The Conversation: Hiroshi Sugimoto-Daniel Libeskind Moderator: William Thorsell, Director & CEO, ROM Thursday May 31, 2007 Presented by the Institute for Contemporary Culture

[Audio ROM sound sting] Ron Graham: My name is Ron Graham, and it is my honour to serve as the chair of the Institute for Contemporary Culture at the Royal Ontario Museum. The ICC was founded in 1989, thanks to the vision and generosity of two ROM patrons, Nicole Eaton, and the late Eddie Goodman. It is being reborn tonight, with a new gallery, a new board and a new mandate.

Our mandate, in a nutshell, is to exhibit contemporary works of art, broadly defined to include architecture, design and even music that somehow engage in a dialogue with the Museum’s collection of natural and cultural artifacts, or that serve as a springboard, from which we can examine a living society, through lectures, seminars, films, and other thoughtful programming.

Last fall, for example, we had a great success with the young Cuban artist, Carlos Garaicoa, and we surrounded it with a number of variety of sold-out events. Next fall we will be showing the best of Canada’s contemporary First Nations artists, some of whom are producing original work to explore today’s issues, or riff off the ROM’s permanent collection. In 2008, we will be presenting an extraordinarily ambitious show of art, architecture and design in Shanghai, a startling update, as it were, to the Museum’s famous Chinese galleries. And tonight I am pleased to announce, that in 2009, Ydessa Hendeles, one of the world’s most influential art collectors, who has earned international acclaim as a brilliant curator of objects, images and …ideas, has agreed to create a new exhibition, specifically in response to the ICC’s invitation to her. We’re not saying anything… [Applause and cheering] This is a tease. We’re not saying anything more about it for the moment, except that her title is, Pumpkin: A Short History of Luxury. [Laughter]

Cuba, First Nations, Shanghai, Ydessa uptown … that should give you a sense of how eclectic, vibrant, and surprising we intend to be. But our first great challenge was where to start. Since we obviously wanted to make our debut by showcasing important works of art, rarely or never seen in Toronto that would be a powerful match for Daniel Libeskind’s cathedral-like space, and at the same time, fulfill our mandate in a clear, interesting and dramatic way. This isn’t the time or place to detail the 18 months of coincidence, complication, bad luck, good luck and pure

Page 1 of 13 fate that brought the ICC together with Hiroshi Sugimoto’s History of History. But we knew from the moment we saw it at the Japan Society in New York, that it that this was what we wanted, this was what we needed, and we absolutely had to get it. Once you see it in the spectacular new gallery we’ve been lucky enough to be given on the top floor of the Michael Lee-Chin Crystal, you’ll understand why. Sugimoto’s intelligent, sensitive, sometimes droll juxtaposition of old and new, of nature and civilization, of the real and the museum, perfectly express what the ICC is all about, not through words, but through wonderful things and exquisite art.

Our thanks to the Japan Society for all its assistance, and our deepest gratitude to Mr. Sugimoto, who not only lent us these treasures from his private collection, but selected appropriate items that will only be seen in Toronto, and even designed an installation wall that is itself, a work of sublime beauty.

Of course, putting on such an exhibition doesn’t come easily or cheaply. We are indebted first of all, to two very good friends of the ICC: Victoria Jackman and Popsy Johnstone, for agreeing to serve as honorary co-chairs of tonight’s fundraising event, to which so many of you have contributed so generously. We would also like to thank our supporting sponsor, Castlepoint Realty Partners, and our exhibit patrons, Cathay Pacific Airways, the Hal Jackman Foundation, and the Japan Foundation. Most of all, we want to express our gratitude to our presenting sponsor, BMO Financial Group. BMO Financial Group has been a long-time friend and supporter of the ROM, and Tom Milroy, co-president, BMO Capital Markets, has been a relentless champion of our efforts to bring the Sugimoto exhibition to the ICC at this auspicious time.

From the very start, Tom recognized that History of History was art of the highest quality; cosmopolitan, sophisticated, cross-cultural—attributes, with which BMO is proud to be associated. Moreover, thanks to Tom and his colleague, Gilles Ouellette, President, Private Banking, and in keeping with their bank’s exceptional support over the years, for Canadian art, and the art of our aboriginal peoples, BMO Financial Group has also agreed to be the presenting sponsor of next fall’s First Nations exhibition of the ICC. Tom and Gilles are with us here tonight, and I’d like you to join me in offering them a sincere and heartfelt appreciation. [Applause]

Among the many twists of fate that allowed the ICC to secure History of History, perhaps none was more crucial than a chance encounter between Daniel Libeskind and Hiroshi Sugimoto one day in New York. Architect and artist understood that they wanted to seize this unique opportunity to conduct a kind of conversation between the one’s structure and the other’s content. Now, before we

Page 2 of 13 go upstairs to see the breath-taking result, we are going to be allowed to listen in on an actual conversation between these two intriguing and talented individuals. To get it started, I would like to introduce someone who certainly needs no introduction to anyone in this room, on the eve of one of the greatest moments in the history of the Royal Ontario Museum. Just let me say, on behalf of the ICC’s managing director, Kelvin Browne, and our entire board, that we would still be down in the basement, literally and metaphorically, without the leadership, stamina, determination, talent, brains, taste and charm of one man. Ladies and gentlemen, William Thorsell. [Applause]

William Thorsell: Good evening [applause continues]. Thank you very much [applause] Ahem…It is kind of an emotional evening tonight ah so much ah…has gone into creating this moment, and we are honoured to have you all among us for this ah very appropriate way to start the ah festivities of the opening of the Michael Lee-Chin Crystal. So appropriate to start with substance and ideas and art and…and intelligent conversation, because that’s what these vessels are all meant to encourage and to host and to continue.

Hiroshi Sugimoto and Daniel ah were…are going to have a conversation here, which I, I think I need hardly do anything to do, except um, tell them to stop, probably at some point.

I’ve in the last few days, given a lot of interviews about this project, and I keep talking about architecture as art, and of course, we see art as architecture, so perhaps it’s just a seamless web, which is a … a way, perhaps, in which these two gentlemen started having a conversation, so Daniel, why don’t you join us? Daniel Libeskind is of course, the man, who came to Toronto and actually, eh…for all of the drama and art of this building, he’s the one who most closely read the program that we had published for what we were trying to do, and…and the vision. Take a seat over there, Daniel. [applause] Daniel Libeskind: First of all, I just want to congratulate… Hiroshi Hiroshi: Oh [Laughs] Daniel: …on your (fantastic) exhibition Hiroshi: …oh Daniel: …it’s really good Hiroshi: This, this must be your first time to see, see my exhibition within your…uh…space, right? Daniel: It’s the first exhibition in the building. [Laughs] Hiroshi: Right! [Laughs] Well, well, what do you...uh think? [Laughs] Daniel: I…I think it’s fabulous, you know, I think that William is correct…that you go by the name of you know photographer…

Page 3 of 13

Hiroshi: Uh huh Daniel: But technically, your art is far beyond…what is possibly considered art… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …because (in some ways you work) with the world at large Hiroshi: Yes Daniel: …ah…and, and uh…for all this trouble that you have with architecture, I think you have done very well Hiroshi: [Laughs, crowd laughs] But this is my first time to work with the building being made under the construction, so usually, I’m usually given the finished space, but uh this is tough to…to deal with the contractor, [crowd laughs] and then the so, so dusty and you are not here…[laughs] Why have to deal with contractor? [Laughs] Daniel: I think because of that…because it’s the first exhibition, not just in the finished space but in this space, which is so…just about to be finished… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …I think somehow…your work will forever be described…in the originary idea of the building…that work and that time… Hiroshi: Right Daniel: …that whole geometry of the circles… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …to me it…it…it’s a…I think it’s very profound insight into…you know, the…the…grander building, and also (kind of particular building) too. Hiroshi: Mmhmm. I thought uh...you know…after seeing your floor plan, there’s no…no curved line. I thought. It’s either sharp edge and then straight line. I thought you…you dislike curved lines, so this is my revenge for you to… [Laughs, crowd laughs] Daniel: You know what, I… Hiroshi: [Laughs] Daniel: …I built the building for […] the Imperial War Museum, which does not have a single, even the floor is curved… Hiroshi: Uh huh Daniel: …there’s not a single straight line, it’s curved…but I do prefer sharp angles, it’s true. Hiroshi: Uh huh [laughs, crowd laughs, sigh] so what…what should we talk about? [Laughs, crowd laughs] William: Well, I know that uh…Sug…Hiroshi Sugimoto… Hiroshi: Yes William: …insists…when he…when he does his installations, that he actually takes over the entire space. You see your installations as…in the context of space, and space has to be changed to manage your…your artwork in each case.

Page 4 of 13

Ah…so…talk to me a little bit about or talk to Daniel a little bit about this issue of architecture. Every one of your…every one of your examples here deals with the architecture and your art… Hiroshi: Mmhmm William: And you and you…you seem to uh…you know, see so much of the contextual in that architecture when you’re dealing with your art. Is that because it’s inescapable, I suppose, and you go into any different space, that there’s some kind of automatic dialogue there that you have to respond to, and then uh…change what you’re doing? Hiroshi: Mmhmm. Well, but before I talk about architecture aspect of the Daniel, my first uh…impression, memory that I heard Daniel Libeskind name was from uh…probably Venice Biennale eight…in 1985. You, you’d shown uh…like a Duchamps-like conceptual installation it’s called…there’s like three (versions) of architecture machine, so that’s why I’ve shown my…my collection machine…you might be interested in… Daniel: Yes, I was very interested in… Hiroshi: [Laughs] Daniel: …of course, and also the notion of… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …making something with your own hands… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …Because those machines actually not were made only made by the hands of some assistant, but also with candlelight, not with electric light and so on… Hiroshi: Right Daniel: ...Much in a kind of spirit of Shinto, of Zen… Hiroshi: Mmhmm…Right…So of course at that time you were known as an un- built architect, so ah… Daniel: […] Hiroshi: [Laughs] …So as a…as a kind of conceptual artist or more like a philosophical kind of fa--…point of view…of art, was quite interesting and amazing. So a…so…I…I wish that you kept as un-built architect, you know then…then [laughs] Daniel: Well, that’s true, all artists’ vision of architects are un-built…artists Hiroshi: [Laughs] It’s like a philosopher is given the position of Prime Minister or President, you know you have… [laughs] Daniel: […] that’s interesting, you know, because many people would prefer architecture in a photograph… Hiroshi: Uh huh [laughs] Daniel: ...They would prefer to live in a very banal environment and have on the wall a photograph of a beautiful building…

Page 5 of 13

Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …Or even in a book, look at a beautiful building, and it has always interested me, the power of the visual… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: ...but architecture is not merely visual…I think that’s a bit different, that architecture is not only a visual art, because it is also tactile, it’s captive, it…it…it‘s not really just for our eyes, it’s for our ear, or for the organs, or for the body, (or even a body without organs) … Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: […] Hiroshi: Mmhmm [laughs]. So that’s why I give myself project, to to uh survey of a 20th century architecture. So uh, and I intentionally gave out of focus uh…shot, even using like a camera, in that way, this is almost like a…a facelift, but uh…uh…the, the, so…uninteresting a…architecture never survives through my out of focus attack. So uh…you know… Daniel: That’s true. [Laughter] I have to say, I remember when I first saw your photographs out of focus… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: They were kind of shocking because they really showed which buildings were good…. Hiroshi: Right… Daniel: …and it, it really reminded me of, you know, Michelangelo… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …Who said that, you know, when asked by somebody, “What makes a good sculpture?” He simply said, “A great sculpture is one that you can roll down the hill and nothing breaks.” Hiroshi: [Laughs] Daniel: So that’s what happens with your photographs… Hiroshi: I see… Daniel: …of of the blurred architecture, which are annoying, of course, to architects… [Laughter] Hiroshi: Well tomorrow, I give you a test [laughter]…but right now there so many stage made, so I, I come before for shooting your building and my show and also outside show, but I think this is so…the…the shape is so strong, the crystal shape is so strong, so it’s just, I’m sure, I am quite confident it survive my attack. [Laughter] William: Hiroshi… Daniel: I am fully sure that it will survive the attack, the building against your photography. [Laughter] William: Hiroshi started this rather impish thing, that he has suffered at the hands of “starchitects,” and it raises the actual issue, doesn’t it, because this building,

Page 6 of 13 many of the questions…are…have to do with its practicality…ah…which many people here today would be the sort, of course, obvious question of how can you hang anything on the wall, there’s nothing hanging on the wall, it’s the obvious question, but then there are all kinds of other questions that people raise about practicalities ah…of this new generation, this new style of architecture that’s very personal, very artistic. And how do you, as an architect, respond to the sort of general, ah, you know…um criticism…that buildings that you build…have uh, have many impractical elements, parts that are, people are going to kick the wall, they’re going to hit their head on the wall, they’re going bump into this, that it doesn’t allow for the—that it overwhelms the art, this is a very common complaint now, whether it’s a Gehry or a […child], or a Libeskind. Somehow, indeed, that these buildings…are too strong for the contents, and uh, we should have weaker architecture so that our collections don’t look so bad… [Quiet laughter in the crowd] Daniel: No I think they are very practical, they are very prac—they are just, they are just eh…more open to other things. They are not just bound to the short ideological discourse that architecture is a passive instrument or a passive art, because, in a way, art is a very powerful entity and there is an art of architecture, which is also a powerful entity, and the strife, the tension of art and architecture, or even decorative art or furniture or whatever, has always been part of the, I think, the beauty of the art of space, whatever you define it as. So, I don’t see the contradiction, I just see that often people are nostalgic for a place, uh...eh for a notion of, in a…it’s kind of based on a notion of laziness, that laziness is a good thing, that the more lazy you are, the better reality is, but if you think of the Renaissance, if you think of Egypt, if you think of the Baroque, the notion of difficulty, was actually integral to art. Look at his [Hiroshi’s] art. His art is the art of difficulty—there’s nothing easy about any of these photographs, they are tremendously complex in every way, not just technically, but conceptually. Eh, um, they’re kind of spiritual, as I see them; they are kind of spiritual exercises of a certain kind.

So yes, I think the recovery of architecture, in the contemporary era, is a kind of re- discovery that architecture is not this kind of formulaic, eh, one-liner, that is akin to a machine, an air conditioner, or a hairdryer, that it’s different, it’s in a different realm. Hiroshi: Mmhmm. Well, from my experience, the more difficult space I was given, the more I get the uh…uh…just feel myself just, like fighting spirits, so this space, definitely gave me challenging spirits, so I have to do something to defeat it, with er…Either artist lose or win, so I don’t know, we take a vote today, but… [Laughs]

Page 7 of 13

Daniel: No, I, I think, look, an objective observer, you know, I don’t have any claim on, I…I’m not a critic of art either, but I think it’s the proportions of that wall, the exact curve, the location of the curve, the way you work with the light and the openings and how the objects are placed—I think it’s really, really, without sounding, eh…in any way, eh…disingenuous, a fantastic, you know, it’s a revelatory kind of exhibit, I saw the world, the world in a different way when I saw it, even very quickly. Hiroshi: Mmhmm. Well, for example, the Guggenheim Museum in New York, you know, Frank Lloyd Wright, this spiral space, I always see, you know, this show is very good, this is successful, but sometimes, it’s just so bad. Artists cannot begin to handle this sloped…sloped floor, so ah… Daniel: But, but look—if you take a, a box, the most, you know ban—simple, apparently simple box… Hiroshi: Right Daniel: …the eh famous discourse of Mies Van der Rohe, with Bernard Hoffman, who was the first director of the in Berlin, ah, when, when the building was opened, and you know, it’s the gallery, the National Gallery in Berlin is all glass, and then there’s a kind of basement. And a, Bernard Hoffman asked Mies Van der Rohe, “So, Mr. Van der Rohe, how do I install the art here?” you know, it’s all glass, and he said, “It’s not my problem, I’m the architect,” [Laughter] “It’s your problem, you’re the […]” [Laughter] And I though, you know, it’s a very ironic, interesting, interesting idea, because he had a kind of, he already made this idea that there’s a temple, in which nothing can ever go and there’s this kind of foundation in which the art goes. Which is very strong, and is this utilitarian? Is this a functional architecture? Absolutely not! [Laughter] Hiroshi: By the way, this is, National Museum building is my next stop. [Laughter] Daniel: [Laughs] that’s, (you’ll) have a challenge! You have to make a hole in the, in the floor somehow, from the bottom [Laughter] Hiroshi: [Laughs] William: Both of you have…seemed to talk about time a lot… Hiroshi: Mmhmm William: Hiroshi, your photography talks about capturing time, stopping time, preserving time, really… Hiroshi: Mmhmm William: …in a sense, in a photograph. And Daniel, your work…you often use the word “memory” in your buildings…almost ah…are evocative of…of almost pulling the memory forward, somehow. They…they…they remember somehow, your spaces…ah…Can you talk about time in relationship to your arts here? Daniel and I talked a little bit earlier about um, he’s just been in Egypt where, even the ruins of architecture become hugely valuable things, unlike the ruins you

Page 8 of 13 photograph, there’s something about architecture that time seems to preoccupy both of you, and either you’re listening…you’re listening to that sense of time or documenting that time, or in your case, even attempting to defeat time through your photographs. Daniel: Well, you know, there’s no doubt that architecture is not only in space, but it’s in time, because it unfolds…it, it has another side, it, it doesn’t have just a front and a back, it has a, it has an interiority and an exteriority, which are in a complex woven position to each other. A photograph, or when you look at a painting, it has a front—nobody can take the photograph of the wall and look at its back. Or presumably, if they did, it would be a very special experience, not something very regular. But in architecture, you know, in a way, the reason I…I think that many people think that architecture is sort of without time, is because they’ve gotten used to it from photographs. Uh, they’ve seen the buildings in photography, and therefore, there, there is no other side. I, myself, had that experience, when I was a student of architecture, when I would visit great monuments, the …uh…you know, past…the Temples of Paestum, the Stonehenge. I was completely disappointed, because they were worse than the photographs I saw of them. [Laughter] Hiroshi: [Laughs] Daniel: …Because they had another side! And so my determination was that, that, that people should not be disappointed when they go to the other side, away from photography, into architecture, into time. Hiroshi: Mmhmm. But you quite often mentioned about the history behind time, and also, your famous Jewish Museum is very heavily related to the memory of the, the…people there, so uh…in my case, I am correcting my…my […], and also…uh my seascapes—this is my time-related concept, you know. My…my question I was given by myself was, what will be the thing that if the first person, the first human appeared on this surface of primitive earth, and then looking at the seascapes, then this is the moment of the human awareness, or the human, first human vision of the seascapes? What would you feel, as though I just want to put myself back to the supposedly first human, facing the ocean and what do I feel? So, this is my system of tracing back my own personal memory and also the memory as a huge, entire human memories. So probably, architect, also, like, like you, so related to the history and time, position, you, your architecture supposedly representing entire human history, and culture, probably, and that’s what I feel. Daniel: Because all human history is related to, to history that is not completely human. Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …And that’s the nature of…of…of, you know, any…any theogony, the first Greek Theogony, Works and Days, actually the beginning of, of, the

Page 9 of 13 beginning of the world is, is conflict. And the last essay of Derrida, just before he died, was “I’m at War with Myself.” Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: I thought they were beautiful, that, that…that that is the originary state, and in a sense, architecture is not linear, most people think the history of architecture is a linear progression. You know, from ancient to the future, but it’s actually kind of a cross-section at any point of time, which is kind of the moment of eternal reflection, because you are there, you know? And there is nothing, there is no future, there is no past, there is only the memory after in the retrospect. Hiroshi: Mmhmm William: Daniel, you use the word, “neutral” with contempt, you talk about, um, “We’re not here to create a ‘neutral’ box,” for example. Or I remember, in New York City, when you were on a panel there, saying, “We’re not here to build backgrounds to cities, we are here to build cities.” So it’s not neutral, what you’re doing, what is it? Is it…is it… Daniel: Well, it has to stake out a position, it, it, you know, when you put a column, when you put a beam, when you put a wall, an angle, you let light and you, you, you have foundation, you make a commitment, and that commitment is not just an arbitrary or neutral, meaning, you, I don’t do anything. Neutral, supposedly, neutrality is not taking a position, but it’s a huge position, neutrality, and not very admirable, I think. You know, I’ve never admired kind of just neutrality, because it’s a position of non-engagement. So I think a building that is interesting, a building, or an art, whatever it is, is engaged, it’s…it’s engaged in a dialogue of something, in a struggle, in a tension, and…and that’s why I, I’ve never been a proponent of the so-called “neutral” box, because they bothered me the most, they, they are the most aggressive of all architecture, these neutral spaces. William: Hiroshi, in your own […] History of History upstairs, you…you combine fossils of 400-million-year-old fossils with photographs that are new, that a that a…you say are capturing time, so you have a… a theme of time, and the relationship you have from three-dimensions to photographs. Can you expand a little bit on that […]? Hiroshi: Well, I found recently, I start collecting the fossils only a few years ago, but I found very interesting aspect, that the fossils works exactly same as photography, so 40 million years ago, under the sea bottom, and those creatures, was quite live, and…and all the sudden…this underwater volcano erupts, and they just instantly, just, just pushed and buried, and after 40 million years later, we, we just removed this one surface to the other and the one side left as a negative and one side has a positive. So this is the…the…the free photography, time-recording devices, I call. So it’s like a…excavating the Greek/Roman ruins, or uh…uh…you know, and then you find a trace of the human habitat.

Page 10 of 13

Daniel: That’s interesting, because you know, Salvador Dali called Gaudi’s architecture “instantaneous three-dimensional photography,” and he…he explained, in a brilliant way, the technique of Gaudi, that it came from kind of instant manipulation of also the…ready-mades… Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: …that created those very complex surfaces, including the, living organic objects, like chickens, and… Hiroshi: Ahhhh…I will tell you what’s going, this, this…cathedral, it’s getting less and less interesting. Daniel: Yes, because it is being completed by people who are not believers [laughter]…No really, how can you make a cathedral if people are wearing Gucci suits? [Laughter] Hiroshi: [Laughs] But did you think you were interested in making, like rather huge plans, like a city plan? Daniel: No, no, in fact, I’m doing, you know… Hiroshi: …Like a society, the building one thinks you are almost going to make in New York… Daniel: No, no…in fact I, I, I have a good chance now, I’m working for Tobias Meyer and Mark Fletcher, to do a very, very tiny house, the smallest house, you know, it’s 2000 square feet, in Connecticut, and you know, they are great collectors, and they’re great sort of…experts in art, and you know, they approached me with the idea of a house, and originally, I built one small house before, but I was not too interested. But they came and said, “You know, we’re not really…you know, we want a house that is very comfortable and very beautiful, but we are not interested in a domestic environment, we just want a beautiful house.” So that’s a challenge, because I said, do you need a kitchen? “Yes,” do you need a bathroom? “Yes,” do you need a…you know, “Yes, but we don’t want it in the form of the domesticated idea of an interior,” So that’s uh, so yes...I… Hiroshi: But how are the cities scaled? Like if I were the architect, you know, I wish I could be a Speer, you know, he was given the entire project too, you can…uh…rebuild…the, the city of Berlin—this is like a dream idea, and… Daniel: It’s a nightmare! [Laughter] Hiroshi: [Laughs] Daniel: No, I never admired Speer, and I never admired this idea of remaking the city, because to me, the city is, is akin to human beings, it’s not something you can easily manipulate, and if you manipulate it, you…you do it at your own risk. Uh…whether it’s Robert Moses, you know, uh…building, you know, overpasses to Long Island, which were too low for buses so that uh, you know…Puerto Ricans wouldn’t be able to come by bus, or by keeping water in public swimming pools cold, so people would find it unpleasant to use the public swimming pools. I never liked the authoritarian-stricken architecture, and I think you can do architecture,

Page 11 of 13 which is bold, strong, eh, without the authoritarian idea that you need kind of, the big power. Hiroshi: Mmhmm. But many architect now, is rushing to the Saudi Arabia, or Dubai, and there’s… Daniel: China Hiroshi: …so many, so much money is just dumping, it’s a flat ground that you can build whatever you want, and this is the kind of… Daniel: But is it interesting? Hiroshi: …imaginative in a city…you can even build. Daniel: But is it really interesting? Hiroshi: Mmhmm? Daniel: I, I just wonder. [Laughs] Hiroshi: [Laughs] No, I am basically negative, but…but this is what, what is happening. And it’s so artificial, and then, you know, I like city of old, old city, like Italian small cities, the narrow street, and also Kyoto…it’s very complicated, just naturally formed, that no master-plan was made in ancient city, it’s just, that’s… Daniel: Yes Hiroshi: …That’s very…as a human, if it’s just like New York and grid in straight street, that’s, that gives me a kind of very eerie feeling. Daniel: Mmhmm. Well, I basically agree with you. There is a history to every place…I’m only surprised that the architects are working in these places, think that the desert has no history… Hiroshi: [Laughs] Daniel: …so therefore, they think you can do anything you want. But partly, it’s not true. Hiroshi: Mmhmm Daniel: There is a history to it. William: The…as you know the History of History is a…as an installation it’s…ah…reflective, it…places the past with present, and juxtaposes the future and the present with the past. The ICC as an institution here or a…as an organization…is insinuating the present into a museum that is filled with the evidence of past, whether it’s nature or culture. I think that’s the creation of some kind of juxtaposition like this, between, whether it’s the new building of the Crystal against the original buildings of 1914 and 1931, where we suddenly see the old buildings for the first time, and notice their detail because they are juxtaposed to the new. And similarly, the Crystal, in this case, not being a work of architecture that is sitting alone, but is in the arms of these two original wings, suddenly you see the Crystal architecture with a completely different appreciation for it, ah…rather than it standing across the street, by itself. I think that these are lessons well-learned by these, ah by these conversations, and what these ah…artists do.

Page 12 of 13

Ah, what you will see in the next few days here at the ROM, is this ah, this, this very energetic juxtaposition, of actually, three communities of architects: the ones who built 1914, the ones who built 1931 on Queen’s Park, and now, Daniel, and I suppose even, the curatorial centre, from the 1970s, uh, which was ah…of a style of, of, of a period. And within this exhibition, ah we see it within the exhibition of the History of History, and as we go forward in this ah…environment, we’re going to see it between what happens at ICC and the rest of these collections, because none of the cultures represented by these collections is dead, and I think it’s a wonderful thing that Ron Graham and his colleagues are investing so much of their energy in, in bringing up today what is happening in these cultures and juxtaposing, even just by their propinquity to the other collections, but sometimes, by, by explicit connections and interventions into the galleries, the present with the past. Ah…the past alone, I think is…is…does…does risk feeling dead, the past needs to be, needs to be provoked by…by the current life of the culture and subs---…and, and in reverse. So I want to thank both of you for your…ah, I think permanent contributions, because I agree with Daniel that Sugimoto’s ah…debut in the architecture of the ICC on the roof, will always, will always be there as the…the start; it will always be the reference point, it will always be the…the thing that created that gallery the first time out. So, ah…Toronto is ah, has benefited enormously from this, and now we get to carry on this dialogue in our own ways, in three dimensions, forever, as long as we live here. Ah…ladies and gentlemen, Daniel Libeskind, Hiroshi Sugimoto. [Applause]

[Audio ends with ROM sound sting]

Page 13 of 13