Following the master plan

Thomas Phifer, Thomas Phifer and Partners: I think the master plan speaks to values that I share about respecting the surroundings. I don’t think I would have ever put a really flamboyant building there.

Why not?

Because I think it would have become confused with the commercial architecture that surrounds it. [ed: the Ściana Wschodnia or Eastern Wall – the architectural concept for the residential and commercial buildings as well as the public space along ul. Marszałkowska]

So it won’t be anything flamboyant? Then in that case, what?

No, I think I would have done something really similar to what we have actually done anyway. Because the height of the building is level with the height of the lower sections of the Palace as well as the height of the buildings on the other side of ul. Marszałkowska. So I think it would have actually been very similar to what we’ve done.

What can you say about the space around your projects?

There’s another part of the master plan for the other areas, which is for buildings of exactly the same height and exactly the same plan. So in a way they will be there to pay homage to the Palace and give it new life. They will be symmetrical and have a similar height as the Palace’s lower buildings – and I think in cities that’s an important factor to respect.

What do you think about the Palace itself?

What I like about it is that Warsaw – the people of Warsaw – have taken the Palace and given it back to themselves, with a new life and a new spirit. That’s what I like about it.

What do you think about Warsaw’s architecture in general?

It’s a mixture of everything. A lot of it is anonymous, but it does have some wonderful moments – such as the Old Town, which is very beautiful. And, you know, due to the way it was reconstructed, Warsaw is an interesting and engaging place. I think the more we can build that is unique, the better. What I think is that cities are about representing diversity, not making buildings that are all the same. The buildings should be different, they should be representative of the time they were made. The time they were conceived. They represent the voice that we have now. I think that all too often buildings are made with some historical reference that takes them out of the time we live in. It is similar in the contemporary arts. A good contemporary performance has something to say about our times. It’s the same with architecture...

What about the other parts of the square?

I certainly respect the master plan for the buildings that are going to be on the other side of the square [ed.: the planned pl. Centralny square – on the eastern side of pl. Defilad]. I think that this will enclose the square, creating a big living space for Warsaw. I think that Warsaw needs a living space. It needs a place that it can call its own. The rest of the area [alongside the Palace] should certainly remain as a park – but maybe with a few changes.