Bernard Tschumi at IAAC Interview

.1.21

Implementing Advanced Knowledge

bits

2

During the interview - IAAC, 2013, with Manuel Gausa and Areti Markopoulou - Bernard Tschumi was asked about architecture and the city, and how these have evolved during his career, to generate the situation we can experience today in both these phenomena. The quotes that follow are of particular interest in the field of urban research, underlining some aspects of the relation between how we perceive architecture in function with the city, and the city itself today, keeping in mind that the urban population rate is, and has been for the past decades, in rapid increase. The estimated urban population for 2050 is around double the current urban population, this in turn leading to a rapid increase in the number of “mega-cities” in the world, and forcing us to question how we can plan the future of this urban phenomenon.

BT: “My position has always been that architecture is not a frozen discipline; it’s a discipline that evolves all the time. I find it extremely “young” and feel it will grow; architecture has thousands of years in front of it, if the earth survives. Call it a science, a craft, an art –it doesn’t matter– it’s a discipline that is constantly redefined, and that constantly redefines itself. I think this is very important. We all know very well the polemics about the autonomy of architecture, and how it’s grounded in history. I prefer to think about architecture as something that is in constant evolution. For me, one of the important roles, whether of a critic or a thinker, is to try to map the evolving definition of what we do. Rightly or wrongly, I’ll keep calling it “architecture,” but an architecture in constant change.

In today’s society, architecture is probably one of the few modes of thinking that can simultaneously address a lot of vastly different issues. If I go to a politician, he can think of one type of issue; if I go to a mechanical engineer, he can talk about duct work and air supply; if I go to a traffic engineer, he can talk about traffic and infrastructure; and the food producer, about production, distribution and consumption. And so on and so forth… but none of them has the ability to find the common denominators to allow their respective problems to be resolved in terms of the place you inhabit, the city you live in, the everyday life that inhabits it, and that is one of the most extraordinary powers that architects still have. So in this sense, to address all these conditions through design reflects an incredible ability that architects have and must not lose. Architects must not lose the ability to think about the smallest thing and the largest thing simultaneously.

Bernard Tschumi at IAAC - Interview(The text that here follows is an extract from an interview by Areti Markopoulou and Manuel Gausa with Bernard Tschumi in occasion of his lecture at IAAC, edited and presented by Mathilde Marengo)

Architecture is often being generally looked upon as something static, that represents stability, and this is very important historically because architecture also gave society words that are constantly used as metaphors; for example, the idea of foundation, of structure, of a pyramid of power, and so on. These words always indicate a fixed status, and I occasionally wonder whether by changing the words we could also change the architecture, and therefore, the society. In reality, it’s already happening today, when we use the words “network” or “mesh,” we immediately modify those earlier parameters.

Figure 1 - Architecture diagram, La VilletteCover - Bertnard Tschumi, Event Cities

4

So I tend to think that the word “architecture” can also start to help have an influence on the way people think, which is no longer the static means, but the one of something always in motion.

The word “urbanist” also has the connotation of the urban designer, meaning to prettify and make the city beautiful, as opposed to the word “planner,” that suggests rational, abstract, and objective goals. Let’s say the work of an urban designer is always partly subjective. In reality, I personally believe that you cannot dissociate architecture from the city. I would even claim this from the very beginning of time. So, as soon as you say that architecture and the city can not be dissociated, you immediately introduce a form of heterogeneity to architecture. The city is heterogeneous. Of course, you have dreams of ideal cities, in which homogeneity and consistency are

Figure 3 - Bertnard Tshcumi: Event cities, concept and form Figure 2 - Bertnard Tshcumi: To really appreciate architecture

6

being made into the rules. But I tend to think that just as architecture is informed by the city, so the city is informed by architecture. In my own work I try very consciously not to use the same vocabulary from one project to another. This is clearly an urban tactic. Conceptually, I sometimes re-use the same concept, but formally, I really try to address a different issue every time. I think some architects do a wonderful job of developing a formal vocabulary and repeating it again and again. But I would not do it, because this is not an urban move; it’s not architecture of the city. The architecture of the city is not homogenous. It’s always confronted with different contexts, different contents, and, of course, different concepts. When the context changes and the content changes, almost inevitably the concept will change and, therefore, appearances will change.

There are many different models, none of which work very well, but some work better than others. It all depends on the type of criteria that you use, and hence if I use economic criteria, that will give me one type of answer; if I use energy consumption criteria, that will give me another answer; and if I use a time factor, etc, etc… At the current time, there is really no single model. It used to be different throughout history - in the 18th century, with the ideal cities, in the 19th, with linear cities, the Modern Movement, CIAM, Team 10, even the regressive New Urbanists. These historical precedents were addressing problems of spatial organization and trying to propose answers, or even concepts, which we know did not always work.

Nevertheless, they were articulate in terms of providing potential urban models for future use. Some models were built and tested. Even if the number of variables that comes with every urban organization is enormous, at least there was an attempt at rationality.

Today, that seems to be less the case. Despite economic interest groups and political control strategies, there is little intelligence applied to the actual making of cities. To take an example: is density desirable or not? The amount of energy consumption per person in the suburbs of New York City is probably 20 times greater than in Manhattan. How do we square that with rational or intelligent design?

I can’t live without exchange. I am here in Barcelona today, I was on the Adriatic coast of Italy yesterday, I was in Geneva the day before, and in Paris the day before that; I will be in Amsterdam tomorrow, and I’ll be in New York the day after tomorrow. I am probably responsible for contributing to a very negative ratio of carbon footprint! This mobility completely changes the way I perceive the city. People move around constantly today, and mostly in and through cities. You (AM) mentioned the statistics, that in 2050 68% of people will be living in cities. How will people move from one city to the other?”

Figure 4 - Bertnard Tschumi at IaaC checking some projects of the students, 2013. Figure 5 - Bertnard Tschumi at IaaC speaking with the students after his lecture, 2013.

8

Pujades 10208005 Barcelona, SpainT +34 933 209 520F +34 933 004 333ana.martinez@coac.netwww.iaac.net

Institut for Advanced Architecture of CataloniaBarcelona

IAAC

IAAC SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE:Nader Tehrani, Architect, Director MIT School Architecture, BostonJuan Herreros, Architect, Professor ETSAM, MadridNeil Gershenfeld, Physic, Director CBA MIT, BostonHanif Kara, Engineer, Director AKT, LondonVicente Guallart, Architect, Chief City Arquitect of BarcelonaWilly Muller, Director of Barcelona RegionalAaron Betsky, Architect & Art Critic, Director Cincinnati Art Mu seum, Cincinnati Hugh Whitehead, Engineer, Director Foster+ Partners technology, LondonNikos A. Salingaros, Professor at the University of Texas, San Antonio Salvador Rueda, Ecologist, Director Agencia Eco logia Urbana, BarcelonaArtur Serra, Anthropologist, Director I2CAT, Barcelona

Copyright © 2014Institute for Advanced Architecture of CataloniaAll rights Reserved.

PUBLISHED BY:Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia

ISSN 2339 - 8647

CONTACT COMMUNICATIONS & PUBLICATIONS OFFICE:communication@iaac.net

IAAC BITS

DIRECTOR:Manuel Gausa, IaaC Dean

EDITORIAL COORDINATORJordi Vivaldi, IaaC bits Editorial Coordinator

EDITORIAL TEAMManuel Gausa, IaaC DeanMathilde Marengo, Communication & PublicationJordi Vivaldi, IaaC bits Editorial Coordinator

ADVISORY BOARD:Areti Markopoulou, IaaC Academic DirectorTomas Diez, Fab Lab Bcn DirectorSilvia Brandi, Academic CoordinatorRicardo Devesa, Advanced Theory ConceptsMaite Bravo, Advanced Theory Concepts

DESIGN:Ramon Prat, ACTAR Editions