Leida Pello: How would you compare the architect's situation now and in the 1980s, in terms of a graduate getting a job and being creative?

 

Andres Põime: Let’s say that at that time, work was guaranteed to everyone, but how creative you could be that was a separate issue. During Soviet times, you were restrained by lack of material and the building sector was under government control. Some materials were limited; I can say from my own experience that if you wanted to do something from metal you had to apply for a special permit from Ehituskomitee [building committee]. But there was more work compared to today. Well, during the building boom 2004-2008 everyone had a lot of work, and money wasn’t an issue and architects could be more creative. Nowadays, it is trickier for a young architect to get a job, only mainly through architecture competitions. But there are a great variety of choices and creative and skilled architects will always find a job.

 

LP: How has your architectural style changed throughout the years?

 

AP: Well, I have lived through changes as well. The 1980s wave of post-modernism was more evident in the philosophical form than in shape. In its philosophy, post-modernism contrasted to that modernist city planning, which in the 1980s, in western world already during the 1970s had come to a crisis and our vivid examples in Estonia are the emergence of Mustamäe, Õismäe and Lasnamäe [districts in Tallinn]. In particular, Lasnamäe, in its core it was this kind of a micro district consisting only of block buildings, an incoherent set of buildings and in a sense I had this inner fight against it. However, I’d describe today’s language of form as rational.

 

LP: What is your take on more and more glass buildings emerging in Tallinn’s architectural scene?

 

AP: It depends on the location. If those so-called glass buildings are used to show off and complement the city image outside of Tallinn’s city centre, then there is nothing bad in it. However, if they do something inside the Tallinn’s city centre I would expect a different approach. Yet there are good examples of glass buildings, e.g. Delta plaza, and, of course, bad ones.

 

LP: Do you prefer doing government procurements, commercial buildings or private buildings?

 

AP: We haven’t done government procurement projects in the last couple of years, as we haven’t managed to offer such low prices as our procurement system wishes. In government procurements, we haven't won any procurement projects. We rather work with private capital. Especially with that kind of private capital that values architecture and knows what they want. Working with them is the most pleasant process. With private buildings, it depends on the client. If he comes to you, it is difficult and complicated, but in a sense it is the most intimate project, you are the member of the family you are doing the project for, or at least during that time.  

 

LP: How would you describe the future of Estonian architecture?

 

AP: I’d say chaotically as the direction in which architecture evolves is dependent on different factors. In my opinion, one of the factors is the topic of energy saving. In a sense, it does affect architecture, making it more rational. As energy saving expects it. It also necessitates that buildings getting more expensive. Unfortunately, energy saving is sort of a luxury in the construction of buildings.