When air conditioning, escalators, and advertising appeared, shopping expanded its scale, but also limited its spontaneity. And it became much more predictable, almost scientific. What had once been the most surprising became the most manipulated.

When shopping was still connected to the street it was also an intensification and articulation of the street. Now it has become utterly independent - contained, controlled, surveyed.

It is not possible to live in this age if you don't have a sense of many contradictory forces.

I think one of the important evolutions is that we no longer feel compulsively the need to argue, or to justify things on a kind of rational level. We are much more willing to admit that certain things are completely instinctive and others are really intellectual.

Each building has to be beautiful, but cheap and fast, but it lasts forever. That is already an incredible battery of seemingly contradictory demands. So yes, I'm definitely perhaps contradictory person, but I operate in very contradictory times.

Designs are increasingly winning competitions because they are literally green, and because somewhere they feature a small windmill.

Escape from the architecture ghetto is one of the major drivers and has been from the very beginning.

If you have this reputation you can sit back and endure it, or you can try to do things with it.

It's a weird city because the uglier the weather, the more beautiful the city. And the uglier the buildings, the more coherent the city.

One of our theories is that one can offset this excessive compulsion toward the spectacular with a return to simplicity.

The areas of consensus shift unbelievably fast; the bubbles of certainty are constantly exploding.

We live in an almost perfect stillness and work with incredible urgency.

Any architectural project we do takes at least four or five years, so increasingly there is a discrepancy between the acceleration of culture and the continuing slowness of architecture.

People can inhabit anything. And they can be miserable in anything and ecstatic in anything. More and more I think that architecture has nothing to do with it. Of course, that's both liberating and alarming.

Influence is a very unpleasant subject and I deal with it in a maybe irresponsible way, which is to really ignore it. It would be a nightmare if we started to really think about it; it would tie our hands, it would tie everyone else's hands.

Not many architects have the luxury to reject significant things.

Our office acts like a kind of educational establishment and we are very careful who we educate.

The luxury of our position now is that we can almost assemble any team to address any issue.

The work in S, M, L, XL was almost suicidal. It required so much effort that our office almost went bankrupt.

We felt it was very important for an entity like CCTV to make its presence felt... To generate a space and to define a space, that is the main thing.