One of the important things about creating an office is that you have the opportunity and the responsibility to create the work environment that you would like to work in. I have to do things differently because the office has evolved and my role in it is constantly evolving. Every three months I realize that I can no longer do what I did three months ago. As the office evolves, your role is constantly changing. What can you tell us about leading an architecture office?Ĭreating an office is very much an evolutionary process. We can actually create the world of our dreams. As human beings we don’t have to accept the world as it is. In that sense, it's an amazing power and an amazing responsibility to be in charge of creating the world that we want to live in. We got the possibility and the responsibility to shape the world around life, rather than life being shaped by the world. Rather than living in a tree or living in a cave, we could build our own tree, we could build our own cave. When we invented technology, tools and architecture, we reversed that situation and we started adapting our physical environment to life. Life always adapted to the physical environment. So, different life forms would evolve attributes that would allow them to occupy different eco-niches. In the really big picture, life on planet earth has evolved, in a Darwinian sense, through million of years by adapting to the surroundings. Life is always evolving and as life evolves, so should our cities and buildings, so that they fit with the way that we want to live.
#Bjarke ingles yes is more pdf into one pdf full#
Be sure to read the full interview after the break.Īrchitecture is the art and science of making sure that our cities and buildings actually fit with the way we want to live our lives: the process of manifesting our society into our physical world. We also asked him to define architecture (“the art and science of making sure that our cities and buildings actually fit with the way we want to live our lives”), and to give students advice about pursuing a career in architecture. In the interview, Bjarke explains that not only does his own role constantly evolve, but that the success of BIG is contingent on the invaluable contributions of his partners. On running an office, Bjarke says that “you have the opportunity and the responsibility to create the work environment that you would like to work in.” He has modeled his firm as a type of organism that is able to adapt to growth and change. An impressive portfolio of both built and upcoming projects shows that his approach to design, though sometimes criticized, is profoundly impacting the social environment of architecture. And it is precisely this go-to attitude that has allowed him to overcome some of the significant limits that face many young architects today.
His conspicuous enthusiasm for the potential of architecture and design sets him apart from his peers. Having found success at a relatively young age, Bjarke has never shied away from embracing his YES IS MORE philosophy.
Sustainability and Performance in ArchitectureĪt ArchDaily, we think that Bjarke Ingels is one of the most inspiring architects practicing today. It's done all over the world and Toronto can do it too, should it wish to.The Future of Architectural Visualization * note that I'm not necessarily arguing in favour of this merely pointing out it's very possible. If most space available were limited (for argument's sake) to a 12,000ft2 floor plate then that's what you would get unless you were willing to pay the premium for grandfathered space in the arrangement you prefer. The same would happen with office clients. If, as a resident you can afford any layout at any price, you'll get just that but for the vast majority, you can only pick from the inventory available and the City (and developers) are making those choices irrespective of It's really not dis-similar to the condo market where rules on mid-rises and on point towers lead to certain shapes /sizes of interiors that aren't ideal from a would-be resident's perspective. In the near-term, yes, a major tenant can choose between prospective building A vs B (the latter having the larger floor plate).īut if the City chose not to allow that size/shape of floorplate on a go-forward basis, that choice would largely evaporate over time it would only change the order in which buildings go up in the nearer term.
0 kommentar(er)
