Introducing Studio Silva Systems

At first glance, this collaboration might not seem an obvious choice – although they are both based in Berlin, from a distance, their work doesn’t seem to intersect. Wegwerth’s work has focused on the “application of evolving systems”, resulting in work like his Crystallised Ceramic series, in which crystals are grown on the surface of shattered ceramic vases to create new forms, or the Blankenau collection, which results from using tree forks as connectors for building furniture. Moritz’s work, on the other hand, focuses more on architecture and urban planning from the molecular scale to the territorial, with projects ranging from award-winning plans that reimagine the urban environment of Berlin to evolving, collaborative exhibitions.

Upon closer inspection, however, it makes perfect sense. Their research and development approach is similar, but it was their shared values that first brought them together. “We realised that we both believe in a few of the same things. They relate to ecology, repurposing and ways in which to treat the earth,” says Moritz Maria Karl. Their approach deals with observing and reacting to an environment, a material or a place rather than imposing a grand concept upon it.

Writer and DAE alumnus Emma Lucek spoke to them about the creative process, how we can be responsive to our environments, and their vision for the new Studio Silva Systems at DAE.

“I like to leave space for things that I can’t really control”

Lukas Wegwerth

→Emma Lucek: Not knowing you yet, the intersection of your practices to form a teaching studio seems somewhat unlikely. Could you tell me how you met and how your paths and disciplines cross?

Moritz Maria Karl: Even though our work looks very different and my work is much less tangible and object-based than what Lukas does, what brings us together is that we share the same values. Initially, when I met him, I thought he was very interesting because he was very interested and curious about things. We realised that we both believe in a few of the same things. They relate to sustainability, repurposing and ways in which to treat the earth.

Lukas Wegwerth: Absolutely. One of the key projects we did together was a project in Paris that was done in collaboration with artists. We also realised that we have a similar way of working — there isn’t really a plan. For me, that’s a good starting point because, not on an urban scale, but on a smaller scale you can observe the pros and cons of every step and be more reactive. I work a lot with natural materials, and I’ve realised that it’s a lot about observing carefully and finding ways to respond to the material. It’s almost like finding shortcuts — I’m not trying to change the shape of a branch; I just work directly with the shape that it comes in.

→EL: How do you see the intersection between thinking and creating?

LW: My process of working I would say I learned at home prior to studying and working as a designer. Growing up in the countryside and being involved in building many informal small architectures, I learned how to make things in an intuitive way. Now, when working on my projects, for example with the branches and the crystals, I don’t envision how I want the final object to look. It is much rather a dialogue with the object that happens through letting go and taking back control, reviewing and adjusting. I like to leave space for things that I can’t really control because it allows for things to potentially be better than I wanted them to be.

MMK: We wanted to translate this thinking process and establish a context within which to work. The forest is sort of the opposite of the city, a place of lawlessness and criminals and witches and stands against a lot of the structures that exist in society, against a lot of the standardisation processes. A lot of things happen in the forest that you can’t control, that you can’t see. It’s a very interesting context for working. Something that we want to focus on in the studio is that if you take something away from the forest, you have to give something back. It’s this observation and reaction element from what Lukas was describing in his process.

“The forest is sort of the opposite of the city… [it] stands against a lot of the structures that exist in society, against a lot of the standardisation processes”

Moritz Maria Karl

→EL: What are some key characteristics that you aim to teach?

LW: There’s a lot to learn from the forest. Actually, the forest acts as a type of metaphor to the design process. You have to react to unpredictability and learn to be responsive, to observe. Also when it comes to sourcing, is sourcing the actual cutting down of the trees, or does it go all the way to planting them?

MMK: And there’s the super important aspect which are the stakeholders, all of the actors involved. It’s a really big economy in the ecosystem. Exploring these things will be really interesting with the students.

LW: And it’s not like we’re expecting everything in the studio to be made of wood. it’s more about all the materials that one could find in the forest or ones that could be found in the future forest. With new materials, they’re very interesting and unexpected but what’s also interesting is how little we know about the diversity of the materials that already exist. Even wood — there are four main types used for furniture, but there are hundreds of types. And most people want oak furniture, but oak grows much slower than other kinds of trees; but if we grow only efficient types of trees, that creates monocultures. So it’s quite complex.

→EL: What does the name of the studio signify?

LW: “Silva Systems” refers to the wide range of potential design, material, sourcing or regenerative systems that we can create by learning from the forest. Silva is the Latin word for forest: so this will include all sorts of observations, materials, species, and cultural, social or metaphorical concepts that can be found in the forest. Sylvi chemistry for example describes chemicals derived from the forest — the studio will apply this notion to design.

MMK: The idea is to work in a real forest and pick an element from our observations there to respond to. It’s an idea to have a collaboration with the forestry department (Staatsbosbeheer). If we work in an actual forest, then it means we can explore the forest and the workshops but also engage with the communities that live there. It will make it an extremely live project, and we’re hoping to engage in a lot of communication and collaboration with experts, specialists, locals, etc. We both believe in collaboration, which is why we wanted to work together. We were also thinking it would be great if the students all had one independent project but then also collaborated all together on a joint project. It’s a very different form of creating.

LW: I also like that the source is inscribed in the format. When sourcing, you’re learning about your project and this can be an interesting starting point to build a theoretical framework. Sourcing and theoretical or conceptual thinking can inform each other. We’re really looking forward to it.