What's your best and worst overseas experience?
Best Experience - Spain. After Franco's death, the Spaniards gained enthusiasm, an appetite for development, they are interested in what they can take from others and use them. The Spaniards are very strong in tennis, they have many champions and great teams, but they do not have a tennis stadium - neither Roland Garros Paris nor Wimbledon London. They want to host international tennis tournaments and create new champions. In 2009 the first tennis tournament will take place there.
This is the best experience, but what is the worst?
The worst Russian so far. It turned out that it is difficult for a foreign architect in Russia to gain respect for his work. They can simply tell him - everything that you are offering us here is nonsense. This does not correspond to the norms of our country. And since this foreigner does not understand anything about the rules and regulations of our country, well, let him get out on his own.
Aren't these common translation difficulties?
Misunderstandings are everywhere. The question is how to overcome them. In my opinion, it is more important to achieve a result, and not to fight off an annoying foreigner who is always demanding something. If the client invites a foreign architect, this does not mean that he makes his life easier, no. An international competition is already a headache. Then the customer must make an effort to accept the foreigner. To work out a contract, oversee the project and, most importantly, help him work in a foreign country. The client must support the architect. The work is probably more difficult, but the result promises to be better. Because then why invite a foreigner?
How did the invitation to the competition, announced in November 2002, go, were there negotiations, persuasions?
Each of us got a call to ask if we wanted to, if we were interested. This is always done so as not to waste time. The negotiations were, as it should be in these cases. At first there was a long list of 30 people, then they were reduced, probably to 20, and at the last stage there were seven of us. Ended up with an invitation letter.
Did you get paid for this entry?
It was in the rules - the program gave the amount of work, terms and remuneration. We had three months to work on the project proposal. In the winter we arrived in St. Petersburg. It was as cold as it had never been in my life. We returned, sat down to work, and submitted the project at the end of May. And at the end of June 2003, in the white nights, we were already sitting in St. Petersburg waiting for the jury's decision. And worried as never before.
The thing is, you put on an amazing competition. This has never happened before. First of all, all projects were exhibited at the Academy of Arts. This is not how we do it. We have a jury first, and then invite the public. And you immediately went to articles in newspapers, discussions in blogs. At the same time, we have not even performed yet, have not explained our projects. And since we all know each other, we called back: look, I like your project, but I don't like mine. And so every day during the exhibition, and it went on for three weeks. They called me both the hairdresser, and the bakery, and the dentist, and at one point I said to myself, "Enough!" and came to Petersburg without thinking about anything and expecting nothing. But when I entered the room, I had a folder with the competition materials near my bed. And here projects of competitors looked at me.
Then there was a performance in front of the jury. I spoke for 30 minutes, we all spoke at least, and in the jury, mind you, no one slept. Then an agonizing ceremony stretched out - first they handed out certificates, then badges, then the governor spoke, and we all waited and waited. And then the madness began - outbreaks and journalists. It was amazing! This is what Russia will be remembered for now. This is a country of strong feelings, which instantly goes from love to hate and from hate to love.
What happened after the competition?
There was a period of calm, and then the first meeting in Moscow, where I stood alone in front of three dozen people in the Ministry of Culture. I met Mr. Shvydkoy, we discussed the details of the contract. It already became clear that they, in general, do not know what contract to sign with me and what to talk to me about. But they explained to me that Russia is a country of precise and detailed contracts and it is necessary to immediately agree on everything. And in the end we signed some incredible, thick, like "War and Peace" contract, incredibly detailed, which already painted all the details in advance, although we still knew almost nothing about the project. Then work began in a group, where there was the chief architect of the city, who sympathized with the project and felt responsible for it, was the director of the North-West Directorate and was the director of the theater. And I got to know Russia as a country where you can work. Because I saw before me people who were vitally interested in the project, involved in it, who fought for it.
This work did not last long, as far as I remember
The state, I don't know why, decided to break this trio and replace it with one person. Mr. Kruzhilin decided to change our way of working. Apparently, even then in Moscow they decided that the French architect was no longer needed, let him leave, take his work and finish it ourselves. And from that moment on, everything became much more bureaucratic and difficult. In my opinion, at that moment the competition was betrayed, the client was no longer interested in the project.
Director of the North-West Directorate of the Ministry of Culture Andrey Kruzhilin suggested organizing a new competition for your project
This was a rather unexpected initiative of the St. Petersburg Directorate of the Ministry of Culture, parallel to the work that we did at the end of last year. I was sure that everything was going well, I had enough worries. It was necessary to coordinate the work of consultants from the Metropolitan Opera, German engineers, Japanese acoustics, Moscow technicians and St. Petersburg foundation engineers. And discuss all this with Maestro Gergiev. We once spoke for seven hours straight with him and the theater team. In December 2004, the next stage of work was shown. And then the St. Petersburg directorate began to say: well, here is just a competition, maybe you want to participate? What competition? I don’t know Russian procedures and I thought it was about choosing a builder, general contractor, we are foreigners, we don’t know the rules, it’s easy to manipulate us. But when it turned out that my work was being played out in the competition, I was very surprised.
And they refused to participate …
Of course he refused. For a very simple reason - I have already won an international competition. Back in 2003.
Didn't you have the desire to slam the door back then?
It would be as easy as shelling pears. But the only reason that could make me leave the project is if architecture, the quality of the project and construction are at stake. You can bargain about prices and conditions, terms and procedures, but you cannot bargain about the quality of the architecture. This is an uncompromising question for me.
So, I refused, informing Mr. Shvydkoy. That time they admitted that I was right, the competition was canceled in March 2005, and later Mr. Kruzhilin was replaced by Valery Gutovsky as director of the North-West Directorate.
In order to be able to work in Russia, at the end of 2004 you were offered to open a Russian design workshop
They demanded that I move to Russia and set up a bureau. The registration process began and it took a long time. I didn’t work with projects, I went to the tax office, God knows where else, to sign 20-30 papers. And at the same time I had to assemble a team, distribute orders among Russian subcontractors, because we worked not with one, but with 20 Russian organizations. And they worked not to make a project, but in order to correctly draw up documents and collect a dossier for state expertise. Then we began to understand the rules of the game imposed on us, but at first we were shocked. After an exemplary competition, nothing was organized to give us the best performance possible. The expertise did not accept our project.
The then Minister of Culture Mikhail Shvydkoi says that you were greedy, you wanted to work alone with a small team in order to receive the entire fee
Yes, we were distrustful of the Russians. Because we were disappointed, we needed the advice of Russian experts, but did not receive it. We did not understand the reasons for the examination, we could not cooperate with anyone there, they reprimanded us, like schoolchildren, and said: "It will not work! You will come next year." As a result, I began to work with the Europeans, since we also had very tight deadlines. If you do not understand what is happening, how to achieve a result, you go to people whom you know and in whom you are confident. I would be ready to work with a large Russian bureau if we shared both fees and responsibility: I am paid as a French architect, and they are paid as Russians. We modified the project, and we did it for free. For three months we worked for nothing to ensure that the project survived.
But the examination in December 2006 again rejected the project
I hoped that they would understand that this project is highly non-standard. This is not a school, not a hotel, not a barn. Each opera has its own character, and each is a unique element in its own country. We tried to explain it, and it was all in vain. We have never been able not only to receive explanations, but also to give our own. We were told: we do not need foreigners in our state examination! It happened that a foreigner could sneak in secretly to meetings, but this was very rare.
We invited experts to Paris to try to explain to them what we had done, but the door was closed. No effort, no step forward, among the hundreds of their comments were barely three or four significant. Answers to many comments of the examination have long been in our project. Why didn't they open the dossier? Didn't see the plans?
And then in January 2007 your contract was terminated?
There was a meeting in Smolny. Ms. Matvienko and Mr. Shvydkoi were there, I was not there, unfortunately, I was warned too late. And they said: we like Perrault's project, but the work is not progressing. We stop the contract with Perrault and give it to the Russian side, but at the same time we want to build an opera by Dominique Perrault.
Then you circulated a communiqué describing what was happening. The scandal came out on an international scale. Did you want to somehow influence what is happening?
Not. This communique of mine was addressed to the Europeans, my colleagues, who began to hear strange rumors from Russia. About the fact that the project of the new Opera is "mediocre", "with gross mistakes worthy of a third-year student" and so on. I had to explain everything to them from my point of view. Because you can't just say, "We want to carry out your project, Monsieur Architect, but at the same time we are going to terminate your contract, Monsieur Architect."
At a press conference in St. Petersburg, Mikhail Shvydkoi argued that your employees are "sharpened" for winning competitions, and are weak in construction
Today I am building more than a billion euros in the main cities of the world, and I would like Mr. Shvydkoy to be better informed. But if the customer repeats that your project is a mediocre, poorly done job, then the contract must be terminated. I just don't understand: why try so hard to become the owner of a project made by a schoolboy?
Was the breakup relatively peaceful?
What could I do? Yes, we concluded then another non-aggression pact. I was relieved. Although, of course, I experienced disappointment too. Theoretically, everything is correct, because it is impossible for anyone, be it the greatest architect or the most powerful design bureau, to develop working drawings in a foreign country. In all eight countries where I happened to build, the working drawings were developed by local architects - with me, of course.
Maybe it was necessary to start with this?
I was hinted at this in 2004, but I didn't want to leave early because the project was not finished. When the contract was terminated, according to the project that we gave to the customer, it is possible to build an opera in any country close to Russia in terms of the type of climate - well, in Finland, for example. This is normal: a foreign architect submits a ready-made, I emphasize, a finished project, while local architects are engaged in documentation, examination and construction. A logical sequence, don't you think?
Why, as you say, this logical procedure was not foreseen from the very beginning?
Because nothing, nothing at all was provided from the very beginning, and this is the stupidity of the situation. The state customer did not bother to work with a foreign architect. The competition was held very high quality, its results were not challenged. Everything was open, transparent, reasonable. Then everything began to fall. Let the accusations go. But all the same, a lot was succeeded - one cannot say that the work was not done. It was done within a reasonable time frame, albeit not instantly, but the bureaucratic procedures did not allow going too fast.
I must have made a mistake. It was necessary to have a partner with a powerful bureau, rooted in St. Petersburg, so that it could take on this work of persuading and lobbying for the project. May be. But when I offered it, they told me: no. Organize your little office. It turned out to be easier for the clients. It's easier, as I understand it, to put pressure on the little ones.
The project, having taken away from you, was given to your former employees, headed by your former deputy Alexei Shashkin
Yes. There was no logic in this - except perhaps the desire to preserve continuity. Especially if you believe that "my employees are" sharpened "only for winning competitions." I could still understand that. And then, until the fall of 2007, I had no news. I heard that the project is under examination, that the examination was passed back in June, but I have not seen the project. It was sent to me only in the fall.
Is this your project after all? Or a Prada bag made by Chinese artisans?
This is partly an imitation of Dominique Perrault. But when I saw this project, it seemed to me that it was possible to return to the right path, to find the real architectural and design quality of collaboration. I expected to be contacted and offered to at least express my opinion. I was hoping that I would be asked to complete the project, at least in terms of design. But that did not happen. I waited for the continuation, but did not wait.
The heads of the North-West Directorate, your former customers say that there were offers, but you asked for an incredible fee, and they had to refuse your services
This is not the case, no one has officially contacted me. Moreover, I still do not have complete project materials. I just made out what was sent to me. These are some fragments, there are several sheets, generally signed by me. I'm not going to moan and ask to be invited to participate in my own project. They know my phone number and my address in Paris.
But in May 2008, Alexey Shashkin was also dismissed, and now we are talking about cardinal changes in the project. Were you invited to the negotiations?
No, because although I am the author of the project, as is emphasized in Moscow and St. Petersburg, I have no contract. So the only way for me to influence events is to say whether the theater can bear my name. The situation is senselessly dramatic. I think that everything is simple. If the customer wants to build, as he said publicly, the project of Dominique Perrault, it is necessary that the customer allows Dominique Perrault to stay close to the project - in the position of the author, consultant, head of supervision. In addition, as far as I know, the function of copyright control in Russia is not as strong as in Europe, where copyright control is, in fact, the management of works. When we built the National Library in Paris, 60 architects oversaw the production of the work and the quality of the architecture. Sixty! And here? How does the customer imagine this? I don't know that yet.
Is Marinka a closed page for you? Or not yet
Yes and no - these are three years of work in my entire workshop. We loved this project very much and tried to make it complete. The competition was well organized, and then I found myself face to face with a customer who could not organize effective work. There was a desire, but the bureaucratic system did not allow us to do what was expected of us.
Do you know what will happen with the project next?
I still have no official news. What I have is more or less random documentation, which is also outdated again. I cannot influence this project, I do not know what will happen to it.
Your customer now claims that it is impossible to build your dome - no one is taken
It can't be. There are many enterprises in England, Germany and Spain who were willing to work with me on the construction of this dome. The roof of the Olympic courts in Madrid is much more complicated than the dome of the Mariinsky, but it is designed, calculated and built. In a year he will be working.
Simultaneously with the Mariinsky Theater, you designed the University in Seoul, and it has already been built
Yes, this is another example of organizing work with a Western architect. This project is ten times more than the Mariinsky, no less functional in complexity, and it is ready. It's built. This is how they work in Korea, France, China, Spain, but apparently not in Russia.
Does this mean that the promise to build a Perrault theater without Perrault was just an empty phrase
I don't know what my former Russian partners are counting on. But I have no resentment, much less gloating.
