the legal name is going to be in the supreme court at least from summer but we don't just believe these seals are legal we'll simply 15 actually immortal is well what's needed is not just an end to be honest you're listening to a mindset which is on its arms sales to now drew has got about 20 seconds i'm so sorry to be saying you're great you're the 20192020 that are expected to be really good as well that makes you want to cry i guess. well we have to who has a terrible year and we'll be doing everything we can to ensure doctors became a son to the supreme court this summer we are can we are sure that this supreme court will also conclude but arm sales to say to the bia as well andrew smith from the company get some straight thank you so much for your thoughts have been a lot internationally. thank you too at home for watching us as well my name's kevin irwin for me in the restaurant you team this friday we appreciate you taking the time i check it out or any of us social media for all the other stuff we talked about stop by to for sophie shevardnadze my latest guess right here right now.

hi welcome to visionaries in this of. my guest today is a troll explorer someone who loves to hate the present in order to figure out the future i'm here with architect urbanist writer a thinker in his office to talk about the future of the city and the future landscape. graham it's so good to have you here on our program i've been wanting to ask you all kinds of questions big questions i was essential ones i'll try yes but like i want to start with your exhibit at the guggenheim that's opening. so it's called countryside the future. and it's really

funny you say that because most of the people i've spoken to big thinkers futurologist most of them agree that the future is within big cities that want to win become trees just big city so when you name it like that do you is it just a concept or do you really believe the future is now and it's of course provocation but it's a very calculating provocation because in 2007 the un said that half of mankind for sleeping in cities may see me from that moment cities are the only thing anyone has been looking at and cities has been what people have been kind of publishing about doing studies about. intellectual concentration is going to cities. the prediction is that. maybe 70 or 80 percent of mankind to live in cities and i think there are 2 point become a completely absurd situation that we you know over us are concentrating on very

overcrowded kind of situations and that we leave the countryside to be its potential all its beauty all its history its. it's nature alone and so. it's more a statement that we should let it happen and that we need to look at the country again that we have to be prepared to live in the countryside thing and. of course in a totally new way. and we're showing some evidence of that between also showing the need for that but is it a statement that actually offer some solutions i'll tell you i'm saying because like the country where account from it's a huge territory and i see that 17 villages every year disappear from the number of russia and i'm not i mean it's understandable the whether there are the monies in the cities living conditions all of that but maybe something for your perspective

maybe a solution that you're offering could reverse this in my country well i think that people who leave because there is a kind of little interest or nation opportunity with this city and that therefore everywhere the city drains people away from the countryside from villages to prince prince in africa to prince in in europe but i think that if you got a very 1st indoctrination or 1st the propaganda of well actually that we are also making propaganda for it. can come to show evidence for instance you know for going to be we're living working with the university of nairobi we have 200. potential students and they said we. are spending really weaken the countryside. 60 percent of them saw their future in the countryside and for africa where the people you know typically have one foot in the countryside and one foot in the city

so there are models of living in the countryside particularly with new technologies new kind of ways of. using media new ways of using the internet that age who people to live there so ok we're talking about the concept now which i understand but if we talk architectural wise for instance i was talking to your country man mark post i don't know who he is is this amazing guy a vascular physiologist who makes made out of stem cells you know and so we're talking to him and he actually showed us the meat and right now it's hamburgers but in the future it's going to be steaks and all kinds of great steaks and everything and we're talking and he's talking to me scientifically how in 3040 years farmers in the countryside and your countries big and farming aren't even going to have cattle anymore because the media is going to be made out of you know by your reactors that you have in your house so everything because of technology yack

you're saying it's changing including the landscape including this space of how you know life in the countryside would look have you imagined what it would look like of course. basically you cannot look at the countryside if you thought knowing that there will be an enormous amount of change in you but you can also not look at the countryside and. realize that in terms of climate change there's an enormous pressure to actually keep more and more and more of the countryside there is kind of plans to preserve 60 percent or of the. entire rules you know in terms of protected areas or reservations or whatever so yes everything will change but part of the chance to also be to live in the countryside in a new way if only to simply maintain it or to maintain a kind of presence there the fact that i think our cities are not that wonderful.

or cities or do kind of centers of inequality. you see whole generations that don't get a foothold in the city it is actually kind of really absurd that they don't live in the much more pleasant much more relaxing much more healthy environment in which more affordable and vibrancy of contraception so now you're talking to me as a thinker as a. theory which you also are but at the same tight same time you're a man who thinks informs right so when we think your buildings it's like far as this thing from the landscape of a countryside and you ringback may be in fear simple words explain how it would look informs the future of the countryside architecture life or space was. i think i think. part of a generation generational 68 that you know already in the sixty's and early in the

kind of seventy's. never been a hippie but of course hippies were perfectly able to imagine what it would be like to live in the countryside. they were confined having series how you could live in communes of course new soviets the have been can be incredible communes compiling and living in the countryside operating in the countryside i think. it will not be a kind of situation where suddenly everything looks different but i think. what needs to happen is that circle logical negativity about the countryside is going to reverse in the 1st instance also on a psychological level so i don't think it's new forms that will happen oh no of course new technologies who implying new forms or new is forms but i see it more

as a kind of base to me campaign. in the almost independent of architecture ok but and that as we for me also. one of the great revelations that in every profession you are always to the prisoner of the parameters of the profession and if you want to kind of think of a real solution maybe you should look to solution that is defined by the architectural field just moved outside talking about professions. i am observing right now how so many professions are becoming slowly obsolete and you're wondering which one of that is going to be obsolete tomorrow so you're saying in your space architecture per se disappeared in the 20th century what does it mean for the kind of political comment i think that. strong and good

architecture is. related to the public sector i think the. architecture is there can probably prefer a profession that works for the public and when i say architecture disappeared i think if the new public client lurch new disappeared. in a kind of period of new liquidity is more and more conventional to private and i think that therefore you know nobility of architecture or the kind of good intentions of architecture that were in question and maybe even 40 years ago have simply evaporate that. kind of pressure on the part of it that's also evolution no part of it oh of course of course it's evolution and i'm still an architect within that system and i'm not saying you can do architecture but it's a new kind of mentally different kind of move that you're playing in the current culture and then you could play 40 years ago and live long enough to going to

realize that things that seemingly change forever may be able to change again a different direction or even to. what to read from us but i like. things that are changing so drastically in my lifetime are the things that globalization has changed and whether you like globalization or not it's here it's reversible and then what you have as a given is that problems have become global markets has become global is there such thing as global architecture. i think it's a very crucial question because we us feel we have to put through all sorts of globalization no we have almost the referrers kind of vast greek equalisation. disappointment with their globalization. i would say yes there's a global architecture and it's not an architecture that looks the same everywhere

but it is an architecture and that engages different conditions everywhere in a different way for instance. did. we. in the city of seattle in the kind of 1st part of the 21st century maybe 10 years later did the qatar national library. value the relative value. or the ambition and quality of each of the buildings is completely different even though i was the. i was the author and it's completely different because you have a different form of interaction with a different culture with a different. form of know how with the different technologies with different environments so i think that it's extremely important to kind of right now to at you know do good globalization and to maintain and to uses them for it because i

think it would be too simple to say ok it was a mistake we go back and let's forget about it it's so funny that you bring out. seattle and qatar say even though on the same arch tack that those buildings are so different because. one of the downfalls of globalization for many is the loss of identity and for instance when you look at the buildings especially in europe like you can say this is a money and building this is a barbarian tavern italian. but when you look at modern buildings all high skyscrapers still the same this everyone wants to do something like you or zaha hadid and you don't they don't. there's a lot of that and it's 2. thing to have 2 opinions about it if there is so much similarity it means that people like similarity and therefore do identity is not necessarily a problem because it's actually something that people like because maybe it gives

a kind of family or tea everywhere or kind of repetition of the same expectation the same environment so i wrote an article about the generic city which is going to simply say ok you can continue to complain about it. maybe people like to tell him why would they like it on the other hand i did to be a nominee in 2014 in venice and i was there every single country to describe the history of the last 100 years. and those 100 years are of course the period that each country had to become in some way. that could really showed the incredible diversity the incredible eccentricity over every kind of story do incredible expression of modernity. you will see how different it was formed. in. different cities from underneath the in finland

so i think that if you look carefully. the story about disappearing identity is. money doesn't talk. is proving this. spending has made.

housing. our back with rahm call has rahm your term bigness in architecture from what i understand it's the fact that everything is sort of anonymous in a way that it can be a library or a hospital or a building where people leave apartment building and you wouldn't make we he wouldn't know the difference looking at it and i just somehow because i was a political journalist in the past had this parallel until recently all the

politicians and leaders looked alike i.q. would not make a difference they were like all great and then all of a sudden people started voting for the most unexpected people trump or johnson or like mattingly penn almost became president friends i mean you can like them or hate them but they're certainly not average so i was thinking did they do this this was the need of people to have something that is not to go beyond a little beyond simple technology actually do you think something like that could happen in architecture where we go back to some extravagant things. things are not traitors you know maybe extravagant is not like quite the right you could even say that are to state your kind of events who dat except during already in the last 20 years and you could even think that exactly because we became so dominant dominated economic incentives that you know there's not

a single developer who tells you please do something really boring and really neutral. rich pre-build don't notice it's all about please make an ark i'm pleased to be noticeable please be exceptional please be. so in architecture we've had the period. we're going to more extreme to apologise and leave it to you to church home satisfying to us what about the whole bigness thing because i see it too i see what you see i don't like it. you know. this was just a kind of way of may be exploring but also reassuring people and. you knew you know i've been a kind of writer you know as part of my activity i simply sometimes see that certain issues are. becoming kind of big or inflated

or critical. tragic simply because nobody has can really interpret them in a kind of very precise way and so nice going to sympathy to say ok since the early 20th century the typical expert. that when you see something you immediately understand it and you know it is for you understand how it works is no longer valid and so it is no longer valid because of certain reasons and those reasons are mostly to do with new technologies that enable buildings to be kind of to. and so it's not that i take a position but i try to give the most precise explanation so that. a certain. in happiness can be avoided but this thing simply through understanding things. but you know how before an artist any artist including an architect could

just. do whatever he wanted to do without really thinking i mean that's. that's that's the feeling we got that idea of architecture is that no architect every do what they want it and no architecture ever be able to. if you look at the history of michelangelo you see that the pope's told him that he had to come and defend himself that he had to kind of change. his does. 5 different times because somebody didn't like it architecture is the incredible profession it's like you want something or somebody wants something you can do it but then a dialogue going to begins. and in a way to better the architecture do more intense the dialogue and it's about. responding to what you need to do what you have to do what you it's about exploring

the theme the lack of freedom. the freedom stew or oh you must be experiencing a lot of cognitive dissonance here. maybe the departed type of called native dissonance a perfect term but i mean with all due respect it's good that you say this because like if you are a writer and you write a movie that i don't like and i can play if you build something i mean i'm stuck with it at least my lifetime i have to look at it every day so i'm not actually even that is not to do is a number of buildings that are terrible how do you feel about that. it's a situation. you know you on the right she is like one of my favorite serbian writers he says that an artist dies twice 1st physically and then 2nd one when he's

. is no more do you feel the same way like if you're building a stereo thinking going at. the time being. the 1st this is thinking about the 2nd. but the there's something that i keep thinking about all the time because we have so many problems now along with global warming and overpopulation 1st of all so it's only a worry is that in the future we're going to have to build more buildings more compact buildings we need to tear down more buildings one need to house this people somewhere do you feel like we're going to have this problem of heritage versus. putting your people in buildings. absolutely. 2 things i think the. issue of global warming is very important in our show we actually have a kind of very detailed look at somebody looking at. how people survive

there and we we have can focus on and seeing all kinds of incredible phenomenon happening you know in terms of how you survive and how you can flourish in. extremely difficult conditions. also in order to deal with global warming. that's a revaluing of the country is extremely important you know because it's clear that you know maybe we saw technologies will help us but simply nature itself also has to help us we have to come to the store in nature to a much more important role then a terror cell and a much more demanding. client in a similar way so that is you know another crucial message of this exhibition. what we're doing now almost like lemmings who can walk into the city it became

simply. if survival to to abandon the country is so it's not exactly what you're saying but could it be also that if we take the countryside and start living there we won't have to tear down the field in order to i don't know built high rise so that people can be housed i think that. if you look at. statistics if you look at. you know quantities i think one of the difficulties is that so many of these questions being. asked become extremely emotional and basically based on slogans but if you look statistically it's actually numerous the 3 or accommodating no. we can kind of really handle them. don't need to kind of

break the story half of the city the only kind of reason would be to replace dysfunctional entities research things the kind of work which better and more discreetly. i think there's no can approach there will never be a situation that anyone is forced to eliminate the beautiful things of the earth thank god he's saying that but still like a job of an architect no matter how great he is is to transform space to create new space new things right so it's only inevitable that your buildings will pop up next to 18th century and i think i think. i thought so too but maybe 15 years ago we can kind of be really interested in prison gratian for diversity reasons and that's why difficult for us and it's more i'm currently working we're going to very basically you know without any ambition to take to do story with the admission simply to improve but also to maintain what was good about

those buildings and i think that you know both in the garage and detention there are there's an incredible generosity of scale. norma's going to spaces that would be very expensive to today and so i think even the mortal of the architect is somebody who's only doing new things and therefore competing with voters there is a bit of stress and what is the future of the form because we're talking about transforming the countryside but look we're like on this on her you know cocoa break with this artificial intelligence robot. certainly going to join. us here so what is it going to look like. i don't think it will necessarily look. once you get used to things maybe they don't. think that anymore i think there's also.

kind of reason to believe that. we need to. much greater discipline and whether we want to or not but death will you know and so we need to embrace that and wants me embodies that thing that. for me is not necessarily something that. you're forced to produce in the future i really think that the kind of pressures we are under. more likely to end in more sober. more sober cities. more personally more intelligent. or modesty can also be a form of intelligence. i'm just trying to figure i don't have kids and i'm thinking about having them now some really trying to figure out what kind of space they will be living in when you're talking about your generics any of the future it

can be any city any place where for me that is like the notion of my home my castle disappears privacy disappears describe it cowhouse is going to look where my kids going to. school. and to be able to leave a mosque or if they want to they can go to dubai or they can go to delhi so i think that to not to be kind of radically different. and. i think it's you can a very beautiful question of course what life move my kids have. but it's maybe also be tragic that we are now forced to oust its christian instead of being able to simply reproduce without too many too many wars going to. just you can reproduce without too many wars. thank you so much of this wonderful interview .

seemed wrong. just don't hold. me. to shape. this day to educate and in. equals betrayal. when so many find themselves worlds apart. she still looks for common ground. money doesn't talk. the republican new york city mayor michael bloomberg is proving this just the sheer force of spending has made him

a serious contender to capture the democratic nomination are we experiencing pete. making headlines. with forces on the russian repelling an offensive. coming up we look at what's at stake for the. involved in the conflict. clash with police as the authorities attempt to place evacuees from china in quarantine there to prevent the spread of a new virus. threatens the fundamentals of.