Archi.ru:
You have been working together for 15 years. What has changed during this time, what have you come to?
Konstantin Khodnev:
- We have become better at understanding many things. Fifteen years ago, we did not have experience in managing a bureau, the past years were the time of accumulation. And also studying ourselves - after all, it is important to understand what exactly we are interested in doing. Now, I think, we have a fairly good command of the organizational side of architecture and at the same time have come closer to understanding the main tasks - those that architecture should actually solve.
How did the sensations change?
K. Kh.: The primary thing was that we were interested in doing architecture. It seemed to us that within the framework of our own office, we would simply be able to work more concentrated, since more things would depend directly on us. It was based on interest, so we treated it and still treat it like an adventure, we get pleasure from work.
Natalia Sidorova:
- We didn’t start from scratch, after graduation we worked for seven years in different bureaus. It was a deliberate step. I would say that now there is a feeling of confidence; we are confident in what we propose and that the solutions we advocate are indeed the right ones. Though doubts are helpful too.
If we divide the past tense into approximately two parts: before and after the financial crisis, how do these two periods differ for you?
K. Kh.: Of course, then the economy and customers changed, the format of tasks changed. We came to 2008 with large and very diverse projects in our portfolio, and all of them, especially large projects, suddenly disappeared or stopped. Then the relationship with customers had to be rebuilt. But as a result, it turned out that over the past five years we have reached much more about a larger scale of tasks and a range of projects.
What projects of a new scale are we talking about?
K. Kh.: If until 2008 it was more about individual houses, now there are integrated development projects. Another segment is redevelopment, it is also related to the theme of the city, but in a different way: there it is required to reformat the industrial territory, turning it into a part of the urban fabric.
NS: We are talking about urban planning projects, where we dealt with everything - from the concept of territory development to individual houses: this is the "River-River", a settlement on 50 hectares; Zvenigorod - mini-city at 500,000 m2 housing; Gorki area on the Kashirskoye highway. Working with the territory is a multidisciplinary task, here you need to work at different stages: starting with pre-project research together with a team of consultants for development, business modeling and functionality related to the analysis of efficiency, scenarios for the use of territories. Often, the work on a project ends with such preliminary studies.
K. Kh.: I think this is what else has happened in the past - we have become the same age as the customers. If before 2008 the customers were older, now we have leveled off, and sometimes customers are even younger than us. That also changed the relationship for the better.
Are you currently working on private house projects?
NS: We continue to work, less than before - the situation has changed, there are not so many elite private housing, villas.
K. Kh.: But we have never made them "packs". Country houses are a separate direction in our work. There is a certain psychological complexity in it, since it implies direct communication with the customer. But this work allows us to do everything practically to the maximum, at the limit of technical capabilities, materials, elements, details. What is rarely possible in a city: there are different budgets, requirements, relationships with clients … Country houses for us are also a laboratory for creating architecture of the highest quality.
NS: We are grateful to our customers - we get good cooperation, they are very attentive to architecture and are interested in the result.
Now there is a second wave: there have been several small reconstruction works of villas that we built about 10 years ago. In one of the houses it was necessary to increase the area, in the other - to transform the space. The wishes are related to the passage of time, changes in the composition of the family and the like. We have already completed the expansion of one of the houses, it happened very organically; as it seemed to us, the site was waiting for this addition. This experience allowed us to imagine architecture as a living, not frozen organism. In general, time is a very important criterion for architecture, it is interesting to observe how your objects live.
A positive report is obtained … And self-criticism does not arise? After all, ten years have passed, the view on the form, technique, material could have changed
K. Kh.: The maximum dissatisfaction arises when the house is built. At this point, you outgrow the project, it seems that some things could have been done differently. And over time, you begin to evaluate the house the way you originally conceived it. The solutions that we lay in work, the desire to completely redo it does not. Maybe because they were not associated with any fashion or magazines. These are absolutely organic things for us, these houses are an extension of us, and we have not changed as individuals by 180 degrees. Over time, you just start to appreciate good decisions. You look and are amazed: how long ago it was done, and how well it turned out. I don’t know if we will learn from ourselves over time … [all three laugh].
Is the same thing happening in relation to your city buildings - the Aeroport gallery, the building on Vavilov Street? Don't want to change something later?
N. S. Recently, at a round table "Facades and meanings" organized by Project Baltia, we talked about a building on Vavilova Street: its example was received by St. Petersburg architects with great enthusiasm, because of their, let's say, abstract-conceptual and timeless approach. It is self-sufficient and therefore has not lost its relevance and freshness until now.
K. Kh.: We try to look at several layers deeper. In the case of the Airport gallery, the task was to build a shopping center, but we looked more broadly. Investigated flows, scales, relationships between buildings in this area and how they will change. We considered the shopping center as a fragment of the city, analyzed the flows of people, accordingly laid routes, organized a certain cascade of unique spaces, starting from the exit from the metro we covered through Telman Square, which became more compact; added the level of the second floor, from where you can look at the square from above. In addition, the building was separated from Leningradka and made quiet by the well-designed public garden in the depths of the quarter. We gave much more, because we took into account not only the interests of the customer, but also the interests of the city and residents. As a result, the project was successful both commercially and as part of the environment. In this project, we have involved all topics: public space improvement, building, interior. Such an integrated approach has only recently become mainstream.
N. S. Despite the change in trade paradigms for 15 years, it does not become obsolete, it still functions successfully, and is not aesthetically obsolete, in our opinion. The solution of the facades is modern on the one hand and neutral enough on the other to survive the bursts of different fashions.
This is not the only example when you, shall we say, outstripped a popular trend. In the building on Vavilova Street, you decided to use solid brick "skin" in 2002, when brick was more often used as a decorative insert than as a basic material
N. S. Yes, it's amazing, but the more time passes and the more popular themes appear, the more we find them in our old projects. So, when in 2011 we did a competition for the renovation of the cinema “
Pushkinskiy”(the current cinema“Russia”), then its main theme was“inclusion”in city life through the formation of new public spaces and landscaping, which is so fashionable now. And when the Biryulyovo project was done in 2010, there was neither the Biryulyovo theme, nor the periphery theme, which was dedicated to Urban Forum 2015, nor the topic of redevelopment and consolidation of territories. And this was the answer to how the districts should be dealt with, to saturate them; reflection on the topic of a compact city. We can say that if one of the developers wants to be at the peak of the trend, they should listen to our ideas and projects more often [laughs].
Yes, I remember, the project was devoted to the tactics of the gradual transformation of Biryulyovo neighborhoods into a compact city, where at the last stage, ponds with spectacular outlines remained from the houses-plates built with stars. Why did you do it then?
Daniel Lorenz:
- For Arch of Moscow, for an exhibition on the theme “Moscow in 50 years”, curated by Elena Gonzalez. It was a response to the Greater Paris program. It was necessary to demonstrate our in several pictures in and denier. We wanted this to become a statement, and in my opinion it turned out so that in every frame it is absolutely relevant. We believe that this is not just a manifesto, but a program that the city must follow.
Well, how do you assess the sources of your statements, where do they come from? Similar views were expressed in Russia by the Gutnov school in the 1970s and 1980s. Now the same thing comes from Western sources, there is a kind of overlapping of meanings, repeated repetition. How do you think, where did you get these, shall we say, advanced ideas from?
K. Kh.: Actually, Gutnov and Glazychev talked about the need to rethink the city. By 1980, the economy in the USSR absolutely prevailed over the psychological and social aspects of life. They tried to find ways to make the city more human. We, too, have a rather humanistic approach. Yes, we probably repeated in many ways what our predecessors said, but many others also spoke about this. The change in urban planning priorities was quite active already in the 50s - 60s, when Kevin Lynch appeared. About Jane Deijcobs and generally can not be mentioned. And here this theory was conveyed through the efforts of Glazychev.
- If we talk about people. There are two approaches of architects to the later life of their buildings: the approach of Aravena, outlined in his
Elemental Monterrey, where everything is calculated on the fact that people will complete and rebuild everything …
K. Kh.: Half.
But this half is the main, meaning-forming there. The opposite approach - when the architect has implemented his project and then God forbid screwing on the air conditioner or glazing the loggia - the project is immediately ruined. Of these two poles, which one is closer to you?
K. Kh.: Aravena has the very concept, the form provides for completion - variability, the moment of uncertainty is already included in the project as one of its conditions. But if we are talking about unplanned changes, then it is clear that the architect's reaction will be negative. Since he is the author of the entire project as a whole, distortion of the original image of the building is at least a violation of copyright.
NS: We were lucky, our buildings were not often changed: neither the customer in the construction process, nor the tenants. We even have an interior that has hardly changed since 1997. This is an arms shop, we started it at ABD, then made one of the additional halls in DNA for it.
D. L.: I would like to say about the variability of the building, even without the desire of the architect - this is very clearly seen in cities on the first floors of buildings: something is changing there all the time, one store leaves, another arrives, the design of the first floor is always is changing. This is normal for the city. And if the building, as a real estate object or as an object of creativity, does not suffer much at the same time, this is a matter of the quality of the building. We changed something, but he is still the same. Let not the same - but recognizable. The original thoughtfulness, harmonious, timeless solution allows the object to live for a long time. It is quite difficult to make architecture of this quality, but this is one of the tasks that we face.
K. Kh.: When designing, we must establish zones where change is possible, and zones are immutable by definition. Calculate all possible options for changes. If the inherent solutions do not allow people to use the building comfortably, then the solution is not perfect enough. On the other hand, it also happens that the architect has foreseen everything, but people act in their own way - this is already a matter of consumer culture. So the architect should calculate, and the owner should treat the building with the utmost respect. Then we get a normal urban environment with normal facades.
How do you analyze the context in order to make the project "humane"? Your western colleagues talk a lot about how they interact with the population, study the needs of residents. It is clear that everyone is watching the Internet, studying maps … Do you have any approaches, methods, what are they?
K. Kh.: Good question. Let's just say that big data analysis is more applicable to very large urban planning problems. At the scale of a residential area, like ours, the use of this data is much less, although we are interested in it and we are researching such information.
Polls are a separate thing, as it seems to me, their importance for generating solutions is exaggerated. In many cases, they are in the nature of a therapy of public opinion so that people come to terms with the fact that something new will be built next to them and perceive it less painfully. If we talk about how we model the human part of needs - well, firstly, we have a sufficient degree of imagination and can imagine life in a neighborhood, a district … We are constantly observing and analyzing. Both in Moscow and abroad - we do not just walk and take pictures, but we investigate, we try to understand why it is good here - or why it is bad.
This applies not only to urban planning, but to materials, facades, design of benches - whatever.
DL: If we talk about people, then we are not outside observers - we are the same people, we have the same experience and the same common sense. Sensory perception is a basic thing in our profession. To understand what another person needs, it is enough to understand what you need.
N. S. In addition, in the project, if it is a serious project, a rather large team is involved - consultants, marketers, and the necessary research is carried out if the customer needs it.
As for our developments, we, for example, necessarily use the so-called "protopes" - paths, and in Gorki, and in Telman, and in Zvenigorod. We fix routes, a footprint left by a person - then they turn out to be in demand, even become the urban development axis of the villages.
All this is good, but what about the beautiful, capacious, iconic form? It's not that you don't have it
K. Kh.: We do not try to create architecture as a sculpture for the sake of form. We are interested in her interaction with living people and with the environment, and with many factors. Architecture is successful if it does not oppose itself to a person, but includes him: with his interpretations, subconsciousness, this is not just entering and finding inside, but also further comprehension … affects him. We always lay in, encrypt the emotional component as well. I wonder if the architecture will not be revealed all at once, if there are some things that need to be dug deeper.
N. S. Kostya mentioned sculpture, I want to cling to this word. A number of objects that we have worked on lately belong to more conceptual forms: I'm talking about Skolkovo, the Luzhniki Basin, the Guggenheim Museum - which are also included in our ideology related to people, convenience and function, and so on. They are at the same time bright, imaginative, but also completely real, worked out quite deeply in terms of designs, technologies and budget. Skolkovo has already passed the examination. They have become a new step in our, shall we say, creativity, since they are truly unique objects.
Speaking of imagery. Do I understand correctly that you declaratively do not have a recognizable language. Instead of handwriting, you end up with a range: from iconic projects like the Guggenheim to latent classics like Vavilov or Breaking Dawn
K. Kh.: We try to approach the project without any prejudices, we have no established opinion about what it should be. This comes in the process of understanding the task, idea and scenario into which the project begins to unfold. And the fact that the building looks in one way or another is just an answer to the question about this building, the project.
NS: In private houses - the answer to a question about customers, partly a projection of the customer's personality. At large objects, other factors are involved: context, urban planning task or form, as in Skolkovo. It can be expressed in two or three words. For example: modernity, field and circle; or historical setting. "Dawn" and Vavilova, by the way, are completely different buildings for us, they are only related by brick. Vavilov - an abstract idea and form, the academic problem of solving form, shell and their interaction. Dawn is more contextual.
DL: At the same time, it still grows from within. The bottom line is what initial factors and conditions we have at each object. We, roughly speaking, start with a clean slate, collect the ingredients. If you have an avocado, then the salad will be avocado. And if a carrot, then there will be a different dish. Moreover, one chef will cook, he has approaches and solutions, some kind of dressing. But it will or will not crunch in the teeth - it depends on the ingredients.
From everything that you have just told, such a strange association turns out. You are pushing your creative personality somewhere deeper, beyond the parameters. Natalya pronounces the word creativity and immediately makes a reservation - it seems that she did not say this. In expanded and deep reasoning, you hide yourself, emphasize your role as a mediator, like an icon painter who does not sign icons, because he only conveys the divine image. You do it in a similar way: there are many factors, you react to them and the result is a certain product. Where then is your creative personality, is it actually in mediation, or is there something else?
DL: I would say that your assumption is reversed exactly the opposite. Because there is no canon in our activity. Iconography is a canon; there can be no personality.
What we do is pure creativity. It is not limited by anything. This does not mean that we come up with some kind of "duck" and strive to implement it. Our creativity in working with material. We do not always know how the process might end. And this is interesting, it kindles.
The feeling that we are hiding can be due to the fact that our work is collective. We do not ask ourselves the question: is it mine? his? or her? It is important for us to get a thing that would be relevant and interesting, would answer all the questions. It is interesting to come to the result.
The collectivity you mentioned comes from the fact that the bureau is not "mono", there are three of you leaders. What is the plus of such work?
K. Kh.: It seems to me that due to the fact that there are three of us, that we must somehow argue for any decision, we are puzzling each other.
Then a little more about the method: what is the scheme of your work? Where do you start, is there any sequence of actions at all that you would call your method?
K. Kh.: The most difficult question. It all depends on the task and the time allotted for the solution. Somewhere in the first place it is necessary to analyze the volume, somewhere the urban planning situation, insolation or the program. It is important to understand the limitations correctly and work with them. At the conceptual level, there may be different, even polar, ways of solving the same problem.
NS: Sometimes a sketch is born to someone, which immediately goes to work, sometimes a word picked up in a general discussion, it happens that even with a different meaning. The three of us are directly involved in each project. We sit, draw sketches, employees draw in parallel, make layouts. But at some point the question of choice arises. One of the most difficult things is to make a decision, to understand what is going on in the work.
KH: After the analysis, synthesis begins and it is rather difficult to describe, because it is a spontaneous, intuitive story. Suddenly, at the level of inner sensation, you understand that this is it, this is already correct.
NS: By the way, from what has changed over time: we have learned to delegate tasks, trust more. At first, we tightly controlled a lot and did it ourselves. Now we have learned to transfer responsibility while maintaining the quality of the final result.
Do you have a stable composition of the workshop?
NS: There are employees who have been working for more than ten years. Of course, the team is changing, but nevertheless it is quite stable.
What qualities do you need to possess to work with you?
NS: Universal. Each team member must be versatile, mobile and able to switch from one task to another, as well as solve a problem from start to finish, from concept to implementation, with an appropriate level of creativity - when there is no stylistic template. Give an original idea every time.
We try to organize our work efficiently. The small staff of the bureau thus allows you to make large-scale projects - up to entire mini-cities. Many are surprised when we say that we often do the work ourselves.
K. Kh.: We make a lot of effort to ensure that people go through all the stages from concept to working documentation: we tell, we train - this helps to create an effective team. Because the deadlines for solving problems, if we are talking about trends, are now very much shrinking, which the customers themselves admit. Being able to respond to this while maintaining the quality of the architecture is also challenging.
But this is also a competitive advantage: if you have already created a team that can “work under pressure” - for example, well and quickly, you already have a certain margin of safety
K. Kh.: Perhaps, yes. In such conditions, this is probably the only way: for employees to have a certain degree of independence. For everyone to be super professional.
N. S. Moreover, we allow ourselves to be distracted by educational projects. Last year, we taught a semester at MARCH, Konstantin and Daniil taught graduate students at MARCH for several graduations, periodically conduct master classes and workshops in different cities. We consider the transfer of experience as an essential part of the profession as a necessary link between one generation and another. After all, we are practitioners, we can share specific examples with the younger generation.
What kind of construction projects are you doing now?
NS: We have 2016 rich in construction projects. The slides are half finished, the first stage is being completed in Severny - two huge blocks, the first of the DAWN LOFT * STUDIO buildings is almost ready.
And all these are construction sites with work and minimal distortion of the project?
NS: Perhaps yes. It is clear that there is no limit to perfection and we may have questions about quality, but in general it is also the ability to understand how to implement a project so that the concept does not suffer. Already at the concept stage, correctly assess the budget level of the project and plan the conceptual "gaps" so that even if some details are distorted during implementation, the concept will be preserved. In Skolkovo, our initial competition idea was and was preserved in the project, already agreed upon by the expertise. As at Rassvet, our first thumbnail picture shown to the customer was, so it was built. This is also given with experience.
If we talk about the super task - in which direction do you want to develop?
N. S.:
The amount of experience accumulated to date, knowledge of advanced engineering technologies, materials, and diverse architectural experience - allows you to solve complex problems, in general, you want to solve them, develop in this direction, make more perfect projects, apply knowledge. We are focused on large-scale and complex tasks that can positively change the environment, and therefore the lives of people.
