Restoring Reason, Beauty, and Trust in Architecture, Part 25: Architecture in an Age of Uncertainty

Episode Topic: Architecture in an Age of Uncertainty

Liam O’Connor, 2025 Richard H. Driehaus Prize Laureate, explores how the timeless principles of traditional and classical design focused on enduring beauty, quality of craft, and integration with the landscape offer a crucial anchor for collective memory and cultural expression.

Featured Speakers:

• Liam O’Connor, Liam O’Connor Architects and Planning Consultants

Read this episode's recap over on the University of Notre Dame's open online learning community platform, ThinkND: https://go.nd.edu/c6903f.

This podcast is a part of the ThinkND Series titled Restoring Reason, Beauty, and Trust in Architecture.

Thanks for listening! The ThinkND Podcast is brought to you by ThinkND, the University of Notre Dame's online learning community. We connect you with videos, podcasts, articles, courses, and other resources to inspire minds and spark conversations on topics that matter to you — everything from faith and politics, to science, technology, and your career.

• Learn more about ThinkND and register for upcoming live events at think.nd.edu.
• Join our LinkedIn community for updates, episode clips, and more.

Transcript

Opening

1 0:13

Good morning. Good morning. Ple-please be, please be seated. Please be seated. Uh, this wonderful buzz is a reminder of what wonderful friendships exist around this tables, and how long we've known each other and worked with each other towards such great common goals, both educationally and, and professionally. This morning, we have the great pleasure of hearing from, uh, Liam O'Connor, who is also a close friend and a cherished colleague, um, having taught in the School of Architecture. Um, I would like to begin, uh, this brief introduction by reading from the citation of last year's Driehaus. Liam O'Connor is a twen-twenty twenty-five laureate of the Richard H. Driehaus Prize. The jury acknowledges his lifelong dedication to the design of a body of excellent new traditional public and private buildings and civil monuments, works projecting grace and beauty, and expressing the shared emotions and cultural expectations of his audiences. That's a very elegant way of saying that your work is extraordinary, Liam. Um, and maybe I should have say, I should say no more, but I, I was going to simply add, for the sake of, uh, everyone here, particularly the students present, that your view of how you practice a classical architecture is practicing it as a bridge between tr-uh, tradition and, and innovation, and that your work is both fresh compositionally and extraordinarily careful, uh, compelling and, and, uh, and deeply engaging from a tectonic perspective as well. So, um, those are words, uh, but when one finds oneself in the presence of your buildings, one feels these words in their knees, uh, through their eyes and their hearts. So we are extraordinarily, um, privileged to have you here. We're very proud to have a friend and a colleague be in this position of being cherished and being recognized. And, um, it is breakfast. It's a relaxing and open, um, environment here wh-we-we're meeting. So we'd appreciate your lecture, and we appreciate to talk to you after the lecture. Um, the program's from nine to ten thirty. Notice we're starting at nine thirty. It's an Italian technique, that one. Um, but we can stay probably until eleven or even twelve, um, and just, and just keep on talking. Okay? Wonderful to have you. Thank you. Welcome again.

Speaker 3 3:09

As it's breakfast, I'm wondering who's gonna bring me my eggs Benedict Well, thank you, Stefanos, for the invitation to be here. It's an incredible privilege to always be here at this incredible campus and this great school, and I've been lucky enough to had, have had, um, pupils from this school working in my office on most of the projects that you will see today. And, um, that's been a fantastic journey, and I'm sure it will continue.

Classicism & History

Speaker 3 3:38

And, um, so I'm very grateful for that But my theme really in, in kind of introducing my work is, is to really look at this kind of question mark we seem to have, um, in our, in our contemporary environment about, um, the certainty of architecture of, of, of the, of the future of classicism, um, in a world that seems greatly uncertain in so many ways. Um, we're bombarded daily by vast amounts of negativity in social media and the media generally on the hostility and chaos in the world. And, um, and, um, in, in many architecture schools, um, students are encouraged to reflect that uncertainty and that chaos, and that has generated a very different form of expression of architecture in the world. And, um, uh, in a sense, I've taken a different path and, um, a path that many people in this room respect and, and follow too. So I'm very much among, among friends and, and esteemed colleagues in, in this room. Uh, many of that I've known for very, very many years who follow this path too. Um, but it does seem, um, that, that, that, that we are in a, um, a, a rather difficult, difficult period for, for the justification of classicism. And it seems to much of the outside world that this is, um, that this is a set of values that are under threat. Um, almost, um, there's a willingness of the modernist press to declare an extinction to the, to the very validity of doing anything in the classical tradition. But as everyone in this room knows, that's, that's not the whole story. It's not even a story. It's just a fragment of somebody else's imagination, and it has very little impact on the, the power and strength and conviction of the people at this school to drive forward the kind of unending traditions of classicism into, into, into the future. And that's very much my position where I stand as a practicing architect. And, um, I, I just, um, would like to just sh-share a few examples of, of where we see this uncertainty in our world and, and, and h-what do we, what do we think about this as a group. Um, um, we see these, um, the, the, this, this, this increasing militancy against the past, um, manifested with, um, with increased, um, violence really towards the past. And we see this in architecture, and we see this in public places, sculptures. Um, there's just no end, in a sense, to the, to, to the, um, the hostility that's being expressed, um, to, to the architecture of the past. Even this monument in Philadelphia to, to Washington, supposedly a monument to, to liberty, um, is, is, ha- has been vandalized in this utterly inappropriate manner. And other parts of our history are also under threat and classicism. I mean, this is an example in Richmond, Virginia, where all the monuments on Monument Avenue were removed in a most unceremonial and violent way. But this is my photograph from a day I spent with the activists who were the proponents of this graffiti and destruction to just really try to understand what they were doing, really. And I said to them, why destroy the past? Why not build your own monument to the things you value that you want to express and share with the world? I won't tell you what they said. So another, an, a nightclub discussion. Um, but e-e-even in other countries, like here in London, in Parliament Square, First World War generals, uh, are, are, are brought into the, into the contemporary political debate. Um, so, uh, it, it just seems that, that everything we build in a traditional way i-i-is a potential kind of blank canvas for, for, for, for a p- a political manifestation, and that sense of uncertainty is, seems to be growing rather than receding in our, in our contemporary world. But it's, it's worth perhaps just looking at, at sort of other moments in the past. Um, this is, um, a very important painting in Venice, um, depicting the Battle of Lepanto of 1571, um, which was the largest naval engagement in the history of warfare. And, um, and, uh, um, it, it, it redefined the, the relationship between Western civilization and the Ottoman Empire for the next several hundred years. But it's worth just remembering that, um, um, Palladio's, um, uh, Quattro Libri was only one year old when that battle took place. And, um, and, uh, Michelangelo's magnificent dome of St. Peter's was y- as yet incomplete when that enormous military catastrophe took place. So in a sense, uh, do we look at Palladio and Michelangelo and look for their reflections of the cataclysmic, um, civil strife that was going on in the Italian Renaissance? I don't think we do really. I think their pursuit of beauty and their pursuit of the nobility and universality of the classical tradition continued despite the, the, the, the, the, the civil chaos and military strife that existed in, in this period. Um, o-other, other significant moments in, in, in the past, like such as the French Revolution, I think everybody knows what kind of situation that was, and, and, um, it still generated some magnificent buildings after that revolution, despite the enormous loss and terror and chaos of the events. And, um, in, in Russia, um, churches were destroyed after the Russian Revolution in 1917, and, um, Bolshevik, um, soldiers would just ravage the churches and take everything away. So there's, there's, there's just a lot of chaos and s-uncertainty and, and confusion in history, but I don't think architecture is necessarily there to reflect o-on that. Um, even today, we see these cataclysmic events in the world where large groups of people are made homeless by conflict and, um, and entire towns are just routinely destroyed. Um, and also churches in Syria are now famously being destroyed one after the other. So th-there's a lot of chaos and confusion and uncertainty in the world, but where does that, where does that really leave us? Um, uh, I think it's a, it's a question to be answered. Um, in Afghanistan, less than a year ago, 21,000 musical instruments were burnt, um, by order of the ministry. Um, and so, um, there, there's a, there's a lot to, uh, there's a lot to be thankful for in our, in our world where we can still have a debate about what we consider valuable and, and, and, and so forth. Even, even our great military leaders and state leaders from the Second World War, like Churchill, was, um, uh, has, has, has, has not been, um, has not been immune to these, um, to these, um, scrawlings and attempts to rewrite the position of these people in history. Um, all over the world, we see this, this, um, desecration of things that we hold dear in our past. Um, and, uh, uh, this spills over not just in, from, from, from, from, from, um, civil disorder, but also in the world of art. Uh, this is a, a Royal Academician whose, um, famous, um, rendition of Winston Churchill is lauded in, in the world of art. Um, but really, um, is, is that how we expect to look at these great leaders? Um, I don't think so, but, um, but we have other-- In the world of architecture, outside of art, we have, in a sense, the same, the same intellectual position being taken. And I always loved Leon Krier's description of, of this project, of Gir- Giriar's, um, arrested collapse, which is a very interesting, interesting description o-of what it is. Uh, and we know what he thought about tradition. Um, so whatever we think of his architecture, um, we certainly know what he thinks of ours. But that's not new. Um, all of this begun much earlier, more than 100 years ago, and this was Corbusier's plan for the destruction of the center of Paris and the rebuilding of these enormous towers. That, um, was a very serious plan of, of Le Corbusier. So the, the historic environment's always been under threat. And, um, and, and you can see the amount of effort Corbusier put into these drawings. So this wasn't just a Sunday afternoon sketch. This was a proposition to change the world And after the war, of course, I mean, in England, um, after the Blitz, um, much of London was destroyed, and you can see the new tower blocks of the future under construction. And this defined, um, our urban environment for very many years to come, and it still does. Um, during, um, St. Paul's Cathedral stood out famously amongst the ruins of London during the aerial bombardment of 1941. And one could say that perhaps it was-- it had a worse effect, um, after the war when the modernist rebuilding of Paternoster Square, um, um, took on a, a, a kind of a Corbusian dimension. Um, thankfully, that's now gone, and everybody knows what it's, what it's been replaced by, which is, um, which is great. So little by little, some of the things are being called into question. Um, th-this is Parliament Square, and the building on the, on the right is, um, a, a, a monstrous project by, by, um, by, um, a very well-known architect at the time to destroy, um, most of the Westminster, uh, quarter around, um, around, uh, Whitehall and, and, and rebuild it with, with this, leaving the great ancient cathedral of, um, or the Abbey Church of St. Peter on the left there floating in a, in a gridded space, um, with, uh, with, with no context left at all. Thankfully, that didn't happen, and we're still left with this great, um, route through Parliament, Westminster Abbey, and, and, and, um, and, um, and Whitehall. So thankfully, that project didn't happen, didn't go ahead. But if you look up the, um, the, um, the, the, the transcripts of the discussions in Parliament at the time, the Minister of Public Buildings and Works thanked Professor, um, Leslie Martin and Professor Buchanan for their imaginative proposals. And reading, reading, um, I mean, luckily, every word that's uttered in Parliament for the last hundreds of years is actually fully annotated in Hansard, and I, I think it's-- some of the debates are highly rewarding to, to review. It's a great archive, um, for finding out the discussions about the, the battles between the potential futures of London, um, during, during-- after the, after the Second World War. And just in case we all thought this was just an anomaly, this is, uh, Le Corbusier visiting the School of Architecture in Cambridge with, um, with, um, Mr. Les-- or later, Sir Leslie Martin, knighted for his contribution to architecture, um, in the, in the few years before that, um, before that project. But whatever we think of the battles won and lost, um, in those, in those formative years after the war, this is London as it is today. So did anyone-- have we won anything? It's hard to say really. The, the, the scramble for individuality in the, in the skyline has literally destroyed the original London skyscape, which is now completely ruined, and there's just no hope of that ever coming back into focus. But what has happened in all these years is that, you know, amongst us came Leon Krier And his incredible clarity of mind in calling into question the validity of how our cities look and who guides them and what they should look like is one of the most important factors that has come into being in the last generation and an enormous legacy for all of us. And most of us in this room came into contact with him at some point. And so we live in his false pluralism universe at the moment. And we're all struggling, I think, together to create this true pluralism, which is still a long way off. But project by project, building by building, we have a world to rebuild and to honor Leo's legacy and his intellectual pursuit of this incredible clarity that he had. I worked with him for a number of years and we worked on this little villa in Corfu. And it's just a kind of refreshing thing to think about as a compositional device compared to all this worldly madness that we see around us all of the time. The genius of this composition is spectacular. One could spend a whole lifetime studying it. It's a miraculous project. And I think these drawings are in the university archives. And I hope that there'll be an exhibition on Krier's work at some point taking out some of this wonderful work. And perhaps Stefanos will invite me to assist with the curation of such an exhibition. And of course, we know that his Leon Krier's legacy is all about regaining that lost world of the beauty in architecture and having a consistency of skyline and a consistency of approach to architecture, which we're all in this room all struggling together towards achieving in our own different ways. But Leo's world was based on a number of fundamental truths and beliefs in the world of beauty and what it constituted. And the idea that things had their proportional sensibility and that it was a part of the way that you make beauty was very much central to his philosophy. And it certainly is to mine. And all of those traditional things that we regard as beautiful are no longer embarrassing to a new younger world where we are unapologetically pursuing that exquisite world of beauty that has been lost.

Craft & Method

Speaker 3 18:53

But how to make that beauty is the question. And as architects, it's a fundamental question for all of us. How do we make this? What is it made of? We all see kind of postmodern edifices around that sort of look the part from half a mile away, and when you get close, it's just full of expansion joints and, uh, and, and, and poor construction detailing. That's not a legacy, really. That's a liability, um, for all of us. And, um, I mean, I, I really... I have th- this is, uh, part of my collection of Piranesi's, and it's, uh, Piranesi, um, just inventing how he thought the Romans built the, um, monuments of antiquity. And it's something I think we should all be thinking about as architects is how you build things, and 'cause how you build things and what they look like should be utterly inseparable. Handing over an image as an architect to some executive team who just, quote-unquote, "value engineer it to death" means it'll n- it'll only be a vague facsimile of your intentions. And how things are made must be integral to your intentionality of design, and that has been something that I have pursued in my career of works. Um, I've always enjoyed this painting of Alma-Tadema, where it shows, um, Phidias explaining his Parthenon frieze to his friends. Um, and I think this, this is a kind of moment in architecture that we-- I, I enjoy whenever I have people come to visit construction sites of mine to see how things are made, 'cause it seems revolutionary in a way to build things in the way that people used to do. And everyone says you can't, but I, I, uh, I, I, I earnestly suggest to you that it is entirely possible, and, um, and, and it's something that I think we should all be pursuing. Um, I always loved this wonderful painting, which was r- remade after a lost painting of Schinkel. So it's a, it's a reconstruction of a lost painting and showing Schinkel's interest in, in, in how buildings are made. And I think when you see his architecture, you, you do see that he shared that interest. Um, how things are made are fundamental to what things look like, and I think that's, uh, an im- very important pursuit for, for our, for our, for our generation. Um- And an architect that visited Schinkel's office, didn't see Schinkel on that day because he wasn't in the office, is Theophil von Hansen on his way from Denmark to Athens to assist his brother with the reconstruction of the Nike Temple and other buildings after the Ottomans left in the 1820s in Athens. It's a very, very fine composition and you can see when you look at the Erechtheion that he's reinventing a lot of the details based on his sketchbooks where he spent his days measuring antiquities, which were then possible for the first generation of architects after the Ottomans left. And that's the rebuilt Nike Temple. This was when they found it was just fragments of military walls that for the building had been destroyed for use as barricades and now happily rebuilt by Hansen, his brother and the other archaeologists who were the first generation to think about the reconstruction of the Athenian Acropolis. He also built this wonderful, um, observatory sitting on a, a hill just, um, above the center of Athens. And, uh, it's wonderful how he was able to absorb some of the, the local vernacular architecture as well as the, the, the high classicism of the, o-of, of the Acropolis. Um, and, and also a wonderful reflection on Schinkel's own observatory, which, which Hansen certainly knew. But back to, back to the Athens Academy. It's a, it's a w- it was such a wonderful building. It made such a big impact o-on me as a very, very interesting, unusual, um, um, example of a classical tradition. Then I came back to Athens and spent six months measuring it, uh, for my, for my master's thesis, and that was a highly rewarding experience. I would strongly urge every student to undertake such a task. Um, brings you very, very close to the heart of what architecture is, and you see how it's made, you see how it was put together, and you discover many, many stories, uh, inherent in the construction, which is, which is a, a beautiful plane of understanding of architecture, um, and s- not something that you can ever gain from looking at books or images on screens. The interior is beautiful with its hypaethral roof, um, an absolutely magnificent place for discussion. Um, and, um, so the Athens Academy here would, um, would, would meet to, to talk about all sorts of matters philosophical, um, and, and philological. And, um, that's one of the products of my six months measuring, um, the, the academy and, um, getting to grips with its beautiful detailing was a, a, a formative moment in my kind of architectural education. Um, and how things are made. So, uh, uh, uh, that, that exercise i-in Athens brought me very close to really looking. When you crawl around the roof space of buildings and see the un- slightly unfinished surfaces, you can see where people left their mark as if it was yesterday. And that was true. I had the, uh, the happy experience of being able to clamber onto the top of the Parthenon and look at the unfinished bits that nobody ever saw, and that fascinated me. You could actually begin to see how the building was made and reverse engineer how its whole construction took place. So, um, measuring buildings is full of delightful surprises that lead you into delightful avenues of consideration beyond what you see in books and on screens. So my fascination with, um, with, um, with, um, masonry and stonework, um, has, has stayed with me throughout my career. And you can see that this-- using this famous Lewis pin for lifting very large blocks is exactly the same as the illustration in the Piranesi, 'cause I was fascinated by... I want to build this as Piranesi envisaged Rome was built. And we did. We used exactly the same tools and technology, um, except the electric cranes, of course, weren't around, but they had their equivalents. And, um, uh, in this, this house that I designed in, um, i- in, in, in London, um, with its Tower of the Winds order, um, was an exercise in very much along the same lines. Uh, everything was drawn by hand full size. Uh, we needed over 1,000 drawings for that building, as many Notre Dame graduates who've been in the office while this was happening will attest to. Um, so drawing it and supervising the construction, and that's another aspect of, of something that deeply fascinates me, and I think it's a, it's a whole strand of expertise that architects have lost. And I think they need to regain that territory with both hands and, and, and with, with considerable gusto because the joy of actually making something that you've designed and seeing it done with a certain kind of authenticity, uh, a- and, and physical power with a lot of craft skill involved in the production of it all, um, is, is, is in my view, an essential component of, of building any or designing, um, building anything. Um, and the finished product. Um, it is entirely still load-bearing stone with no reinforcement. All engineers say that everything needs reinforcement, but it simply isn't true. Um, never was before the beginning of the 19th century, and it suddenly seems to be the norm. But we're, we are battling against those norms and, and we did so here with this very, um, engineering, um, uh, idea of a, of a, a very thin elliptical stone cantilevered staircase, again, entirely unrefor- reinforced. Um, and, uh, the final, the final product. So it is still possible to, to, to, to just take r- really good materials, um, a- a- and do beautiful things with them and really not have too many people involved in the process other than you and the craftspeople making it, and it's a highly rewarding thing. Um, we've, we've been photographing the construction of all of our buildings as I slowly realized that nobody else is really doing this.

War Memorials

Speaker 3 27:36

So we're making a record of, of what we've done and how we've built everything that we've designed, just so we've, we can prove to the world that it really is the way we said it was because people mostly think, "Yeah, you're... That's, that's just, you know, the... That's what you're saying, but really?" But then, you know, we, we have a, a, a lot of records showing exactly how things were made, and it's very important to do that And, um, this is our Armed Forces Memorial, um, m- project that we did in, in-- finished in 2007 up in Staffordshire, and we built this hill and put a monument on the top of it. And it's in a very low location where three rivers meet, and in the winters it floods. Um, so despite significant opposition from the environmental agency that we're, we were building in a flood zone, it was our purpose to do that so that, um, um, um... And, uh, one, one of the references to that is, is Stonehenge, which is a magnificent building and virtually the same size. And, uh, having looked at some of those buildings like Stonehenge and, and compared them to other circular structures, and then we started looking at the Dome of the Rock, Jefferson's Memorial, the Pantheon, and all sorts of other buildings. The dome o-o-o-of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence, Wren's dome, everything or virtually everything is the same as the Pantheon. So it's, uh, almost all circular structures in the history of architecture which are sacred in nature, are almost the same size, which is a remarkable discovery. So how could we do anything else but 43 meters? Um, it was also, um, an opportunity with, with knowing that these rivers would flood from time to time, is to create our own version of this great Böcklin painting, The Isle of the Dead. And so, um, when the rivers do flood and it floats, it is truly an Isle of the Dead. And, um, it, it has, um, about 17,000 names of members of the armed forces. So you, you can walk across this slightly elevated bridge that we've created to, to, to visit this Isle of the Dead floating in a vast, um, lake, which is w-wonderful with its obelisk and, and a, and a spiral path to the top And it's a great space for, for, for interacting. In the middle, there are 15 sculptures in it, and on the right you can see a slot in the wall, um, and underneath this cornice. And again, we're, we're drawing just an example of how we draw full-size drawings for construction, um, to make sure absolutely everything that we intend, um, to happen, happens. And if you don't do this, it will not be what you've designed. It'll be something else that somebody else decided. So as an architect, you-- I think you have a duty to, to do at least this amount of information. It looks overkill to some people, but that just guarantees that you get exactly what you want and the, the character and profile of the stone as cut by in, in accordance with your design intentions is only going to happen if you do this. And if you do not do this, it will be something that you will dislike 'cause it won't, uh, it won't be a reflection of your design thoughts. And in the middle of it, we have this slot with a door, a stone door cut, um, ajar. And, um, the idea here is that the sun shines through at 11 o'clock on the 11th of November every year and, um, touches the wreath at the center of the memorial, um, which is the, the moment of, of when the guns fence fell silent at the end of the First World War, and which you, I think everywhere in the United States, Canada, Britain, everywhere in the West, um, commemorates, um, Armistice Day. And that-that's the architectural manifestation of that, and it's cut in the wall in such a way that it'll be accurate for 1,000 years Um, on a more urban level, um, th- this is a, a, a monument that we built for the common-- the five million men and women of the, of the Commonwealth, um, who lost their lives in the two world wars of the 20th century. It's an urban space rather than a thing. Um, people pass through it. It's five lanes of highway running through it, um, with a pil- pavilion and, um, and that's Wellington's house in the background. So a very important historic setting in the center of London. Um, looking back to the west, the Wellington Arch, um, that was moved at the end of the 19th century, and looking eastwards to Buckingham Palace, um, it sets the scene for a, a wonderful kind of focus of life that goes on beyond that point. And at night, sometimes when the urns are lit around c- um, uh, on, um, um, Commonwealth weekend, um, it's a wonderful spot for people to, to gather, and it's, it, it, it's been doing that for the last 25 years. Um, the bit I'm most, um, proud of, in fact, um, is, is the paving, um, which hasn't been touched in 25 years, but without not a single day of maintenance on it, and most roads in London have been re-recovered in tarmac two or three times in that period. So there is the longevity of construction is something I think that's kind of something very important, especially when you're thinking of making a contribution to the public realm. So, um And, um, again, you know, we have a big photographic archive of how all these things were done. So the, the transformation from intention to drawing, from drawing to construction, and construction to finished product is, is all recorded in our archive of, of drawings. And our monument here to the, um, it's a few hundred yards away, um, to the 56,000 volunteers who fought in the air war over Europe in the Second World War, are commemorated here. Again, it's an urban proposition. Um, it sits, um, at the edge of the park. It becomes... It, uh, it's, it exists at many levels. It's gates to the park on the far left and on the far right, and a gate through into the park in the middle. So it, it's all about open connections, uh, between pathways that, in fact, didn't exist before this monument. So all of the landscaping around it and the path connections, um, at this end of the park are all part of this design. It isn't just the monument. It's, it's everything around it, um, including lots and lots of new tree planting. Um, so o-on one level, it, it, it, it operates as a gate when you see it from the street. Um, it, it's, it's, it's visible in many different ways as you approach it, and it frames wonderful views into, into this wonderful park from one of the busiest streets in London. So that's a very nice, um, contextual dichotomy to play with. And, um, looking back towards Wellington, the Wellington's house, Apsley House, and one of the busiest roundabouts in Europe, um, it still forms a nice frame to the edge of the park. And here we compared it, um, to the, um, the arch at Tip Val above and, um, and, um, uh, Decimus Burton's other works around. Again, this was a design tool to ensure that the scale of what we were doing, um, made some sense. It still has its own architectural authority and dimensions and meaning, um, but it still has a kind of sense of being part of a family of other monuments and therefore fits in with the general kind of visual framework already established for over 200 years in this part of London And, um, it's, uh, it, it's also a kind of a reflection on how we, uh, how, how, how we looked at sort of hi- historic, um, spaces, particularly here in mid-19th century Berlin, which was by all accounts one of the most beautiful spaces in Europe. Um, on the right is, is Schinkel's Neue Wache, um, a building that, uh, as you can see, uh, my Bomber Command Memorial, um, i- is a very strong homage to this. Um, it's truly spectacularly inventive piece of, of architecture in the Doric order. Um, a really remarkable building, and, um, I, I'm sure that everyone can see that it's, um, it's in a sense the progenitor of our own monument. And to, to reflect on some of the detailing that he did and to bring, um, Schinkel's ideas into the heart of London was, I think, a, a, a nice ironic twist to the whole story. And, um, and, uh, and I, I'm sure you all know this is Walhalla in Regensburg. But what fascinated me a lot was the, uh, the first joint in the first drum of the stone column, which is virtually invisible, and that is exactly what von Lenze saw of the Propylaeum and the, and the Parthenon in Athens. So you can see that this man went to Athens and did as, um, as Hansen did, and, um, uh, uh, and understood what the essence of this was. So these are not 15 millimeters of, of cement and, and, and whatever else one might put in these days. It's nothing. It's just two pieces of stone very precisely carved. So there are very good examples really of, o- o- of, of renditions o- of, of ideas from antiquity in modern buildings. And, um, that's quite an inspiring building to visit, um, from every perspective. Um, and of course, um, Parthenon, Doric was essentially, um, uh, uh, um, something that we looked at in detail, um, for our own colonnade at the Bomber Command Memorial. It's not the same at all, that you could spot 150 differences. Um, but still, I mean, we've created our own version of that order, and if you look closely at the two, you will see many, many differences. Um, so we're not set up-- we didn't set out to copy it or to create a facsimile, but to create our own reflection on it, um, in our own way, um, with our own ideas about hypotracheliums, echinuses, and abacuses. Um- And, uh, what's important about this monument too, I think, is that, is that it has this open structural stainless steel roof which is sitting on this stonework, which is, um, which is, um, w- uh, i- in a sense, um, doesn't seem to be a classical idea, but there are, there are many great examples in the 19th century, particularly in France, of, of where, um, st- large steel roofs sat on stone bases. The Petit Palais, the Grand Palais, uh, the Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève are three magnificent examples. And we wanted to follow a little bit that tradition o- of, um, a, a singular metal roof o- on, o- on the, o- on a stone s- substructure. Um, and I'll show you some photographs of that in a moment. But th- these are photographs of the-- showing these great drums of stone being laid into position. Um, it is, it is a, a really fun thing to see s- skilled stonemasons at work, and watching all this incredible skill being, being, being, being deployed really in the service of what will become architecture is a very joyful part of being an architect, and I would strongly advise everybody to pursue the same, same route. Um, really, it's a won- wonderful thing feeling these one-ton blocks of stone being lowered into position We had a fantastic sculptor working on this, making an air crew of seven people that sat in the middle of the monument. Absolutely wonderful work in bronze by Philip Jackson. Quite a feat of bronze. There aren't many large-scale groups of bronze. Rodin did his famous Burghers of Calais, which a copy of is in London. And this is our reflection a little bit on that. That was the basis of a large group of people on the plinth. And it's fun to walk past it and see many, many different constituents enjoying the spectacle. And there is a lot to look at in there. But the roof is very interesting. We were given some aluminium from the Canadian Bomber Command Memorial saying, this is a piece of an aircraft that was shot down in 1944 on its way back from a mission. Can you do anything with it? And I thought, okay, let's think about this. So we had this aluminium from this Halifax aircraft flown by the Royal Canadian Air Force to Scotland. It was then taken on a boat from Grimsby to Norway, re-smelted down as sheets, brought back and assembled by this wonderful metalwork team in England and riveted together. So it's the same. It's really the aluminium from that aircraft that we put back. And we utilized sort of fuselage construction for the roof design based on all these riveted panels that you see in Second World War planes. And, uh, part, part, part of that story, of course, is meeting the veterans and knowing what their experience was, and the controversy, um, that still rages over, over, over the effect of Bomber Command on the cities of Germany will never go away. Um, but I, I, I have met many of the aircrews who flew on those missions and lost many of their friends in the-- in, in, in pursuit of their duty. And, um, and, uh, and they're, they're all-- This is a very famous pilot who, um, Johnny Johnson, who was on the famous Dambusters raid, and I spent a lot of, lot of time with him talking about what all these airmen thought they were doing, um, during this campaign. It's very unders-- important to understand the sense of purpose that people had before you start just drawing a monument out of your own imagination. Um, so we have a, a very long record of, of association with veterans to piece together our own understanding of the historical events that took place before we even designed, um, the first, uh, the first idea about this, this monument. Um, on, on, uh, on a-on another note, uh, briefly, th-there's inside the red box, the-- there's the red building is the Orangery at Kensington Palace. This is a famous landscape plan by Charles Bridgeman, one of the preeminent landscape designers of the 18th century And it's the unfinished bit at the back of the Orangery, which was the focus of our commission, um, um, for Historic Royal Palaces who wanted to extend the Orangery. Um, the ba- bit at the back was full of ad hoc temporary buildings performing vital functions for the, for the functioning of the restaurant, the Orangery as it now is as a restaurant. And all of that was to be consolidated plus some, um, historic textile conservation space, um, in a new building to the rear. Um, the palace is a very, very low-key building, very unusually low-key for an 18th century royal palace, and it's had many, um, many, um, sovereigns, um, living there over, o- over many generations. But it's a very unusually low-key building. Um, and so the Orangery is kind of r- rather the most important piece of architecture in the entire palace ensemble. Um, and, um, and, uh, it-- before we started work on that design, we, we couldn't... I mean, there weren't, there were no drawings of the Orangery, so we had to measure it ourselves. And that, that was very interesting 'cause I've been doing that for so long in other buildings. It was a, a treat to be able to, to actually get to, to measure a, a building that didn't really have an attribution. Um, all of the historic books say that it was Wren with the, uh, association o- of Vanbrugh or Vanbrugh with Wren signing off the accounts. And, I mean, it just looked to me as if it was Hawksmoor, and no one's really given that attribute and attribution. And I think we, we will formalize that in a, in a book soon, um, to, to, um, partly due to how we have formed that attribution. And it started really with looking at the other works of, of, of H- of Vanbrugh and Wren and Hawksmoor, particularly here at, um, obviously one of the great, I'm sure half of you have been there at least, So Blenheim Palace. It's an absolutely magnificent royal palace, um, and, uh, um, incredible piece of Baroque architecture from England in that short-lived period of English Baroque. And, um, the, um, th-this facade is, is, is really where this entire facade is one room. It's the, it's a library, and inside it's this, um, with the little tower bits separately, um, existing at the ends. So we measured the, um, um, Blenheim library, and we also went to All Souls College in Oxford, um, where Hawksmoor, um, is fully attributed as the designer for the Codrington Library, which is an exquisite building. Um, it, it's Gothic on the outside in his, in his typical, uh, manner to k-keep in, keep, um, with the, the medieval traditions of architecture in, in Oxford and, and a, and a magnificent, um, classical interior within it. And hard to reconcile these, um, these Baroque, um, arcuated windows with the Gothic external windows. But, um, it's, it's, it's a feat, a feat of architecture in itself. It's a magnificent long room, um, really an extraordinary space to be in and, um, a very, a very, very, very interesting piece of architecture Um, so here you see the, the Orangery, um, there. We've re- we-- Th-this is a photo montage. We reconstructed the lost gardens, um, that were part of the Bridgeman plan in order to provide some kind of idea about how we might create a facade to the new building and, and sort of reflect that long-term relationship with the lost garden in the hope that we could be a force for good in getting that reconstructed at some point in the future. So our, the layout of our building facade, um, i-i-is, i-is in, in sync with that lost garden. And it is a very, very fine building, a really magnificent piece o-of late 18- late 17th, early 18th century architecture. And even though it's not in stone like some of the other buildings o-of Hawksmoor, the, the architecture still has that incredible authority as if it is built in stone. Um, and that was clearly, uh, in his mind, and, and that, that gives you a strong sense of, o-o-of his architectural pedigree and interest in, in, in classical detailing. And if you compare it to some of his other buildings, this is St. Alfege in, in Benne- in, in, i-in, in Greenwich. Um, you can see that, that all of the molding types and everything else are exactly the same. So he was designing both of these buildings at the same time, and that is a remarkable piece of architecture if anyone doesn't know Hawksmoor. Duncan? Uh, um, really worth seeing. Um, I think, I think there should be a lecture series on Hawksmoor at some point. It's an absolutely breathtaking kind of rendition of the classical tradition at a time when nobody else was really doing this kind of work. And his famous, um, Christ Church Spitalfields was, uh, another remarkable piece of his work. But looking at the key detailing and the proportions of his elements, um, brought us back to, to, to, to see that it was purely Hawksmoor who's responsible for the Orangery, um, plan. Um, there it is with compared to, to the Hodrington Library. And with our measured drawings, um, we were able to, to, to, to compare it with, um, some of the other magnificent detailing of other buildings by Hawksmoor to see how it fitted into this family o-o-of architectural projects. And these are really remarkable, mostly unknown London churches, um, built at this just after the Great Fire. And, um, although it's brick and, and, and painted timber externally, the interior is absolutely magnificent, and there are some elements designed by Grindling Gibbons in there, which, which puts it at the forefront of the English Baroque tradition. And, um, our, our measured, um, proportional systems guiding our new design and, um, and, and how that, um, was generated from our proportional analysis of the main buildings of Hawksmoor's, um, front. And that translated into architectural construction drawings, um, in, in the way that we do, um, in our practice, um, which generated, um, this building. These were the designs for, submitted for the planning permits, um, and some, together with some, some, some photo montage perspectives. And, um, the building is now under con- now finished, um, but, um, some great craft traditions were deployed in the completion of the facade. Um, and that's the finished building, um, and, and, uh, and it, in context of the original building and with the palace in the background Um, but just back to monuments briefly. Um, I, I was al-always impressed by the, the, the argument everybody has about, uh, Maya Lin's, um, um, war memorial in Washington, um, for, for the Korean War. And, um, uh, for me, every time I walk down that ramp, um, I don't see it as a classical building, but I see it as a perfect, um, rendition of Book Six of the Aeneid where Aeneas describes his descent into the underworld to meet the souls of the soldiers who fought with him at the Siege of Troy. And when I walk down that wall, I'm, I'm, I'm in the Aeneid, and I think that's an incredible relationship that people have kind of not, not really taken. I think if you walk down that ramp and read it at the same time, you suddenly see this in a very different way than just a giant kind of slash through the landscape. So there's more to this monument, I would suggest, than people have hitherto suggested. Um, but the great monuments in DC are a, are a, are a, a vision of perfection in many ways, and they're, they're, um, particularly, I mean, this was of great interest to, to me, uh, partly because you can walk through it in the middle of the night, um, unfettered. And that is a, I think, a tremendous demonstration of freedom in modern society that you can walk into and partake in, um, uh, um, the, the civic structures, um, of, of your city. And that's absolutely remarkable, and I don't know anywhere else that you can do that in the world. Um, but in my Bomber Command Memorial, we did that, and we resisted every attempt to put gates on it and stop people being in there at night because that experience of being able to walk into a monument at night is a true expression of civic freedom. And I think, uh, everything we do will be along those lines to maintain that, that, that, that slightly metaphysical sense of freedom.

Later Projects & Monuments

Speaker 3 51:38

Um And in, in Normandy, we did something slightly similar. Um, we buried a monu- a monument in the landscape. There are no gates or entryways to it, so you can simply find it as you cross the landscape. Um, although when you get there and overlook the sea, you feel a, a, a very kind of spectacular relationship of building to context. But when we started the project, uh, again, um, um, uh, without any clear brief really from, from anybody, we, we, we spent about a year just recording the site in a series of paintings so that we could all just imbibe the sensibility of the space before we touched it. And, um, what-- in a sense, the silence and simplicity of this painting is, is, uh, is, is, is one aspect of it. The other thing is that this was a battlefield on the 6th of June, 1944. And, um, and a hundred and seventy-nine thousand men came ashore on five beaches along here. This is one of the five. And, um, a battle raged for many weeks. And, um, and what we were to build there would commemorate the loss of life of twenty-two and a half thousand of those men Um, so our master plan for the 60 acres begins with, uh, on the right with a, with an entry, um, into, into the site from the, from the local town, um, with car parking and toilets and shops and everything else on close by there. And then it's a long walk with six stone steles kept telling you the history of what happened in the Battle of Normandy, so that by the time you get to the memorial, there's no signage, no information, just stone, bronze, the sea and the sky, and the names of 22,000 men. Um, there's no, no, no need for any further information. And but, um, it took two years with an, a lot of, um, direct negotiation with everybody involved, including the 15 farmers who had to sell us the land before we could even think about building anything here. So it was a, a very, very long, um, journey, um, at many, many levels. And that's another great thing about, uh, being an architect. When you're involved early in a scheme, you can have an, a lot of influence over, over things that you would normally not be, not have any influence over at all. So choosing the site was part of our job, and that's what we did. And, um, I think it's, it was definitely the right place to put it. And, and great to be able to face all the veterans and the men who, who lost colleagues on that beach on that day, coming to see the memorial and, and telling me what they think of what happened in their life and how they feel now has been a very rewarding part of that process. And, um, um, and I was happy to, to, to meet an American veteran who's still living in Normandy. He's 101, Charles Norman Shay, absolutely wonderful character. And, um, and I, I've been trying to meet these veterans to just talk to them about their experiences, and I did that from the beginning, and I'm still doing it long after it's finished. A wonderful man, and this is his citation for a Silver Star, and very few people were awarded anything on D-Day. But he, he under German machine gun fire, he was pulling men out of the incoming tide, and these were injured men who would have no chance of survival if he hadn't pulled them out of the tide. So a remarkable man, really, and a Native American Indian. Wonderful, wonderful character, and he duly signed my drawing, which makes me very happy. So the signatures of the surviving veterans will continue to go on that drawing until the last one. I could meet the very last one So the monument itself overlooks the sea, um, overlooks the battle space of Gold Beach, um, where troops came ashore that morning. And over on the right... Sorry, the left, uh, you see the remnants of the Mulberry harbor, which is an absolutely extraordinary piece of engineering, where concrete caissons were brought across the channel, including two pipes, um, to, to, to, to bring the fuel for the entire, for the entire army invasion. All the way to Paris was fueled by those two pipes for six months. It was, uh, o-one of the most extraordinary engineering feats of the Second World War or of any time, really. So it's, it's wonderful to have the memorial overlook the largest archaeological element on the D-Day invasion beaches. And the memorial itself is a, is a very simple structure, um, very, very minimalist in a, in a way. Um, q- and it's based on a, on a kind of courtyard with no buildings around, so it has a sort of monastic feel in some ways. Um, and, um, rather than having any institutional buildings around it, it has the sea, uh, which is a very kind of interesting idea of having, um, a, a courtyard without the buildings behind it. But we did a, uh, quite a detailed, um, um, analysis of, of all of the significant courtyard spaces in history, of which there are an enormous number. But we made our own choices to, just to understand the scale of what we were doing, really to see how they were. The forum at Pompeii, um, et cetera, et cetera. Um, so we classified them in an- buildings from antiquity. We looked at medieval college buildings to understand how those courtyards worked. And it's all, it was all to assist making sure that the scale of what we finally produced had a familiarity, um, with buildings that people would certainly know about or have been to visit. And that, that new, that juxtaposition of something new and something familiar, I think is an important thing as an architect to do when looking at precedent. Um, so it's good to see UVA's considerably bigger, um, and as it should be. And, um, uh, the kind of more French rationalist projects. But looking at the examples of how courtyards are made, um, was a really impo-important exercise for us, especially looking at the 12th century things in Normandy, here at the Mont-Saint-Michel. Absolutely magnificent 12th century courtyard. Um, and here in, in Sicily, in Palermo, another Norman courtyard example of more or less the same period, um, which is remarkable. Um, and obviously, um, Bramante's magnificent, um, courtyard at Santa Maria della Pace Another influence for this memorial, um, is certainly the Temple of Poseidon at, uh, Sounion, Cape Sounion, um, where I would go for the weekends when I was measuring my, my Athens Academy to get out of the August heat of Athens. This was a, a great place of repose. And, um, and it al-always fascinated me that this magnificent temple on this extraordinary outcrop overlooking the sea, um, was just such a magnificent relationship between architecture and nature. And, uh, in a sense, we recreated it here in Normandy. So this is the sunset, uh, a summer sunset through my Normand-- the colonnades of my memorial. And it is a remarkable place to be at sunset, and you do feel some connection to the soul of antiquity. Um, there's a deep connection there, even though the physicality of it is, is significantly different. Um, if any of you haven't been to Cape Sounion, that relationship of architecture and, and, and, and landscape is truly remarkable and unique. And our own detailing, um, o-of, of the memorial is, i-is different, again, with some, some subliminal connections back to Schinkel, who's truly the master, and, um, reflecting on him is always a, a good thing to be doing. So w-we'll be doing that for some time to come as well, I suspect Um, and, um, so it's a, it's a, it's a mixture of this colonnade covered with oak, oak beams, um, set against the more authoritative memorial court building, um, in the center of the memorial. Um, and, um, the, the, the other important thing about this memorial is, is this memorial, which is dedicated to the French civilians who lost their lives in the battle. And almost as many individual people died, uh, finding themselves suddenly in the middle of a battlefield, um, um, between June and August 1944. So we've commemorated them with, uh, with their own memorial. And, um, and when, when you see photography of what happened, and this is the great medieval city of Caen, of William the Conqueror, um, brought entirely to rubble, almost entirely to rubble. Remarkably, some of the churches have survived, um, as they are today. But the city was absolutely devastated, and with it, um, thousands of casualties. So we, the, the, the architecture we've chosen for this is, is much more to do with the, with the local vernacular Normandy, uh, Romanesque architecture. Smaller scale stones, five-centered arches, which is the typical kind of geometry of arches that you find in Romanesque architecture. Um, and, um, following some absolutely magnificent local buildings that were a joy to kind of look at, including here, the Church of Ver-sur-Mer, just, uh... That's a view from our memorial, so it's not far away. Um, but again, put together with the same kind of tectonic, um, tectonic quality as the rest of the memorial with solid load-bearing stone, um, for, for the entire project. Um, at the h-heart of it is, um, uh, is a, is a wonderful block of stone with a wreath and shield on it. And that wreath and shield, it's one and a half meters in diameter, so not the, not the shield of a man in battle, but a shield of an army laid to rest with its broken elements as a symbol of the end of war. With a, a wonderful, um, um, text and, and, and wreath carved by, by a wonderful woman sculptor who did a fantastic job with this. And, and she was very happy to, to work with ideas of antiquity about how shields would l-- how looked and, and how wreaths looked. So we were able to bring some of those kind of fresh ideas of antiquity, um, to a new thing and, and avoid the kind of whole 20th century idea of what wreaths look like. So we were able to rethink that afresh from start to finish. And, um, the whole thing is paved in a, in a wonderful way. So the paving is cr- is critical to it, just as you-- if you visit any great historic space, the paving is always important and a thing we all remember. And having that crafted, uh, to the same level of specification and quality as the superstructure is a really important part of this particular project. Um, in closing, this is a, um, this is, um, um, an 18th century magazine in Hyde Park in London. Um, the, the wing on the right is new, which was designed by us. The rest of it's been there since the 18th century. And that little white thing peeking o-over the edge is the other addition, which we didn't design, but, um, Zaha Hadid did. And it was a wonderful collaboration, in fact. Um, this is our extension at one end, and this is her extension next to it. But the, the thing that was fascinating about this project, and we did it as joint architects, and she, she was a wonderful woman, actually, and a very talented designer, no question about it. And the thing that we had in common was that we were both students of Leon Krier. So, um, it, L-L-Leo's legacy with her just never ended and carried through her whole life. So despite what you think of her architecture, she had a, a, a very soft spot in her heart for Leo and the shared experiences that she had, which I had too. Um, just very finally back to Churchill, um, 'cause we're not gonna let that story go, um, um, quite so easily, despite the paint daubed on Churchill statues all over the world. Um, we are, we're in the, in the process of, of designing a memorial to Churchill. So this is a very early stage, um, sketch of how it's going to be, um, a sort of small stone triumphal arch with a wonderful bronze figure, and he's saluting. It's not there about him. He's saluting the names on the memorial, so he's there reflecting on the losses and sacrifice, which is exactly why you're there too, so he becomes one of us, as it were, um, in, in our experience of this memorial. So i-i-in, in summary then, I mean, uh, this is, uh, the, the Arch of Vespasian in Rome. Uh, it's one of the rare examples of a, o-o-of a, um, a triumphal arch with only two arches. So, so w-we, we kn- we're following this idea, uh, with, with considerable authority. But I, I just in closing, I, I would just like to say, I mean, I, I love this painting of Pierre Bergé, which I, which I look at every day, and it's a kind of wonderful reminder of, you know, of, of the, uh, of the room we're in, um, with all of those, um, with all of those elements that we carry in our imaginations into our, into our work every day in our pursuit of, of architecture. And that door that we enter into every day, which is, which is the door where creativity happens, and we reflect on all those things that we've just seen and invent. And I think that's a, a, a golden moment in the, in the day of every architect. Um, and we, you know, I, I would suggest that we will all continue to do this. This is a stone that we commissioned just as a reminder of the three characteristics that we were, we are in the, in pursuit of, um, in our daily activity, in the pursuit of architecture, so firmitas, utilitas, and venustas. Thank you. Are there any questions before I head to my eggs benedict, which Carrie has organized for me somewhere?

Speaker 4 1:06:52

Yes. Yep.

Speaker 3 1:06:54

So

Q&A

Speaker 5 1:06:59

I just wanna ask if you were designing the East Wing of the White House, what would be your process?

Speaker 3 1:07:09

My process, you mean for designing or for getting it built?

Speaker 5 1:07:14

How, how would you go about thinking about what that should be, what that should look like?

Speaker 3 1:07:19

Um, well, the client's brief, I think we all know in this room what that brief is. You can either ignore the brief and walk away. Um, th- um, there are already several kind of counter projects for that, which are sort of floating around the internet of all sorts of wild and wonderful propositions. Um, every time there's a major building project or competition, um, architects go wild with their propositions, and, uh, I think we all saw what happened at, uh, at, um, Notre Dame in Paris before the president finally said, "Enough, we're just going to restore it." So I, I don't know whether that sort of process will happen here, but, you know, buildings evolve. Buildings do... I mean, I mean, looking at my plan here of Kensington Palace that we know, it evolved and continually expanded and developed over centuries. You know, H- Hampton Court Palace too. You know, once Wolsey was out of the way, you know, Wren came along with this vast courtyard and every, you know, people just-- Bu- buildings evolve, buildings extend, buildings grow. Why shouldn't they? Um, it's a question of really whether they, they make, um, a valuable contribution to the whole or not. So if suddenly there's this massive lopsided wing that's way too big for the rest of the, the White House composition, and it's a delicate composition. It's a beautiful building. I mean, that portico and, um, Jefferson's State Capitol in Richmond are two of the finest porticos in the country. So throwing that off balance is, you know, is, uh, um, is, is a potential risk here. But look at the, look at the, the, the extraordinary extension to the National Gallery in Washington. Look what that did. So I think we're used to things going wrong. There's ample examples of b- of major extensions to significant public buildings that have gone really, really wrong and, and everybody dislikes them. Whether that's going to happen here or not is another matter. But it's a complex story, but I don't agree, uh, that there's some sort of fundamental principle that prevents development, 'cause it- there's-- history tells us that everything expanded and developed. So why shouldn't it happen in this case? It just needs to be a very wise choice of addition. Um, and why not?

Speaker 4 1:09:41

Thank you.

Speaker 6 1:09:46

Uh, Liam, you decried the diminishing of the architect's role in construction oversight. And, and from my world, I certainly see, uh, developers, owners always interested in cutting costs, whether they're fees or whether they're costs in the building themselves. What are you doing in your firm to push back against that diminution of critical oversight that's sometimes missing, many times missing now in our building world?

Speaker 3 1:10:11

Yeah. Um, well, if we're involved early enough, because an architect isn't always first on the scene. Whenever we're first on the scene, we can set the entire agenda for the whole project, and then invite the other consultants and set out how the whole thing's gonna work, which we do on most of our work, and that's just a skill set that we've developed over the years project by project. Having more and more control and demonstrating to the clients that that single point of contact of control actually creates a massive efficiency in the overall process and streamlines everyone's intentionality and makes sure everybody's working towards the same thing. But if it's a, if it's a cost-driven thing, then the architect has almost n- no, no way forward really, because there's always a cheaper way to do something, and it's very rarely better. So, you know, being there at the beginning with clients who have some education and interest and, and understanding really of, of, of, of, of the process, um, and if you can bring that as an architect to the equation, you're bringing something of immense value that nobody else in the design team can bring. And so I think, I think the case has to be made on, on each case. There are obviously certain building types where budgets are so restricted and, and developers have their own pre-made pattern book of things they wanna deliver, so your role is inevitably diminished just by the very circumstances of the commission. There's not much you can do about that except say, "Goodbye, I'm not really the right architect for you. Best of luck."

Speaker 7 1:11:50

Liam, first thank you for the reminder of how much of great architecture came through chaos, and it's a, uh, it's a really healthy message for all of us and the students especially. So thank you. Um, I think that was brilliant. I'm curious, when you were a young architect and a student, it's so rare to become a memorial architect. Did you aspire to that? Were you always into the history and the celebration of these great feats? 'Cause the, the memorials are... They're, they're brilliant. They're so different. They're fabulous, and your passion's clear, and your talent's clear, but was that something you sought, or did it just- No evolve randomly?

Speaker 3 1:12:29

No, not really. I mean, the first major memorial we did was the Commonwealth Memorial Gates, and, um, that was an, uh, started life as an open competition. And I th- I read the brief like every other architect does in the, in the journals, and I, I just thought this is an appalling way to go about building something of value, and so I didn't enter it. Um, the, and the next bit of news on that was that the jury couldn't find a winner, so they went for a stage two competition of six invited architects, and I found myself on that six list. And I thought, "Well, at least I can have a dialogue even if I think the brief is just rubbish. At least I can have a dialogue. I can have a voice at the table and say something about that." So we won that competition, but not with that design. We won it based on the brief, which was just so... O-one day, I sat with the client and I said, "We will never, ever get this thing built. The opposition will be enormous, and it's just unwise to pursue it. But we could try this." So I produced an entirely different proposal based on entirely different parameters, and that's what we built

Speaker 8 1:13:48

Hello. Uh, thank you for an excellent talk, um, and for sharing your work with us. Um, I just had a question about, uh, your decision-making early on in a process, um, in terms of, uh, precedent. So you highlighted a lot of, um, Greek classicism, your study in person of that work, uh, but also Hawksmoor and, you know, a lot of his work is derived from Roman classicism as well as, um, in Normandy, uh, y-utilizing vernacular Norman forms. So can you describe how you make those decisions early on in terms of, uh, the direction for your precedent?

Speaker 3 1:14:29

Um, well, it each... it, it depends on every individual project. I mean, the circumstances of Normandy are different from, from, from, from the Hawksmoor thing, which is a whole kind of research pro-project in its own right, really, to just understand who we're working with and what are we dealing with here. So it's a very open thing. It's not a kind of command and control process of, "I'm gonna do this. That's the outcome. Now do it." It's, it's like very open. It's like, "Let's see where this goes." And, um, just having a hunch, um, partic- Hawksmoor was very much a hunch that these large rooms have something in common. Are they all by him? In which case, we could make a firm attribution of this being Hawksmoor, and no one's done that before. And we just went about measuring and looking and, and comparing, and that, that, that's just one, one proposition. It's very different from Normandy. And I th- I think, I think we felt very obliged in Normandy to kind of reflect on the enormous collateral damage of what had happened And having met people who'd lost members of their family through all sorts of awful means, um, to, to not sort of say something about that for somewhere for them to go and lay a wreath and, uh, and, and ref- know that their suffering and sacrifice has a value to us. And I think that was important. And the vernacular Normandy architecture is magnificent, and it's got its own characteristics. And I think creating something with its own characteristics just made an, an awful lot of contextual sense. So when people come, ordinary Normans come to, to that, they recognize it's theirs. The mom-- the military memorial is, in a sense, is something much more abstract in a way. You know, the, the kind of solid stone walls with, with, with classical pilasters and things is, is, is, uh, is, is in a way much more alien to the local rooted population. But when we go there, we see the heroic endeavors of, of, of the allied nations to, to make France free and liberate it. So it has a value in, in a different sense. So it has different antecedents and different, different, um, sources of interest. But there's lots. I think, I think there's no one precedent in any building, I think, and that that's the r- the richness I think of, of architectural research, is that, um, there, there are many, many strands of relevance and symbolism and, and potency in the history of architecture. It's just a vast, vast wealth o- of extraordinary examples of wisdom, built wisdom, symbolic wisdom, design wisdom. Um, and, um, it, it's a vast well of truth to, to plunder as an architect, um, and make sense of it

1 1:17:33

Okay. This crew is

Speaker 6 1:17:34

undertaking,

1 1:17:35

um, a 20, a 25, a, a 25-building, uh, documentation process in Athens of all the great neoclassical buildings built after 1834, um, for the purpose also of documenting how, uh, a set of buildings can define the character and the identity of a nation.

Speaker 4 1:17:56

Mm-hmm.

1 1:17:56

A new nation. Uh, of all those buildings, you chose one. I think you chose the right one. It's the most important one of all, the Academy. How'd you make that decision, and what is it about the Academy that stands out over and above the others?

Speaker 3 1:18:12

Wow. W- well, I, it, I mean, the, the other, the other buildings, I mean, the, the Academy sits as part of a trilogy of classical buildings. Um, Hansen's brother, Christian, built the university building first, and then the Academy came second, and then, uh, Hansen came back at the end of his life after he'd built the parliament building in Vienna to build the National Library, which is the third building of the trilogy, and they're all magnificent buildings. Um, but in many ways, Hansen's library, uh, th- there are hundreds of neoclassical buildings of that type all over the Western world. The library, sorry, the university building is, is, is kind of interesting, but not that dramatic. It's a very kind of semi-vernacular building. But, um, but Hansen's, um, extraordinary amount of design energy, uh, put into the Academy, I mean, it's one of the most complex, complete buildings I've ever seen, ever. I mean, it is so full of detail and, and, and, and compositional rigor and, and interest. I mean, every tiny detail of that building is, is worthy of study in its own right, um, its proportions, its materiality. And also, if you, if you take the program apart, you can see that the elements are, um, a version of the Propylaion re- reconfigured to meet a 19th century institutional plan. And the fact that he resisted over-scaling it is an incredible, uh, um, depiction of restraint. That building could have been significantly bigger, and it isn't. It's, it's tiny compared to the 15-meter high columns of the Parthenon, for instance. Um, it's, it's, it's kind of, it's like a very, very small jewel of classicism. So it's un-- it's not over-scaled. It's, it's beautifully conceived in every possible way. I don't, just don't know any other building on the planet that's been designed with that level of rigor, attention, a- and, and exquisite beauty. I think it's the number one building.

1 1:20:29

Thank you. I, I have it, I have it from very safe sources that you're part Irish, so it'd be a great thing and invite you to join us in the cathedral football to leave this meeting by exclaiming, "Go Irish!"