好色先生TV

Following the news of the death of Rafael Vi帽oly aged 78 here is our interview with the world renowned architect, first published in November 2007.

Rafael Vi帽oly is nothing if not provocative. In the four years since the US鈥揢ruguayan architect designed his first building in the UK, he has been embraced by British clients with almost as much enthusiasm as he has been castigated by the heritage lobby. In what seemed like a mad dash through the English regions, Vi帽oly designed the Leicester Performing Arts Centre, then the Colchester Visual Arts Centre, alongside a commission to masterplan a 10.5ha city-centre site for Oxford University. In April, these were joined by British refurbishment鈥檚 ultimate prize: the redevelopment of Battersea Power Station.

But then there are the sceptics. These prefer to talk about his 160m tower at 20 Fenchurch Street in the City, better known as the Walkie-Talkie tower. English Heritage, Unesco and others queued up earlier this year to take a pop at the tower鈥檚 organic, concave design. No less a figure than former RIBA president George Ferguson described it as a 鈥渃hild鈥檚 concept鈥� and an 鈥渦gly building鈥�. That鈥檚 got to hurt, hasn鈥檛 it?

鈥淚 don鈥檛 think it鈥檚 much rougher than what other colleagues have gone through,鈥� he says by telephone from across the Atlantic. 鈥淎nything that has the degree of impact that architecture has in general is bound to be controversial. It鈥檚 an essential part of the job.鈥�

The tower鈥檚 problems began in July 2006 when Cabe said it was too bulky. Last November, Ruth Kelly, the then communities secretary, called the tower in for a public inquiry.

鈥淭he problem is there is this extraordinary approach to considering buildings on their own without thinking about what they bring to places economically and architecturally,鈥� he says. 鈥淭here is something to be said about a theory of planning that is based on a notion of contrast.鈥�

On this level, the Walkie-Talkie鈥檚 look seems hardly more contentious than, say, Richard Rogers鈥� nearby Cheese Grater or Kohn Pedersen Fox鈥檚 Helter Skelter. And indeed, the authorities finally appeared to agree 鈥� the tower was given the green light in July.

Vi帽oly is under no illusions as to why his tower has been singled out. 鈥淭here is a degree of noise around what we do in the UK,鈥� he says. 鈥淭he press has a very high degree of involvement. The way in which the media shapes public opinion in this country is different to elsewhere. It鈥檚 subtle and brutal at the same time.鈥�

Nevertheless, he is proud of the work he is doing in the capital, which includes another tower in Victoria and a residential project in Kensington, and praises the opportunities that London presents.

鈥淭he city is enjoying this extraordinary affluence,鈥� he says. 鈥淵ou cannot disregard the importance of this moment. It鈥檚 something that won鈥檛 be repeated for many years, so we have to use it while we can.鈥�

The relationship between the client and the architect is more progressive here than elsewhere, he says. 鈥淚t is an increasingly collaborative process. Twenty or 30 years ago nobody questioned what the official client told you was the list of requirements. Now, there are more voices in the decision-making process 鈥� it鈥檚 a democratic environment. It鈥檚 a different approach to the US.鈥�

The project that Vi帽oly feels best represents this was the competition to design the World Trade Centre, which he lost in 2003. Vi帽oly鈥檚 practice was shortlisted for this most sensitive of redevelopments, but he lost out to Daniel Libeskind, who presented a masterplan with the twisting Freedom Tower as its centrepiece. It will be 1,776 ft tall, a figure that represents the year the American independence was declared.

Although Vi帽oly says competition losses do not rankle with him 鈥� 鈥渢hey always teach you something whether you win or not鈥� 鈥� it鈥檚 clear that he feels Libeskind鈥檚 design, as revamped by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, fails to do justice to the symbolism of the site. 鈥淭he site should be a public place, but the public is not represented in the design of the building. If you think that because it is 1,776 ft tall, that this is somehow a public monument, then you鈥檙e a jerk. This isn鈥檛 architecture.鈥�

The Freedom Tower sums up the way he feels some clients are now approaching projects as collectables rather than living communities. 鈥淚t should be like buying a new car,鈥� he says. 鈥淚f you have a car that looks good but doesn鈥檛 work, people just won鈥檛 buy it. 好色先生TVs have to have purpose, they have to be efficient and they have to be beautiful. But too much architecture today is one-dimensional. Clients buy the picture, and that is all. There鈥檚 too much money around.鈥�

But Vi帽oly feels that this explosion of money has had an effect on architects, too. 鈥淲hat is in question is the confusion between the 鈥榓rty鈥� approach and the full responsibility of what building is. There is a group of people working today who don鈥檛 know what that is.鈥�

He won鈥檛 spill names 鈥� 鈥測ou鈥檝e made me say too much already,鈥� he says 鈥� but he does give some more clues. 鈥淒id you ever meet a brain surgeon who has never touched a patient? No. You become a master brain surgeon when you have worked on lots of patients. It鈥檚 the same with us.鈥�

The next patient on Vi帽oly鈥檚 operating table is Battersea Power Station. The George Gilbert Scott building has long awaited a sensitive makeover, but surely redeveloping this landmark will present yet more grief with the heritage lobby. 鈥淲hat can I do?,鈥� he sighs. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 go looking for it.鈥�

Even so, Vi帽oly is sure another fight is on the horizon. 鈥淚t is very important to come up with something that merits approval but at the same time is developable,鈥� he says. 鈥淭here will be, as is usually the case, a great deal of controversy over what is the correct balance between the two things.鈥�

No doubt the heritage lobbyists will be rubbing their hands at the prospect, but Vi帽oly has a message for them. 鈥淎nyone who thinks nothing is going to change knows nothing about Darwinism,鈥� he says. 鈥淭hings will change. So the question is when, and how, they will change. By managing that, you have a chance to contribute to rather than diminish the possibilities of a place. I think that鈥檚 really a fantastic opportunity.鈥�