91社区

How did you decide to become an architect?

Yeah, how did I decide? It was a bit indirect, Jim, to be honest. I was like every kid right out of high school right into university and not really sure what I wanted to do. But I heard that if I took a maximum number of subjects, I could go into either engineering or science or arts or architecture. In fact, I hadn鈥檛 thought much about architecture. And I remember I wanted to be a math physicist at one time until I darned near flunked out of first year physics. I decided that wasn鈥檛 a good idea. And marine biology for whatever reason. It might have been John Steinbeck; I knew he was a marine biologist. It interested me. And but I think it was the end of the first year I joined that UNTD Navy programme. Saw some great architecture in southern climates and George Challies鈥� s uncle, I think, was an architect and always talked about architecture. He gave me a few architectural books to take with me. 鈥淣ow, that鈥檚 exactly what I want to do鈥�, I said. I read through them and I thought to myself that would be an interesting profession.

[1:10:02]

What- how old would you have been then? Probably just after high school?

Yeah.

About, what, twenty? Nineteen or twenty I guess?

Yeah, nineteen or twenty years old at the time.

And you were at 91社区 then when you were starting to get your-?

Yeah, I started at 91社区 and kept all my options open just so I could, you know, decide what course I wanted to get into. But having seen some interesting architecture and starting to think about it over that summer, I decided that that had a nice combination of kind of arts, a bit of science, creative- I could draw; I knew I could draw. I knew I could do those things. And it just hadn鈥檛 occurred to me before but it kind of clicked over that summer. So I have to give George鈥檚 uncle some credit.

[1:51:14]

And it was natural, obviously for you to carry on at 91社区. I guess you didn鈥檛 give it-

I was already at 91社区, yeah. I worked out of town in the summers and studied in Montreal during the year. That was sort of the modus operandi. So that鈥檚 what I tended to do even then. And 91社区 was a logical choice. I never really considered any other spot.

[2:14:01]

Okay, 91社区 days.

Oh 91社区! You鈥檙e asking me to compress a lot of time in a very short period here. Actually, I remember my whole of 91社区 as being quite exciting years. It was I think the combination of professors and definitely the students. It was the days when you worked, I don鈥檛 know, all night. It seemed to be to two o鈥� clock every morning. Kind of drove home. Got out of bed early the next morning, worked until two the next morning, just day after day. And challenged I think. Challenged by a lot of professors. I mean, you could be critical of professors, but if they didn鈥檛 do anything else, they got us to work long hours; they challenged us; they motivated us, sometimes because you were angry with them, and sometimes because you were working with them. But I can鈥檛 think of any professors I didn鈥檛 like. I think they all contributed, people like Stuart Wilson鈥檚 sketching camp was great. I still find it鈥檚 the best way to design. I still fill up a sketchbook every six months or so or every three or four months. I constantly sketch when I鈥檓 at home and outside the regular office hours. I find it a good way to get work done.

[3:24:22]

It also relaxes I guess. It鈥檚 a form of relaxation.

It鈥檚 relaxing but I find I can draw a lot faster than I can get it on computer and draw mechanically and whatnot. So it鈥檚 still a fast, three-dimensional way.

Is the sketching related to-?

It鈥檚 really drawing, drawing related to building design. And when I鈥檓 on holiday, I sketch a lot of whatever. It could be landscapes or it could be more, you know, being an architect, it tends to be more urban situations. And, of course, there was Peter Collins, who, I guess we got a very formal architectural sort of treatment from him in history. And I always remember going to Europe after taking my, what was it, history of architecture book.

Bannister Fletcher was it?

Bannister Fletcher, yeah. And it was kind of interesting to bring. But and also it wasn鈥檛 everything. I remember probably being more influenced by people like Vincent Scully afterwards, siting buildings and looking less at the building I saw and more at the context and how it evolved. And I guess from that point of view, there was always Norbert Schoenauer who would tell us that there was a lot of architecture that wasn鈥檛 in Bannister Fletcher that was equally important, books like Architecture without Architects that I still find fascinating to look back at, whether it鈥檚 an Indian village in Northern India or Iran or Afghanistan to see these places. Or more recently, I鈥檝e been to China and looked at some of their architecture. So that鈥檚 been- that was a very good foundation.

[4:55:04]

Did you enjoy I guess the lectures with Peter Collins? Was that one of your favourite courses at 91社区?

Yeah, they were excellent. I must say, I developed a bit of a bad habit, though. When the lights go off and the slide projector goes, I tend to catch myself napping. I did then and I do now, but I found the research, the kind of rigorous research quite interesting. And I still am fascinated by going back to Northern France, seeing the cathedrals or, you know, England. In fact, I just came back from New York. There was a great- paintings by Constable of Salzburg Cathedral. And you know, it brings back that whole discipline, that whole fabulous era of architecture. So I still- in fact, what I鈥檝e got on the wall there is sort of part of our inspiration, San Marco in Venice. And if nothing else, it鈥檚 certainly created an interest in the history of architecture and not the sort of glib history of architecture. I think Peter researched it well. It was taught in a very systematic way. In retrospect, I really appreciated that foundation.

[5:58:21]

He certainly had a lot of respect. And I always found his classes interesting. This is not my interview, it鈥檚 yours, but anyhow, I just- and he was one of the people who worked as a catalyst for me to continue because he encouraged me all the time.

Yeah.

I鈥檓 just trying to think of others. Gordon Webber. Do you have any memories of Gordon Webber?

Oh, Gordon, you know, to me Gordon as a second year student at 91社区 is to me the kind of person you had never ever encountered before. He talked about composition, lines, the dynamics of lines, points in space, doing sculptural work and listening to music in the context of the body, you just don鈥檛 when you come out of high school in Montreal, you had never, at least I had never been exposed to that and I don鈥檛 think anybody had. And you know, when you get right- I find even today, like when I get right down to it and I鈥檝e got an elevation of a building in front of me, I say, 鈥淲ell you know, we鈥檝e gone through a huge process here, gone this far, we鈥檝e got to get this thing to where it works visually鈥�. And you know, you find you use a lot of the rules that Gordon had taught. And a way of looking at a building other than the rigor of trying to figure out how to detail it, how to build it. But once all those things are looked at, there鈥檚 a certain visual discipline, which I think he taught us. Certainly, he opened up a huge world that up to that point, I鈥檇 never been exposed to at all.

[7:25:23]

None of us had. Do you remember-? Did John Bland-? I鈥檓 trying to recall. I think he taught Canadian history, didn鈥檛 he for a short period of time?

Well, John I think exposed us to what was really around us, to the great architecture of Quebec, that, you know, when you鈥檙e not living in Quebec anymore, you realize the fabulous history of architecture in Quebec itself, the small- the huge churches in all the small towns, the great farm houses, the great vernacular building. I think John probably more than anybody else taught us that those things were there. They鈥檙e in our back door. We didn鈥檛 see them but he got us out looking at them. And also I always appreciate John as sort of a practitioner of architecture, that he had the experience and he got [unclear] details approved. Some of the things that I know a little bit more about now, he exposed us to it in those days. We thought that was quite useful, not overly so but enough to give us the flavour of what it鈥檚 like to actually build a building.

[8:26:19]

Were you ever exposed to any, I guess I know the answer, visiting crits, like Ray Affleck or Guy Desbarats or Fred Lebensold or Victor Prus? Do you remember any of those people?

You know, I don鈥檛 really vividly. I don鈥檛. I just remember Jane Drew coming to the school and there was a classmate of Moshe Safdie鈥檚, what was his name? A tall guy.

Not Polloway?

Yeah.

George Polloway.

George Polloway and she [Jane] was very critical about one of his projects. And I was fascinated by the dialogue. It was quite interesting. He said, 鈥淛ane, you鈥� ve got to look at the drawings again鈥�. You know, he just wasn鈥檛 going to take any guff from her! It was kind of neat to see somebody with that kind of level of conviction. And she realized that she probably should look at those drawings again and try to re-understand the project. But no, I can鈥檛 say as any of the visiting crits, except for that particular incident. A lot of the speakers stand out in my mind, but not so much the visiting-

[9:23:29]

The lecture series?

The lecture series, yeah.

And I think at one time when we were there, we used to have trips to various cities. And I don鈥檛 know whether you recall any of that. Not that it鈥� s relevant but now I鈥檓 talking about it. We used to go to Boston on the weekend, Saturday morning, come back Sunday and be entertained by the AIA people there to see the buildings.

That I found really fabulous. In fact, I was doing that as a prof later on at 91社区 as well, taking students down to Boston and seeing the work; going to Commonwealth Avenue and down to Boston City Hall and the Italian district and it was fabulous.

You taught at 91社区.

Yeah.

I forgot about that.

Yeah, after I graduated, I worked out of town for a while and then came back and taught at the University of Montreal for about a year or two as a part-time prof. And then at 91社区, when there was an opening for one term, I was sort of full-time half-term prof. And then I came out here to Calgary. I used to teach two days a week or two half days a week at U of C.

[10:28:24]

What, when you were teaching at 91社区, what were you teaching?

Basically taking the other half of Wit Rybczynski. Wit was on a sabbatical down I forget where right now, but I took his class. And we did- it was probably about a third-year level. Pretty capable students. We did a lot of housing design. There was some single-family housing, multiple housing. I forget what else. But also, just to sort of animate the process of it, we would often, or I would assign a one-day project or a two-day sort of charrette like they used to do at University of Montreal, the [unclear]. You just throw them at the project and see what happens. And those were really quite fun to kind of orchestrate a class and just prod them onto coming up with innovative solutions to things.

[11:22:18]

Then after I graduated, that was 鈥�64, I had previously worked in London in 1962. I went over to the library; I decided I wanted to work for a good architect. I didn鈥檛 know what that meant but I thought if I went to the library and wrote application letters to every architect in Europe, I might find one. And I worked for Basil Spence鈥檚 office in the summer of 鈥�62. So I decided I wanted to be a planner, too. Do just architecture as well as town planning. I had applied to the University of London School of Planning and to Basil鈥檚 office as well. And I got accepted at Basil鈥檚 office. And U of L was so long in sort of responding that I said, 鈥淟ook, I鈥檓 coming over. I鈥檓 working anyways. I鈥� ll see you when I get over there鈥�. So I had a job in London and when I got there, they decided they鈥檇 accept me at the University College of London as well in planning, which is a part-time evening course. And in those days, a place like Basil Spence鈥檚 office had fabulous commissions. They were doing great works in the southern part of London. I was working on the University of Sussex. I think I did most of the telephone booths, paving patterns, nothing terribly glamorous, but met a lot of interesting guys, went to the site, talked to the workers, went over to see Basil himself, who worked at a separate office. Just very kind of stimulating environment. But after about a year I decided the English approach to planning wasn鈥檛 North American enough. It was much more government-oriented than our system. Besides, some of the New Towns I found a bit disappointing. Some of the stuff that was coming out was [unclear] New Town and you know, we all looked at in magazines and whatnot. It was very nasty, just very crudely detailed. By North American standards, probably inhospitable and not livable. So I sort of made the decision that I would come back to North America to study. And I got accepted at Harvard. And in the meantime, I had written to Jeanneret鈥檚 office in Chandigarh. I thought well, I鈥� d like to work there. So my wife and I, we just bought a Volkswagen and just drove to India.

[13:36:04]

Are you serious?

Yeah, we didn鈥檛 quite get there because there was a war between the Pakistanis and the Indians. At the time, we got into Lahore to we had to drive back to Kabul in Afghanistan and I worked there for about six months and then went back to Europe and then went back to Canada to work before going back to graduate school. So it was a great experience. It鈥檚 wonderful to travel.

So this would have been about 1966 then? Summer of 鈥�66?

Yeah. And then worked in Montreal for a few offices doing mostly design work and then got accepted at Urban Design at Harvard, which I found very interesting. Those were the days when Lindsay was the mayor of New York.

John Lindsay.

The urban design guidelines had just been developed. There were environmental movements and people talking about greening Fifth Avenue. And in fact, I鈥檒l always remember taking a set of drawings down to New York and we had, one time we had Fifth Avenue all green, which indicated that it was pedestrian oriented as opposed to being grass. The customs officer looked at it. I was trying to convince him that it had no commercial value and he saw this and he said, 鈥淵eah, you鈥檙e right. It has absolutely- something this ridiculous-鈥� it had no cars on Fifth Avenue 鈥渋t has absolutely no commercial value whatsoever鈥� . So there was- a good experience at Harvard and then after that-

How long is that course? A year or-?

In those days, like a year and a few months. Just a little over a year, but it wasn鈥檛 the two-year course, which is standard now. And then after that, I did a lot of planning. I went to- I had a choice of either going to Montreal or a job offer in Toronto, but there was really nothing cooking in those days in Montreal, so-. A friend of mine had a job with John Andrews鈥檚 office in Toronto. He rented a station wagon and turned up with this huge truck. He said, 鈥淟ook, if you want to go to Toronto, I got have this truck for the price of the station wagon. You know, throw your stuff in鈥�. I said, 鈥淟ook, I haven鈥檛 got anything in Montreal, I might as well go.鈥� I never liked Toronto anyway, you know, that traditional rivalry, but it was, again, we worked on some great projects down around the CN Tower in Toronto and I worked on the Graduate School of Design building at Harvard. And then I kind of moved back to Montreal again to work in van Ginkel鈥檚 office. And did a movement and mid-town study for that office. We did a lot of urban design. Then he sent me down to Jamaica to work on the airport project there. And that was the first strictly speaking architectural work.

[16:09:03]

That was van Ginkel that sent you down there?

Yeah, with a team. People were doing some civil work, and other people were doing forecasting work. In fact, the guys that I鈥檓 currently with are very much from that- the groups I was working with at that time. And we were designing all sorts of crazy things in addition to buildings. We had this thing called the Ginkel Van, which was meant for an intermediate-level of transit in cities. And Sandy had this idea for a low-platform bus. And it worked fabulously well. It was designed if you can believe it by second-year architects. 鈥淵ou can graduate!鈥� And we sort of went down to Vale. In fact, I just spoke to somebody last year about if they鈥檇 ever heard of this. He said, 鈥淥h yeah, you know鈥︹�� It worked well for a few years and it was replaced by other transit systems that had the same principle, but obviously a lot bigger scale and production. So that got me into planning and kind of back into architecture, and from then on, I really did both. I did planning half of the time and even today, I still- maybe three quarters of the time, it鈥檚 strictly architectural projects and others in more urban design, design guidelines.

[17:02:23]

Is there one of the two disciplines that you enjoy more than the other or is it a blend?

You know, I don鈥檛 see it as a line anymore. In those days, maybe. But, you know, you design a building, you work right within the zoning bylaws. And I鈥� ve always thought that if you can modify the zoning bylaws, why not, you know? You鈥� re really designing architecture. You know, you鈥檙e designing what the architects could then design. So I鈥檝e never really regarded it as a strict line. I鈥檓 not a process planner. I鈥檓 still very much a physical planner, or I deal with physical things as opposed to processes or social issues. But I鈥檝e just kept on pretty much in that vein, you know, worked in- you know doing more straight architecture in Montreal. And when I moved out west, did a lot of large-scale planning projects, master plans for Lake Louise. We鈥檙e doing urban design plans for east end of Calgary right now, trying to reinvigorate that area of the city. Just the whole spectrum. So I鈥� ve never seen architecture strictly as, you know, you get a commission and you design a building and you walk away from it at the end. I think you have to understand the planning parameters behind it. And, you know, it鈥檚 really fundamental to just being able to carry the project right through. And it鈥檚 too bad the profession tends to be compartmentalized a bit like that. But the way it鈥檚 practiced today, it鈥檚 certainly not. Nobody can afford to be strictly an architect, or strictly a- it鈥� s such a narrow band. And we work all the time, I work all the time with sociologists, economists, with people that I call process planners, who set up systems to make cities happen or make buildings happen. And I find that is as exciting as just the physical design itself.

[19:19:28]

The question I wanted to ask you and you don鈥檛 have to answer this if you don鈥檛 want to, if you had to do it all over again, what changes, if any, would you make? Obviously, the career that most architects have sort of thought of when they were both starting off, I guess it鈥檚 like that with any young adult, they think that the world owes them- not owes them a living but everything- the world is my oyster. Well, quite often it doesn鈥檛 turn out to be that. And I think you- I sense that you obviously enjoyed your life, but it鈥檚 the ups and downs I guess that create havoc for a lot of people. Would you do it all over again? Is that fair?

Well, you know, I would do it- I鈥檓 trying to think how I might do it differently or smarter or something. I think I would do exactly the same thing, Jim, except I鈥檇 do the stupid things longer. Afghanistan, I remember leaving there because we couldn鈥檛 have gone through the passes. They were getting snowed in. And I鈥檝e often thought, 鈥� You know, there鈥檚 an opportunity I should have probably worked at for a year or two鈥�.

Stayed there.

Stayed there.

Because you would never get back there.

I鈥檇 never get back there and there was lots to do. There were schools to design, there were clinics to do, there were bridges to be built. All kinds of stuff that I鈥檝e never been exposed to. You know and actually, I鈥檓 working on a small job, well, different scales of jobs. One in China, but it鈥檚 kind of interesting to go back to a technology that鈥檚 not western, let鈥檚 say. To work with mass concrete walls, sun-dried bricks and things like that. So no, I don鈥檛 think- I鈥檝e had ups and downs but I can鈥檛 say it鈥檚 been-. Well, I guess the other downer is you know you work on projects- at one time, we were thinking about to be a great architect, you really have to be a great developer. And we developed all this. Luckily, we had a very good contract with a developer in joint venture. The thing went under big time. And as it turned out, na茂ve as we were at the time, we had no exposure to the liability. But going backwards, I鈥� ve probably leaned as much- had I not done that, because I wouldn鈥檛 have known the pitfalls. So when it鈥檚 a bit of digging ditches and falling into them, you know, you bumble a lot of them but-

[21:35:03]

That explains it very well, digging ditches and falling into them. Right, you have to learn.

You kind of learn. And you know, I鈥檝e never been- I know some architects are really sensitive about wanting to control things that you want to control a building or how- or because you think that you can control it. But in fact, I鈥� m quite happy to work- to design the building so that they can change over time and I鈥檓 not- If somebody thinks a window should be two feet above the ground, or above the floor, not one foot six, that鈥檚 fine, because frankly, I鈥� m sick of seeing buildings with closets pushed up against floor to ceiling glazing, you know, that don鈥檛 work anyway. So you better listen to people and understand how it works. And I鈥檝e worked on- well, we did the Chinese cultural centre here where very much the role I had was to organize the building but the basic orientation was done by people at our school in classical Chinese architecture. So we got the building facing that correct direction and we have the correct number of columns. And the proportion system was- certainly we helped, I mean, I helped on that, but I wasn鈥檛鈥� I just don鈥檛 find that you have to control in cities. Well, I think one good example is if you look at a city, it changes like crazy from year to year and people should feel free to adapt buildings to their own lifestyles. And so going back on it, I don鈥檛 think I would have- I mean, there are probably some smarter things that I could have done, but I may not have learned as much, so I鈥檓 not sure that I really regret that.

[23:12:15]

It鈥檚 very fulfilling; architecture is very fulfilling. I鈥檓 not talking about the financial aspects, but it is fulfilling if you鈥檙e kept busy all the time.

Yeah.

And the only thing is you want to be busy because that鈥檚 the time that you have fun in the profession.

Well, I鈥檝e never not been busy. I鈥檝e always- it might be the scale of commission changes, but if I鈥檓 not designing a big office building, we鈥檙e doing a small resort in the mountains or we鈥檙e doing- I鈥檝e actually stayed out of single family housing, because that鈥檚 almost too specialized, but I鈥檝e found that I鈥檝e been pretty busy. Sometimes you work harder trying to get work, harder than you鈥檇 like, but generally speaking, the commissions are pretty exciting, the clients have been good and I don鈥檛 really regret any of that.

[23:58:24]

In terms of schools of architecture and where the profession is going, I think fundamentally, the design discipline is still important. That is still central to why we get hired as architects. There鈥檚 no question about that in my mind. What I find quite interesting these days is I guess some architects are quite insecure with that. But I think that a good design is still appreciated by a good client. And strong design has to sell to a much, much wider audience. In most cities, I shouldn鈥檛 say most cities but certainly here, if we have a fairly big project, let鈥檚 say a couple of units of housing, you鈥檙e working very much with a client who鈥檚 watching the bottom line and watching the market and watching the project from where he thinks it鈥� s going. You know what the design concept is. You have to then relate that to the community in your building, because eventually, you got to sell that to the guy across the street if this is going to work for him. The ward alderman will want to know about it, the community association will want to know about it, and if the ward alderman is not on side, if the community association is not on side, the project is not going to go anywhere. So it takes I think a lot of design talent to make these projects happen. And I think that鈥檚 still fundamental to an architect鈥檚 education. I think the part that disappoints me sometimes in the profession is just that we don鈥檛 build very well sometimes. I mean I walk through on my way to work everyday through the Beltline area in Calgary. There鈥檚 a lot of high-rise buildings there that are constantly getting new walls put on them and the exterior skin is failing and the glass is failing. They鈥檙e just badly detailed. So sometimes we do disregard, I think, the technology side. But on the other hand, I think you can鈥檛 be a renaissance man. You have to rely on people in your office, you have to rely on contractors that can perhaps detail some of the building some of the time. But in our case here, we design the building, we insist on designing a building. We take it from beginning to end. We insist on having the best possible contract documents we can build because our clients know that if we don鈥檛 have that done, they鈥檙e going to get hit with costly extras. And we鈥檙e definitely central to the team. People say, 鈥淲ell, you鈥� re not anymore. It鈥檚 being controlled by developers or it鈥檚 being controlled by design-build guys. But I can tell you no design-build guy will get a building approved in the housing community. He鈥檚 just going to need an architect, and a darn good architect, to make that happen. He might be able to build cheaply but in an industrial park. But he鈥檚 not going to get any kind of building of any substance design. We tackle, I mean, just on a sort of philosophical basis, I鈥� ve always tackled single-family housing in a broader sense of doing community design on a big scale residential subdivisions of maybe a hundred acres or fifty acres, that kind of size. And there, it鈥檚 much more controlling the landscaping and controlling the builders. You鈥檙e not really designing every single house. You鈥檙e working with a series of maybe eight builders. They in turn have maybe ten plans and you work with them and modify their plans to fit within this sort of visual image of the community. But then again, for all the nasty things that are said about developers, architecturally designed communities with architectural guidelines that make sense are demanded by the broader market. So I鈥檓 not negative. I think a strong design core is still fundamental to just the basis of selling a project, getting it approved and making it happen.

[27:50:11]

Do you think the students are being short-changed on that now because of I guess the availability of CAD systems and so forth? Because some architects with whom I鈥檝e talked feel that the old sketch pad and creating the ideas on paper and then putting it on the computer is still the way to go. I guess it鈥� s some combination of that. Other people design I guess almost from basic thought and programme on computers.

Well, computers they鈥檙e sort of- if you鈥檙e going to argue about computers or not, it鈥檚 almost the same as having a pencil. I mean you can鈥檛 run an office. We couldn鈥檛 run this office without computers. In fact, when I look for sketch paper, it鈥檚 sometimes hard to find. I guess I鈥檓 of a different generation. I still work with pencil, and pencil sharpener, and eraser and I love doing that, but- and the initial, broad brush concepts are still coming out manually. And we put them on computer in the way that makes sense, as a developer tool. But it鈥檚 not a thinking tool or a design tool. It鈥檚 just another pencil. It happens to be a very handy one because you send drawings to other offices, you can give files to engineers, you can do all kinds of other things with it. So I think to come out of school today without that background would be like coming out of school twenty years ago without being able to draft. You need to know how to put those ideas out, communicate. But I think the fundamental thinking process though, understanding how architecture happens, where it鈥檚 come from, it鈥檚 still an important part of the learning process. In terms of who we hire at the office here, I just look for people rather than where they鈥檙e from necessarily, at their attitude and look at their design approach and whether they鈥檙e- you know, their whole thinking approach rather than their you know maybe their detailed background. But certainly, 91社区 students, I think, are consistently as good if not better than any of the other ones that we鈥檝e hired, so I think 91社区 is- by sticking to some very formal styles of education doesn鈥檛 shortchange its students and in fact is a darn good foundation. I think that you can鈥檛 teach everybody everything but- so you have to be able to lay down a core. And I think that core programme is a good one.

[30:07:03]