Libeskind:17 words of architectural inspiration

As usual, and first of all it is amazing the speed he talks. I wonder how is like to have an argument with him. I would like to have the chance to do it. I remember the first time I saw his work and a documentary on him. I was totally drawn and inspired by his poetics and by the meaning he attaches to his buildings.

This talk is a call for a new future vision, in which architecture for him is optimistic and far from the neutrality and the explainable architecture of modernity.

The following are the dichotomies he presents along side my own comments except for direct transcriptions in “ “ .

Optimism vs Pessimism – to be an architect you must be an optimist unless you want to say “architecture is dead” in a grand gesture as Stark’s “design is dead”. Architecture is not dead, in fact, one might argue that architects are once again gaining more control over their work as the distance between design and building is becoming shorter. Computers are bringing a whole new paradigm. Architects are again surprising engineers. However, we might also argue that architecture is pretty much still a luxury, and in some cases, if not all the most visible ones, architecture is a spectacle. If architecture must answer questions for any particular time in history, this spectacle is questionable, because today the main question is sustainability from the stand point of a single building, urbanism, whole territory planning, and also social sustainability. The spectacle of Dubai for example, is it really as shiny as it looks like? Would it be possible to build that desert dream without the exploitation of thousand of workers?

Expressive vs neutral – neutral is good sometimes.

Radical vs conservative – radical helps to get to a new level.

Emotional vs cool – enough with “the cool”. The whole Americanized world is trying nothing else to be cool. Rich kids in India are dressing like every other American kid.

Inexplicable vs understood – understood is easier to make the cheap architectural mags.

Hand vs computer – He doesn’t seem to mention that computers are not only tools to draw, but, and in my opinion, an extension to one’s mind as it helps the design process.

Complex vs simple – simple is good sometimes, but yes, complexity is more alive.

Political vs evasive – “a private house is a political act”. It should always be a statement.

Real vs simulated – we cannot simulate the heart. “the reality of architecture is visceral”.

Unexpected vs habitual – Habitual= stability Unexpected= full of tension, “the old cathedrals will always be “unexpected”, Frank Gehry’s buildings will continue to be unexpected”.

Raw vs refined – “Raw= untouched by luxury and expensive materials”. I love this one and deeply believe in it. It is not about exotic woods. Architecture begins when you feel something special as you look at the naked structure on a construction site.

Pointed vs blunt – a pointed building is a powerful thing. “it often takes just a building to change our experience of what could be done…”.

Memory vs forgettable - “I rather play something completely unheard off, and even with flaws, then repeat the same thing over and over which has been hollowed by its meaningless.” Buildings that one remembers.

Communicate vs mute – Architecture is not about silence".

Risky vs safe – risk of creating a dizzy building…

Space vs fashion – my own wish. Fashion is to go with the sheep. It is about having no personality. And as it changes all the time, one can ultimately say it can be environmentally unsustainable. Fashion is having a new ikea room every year.

Democratic vs authoritarian  - its about consensus and compromise.