Showing posts with label interview. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interview. Show all posts
December 13, 2013
Interview: Cecil Balmond - Sri Lanka project will be iconic
Interview with Engineer and designer Cecil Balmond [part 3]
December 6, 2013
Interview: Cecil Balmond - ‘non-linear’ approach to design
Interview with Engineer and designer Cecil Balmond [part 2]
December 1, 2013
Interview: Cecil Balmond - mystery makes science art
Monita Raipaul interviews Sri Lankan born Engineer and Designer Cecil Balmond [part 1]
May 22, 2010
December 18, 2009
Studio Banana TV ::: Toyo Ito
Studio Banana TV interviews Japanese architect Toyo Ito on the occasion of his lecture at and with the sponsorship of the European University of Madrid.
September 11, 2009
August 4, 2009
Michael Graves Interview
Architechnophilia recently interviewed renowned architect and designer Michael Graves who has partnered with [yellow tail]wines. We spoke about architecture, Post Modernism, sustainability and wine.
Firstly, when did you make that initial step into product design?
For me, it started back in college. I designed every piece of furniture in my apartment. At that time, it probably wasn’t anything more than orange crates but I was proud of that work. That passion continued for me and never stopped.
Do you think architects approach product design differently than those formally trained in industrial design?
I’ve always considered myself a general practitioner. We are entering an era of specialization and I’ve always thought it was best to be well-versed in a number of areas. In the past architects designed not only the buildings but most everything in them.
Where did you find the inspiration for product design, and importantly for the wine glasses?
The inspiration usually starts when a client brings us the project. We find that most clients have a passion and excitement for their work and we feed off that. And the process goes from there.
For this new set of limited-edition [yellow tail] glasses that celebrate their wine[tails] recipe collection, we looked for inspiration to what the brand represented: fun, unpretentious – they aim to make wine accessible to all.
When the [yellow tail] people and our team sat down together, it was apparent that they had really turned the wine industry on its head. So, we had some fun with that.
The design of the glasses is based on a traditional cocktail glass but flipped on its head to showcase the fun and ‘unpretentiousness’ of a wine[tails] cocktail. Each glass is designed to provide the illusion of an inverted bottle within an individual glass shape.
Do you think as a culture we have moved into a new mode of ornamentation?
Functionality should never be lost in design. Ornamentation is important, but it should never be the sole purpose. It should fit within the functionality of sound design.
What are your thoughts on attempting to unite form & ornament in product design?
They complement each other well. We are in a minimalist society, where it’s often said that “less is more.” Well, sometimes “more is more.” So, ornament does play an important role, as long it complements the function.
Your products although ergonomic typically have a playful twist to it, can we expect the same with your proposals for Yellow Tail?
The [yellow tail] brand demands it. The brand is so playful and fun, that you can’t deliver a good design if it doesn’t capture those qualities.
The actual project assignment was to create glasses for a program they have called wine[tails] – which pretty much break the rules of wine by telling people it’s okay to mix wine with other ingredients to create flavorful cocktail drinks. It flips wine on its head, so to speak.
What is the role of sustainability in design - be it architecture or housewares?
While it has become a buzzword, sustainability for us is a "big picture" proposition. We are the stewards of our planet and we owe it to ourselves and future generations to preserve and enhance (not just sustain!) our natural resources. Our architectural practice belongs to the U.S. Green Building Council and we incorporate sustainable and energy-efficient features in our buildings as a matter of course. For example, in a planning or architecture project, we look at how to balance built and open space, what materials are used, how the air quality affects the wellness of the inhabitants, how water is recycled, and so on.
Why did post-modernism sound so good but unable to survive critical perception?
Post-modernism initially was a reaction to the abstract nature of commercial modernism that was prevalent in the middle of the 20th century, which many found alienating. I coined the phrase "figurative architecture" (and by extension "figurative design") to refer to a way of working that allowed the use of both the traditional and familiar language of forms (and color) and the lessons of modern composition to be part of our work. It was around that time that I was referred to as a post-modernist. I still think that is a valid way of thinking. However, because people associated post-modernism with particular forms and colors, it was regarded as a style rather than a way of working. Like Art Deco, I suppose. Once those forms and colors were imitated throughout commercial architecture, like the abstract commercial modernism that preceded it, it became hackneyed. Even though I've been associated with the origins of post-modernism, I don't refer to myself as a post-modernist in the stylistic sense.
Last question, red or white? Cabernet or Chardonnay? What's your preference?
How about both? I don’t know; I really do enjoy them all.
Michael Graves is designing for a limited set wine glasses to accompany [yellow tail]’s new wine-based cocktail recipes that will be auctioned in November this year.
previously
Firstly, when did you make that initial step into product design?
For me, it started back in college. I designed every piece of furniture in my apartment. At that time, it probably wasn’t anything more than orange crates but I was proud of that work. That passion continued for me and never stopped.
Do you think architects approach product design differently than those formally trained in industrial design?
I’ve always considered myself a general practitioner. We are entering an era of specialization and I’ve always thought it was best to be well-versed in a number of areas. In the past architects designed not only the buildings but most everything in them.
Where did you find the inspiration for product design, and importantly for the wine glasses?
The inspiration usually starts when a client brings us the project. We find that most clients have a passion and excitement for their work and we feed off that. And the process goes from there.
For this new set of limited-edition [yellow tail] glasses that celebrate their wine[tails] recipe collection, we looked for inspiration to what the brand represented: fun, unpretentious – they aim to make wine accessible to all.
When the [yellow tail] people and our team sat down together, it was apparent that they had really turned the wine industry on its head. So, we had some fun with that.
The design of the glasses is based on a traditional cocktail glass but flipped on its head to showcase the fun and ‘unpretentiousness’ of a wine[tails] cocktail. Each glass is designed to provide the illusion of an inverted bottle within an individual glass shape.
Do you think as a culture we have moved into a new mode of ornamentation?
Functionality should never be lost in design. Ornamentation is important, but it should never be the sole purpose. It should fit within the functionality of sound design.
What are your thoughts on attempting to unite form & ornament in product design?
They complement each other well. We are in a minimalist society, where it’s often said that “less is more.” Well, sometimes “more is more.” So, ornament does play an important role, as long it complements the function.
Your products although ergonomic typically have a playful twist to it, can we expect the same with your proposals for Yellow Tail?
The [yellow tail] brand demands it. The brand is so playful and fun, that you can’t deliver a good design if it doesn’t capture those qualities.
The actual project assignment was to create glasses for a program they have called wine[tails] – which pretty much break the rules of wine by telling people it’s okay to mix wine with other ingredients to create flavorful cocktail drinks. It flips wine on its head, so to speak.
What is the role of sustainability in design - be it architecture or housewares?
While it has become a buzzword, sustainability for us is a "big picture" proposition. We are the stewards of our planet and we owe it to ourselves and future generations to preserve and enhance (not just sustain!) our natural resources. Our architectural practice belongs to the U.S. Green Building Council and we incorporate sustainable and energy-efficient features in our buildings as a matter of course. For example, in a planning or architecture project, we look at how to balance built and open space, what materials are used, how the air quality affects the wellness of the inhabitants, how water is recycled, and so on.
Why did post-modernism sound so good but unable to survive critical perception?
Post-modernism initially was a reaction to the abstract nature of commercial modernism that was prevalent in the middle of the 20th century, which many found alienating. I coined the phrase "figurative architecture" (and by extension "figurative design") to refer to a way of working that allowed the use of both the traditional and familiar language of forms (and color) and the lessons of modern composition to be part of our work. It was around that time that I was referred to as a post-modernist. I still think that is a valid way of thinking. However, because people associated post-modernism with particular forms and colors, it was regarded as a style rather than a way of working. Like Art Deco, I suppose. Once those forms and colors were imitated throughout commercial architecture, like the abstract commercial modernism that preceded it, it became hackneyed. Even though I've been associated with the origins of post-modernism, I don't refer to myself as a post-modernist in the stylistic sense.
Last question, red or white? Cabernet or Chardonnay? What's your preference?
How about both? I don’t know; I really do enjoy them all.
Michael Graves is designing for a limited set wine glasses to accompany [yellow tail]’s new wine-based cocktail recipes that will be auctioned in November this year.
previously
March 9, 2009
Interview with Chilean architect Mathias Klotz, whose early works in the 1990s - box-like, austere buildings - were critical of the mannerisms of Post-modern architecture.
via 0300TV
Spanish with English Subtitles
November 18, 2007
nANSWERS...
Back in 2006, I had a series of email conversations with Eric Bunge, of nARCHITECTS a New York practice he runs with Mimi Hoang, for an interview series to be posted on this blog
Here goes:
mad: What motivated the start of nARCHITECTS?
Eric Bunge: We founded nARCHITECTS in 1999 in New York, and pretty much starting teaching at the same time. We had worked independently on various projects as far back as 1990, and together since 1995, moonlighting while working at other offices. Perhaps our choice of a name might reveal some of our early intentions: we chose the small letter 'n' as a sort of unstable symbol - one that can acquire any value, as with the integer in mathematics. On one level this choice is a reflection on naming itself - any name - even partners' last names - begins to acquire associations with the work. At another level we were interested in producing dynamic, flexible work - architecture that will somehow change.
mad: nARCHITECTS appears to be unconventional architectural studio, in the traditional sense, by the work you are involved with. What has allowed the practice to transcend between building, landscape, sculpture and structure?
EB: I can see how one would perceive our work in those terms - yet we don't see ourselves as artists or landscape architects - we have great respect for these disciplines, and think that beyond training and temperament, what distinguishes our work from these is our approach, methods, and ultimate goals.
We - maybe by default - see it all as architecture, or trying to approach architecture. The commissions we gravitate towards are ones that we can have built (like Switch Building), even it sometimes means building them ourselves (as with P.S.1, Windshape, and Party Wall). At this point in our career, the opportunities for building are spread across what might seem like various disciplines. But our goal is to design buildings - much of what we do is a laboratory in which we develop ideas towards that end. This is one reason we boycott ideas competitions, or steer away from projects that have a small chance of being built.
mad: Do you find creative constraints in transcending these conventional "architectural" forms?
EB: Yes. The most important step for us in every project is the definition of the design problem, which involves deciding who the Users are (what is their identity?), what the Site is (what aspects of a site do we respond to?), and ultimately therefore, what are the creative constraints.
mad: Has having such success in creating installations branded nARCHITECTS as a practice less interested in materializing traditional work, despite the desire to do so? Is this a big challege for the practice?
EB: I wonder if you could rephrase these questions, we have built what one might call traditional work, not necessarily less than our peers (~ 10 residential projects so far). The latest is a 7 storey residential + art gallery building at 109 Norfolk, almost complete. We also will be building a 100 acre streetscape project in Buffalo, now in schematic design.
mad: Mathematically, 'n' - speaks as more than an unknown but also includes the exponential increase, becoming rapidly greater in size; has nARCHITECTS sufficiently evolved to be more than a part-time effort? Is that the aim of the practice or to remain a creative outlet?
EB: not sure what you mean by " a part-time effort"; we have been a full service, full time architectural practice since 1999.
the interview ended on a sore note, and after a few missed telephone calls the conversation ceased with the exception of a congratulatory for architechnophilia being featured in the summer issue of MARK
here's another interview with nARCHITECTS
Here goes:
mad: What motivated the start of nARCHITECTS?
Eric Bunge: We founded nARCHITECTS in 1999 in New York, and pretty much starting teaching at the same time. We had worked independently on various projects as far back as 1990, and together since 1995, moonlighting while working at other offices. Perhaps our choice of a name might reveal some of our early intentions: we chose the small letter 'n' as a sort of unstable symbol - one that can acquire any value, as with the integer in mathematics. On one level this choice is a reflection on naming itself - any name - even partners' last names - begins to acquire associations with the work. At another level we were interested in producing dynamic, flexible work - architecture that will somehow change.
mad: nARCHITECTS appears to be unconventional architectural studio, in the traditional sense, by the work you are involved with. What has allowed the practice to transcend between building, landscape, sculpture and structure?
EB: I can see how one would perceive our work in those terms - yet we don't see ourselves as artists or landscape architects - we have great respect for these disciplines, and think that beyond training and temperament, what distinguishes our work from these is our approach, methods, and ultimate goals.
We - maybe by default - see it all as architecture, or trying to approach architecture. The commissions we gravitate towards are ones that we can have built (like Switch Building), even it sometimes means building them ourselves (as with P.S.1, Windshape, and Party Wall). At this point in our career, the opportunities for building are spread across what might seem like various disciplines. But our goal is to design buildings - much of what we do is a laboratory in which we develop ideas towards that end. This is one reason we boycott ideas competitions, or steer away from projects that have a small chance of being built.
mad: Do you find creative constraints in transcending these conventional "architectural" forms?
EB: Yes. The most important step for us in every project is the definition of the design problem, which involves deciding who the Users are (what is their identity?), what the Site is (what aspects of a site do we respond to?), and ultimately therefore, what are the creative constraints.
mad: Has having such success in creating installations branded nARCHITECTS as a practice less interested in materializing traditional work, despite the desire to do so? Is this a big challege for the practice?
EB: I wonder if you could rephrase these questions, we have built what one might call traditional work, not necessarily less than our peers (~ 10 residential projects so far). The latest is a 7 storey residential + art gallery building at 109 Norfolk, almost complete. We also will be building a 100 acre streetscape project in Buffalo, now in schematic design.
mad: Mathematically, 'n' - speaks as more than an unknown but also includes the exponential increase, becoming rapidly greater in size; has nARCHITECTS sufficiently evolved to be more than a part-time effort? Is that the aim of the practice or to remain a creative outlet?
EB: not sure what you mean by " a part-time effort"; we have been a full service, full time architectural practice since 1999.
the interview ended on a sore note, and after a few missed telephone calls the conversation ceased with the exception of a congratulatory for architechnophilia being featured in the summer issue of MARK
here's another interview with nARCHITECTS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
