I may not be the most interesting architect, but I'm still out there and have maintained some position of integrity.
I suppose I'm trying to build an architecture that's as timeless as possible, although we're all creatures of our age. 
The difference between good and bad architecture is the time you spend on it.
Most architects work in studios largely divorced from academia, as if ideas, criticism and historical research were irrelevant.
I don't think architecture is radical. How can something that takes years and costs millions be radical?
