>> from our studios in new york, this is "charlie rose." charlie: the whitney museum of american art opened in 1930 one. its mandate was to focus exclusively on the art and artists of this country. the museum moved to madison avenue in 1966. the new building designed by renzo piano will open a few blocks from its original location. the "new york times" called it a

depth series achievement, and the city's changing colter landscape. joining me now, renzo piano, and adam weinberg. this is a remarkable story. it is about a city. the driving passion of people to make sure that the whitney would live on and reflect our time in the future as well. it is a great honor to have them back at this table. welcome. it is complete after some dozen years of planning and building. how do you characterize this moment for you? adam: the whitney has been trying to expand for 30 years. we tried to expand next were our building was uptown. it was for directors ago. the collection when we first moved in with 2000 works.

today it is 22,000 works. the idea of being able to see not just what we have, but to offer possibilities and aspirational spaces for artists to do things like we have never been able to do before. charlie: and you're going back to your roots. adam: it feels very comfortable. the greatest complement we have received in the last weeks has been it feels like the whitney. even though it is a different kind of space. charlie: hasn't there been effort to design a new whitney building for a while? adam: for decades. first, michael graves many years ago made an attempt. renzo himself did a plan for uptown. quite a good in the end we both one. agreed there wasn't the kind of space you need to for contemporary art. charlie: leonard is a great friend of mine. a great friend of the program. i'm am sure a friend of yours. he calls you up and says what? renzo: i was on the side of the

modern library that day. charlie: which you were designing. renzo: yes. i was inside, and he called me and said why don't you come for a coffee? he was lying. [laughter] of course i will come for a coffee. charlie: tell me the truth. did you have any notion that what he really wanted to talk to you about was designing a new building? renzo: i didn't know it all. i didn't know. i'm like children. it is the sand of the beach, and you play. so he went up. i came in the room. it was full of people. it was the design committee. the selection committee. chuck close was there.

and great people. adam was there. adam: leonard. bob hearst. charlie: you are sitting there with the board. it is not just leonard. renzo: the entire board. i started to think that wasn't an accident. [laughter] we started to talk. that's all. charlie: that's not all. adam: there was a bit of behind the scenes. we were interviewing a number of architects. leonard said we should ask one or two questions to every architect is a constant. we asked every architect what is your favorite museum building in the world? every architect named one of renzo's buildings. at the end of the process, leonard said everybody loves his

buildings. why are we talking to renzo? charlie: which do they love? adam: the byler museum, the manila museum. they love the energy of the po mpidou. it was those that came up over and over again. charlie: you said i'm not just here, i'm not prepared to compete. i don't do that. if you want me to do it, offer me the job and i will do it. renzo: i hope you understand, at a certain age you don't want to fall in love with jobs like that. you don't want to fall in love and then it goes away with somebody else. you know it's too much. , charlie: you don't want to fall in love with the idea of building this museum because you have to tell them what it is and have them say we will decide on someone else. renzo: it's just that passion.

it is not arrogance. you cannot do this profession without passion. yet it yourself entirely fair. this was incredible. i'm european, italian. i grew up with the idea that freedom comes from this country. you know. we grow with this great idea great roots, great culture. at the same time you need. you need freedom. america was and is about that attitude. making a house for american art, an incredible challenge. bringing together my sense of things, and this core freedom that is an absolute necessity. charlie: you hope to incorporate

social life, or vanity invention, construction, technology, poetry, and light. that is hugely ambitious. [laughter] renzo: this is true. architecture is about those things coming together. social life, urbanity, poetry, it is about fighting against gravity and try to create something that is playing with the light. then we have invention. that building downtown, 28,000 tons. charlie: made of steel. renzo: and everything else. you need invention for that. it has to last for a thousand, thousand years.

that is the logic. charlie: it is in a unique place. how did you find it? adam: the city had reserved it. at the south end of the high line, they wanted a cultural anchor for the high line. originally, the dia foundation were planning to build something there, and when they didn't we approached the city about a possible site. kate levin felt to affairs and said that this is a site that would be available to us. we were thrilled because it is hard to find horizontal property in manhattan. there is not much space. i was thinking about what he said. we love the wild character of the neighborhood. the roughness of it. a word we use was feral.

a wildness to it. even though it is a refined building, there is the roughness of the florist, the concrete, a sense of it is not just all about finesse, elegance. it is about something rougher and wilder. charlie: how would you describe the look of the outside? renzo: a bit wild. charlie: you would? renzo: you make a building that is the house of american art. it is about freedom. this sense of freedom. wild, impolite -- when you make a building, it must express that idea. it must express the brave attitude to the city. and also this building is , designed to talk to the city on one side, on the east it is broken down meandering

and taking your time. on the other side it talks to the rest of the world, on the west it talks to the traffic on the highway. then the west. you can look and see across america. you have a dialogue with the rest of the world. this is part of the idea. charlie: did it have to have anything to do with the building on 76? marcel's building. renzo: many things coming from that building. many things. the flexibility of the space. i can go on forever. when you open the door you find yourself in the gallery. that's another important thing. the one thing that he cannot do because he did not get the

place, he did not build up the piazza. it pays to be in connection with the city because he got madison avenue. but we have a space there. we built the making the building above ground. this is what the building does. it comes up. this is what you have to do when you make a public building. you have to be accessible, easy to reach. this was impossible because they didn't find the space. i can go on forever. his building was brave. it was not loved immediately. charlie: weren't you talking about extending the building? adam: several times. it wasn't enough room. charlie: you struggle with the idea. adam: ideally you would like to keep the museum together on one site.

when you talk of the wildness of the building it is of the critics have struggled with. most museums have a front brand image, the front of the net. this is a 360 degree building. you see it from all sides. he composed it from all sides. i think a lot of critics have a hard time because they don't know what is the image. it is the multiplicity, the wildness, the sense that it was designed from the inside out. charlie: i mention there was a moment about this, the new location for the museum confirmed a definitive shift in the city social geography. part of the city in its social context has moved from the upper east side. adam: absolutely. in a big part of that as you know is the high line. charlie: amazing what it is done

for the city. adam: over 5 million people people year on the high line. until the whitney there was a wonderful walkway without an anchor on either end. now with a culture shed on the north end, and the development of the westside, it was so empty in many ways in terms of public traffic. charlie: into short generations, the whitney has gone from being part stern but carrying homeless shelter to its chic and eager tourist destination. adam: i think that -- charlie: you are happy with tourists. adam: we love doris. the more the merrier. the whitney has always championed the artists of our time. mrs. whitney is an artist. she's one of the only founders of a major museum who was also an artist. charlie: did she try to do this? was in her dream turned down by

other museums? adam: she offered to give her entire collection to the metropolitan museum. they said we have enough of that not very interesting stuff in the basement. it was out of a curious refusal that the whitney was born. she was interested in the art as she was in creating some museum. charlie: so she said i will create my own museum. adam: it was out of a need, not just the desire to show off what she had. ♪

charlie: you said you were forced to consider the symbolic value that it will have. part of your driving mission in your own head was to consider the symbolic value. renzo: yes, of course. charlie: because it is a place for american artists? renzo: it is hard to say but it is a sense of freedom. you don't design a building by watching. you build a building by trying to tell the truth. the truth is that it will house forever a great collection of art, the expression of freedom. again that is something that for me makes a lot of sense.

of course what you get is , something that architecturally, it is something that you immediately appreciated. something that goes like a river, like a mountain, like cities. it is something that stays there forever. you know sometimes it takes a , long time. this thing of the tourists, i know the story. i design with my friends centre pompidou, everybody came up saying sacrilegious. this is not for art, it is for tourists. this is a typical reaction. but the truth is that art is for everybody. art is seeking a life in the eyes of everybody. you have to make a place for

everybody. charlie: that art museums are one of the powerful magnets for tourists to visit cities. adam: absolutely. but for us it is about changing lives. not just the lives of the artists, but exposing to people to the art of this moment. people look back at history and they can except they love edward hopper now and jasper johns now but how about the artists of this generation? the mark bradfords, the rachel harrisons. when we are so close in time it is hard to grapple. part of our job is to challenge as much as it is to just celebrate. to test ideas, and put things out there. charlie: let's talk about the relationship between a museum -- this museum and the city.

we mention the high line. you said it was important to let the city and the street encroach. renzo: i think that is the reason why i called that place not a lobby -- well i'm italian. charlie: the piazza. renzo: it is where everything is found. you are in the city. this is the place where the experience matters. this is where fear goes away. this is where people meet people. they get together. it is about not being intimidating. it is about being accessible. this is the beginning. so then, from there, you go up. you take your shoes off metaphorically of course. you enter a different world. the ground floor is public space. adam: and we have a free gallery in the public space. the idea was to make whatever art in that level completely

open to the public. it is a right, not a privilege. renzo: we are adding many functions that are not possible. charlie: like what? adam: education he we have an indoor, outdoor blackbox space a theater where you can be inside, looking out more inside looking outside. we have 14,000 square feet four on four levels of galleries. the rmb art be seen from above below. performance can be done out there. you can have sculpture installation, projections. and the black box, the idea is the building is material for the artists, not just a site for the artwork. renzo called it the testing platform.

renzo: the terrorists. ace. we have been working a lot with artists. one thing not to forget, the building was loved by artists. i know why. it was simple, unpretentious not competing. it was a flexible space. artists love that. and we always thought with artists -- [indiscernible] charlie: you have spoken to this idea before which is don't create architecture that competes with the art. renzo: architecture is art. it is a fantastic art. it is not just function. there is function. construction, it is about society. but it is art. a different kind of art. it is the art of making place for other art. when you make a concert at home

you don't make a concert. you make a chamber for sound. that is the same thing we do. it is not diminishing or making more modest. it is even stronger because it becomes -- adam: that is one of the reasons we wanted to work with renzo because he put the art first . that it was not a competition. it was about supporting it, and it makes the architecture and the art greater. charlie: i'm intrigued by this idea, a building like this cannot be indifferent to the city. renzo: and it cannot be indifferent to people. again, you know why, as an architect if you are in the right moment at the right place you don't change the world. you celebrate the change of the world.

the world has a shift. something happened. a long time ago the world was making a big shift between place for elite and something else. in berlin when the wall went down. you don't change the world. some of the else changes the world. so this building is materializing a shift. because change is not easy to digest, it doesn't please everybody. but you don't do this different because you want to be different. you do different because it is different. that is all. charlie: what did you mean when you said this building is a poetic of movement? renzo: i always thought that buildings has three dimension, four dimensions. another floor is movement and people. that is the reason why we

designed the building -- the movement of people going around, enjoying it, watching down. you see movement. charlie: that put you on the map. renzo: of course. we never got a new job for 10 years for that but movement as part of architecture. this building, we cannot find that sort of place. on the ground floor you see three big elevators. then you see the stairs. everything is about moving. charlie: was adam helpful, or did he get in your way? [laughter] renzo: it was great. adam: we have been accomplices.

exactly. charlie: accomplices in a conspiracy to create something great. you would meet once a week? adam: we met every time he was in new york. every eight weeks. for example, talking about the movement, only one wanted the elevators front and center, we came up with the idea of commissioning the artist richard to turn each elevator into an installation so that not only was the movement the movement, which we loved, and renzo responded to this, and he designed the environment. renzo: i love the idea that you don't go to our review push a button and then are comes to you. [laughter] charlie: what new elements are you most excited about?

adam: we have our fifth floor special exhibition gallery. it is an organist. enormous. one of the largest in the city of new york. we can make exhibitions to the size that we want instead of just saying you have to fit in. we can do a bigger show. beacon to a smaller show. charlie: can you do sculpture? adam: we can do sculpture. the outdoor spaces are extraordinary. what i love is that when you were in the building you could have been in rome, in london, in the new building you always know that you are in new york. you get the views of the city, the river. the whitney has always been new york's museum. it is a new york-based museum. charlie: more so than moma? adam: i think so because we have always had an international presence but it was based in

greenwich village, and the connection to the artist whether it was hopper or calder or sloan. this was the place to champion their work, not just the picassos. charlie: moma was put together by a new york family. collectors. adam: mrs. whitney was an artist. renzo: this was for artists. this idea that the building comes back on is a great thing. charlie: you brought this building in, on-time, on budget. adam: i have an extraordinary board, and board leadership, who said we cannot make a building that we can't afford to build, and we can't afford to run, and we built a sizable endowment. charlie: $450 million?

adam: we raise another $250 million for endowment that we would have the funds. many museums do not have the money to run. we are pleased. we finished our campaign. we are still always raising money. you never stop when you are building. the work really begins. charlie: i was there the first night. it seems everybody was happy about this. do you get a sense that there was artists there, members of the board for their, you were there, a sense of we created something we dreamed of doing? and it is that we wanted to do. renzo: this is exactly what you hope. this is what you want pre-to build a building that is loved by people. buildings need love. they need love like people. i also feel that it would be

loved. adam: we wanted people would feel great. renzo said i'm a humanist. i love the idea that it is based on human scale. you feel good when you walk in those wooden floors, and the sense of sound, the light, the quality of the space. it is a place you want to bill or -- it is a place you want to be in. renzo: the building made with the super finish. and in the floor is made with recycled pine. we cut the wood. you could see the trees. this is very simple. you have to understand, if they

want to name something, they can. it is not something untouchable. it is not something perfect. this idea is open and flexible. it does not intimate eight. -- intimidate. charlie: we'll talk a little bit about the art. a show me the first image. the building image. there it is. looking from the west to the east. tell me what i'm seeing here. renzo: what you see is the west side. the big window is overlooking the hudson river. the far west and the rest of the world. that floor is the fifth floor. then you have the other gallery. the south side building is blind for the simple reason you do not need light.

you could see from the top lights are coming inside. when you look at this building when you make a new building it is always new. you need more. i think this building expressed the complexity. charlie: let's look at another image. renzo: this is looking from east. you're looking down. beautiful. it is an awe inspiring element. then you see the building, you are stepping down. you see the stairs. they are made to enjoy life. to enjoy flying above the city. adam: renzo kept noticing the fire escape. those stairs are public. they're not just utilitarian. renzo: they really enjoy that. they already enjoy that. charlie: the idea came from looking at fire escapes?

[laughter] renzo: maybe not. you know, in studies -- charlie: it you tried to convince me -- renzo: in architecture, and everything come it is somewhere in between. you remember things. you don't really know exactly. there is a kind of illusion. charlie: let's see the next image of the design. there it is. renzo: it shows the overlapping of the different functions. of course, it is very intense. it is very dense. the ground floor is public. we have galleries. you go up. you can see on the left, you could see the auditorium overlooking the hudson. the full floor of the gallery. charlie: tell me this. how do you think the architect

is different today than in that time? renzo: i don't know. you would have to ask someone else. charlie: a significant change in you? renzo: age. charlie: have you changed your attitude about work? [laughter] have you changed in the fundamental way you look at things? renzo: i feel like a big boy. [laughter] i does know how to do things and build. it is about learning. it is easy to say. architects under 50 -- the first 70 you learn. this one is a special one. it is very complex. i know there are many other professions but this one is especially difficult. charlie: next slide. hoist elevators and express staircases. as you said, the poetry of movement. is that the fifth floor? adam: this is the fifth floor

gallery looking south. this is a floor devoted to the art of the 80's. what you see in the foreground is the poster by the artist moffitt. it is about aids. charlie: last slide. i want everyone to go to this museum. so let's focus. renzo: we catch the light from the north. you have to catch the north light. every time you catch the light, the natural light, you have to catch the north light. otherwise, you have two aggressive light from the sun. charlie: this is a magnificent place. adam's tenacity has made it happen and the brilliance of renzo piano responsible for something everyone is talking

about. there is a book on the whitney museum of art. i think put together by your group. renzo: by my daughter and the foundation. charlie: details and photographs and a sense of what it means to create? -- to create a building and make sure it does all the things we talked about here. its connection to the city and its connection to art. its connection to itself. all of that. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪

♪ al hunt: sir peter westmacott is the ambassador to the united states, playing a special role. he was counsel for political affairs in washington during the first clinton administration. among his areas of expertise is iran. he was posted in tehran before the 1979 revolution. he has worked closely with the obama administration and nuclear deal negotiations.

there are some schisms over defense spending and britain's role in europe. mr. ambassador, a pleasure to have you here. let's start with a special relationship that is helped no doubt by the role of a good ambassador. but does this hinge lightly the , on the relationship between the principles come in this case, president obama and prime minister cameron. sir peter: i think the relationship is important. if you look at the last time he was here in january, the president was clear that david cameron was one of his closest and most appreciated friends and advisers and partners. and he talked about an indispensable relationship with the united kingdom. i think from the top, therefore that relationship is strong. , it has more to it than that. we have a foreign affairs relationship, a powerful economic and business relationship. al: some say that the good relationship is not the one

or the intimacy that reagan and thatcher had. sir peter: i think it is close. i have been witness to number of authorizations between them. they ring each other whenever they need to. it seems to me it is as good as it gets. al: you spent a lot of time on capitol hill, don't you? sir peter: i do. al: tell me how the polarization affects you. sir peter: part of it is to explain the united kingdom is the important player and an important part of the united states. part of it is because there are issues which are of direct importance by u.k. interests which are being considered by congress. we want to see the tpa succeed. we want to see the u.s. partnership comes to fruition. so that is important. we also, because we are party to the iran negotiations, which were completed at framework

level a couple of weeks ago. it includes the united kingdom as well as the u.s. we want to see the iran deal completed, and we want to see it succeed. it is important. i'm sure -- al: how different was washington today versus washington then? sir peter: if there's one thing that has changed washington life, it feels it is the influence of very large sums of money. it was always there, but it feels more pronounced now. al: is anyone issue that has dominated most of the time? sir peter: last year i spent most of my time on the iranian peace process. i don't think there is anyone -- any one issue now that's dominates. one day it might be spending on the latest manifestation on the ukraine crisis. then it might be about yemen.

then it might be about some of trust that he committed by isil. there is a national policy i have been focused on throughout my time here. probably the nuclear negotiations. al: you do have a lot of expertise. you were ambassador of turkey. some critics say that french were part of the p5+1. with a getting too much in their eagerness? sir peter: the british view is that there are six altogether. the p5 plus one as we call it. i think the french of course have been there. they are part of negotiations. we agreed on the framework to get there. we all had something to offer. iran for example through the centrifuges. that is an area where there is a lot of specialization. we go back a long way.

i like to think we bring a certain expertise. we have a history. we used to be big players in iran. bp started there. i think the framework agreement at was outlined, agreed, assigned, is a product of all of us working together very effectively. i would not say that to any one country is any more or less a key player. we are all committed to ensuring that iran does not get nuclear weapons. al: what are the aspects of a final deal like and when? what are the big hurdles? sir peter: quite a lot of technical negotiations is still to be completed. we have had three rounds. there is still more work to be

done. we need to ensure that proper verifiable inspection arrangements in place so way -- so we can be sure iran sticks to the terms of the deal. there has to be full transparency. it is not going to based on trust. it is going to be based on fact. al: will it be done by june 30? sir peter: that is our aim. there is no reason why it shouldn't be. al: assuming that there is a deal, look down the road a couple of years from now. you know iran. you know iranians. what do you think will be the iranian behavior then? some say there is more economics. it will moderate the country, that they will enjoy the prosperity. others say they will have more resources to do bad things. how do you see it likely to on

-- likely to unfold. sir peter: it is hard to look into a crystal ball on this. there's plenty of bad behavior by iran. it worries all of us who are involved in the negotiation. that is not to say that it is not right to pursue a good negotiation. if we succeed in getting this negotiation in place, i think it is possible that other aspects might be addressed. think back 10 years or so. there was a time when iran was our national -- natural partner. there is a sunni jihadist organization that hates -- the americans found that there were ieds made in iran that were being used to kill our soldiers. soldiers in a rocket and afghanistan. -- used to kill our soldiers

in iraq and afghanistan. but i think it is possible that iran will see it is in its own interest to become part of the international community. we will have to see how it goes. let us say where that relationship takes us. in my own experience, you don't find a lot of people going off to jihad or to blow up an airplane. people are naturally, in many respects, western-leaning. that doesn't go for everybody. let us give the iranians a chance. let's take things one state at a time. l: you mention war against the islamic state, isil. do you think things are not going as the brits and the americans expect it?

sir peter: i think we are horrified by what might happen of losing a world heritage site. there a lot of bad things, you are right. we have been very clear that we wanted to see the iraqi government be more inclusive. less sectarian. they can push back against the atrocities committed. that is what we do. it is part of our us-led 60-strong coalition against isil. al: they say they don't seem to want to fight themselves? sir peter: some of this is linked to the whole question of sectarianism traditions. i think it is disappointing, but we have to continue to work to try to ensure that the iraqi armed forces have the capability and the inclusive

if you like, nature they need to have if they will be representing the whole of their country. they have begun to push back. it is in our interest that they do so. we have provided military training and a lot of equipment. al: let me ask you a little bit about the special relationship. "the washington post" wrote it does not look quite as special as it once did. there are complaints about the british cutting back on the laws that the u.k. may not be as big of a player as they would have wished. does that worry you? sir peter: look at what the president has said or the defense secretary. who says he believes these special relationship is the cornerstone of the relationship.

they are two people whose words speak for themselves. al: but you are cutting back on spending. sir peter: we are not. we are honoring the commitment to defense spending. where the second-largest defense spender in the lines after the u.s. we are present in many countries. look at what the u.k. has provided in terms of precision strikes, in terms of isr, strikes and tankers supplied. we are doing a lot. i have read the newspapers too. i have seen the commentary. i know there is a bit of uncertainty. we now have a government in power. with a very clear sense of its own role. i think we are doing a great deal. and of course, for the future years, we are doing 2% of gdp

spending right now. that is in line with nato commitments. we will have to see what happens for future years. we are spending an awful lot of money on new equipment. 150 billion pounds. over $200 billion over the next decade. so i think where going to be in , a 30 good place. it is smaller, our armed services than it was in other years. but, if you look at what we are doing with capabilities come it is still a remarkable effective fighting force. al: another concern is the premonition has promised there will be a referendum. if the english or the british should decide to pull out of the deal, do you think that

will affect the relationship? sir peter: the prime minister has been clear. they're not pleased with the status quo. we need to see a number of reforms of improvements. more transparency. more accountability. certain guarantees for the ways we could continue to go about our business without discrimination. there are a number of things. as we go around, we're clear there are many other member states that agree with us. what david cameron is saying look, we need these reforms. i will renegotiate the terms between that united kingdom and its partners in the eu. the firm intention of keeping written at the heart of an improved in union.

that is the plan. that referendum will be held sometime between now and the end of 2017. al: final question on any schisms. the u.s. wasn't pleased when britain joined the chinese investment bank. sir peter: we discussed everything. i think there are some people who think the policy decision we took was not right. i think there are some people who absolutely understood why we did it. if you look at the context of this for the last almost five years, congress has not agreed.

so the international financial , institutions are adapted to the new realities and to the fact there is a big financing gap. everyone agrees upon this. we were well placed in which that investment bank was going to be structured. the governance issues and the manner in which it would be. there are many different governments that have joined. we were there early on. i think by making that decision by being there, we have a much better chance at it seeing internationally credible and well run they and if we had stood aside. al: one of the many areas of strong agreement is trade.

both obama administration and the u.k. administration would like to see -- you have been talking to members up there. beseeching them, urging them are you having any progress? sir peter: have more and freer trade. also, very importantly for the future, is that we should set the global standards for future technological services rather than have to play catch-up following standard set by other parts of the world. i think there are plenty of people here who understand that more free trade is good. you have common standards. you don't have the races of motorcars insulated and you don't have an unnecessary need and so on. there is a lot that we can do.

trade in services and respect for regulations. some of this is difficult to. it will take time. al: you are basically optimistic washington will do it? sir peter: what i see is that the senate has agreed. i know it has been complicated in the house. this will be tough. i cross my fingers. i hope it will be something that demonstration has given consideration. it is not just about that. that is not to say we have got a deal done. we've got to complete the technological negotiations, of which we have had nine rounds so far. the u.s. and the european commission has got a job. i'm optimistic a comprehensive free trade deal will happen by the end of this administration. but, it is out of my hands but we will do what we can to support it.

al: mr. ambassador, thank you. we are out of time. and thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪

>> the following is a paid program. the opinions expressed do not reflect those of bloomberg, its affiliates, or its employees. >> the following is a paid presentation four-time lives music collection. revere said the british are coming, and in 1960 four they came again. they created a social phenomenon that changed our culture are ever.