At the end of this past July, as we were wrapping up the Summer Exploration program at the USC School of Architecture , myself and the other faculty had our students bring all of their final models down into the Watt courtyard to photograph them in the sunlight. It was a wonderful conclusion to the four week program as the students could see the work of the other sections and the sum of the final production of the program was out for all to see by the light of day. As we were instructing our students on model photography techniques, Dean Ma arrived and was inquisitively surveying the student’s output.

Over the course of the program I had had the opportunity to meet Dean Ma, and to go down into the Topping library in the basement of Watt Hall to do some research to find out for myself more about the Dean. The more I scratched the surface of his immense production, the more it became clear that the architecture community would benefit greatly from getting to know him even better, and that conducting an in-depth interview with him on Archinect would be a step towards achieving that. As he was surveying the student work that day last July, I pulled him aside and asked if he would be at all interested in sitting down with me for just such an interview, to which he responded enthusiastically and said to speak with Zelda, his assistant, and schedule a date.

Qingyun Ma was born in Xian, in China, and received a bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering in Architecture from Tsinghua University . He went on to study architecture at the University of Pennsylvania , after which he went to work for several years in New York at the firm Kohn Pederson Fox . He also became closely involved with Rem Koolhaas on the first Harvard Project on the City, which he coordinated and which resulted in the book “The Great Leap Forward ”. In 1996 he founded his firm, MADA s.p.a.m. , which has built over 1,204,000 square meters over the last six years, with many groundbreaking and iconic projects including Qingpu Community Island in Shanghai, the Centennial TV and Radio Center in Xian and Tianyi City Plaza in Ningpo. Ma has taught architecture in China at the University of Shenzen; in Europe at the Berlage, the ETH, in Paris and in Germany; and in the United States at Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania, and Columbia. In October of 2006, Ma was announced as the new Dean of the USC School of Architecture .

On August 23rd, on the eve of Ma’s first full academic year as dean, I went up to the second floor of Watt Hall for our scheduled meeting. As I was ushered into his office, Ma was busy at work on his ‘vision’ statement, and he collected those papers off of his conference table where we sat down to talk. Which we did, for over an hour. What follows is a transcript of our conversation, broken up into the three major subjects that Ma addressed. In Part 1 we focus on his practice, and his observations from operating first in the East and now in the West. In Part 2 we discuss the future of the urban condition, both in China and in Los Angeles. In Part 3, Ma addresses architectural education, how architects need to recalibrate their role in society, and his vision for USC.

AJ: First of all I would like to thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedule to sit down with me for this.

QM: I am excited about interviews. That’s what I am good at. [laughs]

AJ: In doing the research for this, I found so many interviews, so that is clear. And Zelda [assistant to the dean] told me as well that this is something that you enjoy, so I am glad. I am also very excited to join the faculty here in what is a very exciting time as we are four days away from the start of you first full academic year here.

Well, to start off, I would like to ask you some questions about your practice. Currently, you have two offices in China, in Shanghai and Xian, and you have an office now in Pasadena as well?

QM: Not office, I have a seed. A seed project that will give birth to an office. Legally, it is already set up, ready to go, but you know an office is really a product of projects and an understanding of the local practice. So, I think, it’s not ready to go…

AJ: What is the seed?

QM: The seed is my house.

AJ: It’s your house? That’s in Pasadena?

QM: That’s right, that’s right.

AJ: What are you doing to the house?

QM: Well, it’s actually a very aggressive early 1950’s anonymous modern piece. Somebody who designed it has no name, I can never trace to whatever his idea is. In a way it’s very luxurious because it would be bad story if I inherited a Bob Hansman [sic] or a Schindler or any other modern landmark and then I don’t know what we will do to it.

AJ: Too much baggage…

QM: Exactly. So in a way this kind of aggressive exemplary modern piece gives me on the one hand a great inspiration and on the other hand freedom to destruct or to challenge any way I want. So this is the house, what I am referring to is this first phase- the renovation. And then second I would add to it an addition. And then the third phase we would build a new house. So basically I acquired two lots, one with an old building on top of it, the other one is a vacant lot. So it gives me a full circle of how I would engage in the local practice. By doing renovation, which seems simple but is very difficult because of the existing building. Second is an addition so I can start to break away from the dogmatic modern rules, and then the third one would be another challenge to do something else but I don’t know what I am going to do yet.

AJ: So where are you at with this right now?

QM: I am actually now in the process of fixing the old part.

AJ: So you are already renovating?

QM: Right, right. But I feel very unfortunate because the roof is already torn open but I have to stop for some legal reasons, for permits. So that’s exciting, I am not frustrated but I just thought it’ s an amazingly… Well, on one hand I want it to be very smooth because it’s my project, it’s where I’m going to live, but on the other hand I don’t want it to be too smooth because then I can learn more. So more obstacles, more problems that resulted from the lack of understanding can give me a better sense of modifying my next move.

AJ: It’s interesting, this project has given you a crash course on practice in the United States…

QM: Absolutely, absolutely. And not only the United States, but Southern California which is really, I mean, the codes that I find… This is a hillside, so I’ve been joking with friends- I have never been so patient to such a teeny project compared to half of a city in China that I’ve been building. So it’s completely two realms of energy that are working against each other. Which…

AJ: What is it that is so different here? Is it the amount of rules?

QM: It’s just a lack of direct consequence of your decisions in design. In China, a decision made by a designer, I would say that it directly impacts the physical construct. It is much more direct than here. And immediate as well.

AJ: Direct in terms of time, or in terms of…?

QM: I mean the result of it. In China, a designer could just draft something up and very soon you’ll see it being built, and being built just like you drew it. So, it makes a very scary practice where you must… Nobody is really challenging you in such a complicated way, so to me it’s dangerous because then if you’re not critical to yourself you can build something very bad… …But then for some architects who are really responsible and critical about what they draw then you can have a much better time because it’s going to be just what you draw. So the whole industry is almost like a plotting machine, plots your drawings out in a three dimensional way.

AJ: Well, they have machines for that now, that will print a building…

QM: Yeah, exactly, so I think that maybe there is a real chance for China to embrace this fast prototyping technology first.

AJ: I am also curious about how on the website of your office, you describe OMA as a joint venture partner. I know that you have a long history with Koolhaas, going back to The Great Leap Forward, but I am curious as to what your current joint ventures are?

QM: Well, it’s on almost everything happening in China that our office is constantly working with them in different capacities. The current work we have carried out not long ago is the Shenzen stock exchange, actually not only with OMA but more with AMO as well. We’ve done a lot of research projects together. For example, the world expo 2010 script- we worked together to come up with a kind of a script. So what are you going to say to the world? This is not program, program would be difficult, but a script with all the messages. What are messages particularly meaningful at this time in history related to the world expo? So that was three month’s work, not for building but for the rhetoric.

AJ: So what was the rhetoric, in the end?

QM: The true pieces of script we came up with… One is to get rid of the national pavilions because expo by national pavilions is really de-evolutionary because the world has come to a state where globalization, collaboration, world financing, world economical cycles already do not recognize boundaries of nations. Why should pavilions still? So it’s really moving towards the other direction. So the exhibitions and the expo should really be organized by world industries that actually navigate between countries. For example, what’s new next time? Stem cells. How stem cell research is being funded, being researched, being networked by scientists across everywhere. Terrorism is another phenomenon. It’s cross border, it’s… You name it. Everything that we face now. You know this recent campaign against Chinese agricultural products and toys with pens with… But the fact is it’s not really China who makes the pens, it’s actually pens made by international companies. So basically, toys are made by international companies, or actually commissioned by international funds… So, what about alternative medicine? Research on alternative medicine. The whole world has been networking on this… Somehow we can reorganize the world expo away from the national pavilion idea.

AJ: To be more focused on themes?

QM: Yes, themes. So what are the energies, good and bad. We must recognize these. That’s one issue. The other is, it’s a Chinese expo. China is being seen as a production base for the world industries. But, as a production base, what is new to the world? So we detect something that is transforming our production base to a creative base. Because an expo is about “next”, it’s not about what you have done before; it’s what we are going to do next. So if you look through the history of expos, the expos that address the future are always good expos. The expos that are somehow aligned with tradition, history always end up being bad expos. Because for history I don’t go to an expo, I go to Rome, I go to Paris, right? I don’t go to expos for that. So if you are really being nostalgic or tradition oriented, culture itself is tradition but it’s not what an expo is supposed to do. So that’s another thing. What are the Chinese cultural elements that can inform a future thinking? For example we have Buddhism, where we have this totality, meaning total man, or total nature, it’s the same thing where man and nature is one thing. So there are all these amazing Chinese ideas that have not been theoretized but are extremely important. So it’s basically an expo with Chinese characteristics.

AJ: How do you see those characteristics applying to the future?

QM: Well I can give you the oneness of heaven and man, which is really the fundamental goal for ecological sustainability. But we are approaching it wrong, now. We are coming up with all of this technology, but this is like making a case worse. Because the more inventions you have to solve your current problems, they will generate more problems in the future. So I think human beings are really selfish in that way. They are using their scientific capabilities in a way to resolve today’s problem. But things in the world must come around, you thought you resolved it but, no, you delayed it. Next time when it comes around it comes back with more intensity. So heaven and man together, in Chinese belief, is really like ‘just give up’. It’s not inventing another form of what you already possess.

AJ: And do you see that as an aspect of Buddhism as well?

QM: Yes, it’s a really Chinese belief. And the sense of impermanence is really important in Chinese culture. Confucius basically said ‘It’s gone. It’s gone.’ You lose it, you lose it. Don’t feel bad. It’s impermanent. Everything is in flux, it’s a flow. You can never preserve anything. So western culture is entering this wedge, that they want to preserve everything that they’ve built. You know, everything has to have a permanence, which is really not new culture anymore.

AJ: That’s funny, because I have been encountering that in Los Angeles because Los Angeles is now beginning to have very strict historic preservation policies. We are doing projects in Chinatown in downtown LA, and these buildings are fifty years old and we have to deal with these policies.

QM: I would say that there are different schools of preservation. The essential value of that is, what are the ones with thoughts in tradition that foster a better future for you? So it’s not really everything that we’ve done, that is where it has been problematic. I am not against historical preservation, I am against preserving for preservation purposes at the expense of future possibilities. We only have so much space. If you preserve it, your children will not have space to do new things. So there’s a choice. It’s a challenge, in almost every western city it is this way. But China is being constantly condemned as a place where there is not too much talk about preservation… you see western critics they go to China and half of a city is being demolished… but in fact half of the city was demolished before this city was demolished. The problem is when do you actually determine that it is worth it to preserve it as it is? It’s a choice. But if it’s a human choice then it has a lot of complexity. Why do you choose this town and not the town before? And before. Chinese figured that out. So it’s never really a right choice to preserve. So in the end it’s like Confucius said, it’s gone so just let it go.

AJ: This topic of preservation and change, especially here in Los Angeles, is very interesting. I am, however, curious about the name of your office. MADA s.p.a.m. I have to ask you, do you use the acronym s.p.a.m. intentionally?

QM: Yes. Well, it was luck. I like spam because when I first came to the United States the only thing that I could afford to have a sandwich with was spam. Actually, I love it. It tastes so well. Thinking about it, It’s actually good, the idea behind spam is to condense the nutritious agents by not recognizing its original form.

AJ: So it has already been chewed for you…

QM: Yes. Which is a great post-modern idea. But it stands for Strategy, Planning, Architecture and Media. That’s exactly what the office has been involved with, these four areas. That is also the reason that we collaborated a lot with AMO because that ‘M’ is the media part- research, publication, propaganda and all that.

AJ: So how would you define Strategy, Architecture and Planning?

QM: Let’s start with the second letter, which is planning. Planning with no social strategy, or economical strategy, is nonsense. So before you start to plan, you have to work on strategies, and that’s really how it starts. And architecture without planning insights, architecture doesn’t really make sense. But then architecture is really a form of representation of what we do, it’s a form of representation of social forces, of economic dynamism. But architecture being a media, it’s too slow, it’s too rigid, it’s not flexible enough for what is being represented. And then architecture itself can distill out multiple layers of media possibility, and it can be really translated into specific jobs… It’s a whole range of services of everything that our clients need so it kind of fit perfectly.

AJ: That’s interesting, because the way you talk about it, it seems that S.P.A.M., the acronym, is actually linear sequence. Strategy, then planning, then architecture and then media. Is that how you see it?

QM: It has to be linear because you put it down on the paper… But in the actual work it’s non-linear, sometimes it doesn’t even include all of them. It depends on how the project comes in. Sometimes a project comes in with a request of coming up with a proposal, a spreadsheet. Sometimes a project comes in as a VI design, Visual Identity, so that goes into the media part. So we basically do things in a non-linear way.

AJ: It seems that both Strategy and Planning occupy an urban scale, that seems to be a strong focus for you. How did you arrive at this focus?

QM: Mainly it’s because I work in China, because China is in a very early phase of urbanization. Everything that happens in China is happening at the scale of a multitude of what’s happening here. You just have to do large scale projects, without that ability you just cannot survive. So we’re involved in this not because we’re planners, I’m not trained as a planner, just because of the sheer scale, which urges planning thinking, and then planning thinking leads to strategy.

[Read Part II, The New Urban Culture… ]
[Read Part III, Ambition vs. Vision; Career vs. Leadership… ]


Creative Commons License


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License .
/Creative Commons License