Inspirational Conversation With Sir Peter Cook for Aspiring Architects
and many other professions, in my opinion.
I never really gave a thought about what kind of architect I wanted to be during my undergrad study. This was 18 years ago. I wasn’t aware if there were styles and choices for the profession. I thought architects must be able to do them all, but later I started to identify an installation architect, a vernacular architect, and a high rise specialist architect. I even met some architects who only did residential projects because they felt better at designing small spaces. “No such place like homes”, they said.
Once learning the lessons about the profession, I quickly became invested with picturing myself in the future. I’d be starting out working in a studio, spending most time designing and drawing. Then I’d expand my experience to the sites, learning how to build the design and fit it into the actual ground. Then perhaps I’d learn more about cases during construction and project management. There was also a time I considered urban planning, the practice of designing various plans for communities and cities. Having had all the experiences I needed, I might decide what type of architect I wanted to be.
As you may have guessed, I naively presumed the process of becoming an architect was linear and predictable. Instead, just like being an artist, architect also deals with a personal calling, and the EGO. The latter even made this profession harder for me as architecture is one of the solutions to the problems needs to be solved in this world. There is not even a single architecture which doesn’t deal with humans. And the adjustment of this personal stuffs and the standards and systems set before humans became overwhelming for me.
But it was the elements of surprise in architecture which finally made me change my course, for the reason that I might not be a good one. I might not be willing to give up my artistic voices for the problems which don’t affect me. I wasn’t sure if I would care about the humans more than my professional ambition, and so on. I wasn’t sure if I was ready to become the kind of architect the world needs from me at that time. And that was the moment I thought that I had learnt everything about this profession so wrong since the beginning.
Only later I happened to read an interview with Sir Peter Cook, an architect, a lecturer (AA School, Bartlett School of Architecture), and a founder of Archigram, in this book called Mesh: Cutting the Edge of Digital Architecture (2003), I knew the things I understood wrongly. It was painful to figure them out so late but I was glad I saved them for my new course of professional life.
I never really figured out my true self during the study that it made me so lost and blinded by the seemingly ease the profession offered. I thought it was all about the design and the aesthetic, the function and the practicality. I forgot it’s also about my connection with all these aspects, despite they all will eventually serve other people and their society, more than myself.
This is a very rare book to find these days which I thought I should share. It’s very helpful for anyone seeking to develop a career in architecture, and in my opinion, in many other professions. He shared a lot of his experiences during his study and some great tips to keep up over times. Preparing a portfolio, dealing with technology, and some stories on the late Zaha Hadid, you may expect to find.
***
Mesh:
The aim of this publication is to be about developing a career + to help aspiring architects to develop an architectural language. There are many options for aspiring architects. One can go to work for a firm, well known or not, write books, do competitions, etc. For those of us who aspire to build something of a career, could you explain what you think it is to take?
Sir Peter Cook:
I think a lot depends on the first three years out of school and I think it depends a lot of who your friends are. I don’t mean in the usual if you join the golf club, you can get lots of work sort of sense, but who you hang out with in terms of inspirations, goals, and incentive.
If you hang around with people who are similarly ambitious, people who are fast in doing things and who are doing thing themselves, you are more likely to do something. If you hang out with people who are nice and sweet but who are a bit cosy, it will be more difficult to get somewhere.
I was very lucky because soon after I left college, I started hanging out with the people who become Archigram. We were people from different places who had mutual interests and we hung out. In a sense, we were sort of in competition with each other, but we were still moving each other forward.
Various people who were doing things always surrounded me. The other thing, I think, is that most people, who are going to do anything, usually do it in the first three years out of school — they usually have to start to make real achievement in the first five years. If they haven’t done it by then, forget it, it is most likely that they are never going to. There is a one in a thousand exception, but it is such a small proportion.
I think a lot of it has to do with activity. I am always having this conversation with Yael, my wife about not who is talented, but more importantly, who has killer instinct. The thing that depresses you slightly as a teacher is that you see so many people with real talent but they don’t have the psychology to follow through.
If they’re too cosy, it is even worse. They lapse very rapidly into a comfortable life once they have passed their exams and have had a few initial successes. So, it has to do with ceasing the opportunity. A lot of people are faced with the same sort of potential; some jump in and do it and some don’t.
Determination is another thing that you must have, as well as correct understanding of your own talent. Then you need to be able to make the most out of what talent you have. Somebody with middle talent, but 90% drive will get further than someone with high talent and 30% drive. There is no question in my mind on that.
Mesh:
If someone in that first three years is interested in building a career in architecture, what do you recommend they focus on?
Sir Peter Cook:
It depends on the personality. If you seem to have good communication skills, then you should move into something that would exploit those skills. If you have good graphic skills, then you should move into something that will use those skills. Also, if you have good technical skills, you should recognize that.
You should recognize what is you do well and go for it. It doesn’t mean to say that you don’t do a few other things as well, but you really pull the front the things you excel in. If someone is a sort of intellectual, they should go for an academic condition and not mess about with trying to be an all-purpose architect. Why play around at pretending to be an academic?
If they are sort of art architect, why go work in an office that does drains? You can avoid it. If you are a technical architect, go and get into the cutting edge technical situation as fast as you can so you can be surrounded by people who will be interested in what you do. I mean that’s it; try and put yourself where the people who will be interested in what you do. I think one of the biggest mistakes a lot of people make is to go to work for a big name office because it seems to be the thing to do.
Mesh:
Why do you think going to work for a big name office could be a mistake?
Sir Peter Cook:
It is easy to just get lost at the back end of the office, whether it’s Zaha Hadid or Norman Foster. Many tend to go where the crowds go. It sort of looks good on a CV, but that doesn’t last long.
It is much better to go somewhere that really interests you; where people would really support what you do. Go to the place where there may be a niche. Many think they must go to work for a big name firm, but so does everybody, so what does that prove? Not much.
Mesh:
What are some alternate routes one could also take?
Sir Peter Cook:
I think you have to decide what locality you are going to operate out of. Decide early on what your city will be. That is more important than people think. If somebody comes from city X, then hears that the fashionable thing to do is to go to city Z, but possible what they should have done is gone to Z in the first place.
What I mean is that people hunt in packs. If there is a lot of work in Berlin, they go to Berlin or if there is a lot of work in London then they go to London. You have got to sort of sniff out what your demure is. I think that matters more than almost anything because you can waste such lot of time being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Mesh:
As far as other opportunities for work, if you do not choose a large firm, what would you suggest?
Sir Peter Cook:
I think that you have to really study a city and its network. I think you have to hear somebody who may have worked for a big famous firm, has just jumped ship and is keen to make their own mark. You have to be prepared to work for very little money, at first, but maybe you are in on the ground floor or something really successful.
For example, rather than being the six-hundred and forty third person at Fosters, for example, you go and join so and so who just left Fosters, who is starting out with couple of others + who can maybe only offer you three quarters of market rate. You get in with Burt as he/she starts and gets their first break through. Three or four years down the line, that person has got forty people working for him and you are up there on the letterhead or running jobs.
Mesh:
We have heard you speak in the past about time management and how important it is. Could you comment on this?
Sir Peter Cook:
I think you have to go for a bit more than can be done in the time you have, but not twice as much as can be done in that time. You want to surprise yourself as to how much you can do like you have with this publication.
You wake up one day and actually you can do it and what was all the fuss about. Then you have to push yourself a bit harder and say if I can do this much the next time I can do 10% more. I think you always have to reckon that you can do 10% to 15% more, but not 50% more because you will just crucify yourself.
Mesh:
You have watched different people develop their careers, starting from when they were students. Do you think success has to do with choosing to do things at certain times? Is it about knowing when to grab an opportunity? People like Zaha Hadid, who you have known for a long time, what is that has set them apart?
Sir Peter Cook:
Well, I mean Zaha is a special case in the sense that she was extremely talented, extremely quick witted. She was the top student at the AA and that generation knew she was going to be big-time. She had a few disappointments along the way but she kept with it.
This morning I just bumped into Nicholas Grimshaw who was technically a student of mine, in my first group and now he is Sir Nicholas Grimshaw, etc, etc. He was always very bright and he was also the top student in his year at the AA. Everyone thought he was going to do something and then he jumped into it with this a sort of plastic bathroom tower. He stuck his neck out very early on. Often it is the very first or second move they make.
They are out there. Some people do things and they get constantly pushed down and they keep at it. It is very important to keep moving at mach speed — don’t just hang about. I know some people who are extremely talented but they say things like this just is not quite the right competition for me etc, etc.
They have list of things and they say they will do it next year but next year never happens because they have lost the initiative and then they wake up at the age of forty-five wondering why they are left behind.
Mesh:
Do you think persistence is what it takes to succeed at architecture?
Peter Cook:
Yes, I think so, unless you are someone who is very rich and you have someone to hand you buildings to do, which occasionally occurs here and there. If you are not it, you are just somebody who doesn’t have those resources, you have to focus on your own talent.
Mesh:
Do you think London is a good place for people who are trying to develop their career or could you say other places would be better?
Sir Peter Cook:
I wish it were. I think London has three difficulties as far as the English are concerned. English families do not support their young architects. In other places, occasionally the young family members young family members get to do the laundry extension or summer house. Here in London they say I have hired Mr. Jones because he will get it through the planning I hope you don’t mind hear.
Number two, London is very expensive which means that if you don’t want to live like a student and you need start having a taste for Italian restaurants, etc, you need a certain level of income and only offices can give you that so you get trapped. The family won’t give you work and you need to generate a certain amount of money just to keep your head above water.
The third reason is that it does have some rather good offices. So unlike some cities in Europe, you can go and work for Zaha or for Foster or for Rogers, Grimshaw, Ritchie, or Chipperfield. On one hand, you are not selling your soul because they are good architects, but if you are British, it can be a bit of trap. I think if you’re not English, this doesn’t necessarily apply and London has always survived fantastically on its immigrants.
Before my generation — the end of the thirties, immigrants came from other parts of Europe and revivified architectural mannerisms. They brought modernism to England provincial and they inspired the post war generation. There are also people like Rem and Zaha who live here and are not English but practice here. The fact is that we increasingly have to admit we are an aircraft carrier of the coast of Europe that happens to speak American, which … is useful.
Mesh:
When it comes to the process of developing an architectural language that you are going to take on as your identity throughout your life and your career, do you have any recommendations? How does someone go about this process?
Sir Peter Cook:
That is very difficult question because as soon as you consciously say I am developing an individual language, the chances are it is sort of forced language. The other thing to realize about design language is that you are the product of your period. I can spot historically whether someone was twenties or thirties, whether they were sort of Bozart influenced or not, which had almost more of an impact than the Bauhaus scene in a way. It is very difficult to avoid your period so you just need to accept that.
I am a product of my period, I still tend to organize plans a Louis Khan way, although it is hidden by a lot of brew — haha. I am still a child of a sort of romanticized high-tech. I can’t avoid that.
Mesh:
I have a question about computers. You see thousands of projects, do you think computer generated work is becoming a bit stale and do you think there should be a move towards something else?
Sir Peter Cook:
I think visually it is getting stale and I don’t think the computer techniques move fast enough. On the other hand, more can be done with the computer than with any other way. Also I think that computer is leading to a very worrisome aspect of people not thinking about their buildings organizationally, but thinking of them too pictorially.
The computer can very quickly give you a three dimensional image of something that turns around rather nicely and the designer doesn’t need to think about walking from the door to the elevator. All you do is press the buttons and there it goes whizzing up in space. Although things can look spatially interesting, I still think plans and sections give fantastic information about control. Make it quirky, mysterious or deceitful if you like so that when you go through the building, things are revealed to you in a magical way.
Mesh:
Do you think you would like to push more towards a combination of computers and hand drawing at Bartlett?
Sir Peter Cook:
I think I would like to see more interesting buildings coming out of this school. I think people can escape into theory and abstraction too easily. What I mean is that it is not hip to be interested in actually how you get drinks on the bar counter or how the toilets work, which is actually what space is used for.
When I go to Graz, I stay in a hotel at the back of the site when I look out of the window of the hotel, I look right on to the entrance and I just know we didn’t quite get it right. It is a process.
Mesh:
What makes a good building scheme or a good building?
Sir Peter Cook:
Well, I think one, if it works and two if you can remember it a year later. Also, there needs to be a very clear message about what matters. If the key thing is that you get a view of something special from a particular area or it is arrived at in this amazing space after climbing for a while.
Mesh:
What would you focus on when designing one room, for instance? Dennis Crompton, (also from Archigram) for instance said if you think about designing the space by having the objects and the function inside the space take over and that can define your design. Do you hold that same view or is it something else that drives your design?
Sir Peter Cook:
I think I like to write stories about the building, about what you would do. Right now I am working on this for a project and when I am drawing, I write little scenarios for the drawing. You can write scenarios, it helps. Think about what people do in the buildings and how they might behave. I mean I have always invented stories around my projects even as they were build and I can make up endless stories.
The first competition I won was a very small one housing for old people. It wasn’t built but I won it because I was very good about packing things into small spaces. You work backwards from real situations. A lot of architecture is developed by common sense.
Mesh:
Portfolios, that bring us to another question. What do you think you like to see?
Sir Peter Cook:
Oh, that is a difficult one; you just know when you see it. You know, it is a just a mixture of expertise and wit, but it can vary because you can have one portfolio that is not your taste, but it is good and you enjoy it for your own sake. You can also have another one that is more to your taste but it is under- worked so it is irritating, but you know you like it.
Then there are other ones you find it difficult to get yourself excited about. There are different criteria to different projects. When I go around at the end of the year giving out prizes and such, it is often completely different criteria.
Mesh:
Do you have anything else you might want to recommend to students who want to build their careers?
Sir Peter Cook:
Yes, it is very simple thing, almost a boringly obvious thing. I think you should always have almost immediately available where you are; a very good sort of brochure of what you’ve done. You know you have to be really well known and really into the biz to travel without this. Even you are backpacking, even if you are aimed to hear a desert island and you think you are never going to meet anyone.
That is where you meet someone, in the bar, on the plane, at breakfast, during a late-night conversation. Suddenly there is someone sitting there who says, oh you’re an architect. You say, yah, I have got something up in the bedroom, I will show it to you.
In the morning, you should never be without an updated one. I usually nowadays carry some sort of Berlin catalogue in there, which is our latest exhibit. I went to Vienna for a few days and brought the brochure, just in case there was a potential client here, or there … something who might want to give you an exhibition or wants to publish you, whatever. You say, oh here it is. It is an easy one. You should always have two copies with you.