In 1857 a small group of architects got together to form The American Institute of Architects with the goal to promote architecture and the profession – “to promote the artistic, scientific and practical perfection of its members; to facilitate the good fellowship and intercourse of its members and to elevate the standing of the profession.” As a Fellow in the AIA, it is an ambition that I believe in; the power of what architects can bring to our communities, as well as the meaning to which we can bring as a profession to our culture and lives.
In a recent article on Forbe’s blog by Justin Shubow – “Architecture continues to implode: more insiders admit the profession is failing”, Shubow quotes the rising sentiment of critics today expressing that the profession is “increasingly incapable…of creating artful, harmonious work that resonates with a broad swath of the general population, the very people we’re, at least theoretically, meant to serve”. The AIA’s disappointing response amounted to, “Let’s stick together.” In other words, “let us remain in our bastion of piety and avoid the larger issue at hand.”
As a long standing member and Fellow in the AIA I feel compelled to contribute on this issue. There is no doubt that buildings shown in architectural journals today strike little resemblance to the world we live in. Even as an architect I hardly ever pick up a professional journal to glance through its pages, simply because I am unlikely to care about the buildings illustrated within- the buildings shown as models for our industry have no interest to me, nor anyone I know- with the exception of a few architects. Yes, I said a few. What the profession seems to celebrate among themselves are the trends of the unusual and the bizarre- the more bizarre the better. Innovation has become the profession’s god, clothed in the assumed humanistic veil of “sustainability”.
As a profession, it appears we have been misguided, for innovation, for the mere sake of novelty is meaningless- and sustainability merely fashion, if it is never to be integrated into a tradition. Tradition is in itself defined by its sustainability, since only when something is loved and accepted as meaningful to our lives could it ever become lasting and sustained. By being innovative without meaning (or at least meaning to someone other than an architect) we are doomed to be continually hitting the reset button; buildings, no matter how cool, or how technologically advanced, will be torn down to be replaced by an even cooler, more technologically advance edifices- and people won’t care. We won’t care. Our neophilia will have already taken us to the next next thing.
We should be asking ourselves how to build buildings that people care about, for that is the only way in which we can build truly sustainably. As architects, we pride ourselves as problem solvers- if something doesn’t work, we redesign until it does. I urge us to look at the larger issue at hand: what we are selling hasn’t worked. In fact, our arrogance as a profession has destroyed our reputation as the purveyors of our culture. Instead of saying, “they just don’t get it”, let us realize that we haven’t been solving the problem. We need to stop and start over- and listen. I fear if we don’t, the least sustainable thing we will have designed will be our profession as a whole.
Well Said! Thanks Michael.
Good to read this. I, too, can hardly bare to look at what’s usually published. But I do admire excellent work being done in Birmingham by architects attuned to urban context — and some of them are from Dallas!
Excellent piece, Michael… thanks! And yes, I also quit even looking inside the magazines years ago. There really needs to be an alternative publication for those who appreciate lovable architecture. It would be a lot like the best shelter mags like Southern Living, but it would be different in this regard: because it’s written for architects, planners and the like, it would be a higher level of discourse. But I suspect a lot of consumers might find it fascinating as well. It could end up being to magazines what the Nikon D610 is to cameras: a “pro-sumer” model.
It sounds like we may have found our Editor in Chief!
I’d love to have a hand in a publication like this, Michael!
What I look at most today is The Architect’s Newspaper, the online version. They publish a lot, with some regional emphasis, and a stream of projects that changes on a daily basis. Still have to wade through much absurdity, but there are worthy projects to be found. Still, there’s not a particular attempt to select projects that reflect response to place and context. It appears they have 10 or 12 regular contributors, some better than others.
Philip
Architecture is only a symptom, or, if you like, a blossom. It only flowers when the people at large have a belief system that empowers them to draw upon, to direct, and to actualize the best in human nature–as Christianity empowered the West to create all of those great ages of art and architecture that we all know about. Now that there are no beliefs there can be no institutions that can teach and produce; and now that the institutions that we have are taking the destruction of our beliefs and our traditions as their normal business we can have no architecture worthy of the name. If you want to improve architecture you must first improve the culture and the society that lives by that culture.
This is right on target. Architecture is a reflection of its creators. So much of what is currently promoted points to cultural sickness. But the good is there if we look. Calvino said “Seek and Learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of the inferno, are not inferno, then make them endure, give them space.”
~Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities. I believe that is our task.
The link to an article below is critical of 2 projects in my hometown, but speaks more broadly to the state of our profession as you have.
I agree with your assessment, and I would enjoy hearing back from you.
https://timhullihan.wordpress.com/2014/07/17/a-spoon-full-of-humility/
Thank you!!
https://timhullihan.wordpress.com/2014/07/17/a-spoon-full-of-humility/
The above link is to an article that is critical of 2 projects in my hometown, but also speaks more broadly to the state of our profession.
Thank you for your great article. More like this needs to be said.
Methinks There Is A Disturbance In The Force: Its time these all-too-familiar realities get some airing: the issue is venue: We are protestants viewed as apostates, the profession is catholic, and its in a Dark Age Fugue State of fear: we tried this: https://savedbydesign.wordpress.com/2013/10/13/cora-position-paper/ and some things happened: mostly Custom Residential Architects Network received more support from the AIA and CORA has faded into a website and eblasts from a few Jedi (mixing the metaphor)
BUT I ASK: IF TALK IS CHEAP, HOW MANY FOR ACTION?
This is really excellent and honest, Michael. It’s good to hear plain words from a Fellow of the AIA.
My profession is in a profound state of estrangement from the public it professes to serve. The fact that the Institute has found it necessary to spend millions on a slick PR campaign to convince the average person that what they do has value is very telling. Instead of reminding people to “look up”, they should look within.
Thank you, Erik. I appreciate your kind words and support. Let’s visit more about the effort with the AIA.
Thank you for the article. Very well written and what I believe to be the problem with current architecture. I just finished design school but all the way through kept wondering if it was the right profession for me because all the examples of celebrated architecture in magazines were NOT about problem solving and meeting clients/users needs but instead about novelty and what made an interesting magazine photo. Most examples of “sustainability” were fads and tech related. We all know how quickly those items become obsolete. Architects building/ designing low income neighborhoods and having no idea what people REALLY need to make a neighborhood livable. The problem solving portion is not there on so many projects. I hope to help change this.
There are more articles like this here: http://bit.ly/aiapluribus.
And a petition for the AIA here: http://bit.ly/aia-plurality
Thank you Michael !
The Bad Dog would probably send the same message if he saw the planned Nobel Centre in Stockholm: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/architecture/david-chipperfield-architects-controversial-designs-for-a-125m-nobel-center-in-stockholm-could-be-scrapped-10165752.html
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/stockholm/nobelcentret-kan-stoppas