Architype Dialogue presents
What was the most difficult issue about working within this project type or the most unexpected challenge that may have influenced new thought in your design?
Since its conception, the project Inner Forest, was closely joint to the surroundings that lodged it. During the development of the project I had the possibility of developing a daily confrontation with the context. The project used a natural material consisting of pine cones, the material did not have to be transported from another site but was obtained from its own context. In this way, the challenge that supposed to use these seeds directly from the site where the project locates, represents a level of mimesis with the surroundings.
Did this project expand or evolve your role as an architect or designer in any way? In general, do you feel that the role of the designer is changing on current projects?
I have never conceived of architecture as just a specialization, but as a wider vision of understanding and questioning the environment that surrounds us, in which every project can enrich itself through diverse views and disciplines. For me, every project has been a constant search—I don’t have a predetermined system or repeat a former project. In each project I want to be able to discover and experiment with new possibilities. In this way each project has a special character that opens me up to diverse possibilities for the next one. Each project is a window that opens and drives us to another.
How is your project possible today in a way that it may not have been before and how have trends in technology and society inspired new thought and solutions?
Since its conception, my project process is closely joint to the surroundings that lodged it, in which I develop a daily confrontation with the context and its local inhabitants, who collaborate actively during the process. For my the most important is that my site specific interventions are closely joint to the community, in which I involve local people, local materials, applying local techniques.
In the context of this project, how is your studio and design process being influenced by current trends in academic curricula and incoming young architects? In turn, how are current projects and processes guiding the ongoing reformulation and development of academic curricula?
Since the beginning I have tried to be sincere and congruent with what I think and make as this is always something that will be reflected in my work- In this way I have created my studio as multidisciplinary space of young architects, designers, landscape architects and artist oriented towards reflection, promotion, research and action in different fields of contemporary expression. As an open space from which springs a series of initiatives and projects focused to increase and diffuse new lines of action related to experiment and restructure contemporary´s culture.
In another hand, during the last few years, as a professor of Architectural Design and professor of Landscape and Urban Design at the University, my vision have been also expanded having a constant dialogue with new generations, understanding architecture from diverse perspectives.
I think that is very important for new generations to have the knowledge of current projects, but for me, is most important not to get only the first look or only to get the first image of a project. It is important to understand and questioning the new approaches and initiatives which set a precedent, open up cultural, social and politic aspects. To reflect about the new architectural and urban diversity highlighting and to reflect about the multiplicity of new creative solutions, in terms of constructive, social and economic. It is also important the difussion and dissemination of these experiences to generate a critical analysis of these innovative processes.
Architype Review thanks Ivan Juarez for his interview and for contributing to this collection of Architype Dialogue.