Paolo Soleri talking with graduate students. April 12th 1977 College of
Architecture, Arizona State University Side one
in in the use of curve linear forms. Very large, uh, forms responding to
the sun. Um, which, you know, some of the Pueblo Indians did, and so forth
, Uh, you can look at them and get a an equilibrium of heat game
throughout as an overall thing. And one of the things that happens is that
particular area of of them will be very hot. And another area will be very
, very cold, you know? And these happen at different times of day, and it
may not be when you want them particularly. I think that one is that
naturally you have you have the greenhouse, which would tend to equalise
that, but the main, the main source of heat will not be there. What you
get between the two blades or of the sun heating the public is the apron
that would produce the main frog there. So that would be part of the
answer. The only that, uh, there are people that, uh, have preferences.
Uh, not only in the kind of light, but the kind of of when the sun comes
in and maybe even without some some variations in temperature. Since I, I
like to have the sunshine in the morning Better be. Maybe other people are
getting up late in the day. They might like to get the sunshine in the
evening or not sunshine. So I don't think that that unidentified, even if
it's an optimal condition, is really desirable one, because then on on
restaurants we tend to go back to this idea that, uh, only the perfect is
is human, which, which is the the air conditioning, where if if it's not
81 or 79. Uh, plus, uh, that kind of humidity, you're you're you're in bad
in bad shape, which is a substantial nonsense because naturally it depends
on the hour. Depends on the mood. Depends on how the season depends on
many things. And we tend to obliterate that. And we say that if you're
alive, that's it. It's this or uh or, uh, you are underprivileged, or you
are, uh, naughty. Or you are crazy or whatever. Yes, and, uh, so I think
that variation within limits of I think it might be not only interesting,
but perhaps desirable
within that kind of variation, which is desirable for humans. There is a
more limited range of what's acceptable in terms of, well, not in terms of
like the heat. You know, the human body won't you know its comfort range
and so forth. But, you know, how are you moving on the heat? As I was
saying, the the the main theory would be to let the heat move itself. And
then within that scheme, which is, in a way simplistic, you might come up
with some sophistication, But, uh, it goes from opening a window to maybe
turning a switch, possibly less switches to turn and more window to open.
Something of that kind, uh, again, considering that it might be important
to to be resensitized to the daily cycles to feel a little chilly in the
morning might be a very good reminder that the morning I could feel warm
in the afternoon might be a very important experience. Not that the
afternoon, uh, it's easier in Arizona than in China. But no, it doesn't
mean that you have to. You have to be cold or hot. It means that, uh, the
the it's not true that total comfort is it's good for, uh, for feeling
alive. Total comfort it. It's some kind of a condition where you you you
forget that you have a body and I don't think that's very good
because of the body is unforgettable and it's also unforgiving. And if it
becomes if subsist situation is such that where you become desensitised,
then the body might respond by saying, Oh, thank you, love. What's my
culture?
Question related. Just have you've done any work Or are you utilising any
work related to control of micro climbers, control plants and things like
that? When you get into the greenhouse, MO. It should be done for you.
When you're transferring The idea of micro farmers from from the house to
the community, then evidently you're you're making a step towards
something which is more complex in many ways, more demanding
that it's some micro climate. You you know that the the outside climate is
something that you want to alter
in relation to the needs of the group and the plants and so on. So I
didn't even make the crimes. But if you're asking me what we are doing now
about it. The answer is that we are dealing in generalities because we
haven't got down to particular. And we were trying to get some money from
from murder to get done. In particular,
heard is more interested in in gadgets than in environments.
And they're so fascinated with a lot of these models and so forth being
shown look like, quite interesting to see some of the responses related
wind, tunnels and so forth. Because I think that, you know, they have a
scale which obviously is going to modify this. We have been trying to see
how we can develop it. I, um I got it from a man in, uh, in Colorado. He
seems to be the authority. He he did quite a studies for, uh, uh, town
cities. Uh, renewal.
So I think he worked on on the on a trade centre in New York or something.
Years of winter and the simulations to the little so And I try to see if
we can afford them.
What was the, uh, explain that effect that you had on the swimming pool?
Oh,
yeah. Well, the swimming pool is
we have a slope, which is, uh, it is uh, east southeast
on that. And then we have the original question is that we have a shelf,
and then we have a cliff,
and this is a OK, uh, what article? Yeah, and a You got a lot of heat. And
if you touch the rock in the evening, about too many hours is too warm
even in spring or summer or you in the fall. So what we did, we We cut. We
cut the swimming pool here.
It's supposed to be We have some cut here because the structure of the
so we have we have some here still here, and we built this wall
and we and we open gates there, here and then we have a bedrock of about,
uh, 1416 inches
and the bed is carried through here, and so it's going to be on this side.
And what we are going to do is to, uh, to define here the the beginning of
the greenhouse. We are certain here, but it's going to be,
and then the greenhouse.
So this is the volume of the greenhouse. That would actually be if
this is gonna be living space. No. This would be cultivation um, food. So
you you get, you get the sun energy, and it's the chimney effect.
That's good
of the of the greenhouses to be. Sh and I kind of need, um we have, uh we
have two ways to go, and basically, we one way is a double membrane
with possibly some kind of, uh, of going in, uh, changing the The
transparency home is one thing. You know, a journalist has one membrane
and possibly, uh, movers that can be opened. And we might use that that
approach. If you use that approach, the moves will be made in the
insulation material, like Styrofoam. So at night, you can in the winter,
you can shut the moves, get a fairly good insulation.
And in the summer that it was not would be shedding. Another thing I was
thinking about is what determines how high. Ok, Yeah.
Well, in this case, uh, given this design, uh, the the shelf on which we
are building as I mentioned. So once you, uh, you decide about the slope
somehow you are getting you're getting an answer there. No, that's not
It's not given given to you an absolute answer. But
you mentioned something about landscaping inside the building that you're
gonna have on each floor. Different landscapes. Yeah, there are, uh, every
two or three floors, we have a a fairly sizable area, which would be
public in Republic. I mean, uh, uh, ways of of communication
and also offices, or maybe some kind of a family activities like family
industries from the past to, uh, I don't know, assemblage of the radios or
things which are tailoring us things of that sort. So those those would be
some small landscape. Uh, you can have the natural light. Some have. We
have quite a number of of wells and, uh, a light coming in from different
directions.
I know it most. You know, all of your structures
that we saw designs are above ground, and I imagine to save that amount
land that we do have. And what are your thoughts on below ground
or leaving the very negative I I've been connected with the idea of on the
ground for many years. I don't know, but I can guess why. But, uh, it has
always been wrong because even even the experiments we made in in Scotland
that they are not on the ground. They will be below grade, which is
something very different. So we need to to take life and put it on the
ground. I think it's it's scarcely justified. I mean, it's not justified
Life here and some of the experiments of telling us that there was in in
Texas, this developer, I think it was a developer. He started building
underground houses. I don't know if I got they build a few, I think a
number of feet on the ground. So as far as the, uh, conditioning and the
common condition was, the answer was pretty good. But then he ended up by
by having microphones on the highway bringing down the noise of the
highway. And then he had all this approximate of of, uh, fake sounds, fake
P patios. Everything was fake because he had to take the environment that
he abandoned and put it down on the ground. So at that point, uh, the
justification becomes very, very thin.
So I would say that a number of activities can go on the ground and
probably they are going to go Scandinavia and in Sweden have been quite a
while. Uh, but see, I said I would
I
and Charlotte. Mom. He said, you know, uh um to spend, um What was wrong
with it? Well, I, I wish I could do it, but, uh, uh, I had to try to, uh,
to come up with a design which number one was slightly easier to develop.
Number two possibly was more, uh, more energy oriented energy.
And, uh, even though the climate is, uh is not a very harsh climate, it
can get pretty cold or pretty hot. So the new model, from that point of
view, it's it's more, uh, it works better with that. That model have
worked better around Phoenix theory that that was yeah, because that model
was mainly an idea that you you make a leverage umbrella, which is a power
, and then honour them. Well, you can be all sorts of things, in fact,
that that model as it is as it is in, uh, there would be almost ideal for
a place like San Diego or Los Angeles and so on Where you really need is
is, uh, an umbrella for the summer sun. But then he had those elements
which were not working with the sun and so on. But for that climate, uh,
probably the new market is a small city, but also it would be, um it would
be, uh, uh slightly easier to develop and stuff
that's gonna
well, on the north side of the Pakistani. Like the small greenhouses
on the north side, there are terraces quite white because the slope is 45
degrees. So those terrace is with, uh, there. There are only a few that
are really facing north. They they face, they face north, northeast and
north Northwest. In fact, Northwest and Northeast,
right? Well, what I was wondering was, um are they gonna be as well? I
think the idea would be to have a very, very good, very nice awnings
because then, uh, in, uh, in the winter, you get you don't get very much
sunshine, but in the summer, you might get the very warm sunshine in early
morning and late afternoon, and that's when the would be very good. So you
have a terrace, which is an extension of your living room. And also at
night, I was wondering at night like, um, your energy to like that kind of
stuff. I was wondering what would happen when thats at night. Uh, well,
that's that's when you had to count on the hit him in the help of the hit
so the structure would be would be warmed up during the and then, uh, we
are trying to decide about some some bedrocks at below the ground level
floor level, the main more. And we have some hos there, including this
bedrock open. Like so in the combination of those two elements should, uh
, should reach the night quite easily. In fact, we we thought that, uh,
even we we thought there was cons relation to show that that you would
lose 11 degree during, uh uh a night conceiving after a sun sunless day.
Yeah, you have a You have a in there, which is quite substantial. And
then, actually, you have only one place which is exposed to the outside
because all the rest is exposed in a in an area, which is, uh, again the
reason why the the body is more more effective than the surface. If you
are asking around, you have all those the the the The early exposure is
much later than if you are to one building, so there's no real need to
seal up that sign or no, it would be convenient to have a, uh, you know,
double glass bed if you like. But possibly it would not be necessary.
Maybe some curtains.
Oh, when you first started your oncology concept what? What variables you
just choose to deal with At that time? There must have been something
disconcerting about architecture at that time that stimulated your
interest. Well, as I was saying, I was trying to, uh, in my own way to
work out, uh,
a system that would not be, uh, giving up too much, uh, of of the of the
city of the cultural character of that the city has to deliver. But I kept
I kept some lining up by by finding out that, uh, unless you take care of
the logistics, you you you have problems. So the logistics eventually told
me that, uh, having this kind of thing, you have to have this kind of
thing,
and energy has become a more important input. Now, energy has been was
very important then because basically, that's That's where you're saying
that Consider the difference between the automobile, the single person
automobile and the elevator, which is most of the time, is a collective
transportation system, and the the the imbalance between the two, I think
, is very great. The elevator is far more saving, and naturally, then the
elevator is only part of the process that your your walking ability is the
basic the basic, uh, device by which you you move things, including
yourself. So you are moving from a from a a a gigantic technology, the
automobile to my new technology, your legs basically. And that's a
tremendous difference
is in the new, uh, development of the design of our guante. Is there
horizontal transportation
that is so small that we will need some transportation? That's for a few
people, handicapped older people and babies and other pedestrian malls.
It's It's Ma and the ground floor. It's all circulation among greenery and
maybe open markets and so on. And then there are many levels in which
situation is also very substantial. You have the parking. I mean, we have
a we have parking on the north northwest side, in the designs syndicated
in the parking. We Yeah, we would like to think that instead of needing,
uh, a car for, let's say, three person. I know what's the average year you
might need a car for five or six or seven persons. The reason is that
possibly we would rent the car we need, and we need it. So you would have
a pool
and a bunch of two. Is that you? You pick up the car that you need at that
day, and if it's a small car, you need you pick it up. It's a station
wagon. You pick it up and so on. But that would cut the size of the of the
of the car fleet, maybe to one third.
What would be the I mean, others would be iron ore, uh, altogether again
if we don't deal with a prototype. Uh, since we are after fugal, the the
justification of it is that it would be cheaper to live to live in that
kind of, Uh but, uh, we have to come up and see us. Any individual owns
anything in that you could own to as much as you want to up to the real
estate. I don't know. But you know, you you have your clothing. You have
your books. You have your finishing. If that's something you like.
And if I want to want a car, a car, But
you talk about the construction that's going on now, while the process is
like different few things. Yeah. Yeah. As you know, we are doing doing
concrete work. And the concrete is, uh it's a mix of pre casting, casting
in place, pulling in place assembly
process. Well, it's well, mainly because we don't We don't have enough
resources. And also because we are we are not professionals.
We get away with this, the building officials and they come down and, Oh,
yeah,
we are under there.
Do you have a four side of working ground? Did you just go for one?
Getting more and more and full set of which we didn't have when we were
building our Kante, That was improvisation.
But you cannot go, you know, beyond those kind of thing without working.
What if someone wanted to take up one of your other plans? Do you have
drawings for those set of drawings? Oh, you mean a lot Ecologist. Yeah. We
have to start
to ask a question about, um so, like property is not like, um, proper
terms of real estate is not not individually owned. It's personal property
, right? Well, it's not that we we are, uh, dogmatic about it. And that
comes back. Yeah,
um, my questions are originally about the physical thing was like, You
know that that so it speaks like, Well, what I was wondering about like,
is it like some sort of philosophical basis for, um, going in this
direction? Of course. Like that part, I just know it. I would say that
it's even modern philosophical. It's theological, but you see, it's
connected with the with this notion that there are indications in history.
And, I mean not just history but pre history evolution that things click
when they go this way, and they don't click when they go that way. And the
clicking happens always when, when you move from the simple to the less
simple. And actually this is resisted this day and age because we we we
decided that technology is the evil that makes things complicated. But
technology makes things complicated, not complex, because technology is
complicated by nature, but it's not complex. In fact, it's another
simplification, and that's where the trouble comes in, uh, we analyse our
needs. Then we start to say, unless we have a washing machine, which does
that we are unhappy and then that that it has to be transferred to
everything. So you need a gadget for any single little thing that you do.
But that's simple minded. It's not complex design. Complexity is
something very different. Complex is the ability to grasp the totality and
then come out with a with a synthesis. And in that syn, you can use
technology. But that would be a slight, different technology than what we
are doing now. Most of the time
we find a couple of half store in pre store. Well, not not a couple, but
by by the billions. You know, all, uh, if you go through and not that I
know. But
other people know if you go through the process from the very beginning,
you find out that at the beginning you have a very simple minded
triggering enzymes or whatever you know, so things which are which are
utterly simple compared to what we have now and then through the
historical evolution, you see that those very simple creatures constantly
sought to to become more complex in very strange ways, by mutations by
accidents and so on, so that you kept moving
from a from a condition which are very originally very simple. And there
are still a presence with us because whilst they are here, amoebas were
there and so on. But the same they have this build up of of conditions
which are far more lively, far more sensitive, far more responding to
environmental stresses Got to the point where the mind appears
so so that that was one of the next thing that you anticipate any kind of
, uh, potential
evolutionary things as a result of other evolutionary thing. And
it's not what we are expecting. We are leaving it, and we have been
leaving it forever for, uh, 3.5 1000 millions of years. So it's a long
process. There is nothing, uh, uncertain about it. And, uh, and nothing to
extravagant number. There is a bloody, uh, momentous, robust, impressive,
miraculous process. So to to catch that from our mind and say no, that's
that's wrong. That doesn't exist. That's, uh, that at this point, it's
slightly ridiculous. It it's really it's not as gigantic step as it seems
, a tiny little steps. But naturally, when, uh when we appear and we are
beginning to to to look around and say This is not me, that that is not me
, that's something else. Then we begin to be conscious of your of your
envelope or your limitations of your future and so on. At that point,
things begin to accelerate, at least in the mind of man, if not in the
performance. So we are living accelerated times. But that doesn't mean
that we are going to get everything tomorrow morning. It's going to be our
a painful,
long but very glorious process. And we are part of it.
You You said that as far as energy goes, you can do it. It's just gonna go
as far as, um, agriculture and heating. Right now, what happens if we have
to go to individual power? Would we have to rebuild this whole system
inside our on earth, are you? Well, in a way, we would we would better
prepare for it because we we already those conditions which are allowing
us to survive, you know, without, uh uh a a high percentage of the energy
that is needed now in other places. And you could add probably to that, uh
uh, that technology that might produce also electric energy. So I think
that, um at this point point, it might not be the wisest thing to say, and
we're going to be 100% self sufficient. If you could say if if in general
, the the United States could say we're going to be 35% depend not not on
on capital income, that would be a step. But we think we can do much
better now. We can probably do 80% or something, something like this up
north. But in many ways, the further north you go, the more is justified
on the investment of of of going with the, um up to point. At least
if it gets too cold or too cloudy and so on, then might be the
justification might be might be
strong. I was interested in the many of the models that show what appear
to be very large public spaces and very fully enclosed glazing building
above or something isn't that kind of opposite of where your philosophy is
going in terms of You know, people in that kind of environment are getting
farther from nature. In that respect, nature may be outside of it and
available. But your daily kind of functioning might be artificial. I think
there is a double answer again. One is that, uh naturally, there are
conditions which are not very, very, uh, acceptable. Or they are. They are
quite harsh. And I'm not suggesting that we should live in a high
commission by choice. And we can temper the house condition without
getting into this kind of of total. Uh uh, uh, deprivation of all our
senses. So if you have, uh, 10 degrees outside, you might try to get up to
50 degrees, and then you can, uh you can actively take part of that kind
of environmental condition. Or if you give you have 100 and 10 outside,
you might say, Well, let's let it go down to 90 or 80.
Uh, the the en the journal is that, um
what what would you you would gain by by containment is that you are in
such a situation where to get out from the container, it becomes very easy
, becomes laser because it doesn't cost you anything. You are there and
you can step out of it. Or if you're in the middle of Phoenix now, you
cannot step out of it. You have to be privileged enough to own a car.
Pleased enough to have enough time to to step out of it. So suddenly you
find out that unless you belong to an elite, you are, uh you are cured.
It's a functional scale. So yeah, a human scale. The human scale varies,
but in a way, the ecology negates the possibility it doesn't want to
become so. If the walking distance becomes a bonus of that, then you have
to try to reduce the reason I asked the question a few years ago worked on
some housing for the Arctic, and one of our first concepts was a mass
collected units. And there was some share common space, and people living
there were were absolutely opposed to that, that, uh, they would accept it
to going out in 2535 to 0, which totally amazed us. There was that kind of
adoption they would between houses, you know, they wanted their shopping
and clothes that way that they didn't want any of the rest of their life?
Yes,
that everything we do is make sense. You know what starts the metropolitan
area? To move it to where you are now? Nothing, Nothing but the will not
to, not to to stop it. And I mean the collective will.
Well, we have. Well, we have 860 acres. And if the if the right of
ownership still holds, then you can say that we have that buffer
Court junction may become the next week.
Your physical forms. Uh uh. I enjoy them very much myself, but are they,
uh is there anything that you can say that? Did you ever study the origins
of some of those are entirely your own? Is it entirely conceptual? That's
actually becoming material. Or did you actually study historical patterns
that some of these forms relate to? Do you have any specific examples that
when somebody comes up and they see the apps and say, Oh, it looks Roman
or by which might be true, but it's very ire because the function is so
different. But, uh, it's that's hard to tell you. I had a back a
background of finance. If you wanna call it that way. So that means that I
have to go through a certain experience
in reading history or also in graphics and so on. So that makes for what
you might call your personal style, what I call it. But then the other
writing thing is it's not the style. It's how you How do you use the style
for what purposes? And in the archology. Even though there are many
variations, the notion is always one fundamentally contained, uh, reduce,
minimise
and and, uh, put money in it. Yes, I there seems to be I noticed the The
difference seems to be between some of the conceptual ideas which tend to
be more free flow or something which tend to maybe look like veins or, you
know, whatever
just original forms. But then, when you actually get to the model building
of an actual structure that might need built, I notice that it always
becomes geometric and yeah, well, there is that because, Well, there are
reasons there which are 11 is that it's fine, and then it will be very
free on paper, but that doesn't mean to eventually function so very often
you have to, in a way, slow down or try to do your best. Which is that
what you desire to do if you have the ability at this point? No. Because I
find that more and more that the organic is not that the free flow of the
organic is something quite different. It's the performance
because, um, when we talk about organic, we usually think in terms of our
biological system that we would like to translate into a non biological
system, which is, uh, which is pure, uh, pure, uh, Arbi Arbit. Uh, what do
you call it? There's not really a justification for that, because one
thing is a is a living creature that grows and crawls and another thing to
the final environment, like the architectural environment, which by the
clinic something quite different. So when you see the design that looks
like a a crab or what do you say? Don't don't talk about organic. That's
pseudo organic. Most of the time, we have to investigate what that thing
delivers and then begin to talk about organic food. So if you take, for
instance, sometimes the question of that but Kant in the culture, you are
organic and over there you're not organic. Well, I reverse the thing I
said in in I'm more or less appealing to the person that thinks in organic.
But the real organic is going to be there. It's going to be organic
because it's going to be far more pertinent
to that to that kind of condition that you feel is going to respond to
your needs. You have the ability, or if you feel the situation arises
where you should be organic, you what I mean, is that the the thing that
looks less organic? Uh uh. Basically, the more organic in terms of, the
more, the more apt and the more lead. So one thing is the appearance and
the and the copying of the shaking or the the emulation or simulation or
uh in Germany is really the the the actual delivery. And that the system
does
is the attempt at, um, very high quality presentation, drawings and
everything. Is this to sell your ideas or or I mean, are you very much
involved in this process of presentation, or is this somebody else that's
promoting your ideas? I used to. I do less and less of that because of
time and not of the fall, right? Oh, I. I used to like very much to do
good presentations because I felt that there was a certain
necessity, especially if you're in the field of aesthetics, not to
postpone the process, but to to involve the aesthetic process in whatever
you do. So if you if you write a page or if you present a a diagram that
diagram, so at least you at least carry some of the aesthetic impact that
might be eventually carried on by the next thing.
Bob's question about the organic. I also were fascinated that way, because
now we've got the technology to become much freer with our forms than
direct linear and stuff. The concrete
phones and all sorts of these things will allow you to build almost what
you draw it. Let's say this room, for instance, you can say it's pretty
stiff organic, but let's start to walk this start to get that wall to go
up this way started to get the coin around that way. Are you really
getting something which is more organic? My answer is no. Are you doing
something which is, uh, is trying to do something which
No, because you're going to bump your head and you're not going to be able
to put a board, and you're not able to do so. Anything at this room
can can do for you. So the idea that since we are not made of anger on our
side surfaces, means that everything has to be like we are, it's a It's a
poor idea, I'm afraid. And I can tell you because I went through. You know
, I did quite a bit of that. I'd love to curve things to curve things and
so on. But slowly you realise that quite a bit of that is is not really
giving the answer that you you're up to. And once you bump your head 20
times, I guess, uh, a boat and you start wondering it's maybe a detail
detail in handling that kind of design. I mean, but I, I would you know,
I've been in this in a few places that they were defined as organic, and I
find I find them fanciful or extravagant. But, uh, I I find a problem.
Maybe because of my you know, our our standard perceptual background and
expanding that a single foam house. It's really a pleasant environment,
you know, expanding it to a couple of 1000 of them. Free form quality
tends to that lead to confusion, but that that brings in the question of
quality, which is, uh, very often it takes many years to I too get to. And
it was that there has been such a such an outburst of, uh, doing my own
thing and doing whatever. Whichever way, I wanted that, uh, quality has
been going down and down and down and down. And if you want to have a full
things generally you you look at the scene of very young people do, and
it's natural you're experimenting.
You, uh are you opposed to? All right, Roy Rights There is an organic
architecture or anything that you think? No, I think that he had a He had
a very powerful notion about organic. Maybe it was limited, but it wasn't.
You know, the idea that since a, uh uh, a CB looks beautiful, you're
going to make a crab house, or since, uh, a flower was built, you're going
to make a PO, which is a flower that wasn't his notion. Organic for him
was that was the the the nature, the true nature of what he was observing
and then trying to synthesise to translate that nature not the appearance
, but the nature of that into into an architectural expression. That's why
, uh uh, most of organic fail because it it's just copying. You know, I
the crab is this big. I'm going to make it this big. Naturally, it's a
novelty. So everybody said, Oh, look at that big crab. Well, after 25
years that you or maybe after 2025 days, you said, Oh, Jesus, I wish that
club was there and because the club is something and that that's a that's
a fake
But the the the element of novelty is always, uh, is very enticing. So if
I If I see something this size which has an interesting morphology, and I
say, Oh, imagine if this was multiplied 100 times and one of one of the
sculpture does that, What's your name?
No. Oh, the one that makes a faucet. 25 stories.
Well, uh, as a as a fantasy or as a as a idiosyncrasies or as a um you
know, as a celebration of something, it's fine. But when they are going to
last for 50 years or 100 years and you have thousands of those, then the
whole civilization might be in trouble. Some of my story what a four F
function there.
Those cards, I mean, those things very rarely really are responding well
to needs. Well, I OK, I can read it too. Then you were talking about the
vaulted ceiling in in that wall. Well, maybe if the function of that wall
is to hang a vertical blackboard on it, um, how do the two interact and
does that? Maybe part of the identity of that wall is the aesthetic or the
experience of just because it's a negative space and non usable doesn't
mean that it doesn't have a purpose. I'm not saying that we should build
this way. I'm saying that we have to be very careful in not confusing the
What are we talking about? Just to to curve, because that's more organic
than than to have straight. I it's really nonsensical. But if I am, uh, if
I am a Brunelleschi or a great architect, then uh, curving might become
something very, very important. I just could, for the sake of not doing
straight state is is as is as justifiable as as good. I mean, there's not
that one is evil. The only the only is good. It's how you how you make use
of it
also to the nature of the materials. Yes, but keeping in mind that, um, we
are transformers and we are manipulators. And we are, uh, small
recomposing.
And, uh, there there is a limit beyond which nature materials is hiding.
Because if you take if you take, um uh uh Or that it might be made into
you make into iron the iron as a as a certain capacity. And then you say,
Well, I want to something which is more subtle than iron. So you move into
steel and you have another kind of capacity. So where where is the natural
material? Clay that remains clay or clay that becomes aluminium,
uh, oil that remains oil, oil that that becomes plastics. Uh, you're
dealing with a very A very, uh, ambiguous natural material situation. Um,
I don't know that it's that ambiguous in it. Dealing in in the existing
marketplace. You you're dealing with, you know, not or but you're dealing
with steel. You're not dealing with oil, but you're dealing with plastics.
And then if you limit your your dealing at that level, then the plastic
has certain potentials. Steel has a range of potentials. Would you know
what I mean? Is that I? I might take that plastic and am I making
something quite different I can make take good. They might make something
quite difficult.
So there isn't, uh, allergic, which is, uh, which is, uh, unbreakable in
the idea of this natural materials.
It depends on the date, for instance.
That's nice.
Someone asked you if you died with your with your I'm sure I died. I mean
, not right. But when you die, will you will, uh a so keep going, Is there
someone that that's like your right hand man who knows how to carry out of
people that have been with me quite a number of years? But, uh
uh,
that that no matter what you do, you you never get the real answer there.
Th of life is a very good example who could take the place of th of life
just when I find the right so that you you get one of those people once in
a while. So what? What should have the foundation? One would be to fall
over and disappear. The journalists should try to carry on the best they
can with the carry on some ideas of Frank for that, which is what they are
trying to do.
So I in a way, it, uh I feel that it's somehow a waste of time to try to,
to legalise and to structure what's happened after you're not there.
Because in in a sense that you you carry corrosion beyond your, uh, your
lifetime, you give orders even when you are there anymore. So I'm not
talking about that. Well, that's one way of doing it. You know, You you
dog, You said after my dad this gonna happen. This gonna have this and
that. And the poor people that are left, they have to obey. The lawyer is
going to have No, no, you have to do that. You cannot do that.
You thinking of a whole world of psychology?
Not not even the same that I the design that you see, uh, that I worked on
that evidently not that, but in a sense of, uh, of, uh, turning the tide
of, uh, urban floor and moving back into the idea of the city as a very
fundamental phenomenon is that an ARCHOLOGY can coexist with a urban
sprawl. But yeah,
like we have both. Instead of what? The support that that the idea takes
hold. Then you would have a long process of transformation from one time
to the other kind.
Has your group done any work
in terms of looking at Los Angeles or Phoenix or Denver or a sprawl city
in terms of unless you, unless you are asked and some cash comes with the
demand, we cannot even afford to do what we are doing. Just let alone go
around it.
Do you see the, uh, social and political structures about ITS continuing
in the existing structures in this country today are altering them?
Well, I think that it is such a reflection of the of the of the ethos of a
of A of a group of people. So if it's the main drive is materialistic,
there's not very much choice. If the main drive it becomes to begins to
alter then evidently there there's the political structure like that is a
service system for the, for the the feeling of a society. In a way, we got
exactly what we were asking for
following the lecture. One of the questions someone asked about the
relationship, you know, going very high and your answer was related to the
idea of clustering is something historically is is not new. But there is a
difference in terms of historically, the cluster was a maximum of two
stories, maybe three
eight stories in mud still existing still standing somewhere in Africa. I
mean, these are very, quite, quite few and rare, but the common situation
was several stories two or three stories and quite dense. But these were
also densities that were not as great as we're talking about. They usually
allowed courtyards for animals and other spaces. Very close relationship
to the ground and nature. So this is well,
if you take the you take mediaeval town at least originally, you are right.
You have a tough. Then you have the houses with a backyard. And actually
, as soon as you get into the the beginning of the Industrial Revolution,
you have a much greater cost in much higher densities. And, uh, you can
say, Well, that wasn't very good. And you're right. That wasn't very good
for a number of reasons which have probably not to do with caring, but
with other reasons. Uh, health. Uh uh, difference in economic, uh,
capacities and, uh, greed, injustice and so on. But, uh, the connection of
caring with With car has been debunked. I think it is going to be debunked
more and more. There's a study by There's a book by, uh, Freeman or
Freeman Carving and behaviour. And I think the library should have it if
he doesn't have it, because it through through that the studies and
through those experiments which were being financed by a number of
foundations, this man was able to to totally un in caring from time.
And one of the results was that, uh, given a group of people and he was
experimented with students, a group of people that, uh is very friendly
terms. The smaller room you put them in for a number of days to work
together, the greater is the intensity of the Cooper and and the the
fruitfulness of group. But if the group is, uh is not friendlier from from
starting, the more you shrink the the space, the more the more tension
that we build up. So the results are not dependent on on on the crowding.
It's depending on the nature of the group. In other words, an ideal
society. You can stand at a tremendous quality because that's that's where
some of more, uh, more relationships are to develop more social social
relationships and cultural relationship. If the group is, uh, is poor by
definition, in terms of or religion this, then, uh, carving becomes a
problem. It seems that if you go very high and very high density, you have.
Maybe, you know, there's some point of decreasing returns in terms of to
create some, you know, psychological sense of connection with nature, the
addition of gardens and so forth, structurally or physically cost or
whatever are going to be more difficult to provide to see that the most of
it of the way to write those is is suburbia. Unless we decide that nature
is something we want to get rid of it, and suburb is something that we
want to put in, not because suburbia might might pervade everything, which
is not true as possible, but because once once you are separated by, let's
say, five miles away and five miles away and five miles away, you are
already isolated from nature and what you got you you got a neo Uhse of
nature, which is your little garden or your little hotel courtyard and so
on. What I'm talking about is that it's hard for me to accept, either or
in the argument, the suburb or as the alternative that I think you know
what you're working at in terms of a sun right now is obviously not 50 or
100 stories, you know, it's and those that smaller scale, I think, has an
appeal. I think that and beyond which it's pretty hard for me to.
But that's the question of scheduling. To say that that's going to be true
15 generations from now might be a nonsense number one we don't know. But
number two evolution seems to be going in the other way. Evolution seems
to be saying that it's not going to be. It's going to be that so there's
only 11 resource that we have to try to operate. And that's history.
Beyond that, we don't have anything to work with, I If history tells us
that that's the direction, then we might as well try to understand why, uh
, possibly move in that direction. So I would say that the scheduling is
to be such as not to suddenly transport transport the the pins into a into
100 3 story building. But that doesn't mean that eventually, the the what
used to be definitions might not might be in something which is even more
incredible than that. Yeah, special time time.
2000 years
on the
Do you see that? Uh uh uh, Nan relates to nature, and because of its
compactness deep, it seems to me like like it relies on a nature, a
closeness to nature that's not disturbed. So if it was surrounded by a
suburbia or anything, it would be destroyed for sure, right? Yeah.
The the animal per SE cannot be cannot be isolated. Uh, the animal needs
needs a territory. The territory, in this case, it's the the ground that
has is around it. And the ground cannot become a an habitat like, uh,
Scotts or, uh south Phoenix or anything,
because then you defeat one of the purposes of the of the of the animal,
which is number one, the contrast between the manmade and, uh and what you
might call the natural number two the effectiveness of the of the of the
con system less pollution, less energy consumption and all those things.
So is there a limit to the size that park so could become Well, because
that is because, uh, because it's on that little edge, as I was saying and
then once, once you design the structure, you you cannot totally ignore it.
You have to stay with the with the logic of the structure. That's what I
was saying. That if suppose you have 5000 people there for a number of
years or you go up to the 5000 and the the thing is pretty successful
before you get to the 5000, the the community might decide that another
might be to be developed. So you just land, uh, 20 miles away or 3000
miles away or whatever. And, uh, you begin to construct
the new community, which is a bit organic because it's that's how it
happens in nature. The the beehive doesn't go on forever. Police are near
behind, and, uh, the Coyote group doesn't get bigger and bigger. It
spreads.
What do you call it? Discreet chaos.
I know. I just, um let's say that if this system was the new system that
that was to be taken over, what would happen to the land that Phoenix is
on and everything else? If Phoenix went into one of these,
there might be many alternative One is the population in, uh, in Arizona,
for some reason keeps going up. That would mean that possibly Phoenix, uh
, the other that now contains Phoenix could contain double the population
of phoenix. But, uh, instead of being, uh, uh to completely paid over or
completely built, it might be, uh, two or three isolated systems with lots
of garden garden so on and so on. But what to do this now? Existing thing.
You know, things. Things, uh, evolve. Things appear and things disappear.
Where was Babylon? Uh, 1000 years ago. There is dust now. Uh, where was,
uh, I don't know. The the Indian dwell dwellers. Not the Indian town.
There is some ruins. Town
Detroit, 77 C seven C.
So it would be important to be able to have a a movie made on the how New
York
went through its own cycle or how Phoenix developed. So in a few minutes,
you see what took, uh, 23 generations ago and then you see the the
incredible dynamics which are involved in in, uh, this continues changing
that life is because otherwise we we get a feeling that since Van Buren
and Washington are there, Van Buren and Washington is going to be there
forever.
They're not going to be there forever. I can't guarantee that if if
something is going to be very sure is that Washington and and Bermuda are
going to be no further.
One of the really difficult design problems of a large scale system is is
not to design in too much. You know, the reason that vernacular groups of
housings are really interesting is that they've accumulated over time, and
there's there's interest and so forth. It's very difficult to actually try
to design and happen because of changing needs. And isn't that a problem
if you try to design too much on? But there's not the face of the problem
, which is the power If we, uh if we really keep smiling that nothing can
be designed because nothing is going to be LA lasting, then we'll we'll be
sitting forever on, uh, what do you call it on meeting?
Yeah, Chairman of the boards or whatever. You know, endless discussions,
endless piles of of material research.
Uh, yeah, theoretical papers, uh, analysis, archives, pool of things and
very little happening. So the least the the more and more we we feel that
that's the way to go. The the more timid and the more cowardly we are
becoming in our in our actual within your within your culture how we allow
for those variations in design. So you, uh, you really make a a quite a
firm statement. We are interested in environmental degradation. We are
interested in segregation to be dispelled. Somehow we want to save energy.
We want to save materials. We want to be able to feed ourselves and see
where where the the crops are growing and maybe help themgrow