An Interview with Glenn Murcutt

Glenn Murcutt International Master Class (Part IV)

Here is the official press release for the 10th annual Glenn Murcutt International Architecture Master Class – July 11 to 25, 2010.

The tenth Glenn Murcutt International Architecture Master Class will be held in Australia at Glenn Murcutt’s “Masterwork”, the Arthur and Yvonne Boyd Education Centre ‘Riversdale’ on the banks of the Shoalhaven River south of Sydney, and at the School of Architecture at the University of Sydney, 11-25 July 2010. Information: www.ozetecture.org. Watch a four minute clip from the 2008 Glenn Murcutt International Architecture Master Class on the web site (or on Talkitect by clicking here)

The two week residential design studio program is led by Glenn Murcutt with other tutors including Richard Leplastrier, Peter Stutchbury, Brit Andresen and, Master Class Convener, Lindsay Johnston. A major feature each year has been the insights contributed by Aboriginal Elder ‘Uncle’ Max Dulumunmun Harrison. Since its inception, participants from 46 nations have attended the program. Participants are primarily, now, practicing architects – older and younger – with some professors, academics, recent graduates and a few senior students.

Participants stay for the first week in the exquisite hostel accommodation at the Boyd Education Center, designed by Murcutt with Wendy Lewin and Reg Lark and completed in 1999. The ‘big room’ at ‘Riversdale’ is transformed into both banqueting hall and a design studio for six days while participants commence the conceptual design of a project located on a sensitive scenic site within walking distance of the venue. The program includes extensive site investigations, intensive studio tutoring, progress design critiques and after dinner lectures by the ‘masters’. The studio relocates to the University of Sydney for the second week, where participants stay in a hotel near the University at Darling Harbour, and culminates in final presentations and a ‘Big Crit Day’. Other events in the program include visits to significant houses designed by Glenn Murcutt and the other tutors and, in previous years, a Sydney Harbour evening cruise.

THE TUTORS:

Glenn Murcutt is best known for his ‘singular practice’ acclaimed through the award of the 2002 Pritzker Prize. He has also been recipient of numerous other international awards including the Alvar Aalto Medal in Finland, the ‘Green Pin’ Award for Architecture and Ecology in Denmark and the Richard Neutra Award in USA. He received the Gold Medal of the Australian Institute of Architects in 1992 and the Gold Medal of the American Institute of Architects in 2009.

Richard Leplastrier is a seminal figure in Australian architecture and is considered as one of the great teachers. He worked with Kenzo Tange and with Jørn Utzon at the time of the Sydney Opera House and his body of work has been acclaimed with the award of the 2009 Dreyers Foundation Prize of Honour in Denmark. In 2004, he was awarded the ‘Spirit of Nature Wood Architecture’ Award in Finland, also awarded to Renzo Piano, Kengo Kuma, Peter Zumthor and José Cruz Ovalle. He is also a Gold Medalist of the Australian Institute of Architects 1999.

Professor Brit Andresen taught at the AA in London before joining the University of Queensland. She worked with Barry Gasson on the winning entry for the Burrell Museum in Scotland and, with her partner Peter O’Gorman, has authored significant works that have been widely published internationally including in the Phaidon Atlas of World Architecture. Brit was the first woman recipient of the Australian Institute of Architects Gold Medal in 2002.

Peter Stutchbury is a leading practitioner in Australia with a significant body of outstanding innovative built projects that have been awarded nationally and published internationally. He was winner of the 2008 International Iron and Steel Institute ‘Living Steel’ Competition for extreme climate housing in Cherepovets, Russia and held the 2008 Catedra Luis Barragán in Mexico, a Chair previously held by Tadao Ando, Norman Foster, Nicholas Grimshaw, Peter Zumthor and Glenn Murcutt.

Lindsay Johnston is former Dean of Architecture and Design at the University of Newcastle, Australia, with a particular expertise in environmentally responsive design and some of his built projects have been awarded and published internationally.

See the web site for information, program, costs and application form – http://www.ozetecture.org/

See the blog for latest news – http://ozetectureblog.blogspot.com/

For details of Uncle Max Dulumunmun Harrisons’s book ‘My People’s Dreaming” see – http://www.finch.com.au/html/s02_article/article_view.asp?art_id=288&nav_cat_id=220&nav_top_id=70

To contact us - info@ozetecture.org

a2a_linkname=document.title;a2a_linkurl=location.href;

Glenn Murcutt International Masters Class (Part III)

Last summer there was a film crew that followed the Masters Class to create a full documentary about the program. This trailer gives a brief glimpse of the course and the full film.

Click here to read Part I: The Project
Click here to read Part II: Site visits and the Tutors

a2a_linkname=document.title;a2a_linkurl=location.href;

Glenn Murcutt International Masters Class (Part II)

by Lucas Gray

click here for Part I
click here for Part III

One of the extraordinary opportunities we experienced as participants of the Glenn Murcutt International Masters Class was the chance to visit some of the world renowned projects designed by the tutors. It was incredibly captivating to hear about the design process and the final outcome directly from the architects and clients, while actually walking through the buildings. Many of the projects were private residences which aren’t open to the public, giving us an insiders view of some of the tutor’s best work. Along with the site visits, each professor also gave a lecture, showcasing projects currently on the drawing board as well as notable works from their careers.

Peter Stutchbury is the lone tutor that runs a small office and engages in architecture on the international stage. The others are sole practitioners, exclusively working within Australia. An incredibly sensitive focus on the environment transcends Mr. Stutchbury’s designs, while the detailing is incredibly intricate. We were able to visit two of his houses, each in completely different landscapes. The Bangalay House, nestled into a clearing in a wooded and mountainous region, was a wonderful example of how to open a house to the surrounding landscape. The elongated, pitched roof echoed the slopes of the mountain ridges, while the glass clad walls consisted of sliding panels that tucked away, leaving the living spaces completely open to the outdoors. The back of the house, where the bathrooms and other service areas are located, is constructed of concrete, acting as heavy thermal mass to regulate temperature. Rain water collection is another essentially design element, both for irrigation of the gardens as well as for bush fire protection. The Outcrop House was located in a relatively dense, suburban neighborhood on a steep embankment overlooking a picturesque ocean bay. Rather than being completely open like the previous house, privacy was a primary concern and led to an innovative daylighting solution. Light is introduced through a transparent roof, while interior curved wooden elements below, deflect the hot direct sun while reflecting diffused cool light. A ventilation system then takes the trapped hot air out of the building. A steel structure spans between the two exterior load bearing walls, like a warehouse, freeing the interior from columns. Rooms were then built up as individual boxes within the structural shell. The back of the house was left entirely open, once again using movable glass wall panels. This preserved stunning views of the coast below, as well as incorporating an indoor/outdoor swimming pool and patio. The master bedroom overlooks a two story social space and out of this rear glass facade, allowing the phenomenal views and daylight to penetrate into the depths of the interior. Once again, the detailing was immaculate and the woodworking throughout both projects was astounding and, not surprisingly, award winning.
Check out these websites to see images of these houses and more of his work: www.stutchburyandpape.com.au and www.peterstutchbury.com.au

Richard Leplastrier’s work was of particular note because it hasn’t been published extensively. The attention to detail and fine craftsmanship was superb, as he often draws his details at one to one scale. He crafts many parts of his buildings by hand and constructs a lot of his buildings himself. Every aspect of his designs are in harmony with each other – working together to create a splendid symphony of architecture. His buildings are warm, welcoming and perfectly built for the human touch. Finely carved wood, leather wrapped door handles, windows aligning with the eye height of his clients, these are just a few of the minute details he passionately works into his designs. His houses are like ships, with the detailing and woodwork perfectly in unison with the function of the building. Each house adapts and transforms with the climate and seasons, making a fluidity between building and landscape. On top of this attention to detail is a decision to only taking on projects that Richard is passionate about – designs for close friends, for organizations he is part of, and always with a love for the land on which they stand. Like most of the work by the other tutors, all of Peter’s work is done with hand media – extensive use of models, sketches and hand drafting, while his own house was built based entirely on a single detailed model – no drawings. He also works with simple materials that he is familiar with and can easily be worked with the human hand, particularly the prevalent use of wood. Rammed earth was also a material he explored in some of his earlier work.

We weren’t able to visit Brit Andresen’s work because she didn’t have any built projects in the greater Sydney area. However, her lecture introduced us to her graceful architecture and sensitive design process. Ms. Andresen’s work was elegant, beautiful, in touch with the landscape and kept with the theme of creative use of materials (especially wood) and a sensitivity to climate and the environment. Taking full advantage of the mild Australia climate, particularly the northern tropical area where many of her projects are situated, her buildings open to the landscape, using minimal enclosure. Each incorporates natural lighting and ventilation, while offering fantastic views of the natural surroundings.

Glenn Murcutt’s houses were the highlight of the excursions. Once again we were taken to varying examples of houses, designed for different landscapes and completed at different stages in his long illustrious career. This enabled us to experience the evolution of his design ideas. Coupled with Mr. Murcutt’s inspiring lecture – highlighting the projects currently on his drawing board, including some larger public buildings: a museum and a mosque -  we got a glimpse of his architectural passion and vitality. His breadth of knowledge and design process is unparalleled and clearly distinguishes his work from his peers, leading to becoming a Pritzer Prize laureate.

Along with the site visits we had the luxury of spending the first week of the course housed in one of Mr. Murcutt’s most notable works, the Arthur and Yvonne Boyd Art Center in Riversdale. Located about a three hour drive south of Sydney in the midst of the picturesque Australian landscape, this was the location of the site for the project as well as our home base for many site visits the first week. The small rooms – displaying the sensibility and detailing of a master builder – were boat-like cabins and had us waking up to the sun rising over the gently meandering river. An amazing variety of birds swooped through the early morning air and sang unfamiliar songs as wombats and kangaroos grazed the fields – a markedly Australian experience and one that was most welcome for us foreigners. Mist rose off the gently flowing water as the sun rose over the adjacent ridge. The building is perfectly nestled into the hill side, at the moment where the meadow broke into forest. Each morning we gathered and slowly woke over breakfast in the great room, overlooking this spectacular landscape. The bedroom wing branched off to the south, eventually becoming a two story structure as the ground slopes away. Each room had two beds, and a movable partition between it and the room next door. A simple, yet elegant bathroom, equiped with a splendid outdoor shower, separated each set of 2 rooms. A sheltered, yet outdoor gathering space looking out into the landscape broke up these living units. With artistically revealed water catchment systems, operable enclosing walls and windows, incredibly detailed natural ventilation systems and stunning indoor/outdoor showers, this building set the perfect precedent for our design project.

Although the exposure to some of my favorite buildings in the world was spectacular, it was the people that truly made this experience so amazing. Along with the extraordinary tutors discussed above, there were 30 participants representing 21 different countries; they were advanced grad students, recently graduated architects, partners in large and small firms, young architects just starting their careers and older architects looking for a new start and inspiration. The diversity of the group led to amazing discussions, cultural exchanges, and sharing of ideas. Living together for the two weeks, sharing meals, rooms, and wine brought us all close together, cultivating the feeling of a large extended family. We learned from each other as much as from the tutors, and now we all have a network of friends and colleagues spread throughout the world – both from our course as well as the extended nework of all past and future participants.

One of the factors that sets this program apart from many design school experiences, is the integration of the tutors and students. For two weeks we lived, worked, ate and played together as one large family. the tutors sat besides us at dinner telling stories and sharing experiences. Late nights brought out harmonicas as Peter and Richard played along with Lindsay Johnson on his guitar or mandolin. A grand piano was played by those with talents and one of the participants even played a cello concerto. Music may sound like a random side topic when describing an architecture program but these aspects really can’t be separated from the entire experience. These times of entertainment and casual interaction made the design work that much more meaningful and enjoyable. They created an instant atmosphere of belonging, a place everyone felt comfortable to share their thoughts, ideas and dreams. We heard stories from our past lives, future plans and shared our diverse cultures, languages, and songs. With 21 different countries represented we now are part of a family that spans the globe.

To read Part I click here.
To see the video in Part III click here.

For more info visit: http://ozetectureblog.blogspot.com or hwww.ozetecture.org

a2a_linkname=document.title;a2a_linkurl=location.href;

Glenn Murcutt International Masters Class (Part I)

by Lucas Gray

Read Part II
Read Part III

Every summer, well summer in the northern hemisphere at least, 30 international architects descend on Sydney to participate in a once in a lifetime experience. Greeted by Lindsay Johnson and whisked by bus a few hours drive south, this new family of designers embarks on a 2 week studio exploration under the title of the Glenn Murcutt International Masters Class. Australian architects, Peter Stutchbury, Brit Andresen, Richard Leplastrier, and of course Glenn Murcutt lead the workshop as it delves into a design project emphasizing the vital connection between building and landscape. Using site visits to the tutor’s built work around the Sydney area as precedents, the 30 designers are asked to work in small teams to address a design problem in a way that respects, repairs, and enhances the surrounding landscape and environment. Taking a decidedly low-tech approach these students generate a philosophical and technical solution to a difficult challenge – how to integrate architecture and landscape ecology.

The theme of the 2008 class, of which I was a participant, was a Place of Reconciliation. The concept was presented along with a rather vague program forcing the project teams to interpret what a Place of Reconciliation is, and what it represents for humanity’s future. The conversations and debates ranged from reconciling large international conflicts, small personal affairs and even reconciling human inflicted damage to the environment. As the groups explored this theme we also spent the first three days conducting an in depth analysis of the given site – a ridge overlooking the Glenn Murcutt designed, Arthur and Yvonne Boyd Art Center (described in more detail later in this post and these images).

A short hike up a steep embankment from our accommodation, landed us on a ridge overlooking a gorgeous meandering river and farmlands beyond. Our first introduction to this landscape was lead by an Aboriginal Elder who offered stories, legends and gave us insight into the land. He provided an emotional approach to understanding the local ecology and the vital role each plant and animal plays – all told though the filter of a spiritual connection to the world. He also offered us insight into the seasonal and climactic changes and their importance to Australian life. Even the devastating bush fires, present in the international news, play an important role in the evolution of the landscape, opening seed capsules and offering rebirth to many species. From this experience, each group was asked to spend the next three days exploring the ridge, going through a process of environmental analysis, both technical and spiritual. We looked at lush rainforrests, land scarred by fire, light filtering through the canopy, shadows offering protection and enclosure for animals. We heard songs from birds, breezes ruffle the leaves overhead, the sound of the ground beneath our feet and the drone of insects surround us. We felt the texture of bark, the roughness of the stone, the dryness of the soil. We tasted the freshness of the air and smelt the diverse scents carried on the wind. We approached the land from a sensory experience, and took our impressions back to the maps and charts to merge them with an analytical view of the place.

These exercises led to a presentation of each group’s interpretation of the site, and ultimately to choosing a specific location for their architectural intervention. Each team approached this problem in a slightly different way based on their earlier discussions and feelings, leading to a wide range of locations along the ridge. Each location faced slightly different environmental conditions and thus required differing design responses. Throughout the process the tutors were available for consultation, critiques, and offered their insight into the natural history and culture of Australia, exhibiting an exhaustive amount of information and anecdotes.

Once the site locations were selected the building brief was revealed. The program for the Place of Reconciliation consisted of the following:

• Accommodation for 30
• Various sized meeting rooms – spaces for individuals to meditate, rooms for one on one meetings, rooms for small groups
• A Great Room – large enough for all 30 people to gather
• Service and Support facilities

Other Issues we had to address – followed by my group’s interpretations:

• Habitat restoration – build on damaged land, repair land to prevent further damage, preserve ground plane for animals. limit the removal of trees. limit parking
• Sustainable Design Strategies – completely off grid, rainwater collection, gray water systems, take advantage of moderate climate, natural lighting, natural ventilation
• Minimal Footprint (literal and figurative) – stilts limit foundation excavation, use of rammed earth and other natural materials, compact living spaces
• Water Issues – repair and stop water erosion, storm water collection, permeable paving and other surfaces
• Bush Fire Protection – water storage tanks, non flammable materials,
• Landscape Design – interconnected paths, limit damage caused by human use, preserve use of the land for the public, public gathering space, private paths
• Local Animal Habitat – preserve movement patterns, add protected habitats by elevating the buildings
• Climactic Response – mild climate, insulation not necessary, protection from wind and rain, use of fire places for heat and for social gathering points, protection from bugs and other wildlife, open to the surroundings, living in the landscape
• Site Selection – chose a site with easy access from road, already damaged land, protection from western winds
• Site Analysis – direction of: wind, heat, sun, fire, water, slope; damaged land, don’t remove trees, new plantings

After an amazing week living in an incredible building, in the midst of a stunning landscape, we packed our things and returned to Sydney to continue with the design process. We set up a studio space at the University of Sydney, where we delved into further development of our design hypothesis. Late nights, many bottles of wine, philosophical debates, a few sliced fingers, and dinner excursions all led to an incredible bond uniting the participants. To support the process of designing in such a short amount of time, each group was assigned a couple of university students to assist with supply gathering, model building and other necessary but time consuming tasks. After 6 days of intense labor we finally had a night off, to rest up before the final reviews.

The final presentations were a celebration of a diverse approach to design. Projects ranged from three story vertical housing lanterns illuminating the landscape, cave like dwellings carved into the side of the embankments, and almost resort style hotel and meeting halls, to rows of accommodation creating dams in the scarred landscape, rammed earth walls protecting light wood structures, and small pavilions tucked between the trees. All projects addressed climactic conditions such as the intense summer heat, drought, brush fires, and water retention, each in a creative and unique way. Each design also confronted the issue of repairing the landscape, while preserving a public hiking trail and an access road to the river below. Each project was unique, provocative and incorporated sustainable design features in a different way. The various scales of design, from the larger master plan of the site to minute details relating to water collection, materiality and structure were also incredibly varied and unique depending on the site specific characteristics the groups had to confront. The tutors and invited renowned guests critiqued each project, offering alternative ideas and talking points for further discussion, and engaged in thoughtful debate. It was an incredibly lively day and stimulated a great deal of architectural dialogue.

See some images of the work from the course, as well as some great books about Glenn Murcutt’s Architecture after the break.

The following images will give you a better sense of the work environment than my words could describe:

For more information on the Masters Class, the work of the tutors or to submit an application for next year’s program visit: ozetecture.org
For images of some of the site visits go to: architecture photographs
For Part II click here: Part II: site visits
For Part III click here: Part III: video

Books on Glenn Murcutt’s Architecture: Glenn Murcutt: Thinking Drawing / Working Drawing, Touch This Earth Lightly:  Glenn Murcutt in His Own Words, Glenn Murcutt: A Singular Architectural Practice : 2002 Laureate of the Pritzker Architecture Prize

a2a_linkname=document.title;a2a_linkurl=location.href;

An Interview with the founders of PROGRAM: Initiative for art + architecture collaboration

Carson Chan and Fotini Lazaridou-Hatzigoga founded PROGRAM in 2006 as a forum to explore and test the boundaries of architecture through collaborations with other fields. As a non-profit project space, PROGRAM offers a platform for artists, architects, researchers and others to explore ideas of space through exhibitions, performances, workshops, lectures and various other events. Along with the gallery, workspace is available for rent in an open office for people looking for a shared creative environment to conduct their work. This includes individual desks as well as a shared reading and conference room. A residency program further enriches the community and the collaborative spirit of PROGRAM. Through these collaborations the intent is to challenge the traditional notions of architectural representation and broaden our concept of what architecture and space can be. I had the pleasure of sitting down with Carson and Fotini to talk about PROGRAM, their other interests and their thoughts on current trends in architecture and design.

How long has PROGRAM been established?

Fotini: Almost three years now.

Carson: We have had about 18 shows, 19 shows.

What is your background and where did the idea for Program come from?

Fotini: I have a professional degree in architecture from Greece where I’m from. I moved to Boston to go to grad school – we did a masters program together at Harvard – the Masters in Design Studies in the History and Theory of Architecture. I stayed in the States for another couple of years – first working in an architecture office and then I worked on a documentary film project. Since then we have been wanting to engage in architecture in a different way [from traditional practice]. We worked in architectural firms after graduating, but soon realized that we wanted to do other things; to think about questions of space and experience of space – things we were thinking about in grad school but we couldn’t really do working in architecture offices.

Fotini: I was in Boston at a big firm doing construction documents. I learned a lot but it was not that exciting. Then we decided very quickly to open a space and try to pursue this interest through exhibitions, workshops, lectures and different kinds of activities. Carson was in Berlin already, and I moved to Berlin as well. We were very lucky to find this really great space.

Carson: I grew up in Toronto and then went to school, grad and undergrad, in the States. I then moved [to Berlin] and worked in an architecture firm – Barkow Leibinger. From there I started working at the Neue National Gallery, they have an architecture curating department and I helped work on three shows. I then did some freelance curating. Fotini came to visit while I was doing a show at the gallery 0047, and we came up with this idea to start our own thing.

Fotini: That’s also another thing that influenced what we wanted to do here – the fact we were looking at other exhibitions of architecture. Usually it’s a presentation of a building, a drawing or a model, that most people can not really engage with if they don’t have an education in architecture. And even then it is usually not that interesting. So we decided that what we wanted to do is try to find another way to share architecture, mainly through the experience one can have visiting an installation, and what you can learn through that in a more embodied way.

Carson: Architects have a hard time expressing themselves, because it takes so many years and so much money to build a building – if you chose to build buildings, as an architect. City planners have a doubly hard time expressing their ideas physically, because you come up with a plan and by the time its implemented it is completely different than what you initially wanted. There are so many contingent factors.

Fotini: Because we started this soon after graduating, PROGRAM has been a learning process. And this experimental aspect of many of the things that we do is just because we want to try things out – or have other people try out things and then see what we get and learn from it.

To read the whole interview please click here.

So you have always been more interested in the curating art and architecture rather than practicing design?

Carson: Well, not before I started doing it. I made exhibitions in college, art exhibitions and things like that. But exploring exhibition making as a discipline or as a way to ask architectural questions, not so much until we actually started.

Are most of the people who show their work here architects or people who are interested in the built environment?

Fotini: We’ve worked with architects, but its mainly artists we are working  with. Very often we try to do collaborations between architects and artists, or people from different disciplines. The previous show for example was a collaboration between an artist/architect and a choreographer. We are interested in working with different disciplines and seeing what are the different methods and ways of seeing and being, what we can share, what we can learn from eachother.

Do you help bring those people together or do you let people approach you?

Fotini: It varies, sometimes it was an idea coming from us – what would happen if we bring together an artist and a fashion designer and give them the space for a month and see happens – and sometimes, its people that approach us with a proposal. We have been very open to different ways of working. Every month and a half [there is a new exhibition].

Who funds the overall organization or individual exhibits?

Fotini: The whole space is run with this idea of having the workspace here, where we rent out desks to different creative people – architects, artists, graphic designers, journalists – but anyone who can work off a desk. That helps cover the running costs of the space – when we are full. The idea is that it is a workspace on a temporary basis – some people have been here for two years already – but most stay in the space [for a shorter time]. Like Michael Hoepfner, he is an artist and is showing this piece in an exhibition that opens next week. He wanted a desk space for a month. What’s nice is that it is this practical way of running the space but it also creates this community of creative people. They come and go but there is a lot of sharing and collaborations that come up just because we share the space. That is how the space is funded, and then for each exhibition we try to find funding – its usually through embassies and sometimes through private sponsors. We don’t have continuous funding so every month we have to knock on doors.

What about Berlin made this possible? You both went to Harvard so did you consider Boston or other locations?

Fotini: It just fell in our lap. However, I think it wouldn’t easily happen in other places. It happened here because Carson was already here and was going to move back to Europe anyway. Also, Berlin has cheap rent. We were also really lucky to find this space – it was empty for 10 years before we moved in. Finally, the movement of people through the city helps make a space like this possible. For example, renting the workspaces and also the people that we work with for the exhibitions are often international artists. This is something that can happen in Berlin because, at this moment, the city is attracting so many creative individuals.

How do you advertise? How do artists find PROGRAM?

Fotini: Well now, its mostly through the website. We advertise each show with postcards and through email. Because of what we do, because we have this special focus, many people in the city started to know about the space. Mostly, we advertise through word of mouth combined with the Internet. We are not a gallery so we don’t have to operate with a commercial logic – that means we can just support and pursue the things that we really like. There are a lot of people in Berlin who are interested in different kinds of collaborations with PROGRAM.

How do you see it growing in the next 2 to 10 years?

Fotini: 10 years is too long a time… We have established our position in the past three years and this is giving us now the opportunity to work on a different level. PROGRAM also has a residency program – an artist, architect, or theorist, comes to Berlin and works on a project for up to three months. An integral aspect of PROGRAM is that there is always someone living in the back of this space and contributing to the space’s daily life. They often present their work in an artist talk, a screening in relation to their work, or sometimes exhibit in the gallery. We have also been organizing lectures and events – things that we want to focus more on in the future.

Carson: We are here [in this location] for at least three more years.

Fotini: We have always seen this as a platform and there are many things that this thing can encompass – different activities, workshops but also research projects and I think the more we grow the more we would like to include these.

Carson: PROGRAM is not just a gallery. We see the residency, the office, whatever kinds of activities and lectures we do, as an integral part of the exhibition program. They are all, as Fotini has said already, to question architecture and its boundaries and how other media, other disciplines can inform architects about architecture. We’re also interested in questioning architecture exhibitions in general.

Fotini: Like not showing architecture through its traditional representations…

Carson: If you go to an art exhibition you see the actual art. Often when you see architecture exhibitions you see representations of architecture – a picture of a building, or a plan, or a section. Plans and sections, technical drawings, are almost meaningless to anyone that is not an architect. Even for architects, they only show you the dimensions of a space, which is interesting only to a certain degree. In our current installation, by Andy Graydon, you get to hear what MOMA sounds like. Even if that is a oblique was to think about spatial representation, it starts to open up ways of operating that goes beyond the physical dimensions of space. Sound is something that, I think, most people that exhibit architecture never actually think about as a mode of representation. Architecture exhibitions have become somehow like a PR engine. You make a new building and you exhibit pictures of it in a gallery. This shows you what it looks like but not all that much more.

I think its really interesting talking about collaborations between artists and architects. I mean getting the guy who is studying Neuroscience together with an architect – I don’t know what they are proposing – but I think it is an interesting concept – the question of what could happen out of these juxtapositions of different expertise.

Carson: We have worked with choreographers and musicians, fashion designers. The idea is to experiment, to allow ourselves the risk to make mistakes. We have worked with students and we are going to work with students more.

So you run the space, but is this your full time job or do you also design, and make art, and pursue other interests?

Fotini: We do other things too. This is ‘full time’ in terms of time but it’s not a paid job. I’m working on various research projects, and as far as design goes, I make websites and graphics. I’ve been also working on different art projects – usually with video.

Carson: I write about art and architecture and curate other exhibitions. Not necessarily about architecture.

So you use this as an office space for the things you do on the side?

Carson: I don’t think anything is actually on the side. Everything is all at the same time.

Have you noticed the impact of the current economic crisis on the city of Berlin and it’s art and design scene? Has it effected PROGRAM at all?

Fotini: In a way, Berlin has been a place has been able to be what it is because of all these different crisis.

Carson: [Berlin] was never rich to begin with.

Fotini: That is what brings many people here and what allows them to live and create here. In that sense, I think it is kind of resistant to the current economic changes in the world. Of course the crisis is still here. There were people working in architectural offices that have lost their jobs or projects.

Carson: There a critical mass of creative people in Berlin that didn’t come here necessarily to make money but rather to spend very little money. And they are still here and were here to begin with. I don’t know, in terms of the design scene and how it affects us… it’s an abstract question… whenever we think about what to do here it’s always in a very myopic way of seeing our own interests and what we want to do as opposed to larger design questions in general – or larger exhibition questions in general.

Do you ever focus on the city at large as part of your interests?

Fotini: Yeah, we have actually been trying to do more of that. We launched a web-based urban project more than a year ago where we have invited the people living in Berlin to contribute a map of their daily routes through the city. Through the website they can upload a map of their route along with a short description of the things that they see along the way, and what they experience. It came from this idea of trying to focus on this very banal and everyday ritual, which is actually much more real for people who live in Berlin than the route between, say, Alexanderplatz and Brandenburger Tor, through landmarks, which is what tourists usually see when they visit the city. The idea is to create an online archive of the maps and then be able to offer them as alternative routes to tourists wanting to experience the city through the everyday routine of its inhabitants – instead of going from one landmark to another. It is interesting to see where these routes cross, where they go.

Carson: It can be the twice a year visit to the dentist, if it is a route that is somehow memorable for your experience of Berlin. This would be, for travelers experiencing these routes, a much more interesting way to see the city, to experience the lived Berlin rather than just seeing the monuments, which Berliners don’t necessarily have relationships with.

Fotini: Last year I worked on a project in collaboration with an artist – Elaine Ho – where we looked at the spaces between individuals and publics through a daily series of experiments, interventions and discourses. Some of these events took place here, some were in public spaces throughout the city.

Have you used this as a forum to instigate change or is just purely research based? Does it have any social agenda?

Fotini: We don’t really have an explicit agenda but hopefully some of what we do is creating change in small ways, by opening up some questions in people’s minds, in the ways they think about space or the ways they experience it. We had a reading group that explored questions of community and cohabitation. We’re quite happy with engaging in ideas as a material.

What do you see as a current trend in architecture? Is there a defined movement like modernism, post-modernism, deconstruction, perhaps sustainability has become the movement of the day?

Carson: Right now, I don’t see a general movement that everyone is really into. Architects talk about sustainability and green architecture but I don’t think it’s looked at with the same sustained academic rigor granted to deconstruction, postmodernism or modernism. It’s almost more of a responsibility than an actual desire, an actual interest.

So you don’t think there are those people for sustainability? What about people like Glenn Murcutt, who designs and talks about keeping a small footprint on the land and building in harmony with nature?

Carson: Yeah, but as I said, I think that ‘green’ is seen by architects as a responsibility rather than as a genuine interest. The way that architects throw around their LEED qualifications makes sustainable practices seem like a form of validation than a real questioning of building practices and traditions. In terms of design, I don’t know if there is any specific trend or language or anything in the atmosphere that is guiding everyone.

It’s not simply about making buildings look [a certain way], it’s about developing a sensitivity towards the environment. I think Glenn Murcutt is a good example of this attitude. He seems conscious of the environment: the climate, how the sun is moving, becomes a design tool and helps determine whether or not, say, need windows are needed. Le Corbusier’s Villa Shodan, in India, has few glass enclosures because it never gets cold enough to require them. He’s designed a brise soleil and the way the walls work, the rain never actually gets inside. This is a clear example of how the weather and local specificities of the place affected the architectural design. The curtain wall, for tall buildings, is kind of the de facto thing; everything has to be climatized. Sustainability, these days, is often about finding an ‘environmentally friendly’ alternative. We get buildings that are cooled with lake water rather than energy-draining cooling units, but the discourse rarely questions the affects this has on the fundamental design and conceptual tectonics of architecture.

Visit the www.programonline.de for information on upcoming events, lectures, concerts, etc.

a2a_linkname=document.title;a2a_linkurl=location.href;