Activism and Legacy
Phil Freelon inter·punct sat down with Phil Freelon to discuss his works and approach to architecture. Phil was a pioneering architect who chronicled the African American story through his built work and activism. Among many awards, he was appointed to the U.S. Commission of the Fine Arts, and was Architect of the Year in 2017. Phil was diagnosed with ALS in 2016 and passed away in July of this year (2019). We dug up an old interview to celebrate and rember his life and legacy. We hope you enjoy. This interview was published as a stand-alone issue. Download PDF.
For additional information and to view Phil Freelon’s full lecture, visit the CMU School of Architecture website.
i•p:
You recently worked on the Martin
Luther King Memorial Library in DC.
What were the main opportunities and
the main issues with working on a building
that was designed by Modernism’s master?
Phil Freelon:
Well, working on a
building by Mies is certainly an
opportunity and a challenge. It’s his
only commission in DC - and his
last commission before he died - so
that added an additional level of
importance in our view. At the same
time, I don’t think that building is
widely considered one of his best
designs, so it had some problems
aesthetically and functionally. Not
to mention some challenges with how
the library used the space, the efficiency
of it and daylighting. Design-wise there
were certainly some issues that had to be
dealt with. Then, the whole performance
of the building envelope was provided
by old mechanical systems, which was
also something we had to remedy.
When we came to the building it was
leaking terribly, especially in some of
the single-paned glass panels used on all
the façades, caulking and sealant issues
made HVAC systems very inefficient.
The first thing we were hired to do was
assess the functionality and also the
performance – the energy performance
– of the building. We included engineers
and others in the collaborative systems
report of the state of the building.
And then after that it was a more
inspirational story of what could happen.
Could this building be transformed
into a state-of-the-art library and knock
your socks off when you entered? The
director wanted to know if that was even
possible. And so we set out to explore
the possibilities. The study was…not
necessarily a design, but more of a concept
analysis, how the building be
repurposed up to current-day standards
for a library. We did that and found out
the short answer was yes, it could be.
And the result of that study was that
the mayor and the DC administration
decided to fund the project because
they could see the potential that wasn’t
obvious or apparent at first glance.
Our work opened their eyes to the
possibility of what could go on there.
We were then hired to
design the first
phase, the
first
step
in that
transformation,
which was to redesign the
digital commons area. So we had this
design and construction project that took
place and was successful and is operating
today. Then they had a competition for an
entire redesign of the building and they
hired Mecanoo. Regrettably we weren’t
successful in securing the big commission.
i•p:
You’ve also been working on the
National Museum of African American
History and Culture in DC scheduled
to open in 2016. Speaking to the turmoil
surrounding the project recently, how
has working with the city informed
working with the federal government?
PF:
Well we did two other projects
with the [DC] library system. We did
two branch libraries, one in Anacostia
and one in Tenley-Friendship. Doing
that work and the main branch, was
very helpful because we got through a
lot of the regulatory processes on those
projects. We got to know some of the
agencies, the National Capital Planning
Commission, the Commission of Fine
Arts, which all had jurisdiction – the Park
Service – and other interest groups that
are concerned about a very important site
and not overshadowing the Washington
Monument. And so yes, absolutely,
working in Washington
on public
projects was
certainly helpful. However,
with the Smithsonian, the
size of the project compared to the others
– in a sense the nature of the site – you had
a higher level of scrutiny and challenges.
I’d say we got through about half the
regulatory processes. It was difficult. That’s
why the team was hired; because we had
experience and could deliver and worked
very well with the agencies in the past.
i·p:
As a Black American yourself, on
this project in Washington DC, and also
the Museum of the African Diaspora
and others, how do your personal
experiences and your experiences
growing up inform your work?
PF:
I think that as architects, we believe
that we can listen and understand
clients’ desires and needs along with
programmatic, functional settings and
deliver a project regardless of who we
are. We have work that’s not based on
the African-American culture. At the
same time, I do think that being of the
culture, having been raised as an AfricanAmerican in this country does give you
some insight on some of the issues that
were being explored in these museums.
So in the minds of the clients, I think that
makes a difference to them. Interestingly
enough, we were approached by a
gentleman in Dallas who wants to build
a South Asian museum. You know, I’m
not South Asian but he was able to see
value in our process and the work that
we do in other cultural institutions. We’re
hoping that we’ll continue to build a
relationship with that particular client.
That example is just to say that being
sensitive to cultural heritage – no matter
what it is – is a skill and understanding
and experience setting that I think
can be applied across the broader
spectrum of the institutions we have.
i•p:
You’ve begun to touch on this,
but how do you conceptualize
the work of the architect in
our society? In a sense, what
are our responsibilities to local
or regional systems? There’s no
Hippocratic Oath of architecture, so
to speak, so how do you see our overall
responsibilities as a professional field?
PF:
Well, yes, there is a code of ethics,
so that’s a recognized broad guideline.
Beyond that, I think it’s for each of us
to define how we want to apply our
skills to what we want to work on. So
as individuals, there are some choices
we can make. I started my practice in
Durham [North Carolina] in 1990. I found
it useful to write a business plan, also to
set up a mission and a vision for the firm
that would be our guiding principles and
help us make good choices about the
type of work that we would do. I think
that each individual architect and each
firm has the prerogative to do that for
themselves, but always working under the
umbrella of the AIA Code of Ethics. It’s
fairly specific about ethics, and it’s a good
guide. Really, a lot of it is common sense.
I decided that I wanted to practice in
such a way where the buildings and the
plans and the master plans – regardless of
the design challenge or commission – at
the end of the work, we would be proud
of what we had produced and it would enhance the community in which it was
built. So that’s the broader role, and goal,
and statement – that was something we
wanted to achieve. For instance, I don’t
believe that prisons and jails enhance
the community in which they’re built.
Therefore, checking it against our vision
in action, no, we don’t want to do
those. I don’t believe strip malls in the
communities they’re built are something
necessarily to be proud of at the end of
the day. I don’t mean to make a value
judgment about experienced architects
who do that sort of thing. What we choose
as individuals to do is a personal call. It’s
also, I think, important as we bring on
other employees and other coworkers,
that you as a leader are fairly specific
about what you’re trying to accomplish
so that someone can say, all right, I can
pick a line myself. That is something that
is parallel to my own personal goals as an
architect. I want to be clear about it so
that if folks find that here was something
they could buy into, then yes, come into
the firm and we’ll work together toward
those common goals. Or conversely,
if they’re not about that and would
rather go work somewhere else, go
design McDonalds or Walmarts
or whatever, that’s fine too.
i•p:
So in a sense you see it
as being on the individual to
think about what kind of work
and sensibility they appreciate.
PF:
Right, not just to work, to
be an architect no matter what.
The thing for me, there’s got to be
some purpose in mind. That’s for
each of us as individuals to decide.
i·p:
Your firm has recently joined with
Perkin + Will, has that had any affect
on your ability to make those calls and
stand by your personal beliefs? Have
your philosophies begun to merge?
PF:
Good question, and it goes back to
what I said earlier about the vision and
mission. I found over a number of years
talking with Perkins + Will and their CEO
Phil Harrison that a lot of things I’ve been
talking about over the past twenty or
thirty or so years were issues and goals
that Perkins + Will also had. They don’t
do prisons. They have a statement about
doing work for the greater good of society.
They are very much into sustainable
design. And so, the discussions really
began about seven years ago when I was
approached by Perkins + Will. At that
point in time, to be brief about it, I told
them no thank you. But at the same
time I got to know some of the people,
including Phil Harrison as president at
the time. He approached me again even
more recently and the circumstances both
on their side and our side had brought us
closer in alignment. We could see that
coming together would be better for
both firms. We were working all over
the country in places like San Francisco
and Houston, Chicago, Atlanta, DC, and
really everywhere we went as The Freelon
Group we would have to partner with
a local firm. In Chicago we partnered
with Gensler, Atlanta we partnered with
HOK, DC it was a different firm, and
so this was our chance to have a builtin partner in every major city, one that,
again, we didn’t have to worry about the
alignment of values and goals because
that was there. It gave us a
broader platform
to practice,
and we
brought expertise
and a portfolio in civic
and cultural work that strengthens their
overall firm. And of course, Perkins +
Will was strong in areas where we were
looking to expand, like for instance
healthcare and several psychiatric
hospitals in North Carolina. So there was
synergy, which we felt was important
to capitalize on and come together.
i·p:
Is The Freelon Group
being given autonomy and
agency within the organization?
PF:
Yes, we are. I’ll give you an example.
The Freelon Group, we’re maintaining
our structure and identity as we complete
the Smithsonian project. In certain
specific and limited cases, The Freelon
Group will continue - like in the pursuit
of the Obama Presidential Library. On
the other hand, we’re moving forward
with Perkins + Will as the leader of
the North Carolina practice. Perkins +
Will has an office in Morrisville, North
Carolina, which is right next to Raleigh,
and they have an office in Charlotte.
Both of those offices have partnered
under what we’re calling Perkins + Will
North Carolina, which is under my
leadership. In fact, we’ve begun to move
into that building and I’m the managing
director of eighty people in Charlotte
and Raleigh. So, autonomy is too strong
a word. We’ve been given control of…
North Carolina under my purview - and
we are able to maintain, and on a limited
basis the pursuit of other work; if and
when the Freelon brand
is an important
thing for the
client.
i·p:
What attracted or influenced you
to start and maintain your
practice in North Carolina specifically?
PF:
Yeah, well, let’s go back to
undergraduate school. When I got there,
I was kind of nervous about being in the
South, having grown up in Philadelphia.
You hear stories about what it’s like to
grow up in the South. But I found it to
be a charming place, a place that was
growing and had prospects for continued
growth, which to me meant it would be
a good place for an architect. And so as
I left there and headed to Cambridge for
graduate school, in the back of my mind
I thought maybe someday I’ll go back.
And so when we were living in Houston
– my wife and I moved there – we were
newlyweds without children, and then
had two children while we were there.
The whole idea about where I wanted to
live kind of shifted when we started our
family, so as young professionals – just
two people – Houston was vibrant. It
was growing at the time, and both being
from bigger cities, we really enjoyed that
aspect. As our family was growing – two
children there, and eventually three –
our notion of what was exciting and
where we wanted to be kind of shifted.
Coincidental to that, some colleagues
that I knew when I was in undergraduate
school had started their own firm a
couple of years earlier, and they contacted
me to persuade me to come back to
North Carolina. We were ready to go
back to a place where we thought the
quality of life for a young family was
much better. The growth opportunities
in the building, construction, and design
industries were also there, so combined
that’s what persuaded us to move back.
i·p:
Last question now, you’ve taught
at NC State and been a visiting critic
at various places – Harvard and MIT
and so on – what do you think should
be the prime focus of architecture
students at this moment in time?
PF:
I think my view on that has been
the same over the years. We have a
responsibility as key players in the
shaping of the built environment to
do it in such a way that’s sustainable,
that’s beautiful, that gives equal access
to great design across all economic
stratums. I still think that architects are
in a prime position to improve the lives
of people in general, in cities, in rural
areas, and everywhere in between. It’s an
awesome challenge and responsibility.
I’m really energized when I go into
schools to see the projects, the studios,
to see the enthusiasm of the students just
energizes my work. I enjoy teaching. It’s
a way to stay connected with academia,
and the future. I think the link between
the profession and the schools needs to
be strengthened. I think it’s a mistake to
have too much professional focus when
you’re in school because you have a few
short semesters to really explore through
thinking, ideas, the design and creativity
without the constraints of schedules and
all that. You have the internships when
you graduate to really dive into the realworld constraints, having said that, I do
think having professionals participate in
schools of architecture is a good thing.
It makes the transition of moving from
school into the profession smoother. ·