I loved every part of this presentation. This is the way architecture should be engaged within our lives and with every little aspect being considered. Because we're not machinery. We're human beings.
I think the point is that it is cheaper in the long run to build focusing on the emotion of users, as structures that don't consider this get demolished within a few decades.
I've seen many amazing architectural concepts for building designs in Canada. Unfortunately, developers have to deal with municipal planners who have the final say in what gets built. I've seen amazing curved high rises get redesigned into traditional rectangular structures after municipal planners had their way with the original designs before they would approve the project. Despite many of these creative designs being approved and built elsewhere in the world, somehow the municipal planners in Canada "know better".
this is entertainment, delivered with a sensitive look. these ideas must have been around for almost as long as architecture has (my first major in the 80s). TED is masonic bullshit, false advocacy. i was just here for the piccies.
I really hope that this idea catches up. Living in a fast redeveloping London, I can say that all the new buildings are soulless and dull. None of those buildings will be remembered or missed when they’re brought down. We really need buildings to inspire and excite you when you see them.
Yeah. And I really really hate that almost all modern buildings around the world look the same. Locality, climate, building materials, architectural tradition, nationality, history, traditions - all this is completely ignored by modern soulless architecture. UK, France, Austria? They all look the same, indistinguishable.
This was just inspiring to watch. I complain all the time about the depressing architecture were mostly surrounded with. This presentation is everything to me. Much respect to him. I hope to experience all of the buildings sometime.
I've been thinking about this for months and he put it into words. The zeitz MOCCA and 1000 trees blew my mind. I deeply wish we see more projects like these around us. This man is brilliant. I want to see more of him and Heatherwick studios!!
Yeah so the tricky thing is that most buildings can’t be 1000 trees or Zeits MOCAA but what I respect about him is his examples of other architects who are building more attainable projects that are good examples. One thing that I think may be lacking in his philosophy is contextual appropriateness. His buildings are all landmark buildings and as such are allowed to cut against the contextual grain. However there is a great challenge in making sure you do not create a discordant city while you seek to create delight.
@@Dev1nci The glass box thing created dicorod where ever it was built. We can cut down 1000 trees but don't have the intellect to incorporated 100? Every home or place of employment is a landmark in somones life, how can they think outside of a box when their whole life is spent inside them? After the last square was plopped down, I began to include architecture as one of the greatest cons of last century.
@@rosevan7845 Yeah the era of the glass box needs to stop. However buildings need to sit comfortably with each other. To illustrate: look at any of the big old cities in Europe and Japan. They are simple structures that are pleasing to look at and interact in a way that turns the city into a composition. It's good to have buildings like 1000 trees (Zeits MOCAA is in my city and it's my favourite building) however these should be public, high order buildings meant for everyone. But the office block next door can't be like that for 2 reason- it's too expensive and it should not fight for attention from the main public building in a area. That said, the question arises- what should the office building be like so that it has character but does not try outdo it's neighbours rather fits in comfortably and is not prohibitively expensive? Just as an aside putting 1000 trees on your building is a bit of a gimmick because architects need to work closely with urban and landscape planners. In such a situation the building would be efficient and inspirational and the landscape would house many trees comfortably and sustainably. Great to see you are thinking critically about architecture! :)
We are more capable than any generation to make buildings beautiful and interesting. It's inexcusable that we build bland boxes. I'm grateful to see an architect like Heatherwick preaching the gospel of inspiring architecture and designing buildings that are visually interesting.
I am an architect (coeval of the speaker) wholly agrees with his call! I design completely individual residences and not large buildings for this very reason. Developers don't want to build for people, they want to build for business.
the problem is building for people is more expensive, people don't want to pay the extra for designers, yet. It's if there is not a cheaper way to build for people, people will always choose the cheaper project.
@@coreywong What you mean is human centric buildings are only allowed for the rich. You don't know how many people would pay for the beautiful option until you can offer it. People are known to pay outrageous prices for junk just because its popular, hence the stupid ugly buildings we have been conditioned to think are the only affordable option. Not so, they are the option that py Head mentioned.
That was amazing, they are amazing! I recently visited a nursing home and was in shock how depressing it was…. Let art and inspiration save us. I would rather die than be cooped up in a nursing home.
I started listening to this on spotify but i got so much fomo from not being able to see the buildings. and WOW I fully support this movement, I hope the architects of the world see this
“Form ever follows function.” That was Louis Sullivan. I think that people who take this to mean “build boring boxes” has probably never seen a Louis Sullivan building. I am fortunate in that my hometown has one. It may be basically box shaped (lots of buildings are-even old, beautiful ones) but it is *not* boring. It’s totally fine to cover a boxy building with decoration! Sullivan was a pioneer of steel frame buildings that can be built as tall as you need and can be covered in whatever you want. That “whatever” does *not* need to always be “huge panes of glass.” It can be brick or terra cotta or stone or anything really. Pick something that works well in the local climate, and doesn’t clash horribly with the surroundings.
I think the main thing he tried to adress here, is buildings looking 2-dimensional ; most boring buildings are so, because they are just a collection of 2D large planes, and the bigger the planes, the more boring the building is. Cladding or ornamentation have little importance, it still makes a building boring. Thus, good buildings would be made of bite-sized blocks
Yeah Mies van der Rohe misappropriated it which is why we think of the term as we do today. (I like Mies but we can't only have Miesian buildings in our cities).
I like how he talked about monotonous building that is devoid of character and unable to connect us, of which the ‘function of emotions’ are important in the creation of architecture . ‘Emotions’ indeed add values to the city and the people. Although I do love his works but I disagree with his examples of architectural diversity. To me, human instinctively love the old architecture, not just because it is rich in details and texture, it is the human activities that make the huge difference, as what is written in Jan Gehl’s Life Between Buildings. Walking through a tiny street with buildings laid in old bricks and mortar is only interesting when it is teeming with activities, as compared to characterless cities designed for automobile. It is also the buildings scale designed harmoniously with its urban environment that makes it appealing. Imagine if they entire township is covered with sculptural ‘interesting’ architecture like that of his example, the whole city will be in a visually chaotic state.
>Imagine if they entire township is covered with sculptural ‘interesting’ architecture like that of his example, the whole city will be in a visually chaotic state. The problem is that cities should not be too big. Megacities only cause permanent traffic jams and they always lack trees and nature.
Very true... The Bauhaus principle of industrial architecture often made those buildings boring. It might be practical, but it's not really fun to live or work in such a house. Buildings need individuality.
Buildings should add to the built environment, but I fear that a focus on looking nice or neat design will miss out on both sustainable (a lot of the buildings shown had a ton of surface area, which makes interiors expensive to heat and cool ... if not expensive in operation, using conventional methods, expensive in construction, as specialized components or construction techniques are not standard and not standard is expensive) ... and affordable opportunities (where people can live in comfort and dignity at a rate that can be afford by not just the median income earner, but the widest possible income; we've been having an ongoing housing affordability situation here in Canada and developers aren't going to soften their hearts to cut their profits to make buildings nicer for people).
Hi David, I agree with you on the sustainability approach, but there exists a Swedish system that supports extension of the life of buildings. It also reduces the electricity consumption between 30% - 40%, reduction of capital cost of buildings by 3% to 6%, reduction of air-conditioning running costs by 40% to 60% and reduction of overall air-conditioning maintenance up to 80%! Best if you do your own study on this system - it goes under the name of 'TermoDeck'. BTW - I'm an architect and have an interest in having developers in the U.A.E. adopt this technology (it's not a product) since they are still using the old traditional methods of concrete construction here! TermoDeck is best implemented with the time-proven system of hollow-core concrete floor slabs.
I agree in principle with everything he said, however, getting a commission for a few hero projects is one thing. Doing it at scale and with the meagre budgets of most clients is entirely another. I would have liked to have heard more about how he proposed to do this.
Loved the presentation! The buildings shown are definitely not boring, but honestly I'd prefer to take more inspiration from traditional urbanism and design. You don't have to copy historical styles, but the proportions and levels of scale of detail in old buildings make them such a good compromise between being claiming and interesting, and it's something that could be capitalized on a lot more in new architecture, which tends to take on wacky and outlandish shapes. There are some good recent examples of this though so I hope it's a growing trend!
My favorite part of every architecture-centric talk is that they’re always “they suck, but my gods they don’t have to”. And I like it because it’s true.
And the come back to it is always the same, "but but but money" If we haven't learned by now that profit as primary motive always produces souless, boring and damaged goods when will we?
The grain silo conversion is one of my favourite buildings and it's in my own city. I remember exploring in that area when I was younger and I think they did the best possible thing with the site. In a South African context it had a giant budget though XD
This is a great talk on humanizing architecture! Somehow our older generations knew better. I've witnessed the death of my city because of the materials used and the ways the buildings were designed. It has left me with disconnection, a void and deep sadness. I find comfort in a hut made of straws rather than a perfectly built concrete house. We cannot isolate ourselves from nature. We are nature and 'green' will always be a subconscious favorite and healing color of every human. I completely agree with you about hospitals. People would heal better or even die peacefully being connected to the world around them. Thanks Thomas.
People not involved in design don't even consider if a building is boring or not. They just want the maximum square footage for the least cost. The idea of "exciting" or uplifting architecture is really for a very small audience.
the speaker's name sounded familiar, there was a museum show about his architecture group I saw some years ago at the Hammer Museum (Los Angeles). it was quite a delightful show and I'm glad to get to hear his thoughts and voice.
Sir Thomas ideas are worth sharing and to be part of it as a movement to grow human touch building designs, these never goes old. Great presentation and truly an inspiration to us young designers. Hope to collaborate with him,great man with great heart
Wonderful presentation. We build things to make our life happier. Funtional buildings bring us convenience, but now this needs to change. We need more than just convenience, we need emotional connection, natural harmony and cost efficiency. Thank you for your courage and dedication. Hope to see more splendid buildings
No, because the Buildings shown, and having watched some other "Artists" works, its just the same, boring looking Buildings. The idea may be nice, but to think you can put the majority of People into one Box, and think they will all have a similar emotional connection to Stuff they despise is a bit silly. The only once who really get a emotional connection is the Artist and the supporting part of the Art Community. But dosent need to do the same thing to the People living around it.
Interesting study.. I love the last buiding presented with the tress on column. Living in Dubai for a long while now, buildings and skyscrapers here just sprout up like mushrooms. Some really boring and lacking character , but some are really extravagant, beautiful and timeless. A number of them exceptionally humanized. I agree with the idea creating unique "not-boring" structures but context is a major thing to consider lest we create unique eyesores.
Buildings also are built with programmed obsolescence. The building industry fuels the economy and also the builders secure themselves their future jobs.
I love some of the new buildings in Asia that incorporate a fluid design or is influenced by nature and includes nature 🤌🏼, the ones that take it a step further by working with nature are the best. I didn’t know countries de-constructed buildings that much!! 😲 That university! Ohmygosh! 💜 stunning!
This is the revolution Postmodernism was supposed to bring had it any substance. It talked itself out of anything that might have made it worthwhile. Bravo Thomas Heatherwick!! All power to you and your teams.
The modern world is in compliance to standardization of building methods and materials because of the PRACTICALITY and COST-EFFECTIVENESS of modularity and standard sizes and applications. Business owners want minimum investment as possible, they don't care so much for the uniqueness of a building so much as they do for their profit. Not many are willing to fund for "EMOTION". I do agree in giving buildings their own life and emotion, but to EXECUTE such intricate designs would require a custom method of construction, you would have to be more willing to explore and to risk as well, It's all mostly an initiative and intention of the CLIENT, ARCHITECTS are always ready to explore their creativity and execute and realize them beyond the paper drawings.
it's indeed somehow sad and revealing that all that we have built around ourselves as extension of our own bodies does not reflect on some of it's most important legacy. the state of architecture, and not only the buildings in themselves bit how we have connected them between each other, speaks to our failings in the old "art of life", and it is telling of our lack of awarness toward nature, it's seamless and evident shapeshifting beauty and harmony. we are surrounded by our mistakes and it can be difficult to look at, but we will get there eventually. this guy's work is inspiring and more but words are running out now.
Very good diagnosis of the problem and approaches needed. Shame traditional architecture wasn't mentioned - there is so much relevant knowledge and wisdom that has been gathered over millennia!
I‘d like to add that human sized streets and walkability are as important as building design. Just look at any new car-light neighbourhoods in the Netherlands.
They do focus in time and cost where these buildings aren't usually mass producable like tile and concrete. Could sell the longer linespan as the potential investment but usually a hard sell to politicians. Also would be a bit harder to regulate ensuring their up to code. Some of the designs need to be proven for safety.
Please come to Toronto and change the way our hospitals look! The one in the UK you showed is amazing. That must be better for both patients and health care workers.
I hope developers, politicians, accountants will understand eventually what is said here and allow architects to do architecture. At the moment the word is used by IT profession and most of public have no idea what architect's profession is about.
Antoni Gaudi was pushing the limits of possibility 100 years ago. I’ve only been to Barcelona once, over 10 years ago, for just one weekend, and it changed my life. He left an indelible mark all over that city, and I can’t recommend it highly enough to visit it. Nothing boring about Barcelona 👌🏽
I am thinking about this for my entire life. Dehumanizing architecture and technology have brought all suffering in modern life. We are better off and creating a lot of wealth but the quality of life is going down . Thanks for proposing a solution . I will definitely join this movement if I can a chnace
Same! I intensely feel the boring architecture, like knives in the heart, like vampires of the soul.... Whereas, walking through tiny old streets in Europe, with the quirky, even often times crumbling architecture that was built in the last few hundred years, prior to the post modern brutalism movement.... Fill my heart and soul, and leave a feeling of excitement, curiosity and gratitude.
Colour not just shape. How do people dress ,the colder the climate the more muted the tones, you go to the tropics you get bright tones. Same goes for old buildings. We seem to go with what we are used to, what is around us,, how the vegetation, landscapes, fruits look like, what we are comfortable with. Modern buildings tend to be radically different and they might be pretty today but will they be pretty in 1000 years form now? They are not timeless and maybe it's not just the shape but the colours too. We need to keep the vibe a person is comfortable with or to improve it - adjusting it is risky and won't work for everyone. There are young people though that are uncomfortable when in nature so maybe they need the flat gray concrete and glass nonsense. Maybe the bigger mistake is the focus on shape instead of colour and texture.
Frank Lloyd Wright rejected the Bauhaus idea, and managed to make beautiful and interesting homes, churches, office and public buildings, that still largely managed to be functional, and fit the landscape they sat on. The 'glass and steel boys' are boring and soulless; there's nothing 'human' about them. Add in the temporary results of these buildings, and we have one, hot, mess. There is a reason so many old, even ancient, buildings are prized - they represented form in a way that is timeless, or at least, spoke to the generations that built them. As for many old commercial or residential buildings; repurposing them is so much more sensible than simply tearing them down, just to then put something very similar right back up. I find what this gentleman and his assoc. are doing is fascinating. :)
References to the genius Frank have already set the teeth on edge and he is perceived as "the past", but this only exacerbates the approach of developers in the present. They consider themselves outside of this process. This architect shows "today" and that human architecture does not contradict development as a business.
"Form follows function" Isn't supposed to mean that form will automatically spring forth once function is met. It's supposed to mean that form should be secondary to function, so that function isn't impeded by form.
No you are wrong if you watch the documentary of Louis Sullivan on TH-cam, he never said to get rid of ornaments or beauty he just wanted a style for America when early cities were starting to be developed, I truly get angry when people don't follow the original idea instead they understand the revolutionist idea that today's people are saying and instead change the true definition of that term and corrupt with their ideas like most architects are saying it now.
The problem lies in changing the way developers approach their projects as most of the time (with perhaps the exception of their own houses) the driving factor is maximum profit. If that doesn’t change then buildings won’t change and we will continue to see the proliferation of cheap paneltecture. We have to live in or with these things too long for greedy profiteering cheapskates to dictate the final outcome. I do not think that boring is bad, its quality and variety that is important. Too many Primark quality buildings going up being sold at Prada prices.
He is still afraid of ornament and he is still afraid of beauty inspired by the past. I'm not saying we should copy old buildings and styles, but we limit our freedom if certain shapes are forbidden because they were loved in the past.
so true! and maybe the problem with the lack of ornament is, that the architects like him think that the beauty has to come from the structure itself which makes some interesting buildings but some ugly cities because every building HAS to be different.
What is considered ornament? The fluting on a column? A Caryatid? The gargoyles on the Notre Dame? The Mayans and Aztecs ornamented with statues, but they also used the difference in masonry units to ornament their Pyramids. The columns of his tree project had fluting, is that not ornament? The painting? The etching of the prefabricated pieces for his educational center? Ornament doesn't have to be a stain glass Lantern on a domed cathedral, it can and oftentimes has historically been the small things. San Carlo alle Quattro fontane is a beautiful structure, but so too is La Padrera, despite its lack of blatant ornamentation. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Great ideas and great projects. My favorite was the South African grain silo turned art museum--it was so unexpected and imaginative. I also love that the project worked by remodeling an existing structure. I would love to see something like this applied to housing for everyday people. Watching HGTV, you see people always frustrated that the three things they are looking for in a home are never available in a single structure. At first I thought the house buyers had unrealistic expectations of what the market could deliver. And then I thought, a home is the most expensive, most important purchase most people will make. Why should they be expected to settle for the 3 bedroom 2 and a half bath standard American box? Why can't factory-made, sustainably sourced, highly customizable homes be available for the general public?
Look at the Empire State Building and you are in awe and inspired. Look at the new “Freedom” tower and your head immediately turns back to look at the Empire State Building.
REALLY GOOD TALK! Amazing work and I think it is very necessary that we make our living and therefore working spaces enjoyable and natural, especially for when our cities begin to slow in growth with accumulated risk for human and wildlife health.
Architecture designed for the community and interaction…. Is what we NEED.. we have needed that long before this pandemic’s isolation. spaces to address needs, and to address intentions. 💚💚💚
Most developers are looking at profitability and how quickly they gain back the capital, they have spent on building it, especially for commercial projects, which in most cities are dominated by such buildings.
I love your work, Thomas Heatherwick, and you are so right : so many new buildings are souless and boring ... as your daughter said: 'meh'. Let's bring back biodiversity and architectural diversity, and make this planet a nicer, healthier place to be :)
Reminds me of the Burberry building in Chicago. I genuinely got emotional the first time I saw it because it was so beautiful. I think Chicago does a good job of trying not to have 100% boring buildings
Form = function means that only the function matters. It trains you in obedient capitalism. Personality isn’t called for; only function matters. The de-humanization of the environment, which teaches us to neglect caring, humanity, and personality.
Idk man, in my opinion as poor guy from a third world country, everytime I see those "soulless" supertall buildings, I'm in awe and it felt like I'm seeing the future in front of me. Somehow, it gave me a new perspective of how big really the world is and how far we've come as a species, defying nature with those perfectly straight lines and shiny surfaces. I don't think they're soulless really, it's just provoke us that unnatural feeling, the syntheticness of humanity and how we go against the nature. For me, I really find it beautiful, maybe one day if I see them enough, I'll start to find them boring and monotonous the same way you all look at them. But right now, I love seeing those buildings than those traditional ones made from stones with lots of "decorations".
Really appreciate your take. I think there's a lot of different ways urban areas can be appreciated.. Tall, glass structures also can be beautiful and awe-inspiring. I felt that way walking around Hong Kong for the first time. Buildings are vast, but on ground level there's still green and it feels almost cosy, but at the same time a technical marvel. The places that truly are ugly and stressful are common, where there's only bare and monotonous architecture everywhere, and not enough trees. I think integrating as much green as we can goes a long way to make cities more relaxing and interesting.
Fascinated by his work, however, I just discovered that the Vessel sculpture in the Hudson Yards in NYC was created by his studio. Sadly, it became an attraction to 4 people committing suicide by jumping off from this beautiful sculpture.
Character is definitely needed in order to address the constant cycle of rebuild after rebuild, my only worry is how do you combat the need for affordable housing with engaging and exciting design?
In Vienna, social housing is dominating the real estate sector which is publicly funded and rented out by the government to the citizens permanently and the social homes are diverse in forms and affordable in rent for the majority.
just don't make them ugly? is it that hard to make something that isn't ugly? it doesn't need to look like the fanciest building ever just make it look cute.
Wow. You can feel his intense passion for this. I like all the buildings mentioned here, except the hospital one. Now the hospital management has to hire quite a number of gardeners to care for the 17000 plants and the 23000 bulbs can be quite power-consuming. The cost involved to maintain the facility would go into the medical bills.
Turn it about: function should inform form. For years I have wondered if deeply anchored dome shaped buildings would be able to withstand hurricane force winds. The recent devastation in Florida by hurricane Ian demonstrates the failure of flat surfaced angular construction to withstand high winds. A smooth surface without angles seems much more likely to survive the onslaught of high winds in hurricane-prone locations. I envision a dome shape with possible moving parts to be raised in fair weather and lowered in high wind situations. Perhaps even made flood proof from high water situations.
the reason behind soullessness is missing. in previous decades, there were less concentration on public buildings, architects used to spend years on a large public building. now we have better technology, bigger budget but a lot less time. hence many potentially diversive projects failed, mechanical & commercial approach is safer (which is also killing the soul).
When imagining the future in since-fiction we tend to think of a technological glut, geometrical, simply neutral, colorless cities. I finally discovered the other outcome, hopefully the true one for us P.S. instantly fell in love with those masterpieces, keep going 😍
I loved every part of this presentation. This is the way architecture should be engaged within our lives and with every little aspect being considered. Because we're not machinery. We're human beings.
Just that this will not last. More Humans = You need to build different.
all these make sense when you can afford the price of unique design and way of construction.
I think the point is that it is cheaper in the long run to build focusing on the emotion of users, as structures that don't consider this get demolished within a few decades.
I've seen many amazing architectural concepts for building designs in Canada. Unfortunately, developers have to deal with municipal planners who have the final say in what gets built. I've seen amazing curved high rises get redesigned into traditional rectangular structures after municipal planners had their way with the original designs before they would approve the project. Despite many of these creative designs being approved and built elsewhere in the world, somehow the municipal planners in Canada "know better".
this is entertainment, delivered with a sensitive look. these ideas must have been around for almost as long as architecture has (my first major in the 80s). TED is masonic bullshit, false advocacy. i was just here for the piccies.
I studied in a 18th century building and it was always a pleasure to go to school and sat just anywhere and enjoyed what I saw.
I really hope that this idea catches up. Living in a fast redeveloping London, I can say that all the new buildings are soulless and dull. None of those buildings will be remembered or missed when they’re brought down. We really need buildings to inspire and excite you when you see them.
Yeah. And I really really hate that almost all modern buildings around the world look the same. Locality, climate, building materials, architectural tradition, nationality, history, traditions - all this is completely ignored by modern soulless architecture. UK, France, Austria? They all look the same, indistinguishable.
This was just inspiring to watch. I complain all the time about the depressing architecture were mostly surrounded with. This presentation is everything to me. Much respect to him. I hope to experience all of the buildings sometime.
I've been thinking about this for months and he put it into words. The zeitz MOCCA and 1000 trees blew my mind. I deeply wish we see more projects like these around us. This man is brilliant. I want to see more of him and Heatherwick studios!!
Yeah so the tricky thing is that most buildings can’t be 1000 trees or Zeits MOCAA but what I respect about him is his examples of other architects who are building more attainable projects that are good examples.
One thing that I think may be lacking in his philosophy is contextual appropriateness. His buildings are all landmark buildings and as such are allowed to cut against the contextual grain. However there is a great challenge in making sure you do not create a discordant city while you seek to create delight.
@@Dev1nci The glass box thing created dicorod where ever it was built. We can cut down 1000 trees but don't have the intellect to incorporated 100?
Every home or place of employment is a landmark in somones life, how can they think outside of a box when their whole life is spent inside them?
After the last square was plopped down, I began to include architecture as one of the greatest cons of last century.
@@rosevan7845 Yeah the era of the glass box needs to stop. However buildings need to sit comfortably with each other. To illustrate: look at any of the big old cities in Europe and Japan. They are simple structures that are pleasing to look at and interact in a way that turns the city into a composition.
It's good to have buildings like 1000 trees (Zeits MOCAA is in my city and it's my favourite building) however these should be public, high order buildings meant for everyone. But the office block next door can't be like that for 2 reason- it's too expensive and it should not fight for attention from the main public building in a area. That said, the question arises- what should the office building be like so that it has character but does not try outdo it's neighbours rather fits in comfortably and is not prohibitively expensive?
Just as an aside putting 1000 trees on your building is a bit of a gimmick because architects need to work closely with urban and landscape planners. In such a situation the building would be efficient and inspirational and the landscape would house many trees comfortably and sustainably.
Great to see you are thinking critically about architecture! :)
We are more capable than any generation to make buildings beautiful and interesting. It's inexcusable that we build bland boxes. I'm grateful to see an architect like Heatherwick preaching the gospel of inspiring architecture and designing buildings that are visually interesting.
I am an architect (coeval of the speaker) wholly agrees with his call! I design completely individual residences and not large buildings for this very reason. Developers don't want to build for people, they want to build for business.
Developers want to build for profit - money!
the problem is building for people is more expensive, people don't want to pay the extra for designers, yet. It's if there is not a cheaper way to build for people, people will always choose the cheaper project.
@@coreywong >if there is not a cheaper way to build for people
AI architects processing...
@@coreywong What you mean is human centric buildings are only allowed for the rich. You don't know how many people would pay for the beautiful option until you can offer it. People are known to pay outrageous prices for junk just because its popular, hence the stupid ugly buildings we have been conditioned to think are the only affordable option. Not so, they are the option that py Head mentioned.
That was amazing, they are amazing!
I recently visited a nursing home and was in shock how depressing it was…. Let art and inspiration save us. I would rather die than be cooped up in a nursing home.
That's what the admin wants. Turnover of dying clients. Make a place so ugly, you want to die.
I started listening to this on spotify but i got so much fomo from not being able to see the buildings. and WOW I fully support this movement, I hope the architects of the world see this
Same to me!!
Me too xd
The architects of the world dream of doing this, but the companies that have to pay them dream of a more streamlined and economic approach
“Form ever follows function.” That was Louis Sullivan. I think that people who take this to mean “build boring boxes” has probably never seen a Louis Sullivan building. I am fortunate in that my hometown has one. It may be basically box shaped (lots of buildings are-even old, beautiful ones) but it is *not* boring. It’s totally fine to cover a boxy building with decoration! Sullivan was a pioneer of steel frame buildings that can be built as tall as you need and can be covered in whatever you want. That “whatever” does *not* need to always be “huge panes of glass.” It can be brick or terra cotta or stone or anything really. Pick something that works well in the local climate, and doesn’t clash horribly with the surroundings.
I think the main thing he tried to adress here, is buildings looking 2-dimensional ; most boring buildings are so, because they are just a collection of 2D large planes, and the bigger the planes, the more boring the building is. Cladding or ornamentation have little importance, it still makes a building boring. Thus, good buildings would be made of bite-sized blocks
Yeah Mies van der Rohe misappropriated it which is why we think of the term as we do today. (I like Mies but we can't only have Miesian buildings in our cities).
I like how he talked about monotonous building that is devoid of character and unable to connect us, of which the ‘function of emotions’ are important in the creation of architecture . ‘Emotions’ indeed add values to the city and the people. Although I do love his works but I disagree with his examples of architectural diversity. To me, human instinctively love the old architecture, not just because it is rich in details and texture, it is the human activities that make the huge difference, as what is written in Jan Gehl’s Life Between Buildings. Walking through a tiny street with buildings laid in old bricks and mortar is only interesting when it is teeming with activities, as compared to characterless cities designed for automobile. It is also the buildings scale designed harmoniously with its urban environment that makes it appealing. Imagine if they entire township is covered with sculptural ‘interesting’ architecture like that of his example, the whole city will be in a visually chaotic state.
>Imagine if they entire township is covered with sculptural ‘interesting’ architecture like that of his example, the whole city will be in a visually chaotic state.
The problem is that cities should not be too big. Megacities only cause permanent traffic jams and they always lack trees and nature.
OMG, THIS IS BRILLIANT, HE IS BRILLIANT!!!! thank you for sharing!
Very true... The Bauhaus principle of industrial architecture often made those buildings boring. It might be practical, but it's not really fun to live or work in such a house. Buildings need individuality.
Love Thomas’ passion and sense of purpose. Clear and honest. His delivery would have been possible if he truly believed in his cause.
Buildings should add to the built environment, but I fear that a focus on looking nice or neat design will miss out on both sustainable (a lot of the buildings shown had a ton of surface area, which makes interiors expensive to heat and cool ... if not expensive in operation, using conventional methods, expensive in construction, as specialized components or construction techniques are not standard and not standard is expensive) ... and affordable opportunities (where people can live in comfort and dignity at a rate that can be afford by not just the median income earner, but the widest possible income; we've been having an ongoing housing affordability situation here in Canada and developers aren't going to soften their hearts to cut their profits to make buildings nicer for people).
Hi David,
I agree with you on the sustainability approach, but there exists a Swedish system that supports extension of the life of buildings. It also reduces the electricity consumption between 30% - 40%, reduction of capital cost of buildings by 3% to 6%, reduction of air-conditioning running costs by 40% to 60% and reduction of overall air-conditioning maintenance up to 80%!
Best if you do your own study on this system - it goes under the name of 'TermoDeck'.
BTW - I'm an architect and have an interest in having developers in the U.A.E. adopt this technology (it's not a product) since they are still using the old traditional methods of concrete construction here! TermoDeck is best implemented with the time-proven system of hollow-core concrete floor slabs.
This man's vibe feels like a warm hug.
this is one of the most inspiring Ted Talks I ever watched.. thank you Thomas Heatherwick!! you give us hope!
I agree in principle with everything he said, however, getting a commission for a few hero projects is one thing. Doing it at scale and with the meagre budgets of most clients is entirely another. I would have liked to have heard more about how he proposed to do this.
same
Loved the presentation! The buildings shown are definitely not boring, but honestly I'd prefer to take more inspiration from traditional urbanism and design. You don't have to copy historical styles, but the proportions and levels of scale of detail in old buildings make them such a good compromise between being claiming and interesting, and it's something that could be capitalized on a lot more in new architecture, which tends to take on wacky and outlandish shapes. There are some good recent examples of this though so I hope it's a growing trend!
My favorite part of every architecture-centric talk is that they’re always “they suck, but my gods they don’t have to”.
And I like it because it’s true.
And the come back to it is always the same, "but but but money" If we haven't learned by now that profit as primary motive always produces souless, boring and damaged goods when will we?
he is so original. this talk touched me. blessings
The grain silo conversion is one of my favourite buildings and it's in my own city. I remember exploring in that area when I was younger and I think they did the best possible thing with the site. In a South African context it had a giant budget though XD
This is a great talk on humanizing architecture! Somehow our older generations knew better.
I've witnessed the death of my city because of the materials used and the ways the buildings were designed. It has left me with disconnection, a void and deep sadness.
I find comfort in a hut made of straws rather than a perfectly built concrete house. We cannot isolate ourselves from nature. We are nature and
'green' will always be a subconscious favorite and healing color of every human.
I completely agree with you about hospitals. People would heal better or even die peacefully being connected to the world around them.
Thanks Thomas.
People not involved in design don't even consider if a building is boring or not. They just want the maximum square footage for the least cost. The idea of "exciting" or uplifting architecture is really for a very small audience.
Everybody clapping for the mais silo, while it's actually a photo of the old silo, got me good :D "you haven't seen it yet" :D
the speaker's name sounded familiar, there was a museum show about his architecture group I saw some years ago at the Hammer Museum (Los Angeles). it was quite a delightful show and I'm glad to get to hear his thoughts and voice.
Wow this is an eye opener. Really buildings help our mental health
Sir Thomas ideas are worth sharing and to be part of it as a movement to grow human touch building designs, these never goes old. Great presentation and truly an inspiration to us young designers. Hope to collaborate with him,great man with great heart
Wonderful presentation. We build things to make our life happier. Funtional buildings bring us convenience, but now this needs to change. We need more than just convenience, we need emotional connection, natural harmony and cost efficiency. Thank you for your courage and dedication. Hope to see more splendid buildings
No, because the Buildings shown, and having watched some other "Artists" works, its just the same, boring looking Buildings. The idea may be nice, but to think you can put the majority of People into one Box, and think they will all have a similar emotional connection to Stuff they despise is a bit silly.
The only once who really get a emotional connection is the Artist and the supporting part of the Art Community. But dosent need to do the same thing to the People living around it.
Completely agree: Bad architecture harms my eyes, my mind, and my mental health. Absolutely true!
This figure is a global treasure.
Interesting study.. I love the last buiding presented with the tress on column. Living in Dubai for a long while now, buildings and skyscrapers here just sprout up like mushrooms. Some really boring and lacking character , but some are really extravagant, beautiful and timeless. A number of them exceptionally humanized. I agree with the idea creating unique "not-boring" structures but context is a major thing to consider lest we create unique eyesores.
I've never been a fan of boring Architecture. I love all of these buildings!
man i have always wanted to work for him, and even more now!!! so true and inspirational
One of the best TED X talks eveeeeeeerrrrrrr!!
Buildings also are built with programmed obsolescence. The building industry fuels the economy and also the builders secure themselves their future jobs.
I love some of the new buildings in Asia that incorporate a fluid design or is influenced by nature and includes nature 🤌🏼, the ones that take it a step further by working with nature are the best.
I didn’t know countries de-constructed buildings that much!! 😲
That university! Ohmygosh! 💜 stunning!
This is the revolution Postmodernism was supposed to bring had it any substance. It talked itself out of anything that might have made it worthwhile. Bravo Thomas Heatherwick!! All power to you and your teams.
The modern world is in compliance to standardization of building methods and materials because of the PRACTICALITY and COST-EFFECTIVENESS of modularity and standard sizes and applications. Business owners want minimum investment as possible, they don't care so much for the uniqueness of a building so much as they do for their profit. Not many are willing to fund for "EMOTION". I do agree in giving buildings their own life and emotion, but to EXECUTE such intricate designs would require a custom method of construction, you would have to be more willing to explore and to risk as well, It's all mostly an initiative and intention of the CLIENT, ARCHITECTS are always ready to explore their creativity and execute and realize them beyond the paper drawings.
So glad this being talked about. I’m sick of ‘Modern.’ We are humans not robots!
it's indeed somehow sad and revealing that all that we have built around ourselves as extension of our own bodies does not reflect on some of it's most important legacy. the state of architecture, and not only the buildings in themselves bit how we have connected them between each other, speaks to our failings in the old "art of life", and it is telling of our lack of awarness toward nature, it's seamless and evident shapeshifting beauty and harmony. we are surrounded by our mistakes and it can be difficult to look at, but we will get there eventually. this guy's work is inspiring and more but words are running out now.
Very good diagnosis of the problem and approaches needed. Shame traditional architecture wasn't mentioned - there is so much relevant knowledge and wisdom that has been gathered over millennia!
I‘d like to add that human sized streets and walkability are as important as building design. Just look at any new car-light neighbourhoods in the Netherlands.
They do focus in time and cost where these buildings aren't usually mass producable like tile and concrete. Could sell the longer linespan as the potential investment but usually a hard sell to politicians. Also would be a bit harder to regulate ensuring their up to code. Some of the designs need to be proven for safety.
One of my favourite ted talks! Very inspiring and thought-provoking 🖤
That's was a great speech 💚. I can somehow understand a true essence of Architecture Diversity 😌. Thank you👏
Please come to Toronto and change the way our hospitals look! The one in the UK you showed is amazing. That must be better for both patients and health care workers.
I hope developers, politicians, accountants will understand eventually what is said here and allow architects to do architecture. At the moment the word is used by IT profession and most of public have no idea what architect's profession is about.
The building "De Rotterdam" in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, springs to mind.
Antoni Gaudi was pushing the limits of possibility 100 years ago. I’ve only been to Barcelona once, over 10 years ago, for just one weekend, and it changed my life. He left an indelible mark all over that city, and I can’t recommend it highly enough to visit it. Nothing boring about Barcelona 👌🏽
Interesting and beautiful designs. He really has put his buildings where his words are. Nice.
FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT in the spirit/style that MUST move forward in the ways of FENG SHUI!..... STAY THE COURSE!!! WE WILL JOIN YOU!!!
.....
Thank you so much for the very true and necessary words.
I am thinking about this for my entire life. Dehumanizing architecture and technology have brought all suffering in modern life. We are better off and creating a lot of wealth but the quality of life is going down . Thanks for proposing a solution . I will definitely join this movement if I can a chnace
Same! I intensely feel the boring architecture, like knives in the heart, like vampires of the soul.... Whereas, walking through tiny old streets in Europe, with the quirky, even often times crumbling architecture that was built in the last few hundred years, prior to the post modern brutalism movement.... Fill my heart and soul, and leave a feeling of excitement, curiosity and gratitude.
Colour not just shape. How do people dress ,the colder the climate the more muted the tones, you go to the tropics you get bright tones. Same goes for old buildings.
We seem to go with what we are used to, what is around us,, how the vegetation, landscapes, fruits look like, what we are comfortable with. Modern buildings tend to be radically different and they might be pretty today but will they be pretty in 1000 years form now? They are not timeless and maybe it's not just the shape but the colours too. We need to keep the vibe a person is comfortable with or to improve it - adjusting it is risky and won't work for everyone.
There are young people though that are uncomfortable when in nature so maybe they need the flat gray concrete and glass nonsense.
Maybe the bigger mistake is the focus on shape instead of colour and texture.
Frank Lloyd Wright rejected the Bauhaus idea, and managed to make beautiful and interesting homes, churches, office and public buildings, that still largely managed to be functional, and fit the landscape they sat on. The 'glass and steel boys' are boring and soulless; there's nothing 'human' about them. Add in the temporary results of these buildings, and we have one, hot, mess. There is a reason so many old, even ancient, buildings are prized - they represented form in a way that is timeless, or at least, spoke to the generations that built them. As for many old commercial or residential buildings; repurposing them is so much more sensible than simply tearing them down, just to then put something very similar right back up. I find what this gentleman and his assoc. are doing is fascinating. :)
References to the genius Frank have already set the teeth on edge and he is perceived as "the past", but this only exacerbates the approach of developers in the present. They consider themselves outside of this process. This architect shows "today" and that human architecture does not contradict development as a business.
"Form follows function" Isn't supposed to mean that form will automatically spring forth once function is met. It's supposed to mean that form should be secondary to function, so that function isn't impeded by form.
No you are wrong if you watch the documentary of Louis Sullivan on TH-cam, he never said to get rid of ornaments or beauty he just wanted a style for America when early cities were starting to be developed, I truly get angry when people don't follow the original idea instead they understand the revolutionist idea that today's people are saying and instead change the true definition of that term and corrupt with their ideas like most architects are saying it now.
Damn, I am now studying UX but this presentation gives me tons of self awareness.
This is valuable.
Ux applies here too ; ) UX is humanism... When not decapitated by corporate greed/ time
Such an inspiring, wonderful and educative talk. Wishing you all the very best and success in ur career. Stay blessed 😍
better than the cube buildings, but only just - still more impressed by old cathedrals and castles and the like.
You are a hero...Amazing...
Change in architecture is desperately required. We really need a new modern architecture that feels alive again!
We need a tradition style revival thats what we need.
The problem lies in changing the way developers approach their projects as most of the time (with perhaps the exception of their own houses) the driving factor is maximum profit. If that doesn’t change then buildings won’t change and we will continue to see the proliferation of cheap paneltecture. We have to live in or with these things too long for greedy profiteering cheapskates to dictate the final outcome.
I do not think that boring is bad, its quality and variety that is important. Too many Primark quality buildings going up being sold at Prada prices.
Very impressive talk. Each aspect and opinion is strongly supported and exposed. The singapore university is a great design.
Wow. The solo building is incredible work.
We all need a new economic/currency model to pull this off, in all industries, not just architecture.
Heatherwick studios has so many beautiful projects around the world.
First time Im moved by the buildings. wow respect
Heatherwick is the 21st Century’s Frank Lloyd Wright. An important contributor to improving and redefining architecture. We’re lucky to have him.
He is still afraid of ornament and he is still afraid of beauty inspired by the past. I'm not saying we should copy old buildings and styles, but we limit our freedom if certain shapes are forbidden because they were loved in the past.
so true! and maybe the problem with the lack of ornament is, that the architects like him think that the beauty has to come from the structure itself which makes some interesting buildings but some ugly cities because every building HAS to be different.
What is considered ornament? The fluting on a column? A Caryatid? The gargoyles on the Notre Dame? The Mayans and Aztecs ornamented with statues, but they also used the difference in masonry units to ornament their Pyramids. The columns of his tree project had fluting, is that not ornament? The painting? The etching of the prefabricated pieces for his educational center? Ornament doesn't have to be a stain glass Lantern on a domed cathedral, it can and oftentimes has historically been the small things. San Carlo alle Quattro fontane is a beautiful structure, but so too is La Padrera, despite its lack of blatant ornamentation. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Yes it’s because of economics rule!
Great ideas and great projects. My favorite was the South African grain silo turned art museum--it was so unexpected and imaginative. I also love that the project worked by remodeling an existing structure.
I would love to see something like this applied to housing for everyday people. Watching HGTV, you see people always frustrated that the three things they are looking for in a home are never available in a single structure. At first I thought the house buyers had unrealistic expectations of what the market could deliver. And then I thought, a home is the most expensive, most important purchase most people will make. Why should they be expected to settle for the 3 bedroom 2 and a half bath standard American box? Why can't factory-made, sustainably sourced, highly customizable homes be available for the general public?
what's a great lecture you gave! thank you!
Look at the Empire State Building and you are in awe and inspired. Look at the new “Freedom” tower and your head immediately turns back to look at the Empire State Building.
I understand his vision and I agree with much of what he said, shame his garden city didn't get built in London, I liked the design.
I always noticed and complained about how boring and ugly the new buildings are. Thank you for sharing your point with the rest of us !
REALLY GOOD TALK! Amazing work and I think it is very necessary that we make our living and therefore working spaces enjoyable and natural, especially for when our cities begin to slow in growth with accumulated risk for human and wildlife health.
Truly a great piece of work! Amazing! -Tracy
The university building he’s talking about is basically a panopticon without the guard tower. 😱
Architecture designed for the community and interaction…. Is what we NEED.. we have needed that long before this pandemic’s isolation. spaces to address needs, and to address intentions. 💚💚💚
This talk is so powerful, man 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
Most developers are looking at profitability and how quickly they gain back the capital, they have spent on building it, especially for commercial projects, which in most cities are dominated by such buildings.
I respect in proposition with the entirety he addressed,
I love your work, Thomas Heatherwick, and you are so right : so many new buildings are souless and boring ... as your daughter said: 'meh'. Let's bring back biodiversity and architectural diversity, and make this planet a nicer, healthier place to be :)
I couldn’t agree more. How inspiring
Reminds me of the Burberry building in Chicago. I genuinely got emotional the first time I saw it because it was so beautiful. I think Chicago does a good job of trying not to have 100% boring buildings
Very informative and inspiring 💗 I truly hope that more people would build architecture like this
amazing speech- hats off
Form = function means that only the function matters. It trains you in obedient capitalism. Personality isn’t called for; only function matters. The de-humanization of the environment, which teaches us to neglect caring, humanity, and personality.
Idk man, in my opinion as poor guy from a third world country, everytime I see those "soulless" supertall buildings, I'm in awe and it felt like I'm seeing the future in front of me. Somehow, it gave me a new perspective of how big really the world is and how far we've come as a species, defying nature with those perfectly straight lines and shiny surfaces.
I don't think they're soulless really, it's just provoke us that unnatural feeling, the syntheticness of humanity and how we go against the nature. For me, I really find it beautiful, maybe one day if I see them enough, I'll start to find them boring and monotonous the same way you all look at them. But right now, I love seeing those buildings than those traditional ones made from stones with lots of "decorations".
Really appreciate your take. I think there's a lot of different ways urban areas can be appreciated.. Tall, glass structures also can be beautiful and awe-inspiring. I felt that way walking around Hong Kong for the first time. Buildings are vast, but on ground level there's still green and it feels almost cosy, but at the same time a technical marvel.
The places that truly are ugly and stressful are common, where there's only bare and monotonous architecture everywhere, and not enough trees. I think integrating as much green as we can goes a long way to make cities more relaxing and interesting.
Fascinated by his work, however, I just discovered that the Vessel sculpture in the Hudson Yards in NYC was created by his studio. Sadly, it became an attraction to 4 people committing suicide by jumping off from this beautiful sculpture.
Such an inspiration. 🙌🏼
Character is definitely needed in order to address the constant cycle of rebuild after rebuild, my only worry is how do you combat the need for affordable housing with engaging and exciting design?
In Vienna, social housing is dominating the real estate sector which is publicly funded and rented out by the government to the citizens permanently and the social homes are diverse in forms and affordable in rent for the majority.
just don't make them ugly? is it that hard to make something that isn't ugly? it doesn't need to look like the fanciest building ever just make it look cute.
Beautiful art!
Wow. You can feel his intense passion for this.
I like all the buildings mentioned here, except the hospital one. Now the hospital management has to hire quite a number of gardeners to care for the 17000 plants and the 23000 bulbs can be quite power-consuming. The cost involved to maintain the facility would go into the medical bills.
Turn it about: function should inform form. For years I have wondered if deeply anchored dome shaped buildings would be able to withstand hurricane force winds. The recent devastation in Florida by hurricane Ian demonstrates the failure of flat surfaced angular construction to withstand high winds. A smooth surface without angles seems much more likely to survive the onslaught of high winds in hurricane-prone locations. I envision a dome shape with possible moving parts to be raised in fair weather and lowered in high wind situations. Perhaps even made flood proof from high water situations.
Thank you ! That’s what I’m looking for.
the reason behind soullessness is missing. in previous decades, there were less concentration on public buildings, architects used to spend years on a large public building. now we have better technology, bigger budget but a lot less time. hence many potentially diversive projects failed, mechanical & commercial approach is safer (which is also killing the soul).
Amazing, you passed the visual distortion to the level of pandemic of boring !
3:46 what is this graph reference?
When imagining the future in since-fiction we tend to think of a technological glut, geometrical, simply neutral, colorless cities. I finally discovered the other outcome, hopefully the true one for us
P.S. instantly fell in love with those masterpieces, keep going 😍
Excellent!