Practice 2033
Andrew Clapham
Practice: 2033
Andrew Clapham Leeds School of Architecture 2013
Contents
Introduction
p3 p7
Todays Practice Restriction Education Solution Conscientious Revolutionary Conclusion p17 p23 p31 p37 p47 p53
Acknowledgements: Simon Warren Ian Fletcher Dr Teresa Stoppani
‘The New Architects Atlas’ by Martti Kalliala and Hans Park.
Introduc tion
There are many issues facing architecture which will force the architect’s practice to change in the future in order to adapt to what is happening within the profession and those that it serves. As the industry changes at such a fast pace and new ways of creating buildings are being devised every year, the way the architect works has had to change just as quickly. Is it possible that in 20 years time those in the profession will no longer call themselves architects, but something completely different? In the book Spatial Agency (Awan, Schneider, Till, 2011) the authors go to some length to explain why they did not want to call their book ‘Alternative Architectural Practice’ (Awan, Schneider, Till, 2011, p26), which was the original title. They argue that architecture is now a much broader profession because it encompasses so much more than what has traditionally been thought of as architecture. The original title was felt to be limiting because each of the three words had specific meanings which restricted their interpretation. For instance the word architectural implies that the book is simply referring to the design of buildings, whereas the authors are identifying many more creative answers to the use of space. However, the authors go on to show why Spatial Agency is the correct language to be used. Spatial is appropriate because it is still an architectural term, but its meaning is more open and does not force the reader to conclude that it is only describing buildings. Agency also has a wider meaning because, although it is a word that has long been used regarding architectural practice, it encompasses other professions and individuals who contribute to the design of the space that communities use. This allows freedom for designers to respond in innovative ways to the challenges of an ever changing
4
world. During the latter part of the twentieth century capitalism made rapid inroads into the western world and has spread further into developing countries. Many of the world’s leading companies have become successful through maximizing profit, often at the expense of ethical considerations. The architectural practice has been swept along by these developments, where profit is more important than the benefit of what they are building. This has made architecture a tool for the capitalists to use as a way of getting bigger returns on their investment and so turned the Master Builder into nothing more than a means to this end. The financial crisis of the last decade has meant that it has become a necessity for architects to find other means to make their practices work. This has often taken the architect out of the security of simply designing aesthetically pleasing buildings for the clients to show off and sell at the highest possible price, which Dan Hill describes as being ‘trapped in the build and sell, hit and run model of development and construction’ (Hyde, 2013, p9). It would appear that there needs to be a new approach to architectural practice, which prioritises the need for benefits to the local area. The end result has to produce something needed by the community and something that has a positive impact on the environment, locally and globally. With all the problems facing the world it has become increasingly important that the projects of the future are decided upon the area’s needs, not the value of its land. While we can understand the necessity for the practice to have an income to ensure its survival, the ethical principles
5
should always be kept in mind. Rory Hyde says, ‘the world today is defined by a constant crisis’ (Hyde, 2013, p17). By this he means we have a number of issues facing us including the environment being destroyed, the population being older than it has ever been, a banking system that only recently collapsed, more frequent natural disasters, the growing gap between the poorest and the richest in the world and a shortage in the housing available. With all of these global problems it has become vitally important that the right decisions are made in the immediate future. Lars Spuybroek identifies living in ‘an age of cuteness’ (Spuybroek, 2008, p13) as a challenge that architects must respond to. Currently the goal of many architect’s practices is to see their buildings celebrated in design magazines, such as The Architect’s Journal or Blueprint. The celebration of aesthetic design is not a problem in itself. However, this concentration on eye-catching design has often been at the expense of the building’s functionality. Due to this trend Spuybroek argues ‘what ever happened to architecture? Any observation of the current goings on in architecture, even for the shortest of moments, by the shallowest of minds, the critic most disoriented, cannot result in anything but the acknowledgement that architecture is in the most confused state it has been in decades’ (Spuybroek, 2008, p13). To emerge from this state with success will mean the architect’s practice will have to change considerably and become a more diverse industry, offering many more products than diagrams and drawings.
6
Todays Practice
For many centuries the practice of architecture, and therefore the role of the architect, scarcely changed. During the Renaissance the architects of the time designed whole cities and even regions for the ruling classes of Italy. Large areas of cities such as Florence and Milan were built from the vision of one architect. In the Middle Ages huge cathedrals were erected, which, to this day, stand guard over their neighbourhoods, designed to literally put the fear of God into those who worshiped in them. These provide the evidence that defines the historical role of the architect, independent and proud, creating from their own vivid imagination the structures that testify to their skills. They were, until relatively recently, restricted only by the limits of their own vision. Vitruvios said in his Ten Books Of Architecture ‘he who is theoretic as well as practical, is therefore doubly armed; able not only to prove the propriety of his design, but equally so to carry it into execution’ (Pollio, 2007). Historically architects have taken responsibility for every aspect of the design and completion of their projects. They began with the needs of their clients, developed designs in response to those needs, sourced the trades that were needed for construction and supervised every detail of the work, closely involved at every stage, and few restrictions were placed on their creativity. This is how the architects worked for centuries before many other professions became involved. Vitruvious also said that architects are in a profession that needs to have skills in many different areas, and this remains true to this day. However restrictions are now found at every stage and it is within these restrictions that the modern day architect must work. Designing buildings involves
8
many considerations: effect on the environment, the cost, time management, the design ideals of the client, and many rules and regulations. Governments and professional bodies, dictate these rules and regulations, which all need to be abided by, before they can put their ideas onto the computer or down on paper. If we examine the rules laid down by the UK local governments, there are planning laws to pass and then building regulations Dubai that need to be complied with. Within these regulations are conservation considerations, equality laws, fire regulations and structural models that all have to be adhered to by the architect. Architects now rely on other professionals not only to get the knowledge but also to give themselves protection from the issues that arise due to the contracts that have to be used. The idea that the architect is the mediator and takes control of the build is diminishing not only with the influx of management companies dealing with the creation of cities, but also due to a trend, where design and build procurement is now becoming more popular. In the UK, design and build has risen from being below 10% in the 1980s to now having a share of more than 40% in private builds and between 25-35% of all public sector work. It has become more popular because it calculates the price of the building in the
9
initial stages of the design. This gives the client a sense of security and a workable budget, although, because prices have been seen, it can later create conflicts with some of the parties involved. The risk of it going over the cost originally set is high and this can then cause problems with the contracts that have been agreed. Any one of the parties involved could end up losing money, having their ideas not realised because of poor communication between the client and designer, and there is the possibility that the materials might not be as good as originally expected. Architects have been fighting with the problems that were created during post war developments, when they were charged with the planning of towns and cities, and the blame for any failure was attributed to their profession. This is one reason for the decline in the public’s opinion of architects. This has led to a lack of trust in the profession from those responsible for the commissioning of further work, and architects must now find a way to redeem themselves. Otherwise, why should the training in urban design received at university go to waste once working in practice? Architects are taught to look at the wider context of their designs, so why, when they go into practice, are they constrained to consider only the area in the client’s brief? The impact on the wider neighbourhood should influence the final design. Bruce Mau is a designer who has worked with Rem Koolhaas, and he thinks that ‘this obsession with the boundary has constrained the capacity of architecture right at the moment when it’s so important to extend beyond it’ (Hyde, 2013, p30). Mau also has
10
Mau’s theory: ‘From the world of design, to the design of the world.
a repositioning theory: ‘From the world of design, to the design of the world’, shown on the previous image, in which he states design is about more than having a building in the end, it is about designing the future of the area. This means that today architecture has been reduced to a profession that deals with the diagrams, drawings and graphs for the clients to then present to the authorities for planning permission. The diagram is the most important tool for an architect because they have the training to use them to convey the information required which other professions lack. It is this ability to produce diagrams which ensures that the architect’s practice is still able to be an important part of the construction industry. There is no doubt that the knowledge of the architect is more comprehensive than simply creating diagrams, but this is often the limit of what they are asked to do in order to generate a profit for their practice. With the help of new technologies architects no longer just rely on the drawings and have the capabilities of generating diagrams and can relay lots of information in one image or table. Ben Van Berkel and Caroline Bos describe diagrams as ‘best known and understood as visual tools used for the compression of information’ (Jencks and Kropf, 2007, p325). This skill is something that the architect’s practice relies on and if it became a thing of the past then they will be in trouble. This is another reason why the question raised in this thesis needs to be asked. What will architects do as a profession to combat the shrinking need for what they learn during their education? They need to become a far more versatile professional and this needs to be embedded into them from the start of their
13
education. Diagrams are important but that cannot be all an architect is commissioned to do. It is also important to consider the immediate future of the architect’s practice. The innovative members of the profession have already started to branch out beyond their own national boundaries, especially into countries that are developing more quickly in economic terms, because it is estimated that the emerging countries will be commissioning 55% of all construction by the year 2020. The Building Futures report claims that ‘architects will need to develop greater financial nous and commercial acumen’ (Jamieson, 2011, p35), by using the rise in these developing countries as a means of expanding their practices. Small and medium sized firms have started to look for work in these areas. Some practices have been forced in this direction because the opportunities for work at home have become rarer in the current economic climate. Other practices are proactively seeking new opportunities. Many new technologies have begun to make the practices an easier place to work with BIM (Building Information Modelling) being a good example. It is intended that BIM will change the construction industry, bringing the different
Building Information modeling (BIM).
14
sectors closer together. As shown in the diagram all aspects of the construction industry can benefit from access to BIM. However, as far as the future is concerned, this will only be a good thing if architects continue to work as they do presently, but there are many issues facing the architect’s practice which are more important than the ability to use this software. Obviously there is a need for better communication in the construction industry, but the question is; will the industry be working this way in 20 years? This is unlikely to be the case, as the direction being taken by these innovative members of the profession are likely to lead architects away from the current design and build model into a profession based more on consultancy and design. With this in mind it can only be assumed that the future of architecture will be determined by those designers with the foresight to develop new strategies to move them beyond diagrams and more into the development of solutions for the crises highlighted by Rory Hyde earlier in the text (Hyde, 2013, p17).
15
Restric tion
Opposite: King Abdullah’s master-plan for his economic city
In the opinion of many, the architecture profession has remained stagnant at a time when change is necessary. Indeed, Detlef Martins would go further. He is on record as saying that architecture is at ‘the same point as 200 years ago’ (Spuybroek, 2006, p13). He claims that there are no styles that can be associated with a new form of architecture. Without the development of new styles there is nothing to show the direction in which architecture is moving. It seems that, increasingly, all that matters to many practices is the bottom line of profit margins. The aim is the creation of something the world will see as ‘beautiful’ without needing to put a great deal of thought or effort into the functionality of the design. The photos in architectural magazines are seen as of primary importance, aiming to impress others especially potential clients, with the beauty of the design. The limited money that clients are presently prepared to invest in design means that the aesthetics swallow a high proportion of this work and limit the time that can be spent on the functional design of the spaces within buildings. The clients have now started using accountants and financial advisers who now have the say over what can and cannot be built on their sites. There are areas in the Middle East where they are spending tens of
18
billions of dollars on the creation of new cities. These rich regions do not ask architects to create their visions anymore. Unlike the Renaissance families that asked architects like Brunelleschi to create new places in the cities, the modern way to do this is to ask management consultants to come in and take over every aspect of the projects. King Abdullah is currently creating an economic city where the cost will be $60 billion and the group running this is McKenzie, a consultancy firm. The architects role is slowly being taken over by similar consultancy firms for these big projects, and this is reducing architecture to a profession that has training that is far above the level they are able to use simply to design the exterior of a building to create something that fits the clients remit. The thinking architect is becoming extinct. The issue is, instead of standing up and being counted, the profession is just allowing these things to happen. Architects with any nous or passion to keep this important aspect of what architects are trained to do, will be out selling themselves as ‘management consultants’, which is what Todd Reisz has managed to do in Dubai and the Gulf area. The reason that the management consultants are being used is quite a sensible one. They look at a city in terms of its economic value, and how the economics would generate it to be viable. It is understandable that the affluent monarchies of the Middle East are not choosing to employ architects. Architects look at the world in a way that is about scale, but the way forward is to start understanding how to convey the vision of scale and show how it would be economically valuable. Architects have not done this though. They have just been complaining to their peers and allowing
19
the profession to turn into what it has become. The resentment towards the other professions has been created because structural engineers and urban designers have taken over some of the architect’s roles. This has then created a situation where architects no longer are in control. They have had to then compete with each other to get the work.
Total number of architects employed on AJ100 as of Dec 2011
The result of this competition within the profession has been that the price that they have had to quote has been gradually reducing. The local authorities have a lot of responsibility for this and it is they who are constrained to commission the architects with the lowest tender. Steve Ashton of ARM says that local authorities ‘are notorious for running architect selection process exactly like they run a process for buying stationery’ (Hyde, 2013, p123). This is a problem for the architecture industry, and they are squeezing their margins as far as they can, in a time when practices are struggling. The number of architects working in the UK has fallen by almost 2000 since 2007. The squeezing of contracts by the clients to find the cheapest practice makes the margins on the jobs low, which limits the time the architect has to spend on a project. The practice needs to look at keeping their margins at the
20
maximum, so they do not lose money. Consequently, this has meant the design phase is now restricted. The processes that involve regulations, which have to be carried out to comply with the law, cannot be dropped from a project, so, if the architect has to keep the time for the areas that they could be sued for, then the design is not a priority anymore. Ashton thinks they get away with this as ‘most clients can’t tell whether you’ve cut design’ (Hyde, 2013, p123). Architects in the UK spend much of their 7 years as a student concentrating on design and it is the first thing they have given up in order to make money on a project! Another problem the architect faces is sticking to the Plan of Work that has been set out by the RIBA as a way for the architects to be paid for each part completed. Practices have had to carry on working to the RIBA’s Plan of Work in order to get paid. Therefore, an architect cannot get paid for the job they are doing before getting to a certain point along the process. This has been the case for over 50 years and a lot of new regulations have been implemented by the government, which have made the document outdated. Because it has become outdated, and because it is linked to contracts that are already restricting the way architects are able to act with the fellow professionals, it can cause many issues to those that are trying to find ways to cut costs or gain the costs back. This links back to the complaint about the number of consultants that have been involved in architecture recently. To combat this, there has to be a collective decision within the profession to make design the
21
most important thing again. ‘The more architects that get more discerning and tougher about those sorts of decisions, the better off all architects will be’ (Hyde, 2013, 123) says Steve Ashton, and I believe he is right. Their skills far outweigh what these projects now offer architects to work on. As Todd Reisz said ‘the architect can talk about the details on a chair right up to the expounding on Mumbai, the scale is limitless’ (Hyde,2013, p159). As architects, it is their responsibility to reclaim these skills and once again make them a part of their job description.
22
Educa tion
The way the profession prepares and educates those who aspire to become architects is of prime importance, and I believe there is room for development in this area. Currently, the aim is to produce practicing architects who can design a building by looking through research from the surrounding area, and make a design philosophy from it. However, in my opinion, what it should be doing is creating architects, who have skills to apply themselves to a wider variety of products within a practice. A new course has been created in the Strelka Institute in Moscow, of which one of the tutors, Reinier de Graaf, when asked by Rory Hyde; ‘what kind of architects are you going to produce?’ (Hyde, 2013, p61) replied, ‘I’m not sure you could say we’re going to create architects... It’s a school for Media, Architecture and Design’. They aim to use research as a way of generating design, as opposed to teaching design as a skill. The projects do not require a building to be created at the end, only a conclusion to be made. This way of teaching will produce students with a creative side, formed from the knowledge they have gained, and even qualified architects take up the course to gain this skill, as they feel they are lacking it in their approach to design. In the RIBA criteria, a building needs to be formed at the end of the brief, though it may not always be what the area needs. The area might need to be provided with something physical, but it might simply need an event involving the whole community. As Cedric Price said ‘the addition of a building is not necessarily the best solution to a spatial problem and that there are other ways of making a spatial difference’ (Awan, Schneider, Till, 2011, p31). If there is a need to
24
create something then it should not be restricted. Like the practice, the university is required by the ‘client’ (RIBA) to meet the set requirements it feels are what the role of an architect involves. Mel Dodd from muf_aus is an architect who does not believe there should be boundaries to the definition of architecture. She designed a bench in a deprived area in Victoria and it was a complete success for the whole community. She states ‘I just enjoy not having an explicit boundary of which is considered architecture’ The Diorama Bench Western Reserve of Hastings (Hyde, 2013, p77). The Victoria, Austrailia Diorama Bench is there to create a community garden and is the beginning of a park they can develop for themselves. It has given the community a place of engagement for all ages. It is what the community needed; it did not need a building to be commissioned. The education of architects has become as outdated as the architect’s practices themselves. It has become increasingly important that students are produced with an ethical approach to their work. Just as a qualified architect would need to allow himself to think about whether a place needs what the client is asking for, I believe the student has to be able to decide whether a building is the ideal solution to the location designated within the school’s brief. It seems
25
narrow minded of the student and the RIBA to think otherwise. Fashid Moussavi said in a speech at the V & A, referring to needy areas of the world, such as Haiti, ‘it’s quite telling that Harvard students, when they want to be activists, have to go to these areas of the world. It’s tougher to be an activist in America.’ (Klettner, 2011). Her conclusion highlights the fact that the students restrict their responses by making prior assumptions of an area’s needs. She claims that there are places in America that need help just as much as these global areas. There are also areas in the UK that need help and the students should be looking closer to home to see the issues that are encountered in their local communities. As much as Haiti was an area that needed assistance, and there should be help given, a disaster should not be the influence behind a student wanting to help. The education system should be transferring knowledge of the surrounding world and letting the students see what differences they can make on a micro scale. A tutor, Liam Young, at the Architecture Association (AA) has set up Unknown Fields Division. He wants the students to learn about the world’s problems by going and seeing them. What they learn shouldn’t be wasted on creating buildings. He said, after a trip to Alaska: We can watch a discussion on the BBC, and we can examine it through data, or we can go out there and see the glaciers melting, the snow turning yellow from acid rain, and the Inuit populations and their hunting practices. Travelling to these sites allows us to see the real effects on culture and its way of life. (Hyde, 2013, p223)
26
Unknown Fields Division’s trip to Alaska
Going to these places gives the student a better perspective of what the future of the world will be and allows them to transfer this into their future roles in architecture. As the novelist Marcel Proust says, ‘the real voyage of discovery consists in not seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes’ (Hyde, 2013, p232). It is important to give students the skills which relate to what they should be designing for the future conditions. It also helps the emerging architects not only to use research as a tool to help them design a building, but to use it as the basis of consultancy, which can be a means in its own right to bring income into the practice. The idea of consultancy is a concept that, currently, is wasted on most practicing architects. Speculative projects are something that the profession has been applying itself to, but they always have a built form at the end of it. Young also set up a think tank called Tomorrows Thoughts Today, in which he uses the research and speculation as a way to generate money. He sees himself as someone who brings in people from many areas, including science and technology, which creates a dynamic team of many talents. ‘It’s a sort of ‘post-bust’ office model that is less connected with the economy of building, but more connected with the industry, technology, ecology or development’ (Hyde, 2013, p229). This means he can use his skills to create a cash flow for his business that is from consultancy alone.
29
Solut ion
There are many architects, designers and practices that are leading the way for the new generation of thinkers. These are working on what has been called the Edge of Architecture in Rory Hyde’s book Future Practice. In this book he has conversations with many different architects, designers and academics working, in his view, on the edge of architecture and the book is defined by Dan Hill as a ‘lassoing together of people and arranging them to define an edge of architectural practice, from both within and without the profession.’ (Hyde, 2013, p7). It is interesting to think that a practice on the edge of architecture cannot be established by consulting only architects. As previously mentioned, one of the reasons for the problem is the RIBA’s Outline Plan of Work, which restricts architects in what they can charge and when they get paid for their work. As a designer these contracts and agreements with the clients and contractors are a lot less restrictive. Being able to create your own contracts with a client enables both parties to be free thinking, and can become a way of getting the best out of the work. Until this problem has been looked into and a way has been found to make the Plan of Work less restrictive, there cannot be a new way of working in the practice. Architects have found ways around this and used their practices to follow their own principles. The Ashton Raggatt McDougall (ARM) practice has found a way to create their contracts which have turned out to be very successful. They see the contractual agreement as a way to extend their design ideas, making each contract specific for the project it is for. Steve Ashton thinks ‘a contract is just an agreement between two parties. At heart it is no more complicated than that.’
32
(Hyde, 2013, p115). He also thinks, if the design is becoming hindered by the contract, then it should be ripped up and a new one created to help with this. Conventional architect’s contracts are responsible for issues that develop as the Plan of Work progresses: the cost grows to exceed the original expectations or the design does not satisfy the client. As Ashton says in his conversation with Hyde; ‘the real issue is having the project framework set up properly, and by framework I don’t mean contract – I mean is it clear what people want to achieve? Can they afford what they want to achieve? Is the timeline realistic? Those are the real guts of a project’ (Hyde, 2013, p116). If the parties met and worked this out over a number of consultations or over a longer period of time, this then would give both parties a greater understanding of what each of them can achieve and what they want to have as an end result. This also creates a tighter agreement, with each party fully understanding what they are getting into and how it will operate as the project develops; a mutual trust will have been created. This trust is only going to benefit all parties involved and will enhance the design through everyone being happy. The contract that has been created will not become the focus of discussion because it would not be the most important thing when all parties are happy, ‘we’re not lawyers, we’re just architects. What we know how to do is make really good buildings and that’s what we should do’ (Hyde, 2013, p121). It has also been mentioned that the architect needs to become better at competing with the consultants, and move away from simply making the diagrams to sell a project to the client and authorities.
33
This is already happening with the architects that have the foresight to see that they can bring more to the table than the consultants, and Todd Reiz has seen architects using a similar contract to the ones a consultant would ask a client to sign.
Low2No competion winner
There are architects that have used their knowledge to influence the policies of their governments. Low2No is a group of visionaries that have come together to bring back the Helsinki Design Lab (HDL). The members of HDL, Marco Steinberg, Justin Cook, Bryan Boyer and Dan Hill have sought to help the government of Finland solve the issues they it faces, including: the aging population, making the country more sustainable and increasing the quality of education. It is also important to note that Finland tops most tables for the best place in the world to live, and having these consultants working in their country will keep them ahead of the game. I believe that this is something most places should try to follow. The team has outlined a number of key objectives and some of them, when first suggested, would not be able to be implemented in Finland; one of these being the use of timber in their high rise building construction. This was not allowed until the team said ‘there’s this thing happening, it’s
34
going to be here in 2015, and if you don’t get your act together you’re going to miss out.’ (Hyde, 2013, p145). This then gave the authorities something to think about and they were able to revise the regulations on timber construction. Letting architects back into controlling the future of the building industry can only be a good thing. As mentioned, the architect is a professional that has the ability to look at things on a small scale but also on a global scale. However, Bryan Boyer of HDL thinks they also consider the ‘finite things like gravity and cost, with the soft incalculable cultural aspects, like aesthetics and opinions of a community’ (Hyde, 2013, p140). Thinking about the impact of architecture on a community is an important part of the architect’s job description. For too long the architect’s have allowed themselves to become a profession that allows clients to think about the capital that can be gained from the site they have chosen, rather than what the site actually needs. There are architects that have design principles that ensure they think about these aspects before they design anything. Architects practice 00:/ is London based and is prepared to offer the client advice at policy level. They also like to use their expertise to then help the client have a better understanding of their business, with advice on how they can move Hub Collective by 00:/
35
forward. Using this philosophy they developed the Hub Collective which aims to help deliver a ‘global network of innovative workplaces for social entrepreneurs’ and is creating an ‘organisational and spatial model for encouraging small-scale community businesses’ (Awan, Schneider, Till, 2011, p86). The Hub Collective has been a massive success and has given the practice the reputation to be able to attempt new ideas like the way they have worked with the Marylebone Free School, which uses the principle of bringing unused or partially unused buildings back into use. For example: they identified a cafe that only occupied the ground floor but left the upper floor as wasted space. They have suggested that this could be developed as the canteen for the free school. There was also a cinema that was only in use during the evening, but they advised that it could be used as the place for the schools morning assembly. Innovations like this are ideas that the industry would do well to learn from. Cedric Price said ‘the addition of a building is not necessarily the best solution to a spatial problem and there are other ways of making a spatial difference’ (Awan, Schneider, Till, 2011, p31). If all architects were to bear this in mind when considering the needs of a client then perhaps the profession would be taking a step towards a more innovative future.
36
Conscien tious
Not only does the architect need to look at generating new ways to bring money into their practice; they need to consider how they are affecting the world. This involves not only reacting to the government’s targets, such as getting the country to a certain level for being ‘green’, but they should be leading the way in setting their own targets to influence the policies of government within the projects they are involved with. It is a well known fact that the population of the earth is growing at a rate which would seem to be unsustainable with predictions that over the next 50 years it will have risen by 46% and 70% of the population will be living in the urban areas (Jamieson, 2009, p1). There is a very real danger that there will no longer be the space needed for the resources required to sustain this growth. The land that is available on earth cannot be taken for granted and looking towards the future of construction, this situation is going to become ever more important. The way that architects are used to looking at a project now involves getting a job from a client with a specific site and being told what the client wants on that site. They then design the projects to the clients liking and their role is to get it through planning and construction phases. The client will usually be putting these projects forward because it will be a benefit to the economy of the area somehow and make a profit. Woulter Vanstiphout says ‘designs are being produced, which have no relationship to actual buildings, but it’s even that the buildings that are being produced have no relationship to actual needs’ (Hyde, 2013, p94). If the buildings are not being designed for their purpose how can they be designed for the wider global problems we face? This is not ethical architecture. Architects need to look into the
38
Peter Guenzel, London 2005, Volvo Magazine.
way they work and decide what impact the building will have on the site, community, town and also the world. Based on Mau’s critical repositioning of design (‘from the world of design to the design of the world’ (Hyde, 2013, p31)) architects should be considering the future problems of the world when developing their designs. Too many global problems have become evident in the last century for architectural design to be restricted to a small scale. When Mau was asked by Hyde; ‘should we feel guilty if we are just designers?’ he responded, ‘I think we should, actually. I mean, I think architects should feel guilty in the same way that a philosopher would feel guilty if they were working without thinking’ (Hyde, 2013, p34). If guilt exists it should come from knowing that designers are capable of doing better. Architecture is one of only a few professions that have the capacity to think outside the box regarding these issues. However there is little evidence to suggest that they are prepared to address this situation. Hyde thinks: On one hand, the rhetoric at the moment seems to be ‘crisis’ – the financial crisis, the environmental crisis, the crisis of social cohesion, the ageing crisis – but then on the other hand, the greatest solution seems to be urban farming. (Hyde, 2013, p95)
Clearly the limited reaction cannot provide the answer to such a large scale problem. Mau thinks the first step is to design in sympathy with nature and thinks there needs to be a ‘Massive Change’, the name that he has given to his project. He wants there to be a change in the way we look at design, seeking not to influence political or economic climates, but simply using design as a means to improve the experience of ordinary
41
Manhattan skyline New York City
people. He does not see it as a utopian response; he sees it as a necessary and immediate reaction to the needs of the world. Half the world’s population now live in cities and this situation is only going to get worse. This is only going to be solved by intelligent thinking by architects and urban planners. Patrick Moore said ‘we need to draw lines in the ground and say ‘the concrete stops here’ (Mau, 2004, p37). That forces people to build in and up rather than out. There is a great need for a discussion to be had on how urban planning should promote the idea that space is becoming tight, and thought should be put into what is built in the unused spaces of towns and cities, and the spaces that are not used in already existing buildings. Michael McDonough claims that the most environmentally efficient place on the planet is Manhattan. Because of its density and the inability to sprawl they have had to build upward and this creates less of an impact on the ground. It also means people live and work in close proximity and creates less need for a two car family and it even becomes possible for families to exist comfortably with no car at all. This seems to be a solution to the problem. Unfortunately, expansion through sprawl is still happening in cities around the world. This creates an ethical responsibility for an architect’s practice. The notion that a city can just grow outward appears ridiculous. This once again is where architects need to take back the reins from the local governments. If architects are talking to each other about the problem of urban sprawl, and not then turning around to the rest of the population and explaining that this idea is going to have negative effects, then they are neglecting their ethical obligation
43
to design for the wider communities that this sprawl will affect. It is the obligation of an architect’s practice to ensure that the public respect their opinions and trust the profession. The architect’s practice has been walking on the boundary of ethics for some time. Aesthetics has become the most important thing and the idea that the practice could be published in a magazine is something they all strive for. This is obviously an achievement, but is what they built ethical for its surroundings? One example, which is one of the most important and revered buildings of the modernist’s era, is the Guggenheim, New York. Frank Lloyd Guggenheim Museum Frank Lloyd Wright Wright designed New York this building giving priority to it’s appearance, but the inside is not an ideal space for the art gallery. ‘Despite its beauty, the Guggenheim must be judged a failure because it simply does not work for the intended purpose’ (Spector, 2001, p103). This type of pluralist architecture is unethical. If we look beyond whether the building was needed in that location, Lloyd Wright still designed something that put form before functionality. The debate that is created when it comes to form before function is one that architects are keen to have, but, in a time when every resource has to be considered, this debate does not take the profession forward. As the ethical boundaries of architecture become increasingly
44
important these types of ideologies will have a negative effect on the profession. Architects need to consider how they are currently designing, so that in the future they do not have the same problem as the 1970s, to which people now look back and see how the designing of the brutalist towers only created problems. There is a danger that the mistakes of that era could be repeated and future generations could look back and blame the thoughtlessness of today’s architects who abandoned their ethical values to create buildings and spaces that were not needed.
45
Revoluti onary
Working, as these designers do on the ‘edge of architecture’ can provide many benefits. There are few restrictions to limit their designs and they have complete control over the outcome of their projects. Because these restrictions are few, it then creates an opportunity for people that have the community spirit and the will to be an activist to their cause. As mentioned earlier, it is not just buildings that can change a space, so a designer that has the knowledge of what an area needs already has an advantage. Architects like to do their research and attempt to understand communities. This is because the community is of prime importance to the site they have been given. With this in mind the architect would do well to listen to those who represent that community. There are designers other than architects who have been able to achieve what could be considered to be the future of the practice, and the lack of restriction has given them the freedom to achieve good design. These designers, who are considered to be urban activists, are engaged in making change in many areas of the world. These are people that the future practice should look towards as inspiration to what can be done when considering their attitude to design. This was shown in an exhibition called ‘Actions: What you can do with a city’. There, 99 different interventions were exhibited that showed how a small change or a single person can produce a big difference in open spaces. Camila Bustamante is one of these urban activists. She wanted to make a difference in her home city of Lima. After qualifying as a graphic designer in Amsterdam she returned and initiated a chain of events that would bring about the resurrection of a part-built overhead railway system that had halted construction. She calculated that at the current rate
48
Poster for the Lima 2427 campaign
of construction it would be completed by the year 2427. Her response was to create stickers and posters that were then placed around the city. This provoked pressure from the press, which eventually ensured that the railway is now on course for completion in 2014. The railway will connect the poorest regions of the city, and not only generate jobs but will give those in these areas better connections for their futures. Bustamante thinks that ‘transportation is a very good layer to view how a country deals with democracy, human rights and the equality of people’ (Hyde, 2013, p106). In this way she made a difference on an urban scale and this should encourage the architecture profession to attempt change through design in unconventional ways. Another example of this is Marcus Westbury, who is the founder of Renew Newcastle. He approached the challenge of changing the community he grew up in through a series of interventions. He was so successful in this, that he has become a consultant and other communities now seek his advice. Hopefully this can inspire architects to take on a similar role. He describes himself as a ‘part frustrated Renew Newcastle shop for let. architect, part undercapitalised property developer, part town planner, of fictional utopias, part the most petty of petty developers’ (Hyde, 2013, p169). He got involved with the community in his street, which had been gradually in decline and where the shops were now empty. By confronting the landlords and generating interest from
50
potential tenants, he changed attitudes to the area, which is now a place which artists, designers and other creative people occupy. The street now has a vibrant atmosphere, populated by people with similar interests where they can meet and socialise. Architects need to be inspired by these examples. It is not enough to respond meekly to the instructions of clients who approach and ask for a development in a given area because of the capital that can be gained from it. They need to address these important issues and ensure that they are central to the designs they generate. Using the knowledge they have gained during their education, and through experience, they are in a unique position to influence the design of communities, liaising with others who have responsibility for town planning.
51
Conclu sion
The world in which an architect finds himself is no longer what it was. The Master Builders of the past were given the freedom to design without restrictions and this in no longer the case. Mistakes made in the post war era have eroded the trust of those who commission designers. Globally, financial crises have limited the money available to those responsible for building. Increasingly, design has been restricted by planning laws and building regulations. Consultancy firms and new professions have moved in on some of the areas that architects once monopolised, and the RIBA Plan of Work can be seen as a further negative issue when architects seek to compete with other designers. Those responsible with the education of those who set out to be the architects of the future are not taking into account the changes these issues will force on the profession. Currently, most of the designs produced in an architect’s practice are diagrams for other professions to work from. These diagrams are usually a response to a detailed plan that has already been put in place by those who have produced the briefs. The future of the architects practice is not to do what they are asked, but to go out and use their knowledge, which has been gained over centuries. Over the next 20 years architects will need to be much more proactive in order to reclaim the trust and respect they previously had. If the industry has the foresight to see where it should be heading, then it will see changes,
54
including more control over the projects, input into how the cities of the future should be formed, questioning the current problems in the local communities as well as the wider world, consulting on many local and global issues and most importantly getting back more influence on the industry it once inspired. The industry has to reclaim these areas through the changes in education too. This is the most important change for the future architect’s practice because the students of the future need to bring with them the knowledge and skills that they gained in education, which the current practice does not take advantage of. The skills such as research and communication are essentials in the future practice. The diagrams that they create can be a thousand words. Innovative practices are already developing responses to the issues above. They are redesigning the approach to contracts and are responding to the global issues that the world faces. They have a much more proactive approach to involvement in the earlier stages of consultation and are increasingly proving that they are able to compete with the management firms that have currently taken over much of the architect’s original role. The architect’s practice of the future needs to understand that they must only be building places that are needed within the environment, and when asked to do so should be able to come up with what is needed there and advise on how it will help the area. Population is going to grow by 46% and this will see 70% of people in the future living in cities and towns. Space is
55
going to become more and more important, not only for living, but for the feeding of the huge population. Earth is struggling and the future architect’s practice is going to have to come up with ways to help her. This is a responsibility that the profession cannot afford to ignore. The future architect’s practice needs to be vastly different from the model they now use. They need to seize the reins and drive the industry forward rather than allowing themselves to be dictated to by others. This requires a U-turn in the attitudes within the profession Cedric Price once said to an arguing couple ‘it’s not a house you need, it’s a divorce.’ He had concluded that whatever he designed for them, he could not provide them with a secure future. In the same way if the problems within the profession are ignored and the future is not taken in to account then the same problems will remain. There are many lessons we can learn from the designers working on the ‘edge of architecture’.
56
Bibliog raphy
Awan, N. Schneider, T. Till, J. (2011) Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture. Oxon: Routledge. Berkel, B, V. Bos, C. (2nd ed., 2006) ‘Diagrams.’ In Jencks, C. Kropf K. (eds) Theories And
Manifestations of The Contemporary Architecture. Chichester: Wiley- Academy.
Bdonline. (2012) ‘Is The RIBA Right to Overhaul its Plan of Work?’ [Internet] <http://www.bdonline. co.uk/comment/debate/is-the-riba-right-to overhaul-its-plan-of-work?/5045665. article>[Accessed 29th May 2013]. Gov.uk. (2013) ‘Planning Permission’ [Internet] <https://www.gov.uk/planning-permission- england-wales> [Accessed 20th May 2013]. Hunter, W. (2012). ‘Alternative Routes for Architecture’ [Internet]. <http://www.architectural-review. com/essays> [Accessed 30th January 2013]. Hyde, R. (2013) Future Practice: Conversations From The Edge of Architecture. New York: Routledge. Jamieson, C. (2010). The Future For Architects? London: RIBA. Mau, B. (2004) Massive Change: And The Institute Without Boundaries. London: Phaidon Press Limited.
58
Mertins, D. (2008) ‘Foreword.’ In (eds) Brouwer, J. Mulder, A. Martz, L. The Architecture Of Continuity: Essay And Conversations. Rotterdam: V2_Publishing. Moussavi, F. Zaera- Polo, A. (2nd ed., 2006) ‘On Instruments: Diagrams, Drawing and Graphs.’ In Jencks, C. Kropf K. (eds) Theories And manifestations Of The Contemporary Architecture. Chichester: Wiley- Academy. Jencks, C. (2nd ed., 2006) ‘Introduction.’ In Jencks, C. Kropf K. (eds) Theories And manifestations Of The Contemporary Architecture. Chichester: Wiley- Academy. Klettner, A. (2011) ‘Moussavi: Working in The Third World Is ‘easy option’’ [Internet] <http:// www.bdonline.co.uk/news/moussavi- working-in-the-third-world-is %E2%80%98easy option%E2%80%99/5028382.article> [Accessed 3rd May 2013]. Spector, T. (2001) The Ethical Architect: The Dilemma of Contemporary Practice. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Spuybroek, L. (2008) ‘Experience, Tectonics and continuity.’ In Brouwer, J. Mulder, A. Martz, L. (eds) The Architecture of Continuity: Essay And Conversations. Rotterdam: V2_Publishing.
59
Spuybroek, L. (2008) ‘The Structure Of Vagueness.’ In Brouwer, J. Mulder, A. Martz, L. (eds) The
Architecture Of Continuity: Essay And Conversations. Rotterdam: V2_Publishing.
Architecture Of Continuity: Essay And Conversations. Rotterdam: V2_Publishing.
Spuybroek, L. (2008) ‘Machining Architecture.’ In Brouwer, J. Mulder, A. Martz, L. (eds) The
Spuybroek, L. (2008) ‘Textile Tectonics.’ InBrouwer, J. Mulder, A. Martz, L. (eds) The Architecture Of Continuity: Essay And Conversations. Rotterdam: V2_Publishing. Spuybroek, L. (2008) ‘The Aesthetics Of Variation.’ In Brouwer, J. Mulder, A. Martz, L. (eds) The
Architecture Of Continuity: Essay And Conversations. Rotterdam: V2_Publishing.
Tether, B. (2012) ‘Analysis and Data’ [Internet].<http:// www.architectsjournal.co.uk/confirmation?rtn=/ aj100-2012/aj100-analysis-and-data/8630372. article> [Accessed 29th May 2013]. Pollio, M, V. (2007) ‘De Architectura, Book 1’ [Internet].<http://penelope.uchicago.edu/ Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Vitruvius/1*. html>[Accessed 14th May 2013].
60
Imag es
http://ryanpanos.tumblr.com/post/34775633589/thearchitectss-new-atlas-by-martti-kalliala-and Page 1 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/sunandsea/9989808/ Heat-seeking-Dubai.html Page 9 https://www.facebook.com/FuturePractice/photos_ stream Page 11 http://www.arq-e-tec.com/2010/01/bim-archicad-vsrevit-vs-vectorworks/ Page 14 http://www.kingabdullahcity.com/about/master-plan Page 16 http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/ Journals/2012/05/16/r/a/u/Total-number-of-architects. pdf Page 18 xfieldexhibit.wordpress.com/exhibition-2/ Page 23 http://www.unknownfieldsdivision.com/?/blog/?cat=20 Page 25 http://www.bustler.net/index.php/article/winning_entry_ of_finlands_low2no_competition_c_life/ Page 32 http://www.spatialagency.net/database/why/ political/n.00 Page 33 http://artificialorder.wordpress.com/page/2/ Page 37 http://stateinthereal.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/ nyc001.jpg Page 39 http://jameshowephotography.com/blog/2013/02/ guggenheim-museum-fisheye.html/ Page 42
62
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1655947 68974.150758.153356798974&type=3 Page 45
63
What ever happened to architecture? Any observation of the current goings on in architecture, even for the shortest of moments, by the shallowest of minds, the critic most disoriented, cannot result in anything but the acknowledgement that architecture is in the most confused state it has been in decades. Lars Spuybroek
Andrew Clapham Leeds School of Architecture 2013