At Fublis, our “Design Dialogues” series is dedicated to exploring the creative minds shaping the architectural and design landscape. Through in-depth conversations, we uncover the inspirations, methodologies, and challenges faced by industry innovators, offering valuable insights to both seasoned professionals and emerging talent.

In this edition, we have the pleasure of speaking with Consul&Co, a visionary design firm renowned for its conceptual approach and ability to balance bold aesthetics with real-world functionality. Their work seamlessly integrates bionic elements within constructivist frameworks, pioneering architectural storytelling that resonates on both intellectual and emotional levels.

Our conversation delves into their distinctive design processes, the harmonious fusion of nature and architecture, and the transformative impact of technology on contemporary practice. We also explore the firm’s innovative approach to materiality, spatial fluidity, and the challenges of maintaining design integrity across intricate bespoke elements.

Join us as we gain exclusive insights into the creative vision of Consul&Co, their architectural legacy, and their forward-thinking perspective on the future of design.

Your work demonstrates a strong conceptual approach, often balancing function with striking aesthetics. How do you ensure that bold design ideas remain practical and adaptable for real-world use?

Gleb Konsulov: Any work of art (not necessarily architectural) is more valuable the more sophisticated and experienced its creator is, the more aspects he is able to cover with this work, the more thoroughly and deeply he can work through them. Giftedness of the author of an art object is also very important, but this factor is beyond our control (under giftedness I mean the refinement of perception, the tendency to abstract from the stereotypes of society and generate something extraordinary). In my opinion, the main task of design is to maintain this balance between practicality and aesthetics – absolutely equal in importance facets of architectural creation. At one time in architectural universities the paradigm of the priority of the functional component was imposed. I am not a supporter of this approach to design, although I do not minimize the importance of economic feasibility, ergonomics, acoustics, insolation and so on. Paying due attention to aesthetics in the project, we take into account the psychological comfort of a person, we pay tribute to the educational function of design, in some cases we create a memorable spectacular image that has a beneficial effect on the audience – in short, we expand, if not close, the range of needs of the potential user, making his existence in this architecture more harmonious.

It’s nice that you appreciated the “strong conceptual approach.”) Over the past few years, I have been periodically involved in various projects as a concept artist. This actually means to dream professionally. I have been doing this practically all my life, and in different fields (illustration, sculpture, music, etc.). Architecture, as a symbiosis of science and art, allows me to apply many of these skills together. So, returning to your question about guarantees of practicality of my design, I will summarize: I do not guarantee this balance of beauty and functionality, but strive to provide it by all means available to me. How much I manage to do this is for you to judge. Personally, as a rule, I am more or less satisfied with the result at the end of the project (not very modestly)), because, being a perfectionist, I try not to demonstrate the work not brought to a satisfactory state. Over time, my satisfaction wanes, but I console myself with the fact that this happens as a result of my professional growth and, consequently, the demands on myself).

Bionic Constructivist Architectural Symbiosis project is a fascinating dialogue between past and present, reviving and expanding on the vision of a previous generation. How did you approach integrating your grandfather’s original sketches while bringing in contemporary architectural language and technological advancements?

Gleb Konsulov: This process happened gradually, naturally and unnoticed by me. The thing is that I was born and brought up in a dynasty of architects (eight of my relatives, not counting me, are graduated architects), where everyone besides drew and practiced music to some extent. Growing up in such an environment, I subconsciously soaked up the aesthetics of my relatives, which later shaped my own, which, by the way, is in the process of development. My grandfather was an incredibly prolific workaholic, his sketches were everywhere and numbered in the thousands, so there was always plenty of information to absorb. My grandfather died when I was ten years old, at that age it’s hard to analyze his designs in depth. However, they do not pass by: they are deposited until a more conscious age, forming a sense of beauty. Studying the colossal volume of his sketches while working on this project, I discovered many ideas that came to me in the form of reminiscences and were even partially realized by me. I have never allowed fragmentary or, even more so, complete plagiarism, so widespread in architecture and concept design under the euphonious interpretation of “following the style”, but it is unfortunately unavoidable to “reinvent the wheel” from time to time. I come to the conclusion that I began to think partly like him. And when I finally had the opportunity to collaborate with my grandfather, at least virtually, I was happy to find so much in common in our views in materials I had not seen before. Judging by the sketches, he could have come up with this design back in those days (1960), but the Soviet Union was not the place where something so non-trivial could be realized. So this is really our common project, in which we equally participated.

The concept explores bionic architectural elements within a constructivist framework. How did you balance the rigid geometric qualities of Soviet-era constructivism with the organic, fluid forms of bionic design?

Gleb Konsulov: As I said, this was an accomplishment my grandfather and I had in common. At the time when he was designing the hotel itself, relatively little information about the course of events in world architecture seeped into the Union. His main sources of inspiration were the pioneers of constructivism, such as F.L. Wright and Corbusier, allowed here. Wright started with Louis Sullivan and others with frank Art Nouveau – a bionic current, which, by the way, is very close to me. And both emphasized the tight unity of their architecture with nature. In my case, secession and passion for nature were supplemented by the tendencies of modern object design with its streamlined and high-tech ergonomics, some findings of parametric architecture, as well as interest in technical innovations, new materials and technologies, which, as a rule, cause the emergence of new trends in architecture. Another factor that influenced both of us is the architecture of Lviv, a significant part of which is formed by the building of Polish times – functionalism in the best traditions, which organically combines strict geometry with smooth forms and, again, with nature. But this is relative to external prerequisites. The main criterion of harmony of all elements of the project is very subjective – it is my personal feelings of beauty, which create the individuality of creativity. In general, the concept of perfection is very subjective and, as we can see from the history of art, is constantly transforming. Personally, I tend to take nature, proportions of people, animals, flora algorithms, etc. as a standard.

Looking at your portfolio, there’s a strong sense of spatial storytelling. How do you use architectural form and materiality to evoke emotions and shape user experiences within a space?

Gleb Konsulov: There can be different approaches to form-making: one of the techniques widely used in concept art, in cinema is to go from the silhouette of an object or to search for the general composition of an architectural complex, for example, using the language of form. Like in sculpture and painting – a step-by-step sequential elaboration of details from large to small forms. You can be inspired by some phenomenon or object, analyze its advantages and interpret them in the project. Sometimes in the absence of inspiration, which often comes in the process of work, you can start with the construction of initial data, the situation, the wishes of the client, which will provoke the birth of an original solution. If you sketch immediately in 3D (sometimes I do so), then a significant imprint on the form creation is imposed by the package of three-dimensional modeling (in my case, Microstation), whose tools dictate many unexpected solutions. For example, some of my objects I conditionally called Bulin architecture (those who modeled – he will understand). Another important aspect: a work gains much more artistic value if it is based not only on a rational concept or a beautiful visual image, but also on a deep philosophical idea that encourages the observer to think. In general, all these methods help to create a unique space, especially if they are used in combination.

Now closer to your question. As you probably realized, I am more than cool to typical architecture, as well as to any typical “creative” activity (in my opinion these words are antonyms). That’s why I am always happy to have some vague uncertainty that accompanies the process of creation until its completion. And I don’t have a clear recipe for creating architecture, because I don’t treat it as a craft, and accordingly, each successive work is a search (sometimes excruciating), an experiment with a not entirely predictable result. This approach has its disadvantages, such as the client’s reaction to uncertainty), but it allows me to maintain my passion for this kind of activity.

The Gardenhouse Waterfall of Villa Ice Canyon project beautifully integrates architecture with nature through elements like the cascading waterfall and green landscape. What were the biggest challenges in ensuring that these natural elements seamlessly blended with the existing cottage and its surroundings?

Gleb Konsulov: There were no aesthetic difficulties, as such, in the design, or rather I do not consider them to be difficulties. It was an interesting and challenging task to create a whole complex from stylistically disparate components, but it is precisely such tasks that make my work more interesting. And since the client trusted me almost completely in terms of aesthetics (in my opinion this is the most logical and practical strategy of the client), I was actually the main censor of my design. The main goal of the project is to combine the style of the existing cottage, which was not designed by me and sets a certain stylistic tone, with the bionic design of its interior, which is the fruit of my long and painstaking efforts. The facade of the pergola facing the house is made in the same facing materials as the house and is a transitional link between the existing architecture of this elite village and my “modern” opuses. The main philosophical concept of this construction is the interpenetration of architecture and nature. By the way, at this stage of my development as an architect, the idea of architecture striving for nature as the ultimate goal of its perfection is fundamental to me and is a constant leitmotif in most of my aesthetic endeavors. A reinforced concrete membrane separates two environments: a waterfall and a green cascade, which nevertheless continue one another. As we approach our composition, the unfortunate state lawn gradually “goes wild” and crawls into the living space, which in turn penetrates underground (half of the kitchen is under the green cascade). Such a peculiar multi-plane yin-yang required a very sophisticated design solution, which was once again provided by the wonderful designer Turchin V.G. The artificial water body imposed by me at first horrified the customer with its labor-intensive execution, but after viewing the visualization the issue was resolved in favor of my concept. The main unpleasant moments were, as always, connected with the “human factor”.

The construction process involved overcoming local challenges, particularly in craftsmanship and execution. Given these difficulties, what lessons did you learn about realizing intricate, high-quality architectural details in a setting with limited specialized expertise?

Gleb Konsulov: Unfortunately, we have to admit that in our region (Lviv), and in general on the territory of the former socialist camp (and I worked many places as a designer and as a performer) in the environment of contractors on the basis of symbiosis of the post-Soviet and provincial mentality formed a depressing stereotype of behavior: having so low country criteria of quality, workers do not want to make a quality product corresponding to the project and, most importantly, do not want to learn. They have no incentive to raise the level of skill, because customers, as a rule, not skillful in art natives of the same environment, not only do not pay for professional development. In most cases, the client imagines himself a full-fledged co-author with the architect, without any knowledge in this area, and the knowledge of the specialist underestimating. In psychology, this phenomenon is called the Dunning-Kruger effect. I’m sure it’s a problem in all creative fields and all of humanity in general. But in principle, worthy works of art should not be a commonplace phenomenon.

I have made and continue to make many conclusions. The most obvious of them is the need for careful author’s supervision: you can’t rely completely even on proven honest and decent performers (they exist), as their experience may always be different from yours. All stages of production must be controlled yourself, many things have to finish personally. Naturally, all this does not apply to typical large-scale construction, but to chamber exclusive creative works, which I am committed to creating.

With technology rapidly influencing architecture, from AI-driven design tools to sustainable materials, how do you see innovation shaping the future of your practice?

Gleb Konsulov: This is a very topical and, partly, painful topic. Artificial intelligence for a short period of its official existence has already half destroyed the profession of concept artist, and given the pace of its development, we can predict its (the profession’s) final burial in the next year. Undoubtedly there will remain rare, dedicated to creativity selfless marginalized people, but art will not dream of being financed. Nevertheless, the ratio of true adherents of the academic approach to art and the rest of the near-cultural crowd will remain the same: people of creativity will be an aberration as always. Personally, I have not yet experienced the urgent need to use AI, I only tried it for the first time a week ago for the purpose of familiarization).

The emergence of new technologies and materials inspires more optimism. This progress is the impetus for every major transformation of the world’s architecture, the emergence of new trends, and provides food for creativity. And every single material can serve as a trigger of inspiration for a complete concept, whether it is a cladding material, such as aluminum foam panels or ventilated decorative facade systems, green technologies (adobe houses, a new look at dugouts and “dens”, etc.) or more applicable in large-scale structures inflatable ETFE covers or transparent solar panels-chameleons …. However, there are plenty of old technologies and materials that are not often used in everyday construction, such as cable-stayed, tent structures, reinforced cement, fiber cement, spraying concrete on various inflatable formworks – in short, a huge number, not enough life to try everything. So there is enough material for thinking for our century with a reserve – there would be conditions for their realization!

The Villa Ice Canyon – Guest Area project places a strong emphasis on bionic architecture and ergonomic fluidity. How did you ensure that the organic forms and seamless spatial transitions not only enhance aesthetics but also improve functionality and user experience?

Gleb Konsulov: As I mentioned earlier, I am convinced that aesthetics and functionality are absolutely equal and interdependent components of a work of architecture. Note that the more natural and practical a construction is, the more slender and beautiful it seems, even to the uninitiated observer. This is because human perception of beauty and harmony is formed by nature and the feeling of strength, reliability and practicality of the structure subconsciously causes psychological comfort.

The very name of the villa “Ice Canyon”, which emerged in the process of searching for the visual appearance of the mansion, speaks eloquently about the bionic “streamlined” aesthetics in the solution of its interior. Personally, as an environmental designer, I see nature as the most perfect architect, both aesthetically and functionally. As well as the main source of inspiration, analysis and meaningful imitation. Therefore, from the very beginning of work on this object, namely the redevelopment of the existing rather cramped, boring typical mansion, the same processes have been virtually taking place in it as in the centuries-old formation of the cañon, only instead of water and wind, the path was paved by the probable flows of people. And this way, accordingly, is as smooth and as short as in nature. There is a practice of planning parks according to this principle: sow the entire territory with grass and give people the opportunity to trample their own paths, and then turn these paths into alleys. Thus, the bionic orientation of the interior along with my aesthetic preferences is due to ergonomics, form-creation here is not a thoughtless stylization of natural forms.

Every detail in this project—from furniture to sculptural elements—was custom-designed under your supervision. What challenges did you face in maintaining design consistency across such a broad range of bespoke elements, and how did you overcome them?

Gleb Konsulov: In the times of my favorite secession (late 19th – early 20th century), the following scheme, for example, was considered the norm when designing exclusive housing: the duties of one architect covered not only the design of the house with all the necessary documentation and visualization, but also the solution of interiors, down to the smallest exclusive details, such as furniture fittings, lamps, door handles, etc., the arrangement of pre-garden areas with pavilions, greenhouses, fences, small architectural forms, etc. Stained glass, forging, mosaics and even clothes for servants in the house were designed by the same person. Only this approach allowed to create such masterpieces as Victor Horta, Alexandre Charpentier, Hector Guimard, Louis Majorelle, my favorite Gaudi and many others left behind. The diverse quality education of the time allowed for this. For many years now we have been witnessing a total division into subprofessions at the level of universities, which train narrowly specialized personnel for manufactories under the aegis of friendly teamwork. At the same time, there is a global simplification of architecture at the level of trends (a herd-totalitarian concept that I hate), brands (too) and fashion (!). Even the most common in the industry software such as Archicad and Revit (my subjective opinion) makes free form creation as difficult as possible. I dislike the existence of a separate profession of interior designer, but there is also a decorator …. Well, the topic of degradation of creativity deserves a separate discussion, and we will return to the uniformity of interior elements. So, I consider the whole interior part of the villa “Ice Canyon” as one integral art object (as the exterior was not under my authority), and I treated each of its elements as a detail of the whole work. The stylistics were crystallized in the process of work, not chosen in advance. There were difficulties, of course, but they were mostly of a technical nature rather than creative. And the selection of performers, of course.

Looking ahead, if you could design a space that embodies the architectural ideals of the future—one that seamlessly merges technology, nature, and human experience—what would it look like? And how do you see your work at Consul&Co contributing to this vision?

Gleb Konsulov: The thing is that I am a supporter of a very individual approach to design. Typical construction is inevitable, but it is not in the range of my interests. To start working on any object I consider it necessary to collect maximum information about it, and it is not limited to the wishes of the client: as a rule, he does not know what would be useful to inform and I have to help him in this. It is very important to study the environment, situation, background, preconditions, various indirect details, but first of all, of course, the purpose of the object, its function and the smallest nuances of this function. In general, there are a lot of components, including my mood at the time of design, each of which is able to radically change the appearance of our space of future ideals. By the way, the future is also a vague thing and is seen differently for each person (it is especially clear now in Ukraine)). Besides, I can usually say definitively what my work would look like only after I have finished working on it. As for the contribution of my work to the future, I can say that all my creative activity (not only architectural), as it seems to me, is this contribution. But the value of this contribution (naturally from my own subjective point of view) I, being a perfectionist, try to increase it relentlessly with all my might.