Cities for Tomorrow 2015 - Social Infrastructure with Bjarke Ingels

Bjarke Ingels, founding partner and creative director, BIG in conversation with Michael Kimmelman, chief architecture critic, The New York Times.

[@alexfernandezgrande8171]

Say what you will about Kimmelman, but it is REALLY, REALLY, REALLY important to question big architects (no pun intended). Almost all firms nowdays (BIG specially) post rationalize their architecture to a large extent. They make sweeping assumptions all the time. This does not necessarily lead to bad architecture (specially in BIG's case), but it is important to interrupt them when they make sweeping assumptins (whether they are right or wrong) and to never stop questioning them. It is not bad manners, it is good journalism.

[@kalilsarraff8141]

+Alex F. Excellent comment. I agree.

[@328am]

+Alex F. I'm all about keeping people accountable, especially artist with wild visions ad imaginations but this interviewer was glaringly against anything from BIG. He was a passive aggressive protestant that was internally giggling with anticipation of seeing Mr. Ingles choke up, look stupid or avoid answering a question. The problem with most people with an agenda is that they are often against any other view than their own and can't see the forest through the trees.

[@pkingo1]

Problem is that these critics come out of the woodwork when new pioneers actually break new ground but are blissfully silent when there are decades of complete stagnation and uninspired development... block after block of square boring buildings are fine because they don't challenge the (limited, stagnated, out of date) mindset of these old minds. Anyone with any talent realizes the good that Bjarke brings to the scene and he should be celebrated.

[@Sana-df3qw]

Alex Fernandez Grande I feel like he still likes and admires Bjarke somehow

[@reviveproject]

true!

[@kylejosephdalessio6072]

He doesn't let him get away with his scripted information, or what he has planned to say. He's getting to the actual knowledge of the projects. It really pushes Bjarke's limits to open up with more information. Yes he does it in a jerking manor, but this might have been necessary to get more out of the conversation. As you can see, Bjarke Just rambles and as an experienced journalist, He's slowing him down by asking questions inside of a question. 28:00 on He doesn't interfere because its all information that hasn't been said before in other presentations. This is actually a fantastic interview that shows that this great architect isn't perfect. That being said, I still find BIG a fascinating group to study for architectural relevance.

[@Aihiospace]

I totally agree. Finally a probing, informative and interesting interview, with the interviewer doing their proper job instead of some obvious questions and polite agreement of everything the interviewee says. I don't understand the negative attitude toward the journalist (Kimmelman) here - welcome to the proper and useful conversation which isn't shy of criticism. I admire the work of BIG (and it's obvious here that Kimmelman does too), and Bjarke is truly inspirational, but not everything they do is free and above of critique as some commentators here would like to believe.

[@gnawershreth]

As long as the interviewer is clear about it when inviting people, I think it's perfectly fine to "dig a little deeper" but you *need* to let people know about it or they'll likely never accept an invite again. The reason people tend to say a lot of the same stuff in talks etc. is because it's what they were asked to do. A talk isn't some new "stand up show" that people rewrite every time someone calls them up. It's a fairly "standard product" that you can hire the person to "perform" if you want to. So if that's what the person thinks they're walking into ("someone wanting to hear me talk") then it's an ambush if you don't let them talk at all. But as long as you're being honest about what you're inviting them for, they can just decline the invitation if they don't like the idea. If they accept, then it's obviously fine.

[@ynn1n]

...and as it gets really into the point... it clearly shows most of Mr. Ingels' answers are total nonsense.

[@ericcristner7355]

Bjarke is a brilliant mind and innovator, I would love to work with him and learn as much as he's willing to teach. Class act as well.

[@lovekingsly]

Knowledge is truly power. Same with modesty. This is why even though that old guy acts arrogant and smart towards Bjarke, Bjarke looks like the person with the real knowledge.

[@joedory2109]

I understand some o the hate directed at Kimmelman here, but to be fair I really enjoyed seeing Bjarke being held to account and put on the spot a little bit.

[@DMHN84]

Hahaha in this interview is really easy to see who does critics and who does actual things

[@starmanjesus5679]

ahahahahahah and it’s not you 😁

[@lback1505]

“The money is New York City’s, we are just helping them spend it more efficiently” #brilliant ahaha

[@mwmentor]

Great interview with a really cool “starchitect”... Bjarke Ingles - wow 👍🏻😎

[@MrAbdullahalkan]

attitude n respect does matter..

[@kennytheclown3859]

Good stuff!

[@jhe3903]

the kimmelman guy seems to disagree with Bjarke on everything

[@StarCityFAME]

jhe3903 kimmelman thinks some magic machine makes federal funds, which Bjarke knows is actually private people's money that gets stepped on like bad cocaine by the time it gets back to the people it came from. and that direct investment actually makes things go smoother and faster, even with local input from the incurably indecisive...

[@oelscott2460]

31:39 I think is the 1st time he gives him a "half approval"

[@dhruvs8139]

Great ideas

[@leverett7069]

why cut all the time? don't like bjarke?

[@jjjj5452]

glad the interviewer wasn't just an echo

[@kash1992ify]

After watching this interview my respect for Bjarke has grown ten fold. I mean even a child could tell that the interviewer was a dumb ass and all he wanted to do was demean Bjarke. But Bjarke answered all the questions maintaining composure, with dignity and showed respect to the idiotic guy in front of him. Hes not just a genius but he has this kind of humbleness and way with words which is really remarkable...

[@mackylopez1194]

I don't think the critic was an Ingels fan

[@devicetestsandvine-hn2gg]

LIKED IT

[@dhruvs8139]

He's a genius

[@dannysze8183]

he is rubbish

[@bobbyveylupek6329]

Bjarke....to be Clear...=)

[@bobbyveylupek6329]

Genius 2b sure...

[@sarahalideeb4359]

Can anyone summarize the video for me please!

[@olivermcerlean8386]

I felt the underlying rage of the NYT editorial department that such a talented, community-driven architect is getting his paycheque from NewsCorp and FOX.

[@henryvonrintelen3748]

I find it funny how Mr. Ingels has a radically left firm, yet is designing a tower for the most right news co many in America.

[@StarCityFAME]

Henry von Rintelen perhaps some people have known all along that blowing smoke up the arses of certain people is the best way to laugh all the way to the bank. this tactic works well on all ideologies, particularly the stupid. how you think Hillary got rich?

[@alexfernandezgrande8171]

+Henry von Rintelen BIG is not a 'radically left' firm. They have a vision of (a practical) utopia and they dont care wether the money comes from private enterprise of socialist goverment. Architecture does not make architecture political - its politics that makes architecture political.

[@bobbyveylupek6329]

Interesting how that works...huh...=)

[@PAIOUD]

Nice haircut 💇

[@ruthnesskindless]

watching Bjarke Ingels talk increases my IQ to 200

[@Fubuki43]

I see Ingels idea on gardens on the 2WTC, but I cannot get my head around that design. It just looks really ugly to me.

[@c_bulut]

kimmelman's attitude towarss Bjarke is really disturbing

[@princejmn]

+whydidyoukissme He's stuck up and is making his best effort to pour water over an architectural legend in the making

[@c_bulut]

+Prince James thank you! i also think bjarke is legendary. plus this interview was a little too painful to watch bc of the interviewer

[@erwinmoreno23]

Its still his best interview. At least he asks some interesting questions even if his attitude is a bit snobby

[@defaultmesh]

Wait a sec... Vox? *That* Vox?

[@nazzygoreng]

I had to stop at min 10 because I find Kimmelman disturbing.

[@stillphil]

3:30 the bug is ALSO annoyed by failed architect Michael Kimmelman

[@20quid]

Those are some of the most hideous buildings I have ever seen.

[@rezhin93]

20:09 :D

[@architect8332]

this GUY is Almost a Demi GOD to me... hail BIG

[@dannysze8183]

Oh my GOD.

[@architect8332]

@@dannysze8183 this is how ppl made started worshiping human/angels

[@dannysze8183]

@@architect8332 BIG is a salesman. not a good architect, far from angel or god.

[@architect8332]

@@dannysze8183 thats an opinion..

[@dannysze8183]

@@architect8332 you can try to work for him. lol.

[@starjeweller]

Green sustainable 100% recyclable cities of tomorrow, with self food production and max. limiting mobility of products which destroy air of the Earth.

[@danielcaceres9971]

Instead of getting the information out, the interviewer spends more time correcting him on his knowledge about NYC. The interview is meant to get to talk about the projects not to correct opinions or historical facts.

[@KMJ.95]

I never knew a about Micheal Kimmelman and now I hate him. But its true its good journalism but is it really necessary?

[@lovekingsly]

The old guy is like a child who thinks he knows everything in his own head after getting an A in a general achievement test. Small mind.

[@behindyou123456]

+inExiled Wrong, he is just asking honest questions. I know it looks like he is giving Bjarke a rough time but on the other hand this is how we get to see Bjarke's views on a lot of topics.

[@cascasados7239]

Wow. This is an impressive level of antagonism from the interviewer. Of course one needs to ask tough questions, but the side comments, ways he injects his opinion in such a way that he gets the last word.... it's shockingly passive aggressive. The nervous laughter from the audience and the way Ingels had to constantly manage Kimmelman made it uncomfortable to watch and a less revealing interview than it otherwise could have been.

[@kerrinnaude2777]

Wow. That was so unbelievably painful to watch. Kimmelman should be removed from all public appearances of this nature forever and go play his piano. What a rude man. Whether or not you like Ingels' work, this is a public interview, for public benefit. The fact is each project got awarded to him - end of story. He is not solely responsible for all communal or open-plan work spaces around the world, and pretending like he is is ridiculous, and a waste of all of our time - to mention but one of many oversteps. Kimmelman sat there touching his nose and fidgeting in his chair the more he harassed Ingels. To be so visibly incensed by his very existence, interrupting constantly and suddenly changing the topic (and slides) back and forth, whilst unable to even contain such arrogant body-language, is borderline insane. I'd like to see him try those same antics against Ingels in Copenhagen or elsewhere - where that tired, old, pointy-nosed New York ponceyness can't be applied to arguments. Ingels, a man who actually builds complex things, in real life, came off the consummate gentleman in the face of such unprofessionalism. He had a great and balanced answer for every insolent snipe, and pretty much won me over because of it. Extremely disappointing day for all NYT criticism.

[@universeliminate]

The interviewer makes this video unwatchable

[@bl8886]

who's this "trying to look smart" arrogant trying to underestimate Bjarke?

[@Gepodm]

"have you ever been to a garden of a building bjarke?" Bjarke lives in a 2000-something sqm condo in brooklyn with 3 garden.s Yeah idiot i think he knows.