MONDOmagazine

By Tina Chu

This article is the second in a series about fAd, Toronto’s annual Festival of Architecture and Design. The first one can be found here.

On my way to “The Copenhagen Experience: Factors in Urban Revitalization” presented by the Royal Danish Consulate General, Canadian Architect magazine, and the Design Exchange, it was difficult not to think about urban development. With various building constructions and renovations dotting the city and the Michael Lee-Chin Crystal just around the corner from the St. George subway station, the event seemed only fitting.

The discussion, moderated by Ian Chodikoff of Canadian Architect, united four Danish architecture firms: 3XN, represented by Bo Boje Larsen; Henning Larsen Architects by Ingela Larsson; Arkitema Architects by Holger Dahl; and Holscher Arkitekter by Anette Madsen. It also featured a good selection of San Pellegrino soda and Danish open sandwiches (or smørrebrød).

Each firm began with a ten-minute crash course of its history, mission, design process, and projects, a time allocation barely adequate given the age of these firms, ranging anywhere from 20-50 years. Larsen of 3XN was the first to discover the time shortage; for his last minute he scrolled through a load of slides that I wish he’d had time to explain.

He did address 3XN’s devotion to being sustainable and thorough, taking every scientific, human, and environmental factor into consideration and exploring every type of material possible. 3XN consistently reviews what elements work in existing popular spaces and incorporates these ideas, while innovating its own updated features, to achieve the highest quality of work. Larsen also explained that there are no signature buildings at 3XN; structures are designed for the site and conceptualized based on the individual needs of each project.

Larsson of Henning Larsen Architects focused on the similar aims and approaches of HLA, which is not only concerned with how architecture works together with its environment, but internally fosters a non-hierarchical design climate. With 50 years of history and achievements, Larsson chose to speak mostly about HLA’s dedication to designing with master plans and for eye level, so that buildings are not built as structures in isolation, but are considered as functional units within the cityscape.

Continuing Larsson’s discussion of looking not just at the project at hand and the immediate future, Dahl began his introduction of Arkitema Architects by expressing his excitement at being “near Neil Young territory”; he confessed to being a fan. He then quoted Young’s lyrics, using Young’s environmental conscience to transition to Arkitema’s own objective in prioritizing social responsibility and sustainability. Winning more than a few smiles with the musical reference, Dahl explained that Arkitema’s goals are predicated on practicing architecture beyond the pursuit of aesthetics.

This view of architecture as a field with not only aesthetic but also social and environmental responsibilities was echoed by Madsen of Holscher Arkitekter, for whom architecture is about producing a framework for living. A small firm that focuses on national projects in Denmark, Holscher is meticulous in its design process. They believe architecture should involve people and hold workshops before any decisions are made, where not only the needs and ideas of private patrons are heard, but also those of the public, or users of the space.

The discussion with Chodikoff focused on the identity and place of Danish architecture in a globalized economy and what it can offer to a Toronto market. In terms of their identities, the four firms agreed that they present themselves as international firms nationally and as Danish, internationally. They are not intimidated by the competition of the global market, and feel that architecture can only benefit from the scale of international competitions. In relation to the place of Danish or any other international architecture firm in Toronto, the four believe their greatest contribution would be the level of critique in their approaches, and their ability to ask questions about the aspects of the city to which locals have become too accustomed.

All firms stressed the importance of the master plan, of connecting the old and the new, and of creating active, not passive, structures that give back, be it through casting their own shadows to prevent overheating. In addition, they believe the duration of a project’s construction process cannot be ignored and its space should still be usable even if the project is incomplete. Madsen of Holscher Arkitekter most poignantly captured the Danish approach, stating that urban renewal and architecture should be based on how people live and how they would like to live, not on a disjointed design made from bird’s-eye view.

When the floor opened up to the audience, the same ideas on research, collaboration, and attention to detail were re-emphasized in each response, even when the firms were asked for their opinion on Daniel Libeskind’s Lee-Chin Crystal. Answering in relation to his own firm’s policy of having no signature buildings, Bo Boje Larsen offered his remarks, stating, “That’s one of the good things about Daniel Libeskind. You know what you’re going to get.” After the talk, I’m hoping Toronto’s architecture, in that sense, will be a little less predictable.

Grabbing a soda for the road, I left Rotman’s and arrived at the York Quay Theatre for the Toronto Society of Architects’ screening of Gary Hustwit’s Helvetica. From interviews with Massimo Vignelli, the designer responsible for the New York City’s subway signage, to David Carson who, as an untrained designer, helped pave the way for new design aesthetics, the film offers a wealth of insights, departing from but not exclusive to typography. It presents a wide range of viewpoints on what design is and should be, along with intimate looks into why people subscribe to certain traditions. Where Vignelli defines design as the constant fight against ugliness, explaining his usage of Helvetica as indebted to its simplicity and modernity, Paula Scher confesses she is uncomfortable with Helvetica because it connotes for her the corporate and often destructive entities that are branded by it.

The spectrum of reactions to Helvetica the typeface and the passion with which people advocate for or against it reveals the significance of typography and the far-reaching influence of design. Especially in contemporary urban settings, type, in the form of signs and ads, accounts for a significant part of our experience of the city. Type not only directs us, but also shapes space, embodying aesthetic and social ideas that are declared to us relentlessly. And whether one believes Helvetica should be upheld as timeless or mourned as a phenomenon of bad taste, the film gets into the heart of it all and does so with keen wit and an effortless sense of humour.