Emily Abruzzo​ and Gerald Bodziak of ABA. Image courtesy of ABA

What happens if running a practice can be viewed as one long project? With this perspective and approach to establishing themselves as a formidable architecture studio, the Brooklyn-based duo of Abruzzo Bodziak Architects has continued to make their design imprint within the fabric of New York's diverse design community. 

As practicing architects and academics involved in teaching and fellowship, Emily Abruzzo and Gerald Bodziak use their multidisciplinary approach to design solutions that work toward a built environment which "engenders belonging."

For this week's Studio Snapshot, Archinect connected with Abruzzo and Bodziak to learn more about their journey as a budding architectural practice and showcasing the "synthetic process" of the built form through narrative.

How many people are in your practice?

2-6, depending on what we are working on.

What prompted you to start your own practice?

We often consider the idea of a practice as one long project — in some ways, it's really the only project — made up of many different threads. Through the process of doing, the thesis of the practice becomes self-evident. We didn’t wait for conditions to be perfect and certainly didn’t have a client. We don’t really consider that there was necessarily a moment at which we started a practice, but rather, we evolved into a practice. We had slowly been working on a series of articles and self-initiated projects that eventually developed into a body of work. Practices are a reflection of those who build them: their character imbues the work, their community of clients and collaborators, office culture, etc. We had the opportunity to work for some amazing, unique role models, and it’s these experiences that encouraged us to imagine what our project might be.

Practices are a reflection of those who build them: their character imbues the work, their community of clients and collaborators, office culture, etc. 

What are the benefits of having your own practice? Staying small?

We’re able to define how we practice and who we collaborate with. In addition to our built work, research and speculative initiatives (which we call Investigations) occupy about a third of our time. This not only influences the more straightforward architectural work we’re currently doing but shows us trajectories for where we’d like to focus next. Crises of disappearing public space and homelessness are areas we’ve been researching, which we’re starting to find ways to address in the built environment.

We’re not sure the idea of smallness is very relevant anymore. Since S,M,L,XL, there is this abstract need to define firms, projects, clients, money in terms of this size construct. You can see very big firms now doing projects that are very small — the size of an installation or tiny retail space or even a pop up — these sorts of projects used to be relegated to the realm of the small / young firm. Conversely, with technology, small firms are able to hit above their weight and take on much larger projects if given the opportunity. 

Perhaps because of this, it seems like the middle-size practice seems to be falling out of the profession. What would constitute a medium-size firm anymore? Architecture has become such a global industry — the same 10 multinational firms seem to crank out the same generic projects for any market. 

Is scaling up a goal? 

While the idea of scale is important, it's perhaps too much of a capitalist approach to thinking about architecture. We tend to think more in what has longevity — what could be made to last — so in that case, perhaps we are looking towards projects that could have a lasting effect. To that end, any project we decide to take on, we treat the same, regardless of budget or client.

When we think about scale, it’s more about the scale of a project’s reach that we find relevant. We want to serve larger communities through our work; for this reason, we’re looking to civic and cultural clients as our capacity grows.

While the idea of scale is important, it's perhaps too much of a capitalist approach to thinking about architecture. We tend to think more in what has longevity — what could be made to last [...]

What have been the biggest hurdles of having your own practice? 

At its heart, architecture is a service industry. Reconciling the needs of the user and client against a need for an architectural thesis can be an exhaustive process. Testing of these ideas against the code, clients’ needs, the budget, it’s really a process of compromise and evolution. Of course, there is always the problem of the chicken and the egg — and the burden of proof that you can deliver a project. The United States has an extremely toxic environment for young firms trying to operate. There isn’t really a supportive process for young firms trying to compete with larger, more established firms to get projects, as opposed to the European model for awarding projects through competitions. As a result, young firms from the U.S. are really at a disadvantage when competing globally.

What do you want your firm to be known for? 

Built space that engenders belonging. 

Where do you see your firm in 5 years? 

While we continue to build on ABA’s housing, civic, and cultural work, we’re also planning a second, nonprofit company, which, along with a series of collaborators, will produce exhibits, books, and curated research and projects on issues of social justice. We can’t share everything about this here, but we look forward to growing a second engine of production and outreach that will advocate for policy and cultural change in favor of greater equity in the built environment.

Do you have a favorite project? Completed or in progress. 

Our favorite project is always the one we just started! Architecture can be such a slow-moving process from the start to completion, that it’s hard to really look back and choose, and it’s fair to say that whatever was built, was probably exactly what that project needed to be. Architecture is for us is about a sort of optimism — you are always looking forward rather than looking back; new ideas creep slowly into the work through the process of doing.

Architecture for us is about a sort of optimism — you are always looking forward rather than looking back; new ideas creep slowly into the work through the process of doing.

Currently, we’re working on a mixed-use development in downtown Brooklyn, on an irregular lot; the design of which uses the site’s unusual shape to create a series of atypical spaces (interior and exterior) for New York. The building will also challenge norms of residential planning, providing a series of spaces that could be used for various family or collective arrangements as needs shift over time.

On your site, you describe what you do as “producing stories in built form.” Can you share with us how this became the practice’s design ethos?

Each project is a synthetic process: the end results emerge from the clients’ story and needs, from the context, from resources logical and available, and from our own ways of working and seeing the world. Our goal is that the people using the new space see and interpret the identity and qualities that this builds into a project, creating their own narratives through use.

Both of you have participated/are participating in teaching/fellowships. How have those experiences influenced your work?

Teaching and research, and exploring topics that don’t necessarily result in built space, has been a part of our practice since the beginning. It’s this work, which has increasingly focused on social justice and equity issues, that helps us define what types of work we want to do as we go forward.

Your practice has worked on a few retail projects and installations. Many question the retail industry and the need for brick and mortar spaces. Your designs seem to help challenge and reinforce the importance of retail spaces. What are your goals when designing a retail space, and what can others learn from your approach?

We can’t continue to think in terms of old models, when so much that we know about the exchange of goods, for example, has changed. The space we just designed for maharishi functions as a retail showroom, trade showroom, and warehouse; in this multi-functionalism are both the store’s economics as well as its architectural identity.

In a time where so many goods are available online, even sometimes able to be delivered the same day, the hospitality and retail sectors have to work hard for our time and effort. Providing unique experiences that interpret the brand’s ethos in a built environment is a way to elevate even the most modest shop. These places then have extended reach — they don’t just appeal to existing customers, they draw in passers-by, and attract those interested in design. We also believe that the quality of the experience reflects on the brand — it can enrich its perception and aura as a form of cultural capital.

What advice would you give to students?

• Solving bathrooms and handrails is critical to good architecture.
• Don’t take maintenance for granted.
• Don’t wait for perfect circumstances.

What’s the best advice you’ve been given during your career in architecture?

Maybe not advice per se, but a quote by Edward Ruscha that we often comeback to: 

"Good art should elicit a response of 'Huh? Wow!' as opposed to 'Wow! Huh?'"