BIO.

Daniel Moreno Flores, of Ecuadorian parents, was born in 1984 in Marseille, France. He is an architect graduated from the Faculty of Architecture, Design and Arts, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador 2002-2007 and holder of a master's degree in advanced architectural design (MDAA - FADU - UBA) from Buenos Aires, Argentina.

His work is characterized by looking at the environment and materials with great sensitivity. Each project is unique, and the design is based on the needs and aspirations of each client and what each context possesses. In interviews and publications, he makes clear a critical position and concern regarding urban deterioration and environment endangerment, thus, the reuse and reinterpretation of discarded materials is frequent in his work, seeking to upraise the idea of ​​the passage of time on materials.

Among his recognitions, we can find the First National Honorable Mention in Rehabilitation and Recycling at the XVIII Panamerican Biennale of Quito 2012 with the project ‘’Estudio de Mike’’, in which he collaborated with Margarida Marques. That same year, along with José María Sáez, he obtained the National Architectural Design Award at the XVIII Panamerican Biennale of Quito for the project ‘’Casa Los Algarrobos’’. In 2014, he obtained the National Prize for Urban Design and Landscape Architecture at the XIX Panamerican Biennial of Quito, for the ‘’Mirador en Quilotoa Shalalá’’, which he designs and builds together with a team made up of Jorge Andrade Benítez and Javier Mera Luna.

Recently, he and Marie Combette created ‘’La Cabina de la Curiosidad’’, an association that is working on different projects related to housing access, the relationship with the territory and memory.

The interior renovation of Alegrana house (2015), in which he works together with Carla Kienz, shows the principle of ''destroy in order to build''. The rubble obtained from the demolition of walls and furniture was used to fill gaps in the walls, emerging new textures that give a unique character to the spaces. The incorporation of an island in the kitchen from the trunk of an abandoned tree in the street is an element that takes center stage in this work.

Another interesting example of the reinterpretation of materials is observed in the House of flying tiles (2018). The recycled adobe tiles are used in an exterior wall that shades the interior of the house, placed in two directions and tied with tensioners. The tiles appear as if they were floating, conceiving the wall as a sculptural element. In general, the use of materials and the work of the builder men as a relevant part of the work embody in the final result an artisanal and detailed stamp.

Dynamism and the idea of playful spaces that transform and generate surprise in the inhabitant are concepts that are incorporated into the architectural design. In '' La Cueva de Bruno '' (2019), one of the most recent projects carried out together with Marie Combette, the extension of a house is approached from a single wooden structure designed to contain all domestic uses, therefore, optimizing space and multiplying its possibilities. In previous projects such as the Mujeres de Frente school, doors are reused as tables hanging from the ceiling that can be raised and lowered with pulleys. These same pulleys appear in En el Carrizal house to move objects between rooms. These solutions that appear frequently in Daniel's work expand the limits of architecture, turning the work into this kind of maneuverable, transformable and adaptable machine.

In the following interview we will dive into the ways and methods that this office uses to approach the architectural work.

FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS

We have been able to appreciate that within your work you can see a process from which you can always learn something, from solving a resource problem to a constructive solution, what would be the main learning that you would rescue from the work you do? And as for that learning, have you tried to incorporate it into another of your next works?

In all jobs there is in fact learning since conceptually what I propose is to get rid of prejudices and have the greatest possible freedom. That means that I always ask myself specific questions from the commission, and they appear at any time during the development of the work (whether in conceptualization of the idea, design or even in construction). This way of working has allowed me to be constantly learning, I’m always doing work that I’ve never done and that I am not fully aware about the functioning of what’s being done. It is an immediate application of these facts that I am learning, it does not transfer to the next job, in the same job I must solve what I am proposing, surely investigative doors open and sometimes one thing can lead to another.

We believe that something that characterizes and represents your way of doing architecture are the local infiltrations where you develop a certain philosophy, which in your words, pretend to be the treatment to alleviate, heal and protect vulnerable fragments of the territory, do you think that these instances could be used to create a method that allows generating a new way of doing architecture?

I feel that local infiltrations have allowed me to establish a position vis-à-vis with the environment where we operate. It is an awareness of the scale of my intervention and the understanding on what environmental aspect of reality It’s being worked on. I understand that architecture consumes many resources, generates infinite waste and if you do not take a position or have a philosophy or strategy, architecture can become a tool of destruction. It is an awareness of the territory, the resources and the environment where we live, a position that allows you to connect with life in all its forms and does not limit creativity, it focuses and directs towards making decisions that dialogue with each context.

Within the world of architecture we can identify certain works that do not take care of the management process of the work and produce a negative impact on the environment, which is not reflected in your projects. Where does this ideal of environmental awareness come from?

From many places, nourished by experience and reflection. In some cases, trial and error -do something and see that the path does not go that way-. By economy too, I have understood that to make architecture many resources are needed, so I have developed strategies to achieve architecture, for example: recycling objects that are in the urban perimeter, making certain construction processes efficient or working with groups that pursue a common goal and that everyone can get involved in participative processes that dismiss economic value as the most important thing and the human resource becomes something valuable in favor of contributing to society with their selfless work for the common good. Another way has been to understand what the territory can offer you and taking that to an architectural aspect, understanding that what the ground generates is regenerative and clean. I have also wondered about the origins of water and our way of consumption, that has opened a great amount of learning related to life.

In many your works there is a previous process of collecting possible materials to be recycled on site. How is the process of integrating these materials to the work and between each other, when these materials are not serialized and have imperfections? Does some kind of systematization appear when you already have the materials to use? What has been the greatest difficulty that you have faced in any work, when working with this type of waste materials?

In our professional practice, we have differences in the projects we execute.

1- Projects that are carried out in a new way.

2- Those that develop and are articulated in preexistence.

In both cases, the way of intervening is different, in new projects the whole conception arises from variables external to materiality and most decisions are made according to conversations with clients, however, many times because we understand that we can make architecture with fewer resources and that we can contribute to the environment where we live, we put our efforts in getting recyclable materials.

In the case of doing projects in spaces determined by material stocks, the main thing is the reading that we can do in the spaces, we reflect on how we can transform the environments according to the resources that we have in the same place, making intensifications of our actions. We seek consistency in the optimization of resources.

In both cases, the roadmap established when incorporating other materials is the motivation for our clients to open their eyes and extend their arms to obtain materials that are within their reach, either by their family group or by their surroundings. We have obtained a number of materials that have triggered our possibilities of action: huge logs for kitchen, doors that have become flying tables, newspaper for walls, broken windshield for screen, wallpaper for floors, large woods for structures, wooden staves, tiles that have become dividing screens, among others.

The way of occupying them varies according to the material, it is always sought to intervene within its own logic in order to retain its characteristics and can be occupied in its maximum expression. The idea is to occupy it in the same way as it is configured as a tool, if we do something with a wheel, we want to still be reading the wheel in a decontextualized way, the same could happen with a chair, a door, etc. Sometimes the repetition is evident by the amount of material that is obtained, in those cases its efficiency and its systematization in repetition are sought, on other occasions they are unique pieces. The subject of the imperfection of the object is valuable to us, we do not intend to modify and perfect it, but rather, we accept it and consider it as a fact of time.

I consider that all the works that we have worked with recycled materials have had a degree of complexity, at those moments there have been different reflections, because on one hand you have obtained the material at zero cost, but due to your own circumstances you have to do extra work to be able to occupy it. I remember the time of being in the execution of a garden, in which we had two options, to make a simple design so that we could build with our own hands or to occupy some arched structures that corresponded to an old corridor that was out of use. Finally, we decided to occupy the structures so that those elements can have life again. As it was a construction that we did with our own hands, we invested a lot of time in fine-tuning ? these structures, at the time of executing them I reflected a lot if it had been a good decision due to the complexity we had.

Ultimately, there will always be an effort to occupy recycling elements, but it will be important to give new life to elements that are apparently obsolete, most of the time your thinking is challenged and a new order whose possibility you had no prior awareness. The best thing about these actions is that they go beyond human will and show themselves as they are.

Do you think there is a dissociation between what is taught in the academy and what you have experienced in your work process during all these years?

In the academy there is a preparation to face different subjects, it is a constant simulation. This stage is good to generate collective knowledge, which allows each one to strengthen their understanding, there are also many people involved so the criteria are varied and the commitment of all is stimulated in terms of debates, questions, doubts can be resolved, fantasies about orders, talk about materials and technologies, etc. At this point in our training there are many stimuli and it can be understood that there is a lot of information in a relatively short time. In addition, constant repetition encourages our assimilation of what we are doing. At this time, you have the ability to have many tools, that way you can generate processes from your own strengths. The way in which we acquire learning corresponds to an educational model, in which there are virtues and defects. I believe that architectural training is focused on reflective individuals.

In recent years I have seen that in some architecture schools throughout the region they begin to have a certain incidence with projects that are linked to different communities. That is a great alliance, that the energy of young people is directed and materializes in projects for popular urban areas that can stop different deficiencies. The moment this commonwealth occurs, we can say that the role of educational systems in architecture makes a lot of sense. Not only by providing infrastructure in these areas, but also by generating a culture of architecture for those who need it, this learning is essential to be preserved for professional life. There is a collective force in the students that is vital to be engaged for the good of society.

On the contrary, in the work stage, in much of our time we approach from a forceful, challenging, complex reality, with limitations, crude and at the same time beautiful and exciting, full of surprises and demands. I think there are two different experiences, the educational and the professional. In working life, it is very good to do architecture, touching the material, thinking about construction and structural processes. However, at this stage it is important that energy is directed towards making necessary architecture, that architecture for the people who need it, for the neighborhoods or the public infrastructure. In this aspect, professionals in this latitude have it more difficult and we should be more involved so that all this can exist. I think that in both cases we must concentrate on building a dignified life for all so that we can live in quality habitats.