I remember how you congratulated Dominique Perrault on winning the competition for the Mariinsky Theater. It was in the bar of the St. Petersburg "Astoria", I was sitting next to him then. Would you congratulate him now?
True? I do not remember. But, of course, there have been fewer reasons to congratulate since then. There is a lot of talk about what happened there, but no one knows for sure what the matter is. And I can only guess in general terms what the matter is. Yes, this is a very sad story.
Is it generally easy for a foreign architect to work in Russia?
In any case, you can. Especially in today's Russia, a country with an amazing range of possibilities. Compared to England, where I also worked for a long time, in many respects I would prefer Russia.
What are the indicators, for example?
English architecture is extremely formalized. The rules are immovable. If you want to make an avant-garde in England, please get permission first. You will never be admitted to the cultural elite on an equal footing. Unlike Russia, which is much more democratic and liberal, even if you need to get used to some special aspects of Russian life.
And what about modern Russian architecture?
By and large, it is not bad. Of course, when it comes to the work of developers, Russian architecture could be more intelligent, not as vulgar as it sometimes looks from the outside.
How long have you been observing it "from the outside"?
I have come to Russia for a long time and many times, lived in Moscow. And in 2000 I found Capital Group - my first partner in Russia with whom I could work.
How did your collaboration start?
I knew one young Russian architect who worked with Capital Group. We met and in the end they offered me to become their architect. But since I had been working on my own for twenty years, under my own name, I suggested another option. I will remain an independent architect. But working closely with them and working for them, that's how I'm used to working with my other customers. We worked very well for a while, and then we parted. How and why, you know.
Still, tell us more about this
The situation with Capital Group was simple - I came to Russia because I was going to work with them. I created a workshop, we made a rather unusual project and we got people to talk about it. This lasted from 2000 until 2004, when it became clear to me that they were actually going to build something different than what I had designed. I could agree to some changes that would leave the project within the boundaries of the logic I drew, but these were unacceptable changes for me. From that moment on, our relationship soured and we stopped working together. I will never agree that my project "City of Capitals" can be changed beyond recognition without even asking me.
Has anything changed since you won the case against them in the Stockholm Arbitration Court?
No, their position has not changed at all, they still believe that they are the copyright holders. They even claimed that I was attacking Russia, although I was not fighting against Russia, I was fighting for my rights.
And at the same time, people from the American architectural bureau NBBJ, who were completing the project, came to me with an apology and talked about a misunderstanding, they admitted that they were wrong.
Maybe in Russia it is easier to work with state customers, and not with private ones?
As in any country with a large state machine, your bureaucracy is slow. It is echeloned, and even if you have the consent of the mayor, the prime minister, even the president, this still does not guarantee that you will be allowed to work in peace.
It all depends on the customer himself. I have a smaller project than the City of Capitals in St. Petersburg, which is going much better. My client there puts much more effort in terms of organization of work and quality of construction.
Do you take it easy when your name is simply being used to increase the sales value of a project?
This does not only apply to me, It is a problem for the whole world and the entire architectural community - since the early 1980s. And here it is pointless to curse the greed of developers or megalomania and the stupidity of architects - including mine, by the way. It is more correct to condemn the state. This is his responsibility. You must understand that when such a huge amount of money is involved in the game, without any amendments, without any state control, excesses cannot be avoided. We need restrictions, government regulation.
But you, as a Dutchman, and therefore a born democrat, should be opposed to the spirit of speculation in architecture
What does it mean - speculation? By the way, Dutch society is not as open and transparent as it says about itself. It is a small society, but there is no less injustice in it than in any other. More than it wants to see, anyway. But you are right that young people in Holland are constantly protesting against real estate speculation.
Young people are protesting, while developers are working. Even in Holland, in my country, it is possible to build a house in the center of Amsterdam, which even before completion was sold at times more expensive than its construction cost. 100 percent of net profit. If this is possible with us, what profit can be obtained in Russia? This is too much money to give up.
Is there a difference in the copyright of an architect in Russia and in Europe?
To guarantee his copyright, the architect must have a contract with the customer, and this already means that once the customer agrees to sign the contract, he will carry out this project and this particular project, and not something similar to it. Therefore, I never rush to agree with the customer - until we have agreed on everything on paper. The situation is a little different in the UK. In Great Britain, this must be specially negotiated.
Is a situation possible in Europe when Perrot's Mariinsky Theater is being built without Perrot?
It is up to the architect to ensure that his project is implemented without distortion. And if Perrault has nothing against those who carry out his work, then there is no problem.
How painful was the transfer of the Russian Avant-garde quarter that you designed to another site for you? They said that there was a meeting with Luzhkov, and he said that the project was good, but not for the place for which you created it
It was in the summer of 2004 and the management of Capital Group was very discouraged. As for me, I could admit that Luzhkov had reasons for this. For example, the originally proposed site was too close to the small church that stands there. In this case, I asked the authorities to move the project to another place, but to find this place near the Central House of Artists.
What is happening with the "Russian avant-garde" now?
It seems that they are still going to build it. But this is one of the most difficult projects to build, even in my practice. I don't know if my customer is ready to implement it. He is very big and very ambitious.
As ambitious as your project for an artificial island that reproduces the outlines of Russia in the sea off the coast of Sochi? The project is a little Arabic, a little American and of course Dutch in the sense of creating a new land in the middle of the sea
Yes, it is a little in the spirit of the currently fashionable projects that are being carried out in the Persian Gulf and in America. These are the fruits of globalization. It is customary to scold globalization, say that this is the path to the loss of national identity, and so on, that only money decides in it. But if you look at the history of architecture, you will see that crossing state borders, exchanging ideas, was an excellent way of developing national cultures. The best baroque in Poland is made by a Dutch architect. We do not have baroque in Holland, we did not love God so earnestly to build such magnificent temples for him. I am interested in bringing this international polish to such an interesting place like Sochi. Here Russia and the Caucasus and Europe and Asia converge. This is the crossroads of the world, which remains "big" Russia.
How accurate is this copy of your "big" Russia - what is there in the place of Moscow, and what is in the place of the Siberian prisons?
In such details, the model is certainly not accurate. This is not a geographic map. Otherwise, I would have to reproduce there your beautiful rivers, all their bends, your hills and plains. But this is not a copy of Russia. I remember a movie called Toy Trains. So the first words of the announcer there were something like this: "This is a film about toy trains. Toy trains are not miniature copies of trains." They look like trains, but we use them to play. To fantasize. This is a toy, this metaphor train, not its model.
You have created a capacious metaphor for modern Russia, maybe a metaphor for how it would like to see itself: small, well-groomed, in the middle of the warm sea, in which all the neighbors have successfully drowned
Russia has every opportunity to be a very attractive country. Both big Russia and this small one. It may not be 100 percent correct, not 100 percent accurate. Like all good things in the world, it cannot be completely regulated. It is a little dishonest, somewhere too expensive, somewhere too cheap. There is no artist in the world who can say "my art is absolutely true." Everyone lies a little.
When you are asked what you are currently designing and building, you usually answer, I am doing something now, but it is too early to talk about it
Not that I suspect everyone. I just try to be careful - I learned this from the experience with Capital Group - when I worked with seven projects and some of them were built - but not by me. I now have 17-18 projects that I am working on in Russia. Tonight I present a project to my customer from Siberia, we hope to start construction by the end of the summer. In Moscow, I have 4 projects, one of which is to begin construction in the middle of next year, and one is being built now. Closer to the end, it will be possible to talk about it.
Is there a fundamental difference in the education and manner of work of Western and Russian architects?
Russian architects are changing a lot now. There is less difference between young Western and Russian architects than between Russian architects of the younger and older generations. Several young Russian architects are working for me now, and I am very pleased with them.
And if you could identify the features of different architectural schools in relation to Russian construction
For example, Swiss architects enjoy such a reputation because they are used to proposing an unusually detailed and elaborate project that concerns not only the building, but its entire environment. These are the requirements of Switzerland. For Russia, they are too demanding of themselves and others.
German architects are great architects, but a little boring. And the French style of architectural behavior is also not suitable in Russia.
American architecture is the same as the Americans themselves - heavy, large, noisy. American architects are very energetic, benevolent, but not always elegant and subtle.
Perhaps Russian architects are like Americans. They are reaping the benefits of the construction boom. They design, and a lot, but at the same time they do not particularly follow their construction, they are in a hurry to have time for everything. Many of them, I would say, are spoiled by the current situation.
I am quite optimistic, but I would like the Russian architecture to be more European and less American and Asian. Otherwise, they will turn Russia into Dubai. I don't know if the people of Moscow will be happy if they wake up one day and see that their city has become just as modern and just as ugly.
Do you think this process can still be stopped?
When I look around, there are buildings that I like and there are those that are just oh-oh-oh. When I spoke with Luzhkov, he asked me: "Why do you propose to build such complex buildings?" I answered him: “Look at the room in which we are talking, it is richly decorated, and not painted with non-mark paint. We are talking about important things, you are an important person and Moscow is the most important European city. The interior of your office emphasizes this idea - with its decor. I want to do the same with Moscow - my buildings. If a building is large, it must be richly designed, it must be complex to please and not shock. " And in the end Luzhkov said: "Well, well, come on." And all the same, they were not built like that, this could not be allowed, I fought as best I could, but they are the buildings of Moscow City, behind this window in the panorama of Moscow. We must leave the American path of development. Russia is too beautiful to follow. This is not a foreign country to me. My wife is Russian, my son is half Russian. I've been here for the last 18 years and this country has given me tremendous opportunities. Unfortunately, there are some unpleasant moments here, but where are they not, in which country? I am very happy here.
Many Western architects complain that it is difficult to work in Russia
It’s strange. Why go to work in a country to complain about it? Yes, I see prospects in Russia. To be honest, I am not worried about how things will develop, whether it will be better or worse. I am very happy in Russia, because I see changes for the better, I also participate in them, I do what I can. I am ready to wait, I am ready to yield to my customers, not suppress them. And here's what. I just remembered what I said to Dominique Perrault in the Astoria bar.
What?
I told him, "Congratulations." Although, I was not happy, of course, that he won, not me. "Congratulations! If you can build it, this is a building. If you feel the strength to build it."
