There aren’t…
I don’t work in this way, with these references. I try to work like a normal person, like my mother for example, and I try to follow the needs of function and use: what does the place want, what does the place ask. It isn’t an academic work. These references upset me.
When you are in the planning phase, what is the first thing you do?
To feel, to think, to be careful… it’s nothing special, isn’t it? Just using common sense, to be bright, perceptive…
During the first planning stage, you think of the needs of the place and what it lacks. Then how does the planning evolve?
I don’t only think of the place: I visit it, because it’s a physical experience and all can be thought as being in the place.
In architecture, there’s always an underlying need. I think of the utilization: is what I do valuable? Do I like it? And what does it lack? I try to think and feel together the needs of function, use, and the peculiarity of the place. In the place physical appearance, when it’s observed, there is the whole history, because history shows in the world’s body, much more than in books. Also in books, certainly, but history, the memory, becomes narrative to be studied in university, where they need the book’s narration. But the true history, our families’ history, our people’s history, is here, and here, and there, and once again here, isn’t it? . So this is my work: to observe, and to understand what I see…or to try to understand.
In your work, emotion becomes memory. How is it possible to arouse the right emotion in those who live in architectural masterpieces, the wanted emotion connected to the remembrance that the architect would like us to feel in that specific place? I’m thinking especially of the residential house for the elderly in Masans…