Interview by Jeffrey Inaba
Volume #3, November, 2013
Well let me start by saying that I am suspicious of an architecture that is justified by or supposedly generated by climate or climate control. A climate is inherently an air, a heat, an intensity, really the opposite of an architectural object. If you delegate architecture to being a kind of consequence of forces or flows in a particular context, you have a logical conundrum. First, you are saying that something that preceded the architectural object can justify its existence without the object having to do so through the effects that it produces. Second, you are assuming that it is possible to generate architecture out of things which are not architecture, that is, not germane to the discipline. Both of those things sound like very strange propositions to me at this point, and I know you are not yourself proposing them. I am just following the idea down the rabbit hole.