[Narrator] It captures people’s imagination I think. [Narrator] First and foremost architecture does affect people in ways that maybe architects understand only after a building is built. People perceive architecture by simply being an object or a vessel. Within which people are housed. And that’s clearly not what our sense of architecture is. What the hell is an architect What does an architect do, you know? What is the difference between an architect and a builder? We concretize the world. We take human activities and make manifest the physical structures that accommodate all manner of human activity.

The design studio is a place where individual action and individual creativity is measured very directly but the people around them. The students are doing their job with shifting the focus of how we’re talking and thinking. About architecture. [Student] Before you come to architecture school you sort of have this idea about objects and things like that. And then once you get here it becomes all about space. Now all that occupation, people sort of see architecture like children, sort of sculpturely. And there’s a point at which you stop dealing with objects. You know, sort of things to stare at and start dealing with occupation. [Student] I have a lot of friends who find it hard to understand my schedule here and how we function here and being here on strange hours of the day. And working environment. And what studio space is like. [Student] And a way of working, too. [Student] Yeah. [Student] That’s really important. [Student] Yeah. [Student] But also the idea of being critiqued. I know what critique is. [Student] A foreign concept to a business student. [Student] Yeah. [Tom] The design studio is a place where students have to perform on their own.

They have to create something from their own imagination. They have to create something in response to a set of problems that are either given to them or they have to even invent the problem. [Student] There’s not a place where you can get this kind of culture. And we’ve been together for 5 years. The whole group, right? So, we know everybody. Everybody knows everything. It’s like a second home. It’s like a second community of people who are all struggling with the same questions. [Student] Now when I worked at home, it was so much lacking in the projects. There’s nobody to bounce things off of. The inspiration is at a minimum when you’re on your own. [Shigeru] Architectural education in the U.S. is one of the best because of the studio system. All the students hanging around with their own studio. Talking and learning from others.

That is the most important space for the education of architecture. [Student] It’s like having it. They were hitting on Robert Moses. Because he’s so insensitive and he tore down neighborhoods. This, that, and the other. It’s, you know what? Get in the car, drive on the Westside Highway. Take the Triborough into Manhattan. [Student] Ok. [Student] And then you will understand what he was trying to do.

That visual perception in the automobile. Spectacular! [Student] No, no. [Student] It is spectacular [Student} You’re thinking about it now because of the atom. Now, we sit in traffic and look at it. But back then, the city had to make that transformation. [Tom] The great thing about architecture schools is it’s still takes place… in a kind of space where people discuss the work, together. In both a personal way and a on-on-one way. And in a very public way. Ultimately there’s a kind of arena. There’s a public arena where the work is discussed. Where students can present themselves to personally to other people. And show that they have a stake in the work, and what they really think about the work and that’s extremely important, I think, to the development of an architectural project because that’s ultimately how… architecture at certain points has really developed in the real world. And it’s both an important lesson But it’s also a way in which you know, through that kind of intensely personal and human contact that… That the work gets better.

[Student] I do a lot of the culture of studio trappings at the most random times. So, like the most random hours. [laughing] [Student] I have to go through this. [Student] Think the humor adds another level of energy. [Student] So, you got moments where we’re all joking around. We’re doing the work, and we’re joking and we’re vibing [Student] and whatever. Some guys can be like “Well, that’s why you guys never get any work done” [Student] “because you’re always doing this shit.” [Student] [Beep] you! [Student] Go do your project. Live in your little world [Student] by yourself because the human brings the interaction. [Student] And then the interaction brings the energy and the energy [Student] creates an output between everybody. [Student] that we can all feed off of. [Student] Tomorrow morning. Don’t forget, please? [Students laughing and joking] [Student] Now bounce. [Student] Everyone’s hanging out. Smoking cigarettes and [Student] drinking a lot of coffee and not really necessarily [Student] at your desk drawing, or whatever.

[Student] Our teacher school is a really strange, specific [Student] environment. [Student] work into something. Like hours and hours on [Student] you know, 1 drawing, whatever and make it productive. [Student] You know, you could tell an architect that it’s [Student] due tomorrow and they’ll put in the 12 hours [Student] It might actually look the same, as if they spent [Student] a whole week on it. You know? [Student] I should have gone home earlier than I did. [Student] because I just like, every 5 minutes I’d take a [Student] bit of glue and put it somewhere. [Student] Becoming un-stopped. And figuring out what [Student] the hell it is that I just did. [Student] And start clear thinking. [Student] I have this terrible thing that happens to me. [Student] What I call the Design High. [Student] Where I can’t fall asleep because I can’t stop [Student] thinking about my project. [Student] But it’s like, I get home… [Student] the whole time I’m exhausted. [Student] This ease I like, brush my teeth, wash my face.

[Student] I’m gonna do bad. I need to get back to Studio. [Student] Your health is kind of put on hold [Student] to make room for your ideas. [Matthew] Architects are masochists in some ways. [Matthew] You’re in there ’till all hours of the night., [Matthew] You’re cutting yourself at 3 o’clock in the morning. [Matthew] Rush you to the hospital and get stitches [Matthew] Putting these models together that you’re tearing apart and then [Matthew] putting them together again. And you’re [Matthew] going for this iterative process of evaluation [Matthew] that is incredibly personal [Matthew] but yet also very public. And you’re constantly [Matthew] putting yourself on display. Opening yourself [Matthew] to attack and criticism. It’s intense. [Matthew] Why would you subject yourself to that and [Matthew] put yourself in that position if you didn’t love it. [Student] [BEEP] Ahh!!! God [Beep] [Instructor] That’s the conceptual mistake. The structured system [Instructor] does not simply fit with each unit. [Instructor] Usually the style of structure encompasses [Instructor] 3 or 4 units. [talking at the same time] [Student] I understand but I don’t see what that has to [Student] necessarily be the case.

[Instructor] It doesn’t. [talking at the same time] [Student] I understand that I don’t have to but I think [Student] it’s important for the resolution. [Instructor] It’s wrong, that’s why. [Student] Why is it wrong? [Student] Tell us why it’s wrong. [Instructor] Economically. [Student] Not the wrong way. [Instructor] Systems. [Student] You can take his whole project in terms of [Student] the economy of it. [Instructor] But you do it? [Student] Basically there’s [Student] these walls, like this. In terms of his diagram. [Instructor] Yeah, it’s supposed to have the other third [Instructor] with wall structure. [Student] They’re not completely [Student] ruined, so that the area’s in between…

[Instructor] It does not make anything. [Student] It wasn’t necessary to have that conversation. [Student] The point was made. And then that’s it. [Student] I understood the point. They understood my… [Student] I thought he understood my point. [Student] I thought that should be the end of it [Student] and there were more important things to talk [Student] about and other people that had to talk to him. [Student] You know? And still talking about it for 20 minutes [Student] Well, one thing that I always have an issue with [Student] is like, students get so frustrated if they don’t [Student] have a good critique. I think they misinterpret [Student] what a good critique is. I mean, by definition [Student] it’s a critique. It’s a criticism. [Student] So, if you go into a critique and all the critics, [Student] all they can do is blow hot air up your ass and tell [Student] you how great the project looks.

[Student] To me, that’s not a good critique. [Student] They didn’t criticize anything. [Student] To me a good criticism is if you can inspire [Student] enough thought based on what they see [Student] and what they hear. If it inspires enough thought [Student] then they will criticize. Not criticize [Student] in the sense of attacking. Criticize because [Student] whatever you showed them inspired [Student] enough thought that they had their own opinion [Student] about the thing now. That’s a criticism. [Instructor] I’m not gonna argue with you because I have a [Instructor] feeling it wouldn’t be productive. [Instructor] We can go on all night. [Student] We could. I know that’s [Student] not the point. [talking at the same time] [Instructor] We dare to find some resting spot, here. [Student] Where we’re not talking about the same thing. [Instructor] Allow us to help you. [Instructor] The other thing I think is sometimes negative [Kenneth] is the idea that the student should be trained [Kenneth] to do a sales pitch in this jury presence. [Kenneth] I think that first the student should be silent.

[Kenneth] And the jurors should start asking questions about [Kenneth] the drawings and try to understand the [Kenneth] project in a more Socratic way, you know? [Kenneth] Other than this sales pitch followed by criticism. [Instructor] If you’re a smart architecture student, you’re [Instructor] listening very closely because you’re not only [Instructor] interested in how that work is coming out of you [Instructor] but also how other people are seeing it. [Phil] The best architects, in my view, are the ones [Phil] who bring a coherent view of the world [Phil] to design. Those are the folks that become [Phil] the best architects in the sense that they’re the [Phil] ones that progress the profession, innovate, [Phil] create new ideas.

The most important thing about [Phil] being an architect is learning how to think clearly. [Phil] You have to be able to think clearly to [Phil] practice architecture. [Thom] You can, kind of see the same people as singular. [Thom] If your artistic, you’re not practical. You’re practical [Thom] and not artistic that’s totally preposterous. Architecture [Thom] is embedded in both worlds and if anything [Thom] architecture is the connect-a-tissue between [Thom] these two kind of spheres.

And it would be [Thom] impossible without one or the other. [Phil] One, we’d be practical and never produce a piece of [Phil] work of any interest. Yeah, you’d be producing [Phil] work that has no meaning. And no connectivity. [Joe] I think design require a certain kind of smartness. [Joe] It holds those schizophrenic views simultaneously. [Joe] In one’s thinking, even as a young person [Joe] you know whether you can do that. [Joe] and as you mature it’s quite rewarding to have [Joe] those imposing views in your mind at all times. [Terry] There’s not just one role for an architect. There’s [Terry] different kinds of contributions an architect [Terry] can make in the culture. The question of what’s a [Terry] good architect, I think that there are many different [Terry] perspectives that come at the project, [Terry] as it’s developing. And what’s important for the [Terry] architect is to be able to listen to people outside of [Terry] themselves.

And take that, and [Terry] then give something of yourself to a project and [Terry] make something incredibly unique and wonderful. [Terry] It has to be a person who’s really willing to learn in a way [Terry] that architects need to learn, which is they need to [Terry] learn something every day for the rest of their lives. [Terry] You’ve got to be, in a sense, kind of driven by [Terry] that inner force. But I think you always… [Terry] You also have to have the ability to work through [Terry] something and to be able to look at particular [Terry] and be able to listen and learn and examine with [Terry] great patience, some of those questions.

So again, [Terry] it’s kind of left brain, right brain kind of dichotomy that is constantly… Those demands are constantly placed [Terry] on you as an architect. [Maurice] The other disciplines bring other things to the table. [Maurice] But I think our ability to envision, or imagine [Maurice] something that is not there. [Maurice] It’s almost spooky to people. This notion that you can [Maurice] look at a site or look at a parking lot and see [Maurice] and see a building? It’s an extraordinary skill.

[Maurice] And we are one of the few disciplines that can [Maurice] do that. I would not trade for anything [Maurice] the skill-set that I learned in school. [Maurice] Because it’s very, very, very unique to our discipline. [Maurice] And that’s what we bring to the table. [Mary] I don’t believe schools of architecture, either historically [Mary] or today, have particularly prepared young architects [Mary] for the realities of architectural practice. [Mary] Referring to this notion of safe space, where one can [Mary] fail. Where one can push the envelope, in a sense. [Mary] I think the academy always needs to be that.

[Mary] In a certain sense, you’ll get freer of the constraints of the [Mary] real world. We need to understand that those constraints [Mary] also have to be brought into the academy, so that [Mary] students can begin dealing with it and dealing with it in [Mary] an inventive and creative way. [Mary] I think the academy should be a, kind of, idealized space. [Mary] But it also has to be a kind of laboratory, a testing [Mary] ground for the real world. And I don’t think we’re so good [Mary] with the ladder.

We are still that ivory tower. [Student] Sometimes I think we lose a little bit of the reality [Student] of what are job is. And what our profession is really about. [Student] I think people really forget the reality of what it’s [Student] gonna be like to be working as professionals. [Student] Architecture school is really… You need to because [Student] it’s probably the only time that many architecture [Student] students get to work on their own projects. [Student] After that, architecture is basically a service industry. [Student] I think that the profession is a lot different than the [Student] education, in that you never work alone. [Student] It’s hard to design an entire building by yourself. [Student] There’s other people that you have to network with. [Student] Or design with. Or consult. Collaboration is not usually present [Student] in school. Which is a good thing and a bad thing. [Student] Because during school you’re trying to develop your [Student] own sort of way of working. [Instructor] Very fast. And you only go, listen to what I say. [Dan] Education is not preparing them to be [Dan] some kind of architects in the full sense of [Dan] the word, architect.

Being both poets and practitioners. [Dan] They don’t want to be fooled. They’re talented, they’re smart. [Dan] The tragedy is that the students are not sufficiently [Dan] prepared to be independent thinkers. [Dan] If they have the function at the poetic level [Dan] or they function at the pragmatic level. [Dan] The two shall never meet. So we have to, kind of, [Dan] help them put those two together. [Student] Like a series of overlays where you’d start to see if [Student] there’s [inaudible] [Instructor] So the walls are retaining walls. [Inaudible conversation] [Instructor] If you give me a word right now, we can only [Instructor] respond to it. Let me ask you this. [Instructor] Why are they working just to put these things… [Student] They’re making things. Yeah. [Instructor] And they’re making things because they want to [Instructor] create something of value, right? [Student] Yes.

[Instructor] Why do the just want to [Instructor] put it in storage. [Student] Do I think I might not be an architect? Sure. [Student] The likelihood that I work in an office after I graduate [Student] is pretty high though. I don’t think people have to [Student] be stuck there for like 3 years and then [Student] get their license and then they do their own stuff. [Student] I’m gonna start doing my own stuff [Student] and work in an office. [Student] I look forward to… [Student] It’s hard to say what’s gonna happen. [Student] I’m excited to see what my signature ends up being. [Student] I wanna teach and I wanna write, and I wanna work [Student] for a friend that will let me do all these things.

[Student] I wanna get some experience in a larger firm. [Student] to see how they work and see how they operate. [Student] Do that and then hopefully the long term goal is to [Student] you know, start my own practice. [Mary] The remarkable thing to me is how optimistic [Mary] students of architecture are. [Mary] How they sustain that optimism. [Mary] Again, it’s almost a bit like an actor or actress [Mary] truths that they still cherish that belief that they’re [Mary] gonna break out of the chorus line in some way. [Mary] Even though the reality as it is on Broadway [Mary] is very, very different. In part it could be [Mary] how they very quickly imbibe this notion of the [Mary] store architect, and this belief that against all odds [Mary] that they might be able to make it.

[David] Fortunately a lot of people when they think of architecture [David] think of what storeitects. They think of where the [David] handful of brand name architects that they might have [David] heard of. Which to me is rather limiting. [Student] You only know Frank Gehry, you know? [Student] I mean there’s other architects out there that [Student] that are doing better work or work more important [Student] than getting… [Instructor] The problem is that the way we teach architecture [Instructor] right now is we sort of train everybody to do [Instructor] that exact same thing.

The whole sort of pedagogical [Instructor] model right now is around creating [Instructor] the next generation of star architects. [Instructor] That’s actually a flawed model. [Ted] For many years, everyone wanted to be [Ted] like Frank Gehry. They wanted to create [Ted] great sculptures in the landscape. [Ted] Whether those sculptures worked or not [Ted] is largely irrelevant. The ability to use [Ted] aerospace engineering to come up with forms that [Ted] hadn’t been built before. Was considered [Ted] to be a primary task of someone coming out of school. [Ted] That’s over. That’s over. [Evan] I would argue that this current generation of [Evan] beginning students of architecture [Evan] have the capacity to reshape the world [Evan] like we’ve never seen before. And they need to have access [Evan] to as much technology and as much discourse [Evan] meaningful discourse surrounding these techniques [Evan] and these tools. So that they’re fully prepared [Evan] to go out into the world in the future [Evan] to do something positive and productive. [Instructor] Students are coming out. They’re working with [Instructor] individuals around the world who need [Instructor] shelter and who need ways of living that are [Instructor] affordable and supportable and sustainable.

[Instructor] The students themselves have been pushing to force [Instructor] faculty to think differently. About the way faculty [Instructor] see the environment use the environment [Instructor] and create objects that serve, not just the [Instructor] esthetic interests of the architect. [Instructor] It’s fundamental an optimistic profession. [Maurice] You don’t go into architecture if your a pessimist. [Maurice] If you don’t actually believe that [Maurice] the world can get better. [Maurice] So, I think you got a bunch of optimists [Maurice] that go into this designer profession, they actually [Maurice] believe that their buildings are gonna make a difference [Maurice] in somebody’s life. [Student] I think that the best [Student] environment is something that people [Student] have appreciation for. [Student] If you don’t care about this, like what do you care about? [Student] It’s about understanding human behaviour.

[Student] Being a designer of human want. [Student] All the extra is what you experience in your daily life. [Student] On the street, the space of the street, [Student] how you navigate the street, how you relate [Student] to the buildings around you. [Instructor] People tend to think architecture is done [Instructor] for and by other people. [Instructor] But, it’s also done by you if you decide to [Instructor] put a new window in your house or [Instructor] change the traffic flow in your house or your office. [Student] At architecture school you got the freedom to… [Student] You don’t like something? Do something about it. [Student] That’s what they told you for 5 years. [Student] Do something about it. Doesn’t matter what. [Student] Just do something about it. [Instructor] This school is, kind of about a way of thinking [Instructor] And what you’re gonna do in architecture school is [Instructor] not what you think it’s gonna be, you know? [Instructor] They aren’t gonna go in there and [Instructor] you know, be designing [Instructor] a colonial home and things like that. [Student] We don’t just need shelter, we need atmosphere [Student] We live to be inspired. [Student] I think one of the most important things you can [Student] take from this school is not to lose your ambition.

[Student] It’s not just, you know, 4 walls and a roof. [Student] There’s more into it. There’s a life to it that… [Student] I think we get here and we should really take with us [Student] every way to go. [Student] If you’re gonna come to architecture school [Student] I hope you understand the creative process. [Student] I hope you understand the transformation that your [Student] mind and body an psyche is gonna go through. [Student] Because there is nothing absolute about this. [Student laughing] [both laughing] [Student] What do you think about that, Mr.

Zacoy? [Student] Yeah, making a movie, huh? [Student] Trying. [Student] Sure you are..

Man: TO ONLY TALK ABOUT AESTHETICS IS ACTUALLY KIND OF INSULTING TO AN ARCHITECT BECAUSE THAT’S THE RESULT OF SOMETHING. IT’S WHAT IT FINALLY LOOKS LIKE. BUT THAT RESULT, LIKE THE LUNAR LANDING MODULE OR HELICOPTER, IS THE RESULT OF A SERIES OF PROCESSES OF THINKING THAT WENT INTO IT, THAT Allow IT TO BEHAVE A CERTAIN SORT OF WAY. WE’VE GONE FROM I LIKE OR DON’T LIKE THIS BUILDING, TO UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE BUILDING DOES AND TRACING THAT THROUGH TO A BROAD VALUE SYSTEM OR ETHIC OF WHERE WE HAVE TO BEHAVE AS A CULTURE TO FIT IN THE WORLD. Wife: WHAT WE’RE Create HERE IS Best available OF THIS TIME.

IT IS ABOUT THE FUTURE, IT IS ABOUT WHAT WE’RE TRYING TO DELIVER FOR THE PUBLIC, FOR OUR CHILDREN, TO SEE Best available OF AMERICAN ARCHITECTURE. Mayne: IT’S ABOUT ASKING QUESTIONS AND IT’S ABOUT DEVELOPING, LITERALLY SMART BUILDINGS. SOME PEOPLE WILL LIKE IT AND SOME NOT. BUT IT’S MUCH LESS IMPORTANT THAN ACTUALLY ASKING WHAT THE BUILDING DOES OR DOESN’T DO. CAN RETHINKING A BUILDING’S DESIGN ACTUALLY MAKE PEOPLE WORK MORE EFFICIENTLY , MORE CREATIVELY, MORE DEMOCRATICALLY ? PERHAPS NOWHERE IS THAT RETHINKING MORE APPROPRIATE THAN IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT . THE NEW SAN FRANCISCO FEDERAL BUILDING COMMISSIONED BY THE U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, OR THE GSA , IS ANOTHER SIGN THAT THINGS ARE CHANGING . FOR A PERIOD OF TIME IN THE 1960 s AND’ 70 s, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS BUILDING A NOT VERY DISTINGUISHED STABLE OF PROJECTS TO HOUSE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE GOVERNMENT.

AND WHAT WAS HAPPENING IS 20 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, Is well OF THESE UNFORESEEN COSTS IN MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP AND REPLACEMENT. WE’VE HAD THE UNFORTUNATE ECONOMIC IMPETUS TO BUILD QUICKLY, CHEAPLY, AND TURN OVER. BIG WAREHOUSE-LIKE BUILDINGS THAT WERE BUILT ON THE CHEAP, THEY LACKED PERSONALITY, THEY LACKED SOUL. PEOPLE DIDN’T LIKE TO WORK THERE, COMMUNITIES DIDN’T WELCOME THEM — THEY STILL DON’T — AND NOW, THERE’S AN ENORMOUS OPPORTUNITY TO RETHINK WHAT THOSE BUILDINGS CAN BE. AMERICANS ARE ALL TOO FAMILIAR WITH UNINSPIRING , WASTEFUL OFFICE BUILDINGS . MID-LEVEL EMPLOYEES JAMMED INTO FLUORESCENTLY LIT CUBICLES , SPEND MORE THAN HALF OF THEIR WAKING HOURS THERE . THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT , AS THE COUNTRY’S LARGEST EMPLOYER OF TWO MILLION PEOPLE , HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESHAPE THE WORKPLACE . ALL IT WOULD TAKE WAS LEADERSHIP TO RECOGNIZE THE POWER OF DESIGN INNOVATION . THE GSA IS ACTUALLY THE GOVERNMENT’S LANDLORD, AND THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ABOUT 300 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF PRIMARILY OFFICE SPACE THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES.

SO THEY ARE PROBABLY THE COUNTRY’S LARGEST DEVELOPER, MANAGER, AND ENTREPRENEUR OF REAL ESTATE IN THE COUNTRY. THE GOAL WAS TO REACH OUT TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO FIND TOP-QUALITY DESIGN TALENT FOR NEW GSA BUILDINGS . THE SAN FRANCISCO FEDERAL BUILDING IS ONE OF THREE PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN THE GSA AND CUTTING-EDGE L.A.-BASED ARCHITECT THOM MAYNE . OUR PERCEPTION HERE — WE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE LAST PEOPLE IMAGINABLE TO BE THOUGHT ABOUT AS DOING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WORK. THIS — THE COURTHOUSE, THE NOAA PROJECT — FOR ME, IT’S BEEN A REALLY INTERESTING KIND OF RIDE AND IT’S BEEN FINALLY IMMENSELY FULFILLING AS WE NOW COMPLETE THE THIRD OF OUR THREE BUILDINGS. WE WERE USED TO LOTS OF MEDIOCRE PROJECTS. SO WHAT WE REALLY WANTED TO DO WITH DESIGN EXCELLENCE WAS FOCUS ON THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE ABOUT THE BUILDING. WHO WOULD BE THE ARCHITECT THAT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CREATIVITY, New innovations, THE IMAGE, THE FUNCTIONALITY — EVERYTHING THAT IS IMPORTANT ABOUT A Build, THE THINGS THAT LAST FOREVER? IT’S VERY IMPORTANT THAT ONE OF THE MESSAGES MUST BE THAT BUILDINGS MUST CONTINUE TO REPRESENT THE HIGHEST IDEALS OF WHAT WE BELIEVE IN AS A SOCIETY AND AS A CIVILIZATION.

I Envision, IN THE LAST 10 YEARS, WE’VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN BRINGING IN NEW TALENT AND WE’VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN SHOWING WHAT AMERICANS, IN TERMS OF DESIGN AND INNOVATION, CAN SHOW IN OUR BUILDINGS. IT HAS TAKEN A BACKWATER, WHICH IS WHAT GSA WAS THIRTY YEARS AGO IN THE ARCHITECTURAL FIEL, AND IT HAS PROPELLED THAT WHOLE DIALOGUE INTO A VERY SPIRITED DISCUSSION AS TO WHAT ARCHITECTURE IS ABOUT OR SHOULD BE ABOUT, AND WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF ARCHITECTURE IN THIS COUNTRY. THOM MAYNE, THE 2005 PRITZKER-PRIZE-WINNING , COUNTERCULTURIST, ICONOCLASTIC ARCHITECT , FOUNDED THE DESIGN FIRM MORPHOSIS IN THE EARLY 1970 s . HIS BUILDINGS ARE KNOWN FOR REFLECTING Is not simply THEIR TIMES , BUT ALSO THE CONFLICTS, CONTRADICTIONS , AND ASPIRATIONS THAT DEFINE THEM . Mayne: WE DON’T PRODUCE THING YOU’VE SEEN BEFORE, WE PRODUCE THINGS YOU’VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE, THAT’S ALL WE DO. WE PRODUCE PROTOTYPES, ESSENTIALLY BECAUSE ALL WE’RE INTERESTED IN IS PRODUCING BUILDINGS THAT RESPOND TO A PARTICULAR SITUATION AND A PARTICULAR PROGRAM, A PARTICULAR SITE. A SET OF PROGRAMMATIC CIRCUMSTANCES NOW, IN THIS TIME OF HISTORY. IN THE U.S.

ALONE , MAYNE’S WORK SPANS FROM CALIFORNIA TO MARYLAND , FROM HIGH SCHOOLS TO COURTHOUSES . EACH UNIQUE PROJECT REFLECTS A BOLD UNORTHODOX APPROACH WITH ONE UNIFYING ELEMENT — AN UNCOMPROMISING DESIRE TO MARRY FORM WITH FUNCTION . HE’S ALWAYS SET HIMSELF APART AS THE — NOT THE BAD BOY, BUT THE ARTIST, LET’S SAY, WHO WAS SOMEWHAT APART FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT. BUT DOING A FEDERAL OFFICE BUILDING, AND A FEDERAL COURTHOUSE AND A NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC HEADQUARTERS IN MARYLAND, YOU’RE NOT DEALING WITH THE OUTER FRINGES HERE, YOU’RE DEALING WITH MAINSTREAM, MAJOR WORK. SO, HERE’S AN INDIVIDUAL WHO’S EXTREMELY SERIOUS, AND SO HE’S GOT IDEAS ABOUT POLITICS AND PHILOSOPHY, BUT HE’S AN ARCHITECT, SO HE WORKS THOSE OUT IN THE PHYSICAL WORLD.

Man: I Envision THE INTERESTING Thing ABOUT THOM IS THAT THE WAY HE TALKS ABOUT HIS BUILDINGS IS THAT THEY REPRESENT FREEDOM AND OPENNESS AND A KIND OF OPTIMISTIC SPIRIT ABOUT WHAT ARCHITECTURE CAN DO, AND I Envision MOST PEOPLE, INCLUDING ME, SEE THEM AS MUCH MORE AGGRESSIVE, AND THEY HAVE A KIND OF BROODING QUALITY, OFTEN, AND SO, YEAH, I Necessitate, IT WOULD TAKE A PSYCHOLOGIST TO SORT OF UNTANGLE ALL THE CONTRADICTIONS IN THE WORK, BUT THAT’S WHAT MAKES IT REALLY FASCINATING. EVEN THOUGH I’VE BEEN, PROBABLY, MORE CRITICAL OF HIS WORK THAN MOST CRITICS, I ALSO Envision HE’S ONE OF THE MOST FASCINATING ARCHITECTS BECAUSE OF ALL THOSE CONTRADICTIONS. Mayne: I Envision ALL ARCHITECTS ARE THE SAME IN SOME WAY. I Envision WHEN I WAS A KID, I Appeared OUT THE WINDOW AND I JUST SAID, “THAT SUCKS.” I PROBABLY Told IT IN THOSE EXACT WORDS, ACTUALLY.

I CAN DO THAT BETTER, OR I Crave TO CHANGE SOMETHING. I ALSO GREW UP IN THE’ 60 s, AND THAT HAD TO HAVE AN EFFECT ON ME. THE WORLD WAS CHANGING HUGELY. Of course, THERE WAS AN EXPLOSION IN CULTURE AT EVERY LEVEL. CLEARLY, I’M A PRODUCT OF THAT. WE NEED ARCHITECTURE WHICH IS THOUGHTFUL AND RESPONSIVE TO THE NATURE OF THE SPECIFICS OF THE PLACE, BOTH IN HUMANISTIC AND URBAN TERMS, AS WELL AS IN CLIMATOLOGICAL TERMS. YOU TAKE THIS BUILDING THAT’S VERY GENERIC AND YOU START WITH ANOTHER SET OF QUESTIONS, AND THE FIRST QUESTIONS ARE CHALLENGING ITS GENERICNESS.

ARE THESE BUILDINGS — WHY ARE THEY GENERIC, AND IS THAT A NECESSITY AND DOES THAT REALLY — IS THAT USEFUL FOR THE NATURE OR THE CULTURE OF A WORKPLACE? AND AS WE STARTED ASKING QUESTIONS, IT JUST BECAME REALLY INTERESTING BECAUSE YOU’RE GOING, WELL, ACTUALLY, THE WORKPLACE IS A PROBLEM WE HAVEN’T REALLY LOOKED AT, AND WHY DON’T WE JUST KIND OF REFOCUS ON KIND OF WHAT IT Entails AS YOU SPEND YOUR 8, 9, 10 HOURS A DAY IN THIS PLACE, RIGHT? I Envision, IF WE’RE REALLY SUCCESSFUL, IT WOULDN’T EVEN BE ABOUT THE BUILDING, “It wouldve been” AS A REAL SUCCESS, AS REPLACING THE MODEL WITH A NEW MODEL. AND THAT WOULD BE A MUCH, MUCH MORE AMBITIOUS GOAL THAN JUST MAKING A BUILDING. SO, WE’RE STANDING ON THE 13 th FLOOR OF THE SAN FRANCISCO FEDERAL BUILDING. THIS IS A 600,000 -SQUARE-FOOT OFFICE Build THAT SITS RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF 7th AND MISSION, AND WE ARE IN THE TOWER PORTION OF THE BUILDING. THE PROJECT IS DEFINITELY SPECIFIC TO THE TEMPERATE CLIMATE IN SAN FRANCISCO. AS DESIGNERS, ONE OF THE FIRST QUESTIONS WE BEGAN TO ASK IS, WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS ON THIS SITE? WHAT ARE THE ORIENTATIONS WITH REGARD TO SUN? WHERE ARE THE MAJOR SOLAR GAINS GOING TO BE HAPPENING ON THE PROJECT? AND WHAT ARE THE WIND CONDITIONS? WE KNOW THAT SAN FRANCISCO, AS A PENINSULA, HAS REALLY GOOD PREVAILING WINDS.

SO, WE STARTED, By the start, TO CANVASS 50 YEARS’ WORTH OF WEATHER DATA IN ORDER TO OPTIMIZE SOME OF THE BASIC DESIGN MOVES AND TIE THEM TO THIS SITE. IN THE CASE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, WE WERE VERY INTERESTED IN THE IDEA OF WORKPLACE QUALITY, WHICH IS TO SAY, HOW DO PEOPLE ACTUALLY ENGAGE IN AN EXPERIENTIAL WAY, THEIR ENVIRONMENT AS THEY ARE WORKING. THIS IS LIKE DOING A SMALL CITY, IN A WAY. THERE’S 2,000 PEOPLE COMING TO WORK IN THE BUILDING EVERY SINGLE DAY, AND WHERE WE BEGAN AS DESIGNERS WAS TO TAKE A REALLY HARD LOOK AT WHAT THE EXPERIENCE WOULD BE OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO’S COMING TO SIT AT A WORKSTATION AND SPEND MAYBE THE NEXT 25 YEARS OF THEIR LIFE WORKING FOR A PARTICULAR FEDERAL AGENCY.

THE BUILDING’S SITING AND ORIENTATION MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF SUNLIGHT THAT CAN FILTER IN , AND THE STRUCTURE’S UNUSUALLY NARROW FOOTPRIT HELPS THAT SUNLIGHT PENETRATE DEEP INTO THE BUILDING . Christ: THERE IS A SERIES OF VERY INEXPENSIVE SENSORS THAT ARE GOING TO BE MONITORING THE DAYLIGHT ENTERING THE SPACE, AND WHEN THE LIGHTS ARE NOT REQUIRED, THEY WILL BE DIMMED DOWN TO ZERO. THE ESTIMATES FOR LIGHTING IN OFFICE BUILDINGS, THEY RANGE BETWEEN 30% TO 40% OF THE TOTAL ENERGY USE. SO, IF WE CAN ABSOLUTELY OBVIATE THE NEED FOR THEM AND ALSO GET RID OF THE HEAT GAINS THAT THE LIGHTS MAY BE PUTTING INTO THE SPACE, WE’VE GONE A LONG, LONG WAY TOWARDS A SENSIBLE SOLUTION FOR THE BUILDING. ANYONE WHO’S WORKED INSIDE A MODERN OFFICE HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO THE OVER-CHILLED AIR OF SUMMER AND THE DRY, STUFFY HEAT OF WINTER — BOTH MAJOR USES OF ENERGY . THE SAN FRANCISCO FEDERAL BUILDING’S SOPHISTICATED TECHNOLOGY ALLOWS FOR SOMETHING UNPRECEDENTED — NATURAL VENTILATION . IT ALSO GIVES THOSE WHO Operate THERE SOMETHING ELSE UNPRECEDENTED — CONTROL . THERE’S A GREAT PSYCHOLOGICAL BENEFIT TO HAVING CONTROL OVER YOUR ENVIRONMENT.

WE’VE KNOWN THIS FOR A LONG Day, BUT IT’S A VERY DIFFICULT THING TO ACHIEVE IN BIG OFFICE BUILDINGS. LOCAL BUILDING CODES ALL AROUND THE UNITED STATES TYPICALLY PROHIBIT THE USE OF OPERABLE WINDOWS IN COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDINGS, AND WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO WAS SHOW THE GSA’S FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER THAT WE WERE MEETING A HIGHER OR EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF LIFE SAFETY IN THE BUILDING, EVEN THOUGH ALL THE WINDOWS OPEN. AND SO, WE’RE ON A MODEL WHICH IS CLOSER TO A EUROPEAN MODEL. Mayne: ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS WE ASKED OUR MECHANICAL ENGINEER — COULD WE Envision ABOUT TAKING THE AIR CONDITIONING OUT? IS IT EVEN POSSIBLE? JUST ASK THE DUMBEST QUESTION. THEY GO, OH, ACTUALLY, UM, ACTUALLY, IT COULD BE — IT’S PLAUSIBLE. Christ: THE BUILDING RELIES ON THE DIURNAL SHIFT BETWEEN DAYTIME AND NIGHTTIME TEMPERATURE.

SO, IN A NUTSHELL, DURING THE WARM WEATHER IN SAN FRANCISCO, THE BUILDING AUTOMATION SYSTEM, IN THE EVENING, WILL OPEN THOSE VENT WINDOWS. THERE ARE SMALL MOTORS THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THEM AND ALLOW COOL NIGHT AIR TO ENTER THE BUILDING, WHICH IS MAYBE 20 TO 25 DEGREES COOLER THAN THE DAYTIME TEMPERATURE, AND BATHE ALL OF THESE CONCRETE CEILINGS IN COOL AIR. THERE ARE SENSORS WHICH ARE BURIED INSIDE THIS CONCRETE CEILING, AT WHICH TIME WE HAVE ABSORBED ENOUGH COOLING ENERGY INTO THE STRUCTURE THE WINDOWS WILL CLOSE AND SEAL THAT COOLING ENERGY IN.

SO, PEOPLE COME TO WORK THE NEXT DAY, AND THE CONCEPTUAL BASIS OF THE BUILDING IS THAT WE WILL HAVE STORED ENOUGH COOLING ENERGY IN THE STRUCTURE ITSELF TO OFFSET THE HEAT GAINS OF The following. SO, AS PEOPLE COME TO WORK AND THE SUN COMES UP AND STARTS SHINING IN THE BUILDING AND THEY TURN THEIR Computer ON, THEY START MAKING COFFEE AND TURNING MICROWAVES ON TO WARM UP THEIR DANISH OR SOMETHING, YOU START TO ACCUMULATE A LOT OF HEAT GAIN DURING THE DAY. WELL, THE FOLLOWING EVENING, THE BUILDING WILL OPEN AND ALL THOSE GAINS WILL BE FLUSHED OUT AGAIN. WE CALL IT A NIGHT FLUSH. NOW SOMETHING THAT IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT IN THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF THE DESIGN AS WELL IS The facts of the case THAT WE HAVE A PERFORATED STAINLESS STEEL SCRIM ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING WHICH IS Shadowing THE GLASS AND REPELLING ABOUT 50% OF THE SOLAR GAIN, AND ON THE NORTH SIDE, WE HAVE A SERIES OF GLASS SUNSHADES THAT ARE FIXED AGAINST LOW SUN ANGLES IN THE SUMMERTIME.

SO, WE’VE DONE TWO SPECIFIC SOLUTIONS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING TO HELP MODULATE THE HEAT GAINS BECAUSE THAT’S THE BIGGEST ISSUE IN DOING LOW-ENERGY COOLING. MAYNE’S TEAM USED DESIGN Is not simply TO SAVE ENERGY , BUT ALSO TO RESHAPE THE CULTURE OF THE WORKPLACE AND PROMOTE INTERACTION AND CONNECTION BETWEEN PEOPLE . WE REVERSED THE ORDER OF MANAGEMENT AND STAFF — WE PUT THE MANAGEMENT ON THE INSIDE AND THE STAFF ON THE OUTSIDE. THEY DON’T GET THE CORNER VIEW, THE LITTLE OFFICES THAT ARE ON THE EDGES, WHERE THEY CAN HIDE AWAY AND LOOK OUT THE WINDOW. THEY ARE ON THE INSIDE, WHERE THEY CONNECT AND HAVE INTERCONNECTION. ONE OF THE MORE UNIQUE INNOVATIONS OF THE SAN FRANCISCO FEDERAL BUILDING IS ITS SKIP-STOP EXPRESS ELEVATORS , WHICH STOP EVERY THIRD FLOOR AND ENCOURAGE WORKERS TO WALK EITHER UP OR DOWN A FLIGHT OF STAIRS . WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, WHAT CONSTITUTES A HEALTHY WORK ENVIRONMENT, WE TALKED ABOUT WALKING.

THERE’S ONE THIRD THE AMOUNT OF STOPS. YOU GET EFFICIENCY, AND YOU PRODUCE THESE SECOND KIND OF ORDER OF LOBBIES. IT’S PART OF A SOCIAL MODEL, AN INTERACTIVE MODEL, AND WE’RE GETTING INTERESTING RESPONSES BACK THAT THEY LIKE IT, THAT IT PROMOTES INTERCONNECTION. I Envision THIS IS A Build THAT’S GOING TO HAVE TO BE LEARNED, AND I Envision IT WILL BE LEARNED VERY QUICKLY BY THE PEOPLE WHO WORK WITHIN IT. IT’S NOT MEANT TO CALM US AS MUCH AS IT IS TO INSTRUCT US. IT’S SOMETHING, I Envision, TO MAKE US WAKE UP BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY IDEAS EMPLOYED IN THIS BUILDING THAT WE’VE NOT REALLY SEEN TYPICALLY EMPLOYED, CERTAINLY IN FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION OR EVEN IN THE AVERAGE OFFICE Build. Ciprazo: THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I’VE WORKED IN AND GROWN UP IN, IT HAS BEEN KIND OF NEGLECTED BY THE CITY.

SO, A BIG ISSUE, WHEN WE DO BUILD IN A CITY, IS TO LOOK AT A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE HAVE NEGLECTED. IF WE INVEST THE DOLLARS IN THAT AREA, THEN WE SEE THAT AS A GENESIS OF OTHER PEOPLE INVESTING IN THAT AREA. MAYNE AND HIS TEAM SOUGHT TO INTEGRATE THE NEW BUILDING INTO ITS NEIGHBORHOOD BY USING THE BUILDING’S AMENITIES TO CREATE LINKS BETWEEN THE PEOPLE WHO Operate THERE AND THE COMMUNITY . WE TOOK THE CAFE WHICH IS USUALLY INSIDE THESE AND PUT IT ON THE STREET, SO THEY COME OUT OF THE BUILDING, THEY JOIN THE WORLD.

THEY SIT IN THE PLAZA. THEY INTERACT WITH THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY, AND USE THAT ACTUALLY TO ACTIVATE THE COMMUNITY. Ciprazo: MY VISION WAS TO ACTUALLY BRING INTO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD A PLACE THAT HAD OPEN SPACE THAT PEOPLE COULD FEEL SAFE IN, WAS TO BRING FACILITIES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY COULD USE, LIKE, SAY, OUR CONFERENCE CENTER AFTER HOURS FOR, You are familiar with, COMMUNITY GROUPS TO HAVE PLAYS. TO Deliver THE CHILD CARE CENTER THAT IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, SO THAT WE’RE NOT JUST AN ISOLATED FEDERAL COMPLEX IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD. WE BECOME A PART OF THE FABRIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. Mayne: I Envision, Is not simply DOES IT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING A MODEL FOR OTHER GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS OF THIS TYPE — OR OTHER TYPES, EVEN, AS FAR AS THAT GOES — IT ACTUALLY HAS AN OPPORTUNITY OF RETHINKING OFFICE BUILDINGS IN GENERAL FOR THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

BUT WE HAVE TO WAIT A WHILE TO SEE IF THAT’S TRUE OR NOT. I Pass YOU THE PRITZKER-AWARD-WINNING THOM MAYNE.[ APPLAUSE] SOMEBODY PUT LITTLE METAL PIECES IN ALL THE BENCHES, AND I Envision IT DOESN’T ALLOW KIDS TO SKATEBOARD. AND I’M GOING TO SAY NO. WE WANT CHILDREN. WE WANT YOUNG PEOPLE IN THIS CITY. WE Crave SKATEBOARDERS — THEY ACTIVATE THE CITY.

IT’S FANTASTIC. TIMOTHY LEARY ONCE SAID , “THINK FOR YOURSELF AND QUESTION AUTHORITY.” FOR THOM MAYNE AND HIS BUILDINGS , IT IS ABOUT QUESTIONING WHAT THE STATUS QUO IS , EVEN IN THE WAY WE THINK ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY . Mayne: SUSTAINABILITY — FINALLY, IT HAS TO START WITH AN INTELLIGENCE OF HOW WE USE ENERGY. IT’S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. AND IN TODAY’S WORLD, IT’S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. TO THE EMBARRASSMENT OF OUR CULTURE, THE U.S.

USES JUST ABOUT TWICE THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY OF THE AVERAGE EUROPEAN. THEY SEE US AS GLUTTONS, AND THEY SHOULD. AND WE HAVE TO SOLVE THIS, AND THIS SEEMS TO BE AN ISSUE THAT PEOPLE ARE EXTREMELY INTERESTED IN TODAY, AND IT BECAME AN ABSOLUTE PRIORITY IN THIS BUILDING. Ciprazo: WHEN I Envision ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY, I Envision ABOUT IT IN A LARGER VIEW. IT ISN’T ABOUT JUST ENERGY SAVINGS. IT ISN’T JUST ABOUT HOW MANY BTUs PER SQUARE FOOT WE’RE SAVING. SUSTAINABILITY IS ABOUT, HOW IS THIS BUILDING SUSTAINABLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD? HOW, IN 100 YEARS, IS IT STILL SUSTAINABLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD? Ivy: I Envision PEOPLE’S PERCEPTION OF THIS BUILDING WILL SHIFT RADICALLY AS THEY GET TO KNOW IT. IT’S GOING TO BECOME AN ICONIC STRUCTURE WITHIN THE CITY, AND, I Envision, PERHAPS, In different countries. IN THE State, WE’VE NOT HAD A MAJOR OFFICE Build THAT ATTEMPTS THIS LEVEL OF FULLY INTEGRATED ENERGY SAVINGS AND SUSTAINABILITY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE FABRIC OF THE BUILDING. I DO Envision IT REPRESENTS A REALLY SIGNIFICANT STEP FORWARD IN INTEGRATING SOME OF THESE IDEAS ABOUT SOCIAL INTERACTION AND ALSO ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY INSIDE THE BUILDING.

IT’S NOT PERFECT AS A GREEN BUILDING — THERE ARE LOTS OF INEFFICIENCIES ABOUT IT, STILL. I MEAN, THERE’S A LOT OF STEEL IN THAT BUILDING THAT’S USED IN A PRETTY ORNAMENTAL WAY TO DO THESE KINDS OF FOLDED PLANES THAT HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AN IMPORTANT MOTIF IN HIS WORK, BUT THEY DON’T SERVE ANY PURPOSE. SO, I Envision IT’S TOUGH FOR SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN GREEN DESIGN TO LOOK AT THAT BUILDING AND REALLY SEE IT AS, You are familiar with, AS A MODEL OF SUSTAINABILITY OR EFFICIENCY.

IN THE END, You are familiar with, THE SUSTAINABILITY OF A BUILDING HAS A LOT MORE TO DO WITH THE FEELINGS OF THE PEOPLE WHO USE IT, I Envision, THAN WE SOMETIMES REALIZE. BECAUSE IF A BUILDING BECOMES SORT OF BELOVED AND IT’S A GREAT PLACE TO WORK, WHETHER OR NOT IT’S EFFICIENT, You are familiar with, IN TERMS OF ITS MECHANICAL SYSTEMS, THEN IT’S GOING TO BE MORE LIKELY TO LAST. IT’S GOING TO BE MORE LIKELY TO BE PRESERVED AND NOT KNOCKED DOWN TO, You are familiar with, MAKE WAY FOR ANOTHER BUILDING, WHICH USES ENTIRELY NEW MATERIALS. SO I Envision THAT’S ONE WAY WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY, TOO. IT’S NOT ALWAYS AN AESTHETIC ISSUE. SOMETIMES, IT’S A PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUE THAT MAKES A BUILDING VERY UNIQUE TO ITS COMMUNITY AND ITS ENVIRONMENT. PEOPLE WOULD WRITE AND THEY’D CALL AND THEY’D SAY, “IT DOESN’T LOOK LIKE A SAN FRANCISCO BUILDING.” AND, You are familiar with, THAT’S A REAL TOUGH ONE. SOMETIMES IT’S HARD TO SAY WHAT DOES LOOK LIKE ANY CITY’S BUILDING.

TRUTHFULLY, JUST THE OVERALL EFFECT, IT FEELS PRETTY UNFINISHED. Man: I Necessitate, I Crave TO LIKE IT, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND, LIKE, IT REPRESENTS, LIKE, REALLY MODERN TECHNOLOGY AND, You are familiar with, THE NEXT STEP IN BUILDING, AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT I HAVEN’T FALLEN IN LOVE WITH IT BY ANY MEANS. Woman: I Envision THAT IT’S WONDERFUL THAT HE USED NATURAL LIGHT. I REALLY DESPISE FLUORESCENT LIGHT, AND IT’S JUST A SUPER STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION REGARDING ARCHITECTURE AND The environmental issues. IT’S VERY CLEAR. IT’S NOT PARTICULARLY INVITING. YEAH, IT’S NOT INVITING, IT’S LIKE — WHEN YOU CAN’T SEE INTO ANY OF THE WINDOWS, THERE’S NO PHOTOGRAPHY FROM ANYWHERE AROUND. IT’S LIKE, WE’RE WATCHING YOU. THAT’S THE FEELING YOU GET. AND YOU CAN’T SEE US. You are familiar with, SO IT’S GREAT THAT IT’S GREEN, BUT I Envision IT’S OVER — You are familiar with, IT’S IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT’S LIKE, YEAH, WE’RE WATCHING YOU NOW.

YEAH, WE’RE HERE. I REALLY DON’T CARE IF SOMEBODY LIKES OR DOESN’T LIKE MY BUILDING — WE DON’T TALK ABOUT, LIKE, BEAUTY OR LOOKS OR — IT’S NOT A DISCUSSION HERE. WE TALK ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE THING. AGAIN, GOING TO THE HELICOPTER. THEY’RE KIND OF ODD-LOOKING THINGS, AND THE MORE YOU LOOK AT THEM, THE MORE YOU KNOW ABOUT THEM, IT’S VERY POSSIBLE YOU’LL FIND THEM MORE INTERESTING THAN YOU DID THE FIRST TIME YOU SAW IT, INSTEAD OF Reasoning ABOUT IT’S UGLY OR BEAUTY. IT GETS IMMEDIATELY CONTAMINATED BY YOUR KNOWLEDGE, AND NOW, YOU’RE FINDING IT MAYBE NEITHER UGLY OR BEAUTY, BUT JUST INTERESTING. AND AGAIN, I’M MUCH MORE INTERESTED IN THAT. I WOULD BE VERY DISAPPOINTED IF IT’S NEUTRAL AND IT GOT NO RESPONSE. Ciprazo: LET’S PUSH THE ENVELOPE A LITTLE SO PEOPLE ARE OUT OF THEIR COMFORT LEVEL, BUT IT’S NOT FOR ANYTHING NEGATIVE. IT’S ABOUT CREATING SPACES THAT ARE BETTER FOR THEM. AND Formerly THEY’RE OUT, TAKING THAT RISK, AND THEN UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU’RE DOING, THEN THEY CAN EMBRACE IT. ONE OF THESE THINGS ABOUT ARCHITECTURE, YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR ENVIRONMENT AND CHANGE BEHAVIOR.

I Envision THE WORK WE’RE PRODUCING NOW, THE WORK WE’LL PRODUCE IN THE FUTURE, IT’S GOING TO AFFECT THE CULTURE OF THE WORKPLACE IN TERMS OF THE INHABITANT. I HAVE NO QUESTION THAT IT’S PART OF A THINNING DOWN OF THIS COUNTRY, WHICH HAS TO TAKE PLACE. WE’VE GOT PEOPLE THAT EAT TOO MUCH — ENERGY, IN THIS CASE — AND THEY HAVE TO BE RETRAINED. AND THEY HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT’S IMPORTANT, AND THEY DO UNDERSTAND, REALLY, I Envision — RIGHT? AND IT’S IMPORTANT GLOBALLY, IN TERMS OF HOW WE BEHAVE IN A GLOBAL CULTURE, IN OUR ROLE IN THAT GLOBAL CULTURE.

AT THAT LEVEL, IT MAKES THE PROJECT MOST INTERESTING BECAUSE NOW, WE’RE MOVING FROM ARCHITECTURE TO HUGE MACRO IDEAS AND WE’RE STARTING TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF A SINGLE BUILDING. AND AS THAT BUILDING ACCRETES TO MAKE LARGER THINGS LIKE CITIES, AND THEN THAT TURNS INTO A CULTURE OF A COUNTRY OR ET CETERA, IT CONNECTS NOW TO HUGE, HUGE ISSUES THAT ARE GLOBAL. FOR MORE Datum ABOUT E-SQUARED , VISIT OUR WEBSITE AT PBS.ORG . E-SQUARED IS AVAILABLE ON DVD . TO ORDER, CALL PBS HOME VIDEO AT 1-800-PLAY-PBS .

As found on Youtube