the strength and precision of the material and began to think of using them as a structural material. Alongside his development of unconventional materials, Shigeru Ban sought to be involved in an equally unconventional area of design; refugee relief shelters. He felt “disappointed by his profession as an architect” (Ban Shigeru, May 2013) as he put in his Tokyo TED Talk. He felt that architects don’t work for or contribute to larger society, but are employed by the rich and powerful to create visual representation and monuments of their wealth and power. He has been involved in disaster relief projects in Rwanda, Japan, Italy, Taiwan, Turkey, India, Sri Lanka, Haiti and several other countries and in 1995 founded the non-government organization, Voluntary Architects’ Network (VAN), to aid in and initialize disaster relief activities.

Fig 1. Alvar Aalto: Through The Eyes of Shigeru Ban. (Sachanowicz, 2014)

“

“. . . Instead of throwing them away, I brought them back to my office” —

Ban

”

Alongside his development of unconventional materials, Shigeru Ban sought to be involved in an equally unconventional area of design; refugee relief shelters. He felt “disappointed by his profession as an architect” (Ban Shigeru, May 2013) as he put in his Tokyo TED Talk. He felt that architects don’t work for or contribute to larger society, but are employed by the rich and powerful to create visual representations and monuments of their wealth and power. He has been involved in disaster relief projects in Rwanda, Japan, Italy, Taiwan, Turkey, India, Sri Lanka, Haiti and several other countries and in 1995 founded the non-government organization, Voluntary Architects’ Network (VAN), to aid in and initialize disaster relief activities. The Cardboard Cathedral in the city of Christchurch New Zealand combines both his humanitarian efforts and his paper tube innovation. Constructed in 2011 as a transitional cathedral following the 6.3 magnitude earthquake which struck the city on February 22 2011. The earthquake completely destroyed the Christchurch Cathedral bell tower, which had been the city’s landmark, and there killed 115 people, with subsequent aftershocks causing further damage and shattering the glass panels. Shigeru Ban was contacted about building a transitional cathedral to be used temporarily by the Anglican congregation of the church, and to be used as a memorial as well. What resulted was a 770 square meter triangular structure made from paper tubes, with a capacity of 700 people. Situated in Latimer Square, only a 5-minute walk from the original cathedral, the Cardboard Cathedral is constructed from 98 paper tubes which rise on two sides of the cathedral to form the walls and roof of the cathedral. The trapezoid in plan and triangular sections of Ban’s designs were derived from the original Gothic style cathedral shown in fig. 2, built between 1864 and 1904. The structure rises about as high as the destroyed bell tower. The entrance is crowned by a stained glass window with tessellating triangles, each featuring fragmented images from the stained glass windows of the original cathedral. As the plan narrows from the entrance to the altar, the paper tubes on either side gradually change in angle such that they reach their highest point of 24m at the altar, which was a conscious design feature meant to echo the gothic spirit of the destroyed Anglican cathedral. The polycarbonate sheets that cover the tubes to provide a shield from the elements are translucent, which causes a softening of the daylight that passes through the paper tubes. The paper tubes are 600mm in diameter with waterproof polyurethane and flame retardant coating, and filled with laminated wood for added stability. The bottoms of the tubes which each weigh in at 500kilograms, are fixed onto eight shipping containers to secure the stability of the walls. The containers function as storage and serve other supplementary functions as well, and are anchored onto a concrete base. This multi usage of architectural elements is clearly influenced by Emilio Ambasz’ functional duality, and illustrates Ban’s thoughtfulness and refinement when creating his designs. The architectural elements of the structure insure that the integrity of the Cardboard Cathedral would be viable even in the event of another earthquake, which shows Ban’s commitment to creating buildings that are useful in their context. 10

Fig 2. Christchurch Transitional Cathedral. (Goodenough, 2013).

Christchurch’s transitional cathedral meant as a symbol of healing in the wake of a disaster whose “quiet simplicity draws people to peace and prayer” as stated by the Dean of the church, Lawrence Kimberly, had its civic opening on September 1st 2013. “As an architect, he acknowledges a responsibility to the built environment, understanding both the physical and emotional constructive potential of architecture” (McQuaid M, 2003). The Cardboard Cathedral answers whether architecture can be socially and ecologically responsible even as it delights in its aesthetics, and it answers yes. Shigeru Ban’s humanitarian and architectural achievements are best encompassed by his simple statement “I just hate wasting things” (Ban Shigeru, August 2014). Another architect similarly bridging the gap between sustainability and innovation is Danish Architect Bjarke Ingels. Born in Copenhagen on October 2nd 1974, Ingels was never interested in architecture and only attended the Danish Art Academy School of Architecture to become better at drawing cartoon backgrounds due to the absence of a cartoon academy. Today, incidentally, the usage of the word ‘starchitect’ is most likely in reference to Bjarke Ingels. As a student in 1998, Ingels moved to Barcelona to study under Enric Miralles at the Escola Tècnica Superior d’Arquitectura. At the time the architects he was greatly inspired by were Miralles alongside Alvar Aalto and Alvaro Siza. However, he dropped out because he felt a disconnect between the philosophy, poetry, and historical references he was learning, and the real world of people and traffic and shopping malls bustling outside the classroom. He instead went back to Copenhagen and graduated from the academy in 1999. He worked at the Office for Metropolitan Architecture in Rotterdam, Netherlands between 1998 and 2001, for Rem Koolhaas. He had discovered Koolhaas through the extensive time he spent reading as a student. Koolhaas’ books “expressed the idea that architecture can be an instrument for society rather than an autonomous art form” (Ingels B, 2011). He credits his time with Koolhaas as a major force in his education. In High School he majored in Political Science, therefore the ideas taught by Koolhaas that architecture is not about the aesthetics of an isolated object, rather about engaging in social structures, politics and advancement, resulting in architecture that is both avant garde and highly functional, were readily embraced by Ingels. Ingels started his own practice in Copenhagen in 2001 called PLOT with Belgian colleague from the OMA offices — Julien de Smedt. For their inventive designs, PLOT garnered international attention and received multiple awards including the Forum AID Award for the best building in Scandinavia in 2006 for the VM Houses in Ørestad. The project is named VM Houses after the shapes of the two residential blocks inspired by the Le Corbusier concept, Unité d’Habitation. PLOT disbanded in 2005 and Ingels formed BIG, Bjarke Ingels Group. He has developed and presented concepts such Hedonistic Sustainability, Vertical Suburbia, and Utopian Pragmatism through publications such as his notable manifesto Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution , and his presentations for TEDTalk at universities including Harvard. Ingels presents us with contradictions and paradoxes and then marries them into promiscuous hybrids. 12

The 8 House, completed in 2010 in Copenhagen Denmark is a prime example of this design approach. The building is a physical incarnation of hybridization. Ingels finds it problematic that “the future is being decided by those with power: the politicians, or those with money: the developers” (Ingels B, 2011) whereas architects should be at the forefront of envisioning our urban future. The 8 House, which hosts residences, businesses and recreational public spaces in its distinctively adapted and dynamic design.

“

“Architecture seems to be entrenched in two equally unfertile fronts: either naively utopian or petrifyingly pragmatic. We believe that there is a third way wedged in the no-mans-land between the diametrical opposites. Or in the small but very fertile overlap between the two. A pragmatic utopian architecture that takes on the creation of socially, economically and environmentally perfect places as a practical objective.” —

Ingels

”

The different sectors of the building are divided horizontally rather than in separate blocks. The commerce and offices are placed at the base to merge with life on the street while the residential spaces are placed at the top to make the most of the sunlight, airflow, and views. A distinctive and carefully considered design feature is immense difference in the height of the garden rooftop. It slopes up from the south west corner to the north-east corner, not only permitting air and light to enter the courtyard in between, but also serving the added function of a green roof and public mountain path. The building functions as a hybrid of the energy of a big city and the tranquillity of suburban life, illustrating Ingelsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; idea that sustainability does not necessarily have to reduce or be a sacrifice of quality of life but rather actually increases quality of life. Bjarke Ingels challenges the idea that architecture be reduced to either â&#x20AC;&#x153;naively utopian or petrifyingly pragmaticâ&#x20AC;? (Bobkoff D, 2014) but that rather is the main driver of human evolution.

Fig 3. 8 House. (Lindhe, 2010).

Conclusion By going against the grain and paying less attention to architectural styles and movements and being more concerned with the people who inhabit their spaces and architectureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s responsibility to those people, Shigeru Ban and Bjarke Ingels have managed to create buildings which in their simplicity; are highly functional, in their sustainability; are highly sophisticated, and in their innovation; are at their core â&#x20AC;&#x201D; for people

LIST OF REFERENCES

Barrie, A. (2013) ‘Shigeru Ban and the Cardboard Cathedral’. Architectureau [online] available from < https://architectureau.com/articles/christchurchtransitional-cardboard-cathedral-1/# > [May 2013] Ban, S. (2013) ‘Emergency shelters made from paper’. TEDxTokyo [online] available from < http://www.tedxtokyo.com/tedxtokyo_talk/eco-architect-andthree-dimensionalpoet/ > [May 2013]. Ban, S. (2014) ‘Paper Palaces’. The New Yorker [online] available from < http:// www. newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/11/paper-palaces > [August 18 2014]. Bobkoff, D. (2014) ‘Bjarke Ingels: An Architect For A Moment Or An Era?’. NPR [online] available from < http://www.npr.org/2014/01/03/259117207/bjarke-ingelsanarchitect-for-a-moment-or-an-era > [January 3 2014] Goldberger, P. (1996) ‘Architecture View; A Little Book That Led Five Men to Fame’. New York Times [online] available from < http://www.nytimes. com/1996/02/11/books/ architecture-view-a-little-book-that-led-five-men-to-fame. html > [February 11 1996]. Ingels, B. (2011) ‘One-on-One: Architecture as a Social Instrument: Interview with Bjarke Ingels of BIG’. ArchNewsNow.com [online] available from < http://www. archnewsnow. com/features/Feature353.htm > [March 1 2011] Jodidio, P. (2015) Shigeru Ban: Complete Works 1985-2015. Slovakia; Taschen. 567pages. McQuaid, M. (2003) Shigeru Ban. Hong Kong; Phaidon Press Limited, 240 pages. Minner, K. (2010) ‘8 House / BIG’. Archdaily [online] available from < https:// www.archdaily.com/83307/8-house-big > [May 2013] Sachanowicz, T. (2014) ‘ALVAR AALTO through the eyes of SHIGERU BAN’. Architecture in Szczecin. [online] available from < http://architektura-w-szczecinie. blogspot.com/2014/12/alvar-aalto-through-eyes-of-shigeru-ban.html > [May 2013]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

‘Alvar Aalto - Through the Eyes of Shigeru Ban exhibition opens at Barbican Art Gallery’, Embassy of Finland http://www.finemb.org.uk/ public/?contentid=98819&conten tlan=2&culture=en-GB [12 March 2007] Ban, S. (2013) ‘Emergency shelters made from paper’. TEDxTokyo [online] available from < http://www.tedxtokyo.com/tedxtokyo_talk/eco-architect-andthree-dimensionalpoet/ > [May 2013]. Ban, S. (2014) ‘Paper Palaces’. The New Yorker [online] available from < http:// www. newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/11/paper-palaces > [August 18 2014]. Barrie, A. (2013) ‘Shigeru Ban and the Cardboard Cathedral’. Architectureau [online] available from < https://architectureau.com/articles/christchurchtransitional-cardboard-cathedral-1/# > [May 2013] Berg, N. (2014) ‘Shigeru Ban: Triumph From Disaster: Shigeru Ban, winner of the architecture world’s top “Oscar,” the Pritzker Prize, sets an important example: creating buildings for people, rather than glamor and prestige’. The Daily Beast; New York [online] available from < http://search.proquest.com/ docview/1649022661/ FCFBC74FE39A4073PQ/5?accountid=10286 > [31 August 2014] Belogolovsky, V. (2011) ‘One-on-One: Architecture as a Social Instrument: Interview with Bjarke Ingels of BIG’. ArchNewsNow.com [online] available from < http://www. archnewsnow.com/features/Feature353.htm > [March 01 2011] Bobkoff, D. (2014) ‘Bjarke Ingels: An Architect For A Moment Or An Era?’. NPR [online] available from < http://www.npr.org/2014/01/03/259117207/bjarke-ingelsanarchitect-for-a-moment-or-an-era > [January 3 2014] Choi, D. (2001) ‘Designer of the Year: Shigeru Ban’. Interiors [online] available from < http://search.proquest.com/docview/221550515?OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/ sid:primo&accountid=10286 > [January 2001] Doroteo, J. (2016) ‘Spotlight: Shigeru Ban’. ArchDaily [online] available from http:// www.archdaily.com/792108/spotlight-shigeru-ban [August 05 2016] Fraser, M. (2012) The Future is Unwritten Global Culture, Identity and Economy. London; John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 65pages. Goldberger, P. (1996) ‘Architecture View; A Little Book That Led Five Men to Fame’. New York Times [online] available from < http://www.nytimes. com/1996/02/11/books/ architecture-view-a-little-book-that-led-five-men-to-fame. html > [February 11 1996].

Ingels, B (2009) ‘Hedonistic Sustainability’. TEDxAmsterdam [online] available from < https://www.ted.com/talks/bjarke_ingels_hedonistic_sustainability > [July 09 2009] Jodidio, P. (2015) Shigeru Ban: Complete Works 1985-2015. Slovakia; Taschen. 567pages. Lawson, M. (2014) ‘How a cardboard tube inspired a cathedral, and other happy accidents in architecture’. New Statesman [online] available from < http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/ detail/detail?sid=a555c8b68a10-487d-8e39-6c0420b1e796%40sessionmgr101&vid=0&hi d=118&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=95377370&db=a9h > [04 April 2014] McQuaid, M. (2003) Shigeru Ban. Hong Kong; Phaidon Press Limited, 240 pages. Møller, Anders. (2013) ‘Yes Is More: The BIG Philosophy’. ArchDaily [online] available from < http://www.archdaily.com/366660/yes-is-more-the-bigphilosophy> [May 06 2013] Myers, M. (2015) ‘Architect Shigeru Ban Turns to Tubes’. Wall Street Journal [online] available from http://www.wsj.com/articles/architect-shigeru-ban-turnstotubes-1429627795 [April 21 2015]. Pollock, N. (2013). ‘Temporary buildings — Design & construction’. Architectural Record, [online] available from < http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/ detail?sid=e321f3d4-852b4bd7-8c48-6a64ba9fc93c%40sessionmgr102&vid=0&hi d=118&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3Qt bGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=92681263&db=a9h > [November 2013] Rawn, E. (2016) ‘Spotlight: Bjarke Ingels’. ArchDaily [online] available from <http://www. archdaily.com/553064/spotlight-bjarke-ingels> [Oct 02 2016] (2007) Rose, S. (2014) ‘The Yes Man’. The Independent; London (UK) [online] available from < http://search.proquest.com/docview/1544441610/abstract/ F3A19A2FEFC148AFPQ/1?accountid=10286 > [July 12 2014] Winston, A. (2015) ‘Architecture should be more like Minecraft, says Bjarke Ingels’. Dezeen [online] available from < https://www.dezeen.com/2015/01/26/ architecture-minecraftbjarke-ingels-big-movie-worldcraft-future-of-storytelling/ > [January 26 2015]

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Bjarke Ingels interviwed by Vladimir Belogolovsky for ArchNewsNow.com, March 1st 2011. “Bjarke Ingels is an upcoming star of contemporary architecture. His energy and eloquence with which he presents his work could make any politician envious. Actually, architecture for Ingels is somewhat like politics, and his creative practice represents a tempting political program. Ingels’ projects are extraordinarily interesting and original. But what distinguishes them from other architects’ novelties is his ability to find the balanced compromise between the original form and the functional content that would satisfy literally everyone – developers, investors, politicians, engineers, contractors, builders, and the public. It is not for nothing that this young architect is referred to as the “Yes Man,” the person who says “yes”; his motto is “Yes is more” – more mutual understanding, more concessions, more approvals, and therefore more commissions. The architect admits openly that he doesn’t waste his time on basing his visions on the latest fashionable form-generating theories. First and foremost his forms respond to specific site and program conditions. And they take into account the preferences of all concerned parties. Ingels insists that this is what makes his approach radical: his willingness to please everyone turns the process of the architecturemaking into a certain alchemy, which allows the architect to create his sophisticated new forms. “As architects,” says Ingels, “our role is often reduced to the beautification of predetermined programs. Architects only get involved when the decision to build has been made, when the site has been found, and when the size and content of the program have been decided. Thus architects and architecture rarely have any decisive influence on how the physical structures of society evolve. The role of architecture is often reduced to cosmetics. As architects constantly working in and with the city, you would think that we would be at the frontier of envisioning our urban future. However while we sit at home waiting for the phone to ring or someone to announce a competition, the future is being decided by those with power: the politicians, or those with money: the developers.” Ingels initiated several projects on his own. The truth is that when his office would come up with projects that no one has asked for there was a greater chance of realization than in the architect’s attempt to win a prestigious international competition. This way it is possible to be the first at formulating a problem and finding the appropriate solution before anyone else. It is acknowledged that there can’t be good architecture without a good client, but in that case why shouldn’t the architect himself choose the right commission and find the client who would be willing to realize it? Bjarke Ingels was born in Copenhagen in 1974, where he graduated from the Royal Academy of Arts in 1999 and also

Our conversation took place in a busy restaurant in Manhattan in between his design critique at Columbia University and a public lecture at Cooper Union. Vladimir Belogolovsky: Architecture wasn’t something you aspired to do as a child, right? I read that as a teenager you wanted to become a graphic novelist and that you grew a passion for architecture after becoming a student at the Royal Art Academy in Copenhagen. Bjarke Ingels: I went to architecture school at the Academy basically to get better at drawing. But after two years of free-hand drawing and other technical classes, I was exposed to architecture and got intrigued by it. Apart from Lego or cool buildings in James Bond movies, architecture was an art form that I never had any interest in. The tipping point for me was when I discovered that architecture is not just an art form, but you can’t think about it independently of social, economic, and political issues. Political science was my major in high school so I embraced the idea that architecture is relevant to real life issues. My professors at the Academy spoke less about aesthetics and more about architecture’s impact on people. There was a lot of excitement about what is possible. Belogolovsky: You started your own practice before graduation. What was that experience like? Ingels: In 1998, when I was still a student, I partnered with four other students in Barcelona to work on a two-stage competition for a university campus expansion. We were selected as finalists along with nine other firms and were given $90,000 to develop our scheme. We took a break from school and rented an office to complete the project. We knew each other for just a couple of weeks before the competition and we didn’t really share a common vision. In the end we submitted a kind of Frankenstein and did not get any award – but it was a good experience. Belogolovsky: And the end of your collaboration? Ingels: Yes, it was the end of my first collaboration. Belogolovsky: Apart from the fact that Barcelona is one of the most beautiful cities in the world, why did you go there for your studies? Ingels: I wanted to live in Barcelona, but the main reason was to study with Enric Miralles (19552000). At that time I was interested in questions of tectonics and I was really inspired by such architects as Aalto, Miralles, and Siza. But after taking the Miralles course I became very disappointed with his teaching and dropped out. To me it didn’t make any sense. There were incomprehensible collages of everything mixed together: French philosophy, historical references, ideas of movement in space, medieval street grids, patterns found in nature, poetry, and so on. I couldn’t understand how all of that related to real life. I was inside a bubble that was completely disassociated with the rest of the world. I would go out of the studio and see traffic, people, bicycles, shopping malls. I would go back to the studio and none of that would matter. It wasn’t my world. 22

Belogolovsky: So you are not interested in French philosophy. Ingels: I am, but not in a literal sense – the way architects read it. They read Deleuze’s The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque and they literally start to use the folds. To me philosophy is not the goal. Life is the goal. Philosophy is a creative act that helps to expend possibilities of life. Belogolovsky: So you went back to Copenhagen? Ingels: After Barcelona I went back to Copenhagen to graduate from the Academy and then went to work at OMA for Rem Koolhaas where I worked on the Seattle Library project. Belogolovsky: Why were you interested in Rem Koolhaas? Ingels: Education at the Academy was very liberal and I spent a lot of time in the library and through books I discovered Rem Koolhaas. He triggered my interest. Through his books I discovered Corbusier and the idea that architecture can be an instrument of society rather than an autonomous art form. Belogolovsky: You discovered Koolhaas before Le Corbusier? Ingels: So it happened. Belogolovsky: You worked for Koolhaas for three years. What did you learn from him? Ingels: Rem Koolhaas was a major discovery for me and that’s why I wanted to work for him. I can’t think of contemporary architecture without him. He is the major force in my education. He taught me not so much about how to design a beautiful building as an isolated object, but how to use architecture as a tool for engaging in development, politics, social structures, and to be free to realize various means of expression. Architecture for him is not about aesthetics. Architecture is not driven by styles, but by ideas. Our architecture is never triggered by a single event, never conceived by a single mind, and never shaped by a single hand. Neither is it the direct materialization of a personal agenda or pure ideals, but rather the result of an ongoing adaptation to the multiple conflicting forces flowing through society. We architects don’t control the city – we can only aspire to intervene. Architecture evolves from the collision of political, economical, functional, logistical, cultural, structural, environmental, and social interests, as well as interests yet unnamed and unforeseen. Belogolovsky: Among your inspirations you named science fiction writer Ian M. Banks. How does his work influence your architecture?

Ingels: He is a good thinker and he is a great speculator on future possibilities. Many of his speculations have to do with architecture and creations of new worlds which is about the relationship between the technology and social life. I also like to read Wired magazine because it surveys the impact of technological innovations on social, political, and cultural life.

Reflecting on Ingels’ words, I feel he is convinced that by means of architecture, it is possible to solve the most diverse issues of the society. There is a certain exaggeration for such certainty. I recollect Peter Eisenman (by the way, a teacher of Rem Koolhaas), who asserts exactly the opposite: “Architecture does not solve questions. On the contrary it generates new ones. It does not solve problems, rather it creates new ones.” In architecture the presence of an inspiring, beautiful idea is important and one should not seek it in the preferences of the investors and contractors. There are many sources to turn to – whether it is nature, the cosmos, or anything that would not equate the process of architecture-making to alchemy. As far as aiming at solving ordinary pragmatic problems, by and large, it is not at all necessary for society to turn to architects. But it is the architects who need to define their position in principle – should they be led by others or should they be the leaders.”