Architecture must bring ethics back into the way we build space

Architect Milić Djerković, after twenty years of experience, sees architecture as a craft and an art. He won the national competition for the selection of the conceptual architectural solution for a public parking garage in Bar on his own, and in Kolašin he won first prize with his colleague at the international competition for the conceptual solution for a garage. Miloš OstojićHis work is characterized by clarity, simplicity, and a deep understanding of aesthetics as functionality.

He tells Vijesti that he advocates for an ethical approach to architecture, slowing down pointless construction, focusing on ecology, and adapting to contemporary trends. He emphasizes the importance of architectural signature through pure form and the educational role of architects in shaping public awareness of beauty and context, and encourages young colleagues to be persistent, self-developed, and activist.

Your conceptual solutions will be used to create projects for the construction of garages in Kolašin and Bar. What characterizes your work, that is, what guides you when creating these conceptual solutions? How do you recognize the “right” idea for a particular project and a particular environment?

I think that at the moment my work is characterized by clarity and reduction. What I am guided by during the process of creating an idea, and then a rounded concept, are primarily ideals and the need for aesthetics. Aesthetics is a multi-layered phenomenon that is not only a question of the artistic quality of an object, but also a clear idea of ​​its use, and then the durability of the idea. Aesthetics is, therefore, a universal starting point. It is important to give space something beautiful anew.

The emergence of the idea has a lot to do with what I have always carried within me, but it is also equally connected to the architectural practice of the last two decades. Almost invariably, especially in the last few years, in the process of thinking about a concept, in the phase when the ideas are still extremely eclectic and go in many directions, there comes a moment when everything falls into place by itself. Of course, so as not to sound accidental, the skill that you have been working on for years comes to the fore, and then, combined with a sense of beauty, something emerges that begins to have its own value and character.

Where do you draw inspiration from?

Of course, inspiration is especially important. For example, I do not possess a mechanism capable of calming the inner turmoil caused by any negative situations in my immediate environment. It is especially important for me to feel calm in order to summon inspiration with my thoughts. First of all, I draw it from my family, and then from architecture itself through all its manifestations from its inception to the present day.

I suppose all creators feel a moment in time when they begin to master a skill to the point where there is no challenge they can't solve.

How would you define your architectural signature or philosophy? What do you want your projects to say to the world?

My signature, if I have one at all, and I would be dishonest if I said I am immune to this topic, is probably a combination of several elements. I belong predominantly to that part of the profession that puts pure form, almost completely devoid of decoration, in the foreground. Along the way, I try to create dynamics through certain procedures that are absolutely necessary to keep the idea from becoming monotonous.

I would like the objects I design to be as unassuming as possible, to logically appear in their proper places and to speak for themselves. Architecture is one of the most important socio-cultural indicators. It should be the result of proper consideration of space and time, but also to have an impact on the consciousness of the common man about what is actually beautiful. I am a great opponent of the slogan “tastes are not debatable”, because it is impossible to have a discussion about something that does not exist in the vast majority.

Where is the place of architecture in Montenegro today? What is the value of its heritage?

Architecture in Montenegro today, as in the last 20 years or so, is in a rather unenviable situation. All participants are to blame, including us as a profession. The capitalist business model in our country, like everything else, is reaching its radical extreme. Investors are the ones who predominantly “design”. A large number of colleagues have very calmly accepted this management model, perhaps out of some existential necessity, although I think primarily due to a lack of skills.

However, there is one, unfortunately smaller number of architects who have managed and are managing to resist, trying to preserve what they believe in. In Montenegro, there is currently nothing that could be called a new wave in architecture, but there are small leaps that shine from time to time.

How do you see the balance between preserving the authenticity of the space and introducing contemporary trends?

We are part of an era that relies primarily on technological progress. Therefore, it is necessary to adapt, because the way we spend resources will quickly lead us to a position for which we must be prepared. In this sense, the authenticity of a space, unless we are talking about an unspoiled natural landscape, can be inherited, but it can also be created.

Modern trends are not a one-way street. There are some very good trends, but the problem is that we shy away from trends out of fear of the new, and then quite naturally adopt the wrong trends. I think this is a childhood disease of transitional societies, and only when we have purified images of available utopias in our minds will we be able to see what is good and what is bad for authenticity.

What, in your opinion, are the biggest challenges, but also the biggest opportunities, for the development of contemporary architecture in Montenegro, especially in the context of accelerated urbanization and tourism development?

At this point, I think that the profession should first and foremost be united around the view that the plans created in recent years have treated the space very illogically and have necessarily brought it to the state it is in now. It is necessary to slow down the wave of senseless, megalomaniac construction, think things through, and then find a better model.

I think that contemporary architecture in Montenegro should focus on ecological phenomena and through its activities influence the formation of ecological awareness. Montenegro is a country without production and the concept of construction that circulates money between banks and investors is sustainable in the long term only for those two instances.

How do you balance functionality, aesthetics, and social responsibility in your conceptual solutions? How do you see the future of architecture and what role should architecture play in the context of environmental preservation? Is the profession losing the battle to the demands of big capital?

It is enough to have a very clear ethical norm. If you were raised not to throw trash next to you but in a bin, it is normal that your professional part of your personality will also take care of the messages it leaves behind. As I mentioned, aesthetics, which in my opinion is rather superficially experienced, is not just a matter of affecting the senses, but a clear principle of functionality.

Architecture should be as beautiful on the outside as it is on the inside. The architecture of the future is closely linked to technology in every sense. Substantial advances are seen where you have the best workforce available, the best selection of modern materials, and then the capacity of the state to deliver something like that.

The question of the relationship between architecture and big capital is directly related to the proportions of society and its cultural progress, tradition and consciousness. China, for example, has no problem with excess money. The most beautiful works of contemporary architecture are created there, which are often megalomaniac, yet do not protrude.

How do you deal with the often differing expectations of investors, users, and the local community when implementing projects? How important is public participation in the architectural process?

I try to involve the client - investor, friend or family member - in the design process in as much detail as possible. I think it is very important to have conversations that result in educating people about what architecture really is. I am very stubborn and I am not ready to give up on a whim. When I believe in an idea, I also believe that I will bring the person across from me to a position where we believe in the same thing.

Do you think architects have a broader role in society, perhaps in educating the public about the importance of quality architecture and urban planning?

I think architects should have a very clear and direct role in creating awareness in general. I know fellow architects who are truly erudite. I have learned a lot myself just by listening to them. Architecture is supposed to view reality in layers, so an architect is expected to understand the time and context in which he finds himself, as well as the causes that brought us here, and then ultimately to be able to plan for what will happen tomorrow.

I think that activism outside the office and casual conversations with people, as well as shows on the topic, can help create better awareness.

What is your message to younger colleagues?

Young people who are involved in architecture must be prepared for hard work and challenges. An architect must have the capacity to endure constant ups and downs. For a start, it is important to work on themselves and develop in multiple directions. In this sense, I recommend participating in competitions and following daily developments in the field of architecture, but also in other spheres of life.

They should beware of ego and vanity, because the sooner they learn to deal with these traits, the sooner they will be in a position to more easily master their basic talent.