Oris: Jeste li oduvijek znali da ćete postati arhitekt? Jeste li možda razmišljali i o drugim mogućnostima?

Vodopivec: Ni u kojem slučaju nisam jedan od onih koji su još od malih nogu znali da moraju postati arhitekti. Upravo suprotno. Kad
sam se upisivao na sveučilište kolebao sam se između matematike, psihologije, filozofije i arhitekture. Tek sam kasnije spoznao da je arhitektura u mnogo čemu refleks prvih triju znanosti: u velikoj je mjeri matematički racionalna, no kao svako
umjetničko djelo istodobno je autobiografska. Naše poimanje prostora ide preko osobnog
iskustva – od rođenja nadalje. Jednako izravno i spontano kao materinji jezik. Posljednjih se godina o analogijama izme|u filozofije i arhitekture mnogo pisalo. Arhitektura je filozofiji potrebna kao usporedba zgrade misaonog sustava, a filozofija arhitekturi za razja{njavanje suštinskog. Upravo me potonje navelo da sam uz arhitekturu nekoliko godina
studirao i filozofiju. I sve sam više uvjeren da je filozofija najznačajnije štivo arhitekta.
U početku sam strahovao da nisam rođen za arhitekturu pa sam zato najprije upisao studij gra|evinarstva. Tamo sam spoznao da me tehnika ne zanima u dovoljnoj mjeri. Nakon opredjeljenja za arhitekturu imao sam sreću da sam veći dio studija proboravio u blizini prof. Ravnikara. Njegova osobnost i duhovna snaga presudno su obilježili moj daljnji životni put. Ne samo u arhitekturi.
Često se pitam jesam li pravilno odlučio. Mogu li se posve poistovjetiti s pozivom arhitekta? Arhitektura je nedvojbeno struka koja, obuhvaćajući mnoge, upravlja njihovim životima. I mojim je
poduže upravljala. S godinama sam ipak spoznao da jež‘ivot bitno više od arhitekture. U to sam sve više uvjeren. U vezi s tim parafrazirao
bih Giacomettija: arhitektura me jako zanima, no neusporedivo me više zanima istina.
Posao arhitekta je lijep, ali često nezahvalan. Uloga i značenje arhitekture i umjetnosti u
posljednje su se vrijeme iz osnova promijenili. Kao i sve ostalo,
postaju dijelom komercijalnog svijeta. Stoga će ubuduće poziv arhitekta biti po svoj prilici teži.
Više od dvadeset godina prakse ostavilo je mnoga gorka iskustva i tek rijetka zadovoljstva. Dakako, to ovisi o pojedincu i njegovoj osjetljivosti.
Posljednjih sam sedam godina
imao sreću da predajem na školi
za arhitekturu u Ljubljani. Kažem sreću, jer taj posao rado obavljam,
a istovremeno mi je pružena mogućnost da se kao arhitekt prihvatim samo onog posla koji me uistinu zanima. I ne na zadnjem mjestu, prvi sam put u životu
plaćen da čitam knjige. To je
uistinu privilegija.
(...)

Oris: Have you always known that you would become an architect? Did you ever consider other possibilities?

Vodopivec: I am not one of those who have known from childhood that they would become an architect. Quite the reverse. When it came to studying, I couldn’t make up
my mind between mathematics, psychology, philosophy and architecture. It was not until
later that I realised how architecture was in many ways
a reflection of the first three – to a great extent it is rational like mathematics, yet like every other work of art, it is also autobiographical. Our
conception of space is a personal experience – from
birth onwards. It is as direct and spontaneous as our mother tongue. Much has been written in the last couple of years about the analogy between architecture and philosophy. Philosophy needs architecture as a metaphor of its thinking structure, and architecture needs philosophy to explain the essential. It was the latter aspect that led me for a couple of years to study philosophy alongside architecture. And I am all the more convinced that philosophy is the most
important literature for architects.
In the beginning I feared that I was not born to be an architect, so I first enrolled in civil engineering. It was there that I came to realise that technique was something that didn’t interest me all that much.
Having chosen architecture, I was fortunate enough to spend the greater part of my studies close to Professor Ravnikar.
His personality and spiritual strength were crucial in defining my future path. And not only in architecture.
I often wonder whether I made the right choice. Can I equate myself with my vocation as an architect? Architecture is, undoubtedly, a profession that overwhelms many and takes control of their lives. It controlled mine for quite a period. Over the years I have come to see that life is definitely far more than
just architecture. And I am more and more convinced of this fact. In connection with this, I would like to paraphrase Giacometti: architecture interests me a great deal, but truth interests me far more.
Being an architect is fine, but often unrewarding. In recent times the role and significance
of architecture and art have changed fundamentally. Like everything else, they have become part of the commercial world. Therefore, in the future, architecture as a vocation will most probably be much more demanding. More than twenty years of experience have left a bitter aftertaste, with only the odd gratification. Naturally, it depends on the individual and how sensitive he is.
Over the past seven years I have had the good fortune to teach at the School of Architecture in Ljubljana. I say good fortune, because I do it gladly, and, at the same time, it offers me the opportunity as an architect to accept only those tasks that truly interest me. Without mentioning the fact that for the first time in my life they are paying me to read books. A real privilege.
(...)