so this is your third interview with arc
daily
after uh after three years i would say
and the binary was postponed twice
so but i see that you have a lot of
optimism still
my question for you is how do you feel
that it finally happened
i feel very moved i feel moved because
everybody worked so hard
and believed in architecture and then
the possibility of us coming together
against all odds and given all the
challenges
the fact that everybody’s here and
committed
and really interested in the dialogue
that this pianelli can
create is very moving
so i know the question is in the future
form but you always
always underline the present dimension
of it so
my question for you is how will we live
together now let me try and avoid
answering this question
because i feel like we have 115 ounces
inside
and that there should not be as i
mentioned in my previous interview with
you
a single source from which we get the
answer however
each of these answers comes with a level
of
determination that we should change
things
that they are not so far out there that
there is a level of possibility
in each of them but also that they do
that at two levels one level
is we change things but at another level
we
exercise the architectural imaginary in
order to help us think
what if how about this how about that
but not too far out that it leaves the
realm of possibility
okay so actually today you said that
the pandemic will come and go but issues
like climate change and mass migration
will not go if we don’t really tackle
these issues so
how much you think the biennial is
relevant
in actually exploring these questions
the biannual whether it’s architecture
art or the other fields
has been crucial for convening
bringing people who have been
experiencing the same issue
across the world to compare experiences
to compare
approaches and therefore it is vital for
that exchange to have a platform like
the binary
and in architecture much more than the
other fields there is no such platform
there is no such
comprehensive and inclusive platform as
venice
yeah and we notice actually that there
are a lot of like similar responses and
actually you spoke of
recurring qualities among the
interventions the pavilions etc
but knowing the fact that they come from
different backgrounds from different
contacts so
how do you actually explain this and do
you think that the world actually
has finally realized that we have common
problems and that we should face them
probably together there’s a level at
which these
responses which i’m referring to as
recurring
are very evident you know when you face
a boundary you want to get rid of it you
level
when you want to bring people together
in a manner that is equitable and
inclusive
you form a circle i don’t know if you
notice but there are a lot of circles in
this binary
these are forms of social association
that i feel are universal
even though they have different meanings
and they acquire different attributes
with time in different contexts
but it’s beautiful to see that there’s a
universal language that we can call
architecture so i noticed that there are
a lot of new representations and
also a lot of diversity and like the
backgrounds of
the people that are actually part of
this biennale do you think this is
related to the question the
exhibition is asking i think so
we cast the net very wide not because
only we wanted to be inclusive there’s
definitely that
willful need to be inclusive but also
because we were seeking innovative
answers
and guess what the innovative answers
are not coming out of
europe and the us only anymore they’re
coming out of everywhere
and that’s our hope is to show a
leveling of talent
and the possibility that many of the
problems which are
being faced in cabo verde in
angola in lagos in beirut
uh are problems that
the local architects are already
tackling and dealing with their
solutions
and coming up with billion solutions for
them so why not put those on the
same level as other problems in europe
or in north america well speaking of our
curators like
we had a chance to talk to a lot of them
and everyone actually
appraised your involvement in their
project and how much you push them
forward
so i wanted to ask you about how was the
collab after the postponement
of the biennale
how was the collaboration all and all
like with them because it was like
digital they were not here and even like
they couldn’t really build their
pavilions
i have to say that after this finale i
have 115 friends
because of this piano and i’m very
grateful for them to engage in
discussion dialogue
and also to work with each other and
that has been
one of the benefits of this extra year
so the digital aspect is super
omnipresent i would say and
do you think this is a way to enhance
the experience you were talking about
like the need to have an experience
or do you think this is more of the
future of architecture
let’s see but i feel that there is
something there you’re right
there’s something about this enhanced
experiential dimension in the way that
these
installations projects uh focus on
amplifying the sensory tactile
dimensions of architecture
there is something there and if we have
to compare the digital
actually the digital exhibition versus
the physical one because we know that a
lot of openings are going to happen
digitally and a lot of creators are not
even here
actually we had the uh an interview with
the korean curators who were not here
and we were
here so my question to you is like how
do you see this difference
at some level there’s nothing that would
replace the
bodily tactile experience but another
level
i do not see them as opposed they tend
to be complementary
sometimes one enhances the other in
unexpected ways and there are many
explorations of that nature here
and finally what would people who come
to the vienna expect
physically i don’t know what they’re
going to expect but i hope that what
they will walk out with
is a stronger belief in architecture as
being
a medium a vocation that
can make a difference thank you