His refined, essential, style with a strong recognisable visual identity, is perhaps the key to a success that involves various design fields at International level also thanks to two studios in Milan and New York. He has been among the first architects to be part of the “band” of young designers that Giulio Cappellini gathered around himself for the first exhibitions at Superstudio since the beginning of the millennium. Unforgettable experiences for us, and for him.  

 2000/2020 what has changed and what will change?
Everything has changed and nothing has changed. Perhaps we got better, faster and we have gained awareness at doing things.

Has there been a popularization of design?
I think so but not so much as standardization, according to classic parameters. I think that design has become bigger as intellectual model. Twenty years ago it was already “conformed” enough to talk about design, now even more. More people are getting closer to this universe, and it wasn’t simply due to the arrival of large chains which sold or are selling the so-called democratic design but simply design has become more interesting, wider...

His refined, essential, style with a strong recognisable visual identity, is perhaps the key to a success that involves various design fields at International level also thanks to two studios in Milan and New York. He has been among the first architects to be part of the “band” of young designers that Giulio Cappellini gathered around himself for the first exhibitions at Superstudio since the beginning of the millennium. Unforgettable experiences for us, and for him.  

2000/2020 what has changed and what will change?
Everything has changed and nothing has changed. Perhaps we got better, faster and we have gained awareness at doing things.

Has there been a popularization of design?
I think so but not so much as standardization, according to classic parameters. I think that design has become bigger as intellectual model. Twenty years ago it was already “conformed” enough to talk about design, now even more. More people are getting closer to this universe, and it wasn’t simply due to the arrival of large chains which sold or are selling the so-called democratic design but simply design has become more interesting, wider. By reason of what happened with interviews, fairs, socials and everything that happens in the communication of new generation, yes, design has become more popular.

Influential as the language of fashion?
According to a certain aspect yes. My colleagues are horrified as they think it is superior, by virtue of some arguable masters, I am talking about Enzo Mari, of Superstudio group of Florence or about Dieter Rams, who sees design as intellectual model able to politically influence the quality of our lives. This is why when you talk to me about fashion yes, design has become an influencer as we live surrounded by so called stylist elements. It influences life just like fashion does and in a way we have created different models based on different interlocutors: for those who wanted to live in a more decorated world, or in a simpler world or more contaminated one.  Also for companies, when we talk about design we interpret it in a snob form as if it is an aristocratic version of a very high cultural model, when they are actually very simple aesthetic models.

What is the incisive mark, the fil-rouge of your work?
Take a step back, as an architect that does design I think the fil-rouge of my work is the constant dialogue I have with the companies. Design alone doesn’t go anywhere, the designer can describe a sort of dream but if we do not find the interlocutors able to take the risk to dialogue with us, design would not exist. Design exists thanks to companies that are able to think in this direction, and this is my fil-rouge: being part of such complex entity, being part of a world made of many synapses or many different connections. Without this world my fil would break, as we would then be only talking about style but it is much more complicated. I am looking for a simple stylistic and aesthetic approach that needs a paradox of complexity on our shoulder.

Can we talk about Italian elegance?
More Milanese than Italian, I really like the idea of growing up in this environment that has in some way defiled me and at the same time made me so European. Milanese as there is this substance of making things, making them well and call yourself into question and being yourself at the same time, European as the culture we bring into play is the European one, how many times did you happen to smell the scent of an idea in Paris, because you are in Paris, not because you are in New York. Just think about linguistic terms, to survive in Europe you at least need to know two languages, if you are English you just need to know your own and from here the culture closes.

Which adjectives would you use to define trends of contemporary design?
Design uses different languages, some designers are very good at moving among these and are always able to interpret them. If I could choose I would say libertarian, quite responsible.

Let’s go back to your experience at Superstudio. In which year, what and how did you present your proposal?
I worked at Superstudio in what I define The Golden Age, for me it was the preparation with Giulio of his extraordinary spectacular intuitions, this sort of theatre-like mise-en-scène that became an unexpected kermesse every year. For me Superstudio meant surprise, systematically a kind of preparation of an all-round theatre opera, you had to be a very good set designer and at the same time you needed to control what might have been the surprise element. Perhaps I lived in a romantic way, or maybe with great ease, the spectacular years of Superstudio, that from a forgotten place becomes the centre of what happens during design week in Milan, even more than the Fiera. Let’s recall when Fiera used to be a boring, even ideally and strategically, place, whereas Superstudio comes as a bang on the table.  Via Tortona introduces the kermesse, the music, a completely different life, mummies there, another world here, a world able to change another world, like when the I-phone arrived, other phones immediately became pieces of stones. The others will never want to hear it as they are convinced that Milan was only Salone del Mobile.

The whole Milan has tried to act like Superstudio, bringing the concept of design-event all over the city. Good or bad?
Good, it is as if I changed the DNA of a creature, as if they were transgender fruits, it started, polluted, transformed, causing something like an epidemic involving the whole city and what before was mould at the Fiera and a few stores downtown, a gloomy city. Superstudio’s experience proves that different things can be made all over the city.

How important is the mise-en-scène in all of this?
I think it is very important, if I could blame Superstudio for something is that at a certain point it becomes more important than what was on show. Therefore not a clarity from the creative point of view from the exhibitors that disguised their poor ideas with spectacular presentations, beautiful ones, for an experience yet lacking of contents. The mise-en-scène is fundamental, as if I went to see an opera, you can have the best orchestra but if you don’t have the appropriate lights and an idea of setup something is missing. I think it is essential that both parts equalize, excellent kermesse and excellent products.

If you could mention maximum three icons of design?
I most certainly haven’t made any true icon.  I could take the lamp designed by Michele De Lucchi and I think of a Tolomeo, a transparent chair by Philippe Starck comes to my mind, and a sofa by Antonio Citterio that is Charles.

Design as an alibi to sell any product. What do you think about it?
It’s fine. Today we only talk about design, even stylists come in our world as they consider themselves designers, all the better. If, in the future, we could draw molecules and enter as designer the world of nanotechnologies to improve our bodies.... this sounds good to me.