Lyndon Neri + Rossana Hu

Stacy Shoemaker Rauen: Hi, I’m here with Lyndon and Rosanna. Thank you both for joining me today, virtually. How are you?

Lyndon Neri: Very good. Good morning, Stacy.

Rosanna Hu: Good morning. Good morning from Shanghai.

SSR: Yeah, it’s so good to see you. Let’s start at the beginning. Did you both know? You had a love for design early on. Are there any early childhood memories of design or were you creative as a kid?

LN: Interestingly enough, my grandparents had a small furniture store, retail store and a small manufacturing. There was a small manufacturing component and that was in the Philippines. And I remember growing up with original Eames chair coming into our house. And I remember my dad, not the creative one, it was more my uncle. My dad was really creative business wise, had all these import Italian chairs coming into our house. But I grew up loving to draw, so I love drawing. And so whether that was designed at that time or art, painting sculpture, I didn’t really know the differentiation, but I always knew that that was my interest, just being artistic in general.

And I grew up thinking to myself how could in a very business setting, all my brothers all went into business and being a Chinese, at the Dias Baric Chinese, that was the only way that was the only route. There was no other possibilities. And I guess the rebellious side in me always thought to myself, how am I going to break away from my family? One, two, how am I going to break away from this monotony of just business, all business, business, business, our conversation during dinner was all about business opportunities and business ideas. And not that I could not participate, but that was just not my passion.

RH: My story is quite different. I was not exposed to a lot of art or kind of visually creative things, but I grew up with a lot of music. So I think maybe that’s the kind of the artistic side. And then all throughout high school, I was really just hardcore math and science and, well, both my siblings, they studied engineering, so most of my circle was kind of engineering, medicine, law. And it was not until I started applying to college, I had to think about what to major in. And then I just picked architecture without knowing anything about architecture, thinking that it’s kind of perfect balance between the left and the right brain. Because I thought I would be interested in design, but at the time my only understanding of design was fashion. And of course like every teenage girl, you love clothes. And so I thought, okay, I’ll try it out. And then first year at Berkeley, I just fell in love with the subject and stayed in ever since.

SSR: Lyndon, did you go to school for architecture as well?

LN: Yes. Well, initially at Berkeley, I started as an art major. I guess that was another defiant way against my very strong-willed father. And I did not tell him at all. He was still in Asia. And my first two years at Berkeley, actually it was the end of the first semester of my sophomore year when I got an email. I wasn’t sure if that was an email, it was a letter actually. I just dated myself. And my father had said that, I should be spending more time with you and your siblings in the U.S. I should come more often. And that’s when I panicked because I basically told him that I was studying mechanical engineering at Berkeley. And of course, he was extremely proud.

It was very hard to get into Berkeley as an engineering major. So I was just making that up, but I was really panting, I was really happy, but then I kind of panicked. And as an art major, you don’t just transfer to an engineering department overnight, there was absolutely no way you could. That’s not even possible. I still remember you had to take physics 7A, 7B. And so I quickly took physics 8A, which was the criteria for architecture. Thank goodness I made it. And so my transfer was successful at the end of my sophomore year.

SSR: Is that where you two met at Berkeley?

RH: We met earlier, but that’s when we started becoming friends.

LN: Yeah. When we started dating. We have two stories behind that. Rosanna is still in denial. We’ve been married for 29 years, but I’m still very much in love with her, but I’m not so sure. She’s still questioning about the meaning of life, and the meaning of love. So I’m constantly in pursuit, Stacy, do you understand?

SSR: Keep you on your toes, I guess.

LN: That’s right. We’ve been together 35 years. Again, that’s dating us again.

RH: We started dating my freshman, and he was a senior when I was a freshman at Berkeley.

SSR: Got it. And then you both went on to different careers or first jobs or were you both together?

RH: We both stayed in architecture. It’s quite unusual, but we both stayed in architecture since our undergraduate. So we both graduated with an architecture degree as an undergrad. And then he worked for two years in San Francisco as an architect, and then went on to grad school at Harvard. And I worked for also two years in San Francisco with a different firm as an architecture intern and then went on to Princeton for my master’s.

SSR: Got it.

LN: But before she went to Princeton, that summer we got married. And we moved cross country.

RH: Yes. We drove cross country from San Francisco straight to New Jersey.

SSR: Love it. And was it your schooling that brought you there, Lyndon?

LN: At Harvard, Cambridge? The East Coast. Yeah. So that was the first time I moved from the west coast to the east coast. So you can imagine, I was quite shocked because I mean maybe now it’s a little bit different, but during that time, you go from California where diversity was rampant and being Asian was nothing unique all the way to Cambridge.

RH: Majority.

LN: Okay. Cambridge was quite liberal, I mean, now there are a lot of Chinese students, but during that time, I was probably one of three. And they were not from China. I was Chinese from the Philippines, China, there was an individual Chinese from Singapore and maybe two American born Chinese or American born Korean. But that was about it. Maybe four or five, a few from Hong Kong. But yeah, it was really a minority.

SSR: And from there you were it on to work for Michael Graves? Correct.

LN: I worked for various smaller firms before I worked for Michael Graves. And partially that was because Rosanna didn’t really want me to commute to New York. She was still studying at Princeton and it was unfair for her because she would have to pick me up or drop me off and pick me up at the dinky station if you know Princeton.

RH: We only had one car.

LN: Yeah. So I worked for Michael grave for 10 years.

SSR: What was that like?

LN: It was amazing. It was amazing. often times people tend to focus on the stylistic nature of what Michael Graves represent, at least during that time. And even now I do believe his history will paint him differently. He was amazing, at least for both Rosanna and myself in many ways. He was a mentor, even though there were over a 100 people at that time when I was there. He took it upon himself. He had his favorites, and that was the common complaint in the office. I just happened to be one of his favorites. So it became easy.

SSR: That wasn’t it. Is that a problem?

LN: It wasn’t the problem. He gave me a lot of freedom to run. And we traveled all over Asia to different projects. And so I saw the personal side in him, some of even more intimate side, which I’ll probably write a book one day.

RH: You’re being recorded.

LN: I understand. I just want to give it a spice called the Postmodern Affair. Anyways, that’s a whole completely different thing. Stacy, that’s a whole different book that will bring about a whole crowd for your hospitality platinum circle thing. Not because of the award, but.

RH: He can start your gossip column.

LN: Yes. I’m very good at that. And so it was a lot of fun. But what was really important was the fact that he introduced the idea of an interdisciplinary practice in the field of architecture. So architecture was not limited to the big A, but to understand interiority, to understand product design, to understand master planning, graphic design, and all the other things that’s very important. In fact, he was the one that brought the idea of just John Ruskin’s mentality on sort of understanding, traveling and understanding culture, not just processing it, but actually understanding the essence of it, which is actually our studio topic this year at Harvard, which is kind of interesting. That’s come around.

SSR: And you went to work here as well, right, Rossana?

RH: Yes. Michael was of a different nature for me as a start. He, he was my teacher, he was my thesis advisor in fact at Princeton. So I first knew him in school and then his office started working on a project in Shanghai and they basically came to me and asked me if I wanted to run the project. And so I went over for the project to Michael’s office. But I think more than professional kind of influence. I mean, obviously, he, he was a great teacher and a great boss, we learned so much from him. But I think it, it was the personal side that he had to offer that really made us very impressed and felt close to him. I mean, before we even knew him well, I felt he just took all of us very seriously.

I remember, when I was still a grad student and Lyndon was entry level architect in his office, we wanted to go to Japan one summer, and he didn’t just give us a list. He booked a time, asked us to go to his office, he sat down and he opened an entire folder and went through every card, every image and just gave us, I don’t know, two hours of travel advice, where to eat, where to buy, what kimono shop. And we were both just like, wow, I can’t believe he did that for us. And then for the next 10 years, working with him and traveling with him, he just show so much generosity, and yeah, on every level, he, we were just really impressed with him.

SSR: Was there one early project that has stuck with you that you worked on there, worked with him with.

RH: I took on a really special project in his office. It was the reconstruction of the Duomo in Florence. And it was an invited competition. Obviously, it’s a tiny project, and there were 10 architects in the world who were invited to work on that project. And so I worked on it with him, so it was just Michael and me on the project. So in a big office, I was an intern and well, at least entry level. And for him to work on that project with me, I thought it was really special.

SSR: For sure.

LN: For me, I was there for 10 years and so I was working on a lot of cultural projects and many of them were under either a senior associate or a partner. And as I grew within the practice, I started running some of the Asian projects just because I was interested in also delving into not just the business side of the practice, but also especially the design practice and understanding how the client, their requirements and how we can meet them. And it was interesting because I think in many ways, what brought us to Shanghai was three under bun. So that actually was a project that I worked with a partner and Michael.

And so that was an amazing journey because I had to deal with not just the project itself, but the politics behind it. Dealing with all the different personality, from John George to Nobu you name it. All the names that are common names now in the U.S, I mean, this was their first foray into China and Asia specifically. And so we had to deal with a lot of personalities, top artists, significant Chinese artists that are not touchable anymore right now. I mean, when three in the bun opened up, they were all young, they were all upcoming. If we had bought their paintings then, I mean the top 20 artists today in China, I would say all were there.

RH: We missed the boat.

LN: To say the least. Yeah. And so there were a lot of things, a lot of movement that happening through that building because it was not just a restaurant, it was an epicenter of culture. So there was a gallery, there was a place of think tank and many different things, activities going on. There was also retail aside from restaurant. We were a lot of first in not building. So that really was very impressionable for me.

SSR: So you started your own firm in 2004, so 17 plus years. Why did you decide to go out on your own? What did you want to create? Why was it the right time?

LN: Actually, we really did not want to start our own practice. Initially, we were asked to come here or I was asked to come here to run the project, Three on the Bund by the client. Initially the client went someone else because I was pretty senior by then. Or actually the client wanted a representative from Michael Graves. I didn’t know then that he, the CEO really wanted me. And when he made it, when he made his wishes clear to me, I told them, I said, I can’t negotiate on my own behalf.

And I remember what started in 2003 at that time, what started as six weeks assignment turned into 10 weeks because the client really liked the fact that the project was moving rather fast after being going through, the project has been under construction for three years. And all of a sudden it went from six weeks to 10 weeks and then SARS, and SARS came. And I was with Rosanna, one of the criteria to move to Shanghai temporarily was to bring three of our kids with us. The youngest was four months old. And I said, I was not about to leave Rosanna with the three kids and be in Shanghai for six weeks. Aside from being guilty, I just didn’t think that was the right thing to do. And so six weeks became 10 weeks and SARS came and there was absolutely no way we could fly back.

The U.S just kind of closed their border borders to anyone from China, and rightfully so at that time. And so it went from six weeks to 10 weeks to three months and everyone got so used to me being here, and the project was moving at the pace that they never thought possible. I didn’t think either, but decisions were being made and we were sending faxes back to the main office and all that. So by the time SARS was over, they got so used to it. They said, look, why don’t you continue to stay here? And the office was more than unhappy because the project was moving along and they were compensated for this. And so it went from three months to six months, six months to nine months, all the way to the opening Three on the Bund. By then, I was sitting here and I said, wow, that was amazing that I didn’t really travel much. I mean, I traveled to Japan. I traveled within Asia. I was allowed to. I helped with a lot of Asian projects for Michael Graves, as well.

That also made it easier for the office in Princeton. To make the long story short, we realized that it was very good that our kids were speaking Chinese to each other. Arguing with each other in Chinese. We said to ourselves, well, maybe that’s something we need to make sure that they’re back to their roots. To have this cultural underpinning within them. I suggested to have an office in Asia for Michael Graves. That all started. Of course, it got so complicated.

RH: It wasn’t about coming out being independent. It was more, oh, we really liked living in Shanghai. On a lot of personal level, it just all made sense. Then Lyndon proposed to the office. Why don’t we just help Michael start an office here?

LH: Why don’t we instead of traveling? But it was complicated obviously. There were a lot of issues. At that time I was rather young. I was in my 30s. To trust a 30-something to start a practice, I completely understand where the office was coming from. They were so used to traveling back and forth, having people coming back and forth. It didn’t really quite make sense. I can understand that. The upstart cause. Having people here full on. Some people were for it, Michael was for it. There was this principle that I worked for Tom Rowe. He was for it as well. It was interesting. But I think one thing led to another. I mean, I don’t think there was one.

I don’t think there was one major decision to say it was approved or not approved. But they just decided maybe that was not the right choice or maybe we can wait. By then I was getting nervous that my kids would go back and not know Chinese. We had to make a very hard decision. I said, maybe it’s time for me after 10 and a half years to come to Asia. Not knowing what we were going to do. That was reckless actually. Now thinking back.

RH: It’s very risky.

LN: It was really crazy.

RH: We were naive. We had no idea what we were doing.

SSR: Is ignorance bliss though? Or are there some things you would’ve liked to know that you know now?

LN: I think it was probably good at that time. I think if we know too much, we’d probably be so worried about many things. I still remember six months into the practice, we have no project. You can imagine. I mean, in Shanghai, everyone was doing high rises. First, we didn’t have that kind of background.

Second, I mean, we didn’t work for KPF or SOM at that time. We didn’t have a lot of these experience. First, no one would give it to you. The liability behind that was just too high. We were not proven. There was not a lot of interior fed out at that time. In fact, I had given up on architecture and I said, you know what? Maybe my father was right all this time. Maybe I should go back into business. We started this idea of having a new Chinese branded furniture or accessories brand. It started with the label called Objects Dōng hé xī, which is east and west. That’s how it started. Dōng hé xī in English means object but it also is the word East and West.

We thought it was interesting. Small objects, big objects, imported objects, handmade objects, sustainable objects. It was good to have that name. I still remember Rossana coming to me six months after we started, because Lyndon you know we have three kids. You remember we brought with us three kids. We have not had any salary for six months. What are you going to do about this?

You have a dream, you have an idea. You have this vision of creating a new Chinese brand. Well, that’s great and good. It’s good for museum. We have beautiful pieces. But this is not a viable option. We should do something about this. That’s when I came out of my dream stage and said, okay, maybe let’s try to find a project. Maybe let’s try to make all the products we’re making and let’s try to sell.

SSR: Is that what you did first? You sold products before getting your first project?

LN: Both.

RH: Yeah, it was simultaneous. We started a company called Design Republic. Which is a platform for retailing design objects and import of furniture and then also designing some products on the side. Then projects started coming. First, it was interior projects.

Our very first project was a yoga studio. In fact, that was our first project. But then it got a lot of international recognition through design media internationally. It came out of nowhere. But we were pleasantly surprised. Then from that, it led to other projects. Then later on to architecture projects and a lot of hospitality projects as well, I think after Waterhouse.

LN: To think back, actually that’s very memorable. Because that’s probably also one of our favorite projects because both Rosanna and I were literally on the construction site. We were remaking things because …

RH: We were tiny at the time. They were probably just … the two of us and two drafts people.

LN: I remembered the fee quite clearly. It was less than $10,000.

RH: I didn’t know that.

LN: Yes. Well, you know now. I didn’t want to have her-

RH: I don’t touch fees. I have no idea what our fees are.

LN: I hide all the fees from her because I just knew she’s the-

RH: I would’ve said no. Don’t do it.

LN: She’s the type who worries a lot. I still remember the idea of value engineering, VE was brought to another level. Because literally the client was saying this plywood was so expensive. Is there any way of redoing a beautiful plywood? I don’t like veneer because it’s too expensive. Is there any way? We were cutting. We were literally using labor to overcompensate all the other things. We would cut a plywood, paint it and reglue them together as the main wall. I still remember the FRAME magazine. One of the editor was visiting Shanghai and was shocked. We had ropes and we would dye them green like trees, and hang them in the space as a divider. I still remember the client goes, have you done yoga, Lyndon? I said no. But this will be the first time I will do it. I’ll come to your class. It was a lot of pain. I went to the class because I just want to know. I was so desperate. We were so desperate.

I realized maybe it was the wrong move to leave Michael Graves. We had a beautiful house in Princeton, New Jersey with a hundred trees behind our house. It was quite comfortable. It was really comfortable. To just come into Shanghai in a rented place. Actually it was just two bedrooms, very small. One for us, the other one for the three kids to be together. To think about it, those were really crazy. We probably would not do it again if we had known all the difficulties we’re going through.

RH: But also I think no one knew at the time that the next five to 10 years in Shanghai was going to be such a renaissance. Everything pretty much exploded. We did not know that. It wasn’t strategic. I think looking back, a lot of people say, oh, you guys were really there at the right place at the right time. But no one knew.

LN: Everyone thought we were really smart, asks for prediction for the next 10 years, I said, trust me, don’t ask us. We were just naive, young, fearless. It was also a good way for us to be closer to Asia. To understand our roots and to come back to our roots. Also to be closer to my grandmother and a lot of my relatives and Rosanna’s relatives.

RH: My father’s originally from Shanghai. I felt like coming full circle. He left Shanghai when he was about 16, 17. Then I came back in my 30s and brought three kids. All three of our kids grew up here. It’s just really, on a personal level, very rewarding.

SSR: Were your kids on site with you? I mean, were you taking them with you to places?

RH: Yes. I think they lived to architect’s childhood.

LN: Both fantasy and nightmare.

SSR: Are any of the architects now?

RH: Not yet. We have no idea. Most likely not.

LN: They’re all studying. They’re all back in the U.S. studying.

RH: But they’re all very artistic and a wealth of architectural knowledge.

SSR: Got it. What would you identify as your big break?

LN: I think we had probably do two projects, I would say when we first opened in 2006, Design Republic Store. I think that was a big break from China’s point of view. China’s never seen a store with beautiful products. Let alone all the classical ones. It was shown in a setting like a museum.

They were quite confused. Is this a retail store? Is this a platform? Is this a school? Is this a museum in many ways? It’s not all of the above and yet it’s all of the above. That was very diff difficult for comprehend. But because of that, they were really interested. The government was also very interested in supporting it. Both Rosanna and I was thrown into the limelight reluctantly as the ambassador of Chinese design or bringing in what the best could offer back to China. Because I was frustrated with all the copies. I was determined to have a completely different image of what Chinese design would be like.

My goal was, look, you guys need to know the classic in order for you to even produce. This idea of just copying does not work. Our goal with Design Republic was to bring the best of what the world can offer and one day to bring some of the best of what China can offer back to the world. It was a naive, rather simple strategy. But that was more from a cultural, maybe even interior, one could argue. Because we did the interior space of that project. That awareness, that breakthrough. But it was limited to China and Asia as a whole, not so much the U.S. and Europe.

The project that I think had a major breakthrough was probably Waterhouse. That was about 10 and a half, 11 years ago. When that opened, I think a lot of architects then, even Chinese architects thought we were just good and cheered designers. They didn’t really know our background. I think that was the first time we were recognized as architects. We were recognized as sensitive architects that actually think of sustainable issues that deals with old and new. That deals with cultural issues. A lot of people resonated well with that building. It seems to stand on its own as a statement of what design could potentially be.

People were demolishing a lot of things and at an unprecedented rate. You can imagine the public and the government saying to themselves, maybe this could. The business people thought, oh, if you keep an old building, it’s a cheap investment. It’s perfect. It resonates well all around the community. Again, not planned by us. It was just our conviction. We just did what we believe in.

RH: That project challenged a lot of conventions and broke away a lot of boundaries on many levels. I think that’s why it was such a noticeable project, both from architecture and interior design perspective. Because it dealt with, like Lyndon said, a new way of preservation if you will.

It questioned whether you should rip out a building completely, demolish and build anew. We really challenged it and said, even though it’s not one of those buildings that has a bronze plaque and that’s what happens in China and Shanghai specifically. All the historic buildings that are worthy of preserving our grant to this plaque. Without the plaque you can actually demolish. The client wanted us to demolish. But we went on site and we said, you know what? This is actually much more interesting. Especially as a hotel because people come to China and people come to Shanghai. What do they want to see? I think we want them to see a certain authenticity. Staying in a hotel that has pieces of history. We retained a lot of things that most people would just strip out. Then on the other hand, it’s a really inventive way of working with a boutique hotel. All 19 rooms are totally different. We had to design like 19 different room types, which …

LN: We’ll never do that again.

RH: It’s not a very sounds way to practice design. But I think the client appreciated. The market appreciated. It became a real destination for Shanghai. It used a part of Shanghai that no one visited that part of the bunch. Even though it wasn’t really that far out but still quite inconvenient to get to. But because of what we designed, people started going there and then that made that area much more active.

SSR: Amazing. What are you looking forward to? Or is there one that you’ve recently opened that you’re really proud of? Or one that’s coming down the line that you’re excited about?

LN: There’s a lot of projects that we’re excited about. A number of them in Europe. But I think we have a few projects. There’s a project that’s about to be opened in two, three weeks. It’s the opening of the first Chinese whiskey distillery by Pernod Ricard. It’s quite an amazing journey for us because it started as a competition. We won the competition and it’s in the middle of China in Sichuan where all the pandas are. This is in the remote area. I’m using that term loosely, where the pandas are. Because I know I’m addressing to the Western world for you guys to have a context of where it is.

It’s in the middle of China. It’s a beautiful, sacred place. When we started this project, the tension between, because it’s also a highly religious site. Where people, Buddhist monk would go and retreat themselves and all that. Imagine Buddhism, being religious and alcohol coming together. It’s that duality. We dealt with the idea of building in a beautiful landscape. How do you blur it? How do you combine them in ways that they can cohabitate and work together seamlessly? There’s also another project down south which I’m really excited about.

One could a developer took over the old village. Instead of just demolishing it, decided that it’s time as developers in China that maybe we reinvigorate the program. They took over an old town with real life condition happening. They’ve taken over this old town and basically told everyone, look, we’re going to renovate your building. We’re going to make sure that the rent actually goes up by all this renovation, revitalizing this town. We’re going to bring all the different brands to have an opportunity to come to this old town. In return, the owner of these building allows one code a developer to have 20 years lease. Of course, they also share from the profit. There are about 240 buildings that they’re renovating. There’s 20 buildings they ask international architects of renowned to build different things, cultural center. MVRDV is doing this retail center. Sejima is doing something. Voltron is doing a park. We’re doing a hotel. About 20 different buildings that became the centerpiece for this.

RH: The hotel is about to open soon.

LN: In January. We’ll show you images of that. Which is quite interesting. 11 rooms.

SSR: Another small one. Are there 11 different types?

LN: Again, they’re all different. I never learn. We never learn from our lessons. We said to ourselves, we’ll never do that again. Of course we have an amazing managing director that draft out all the contracts and the proposal. But we just like, I think this is a good opportunity to change this corner room.

SSR: Exactly. Well, at least it’s eight less than the other one. What’s your process? How involved are you still in each project? Is there a part of the process that you each like differently? Or that you each like, is it similar or do you guys take on different roles? I guess there’s many things.

LN: It’s interesting you should say that. Because Rosanna woke up this morning. Last night, I went to sleep hearing her voice saying this: ‘Lyndon, we’ve really got to change how we practice architecture.’ I went to sleep and this morning she woke up and she says, you know, Lyndon, just so just to be clear, with what I said last night, we could not possibly be on top of every single project like the way we do it now because it’s just not sustainable.

It is both the strength of nearing who, but perhaps also our Achilles heel. That’s the reason why we could never get to 300 or 400. We’re always at around 90 to 110. We had that. During COVID year, we had over 500 requests to do projects. This year where it’s not even December yet and we’re over that. We took maybe seven last year. This year maybe we took six. It’s hard. It’s very hard because sometimes you look at those projects, they’re amazing We’re very happy. We have many practices that had spun off from our practice, both architecture interior and product design. And so we’re really proud of our little babies, for a lack of better description. So, a lot of these projects go to them if the client is okay with it, at least the smaller ones, but it’s both rewarding, but at the same time, seeing some of these amazing projects and not being able to do them because that’s just reality is also difficult.

SSR: And it’s a fine line, right? The more you take on, the bigger you have to grow, the less you’re involved.

RH: Absolutely. Yeah. So we need to make some hard decisions. You can’t have everything and basically, you didn’t tell Stacy the other part of what I said this morning. It’s not just about work, but it’s also life. How hard do we want to continue? Okay, not that we don’t enjoy our work. We definitely do, but sometimes I feel like 24 hours a day, it’s just like it’s all about work and I just feel like at this age, we probably need to slow down a little bit. And so yeah, we need to have that conversation. How do we balance everything that’s around us? And also, we’re teaching. We’re teaching a full studio load. Actually, two full loads. So we’re teaching in two different schools right now, this semester.

SSR: How is your team set up? So you said 90 to a 100 people. So do you have studios and studio leaders, or do they work across projects? The interesting thing to me is you see hospitality, you see commercial, you see urban planning, you see cultural, you see so many things come across your portfolio.

LN: That’s intentional. Our setup from the get go is very important for us that there was no typecasting. So when I go into a studio full of product designers, I made sure I asked them about the significance of adult laws during the secessionist movement, for instance, or I would give a little talk about it. When I’m among architects, I would talk about why Hoffman is not just an architect, but the importance of Hoffman in the lives of the Viennese, or what Achille Castiglioni means, [inaudible 00:46:40], and all that. So it’s very intentional and we mix them up. So every project, there will always be an architect, interior designer, a product designer, constant, constant. And there will be this argument and quite interesting, because some are more interested in the more myopic and the small, and some are interested in the bigger picture, but you need to constantly shift and change.

Certain directions may be going a little too interior like, and the space is not being considered. I would bring someone to kind of either stimulate or provoke that whole discussion. People often say, “Lyndon and Rossana are very intentional. They bring people and you know and they bring people to the team. That’s their direction of where that team is going and it’s a constant shift.”

However, having said that, I need to give credit where credit is due. We have a number of amazing people. First, we have an amazing Managing Director who’s worked with us for many years, since Michael Graves’ days. He is seen as extremely managerial and extremely technical, but I only see him as an amazing designer when we work together at Graves. So it’s amazing to have someone with an extremely organized head that actually has amazing sensibilities. Below him are a number of associate directors and senior associates. There’s about 10 of them.

RH: So, they are the project leads.

LN: And then below them, there are associates, another 10 associates. And so, there is a tier system, but obviously, it’s very loosely defined and many of them are very well-traveled. A lot of them are bilingual.

RH: It’s loosely defined because that’s how you want them to get, but in fact, they’re not loosely defined because we have a real chart.

LN: Stacy, you should make sure we don’t say this during the Platinum Award. ‘Yes, yes. Loosely defined.’

RH: We actually have a very organized chart. That’s not loosely defined.

LN: So Rossana is very organized. This drives Rosanna crazy because you can imagine, I just go in there. I’m really a very unstable individual. I’m very stable at home. You can answer Rosanna.

RH: It’s true, it’s true.

LN: We’ve been together for 35 years. Okay. She’s very unstable at home. I’m very stable at home. When we travel, she absolutely does not plan anything. I’m the one, I’m the planner, but when I go to the office, I just-

RH: He doesn’t plan anything.

LN: I become a different individual. I don’t like set meetings. So it’s like a doctor’s office, like in a Chinese hospital, where you stand in line and then you decide whether you’re actually going to meet the doctor that day or not. That happens. There’s no such thing. When you go to a doctor… when you go to a hospital here, you basically have to stand in line. And there is a time between 8 to 12 that you get to see the doctor. And if it’s full and you happen to wake up so late, there’s no such thing as making an appointment.

RH: And I go strictly with my schedule, so we’re totally different.

LN: So I said, “That’s a great idea.” So oftentimes by six o’clock, the line gets really long outside of my office. And I have a side door, if decide not to see you, I just go away. I just run away. So it’s quite interesting sort of, and it’s been working for me, despite the problems.

SSR: But it seems to be working. Wait. Okay. So I love your back and forth. So do you guys have different roles then in the office? I know Rossana, you said you don’t do fees. So do you guys have lanes that you try to stay in, and how do you work together as husband and wife all day, as you said, 24 hours?

RH: That’s quite organic. So that is truly loosely defined, because we have never… since day one, we’ve never sat down and said, “You do this and I do this,” but just by virtue of our difference in personality and experience, and ability, I think things kind of fall naturally on different plates. So for example, Lyndon is great with fees. I can’t remember numbers, so if you talk to me about fees, I will give you the wrong fees. So I never give any quotation. So that’s Lyndon, but I’m better with contracts. So I am more detailed and I have a much more kind of legalistic head.

So when it comes to contracts, I will review them. And then when it comes to organization, that’s more me. When it comes to schemes and schematic, that’s definitely Lyndon because he just has different ideas every day, every minute. So he’s more of an additive person and I’m the one who comes in and say, “You’ve got to stop. We don’t need 20 or 200 schemes. We just need two. We just need two really good schemes.” And so, I go in and I cut out and cross things out.

LN: You’re a good critic.

RH: We’re both good in design development, but Lyndon is better during construction and detail phase. And I’m probably better in kind of closing and packaging at the very end, and also with kind of press releases, how to represent the project, and how to speak about it.

LN: I always go to Rossana when I want the truth. So oftentimes, when I actually don’t want the truth, I want the project to just go through-

RH: He stays away from me.

LN: I stay away from Rossana. But you have to be really strong to be under the scrutiny of Rossana’s criticism. Rossana’s not afraid to fail students in class, and Rossana is only after the matter and not the individual. It’s not personal with her.

And so, when I’m uncomfortable with a scheme, when I’m uncomfortable like yesterday, I was really uncomfortable with a scheme and it’s a scheme I created, and I know that fully well, and I just didn’t know what’s wrong with it. I asked Rossana to come in and it was harsh. The criticism was harsh and it was brutal, but actually, in many ways, in a very sick way, I kind of like it. I like that pain because I just don’t like to be in a place where everyone’s constantly praising you.

So Rossana is the perfect balance to completely kind of put me back to where I belong, and it’s a grounding process and it happens. But I can’t do it every day because that’s just humbling process. Humbling is one thing, to have low self-esteem is another, right? So if you have to have Rossana critique you every day, you’ll have very major low self-esteem. Once a week, it’s really good. Especially when you have good media hype, it’s good to have Rossana around, because Rossana tells you, ‘You know they’re just saying that, right?’ So yeah.

SSR: She keeps you grounded. I love it. Saying you have a style is not what I mean, but there’s definitely an ethos that runs through your firm of, it’s not a particular look. I’m grasping a word to describe it, and I think just the way you use materiality and you use interior architecture in your buildings that they just speak so profoundly in a simplistic way. Does that make sense? How do you keep that going and pushing that with such a big firm, right? To have these projects continue to, again, not have a look or style, but to have the ethos of what people come to you for, right? Because you do create beautiful, magical spaces.

RH: That’s a really good question. And it’s a question we ask ourselves all the time, if not daily. And recently, I’ve been thinking a lot about how our teaching actually is very much part of that design process in the office. So we kind of teach like we are in a practice, and then we practice like we are teaching.

SSR: Got it.

RH: So in the office and we hope, and it’s only a win-win situation. If a person who works for the office, if one of the staff, no matter how young or how senior they are, that they’re also learning, that they’re also getting what they want through working with us. And because we cannot be there with everyone working on all the projects eight to 10 hours a day, as they’re making every decision for our projects. We need to be able to kind of pass down certain principles of design. So once they learn it, it will affect every project they touch.

And it includes even after they leave the practice, and that’s why I think right now, there are a lot of young firms in Shanghai and a lot of their projects evoke styles or ethos of Neri&Hu, and we’re actually very happy and very proud of their projects because I think they’re all kind of like they all went through the schooling of Neri&Hu.

And so, it really has to come down to certain fundamentals of design, certain ideas and ways of thinking about design and architecture. And I’ve been thinking a lot about how it’s very similar to when you are a conductor for as symphony or orchestra, you’re not playing any instrument, right? You’re conducting a group of musicians who each play their own instrument, but that sound that you create on your podium, whether you’re the Berlin, the Harmonia or you’re the Philadelphia, or you’re Boston Symphony. They have their own distinct sound, and sometimes even when the conductor leaves and there’s a new conductor that comes, it retains the same sound. And it’s weird, right? After 50 years, each symphony or orchestra still retains their own characteristic.

And it’s kind of like that with design. We kind of have to become… We probably used to be the soloist. We were playing ourselves, and then we’re expressing our music or our ideas, and our design on stage. It’s easy to do that when you’re playing yourself, but then when you become a conductor, you have to teach other people how to play and still create the sound you want.

LN: It’s also a by-product of where we are and the time where we’re practicing. If we’re trying to do what the Japanese did in terms of architecturesx, be precise, be all wide, I think ask the Chinese contractors to do that, they will bastardize it, right? So there’s always a joke. When we did projects in Japan, trying to get the Japanese designer to do kind of the layered look or the textured look, they will make it so precise that the patina will disappear, right? The idea of having green and moss growing in a brick is absolutely of cultural for PA among the Japanese.

So yesterday, it’s interesting you should ask that question, because yesterday I looked at Rosanna and said, “So what do you think I look like?” I was actually wearing this yesterday and Rosanna goes, ‘Oh, this is really good. You look really good. It’s the layered look.’ The layered look is really interesting because when you don’t have a brand, when people look at you goes, ‘That’s so Gucci, that’s so Louis Vuitton,’ or even, ‘That’s so Comme des Garcons.’

A lot of people can’t really define us because we are the layered look, I would argue. And the layered look is part of the time, and because of the period and time where we are, and sometimes materials are cheap, the speed in which the building needs to be done, you need to have a combination of layered discipline. We have to layer in many different disciplines to buy time. So not just architecture interior, product design comes into play. The layer of cultural understanding, the layer of different spaces that allows multiple reading and flexibility because that’s what the client wants, right?

Most Chinese clients wants everything to be flexible. The reason why they don’t have a program, because that living room could become a karaoke bar, could become a dining room. Pre-COVID, they were already doing COVID measures. It’s always multi-purpose, drives me crazy, everything. Oh, this is a church, a chapel. Yeah. There’s a wedding, sure, it’s going to be a chapel. But tomorrow there’s a banquet. Everyone’s just going to dine there with round tables, and it’s absolutely insane for us.

But because of this condition, we ask ourselves, ‘What do we make out the best out of this condition?’ There’s always two ways of looking at it, is the glass half full or half empty? So we decided we have no choice. We are here. This is our roots. Our kids are growing up, bilingual and understand sort of the roots of what being Chinese is in a global setting. And so, I think the idea of layering, that’s the reason why this whole interdisciplinary, and that’s probably why it’s also very hard to kind of pin us down. And yet oftentimes people say, ‘We get it, we see it.’ And by doing this, all the clients feel their project is their own. Despite the fact that they can say it’s very Neri&Hu, they have their own layered look because they have their own layered sort of hang-ups and issues, baggage that is actually part of that layer. So actually, in all the projects, I can show you all that. Yeah.

SSR: That’s amazing. Let’s do a little lightning round. What’s one thing people don’t know about you?

RH: Actually, I can answer for Lyndon on this one. He’s an amazing basketball player. You would not know, and no one would know, right?

SSR: But now they do. What’s one thing people won’t know about Rossana?

LN: That she actually is an amazing piano player.

RH: Oh, that’s not true.

LN: It is true.

RH: That’s not true.

LN: It is true. It is true. Yeah.

SSR: Biggest pet peeve in design?

LN: Decoration.

RH: Oh really? Oh. For me, when things don’t align.

SSR: Besides your wallet or passport, one item you won’t leave home without?

RH: My mask.

LN: For me, it used to be the Bible, but now the Bible can be in the phone. So I think that would be my first answer. The word of God.

SSR: What’s still on your bucket list to create?

LN: An orphanage. Lightning Rossana, lightning.

RH: Oh, sorry. I was going to say a bag. A bag. We haven’t designed a bag yet, so that’ll be next.

SSR: Best piece of advice you’ve ever received?

RH: For me to be humble.

LN: Yeah. Same, to be humble.

SSR: What do you think is your secret to success?

LN: Work hard.

RH: To continue to define and redefine what success means.

SSR: And why do you love what you do?

RH: We’re just very grateful.

LN: Very grateful.

RH: Yeah. We don’t know why. It’s fun. What we do is really fun. One thing that we didn’t talk about is what we’re teaching. This semester, we’re teaching graduate studio at Harvard GSD, and also Tongji here in Shanghai, Tongji university. And we’re teaching about traveling, and our program is on cultural tourism. So, I think just that, from our experience working with hotels and the hospitality industry, we’ve seen a lot of cases and examples of ways to deal with different cultures.

Obviously, we’re Asian, having been educated in America, but we often are designing in places that we don’t know that well. For example, we’re doing a project in Italy and it’s a place, we’re obviously not Italian, but how does a designer engage their personal passions and history and background working in a different place? And I think a lot of it has to do with how do you bring different hybrids together and how do you work with culture as an element in design? So, that’s something that’s been really fascinating for us.

One other thing I would like to actually share is the fact that oftentimes, and I don’t know if this is true in the US, or at least when we were going to school in the US, this was true. We’re in the medical field and the tech world and the field of law and business are glamorized more than design. Maybe that’s changing now. And therefore, you can see with the compensation and oftentimes the best minds do not go to the world of design because they just get so frustrated. And you are left with the few that are really passionate, they stick it out because money is not important to them.

LN: I actually want to address this to the world of design, that what we do is very important. Whether you’re a graphic designer, interior designer, or architects or product designer is very, very important, because it change lives. The everyday the mundane, the ordinary that surrounds our every day is very much designed by an individual, the spaces that we are in. And just because we are not compensated, just because the narrative of this world does not put us in a position where in perhaps we’re not seen as important, that that is not true. That the gift that’s given to us from above is equally important to the gift that’s given to the person who’s articulate in the legal system, or very good in assessing the medical condition of an individual. The design field is not just a frivolous act, it’s an important part of our daily lives. Just because we’re not compensated as well as the lawyers or the doctors or the tech world, we should continue to be resilient. And we have to continue to stay focused because what we do is of equal importance, or probably more.

SSR: Yeah. And I think even these past 18 months have even proven that even more, how much buildings affect your wellbeing and your emotions and your wellness and everything about it.

RH: Absolutely, yeah.

SSR: I love that sentiment, and I think it starts with education. So, congrats for you guys for doing it and how can we even trickle that down even more. And then we always end with one question and that’s, what has been your greatest lesson learned along the way?

LN: Humility, humility, humility.

RH: For me it’s, it’s never good enough.

SSR: Yeah. Yay, I love it.