Daniil Lorenz, Natalia Sidorova, Konstantin Khodnev, DNK ag partners
Among the many stories of early success, there are not so many examples when an ambitious young architectural bureau grows into a truly highly professional team that overcame "fire, water and copper pipes", preserving the uniqueness, the author's handwriting and and finding ways to solve complex problems. DNK ag belongs to this rare variety. The name of the group is collected from the first letters of the names of its leaders, but the obvious association with the dnk chain is more than appropriate. The work of the bureau is characterized by a special, sensitive attitude to the totality of tasks solved within the framework of the project. Their buildings attract attention for their quality and elegance, but at the same time they always fit organically into the environment and respond to its challenges.
Video filming and editing: Sergey Kuzmin.
Daniil Lorenz, Natalia Sidorova, Konstantin Khodnev
DNK ag partners:
Daniel: The topic, on the one hand, is complex, but on the other, it is quite definable. It seems to me the quality, first of all, is an idea, an undertaking, a character that you read. Even though the object may not be executed very well, it is unsuccessful, but when some idea is read, some interesting idea, it already goes to the level of high-quality architecture. To count and see this, you need to be free from some kind of framework, especially those frameworks that you have accumulated in the process of practical work and experience. You must always be critical of your box to see what others are doing.
The second aspect that can determine a quality architecture is attentiveness, versatility of scales. An object is always read from different distances, different positions, and when there is an answer in an architectural work, when, as you approach it, you see some additional things, their elaboration, you feel what the person was thinking. Up to those close, at arm's length, when you understand that a large volume, medium, small, texture - it all fits harmoniously into each other. And also purely architectural things: proportions, pause, tension, and so on. All this can also be defined as quality architecture. And the third point - probably the most understandable one - is the construction quality of performance. When all three of the above things are there, then this is it.
Natalia: It's hard enough to disagree with all of the above. Architecture is definitely a complex thing. An object is obtained when everything - from the idea to, in fact, its implementation - is done with high quality. And not only completed, but also taken into account things that may not be directly related to architecture - such as compliance with the budgetary objectives that the customer set for this object. That is, a certain appropriateness of the statement in terms of answers to all questions. If the answers to all the questions that were in the original project - from idea to detail - to implementation, are given correctly, the result is an ideal answer of the highest quality architecture.
Konstantin: I think that architecture is, first of all, the solution of the assigned tasks. Probably, from this point of view, the issue of the quality of architecture should be considered. The more questions and tasks we solve in the design process, the better it becomes. These issues are related to both the functional component and social functions. And, of course, the relationship with the physical context, with the environment is very important. Sometimes a building is very well done, but it is completely out of context. It does not react to it in either a contrasting way or inline, but simply completely ignores it.
The architecture of the ego really hides, because it answers so many questions from so many people, characters and scenarios that the architect's ego, his self-expression is no longer readable directly. If there is too much of it, then perhaps the person missed some factors in his project.
There is a strong self-expression in "star" architecture, but at the same time they solve all other problems. But besides self-expression, experience and skill are also important, and everything that was said above. "Star" architecture is those who most vividly solve the problem of creating high-quality architecture.
Natalia: It seems to me that "star" is more often used as a synonym for an unusual shape, but this is not always the case. Of course, there are such vivid artistic gestures, but under "star" architecture we mean not only memorable wow-effects that are clearly read as a gesture, as belonging to a certain name - namely, the depth of approach to the object.
Daniel: But there are a lot of evaluation parameters. Suppose, on one parameter, everyone agrees, this is an impeccable thing, and on other parameters - excessive brutality or, conversely, excessive mannerism.
Natalia: Different assessments are sometimes associated with different experiences of experiencing this or that, because it is concentrated in an analogue, in another object. And what is also important in high-quality architecture - it should be perceived not only from pictures, but also through live perception. 100% quality can be assessed by visiting the facility, inspecting it. And the impression can be diametrically opposite to what you expect.
Daniel: If we talk about joint work, then, on the one hand, views on one thing differ, and so they help - in a dispute, truth is born. One may not think of it.
Konstantin: This is a normal process. It's probably more complicated than when everything happens in one head. This is a question of parallelization and criticism from different angles. But it seems to us that this, on the contrary, adds prudence and balance, getting rid of not very motivated unnecessary outbursts. We somehow have more thoughtful decisions.
It is clear that it takes a little more time to agree on positions, but this gives more options. Large variance is also a guarantee of product quality. What we looked at analyzed a large number of different things - maybe not diametrically opposed, but different in mood.
Of course, everyone has their own position, which we treat with care. We are all developing. It is normal for an architect to grow, develop, gain more experience and change their point of view. Each of us does not have frozen systems and standards of behavior.
The most successful projects appear where the three of us take the most active part. But, of course, this participation can manifest itself in disputes, and in discussions, and so on. When everyone adds a part of themselves - these are probably the most successful projects, the most complete.
Natalia: Probably, the most successful ones come out when everything is built on some kind of wave and when a bunch of ideas are thrown at the very beginning. Someone picks up the spoken word, transfers it a little to another level, from this an idea is born. These projects are going a little easier. And, accordingly, the result is interesting. There are difficulties in choosing options when there are options more or less the same in terms of saturation and prospects of the inherent solutions. It is sometimes difficult to choose here.
Konstantin: Working inside the office is not about finding a compromise, but about finding the best solution. This is not leveling, not averaging, but on the contrary, reaching the maximum for each question. The story with the customer may at some point be in the nature of a compromise, but we still try to minimize the number of compromises, explaining what is our position, what is the strength of this position. Because compromise is an inevitable decline in quality.
Natalia: I would say that an architect should have the art not even of persuasion, but of balance. A lot of different questions arise, there are no ideal situations. Some questions - including at construction sites - may even benefit the object. It happens. And it is very important to look for a solution and be able, as Kostya said, to defend fundamental decisions. Yes, at the same time you understand that in accordance with the circumstances, something can be changed somewhere, but changed in such a way that the overall concept and quality of the product and object does not suffer. This is a very difficult quality that only comes with experience. When you make a project on paper, everything can be checked, reviewed, and at the construction stage this line is very thin - what can you allow further in the changes without fundamentally changing the final result. The sense of the framework that Danila talked about, the sense of tolerances does not come very quickly.
Daniel: I got the idea that the quality of the solution is very important in high-quality architecture. The solution must be such that it withstands possible external pressure, including from the customer, from the builders. Some new things and changes may occur with the object in the process, after the project. Even during the design process, things can change, but you need to make the initial decision that you lay down to be powerful enough to withstand this onslaught of other things.
