Does creating together affect your personal practices and preferences?
Avşar Gürpınar: The spark of reality grows out of a collision of ideas. We affect each other also on an unconscious level, without even knowing. In addition to the process of creating together, the way we think about, do or don’t do certain things affect each other as well.
Cansu Cürgen: We spend 24 hours of each day with Avşar. On our way to work in the morning, in the office, at lunch, during breaks, after work… The only difference is we don’t teach in the same departments. (laughs)
The generosity both of us show for the time spent for thinking and creating is also alike. Therefore we are always within arm’s reach of each other. This state of intertwinement may gripe the souls of outsiders. It is not easy, yet I think it is wonderful. We are inevitably affected by each other; however, this does not mean that we always have the same opinion or stance. There are things which we discuss vehemently, and sometimes we “agree to disagree” on certain issues. I have mostly benefited from the things on which Avşar had an influence. It is more refreshing to adopt a Spinozaean towards influencing and being influenced, rather than seeing it as a contrast. This state of togetherness increases the strength to exist and operate for both of us.
Can you name a quality the other possesses that you don’t, which enables you to work better together?
AG: The ways we deal with issues are quite different. I feel more comfortable in an analytical and gradual design process. Even as my thoughts scatter around I feel unease when I cannot answer the question of “How did we get here?” in any T-period. I take heed of following up ideas.
As far as I can see Cansu has a more free approach towards thinking; she can be at any point in the universe in a T-period, and then jump off to a whole another point. This provides her with a potential to move within a much wider spectrum, which is way more flexible than my flow of thinking. This does not mean that I have an extremely boring thinking and working practice. These two methods provide different opportunities. Since we balance each other in this sense, the work we put forward turns out to be satisfying for both of us.
CC: We affect and are affected by each other, so this is hard for me to answer. We are not a copy, rather an assemblage of each other. There are also certain unprecedented qualities which we consider superpowers. Avşar, for instance, is quite resilient while carrying loads, he can read written material from far away, give brief answers and talk in abbreviations, read and sing by only using vowels, write down and list everything. I do not possess these qualities. Even our most redundant superpower can come in handy at a certain moment, change what we are doing at that particular time and make that moment memorable. In fact the idea for Ambiguous Standards Institute (ASI) came during such a moment while we were listing certain words we thought of.
Are there any issues around the design world on which you disagree?
AG: We do not have fixed opinions on any issue. This is why we quite easily affect one another on topics related with design. We get excited and bored about, reflect on, be pleased with, and get frustrated from mostly the same things. Then again I think I am more ruthless when it comes to assessment. Cansu is more of a humanist, she always reserves the presumption of innocence.
CC: We may be able to speak of a genuine difference with regard to methods. Our focal points and sights sometimes contradict. The difference can be measured with degrees when it comes to topic, depth, our curiosity and connection with the world; something that is good for us can sometimes affect the other only up to a certain degree. We have enough time to observe these changes of intensity within each other; we do not lack patience.
What does an ideal image of duality look like?
AG: Nothing. Every duality is flawed or related with each uniqueness within. What makes the duality exciting is how these flaws come together. There is always a certain noise involved. Change and discovery arise out of this noise, perhaps due to us not fully understanding one another. I do not relate this with perfection, but the things that are the closest to an apprehension of ideal in my mind is when I hear something from Cansu a couple of seconds or a couple of days after I think of something, with the same words and in the same manner.
CC: Two philosophers I like state the following for the opening sentence in one of their books: “Since each of us was several, there was already quite a crowd.” We both see research and design as a behaviour rather than a habit or an occupation, but the ways which we exist and behave also change; we do not give up on the things that motivate us, things we are moved by and reflect on. In this sense we are quite the crowd, which I find better than being a duo.
Tom and Jerry, Bert and Ernie, Beavis and Butthead, C-3PO and R2-D2… Who do you think is the best duo of popular culture?
AG: Definitely not Tom and Jerry. They have a very asymmetrical relationship. An extremely smart yet arrogant mouse and an innocent yet dumb cat. They are not even a duo, they do not do anything together.
Bert and Ernie are a good duo, we resemble them in many ways but not with regard to design, rather in practices of everyday life. I find Beavis and Butthead, and C-3PO and R2-D2 too cartoonish for us.
We used to take Ray and Charles Eames as sources of motivation, but it is sad to see that –as a result of their characteristics and the sexist cultural climate– Charles has kept coming to the forefront as Ray has withdrawn into her room and herself.
Another duo we like is René and Georgette Magritte. Apart from everything it is great that they enjoy being together and they form a whole new world for each other. Of course René also has many mistakes in that relationship; we try not to identify with that part.
I think it is safe to say that we are inspired by both duos. As “The Cürgenpınars” –while looking at The Carters out of the corner of our eyes– we have flamboyant side that we occasionally reveal. Among our five-year development plan is shutting down one of the prominent museums of the world for a while, even if it is not the Louvre.
CC: Why not? We can shoot a music video. (laughs)
We like to gamify ourselves and what we do, but this does not mean that we frivolous people. I think a paragraph we use while defining our current project ASI is valid for Avşar and I as well: “It might not always be easy to understand why we do what we do. At certain times, there might be reasoning and justifications on secondary or tertiary levels. At other times, there might be not at all. But institutians do what they do with utmost seriousness.”
Among the duos you suggested I like Bert and Ernie the most, because they acknowledge and embrace one another as they are. However, my heart’s desire would be Fox Mulder and Dana Scully of X-Files. I would also like to get something on the record: Compare photos of Agent Scully and Avşar by bringing them side by side, the similarity is ravishing!
Click here for more information on Ambiguous Standards Institute.
