- Article by Online Editor
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Above: The Clock House can be oriented differently, depending on the site, and opportunities for roof gardens or outdoor shades can be created.
Neil Durbach is a principal at Durbach Block Jaggers Architects, based in Sydney, Australia – a practice known internationally for its intricately designed residential projects, most notably the award-winning Garden House and the instantly recognisable Holman House. With a distinctly Modernist sensibility, its works are often nestled in a suburban context and are imbued with material consideration.
Jacqui Alexander: You’ve said in the past that you believe in architecture that’s not afraid of beauty. How does beauty manifest in your projects?
Neil Durbach: I don’t know who first said that beauty was a kind of happiness, but it seems such a gracious, generous way of thinking about what you do. There’s an incredibly soulful quality, for instance, in Le Corbusier’s work, it’s so charged. It never feels ironic, cynical or fast – it just feels raw. It makes you feel human because you know someone like one of us built it. Everything was made and considered with care and thought. You sense the intelligence driving it. It’s all of those things that architecture can make possible, which we explore in our work.
JA: Robin Boyd aligned good housing with good taste in The Australian Ugliness. Today we may understand that to be a flawed position, but is there still room for a discussion about beauty in relation to housing?
ND: Things such as intelligence, clarity and subtlety still make for beautiful housing. Today ‘good’ design is so ubiquitous – everything is good design and it has made excellent design quite difficult. But I don’t think cool is the same as beautiful. A lot of housing [in Sydney] is now done by architects. The city gives you big incentives – you can get an extra couple of floors if you have architects involved; many years ago, they felt [we] were a waste of money and time. It’s changed hugely in the last 10 to 15 years. But these designs are kind of trendy, hip. Sometimes that’s problematic in itself; it’s quite sugary. Sydney has this herd mentality and it’s very conservative. I suspect Victoria is much more adventurous in its housing.
JA: You’ve designed two prefab project homes for Happy Haus. Has the project resonated with the public as an affordable suburban alternative?
ND: I wish I could say Happy Haus had been a success. Toby Lewis – a young, optimistic developer – had been working with Donovan Hill Architects. We all believed that it was possible to do these beautiful, cheap houses and Toby just said, ‘Whatever you want to do … as long as it can fit onto a truck …’ Toby wanted to use good materials, fixtures and fittings and sell it for about $250,000. We were interested in [a double-storey] Happy Haus that could move. The idea for the Clock House was that you could orient it differently, depending on the site, and create opportunities for roof gardens or outdoor shades. We detailed everything; it was totally feasible. But nobody bought it. Two weeks ago we had an email from Toby saying he had decided to wind the whole thing up. I guess in a recession people become less adventurous. Even though the Clock House was bespoke – you could do whatever you wanted with it, but prefab still has a bad image. At the suburban level, I think it’s too difficult, but I suspect in big apartment buildings, there are some advantages and maybe that’ll be what alters the way people think.
JA: Are you optimistic about the role that architects can play in the future of Australian housing beyond bespoke housing for the elite?
ND: I was. Fifteen years ago we did a competition for individual houses and we actually partnered with marketers out at [Sydney suburb of] St Clair. They were courtyard houses, with water collection, community gardens, collective parking. It was 30 percent house and 70 percent garden. But they just said, ‘No, we want the minimum 10 percent for garden and the rest should be houses and garages’. It went nowhere. I think it’s difficult to stay optimistic when people just want the same old crap year in, year out; they just want it bigger. The McMansion sensibility is unbreakable in Sydney. It’s just got to be huge and bloated and meaningless.
JA: Durbach Block Jaggers was included in the Icons by Icons – Twelve Iconic Australian Architects, Twenty-four Iconic Houses exhibition at University of Technology, Sydney, in which selected architects were asked to contrast a seminal house they had designed with a current house. What was your response?
ND: There was a potential to undermine that heroic position. What we tried to say was that we go through this difficult doubt- ridden journey; doubt is like this incredible friend, something you deal with every day. The Holman House was like a weird child, 10 years later you say, ‘Wow, you turned out all right! We thought you were going to be the dropkick.‘ This insecurity is the driver in all our projects and, if it becomes iconic, well that’s just not that important. You look back and there are failed parts in every project and parts of every project that were successful; you just try to incorporate those things into the next one.