For two years in a row, the Archimatika bureau has entered the WAF finals, remaining the only representative of Ukraine at this largest international architectural competition. We talked with the director of the bureau, Alexander Popov, and the head of the competition department, Alexander Simonov, about why you need to participate in such festivals.
Archi.ru:
How do you feel about design competitions and construction awards? What principles do you follow when deciding where to participate and where not to participate?
Alexander Popov, head of the Archimatika bureau:
We did not have any specific doctrine - WAF attracted us with a set of projects that are shortlisted. Two years ago, we went to Berlin and saw how this is happening. We liked the atmosphere very much, and we wanted to be inside it - not as spectators, but as participants. We selected projects that would be worth showing, and one of them was shortlisted. It was incredible enthusiasm - we did not expect that this is possible: just sign up and you will be chosen. Any competition is a lottery. But in what there is real objectivity, it is in a certain classification, qualification, professional level, below which the project cannot sink. If you did not pass this year, but did the next, you can say: lucky - unlucky. But if you never pass, you should think about the professional level. It is a pleasant addition to professional activity, allowing the architect to get rid of loneliness and to be in the competition in good company.
For you, awards are somehow ranked: what is valuable to you, what might interest a potential customer?
A. P.: I would say that the main component is the pleasure of professional communication, because no pragmatic reason can explain why you should study architecture from morning to evening and on weekends. There are competitions that bring pleasure, and there are those that make no sense to participate even for money. And then there are contests, where we get "tangentially" - the project is submitted by the developer. The developers have an absolutely pragmatic reason: the investment status of the project. It is convenient for bankers in the process of making a decision on lending to be guided by the consideration “this project has received so many awards, it has such regalia, stars on the fuselage …”. We don't play this game, but developers are forced to play. In defense of such events, I can say that sometimes there appears the possibility of very interesting dialogues, contacts, acquaintances. And this is not only pleasure, but also business. A stream of activities grows from contacts: projects and money, including. It is impossible to calculate how much we spent on WAF last year and how we got this money back. The project came to us not only because we were seen at the festival: we have an attractive website; we showed some activity, an article about us was published in a certain edition; the customer called a colleague, and he said: "Yes, these are good guys." What and to what extent influenced the final choice? It is impossible to assess this. This means that if architectural communication is fun, you need to find and earn money.
It is very important to enjoy the profession. But perhaps this is not the only thing that matters?
Alexander Simonov
head of the competition direction of the Archimatika bureau: In addition to pleasure, participation allows you to feel the time itself, to assess whether you are in the trend of architectural thought or lagged behind. Or suddenly he was so ahead of everyone that your idea should only be shown in a couple of years, when the rest of the world grows up to it. The WAF is a unique venue, a place where Pierre de Meuron and the Australian hipster bureau of four can clash during the defense, and they will have the same chances of winning. It all depends only on who and how will protect their project. Sometimes you look at a category and think: Zaha Hadid is here, she will win. And it is not even recommended for consideration - they put forward a little-known bureau of ten people, which has made a very small high-quality house, which has put its whole soul into it. When members of the jury see the project, and they have a question: "What, was it possible?" This is 50% of what your project will be shortlisted for.
This is Norman Foster Mater outside. And when he is inside, he is your colleague who came to defend a project or give a lecture. WAF is a platform where everyone is equal. Here all the snobbery of architects is erased. People become open, welcoming, and maximally ready for contact.
This year we have submitted two projects. They doubted a little about one thing, but personally I was one hundred percent sure that the second would pass. This is one of our iconic works - the residential area "Comfort Town", 40 hectares of colorful houses. The project for this quarter is ten years old. The KAN development company is building it in stages and the last houses will be commissioned in 2020. And to this day, his architectural solutions are relevant. This means that ten years ago we were ahead of Europe and the world by ten years. The pleasure that you are in the trend of architectural thought, in the mainstream, a great feeling - both from communicating with colleagues, and from the joy of being shortlisted.
-
zooming 1/4 Residential Quarter "Comfort Town" Photo © Andrey Avdeenko, 2017 / Archimatika
-
zooming 2/4 Residential quarter "Comfort Town" Photo © Andrey Avdeenko, 2017 / Archimatika
-
zooming 3/4 Residential quarter "Comfort Town" Photo © Alexey Ivanov, 2019 / Archimatika
-
zooming 4/4 Residential Quarter "Comfort Town" Photo © Alexey Ivanov, 2019 / Archimatika
Why were there doubts about the first project?
A. P.: The first object is a residential complex Snail-apartments in the USA. The WAF is somewhat Europeanized, so earlier from America it was short-listed about five to eight percent. In addition, housing is a mass product; 70% of the world's architects are engaged in it. And there are categories in which only twenty projects were submitted - here the chance of getting into the short list is much higher.
-
zooming 1/4 Complex Snail-apartments © Archimatika
-
zooming 2/4 Complex Snail-apartments © Archimatika
-
zooming 3/4 Complex Snail-apartments © Archimatika
-
zooming 4/4 Complex Snail-apartments © Archimatika
What is the most difficult thing for you in project presentation?
A. P.: The main difficulty is to talk about your work in English. They say that nobody understood Aldo Rossi's English. Hence, the main thing is the message in the international language of architecture. There are two parts to a presentation. Architectural - solution, structure, logic. And the context is sociocultural, geographic, climatic, economic. It is important to talk about the two sides, their relationship and complementarity. Last time we chose not the most successful format - in the fifth minute of the story about the context, the jury asked us to focus on architectural solutions. This year we will try to make it not two stories, but one.
Nowadays, many people use video and animation in presentations. In addition, social implications are of great importance to the WAF jury. Have you planned any innovations in the presentation of the material? Will you take into account the specifics of the WAF?
A. P. A: If we talk about tricks, we would represent architecture in the language of dance. As for the video, I don't think this is the most correct format. Because, after all, we communicate with colleagues, professionals, and an architectural assessment requires a static picture that allows us to concentrate and evaluate what we have seen for at least a few seconds. From the first acquaintance with the festival, we began to think both about culture and about connections not after the completion of the project, but from the first acquaintance with the site and the customer's requirements. This is an algorithm that turns on when you understand that there will be a point in the development of a project where you should stop and talk about it. While working on the current project, we answered the question received at last year's WAF: what cultural specifics of the residents of the complex were we focusing on, and how this was reflected in the architecture. And now, when designing objects in New York, we thought about this from the first contact with the customer. And they created houses for a certain lifestyle, certain cultural characteristics.
A special atmosphere at WAF: no hierarchical division. Maybe the architectural workshop strives for a horizontal system of interaction, while the vertical one, with the identification of "stars", does not correspond to the internal workshop culture?
A. S.: In fact, some of this vertical stardom remains. This is reflected in the fact that it is almost impossible to get to the performance of the architect of the renowned bureau. When architects from ZHA, Thomas Heatherwick and Foster + partners defended, there was a real crush. But a little later, nothing prevented us from approaching any of them, saying hello, getting to know each other. They are open. And we understand that all architects are engaged in one thing - they create the world around us, regardless of which country they work in and what level of "stardom" their bureau has. This is how boundaries are blurred.
A. P.: I would add: the reason for the hierarchy and some inaccessibility of "stars", in fact, is the fear of inappropriate behavior. And the answer to the question why there are no these distances, these barriers in the architectural environment - is the adequate behavior of the audience.
I would like to ask about the integration of Ukrainian architecture into the global context and about the struggle of Ukrainian architects for a place in the world sky. Does this question exist for you?
A. P.: The correct answer is of course yes.
Correct or True?
A. P.: Correct, and partly true. The completely truthful answer will be a little wider, because architecture is global. The most national architecture is in an absolutely isolated state that has no connections with the outside world. In all other cases, to one degree or another, there is a process of exchange of ideas, solutions, realizations, envy, enthusiasm … And in this respect, architects are divided not into national, but into some ideological schools. There are architects for whom the social mission of architecture is more important, there are those for whom the quality of the solution is decisive. And it seems to me that a Spanish architect, who feels some moments in the same way as I do, will be much closer to me than my Kiev colleague with an office in the next quarter, guided by different approaches. Therefore, architectural values in the global world bring closer together much more than national identity.
The question is, rather, in understanding the social order. And this question was very acute for me in the nineties, when I was a student. Because at that time the society and reality of the United States, Western Europe, Japan was very different from our Soviet reality. And this gap made it impossible to create an architecture in the Ukrainian context that would correspond to the level of an international school. Now there is no such border, and good work, a good decision made by our colleague in some European country can be implemented in our country. The European architect answers the same questions as we do. Taking into account the climate, taking into account the mentality of the people, but still we are in a common cultural environment.
Please tell us about modern architecture, about the architects of Ukraine
A. P.: I will just say right away that there are excellent architects here who create outstanding buildings. I consider the Lviv University Library, designed by Stefan Benisch and Yulian Chaplinsky, to be the best new building in Ukraine. This is such a rich topic of conversation that it is better to continue it in a separate article.
