A Deeper View: A Conversation with Architect, Chris Moller

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Ben Sutherland (00:00):
Welcome back to the Design Principles Podcast,
episode 10.
Today we have yet anotheramazing guest, probably best
known for his many years ofhosting Grand Designs New
Zealand, but he's also anexceptional architect, urban
designer and someone who hasbeen a great mentor and friend
over the years architect ChrisMoller from CMA Plus you.

(00:22):
Chris is a very passionatearchitect, so it's not difficult
to get him talking aboutanything design related, as
you'll soon find out but healways brings an interesting and
unique perspective that Ireally enjoy.
Today we discussed digitalversus analog, Chris's design
principles, and he fills us inon some interesting up and

(00:44):
coming projects he's beenworking on.
Hope you enjoy our discussionand if you have any questions
for chris, feel free to dm us ondesign principles on the gram.
Enjoy the pod, go analog.

(01:08):
Go in a log.

Sam Brown (01:10):
We could have done that.
We could have taken notes likeproper journalists.
It's pretty official aroundthese parts.

Chris Moller (01:19):
Yeah, why would you do that?
I mean, that would just reallymess with existence and
everything else that implies.
That's true.
Oh right, go.
Analog is really, reallyimportant.
I mean, digital is all verywell, and I'm the first one to
kind of say, hey, um, there is arole for computers, but I think

(01:42):
they're out of control andeverybody is being controlled by
them, whereas when you actuallythink this is a really
interesting pencil, what can wedo with it and how can you jam
with it?
You know, like, how can youhave a series of instruments
that you then kind of weave instrange, different, funky,

(02:06):
creative ways?

Gerard Dombroski (02:07):
Yeah.

That's good architecture, you know like.
Think of the Russians and theirhigh-tech space pen.
It's called.

Sam Brown (02:17):
I love that.
That's one of the best storiesin like technological
advancement.

Yeah, we're just saying Sam couldn't figure
out what to do without internet.
Oh shit, what do we do?
Well, the computer's turned off.
Y2k.
I thought, you were sharpeningthose model-making skills anyway
, Sam.

Sam Brown (02:42):
Yeah, absolutely.
We've got lots of models in ourstudio.
Post that chat that's good.

I'd still yet to make even one.
It's shameful.

I did all that master planning the other day
with legos, which was awesomethat worked really well I mean
it's interesting because, if Ithink backwards, and it's
interesting that somebody likeben, for example, who's very
digitally savvy as well as beingmultidisciplinary and that's
good to embrace, because therearen't so many architects or

(03:15):
designers who really have thatcapability and Ben does, and
it's really, really interestingdoes and, and it's really,
really interesting.
And I'm just kind of thinkingof a really fantastic interview
back in the early 90s, um, theat the time the editor of wired
magazine.
So this is 93 94, right at thevery beginning of wired, uh,

(03:37):
emerging as as um, probably thefirst serious online magazine or
zine or whatever you want tocall it these days.
Wired was fundamentally backthen not printed but digital and
they did printed versions of it.
In fact, they did two.

(03:58):
One was European-based I thinkit was based in Amsterdam, and
the other was American based,california probably.
But in any case, they haddifferent manifestations of the
digital realm and theconversation was between Kevin
Kelly and Brian Eno and yeah,look, it just hit all of these

(04:22):
issues that we're kind ofstumbling into right now, which
has a lot to do with, you know,the phenomena of the digital
realm and what you could sayeven back then was really
obvious.
And in the discussion betweenKelly and Eno that kind of came

(04:44):
out.
And as a little bit ofbackground, before I reveal what
Brian Eno says, it was reallyinteresting because, of course,
they had also embraced MarshallMcLuhan as their kind of patron
saint.
And Marshall McLuhan, who'sinfamous for, you know, coining
phrases like the global village,you know, this kind of slamming

(05:05):
together of completelydifferent scales, of things that
don't necessarily, you know,it's a juxtaposition, in other
words a shock which then iscreating a, you know, a strange
tension.
I mean, that's what I think ofas good architecture.
And he wrote that amazing bookcalled the Medium is the Message

(05:26):
, which of course, is anaphorism, and he's talking about
it like, if you translate it hesaid it several different ways
really fast Like the medium isthe message, you know, as in the
way that you perceive the wordmedium, it's the context within
which we operate, and mccluhanwas talking about us as a

(05:48):
species being electronic.
As in you know, most of ourinteractions are via electrons,
as a kind of extension of yournervous system, and we're really
in it now.
I mean, you can't bloody escapeit, especially social media.
And so this conversation, thatum, oh, translations of the

(06:13):
medium is the message, so themedium is the mass age or you
know yeah bingo yeah but theother one that he said which was
really brilliant was the mediumis the mess age and I just
think that totally sums it up.
it's just like, oh my god.
And so Kevin Kelly's kind ofbasically asking Brian, you know

(06:36):
.
So where do you think the realmof art has gone, you know, and
the realm of music, you know,which is again Marshall McLuhan,
as well as Brian Eno.
But especially Brian Eno isvery much a renaissance thinker,
so multidisciplinary.
That's the link with Ben beingboth a builder and an architect,

(06:56):
and it's really interesting tokind of think about this tension
across very differentdisciplines.
Mcluhan couldn't give a tossabout these so-called
definitions at all and Eno'sresponse was well, you know,
what's really pissing me offabout computers is that there's

(07:17):
not enough Africa in them, andreally what he was saying is
that you know, like that wholevisceral thing of being able to
touch, to feel to, you know thesensory engagement that you
really miss with a computer, andthat's where I think you know
the pencil or the model,physical model.

(07:37):
This is where architecture getsreally interesting, because
when you're using differentmedia in different mediums, then
you're getting differentfeedback loops and different
perceptions or different jammingpotentials, different kinds of
music, different kinds of sounds, different kinds of

(07:59):
interactions and certainlydifferent kinds of information
that can help you make,hopefully, a more relevant and a
more awake architecture,something that is, you know,
like slamming and rubbing upagainst something that isn't.

(08:21):
And on that note, this isclassic for what is
traditionally an audio mediumwe'll be right back after the
break kids show and tell it'salways, you better be making it

(08:43):
it's always interesting you know, like I'm the one that
constantly runs around with realbooks, real library, this is
Wired and they develop their ownlexicon for the digital age.
Nice, mcluhan.
You know there are gems here,but here's the medium, is the

(09:10):
message oh, nice, and in it,which is wicked, and this is a
really good example of the kindof shock tactics McLuhan uses.
You know like, oh, both ofthese are kind of cool, I should
show both of these.
So maybe read them, chris givenit's worth talking about and

(09:36):
even just listening to thenervous laughter because it
tells you a lot about what, um,and how we perceive.
So, looking, looking at a bookthat is more eloquent than
digital technology now, so youcan literally so this photograph
of a big toe that goes acrossboth pages.

(09:58):
This is a book.
And you turn the page and youliterally go from that idea and
it says the next page is animage of a wheel, a car wheel,
and it says in the top left-handcorner or I should go back to
the previous one it says thewheel, even though you're
looking at the picture of a foot.

(10:19):
So you're looking at a pictureof a foot and it says the wheel,
and you turn over the page andyou see the wheel is an
extension of the foot.
What book?
Turn the next page, turn thenext page, the book, oh nice.
And you're looking at a whitepage with two thumbs, you know,

(10:41):
as if you're holding the book.
And then you turn the next pageand you have a photo of an eye
and says is an extension of whatdoes that say?
Ben Of the eye?
Yep, and then you turn the nextpage and what are you looking
at?

Clothing?
No, you're not.

An extension of the sky Naked lady.

Sam Brown (11:03):
Explain what you're looking at Naked lady.
Yeah, clothing an extension ofthe sky, naked lady explain what
you mean naked lady yeah, anaked woman with arms
outstretched, breasts exposedand what does it say?

clothing, an extension of the sky, the skin
oh, sorry my browser wasblocking

it in the last moment, yeah right.
I can't believe it's been aminute.

Nice.

Whatever.
But you know, the interestingthing about all of this is that
he's using shock tactics onpurpose and juxtaposition of
different media across pages sothat you can kind of get a shift
, a shift in context or a shiftin scale, and that can be both

(11:59):
space and time, like you know,looking at this, where you're
flying into the future, butyou're looking through a rear
view mirror in a car the pastand what can you see in the
mirror?
Awesome care, a carriage.
Yes, exactly so.
In other words, we're runningaround flat out in yesterday's

(12:20):
news.
And then here's the next page,which, which is what when
information.

Oh, I need to hold it back again.

Sam Brown (12:28):
Some ladies' legs.

Some ladies' legs.

Come here man Stockings.

Sam Brown (12:36):
But with what?
Some nice lacy stockings, yeahwith lots of skin exposed.

And then what does it say next to it?

Sam Brown (12:47):
When information is brushed against information.

Yeah, there you go .
So this is McLuhan, and Eno isvery similar in the sense of
embracing juxtaposition as a wayof thinking and as a way of
working.
I would say Eno is a greatarchitect.
I'd say McLuhan is also a greatarchitect.
The people who are reallyinterested in concepts and how

(13:13):
you bring completely fresh ideasaround, composition and
juxtaposition, which then shockpeople awake.
Well, that's part of the roleof architecture, is it not?

Yeah, it's quite a common thing in the
design process.
It's like a trick.
They're ramming things upagainst each other, like the
simple ones, like Bjarke Ingallsputting a ski slope on top of a
power plant or soft, yes, yes.

well, that's kind of interesting because what
you're raising is the Dutch wayof thinking.
I mean, bjarke Engels wentthrough the office of
Metropolitan Architecture, sohis architecture is very much
influenced by OMA and you knowthat bundle of really

(14:09):
interesting people.
Rem Koolhaas was just one ofthem.
Zaha Hadid was also an originalpartner in OMA, as were Ilya
Zengalis and his partner, sothat you know those guys and
what they were doing was reallyexploring crazy, strange,

(14:31):
different kinds of conceptsabout urban life and different
materials, and what does thatreally mean in the modern age?
I guess you know.
The thing that is reallystrange in terms of our time is
trying to be calm and trying tobe normal in a situation which

(14:57):
is completely nuts.
I mean, how do we do that?
Easier said than done.

What is calm, what is normal?

Well, yeah, good question.

Sam Brown (15:12):
I feel like I don't know what calm is anymore.
Well, it's not even that.
It's just the nature of theworld, right?
There's so little space forcalm anymore.
I mean you have to really seekit out.
It doesn't come to you, I find,but maybe that's just me.

Throw away your phone very good point yeah, now
there's only two places whenyou're exercising or when you're
in the car by yourself.

Sam Brown (15:39):
That's about it that's true, take a nice long
drive, nice long run.
Two, yeah, very true, it's beenthat those.
To be fair though, those aretwo of the best thinking times
them, and when you're asleep,that's ultimate classic shower.
Amount of design work you cando through dream is pretty
impressive.

I'd argue that my somewhere I find calm is
like in the process stages, likemaking things.
I find some of my calmermoments.

Yeah, depends how many phones you use and why is
that Because you've got aphysical workshop, so you got
rid of your digital and you'reactually physically making
things and probably learningmore by you, know what the
material is demanding of you.
You know, like, if you'rewelding or if you're shaving
wood or whatever it is Justbeing hands-on.

(16:34):
Yeah, would that?
I mean, is that part of it thatyou're literally in the realm
of the material as against inthe digital realm?

Yeah, I think so and like just the quiet
satisfaction of making, I think,is the rewarding aspect, is
quite calming.
There's definitely times whereyou're stressed on a deadline,
where it's incredibly not calmand frustrating, but when you
continue, something doesn't goright and things keep breaking
for some reason.

(17:04):
Or trying to tig weld in a rushis not a good idea.
You have to be like really calmfor that.
I find so like you don't evenbother if you're a little
impatient or trying to dosomething before you leave.

It's like being an .

Olympic.

Then you're using it as a gas cutter and you
probably go through the wallit's like being an Olympic
biathlete.

Sam Brown (17:28):
Right, it's like sprinting, but then being able
to calm yourself to perform atthe right time.

I think the sports analogy is good because
in sports most people kind of goblank, especially in an extreme
sport.
When I kayaked quite a lot whenI was younger sort of
whitewater kayaking your mindwould kind of go blank and you
would just do, you'd kind ofbecome a robot.

Sam Brown (17:54):
So weirdly, in like a very stressful scenario, you're
quite calm, I'm like that whenI'm mountaineering, Just like
laser focus focused, there is nooutside noise because there's
no space for it.

you can't afford so you're in trouble?
Yeah, is it that, or is it?

something deeper.
You know, like, if I think ofum, the way that, say, louis
Kahn talks about architectureand he's talking about the
difference often, you know like,say, for example, between
silence and light, between theimmaterial, the realm of forms

(18:38):
before material, so the let'scall it, the meta realm, beyond
sensory perception, beyondmaterials, and then translating
that into the material world inorder to express or to reflect

(18:59):
those ideas or those forms.
So it's almost like I mean youthink of freud's um archetypes,
like go back to not just therealm of dreams, or you know
which of your parents wasinfluential on your sexual
drives, or whatever, but evensay, for example, in the sense

(19:22):
of what is chair?
You know, all of us have anidea of what chair is, a kind of
proto-idea of chair, what ischairness and how would you make
a chair?
And for Gerard, for example,who does this quite often, that

(19:43):
you know every chair isdifferent, yet what would be
always the same chair?

Well, hopefully it supports your bum,
gets you to take a load off theold feet.

So this is good, because when we shift out of
that cosmic realm of ideas intono, no, hang on a minute,
because this is where the kayak,the mountaineer and, I would
argue, the smithy, as in you'reworking with fire.
Because in each case we'redealing with this intense moment

(20:21):
of transformation, right yeah,where Radical things can happen
in a split second.
And so, if we use this in termsof the sense of craft and the
sense of the smithy, for example, where you're dealing with fire
, which is this ultimate kind ofprimeval realm, where you're

(20:46):
taking something almost inliquid form and turning it into
something solid, somethingpermanent, and let's also kind
of bring that back toarchitecture in the sense of

(21:07):
what that does.
So this transformational craft,that is literally very much
based on physics and I don'tmean abstract mathematical
physics, even though thatinforms what we're talking about
.
Like if you're talking to a topfootballer, you don't ask him

(21:30):
if he was using a sign curve,you know, in order to get the
ball in the back of the net.
You know there's, there's asensibility, just like if you
asked it and center how the hellhe managed to get around monte
carlo in the wet and nobody elsecould, you know.
know, like the moment of a greatsportsman or a great craftsman

(21:55):
to bring that realm of theunknown and the very visceral
but utterly transformationalmaterial into a very specific
expression which, at its highestlevel, is really art.

(22:20):
You know, it's really reachinganother kind of level, yeah.

It is the extreme sport, again the action,
and then there's the act, Iguess.

Sam Brown (22:36):
Are we classifying architecture as an extreme sport
now?
Because I like that?

Yeah, absolutely, and it is, and I would say each
one of those, whether it'sAyrton Senna, oranta or you know
, you on the mountains orkayaking or whatever it is it
that's really great architectureat that level, because it's

(23:01):
about in-tuneness.
It's you know, and to get tothat in-tuneness state, just
like you know when, when you'reholding um, uh, the welding, uh
torch, that it comes to a pointwhich I like to to call
isn'tness.
So it isn't this and it isn'tthat it, it's the un thing

(23:27):
before the thing.
And often what we tend to talkabout in architecture way too
much, and I would say in all ofthese realms that happens is
you're focused on the thing, theobject.
In actual fact, that doesn'tmatter.
You know.
What matters is not the cup, butwhat the cup does, and you know

(23:54):
what it enables.
So the space or the un-thing.
You know the fact that you canput water or you know whatever
liquid you want to into the cup,you want to into the cup.
So it's about the water and theexperience.

(24:14):
Or is it wine or is it coffee?
In which case, what is thenature of the material, what is
the experience of how you drinkit and the shape of the lip or
the shape of the vessel in termsof how it holds that aroma or
that particular flavour.
So then we're kind of gettingcloser to it.

(24:36):
So there's this dance betweenthe material and the immaterial.
That's really what I meant whenI referred to Khan.

I remember at university when you were
tutoring us talking about theunspaces, the, the spaces in
between the building.
I always thought that was veryinteresting actually.
Good perspective, Good point ofview, All right.

I also said build or die.

And I've been building ever since?

No, it's been both Took it literally.
I mean it's funny, I meanBuckminster fuller talks about
this a lot make mistakes,because mistakes are the best
opportunity for learning, andthrough making mistakes.
So in other words, build or dieis kind of like just roll your
sleeves up and um, you know, getbusy, and gradually you learn

(25:32):
by.
And this is where the analog,the physical realm, in other
words getting out of yourcomputer, or as Eno talked about
it, you know, I need moreAfrica in my computer.
That's where that's soimportant and one that it gives
calm.
In other words, you're reachingback into the cosmic realm way

(25:52):
beyond, um, what a computer cangenerate, because the most
powerful computer anyway isactually in your head.
You can have a what-if computerand it can do computational
processing way beyond anycomputer ever will be able to,
ever.
Amen.

Sam Brown (26:15):
Chris, do you find I mean you've got a pretty
well-documented and broadexperience with a lot of ranges
of architecture.
Do you find that exactly whatyou've just talked about, this
maybe more modern-day shift tothe reliance on digital or the
computer has had a real andvisual impact on current
architectural outcomes andstyles?

Totally.
Yes, it has, you know.
To go back to McLuhan, he sawall this early, but he realised
that the shift away from thewritten word, in other words, a
slowness of interaction that wasscholarly and considered and

(26:58):
you know, reflective, that thatthat gave it generated a public.
You know that, even the idea ofthe press, that you could then
make something which you thenreplicated and created a public
with that, whereas, as hereferred to the different stages

(27:20):
of, let's say, different kindsof humans or different kinds of
mediums that humans operatedwithin.
I mean, the thing about McLuhanthat's really interesting is
that he wasn't a futurist, hewas a linguist and he knew very

(27:47):
deeply about the history ofhuman interaction.
So he talks aboutpre-alphabetic man, Before the
alphabet, that we interacted ina radically different way, not
just before the book but beforethe alphabet.
So this idea that you sitaround the bonfire and

(28:12):
communicate it more throughimages.
So he talked about the ideathat that's where the term the
global village is coming from,this collapse of time and space.
That because of visual mediaand the immediateness of it,

(28:41):
specifically social media, whichis really fast that the culture
and communication becomes veryreactive and it needs to be more
extreme, like extreme sports,in order to just get attention.
So you know which you just getfor a split second anyway, but

(29:01):
you know you need to scream inorder to even be heard.
That's kind of what it's comingto, whereas in the age of you
know, of the written word in thebook, these things were much
calmer and more considered andmore propositional perhaps,

(29:24):
rather than reactive.
So it's a fundamentallydifferent way of operating.
So the very mechanism ofoperating even if we produce a
bunch of really beautiful umenvironments, they'll just be

(29:44):
there for a moment and maybe noteven seen or registered
relative to social media.
So then the question is ifthey're not on the latest blog
from the latest competitions,whether that is Dazeen or some
other phenomena that's out therethe latest awards, whatever
they might be, whether they'relocal or international, it's

(30:07):
just there for a split secondand then what it's gone.
It's just there for a splitsecond and then what it's gone.
It's just.
You know what was that actually?
So the panic of the now hasovertaken actually what's
important.
Things that are important arebeing pushed off the table
because of the panic of the now.

(30:28):
So that has a fundamentallydifferent impact on what
architecture is.
If we all walked into today'snot such a good day, but if it
was late evening, sun, wintersun coming down streaming into
Fortuna Chapel.
So John Scott's wonderfulmasterpiece, and we're literally

(30:52):
in the space.
You cannot replicate thatexperience that you feel in a
photograph, not even close.
You can't do it, even thoughyou might be engaging people's
imagination through description,either verbally, like we are
right now, or with words.
But actually to experience itand and feel the light literally

(31:17):
coming into that space and thedarkness and how the light
penetrates the darkness thatjohn has created in that space
is extraordinary.
And on top of that the geometryis amazing.
I mean it's utterly amazing andincredibly powerful and very
unexpected if you've going on inother places, like Le

(31:37):
Corbusier's or Matisse's chapelin Saint-Paul-de-Vence, but

(31:58):
neither of them have had thisextraordinary quality that
Fortuna has.
It's almost as if you'reunderwater.
You know you're in thisencapsulating space of two wings
, which are where people sit,that are opposite each other
Very unusual for a churchbecause it's in the round and

(32:19):
it's like a cloak on either sideand the walls are really low
and solid and dark.
And then the exact opposite onthe other two corners, where you
have these butterfly roofs thatopen up and bring light from
the different horizons into thespace.
And it's just extraordinary, soas the light moves around, you

(32:43):
know, different at differenttimes of the day, you, I mean
it's utterly beguiling.

Sam Brown (32:49):
That's the power of architecture, that's interesting
because that's something thatyou'd never like you've already
mentioned that's something you'dnever be able to achieve or
understand or replicatedigitally, that can only be
understood now physically and itcould only have ever been
designed physically.
Yeah, there's such like anecessity for us to peer back

(33:14):
right to have that like morehuman engagement.
Like we didn't evolve to workin this digital realm.
Maybe we're evolving there now,who knows?
You know many years down thetrack, but like engagement with
everything around us is actuallyphysical and so we need to
probably design with that inmind.

I would just say we need to fight back.
You know I think I mean allthree of you know this that that
moment of quiet, thereforereflection away from the digital
realm, is one thing, whetherit's in the gym, whether it is
literally with a gas torch inyour hand, or whether it's up in

(33:58):
the mountains, um, or in akayak, you know.
Literally not so much, that'sthe only thing, because I I
think it's bigger than that.
I think what you do is you gothrough what, in mathematics,
you call a point ofcontraflecture, which is, you
know, that's where the sinecurve comes in, especially when
you push them past one another.

(34:19):
That point of contraflecture isa twist, and and it's a twist
into the cosmic, and I would saythat the cosmic which deeply
informs Kahn's work as much asScott's, john Scott.
So when you experiencesomething like Fortuna, what

(34:39):
you're experiencing is thatvortex.
You're experiencing the cosmicrealm being brought in and
twisted and manifested in in allof its dimensions and, and it's
both pre so proto form, so it'sbefore idea as well as post

(35:03):
idea, as in it has materializeditself, and that's exactly what
khan's talking about, I mean inkhan's greatest works, that's
what's going on.
I would argue the same with anygreat architect.
I mean alto, right, you knowthese, these um, uh,
extraordinary, and they wereabsolutely extraordinary
architects who were touching onthe edge of the cosmic realm.

(35:30):
And, like you know, if youthink of Bach, bach, as in his
music, is like that.
There's this direct sense ofthe cosmic realm informing the
work rather than the personalityof the individual.
You know so there's somethingbigger, way bigger, and I think

(35:54):
that's why spiritualarchitecture often, regardless
of what it is is it a church, isit a mosque, is it just a
beautiful building or not even abuilding in a natural setting
that you're deeply connected tothe cosmic.
And you know the metaforms ofarchitecture at landscape scale

(36:17):
are part of that too.
I mean, that's what the Greeksoften refer to, and you know the
idea that the temple makesmanifest the architecture of the
land.
So we're talking about thearchitecture of the planet and
even the architecture of theland.
So we're talking about thearchitecture of the planet and
even the architecture of thesolar system, because all of
those cosmic dimensions informhow we experience where we are,

(36:39):
although ironically, often, uh,completely incorrectly.
I mean what buckminster fulleroften referred to.
He said we need to throw awayour silly lexicon.
You know there is no up anddown, it's in and out.
The sun doesn't rise in themorning, it's still there.
We're just spinning around andwe experience it as we come

(37:03):
whizzing by and then it seems togo down, but you know so,
that's our feeble experience ofit.
So that's our feeble experienceof it, but you know so.
There's this sense of connectinginto these larger processes at
fundamentally different scales,just like if you zoom in at

(37:23):
nanoscale.
That's extraordinary too, youknow, like literally we should
be able to, you know, put yourfinger through the material of a
desk, because it's primarily,you know, that's under your hand
, as we're kind of sitting here,because it's primarily space.
It's just electrons whizzingaround.
That's stopping you from, youknow, going straight through

(37:44):
that piece of whatever it iswood or metal or whatever your
table is made of.
It is wood or metal or whateveryour table is made of, and you
know so-called concrete that weoften refer to as something
permanent so.

Isn't so one of your projects, chris, the, for
example?
A lot of your projects actually, um, but we'll take the mount
pleasant Centre, for example.
How it was directly influencedfrom you know, say, as a
response to the neighbouringcoastal environment.
Is that kind of what you'retalking about, in a way, how

(38:21):
nature's starting to inform thearchitecture itself as well?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yes.
There is a purity about thatresponse, and the reason that
purity happens is twofold in away on the one hand, us as a
team putting that thing together, exploring its potential.
So architecture is structure,structure is so, working

(38:49):
together with Dunning Thornton,with Alistair Kastanak, that
when the architecture and thestructure are one and the same
with services, that's going backto learning from Louis Kahn,
who learned from others as well,including Frank Lloyd Wright's
earlier work, and it's really,really interesting, because then

(39:10):
they're deeply essential.
You can't disassemble thosethings, so they're each
informing one another.
And that's where, when you usematerial in a very mathematical
way, just like you know whenyou're welding and metal has
become liquid, it is followingpurely the laws of physics.

(39:32):
So then it is following realphysics in its forms, in its
shapes.
So you're getting closer tocatenaries and hyperbolic
paraboloids and these kinds offorms, because they're naturally

(39:52):
liquid.
And the same with when you lookat other species, and that was
the importance for MountPleasant is to learn from other
species about how we shouldreally build here, because I
don't think humans really know.
I mean, we haven't, as aspecies, been here long enough
to really know it.
We're not like the japanesewho've, you know, lived with

(40:14):
earthquakes and lived withvolcanoes and all the rest of it
for millennia to develop a wayof doing things that is deeply
informed like that, whereas ashumans here we're just kind of
messing around, trying stuff out, stumbling in the dark if you
like.

Sam Brown (40:33):
When you say humans here, Chris, do you just mean
New?
Zealanders?

Yeah, yeah, just humans in this place.
We're still working it out.
And the thing is that there areother species who have adapted
to this place, like crustaceans,bivalves and so on.
And that's what I started toobserve, because Mount Pleasant
is on the edge of the estuaryand you know where the sea kind

(40:58):
of comes in towards Christchurch, just past Sumner, and the
thing that was reallyfascinating is there were crabs,
you know, these shellstructures, but especially the
bivalves, blew me away that, ofcourse, these creatures were
doing something that wasincredibly efficient minimum

(41:22):
amount of material, making shellstructures, literally.
Think of the structuralprinciple of making a shell and
how lightweight it is.
I mean, think of the structuralprinciple of making a shell and
how lightweight it is.
I mean, think of a boat andyou're keeping the water out,
but you're also creating thesense of home, the sense of

(41:43):
safety, the sense of shelterwhich for Christchurch at the
time, because Mount Pleasant wasa response to the earthquakes
the previous community hall hadbeen destroyed by the
earthquakes and so we needed tocreate something that was both
safe and calming but alsoefficient and inspiring.

(42:12):
And so how to do something thatwas uplifting but economical in
its use of materials, so usingless materials.
I mean, in principle, we onlyhad three materials.
There were the foundations,which were the concrete beams,

(42:34):
then there was the engineeredtimber, which was the shells,
and then there was the wrapper,if you like, over the top of
that, which creates the wettedsurface.
So that's the insulation andthe roof.
You know you want to keep thatas simple as possible, just like
a boat, because you don't wantit to leak.

(42:54):
But the rest of it was thisfolded geometry, which was
informed by observing andanalysing, to some degree,
lessons from these bivalves andthe pippies that I was picking
up from the shore.
They had these amazingtriangular reinforcements in

(43:17):
them and it was fascinating andit was just kind of like an aha
moment.
It reminded me of, you know,folded forms, just like the
folded forms of waves, but alsothe folded forms of origami, and
, and so when I I kind of playedaround with it a bit, and I

(43:41):
think it was with a, uh, anairplane ticket, I folded up an
airplane ticket and um handed itaround to the committee, the
client and they were like,what's this about?
And I just talked about howlight and simple and direct it
was, and when I showed it toAlistair.

(44:02):
He got it straight away.
He said, yeah, we can do this.
So this idea of opening theshell, this bivalve, so this
idea of opening the shell, thisbivalve, where then the space
that you come into is like theligament in a bivalve.
You know the hinge, but in thiscase it's not just the physical
hinge, it's actually the socialhinge.

(44:23):
It's the place you arrive andit embraces you, and then you've
got the hall on one side andyou've got the studios and, um,
all of the other stuff that youneed on the other side.
But but effectively it's allunder this, um, very simple
shell.
So in plan form it's, it'sextremely simple, but in
cross-section, uh, quite complex.

(44:43):
So, yeah, then thenrationalizing all of that and
creating an architecture out ofthat where we interwove the
structure and the services andthe architecture as a tightly
integrated, extremely efficientform.
That's where that came from.

(45:05):
So it was really about learningfrom other species that have
adapted brilliantly to thatcontext.

I think that tying architecture into
structure is like pretty genius,really.
Like that's, I guess, how youmaintain your architecture
through a project.
I see that project we saw theother day and Potiphar has that
as well.
Like the structure, is thearchitecture right?

and the services too.
So that you know, like to goback to khan and it's really
interesting.
I mean, khan has indirectly ahuge influence on me, you know,
like, if you look at what he didat various times, because he's
very much a philosopher,architect.
So, to go back to that term ofisn'tness that I refer to, it's

(45:56):
a little bit like some of histhinkings around, you know,
going from the material to theimmaterial, like where is that
realm of isn'tness?
So you know, again, to go backto the cup, where the cup isn't,
that's what makes it useful,which is kind of ancient chinese

(46:16):
philosophy.
You know, dao, the the, thething that isn't.
You know, just like the hub ofa wheel makes a wheel useful.
So you know it's this, it's thething that you need to use.
Why are you creating thisobject?

(46:40):
And and it's the dance betweenthe two, the physical and the um
, the spatial, let's say, butthe thing and the un-thing.
And I think that that's whereunderstanding all of those,
let's call it the architectureof the services, which is the

(47:03):
plumbing, the electrics, thelighting, which includes natural
light as well as artificiallight, and in the case of or
kaitahi, it's, it's this cosmicrealm again, where you're
bringing light in the earlylight in the morning that is
coming in on one side and theevening light in the evening

(47:27):
coming in the other side, whichof course in winter is extremely
low and it gives you thisalmost euphoric kind of hovering
quality in the space and theground is concrete pavers so
that you have this thermal mass,so you're getting light and

(47:49):
warmth even though you're in themiddle of winter and you've got
this extremely light uhstructure almost not there, the,
you know the, the triangular,um timber, blue, lamb beans,
that that kind of are holding upthe etfeE roof, and then these

(48:11):
light tubes which are kind oftalking to the other cosmic
bodies, whether that is the moonor the sun.
And likewise, how does thatexperience translate across
different moments in time, likedifferent seasons?
And summer, of course, isradically different to winter

(48:32):
and you really feel it Roughly.
From September onwards thelight tubes will start to work
again and the golden light thatis coming down through the light
tubes will land on the floorand move around the floor and up
the wall.
You didn't experience that theother day because we're in the
depths of winter, so we have avery different kind of

(48:53):
experience right now, and sofrom roughly end of September,
beginning of October, so that'skind of equinox, you know.
So right through to roughly, youknow, end of February, early
March, that zone is suddenly thebuilding wakes up and has a
different personality, you know.
So that's part of what's goingon there too, but that's also

(49:17):
informed by really ancient deepsea creatures coming out of the
water.
Like you know, if you think ofwhere do we all come from?
Life came out of the sea and itcrawled up onto the land.
And you know, we, even whenwe're evolving in the wombs of
our mothers, are fish to startwith.

(49:39):
So we're kind of crawling intothis existence and that's kind
of what that building's talkingto.
So its architecture is alsocoming out of the deep, both
metaphorical realm of the deepunknown, the subconscious, and
literally that the ocean is ourreal home.

So that building is the just, so everyone's
aware is the Porirua CommunityMarket.
Is that about right?

Well, it's a market hall and event space.
So the idea I mean it'sdirectly across the road from
Pataka Art Museum and so theidea is that it can also be used
by them for events and so on,as well as other activities.

(50:29):
Who knows how that will be used, but the dimensions of the
space which was the originalservice lane are nine metres
wide by nine metres high, whichis a classic dimension of a

(50:49):
southern european slash,northern african, middle eastern
um bazaar or marketplace.
And you know, like, if, if youlook at the bazaar in isfahan or
in istanbul, they're thatdimension nine meters high by

(51:10):
nine meters wide, and and, andit gives you a sense of amazing
space.
And then you've got MichaelTuffery's art wall, which is
along the right-hand side as youarrive from the south, so from
Partica, and that's telling astory about two things.
One is the journey of the tuna,or the eels, as they go back to

(51:35):
the islands, you know, to um,to spawn and so on.
And he's, he's from, uh, youknow pacifica.
Culturally, he comes from acouple of different islands in
the pacific, so he's very awareof that.
And then he's also hanging aseries of discs, like a kind of

(51:56):
moon cycle, that hang along thatwall, and the idea is that
there is this arcade that thenhas a balcony which you walk up
to and you can view the work andany events that happen from the
balcony, which then connectsyou into a roof garden, which

(52:17):
again is about getting intonature and connecting you to the
hills, to the ocean, to the sky, to the sun and to the moon
when it's doing its thing.

Sam Brown (52:30):
Chris, it's really interesting.
From an architect's perspective, I think we understand the
depth of thinking and like theprocess that goes behind our
design and everything.
But from a like, general publicuser interface and experience
point of view, they're probablyunlikely to understand or
realize all this thought andthese, these like really poetic

(52:52):
movements and everything.
But I think what you've sort ofalluded to earlier is people
that use these spaces, that havehad this depth of thought and
this level of sort of work putinto them to make them feel
right, the users of those spaces.
They don't know why, but theymove into them and they're like
this is the correct space for meto be in.

(53:13):
If you know what I mean, wouldyou agree with that sort of
statement?

It's interesting, I mean, I think there are a lot
of really useful things in whatyou're suggesting, and one of
them is that the experience ofarchitecture is not front of
mind, it's.
It's much deeper, it's muchmore subliminal and and uh,

(53:41):
that's a really important partof its role is as an extension
of landscape, or at least a, acomplementary condensing and
articulation of the cosmicarchitecture at the scale of the
universe the solar system, theplanet, landscape, water.

(54:07):
You go back to the primarythings of earth fire, air, water
.
These things are inherently inthe physicality that we were
talking about earlier, becausethey're so, so visceral, and
architecture, if it's good,speaks to these things very
directly.
And yet there are buildingswhich transcend just the

(54:33):
background and there arearchitects who manage to do both
, in other words, to be quiet inthe background.
That you know, a great spiritualspace, whether it's a cathedral
or a mosque or whatever, likeisafia in istanbul or
constantinople, um, or Byzantium, as it was originally called,

(54:56):
is that kind of space and it'sextraordinary.
You know this massive, massivedome, just huge.
Sinan's later mosques are basedon that and they're brilliant
works too, but they're reallydifferent than what Hagia Sophia
is about.
Hagia Sophia is about a kind ofinterpretation of the universe

(55:18):
the sky dome, literally.
And at the beginning it was tooshallow and it collapsed in
earthquakes because you knowjust perhaps too literal, but
the physics of the dome didn'tquite work.
So of course what we've got nowis a more efficient structure.
Let's say, and hey, turkey getssome serious kick-ass

(55:40):
earthquakes and it's still there, so it's extraordinary.
But compare that, say, forexample, with the Pantheon,
which is older in Rome, and asimilar thing to the kind of
stuff that I was just talkingabout in Pororoa, with these

(56:03):
light tubes and also theexperience of light coming in
both in the different seasonswinter versus summer, equinox,
and how you can register whattime of year it is, just by how
the building's behaving andwhether it's cool, which is what
you want in summer, or whetherit's warm, which is what you
want in winter, especially inPororoa, especially on the

(56:24):
waterfront.
Let's face it, the whole townhas turned its back both to the
sun ie not orientated north andto the water, which is its
primary address.
This is the first building toactually connect not the town to
the water but the water to thetown.
It's connecting the ideasconceptually of the ocean as a

(56:51):
species coming out of the oceanand connecting via partica back
into the city and saying, hey,let's turn this around and let's
have a fundamentally differentkind of relationship with the
landscape for the whole town,and the building is the catalyst
for that.
So it's very ambitious at thatlevel.
But another, but still, I thinkthe experience, because of the

(57:15):
fact that it's marketable, isprimarily that it is providing
this ambient background whichpeople like Kahn another one
brilliant architect, for thesame reasons, jorn Ut utzon does
that as well, and and so hisarchitecture is is actually very

(57:38):
much supporting what's going on.
You know, like to come back tothe vessel, the cup, you know,
and maybe the exception, atleast.
Um, the first exception thatprobably comes to many people's
minds is the sydney opera house,but actually it's not.
Again, it's about an expressionof what's going on inside and

(57:59):
because it's so important.
But actually Utzon was mostinterested in what was going on
inside, which is why it was sotragic that we lost him.
To finish the building, to dothe interiors, but you know,
even to shape the shells wasextraordinary.
But if you look at his Kinkohousing, you know, even to shape
the shells was extraordinary.
But if you look at his Kinkohousing, for example, which are
primarily courtyard houses.

(58:20):
Again, he's focused on theunthing, the court and the house
you know holds two sides ineach case, and so you know this
sense of the building enablingand supporting and facilitating
people's lives rather thandemanding attention.

(58:43):
It's not screaming forattention, it's actually quietly
just sitting there, and his ownhouse in Menorca is like that
too.
It's quietly sitting there andI think that's really, really
important.
If we go back to the Pantheon,that's really interesting
because that's slightlydifferent.
When you go into the Pantheon,you cannot go in there at any

(59:09):
time of the year and not beconfronted by the cosmic realm.
You know this hole in in in themiddle of the dome, which you
know, the oculus, this singleeye that is, you know, blasting
light down onto the floor as itmoves around.
I mean, that is the mostoutrageous, extraordinary,

(59:35):
incredibly.
You know front architecture inyour face, if you like.
It's not an external experience.
You know like the colonnade outthe front is.
You know classic, roman or evenGreek, if you like, whether
it's in tablature, and you knowthe orders, the columns, et
cetera that we all know.

(59:56):
You go through that, you goinside and bam, it's like you're
confronted by this singular,incredibly powerful translation
of the primary elements of whatmakes great architecture.

Sam Brown (01:00:13):
So you're saying that is an example of architecture
that you can't help but knowwhat it's doing to you?
Yeah well, I would argueFortuna is in the same realm.

Chris Moller (01:00:23):
Yeah, I'd agree, you know Fortuna and the
Pantheon, you know kind of nudgeup against one another.

Sam Brown (01:00:31):
And Sagrada Familia.
For me, I think that's anotherbuilding that I've been in, and
it's you know, I've been to manybuildings around the world and
a lot of the time you're like,oh, this is really lovely.
I understand what thearchitect's done here, blah,
blah, blah blah, but very rarelyhas it like hit you in the face
and been like holy shit, thisis what it's all about, and I'd
argue that that's anotherbuilding that falls into that

(01:00:53):
category.

Which is quite funny from that perspective,
because, you know, of course,gaudí was also extremely
ambitious.
He was reinventing how hethought the next evolution of
Gothic architecture should be.
You know, do it properly, theyonly got to the pointed arch.
You know, do it properly, um,they only got to the pointed

(01:01:18):
arch.
You know, the parabola is bothmore efficient and and in a more
pure structural form.
Oh, and, this is beautiful,actually, that we're talking
about gaudi, because he bringsthe visceral realm back to the
digital and actually shows howslow and pathetic, uh, let's say
, computational algorithms are.
It's taken 100 years, right?

(01:01:38):
Well, get this.
So the physical modelingtechnique that he developed,
using catenaries is, is, uh,more efficient in terms of its
immediate ability to translateand shift algorithms through

(01:02:02):
shifting the weights.
You know, changing the weights,you just add a little bit more
weight and the entire structure,the whole system, updates
itself immediately, and then youinvert it, and that's through
physical modeling.
It's just utter genius, uttergenius.
It really makes computationalpower look pathetic.

(01:02:26):
It's extraordinary,extraordinary.

Gerard Dombroski (01:02:31):
Do you think sometimes kind of touching on
our first discussion of pencilversus computer that like it
seems sometimes that thethousands of years that humans
have been building buildingswe've seemed to have like
forgotten a lot of them we'velearnt?

Oh for sure.
I mean, okay, I'll give anotherexample which is really
accessible.
I mean, there's a few versionsof this which is quite funny,
just to throw it out there.
But you know this utterlystupid issue about housing
affordability.
It's a total nonsense.

(01:03:10):
And the reason it's a totalnonsense is we all know how to
do it.
It's not that hard, it'sextremely economical and very
efficient.
You only need to look at a yurtor its translation in the
Northern Hemisphere, an igloo oryou know even a teepee, but a
yurt is unbelievable becausethey're just so incredibly

(01:03:34):
efficient, you know, and thatyou can pack it up in a day or
so, put most of those materialson the back of one or two small
horses and off you go to thenext spot.
So you know, this whole thingabout affordability and housing
per se is just a bunch of peoplewho have agendas that want to

(01:03:56):
control supply and demand.
It's total bullshit.

Sam Brown (01:04:00):
I'd live in a yurt.
Do you think it's a modern-dayperson's desire for permanence,
though, as well?

That's a separate issue.
What is permanence?

Sam Brown (01:04:09):
Yeah.

But to come back to this, the reason that I was
talking about yurts and igloos,for example, is also because
it's very, very close to whatgaudi was doing, which is that
it's following again.
Structure services are one, notthe Oculus in the roof of a

(01:04:35):
yurt, it's a bicycle wheel.
There's nothing there, you know.
Incredibly efficient thermalinsulation around a very
adaptive timber, lightweightstructure, which then is
effectively holding up this ringbeam and the ribs that come

(01:05:00):
together and then the innercircle.
So it's again genius, butthat's evolved over millennia.

Gerard Dombroski (01:05:11):
The services chat.
Louis louis khan.
Like assuming like he uses likea lot of thermal masks, like
stack effect, and like having alittle lake outside, like um I
think, thermally there's there'swe discussed it the other day

(01:05:32):
like passive houses.
Thermally there's there's wediscussed it the other day like
passive houses, like these oldertechnologies having an oculus
in the roof, like using the, thephysics of heat, etc.

(01:05:53):
Blah, blah, um.
The actual passive building,versus like lock your house up
and plug it into machines andstuff, like a lot of that has
been lost and like I don't know,like it's good that your
building's, you know clawingsome of that back.
And I feel like architecturecould really focus on bringing
that extremely old, reallypassive cooling heating methods.

(01:06:13):
There's a lot of history andknowledge that's been built up
over the length that we've beenhumans.

It's interesting to reflect on that, a couple of
different things that are worthkind of adding to.
That, I think, is a reallyimportant thought, and that is,
you know, a good example of thatis, you know, the early

(01:06:47):
architecture school that Khandid with that kind of crazy
hybrid concrete, triangulated umspace frame.
It's not really a space framebut in any case it was a really
interesting interpretation ofthose ideas.
Again, khan exploring theinterrelationship between

(01:07:08):
structure services andarchitecture and also the
stairwells in that building.
Because the stairwells you knowhow often in institutional
buildings, offices, but also alot of university buildings you
go into the stairwell and it'sstagnant and and it's not very

(01:07:29):
pleasant and certainly notinviting.
And and in k Khan's case, rightthere, it's circular, the
stairs are not against the walls, they're triangulated, so
there's this gap between theouter brick walls and the stairs

(01:07:51):
going up walls and and thestairs going up and then there
is this kind of band of of lightand ventilation at the top.
So it's also using convectionand so the way that it brings
light, in the way that it turnsover the air, it's actually, you
know, it feels really freshwhen you go in there, amazing

(01:08:12):
and inviting, so you naturallykind of go up towards the light,
up to where the architecturestudios were, and it's really
interesting how that youngergeneration of architects were
hugely influenced, if notdirectly, by Kahn himself, by
his buildings.
So I'm talking about Foster,renzo Piano, richard Rogers, I

(01:08:37):
mean there's a whole heap ofthem, moshi Safsi, there are a
whole heap of them who directlyexperienced his buildings and
were radically influenced bythis way of thinking.
By this way of thinking and ifwe go further and slightly

(01:08:58):
sideways and think of what, say,brunelleschi did back in
Florence, which was a similarthing to look back and to learn
from what the Romans did inorder to inform what he was
doing in Florence, that wasequally interesting.
And using these kinds ofprinciples as well, and a

(01:09:21):
parallel one is oh, what's hisname?
Very important Egyptianarchitects in the 20th century.
Name escapes me just at themoment, but he did a series of

(01:09:42):
really deep analysis aroundperformance of ancient houses in
the middle of Cairo and howthey actually modify so both the
structure and the set out andthe dimensions of the streets
and and the urban fabric, aswell as the buildings themselves

(01:10:04):
.
So these things arecomplementary.
You know, at different scalesthey're all helping to create
cooling and shade and airmovement.
And in the house, these twocourtyards one is dark and cool
and full of plants and the otheris hot and paved and has a

(01:10:29):
little fountain in it and Ithink what also happens is one
of the guys inside goes outearly in the morning and his
role is to throw water on thepaving slabs and kickstart the
airflow between these twocourtyards.
So it's really again aconvection engine which is

(01:10:49):
driven even on the stillest,hottest days as well as
humidifying the air.
So really extraordinary.
Hassan Fatih is his name and hethen embraced that in his own
architecture, which he then usedin New Guana in Luxor, and you

(01:11:10):
know, basically using localmaterials.
And you know basically usinglocal materials.
So the other thing that we needto do is to use local materials
much more directly.
Again, direct processes.
So we're harvesting stuffdirectly, literally.
How do we, you know, make theearth useful, not just as a

(01:11:37):
vessel, as a cup, but to makeour buildings, and you know
whether it is trees which wegrow specifically.
Choose to grow good qualitytrees in order to make good
quality buildings.
Choose to grow good qualitytrees in order to make good

(01:11:58):
quality buildings.
Choose to harvest good qualityearth to make good quality
bricks.
These are things that we shouldbe doing directly in the
location, because then thatcolour of that earth is talking
to the building and the buildingis talking to the landscape.
We should be doing that too.

(01:12:21):
So we need to get back to thatas well, which, ironically, is
heading in the oppositedirection than, say, for example
, prefabrication, but that'smodern prefabrication, ancient
prefabrication, which, of course, a brick is a prefab,
prefabricated module, just likeum.
You know in the middle medievalera that most buildings were
prefabricated, um.

(01:12:42):
You know big timber structureswhich they then made barns or
whatever kind of building thatyou needed, and you then had
infill walls.
So these buildings are easilythen able to be repurposed or
reused.
So these, these are reallyancient principles which we can
easily use again.

Ben Sutherland (01:13:03):
Good, we might have to wrap it up there, though
, chris.
I think that's yeah good adviceto finish on.
Really Well, as a last thought.

That's what we're trying to do for the Ruamahanga
River Theatre, which is atheatre between the trees on the
edge of the Ruamahanga Riverand is part of an initiative by
the Ruamahanga Restoration Trust, which is out there you can

(01:13:35):
look that up, so they have awebsite, the Ruamahanga
Restoration Trust and the ideaof this is to both create a
place where these kinds ofdiscussions and debates can
happen in amongst these ancienttrees, these lowland forest

(01:13:58):
giants which are somewherebetween about 500 and 1,000
years old, and really to focuson cleaning the quality of the
river and bringing againvisceral stuff which is analogue
science, so water testing kitsfor school kids to go and learn

(01:14:24):
about water quality and thenraise awareness by talking to
their teachers, their parentsand communities.
So that's a really interestingproject which we've been asked
to be involved in as well, andvery much about harvesting
material directly from the land.

Sam Brown (01:14:45):
We have to share a link on our yeah, I've just
searched them all up, so I'llput them in the show notes.

Well, thank you so much for coming.
I think that was part one ofmany I feel we've only we didn't
even get to any of thequestions that I was going to
ask too interesting oh

Sam Brown (01:15:09):
that was fantastic yeah, that was awesome, just
getting started.

Thanks, thanks for um triggering my thoughts.
I mean, the the things that youguys are doing are deeply
inspiring and and I just kind offeel the future's in safe hands
.
We need more visceral hands onmad hat experimenters like you
three, starting a revolution,re-revolution.

We hope so Build or die.
Awesome.

Thanks, heaps Chris Into the realm of
peasant-ness.
I'm out.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}A Deeper View: A Conversation with Architect, Chris Moller

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

A Deeper View: A Conversation with Architect, Chris Moller

Stuff You Should Know