Wolf Prix talked to Archi.ru regular contributor, Russian architect Elizaveta Klepanova and Austrian architect Peter Ebner.
Peter Ebner: You work in different countries. Where does it get more complicated?
Wolf Prix: I thought it was difficult to work in China, but no - there are many more unpleasant countries to work with. For example, Germany. The Germans do not have a culture of building, they have a culture of making claims.
P. E.: But working there also brought you fame, just remember your wonderful
project of a cinema in Dresden.
Elizaveta Klepanova: If now you were asked to develop the layout of a new city, how would you approach this issue?
V. P.: I will never receive such an order, since the only country in the world where this is now possible is China. But there, large American companies are firmly entrenched in the architectural market, and there is simply no chance of getting a job of this level. Some American company with a staff of a thousand people will agree to do a project for 1% of our price. It is simply impossible to compete with this. They take out of their pockets ready-made blueprints based on the layouts of American cities and sell them to the Chinese. And they are happy.
P. E.: I understand this situation. I was once invited to design a layout for a new city in Saudi Arabia, and the conversation came to a discussion of the price. And, as a result, the order was received by French architects who agreed to make the project for 10% of the amount that I offered. The clients told me that if I agreed to do the project for the same money as the French, they would hire me. It was later revealed that these architects received financial support from the French Ministry of Culture.
V. P.: When we participated in the competition in Beijing, a young Chinese architect who was on the jury told me that we were in the top five, but at the same time said that I, as an Austrian, would never win such a prestigious competition. Naturally, I got very angry and replied that this was not an architectural argument. He objected to me that they had five commissions from France, three from England and one from the United States. And he suggested that I try to guess who will take the first, second and third places. The French participants received tremendous support from their government. I could never have expected something like this from Austria. The French understand that such projects are prestigious. And the Austrians would say, “Where is Beijing? How do you say this? Is that something edible?"
P. E.: Yes, indeed, only from the French have I met such support from my compatriots.
V. P.: Why is that? The Americans are the same.
E. K.: Does this mean that you are trying to work in those countries where you will not face such a dishonest situation?
V. P.: No, sometimes we get lucky and we just win because we have a good project. Or the jury includes a person who can explain our architectural language and idea to others because he himself understands it. This, by the way, is the reason why Zaha Hadid wins so often in competitions. The jury usually includes former students of the London School of the Architectural Association who can explain to others what she wanted to say with her project. This is why I always say that a good school is one only if it can create a network of connections.
P. E.: You have taught for many years. What, from your point of view, should be changed in architectural education?
V. P.: The most important thing in education is that students, after completing their studies, can continue to use the connections of the institute. You also need to teach students progressively. They must understand what awaits them in the profession, be ready to overcome difficulties, since this is the only way they can survive. Students should definitely work in architecture firms to find out what is happening in reality, and then return to their studies, ponder their next steps in architecture, without succumbing to the trend of "immediate success". And never forget that you will have to fight from the very beginning, otherwise you will lose. In Austria, for example, more than 50% of architects work for salaries below 1000 euros. Architecture is a fusion of many things. And only you can choose whether you will be an architect or a traitor, or stay on the sidelines. I never blame anyone for anything, because, perhaps, this person needs to feed his family. I do not blame, but if a conflict situation arises, then I react. The funny thing is that in architecture everything, in the end, comes down to grudges on a personal level. For example, I criticized the 2012 Biennale of David Chipperfield. And his reaction was on a personal level. He stated that if I drive a Porsche, I cannot judge anything from the window of this car.
E. K.: What do you think of the Biennale this year?
V. P.: I cannot criticize Rem too much. He is one of the smartest people I know. But I criticize the attitude of the critics to the Biennale - that they believe what Rem tells them. He is smart and always tries to manipulate them. In this case, I call this exhibition "3D Neufert". This is unbearably boring for me.
E. K.: This is very interesting, since this year's Biennale was mainly liked by people from the near-architectural world and was criticized by architects.
V. P.: Of course. The Biennale, for example, was liked by students - because they do not yet have enough knowledge, or by developers who generally have a poor understanding of what architecture is.
P. E.: Francesco Dal'Ko told me that when Rem Koolhaas left the School of the Architectural Association, they decided to invite him to a professor in Italy [in the 1980s - note from Archi.ru]. And Rem then wanted to teach "the basics" - exactly what he did at the Biennale.
E. K.: And yet, going back to where we started our conversation: how would you make a new city?
V. P.: I compare the city with the growing capacity of our brain. If we could transform these opportunities into reality, we could create a city that instantly responds to the needs of its residents. We strive for this in design - not just to develop a master plan, but to create a city-organism that changes and develops independently. People are too attached to the rules instead of breaking them and doing better.
