“Sometimes it’s worth taking the risk” — Jeanne Gang on architecture as a collective choice

Jeanne Gang is among the architects who have most contributed to redefining the relationship between architecture, public space and environmental responsibility in the North American context. Cofounder of Studio Gang, her work traverses theaters, civic buildings, cultural infrastructure and river landscapes, moving along a line that considers the project not as an isolated object, but as part of a system of social, ecological and political relationships. This meeting takes place in Venice, at the Holcim Foundation Awards, where Gang served as Jury Chair for North America. It is from this position, between evaluating projects and comparing different contexts, that the architect articulates a reflection on the meaning of civic architecture today, especially in territories where environmental rules are not always taken for granted.

Talking about the theaters designed by his studio, Gang describes them as complex devices, capable of concentrating urban and social dynamics: "I really like working on theaters because they are technically challenging, but mostly because they function as a kind of miniature city. They bring together different people, times, functions. It's not just the performance space, but everything that revolves around it." Also making these buildings particularly significant is the collective dimension of the process: "The people who work on a theater-the artistic director, the technicians, the people who run it-are incredible. It is deeply collaborative work."

Jeanne Gang

In some cases, this nature extends beyond the cultural program. The theater made in Chicago, Gang says, became a de facto informal civic center: "There was nowhere else for the community to meet, and so the theater began to be used that way. It happened almost naturally."

From here the discourse shifts to civic centers, a typology that Gang considers central to his practice. In the United States, he explains, these are often buildings promoted by public agencies or nonprofit organizations, designed as spaces "built by the city for the people." Even small-scale interventions fall under this definition: "A boathouse may seem like a small project, but it's still a civic building. It is public, accessible, and part of a larger system." Among current projects, Gang cites the Shirley Chisholm Recreation Center in New York City, a recreation and community center named after the first woman to run for president of the United States, a Brooklyn native. "It is a building that brings together political memory, everyday functions and community space. It is not a monument, but a civic infrastructure."

In his role at the Holcim Foundation Awards, Gang stresses the importance of an award that intervenes before construction. "It happens all the time that as we move forward with the project, sustainability is the first thing to be cut," he notes. "Acknowledging a project at this stage helps maintain its ambition and give it a legitimacy that can accompany it all the way to completion." The difference between Europe and North America is also regulatory, according to Gang. "In Europe, the rules on carbon and sustainability are more stringent, and that's good, because everyone has to comply with them. In North America, on the other hand, when a project achieves high goals "it means that the client and the architect had to fight to get there." In this sense, he cites Mowgli Park, the winning project, as an example of a complex and ambitious intervention supported by the city and a broad network of designers to address issues of resilience and sea level rise.

Sustainability, for Gang, is first and foremost a systemic issue. "It's not about a single species, but about the relationships with the habitat and other species," he says, borrowing a principle from ecology. Applied to architecture, this view implies that even a limited intervention can trigger larger transformations. "A project can become a model, or it can change the way people relate to a place."

Jeanne Gang

The work on the Chicago River demonstrates this, as does a project in Memphis, where an embankment area devoid of public life was rethought through listening to residents. "We asked: what would bring you here? What would you like to do in this place?" The answers were simple-sports fields, bathrooms, basic amenities-and the project chose to stay true to those requests. "We didn't do something iconic or spectacular. We did what people had asked for, with attention to design and quality." The result, Gang says, was immediate: "People felt that space was theirs, because they had said what they wanted and they got it."

In closing, Gang returns to a crucial issue: without external rules, sustainability remains fragile. Therefore, he explains, it is crucial to clarify objectives from the outset and to fully understand the intentions of principals. "Sometimes it's worth taking the risk and trying to get them there," he admits. "If it works, it can produce real change." Even when the process is contentious, he concludes, architecture retains the capacity to affect: as a space for negotiation, as civic infrastructure, as collective practice.