Architecture doesn't have to be "complicated," says David Chipperfield 

The work is beautiful -- characterized by a straightforward elegance that soothes the eye and can induce calm in an urban soul. The interiors are particularly wonderful. If Mr. Chipperfield's voice is any indication of his personality, he sounds like a centered mind who has a deliberate way of finding out what is right (best) for his projects.

David is the best architect for me

I am a fan of simplicity and minimalism in architecture. Look forward to having a house, 2 or 3 bedrooms, designed with ceiling to floor windows in a rural area, beach or countryside.

Chipperfield is one of those few extraordinary architects in a world of architectural chaos

My profesor said, "don't put urself in hardship, just make a box shape building"😂

From experience, it takes thoughfulness and attentiveness to detail to make a building appear effortlessly minimalist. Architects only make it seem easy when in fact it's extremely difficult. It's a lot easier to create clunky deconstructive buildings that have no consideration for clean terminations, centerlines, axes, and the like. With few distractions, the eye gets drawn to even the smallest mistakes, and therefore, every element must be executed perfectly.

ooh boii coming up with a refined simple design can take just as much time as working out a complex one ;)

Can you make city design

Wether thinking more about choices leads to a better result depends on the quality of the thinking. This thinking could be informed and inspired or it could be superficial pseudo-intellectual regurgitating of current trends of self-promotion which any architect who wants to present himself as philosopher-artist can help himself to. Telling fabulous stories becomes necessary, if the building is basically just another shoebox. That does not mean that creating a building modeled after crumpled paper or happy accidents with Rhino and Grasshopper software would be more original than a shoebox...

There is something iirritating about the "Minimalism" that began in the 80s. Its kind of predictable and based on a numbe of cliches. We know powerful and not impoverished simplicity from before this kind of Minimalism, which did not hamper the designer or often become boring. For example when Mies used a large stone wall in both the Barcelona pavilion and the Tugendhadt, the way it was prominently positioned made it integral and essential to the rest of the design, but here that marble wall seems like a bit of luxury whose absence would not be consequensial to the totality. In fact the rest of the finishes look basic, in the Minimalist cliche sense. It seems that the Minimalists limited themselves to a kind of basicness that they don't have the means to get out of any longer. The problem with PostMoernism is its banality, whether its of the formally overcomplicated kind or of this basic kind doesn't make these two categories opposites. They are both part of the banality of PostModernism.

Architecture doesn't have to be complicated, but modern architecture doesn't need to reduce to shoe boxes stacking up on each other either. Look at major cities in Britain now, all but shoe boxes, prisons, pigeon box and ugly glass boxes mushroom everywhere that will end up as eyesore. I doubt many so call architect today do not have any art sense at all.

Thought Alan Rickman was narrating this.

if it doesnt have to be complicated then it doesnt have to be expensive too.

we're romanticizing boxes again?

It´s a eyesore. Brutal and ugly.

......and your architecture it's too boring