Turning Architectural Dreams Into Reality, with Global Architect & Founder Bjarke Ingels

0:00It has to be beautiful, but also has to be functional. It has to be economic, but it also has to be generous. So once you can combine what seems like contradictions, you suddenly open a whole new world of possibility. Hello, and welcome to Giant Ideas with me, Cameron McLean, and me, Tommy Stadlin. We're co-founders of Giant Ventures, which builds and backs purpose-driven companies.

0:24Bjarke Ingels:At Giant, we're lucky to meet extraordinary people with Giant Ideas that are changing the world. This podcast brings you behind-the-scenes access to those ideas and the inspiring stories of the people behind them. We explore how one giant idea can kickstart a billion-dollar company, shape culture, and transform life as we know it.

0:48Bjarke Ingels:Today on the podcast, we welcome Bjarke Ingels. Bjarke has rapidly established himself as one of the most inventive and sought-after architects in the world. His work has had global significance, from Google's Silicon Valley office, on which he collaborated with another Giant Ideas podcast guest, Thomas Heatherwick, to the Danish Maritime Museum, to World Trade Center, and the Washington Redskins Stadium. In his documentary, he says, in real life, you can't realize your dreams because you have so many constraints. But in the dream world, you can do all these things. And when architecture is at its best, that's exactly what you're doing.

1:22You're coming up with something that is pure fiction, and it now becomes concrete reality. Today, we're going to talk to Bjarke about why architecture matters, what good architecture looks like, and his notion of hedonic sustainability. Bjarke, thank you so much for joining us on Giant Ideas. I guess we'd love to start just by asking you a very simple question. Why does architecture matter? The Danish word for design is form-giving, which literally means form-giving. Because to design something is to give form to that which has not yet been given form. In other words, to give form to the future.

2:01because when you're designing a space or a place, you're giving form to the world or at least a part of the world that you would like to find yourself living in in the future. So it is really a fundamental question, not of style or fashion or whatever. It's really a question of what kind of world would we like to live in. And do you see yourself more as a creative, as a designer, or more of a practical craftsman? I see myself as a utopian pragmatist. Okay, tell us more. Because in a way, like on one hand, you have what you could say is ideology or your sort of your dream of what a perfect world would be or the ideal world would be.

2:53And on the other hand, you have the practicalities of everyday life, of the logistics, the functionality, the economics, gravity, flow, traffic, etc. Even like legal issues, building code, you know, the limitations and possibilities of various materials. and it is somehow to while understanding and respecting and and in many ways you can say what architects do is that we try to turn all the practical into something poetic so so in that sense like i i don't really believe in in sort of discriminating between let's say form and function because architecture is one of the few media where form and function, you know, hardware and software is still actually integrated.

3:57In architecture, the flow of the spaces, the way that the light comes in, the way that your orientation is guided towards somewhere, the way you move up and down, the way things are placed next to each other, the form and the function is intrinsically connected and in that sense i would say if even when our buildings end up looking beautiful or different it is because they perform beautifully

4:26Bjarke Ingels:or they perform differently it reminds me a bit of um marshall mcclellan's idea that the medium is the message and to some degree you know like the the functionality and the form the usage the beauty they're all kind of interlinked i think mccluan was was very right and you can say like the medium in architecture is is space and of course we we can construct space in all kinds of ways we can contain it we can condition it we can frame it but ultimately that that that space is becomes the space of possibility or or or lack of possibilities if if we do a shitty job But in that sense, I think it's very true.

5:10In architecture, the two are inseparable. And talking of not doing such a good job, we had your collaborator, Thomas Heatherwick, on Giant Ideas a while ago. And Thomas, as you know, is ultimately very optimistic. But he's quite negative on the world of architecture today and was damning in his indictment of quite a boring world that we are building now. So many of the buildings we tend to build are soulless, are quite flat, are boring, basically, in Thomas's view. Do you share that view that we have, to some extent, lost the ability to build really interesting, beautiful, sustainable buildings, apart from one or two instances?

5:50Where do you think we are? I mean, I think, of course, I know Thomas quite well. And I also know that, I mean, I think he's, as I remember, his mother was a jeweler of sorts. So I think he definitely has an understanding of architecture that is very rooted in decoration. So in that sense, I think the absence of decoration for him is like a layer that's missing. I don't share exactly that mindset because I somehow love when the decor or what makes something beautiful or not is not an added layer, that it is intrinsically built into the way that the space is orchestrated. However, when I started studying architecture, I really noticed how bad a rep architecture has because I would sit at a dinner party and people would say, so what are you studying now?

7:01And I was like, yeah, I'm starting to become an architect. And then people would mishear me as saying actor and there would be a moment of interest. No, no, no, no, architect. And then some, ah, okay. And then typically the follow-up question would be, so maybe you can explain to me why are all modern buildings so boring? A lot of the decisions in architecture are made by real estate investment companies, where it's typically a lot of people that have a background in business. And they're portfolio managers of various kinds for pension funds or whatever. like sort of and for them the building is really just an an asset in in any asset class and it is ultimately an a line item with some kind of roi uh in an excel sheet so so therefore there's so far the people that ultimately pull the trigger or not make the big decisions or not are so far removed from the reality of what that line item actually signifies in the world.

8:09And that means that a lot of things sort of trickle down to the lowest common denominator. Also, the way that you assess costing at a kind of high level is very much associated with how you assess risk. so anything that deviates from the absolute common like comment like sort of lowest common denominator again is going to show up as a blimp that adds a little bit of perceived risk and that adds a little bit of of added cost and and and therefore the way that society and and the business of real estate has been organized really wants everything to end up predictably the same even if that's not what people are longing for when it actually gets built so so so therefore as architects we have to somehow resist that kind of entropy by coming up with ways and the way we try to do it is that we really try to understand what are the success criteria for the people making the decisions ultimately whether or not to build, whether or not to green light a project.

9:29And we try to see how ways that we can demonstrate there is the possibility to maximize or optimize the return to ensure the long-term value proposition of this particular asset. I, again, fundamentally don't believe that public and private interests are opposed. Because ultimately, if a place becomes popular for the public, that means that you will have footfall on the ground floor for the retail. It might mean that the sort of, and then by people coming there, like the lively restaurants, it might mean that they feel that, oh, well, this is actually a great neighborhood. so maybe the apartments will rent more frequently at higher rates, etc.

10:14So there are so many ways where you can show that public and private interests are actually two sides of the same coin, but it just takes more work. You've earned the right to kind of get away from what the modern world often demands because of economics in terms of rather boring buildings. So has Thomas. I do just want to ask, it's fascinating, You clearly are two big name architects. You have your own grand visions. What was it like collaborating? How did you make that work on the Google offices, for example, where you want to stay true to your own vision and your own integrity, but you're working together?

10:47I'm really curious how that collaboration worked out. Ultimately, we had various kinds of priorities and we kind of swore an oath that we would never reveal who ended up doing what. So that we wouldn't have to worry about it. But of course, we have different priorities and different focus areas. And so in that sense, the collaboration naturally found its ideal constellation.

11:24Bjarke Ingels:Let's maybe make it specific for our listeners and give an example of great architecture. You've been commissioned to design the Mindfulness City in Bhutan. Let's hear more about the Mindfulness City. What's your vision for that? It's been a sort of labor of love the last two and a half years. It just so happened that the King of Bhutan went to the coronation of King Charles, and then he did a stopover in Copenhagen, and I was invited for a dinner. And I ended up sitting next to him, and he said that he had been curious about meeting me because he was about to launch this special administrative region of 2 ,500 square kilometers in the south of Bhutan on the border to India.

12:05I like this, it's a country with less than a million inhabitants and they have two neighbors, China and India, like the two largest countries on earth. But they somehow managed to retain their autonomy and now they're seeing a sort of brain drain where a lot of the young Bhutanese migrate to Australia, to Canada. They speak perfect English, they're well educated, but they go there in pursuit of economic opportunity. So he was into this idea, could we create a framework, a new city from scratch that would be tailored to be attractive for international investment so we can provide the economic opportunities within the country, but to do so without, you know, flushing the baby out with the bathwater, without sort of reneging on all of the values that are essential to Bhutan.

13:03and you can say that the nine parameters of gross national happiness are actually rooted in sort of Vajraana Buddhist principles. So we took those Buddhist principles and baked them into the the kind of planning of the city. So the city it's in the tropical plains at the base of the Himalayas. It's 34 rivers flow through the whole region. So the city is shaped by the rivers. So it has it's also gently sloping down so it's almost like paddy fields like each each city block is like a terrace as it kind of steps down we're using locally available materials river rocks rammed earth wood bamboo and the the public institutions actually become the bridges that span over the rivers so because of course the building has like the city has no identity right now so the identity that it gets is this kind of relationship with the rivers could you maybe give one example

14:05Bjarke Ingels:of how a buddhist value has been directly integrated into kind of a design choice that you've made for the city no like one of them is of course like a respect for for nature respect for the for the environment so it doesn't displace nature it actually enhances it it doesn't displace agriculture it doesn't get rid of the rivers it actually is shaped by them um also um this design for community, like the public space is always orchestrated so that it can be animated by the ground. The ground level is always publicly oriented. So you'll have schools that spill out and you'll have teaching happening in the public realm.

14:47Instead of like paving everything with asphalt, most of the streets are permeable. So the tropical rains can seep into the ground. So also we ensure that you have spaces for mindfulness, for spirituality integrated in the city fabric. So sort of on as many ways as possible, it is a city that is somehow rooted in the heritage, shaped by the natural environment, that somehow still provides spaces and opportunities for the future of the country. And Björk, as part of this mindfulness city, you're also building an airport, which is meant to be mindful as well. I remember talking to the musician Brian Eno about his album Music for Airports.

15:36And Brian had this view, I think I'm not misremembering this, which is that the unease that you feel in an airport and the sort of latent anger of the people is all around a underlying fear of death, that they're all about to go up in an airplane and potentially die, which I thought was fantastic. And so he had this beautiful ambient music to try and, which I think was actually played in airports, try and calm everyone down. What's your approach going to be to bring some mindfulness to airports? Yeah, I think there's a lot of other reasons why you would be tense and borderline depressed in an airport than fear of death.

16:10But of course, death is always an option. But, like, you know, Bhutan is interesting because it's the, I think it's probably the most sustainable country in the world. They sequester twice as much carbon as they emit. There's 82 % forest cover. And the same is true in the region. So the landing strip of the airport actually is framed by two rivers and it runs across a third river. So along the rivers, we bring the forest in. So the arrival plaza at the airport is actually under the canopy of this tropical forest. When you go inside, we have this kind of rainforest courtyard that separates arrival from departure.

16:53So when you're going through passport control and security, you're next to a forest. When you arrive and you're waiting for your luggage at the luggage belt, you're next to a forest. And then finally, we've designed the airport using locally sourced mass timber. So it's kind of modular. It kind of echoes the sort of the sloping roofs of the traditional Bhutanese architecture. But it forms almost like a stylized image of a mountain range, if you like. And then one thing that's so unique about Bhutan is that they have like eight large schools where they still educate artists, woodcarvers, stonemasons.

17:32So we're actually harnessing that richness so that all of the kind of mass timber superstructure will actually be engraved with the traditional ornaments of Bhutan. But because of the vastness of the airport, we're having the artists do the kind of central spine. Then we're going to scan it and use milling machines to apply the kind of fabric to the rest of the airport. So in some way, again, it captures this kind of quintessential idea of the city that you can actually embrace modernity and economic opportunity and global investment, but without sacrificing your cultural heritage or your natural environment.

18:29Bjarke Ingels:Is this what you mean when you talk about hedonic sustainability? You clearly have an eye for an oxymoron and a phrase. So is that a good example of that? It's in some way like I've actually used the term ancient futurism for.

18:48Bjarke Ingels:But put two opposites together. I think very often, and you can say, if we bring it a little bit into politics, cancel culture and a kind of polarized public environment where any kind of productive discourse between opposing viewpoints has been silenced to death through a cancellation or polarization, is the opposite of oxymorons. And I think the reason that democracy is an interesting form of rule is actually that it provides a platform for people that are in disagreement to find solution in parliamentarism. When you really understand and appreciate what seems to be diametrically opposite or at least contradictory elements, but you also acknowledge that there is a point here and this is also important.

19:52It has to be beautiful, but also has to be functional. It has to be economic, but it also has to be generous. So once you can combine what seems like contradictions, you suddenly open a whole new world of possibility. Tell us then about this particular contradiction, hedonic sustainability, because it's obviously something we're very interested in because we back climate startups that we think are going to create a huge amount of economic value and be good for the climate, which in itself is perhaps, has been oxymoronic in the past. But tell us about your version. Exactly. I think I stumbled upon the concept.

20:27Our first project ever was the Copenhagen Harbour Bath. Through investments in surface drains, suddenly the port of Copenhagen had become so clean that you could swim in it. So on opening day, and it's a tiny little project, it had a million euro budget. But on opening day, suddenly all the Copenhageners are jumping in the port. They don't have to drive their car for hours to get to the beaches. They can actually jump in the port in the middle of the city. It's almost like, you know, 1968 student riots in Paris, Soule-Paville-la-Plage, you know, that you have the beach under the cobblestone, right?

21:02And it just became so clear to me that the clean port is not only nice for the fish, it's amazing for the people that live in it, that the sustainable city or building not only is better for the environment it's also more enjoyable for the people that live in it and suddenly instead of a sacrifice this kind of protestant idea of cold showers it actually becomes desirable and you can see them the electric car existed you know since my childhood but it was always some shitty car but when tesla finally cracked it and made a car that was faster you know more athletic safer and beautifully designed that's when the electric car started winning so in some way like you can almost say instead of always making sustainability a question of sacrifice almost like a moral or political dilemma what if you just simply make it a design challenge if you design the same the sustainable future so it is irresistible it's it's better it's more desirable, it's more enjoyable.

22:13That's how you win.

22:14Bjarke Ingels:I love that framing. I couldn't agree more that tackling climate change is really a systems issue to solve, right? It's a challenge of redesigning our systems more than anything to be delightful. It doesn't have to be necessarily a huge sacrifice. It's more about an intellectual challenge of redesigning the systems. I think that resonates a lot with me. Hearing you speak about the livable nature of Copenhagen, it also strikes me that you come from a rich history of Danish design and Copenhagen is a very, very livable city. How much do you think growing up in the Danish ecosystem and environment and traditions has influenced your views as an architect?

22:50Teenagers end up moving away from home despising their parents, but then once they get a little bit of distance, they realize how much they owe them and how much they actually are like them. And I think for me, it was not until I moved to New York, where I'm sitting now, that I sort of realized that some of the things that, like sort of unquestioned values, such as, you know, environmental responsibility or social engagement. um uh like i remember one of our first conversations with our first project here in new york and we were trying to make this sort of a rival plaza as as inviting and as and as engaging and as accommodating as possible which is how you would do it uh in denmark but he had triggered all kinds of you didn't want to make it so inviting that he would attract homeless people or people loitering uh or you know like sort of uh so so in that sense i started on i started understanding that of course in many ways even though I grew up criticizing and trying to change or add to at least the Danish model, I also really realized how much I fundamentally subscribe to it.

24:14It's also interesting, and you just mentioned that you invest in environmental startups that have the potential to make an incredible impact and in doing so make it you know be both environmentally and economically profitable i i love this idea that economy and ecology sound to the ears like opposites uh but but as you can also hear it's almost the same word because they're both They both come from the ancient Greek root oikos, that means house, because economy is the management of the household and ecology is the study of where you live. So in that sense, in the obsession with oxymorons, we came up with the idea of economical thinking, where again, that because, you know, also, as they say, you know, if you want to make a billion dollars, solve a problem for a billion people.

25:16and you could probably not find a bigger problem right now than to accelerate the energy transition and to decelerate and eliminate climate change. So in that sense also, just looking again at the fundamentals, I think it's also interesting to understand that when things end up being a big problem, it's rarely because of their failure it's often the byproduct of their incredible success. Bjarke, I think that's a lovely way to end part one. So much more to come in part two but thank you for joining us on Giant Ideas. Thank you. Thank you.

26:05If you like the episode don't forget to like, subscribe and follow the show and you can find many more Giant Ideas wherever you get your podcasts.