Sarah Wigglesworth

Sarah Wigglesworth. Photo: Timothy Soar

Sarah Wigglesworth established her Londonbased practice in 1994, and rapidly developed a reputation for bringing a rigorous, ecological approach to the design, operation and impact of her buildings, from both a people and planetary perspective. Her buildings are highly innovative in their use of materials, aesthetics and programming. As a professor of architecture at Sheffield University, she has been part of a pioneering movement there to bring research and practice into meaningful dialogue.

In my opinion the whole definition of innovation needs a bit of a reboot. In architecture, the drive for innovation has been focused on technology for so long. To my mind, technology is not that interesting - it’s a means to an end. I’m more interested in the ends, really.

Why are we so obsessed with innovation to start with? Primarily, the conversation seems to be about how we position our society at the forefront of the global economy and Western civilisation, and appear progressive. I’m less interested in innovation and more interested in research. Research is about curiosity and discovering new insights and I think that subsumes innovation, but I don’t think innovation subsumes research.

Mellor Primary School in England’s Peak District. Photo: Beccy Lane

True research is about building on an existing body of knowledge and understanding what’s out there so that you’re not simply reinventing the wheel all the time, but you’re actually informed about what other people have done. You need to have a method by which you’re constantly exploring the questions you’re trying to answer, and then it’s about rigorously applying that method to create new knowledge. Then you have to disseminate it.

Thankfully we’re living in an era where shared knowledge is seen as something really important. There is quite a lot of openness and sharing in architecture already - probably much more so than many businesses - but a lot of the knowledge sharing in architecture has been about commercial knowledge and how to give yourself an edge in terms of business.

For me, it’s about curiosity. I want to understand the built environment in terms of human behaviour and unpack why we do things the way we do and maybe discover if there are other ways of thinking. Architecture is about people, ultimately.

I always start by asking: what’s the cultural context? It’s partly about place, the people and their motivations in commissioning a project. Obviously, budget comes into it and that gives rise to all sorts of challenges. And there are the users.

Users are very different from clients. They may be pulling in different directions. Then there’s our stream of interest - things we’ve done before, things we’re interested in, the kinds of people we’re interested in engaging with. It’s a weird mix.

Every project at that level is unique. You’re never going to solve everything. I don’t think architecture is like a maths problem with one perfect solution. It’s a conversation and you’re part of that conversation. What you’re trying to do is reveal some new insights. If that’s innovative we’re really lucky.

Since Desiring Practice [a book and exhibition exploring gender bias and interdisciplinary working, 1996] I have been interested in seeing what collaboration can bring in breaking down notions about your authority and expertise, to see how you can make links with people who are users of your buildings or other professionals or artists who may think in different ways, and who are going to expand your understanding of the world and your repertoire of responses.

Siobhan Davies Studios in London. Photo: Richard Bryant

The challenge is to create the opportunity for other people to be creative with what you make. They are invited to become architects in their own right. One of the most interesting collaborations was with Siobhan Davies on her dance studios (2005).

Working with somebody who is so masterful in her own field, and having the privilege to explore the way she thinks about the world, her ambitions, what it is to work with other people in her company and what the building means to her, was fantastic and very demanding, but good because it meant she was really ambitious for the environment we were trying to make together.

What’s interesting is that her practice really changed as a result of that building - she’s gone from being a choreographer and a dance company to being an interdisciplinary arts organisation. For me, the best compliment you can have about a piece of work is that somebody uses it in a really inventive way. VS