RESEARCH 56

inadequacy of designers to relate to the layered complexity of the existing contexts in which they (now) work. The empty sheet of paper is, above all, very convenient, it has a comfortable emptiness that does not get in the way of the design of cool architecture.

In their book, the editors describe a different attitude – one that focuses on both the context and on ways of designing – rather than a method. They describe a different design practice that fits perfectly with the ‘new’ Dutch architecture that Kirsten Hannema labelled ‘Supernormal’ in A+U 592. She (also) positions this ‘other’ architecture as both the successor and the counterpart of Superdutch architecture. It is no coincidence that this particular issue of A+U presents a large number of recent projects that are all to a great extent ‘dealing with the existing reality’: with reuse and transformation.

The fact that the projects Hannema identifies in ‘her’ A+U have been in the pipeline for almost ten years indicates that she did not ‘discover’ anything new, but that a long-standing design practice is (only) now proving to have a definable coherence. The many examples given in Rewriting Architecture often go back even further and show that this ‘new attitude’ has always been present, albeit not in the (imagerich) foreground. It is another part of the practice that holds the spotlight. Somehow, the comparison with OMA/Rem Koolhaas’s recent (absurd/painful/ alienating) ‘discovery’ that there is a whole world to be found outside our metropolises comes to mind. Is this really a ‘new’ insight, or are people (finally) taking off their (intellectual) blinkers?

The emphasis on a different design practice is not only explained in interviews and essays that describe the actions, but also by exemplary projects set up by kindred spirits. There is a lot of Belgian input: the book includes interviews with architects de vylder vinck tallieu, 51N4E and Xavier de Geyter. As this is supplemented by projects by and interviews with Lacaton Vassal, Atelier Bow-Wow, Sam Jacob, Assemble and Elemental, the editors have managed to assembled a parade of contemporary (but relevant) trendsetters.

The Dutch contribution is limited and consists largely of projects by students of the Amsterdam Academy of Architecture and projects by the practices of Jarrik Ouburg (HOH architects) and Floris Alkemade (under his own name, from his collaboration with Xavier de Geyter and from his time as partner at OMA). Compared to the other projects, the editors’ own examples sometimes seem insignificant and forced. It cannot but be that they want to frame themselves as active proponents of ‘their’ attitude. Vanity sometimes seems to have taken precedence over substantiality.

The editors provide the artists, architects and activists with a generous platform to display their sensitivity to places, people and to the complex situations in which they work. Being put into practice does not reduce this to a few slick diagrams; it is explored by searching, listening, together with many others. Complexity is embraced, explored and transformed into design actions.

In contrast to the straightforward brick boxes of building blocks and/or the frenetic muscle-flaunting of architectural icons that now dominate the building production, the everyday and modest elegance of the presented projects is radical and provocative in a disarming way. They are seductive, stimulating and challenging.

However, a dilemma also presents itself, one that the editors have noticed, too. After all, doesn’t ‘working from inside reality’ also mean that one accepts reality ‘blindly’, at least in the first instance? Where does that leave the critical moment, what ideals are left to nourish the profession? What does modesty achieve? Is the propagated modesty really meant to be positive or is it, given the observed marginalization of architecture, a way of accepting one’s own powerlessness by fine words?

Rewriting Architecture does not literally say so, but the editors in fact expose the myth that architects (want to) have the capacity to tilt the world in the right direction, purely by the power of their ingenious design. It recognizes their actual powerlessness not out of resignation, but out of pragmatic idealism. It presents an attitude that, despite this actual powerlessness, does have the tools to bring about change.

Unfortunately, the editors do not start from their own strengths and cannot resist the temptation to contrast ‘their’ attitude to one of the immediate past: it is not the Superdutch attitude. That is fine as a kind of adolescent defiance of the previous generation, but it does not make the argument any stronger. Today, the Superdutch generation mainly designs shopping centres, skyscrapers and sheikhs’ toys. Surely it is clear to all that their claim – that of the self-appointed successors to the radical ideals of the early-twentieth-century avant-garde – is now empty? Making the Superdutch generation the measure of all things, Alkemade et al. are comparing apples with (rotten) pears.

Rather than identify a generational conflict, Rewriting Architecture describes an architecture with a vocabulary that has always existed, but with which the headlines have not been written in recent decades. Rewriting Architecture shifts the gaze, rearranges priorities and sets a different rather than a new agenda. This other agenda does not aspire to think reflectively/critically about reality and represent it in architecture, but to be a concrete part of it and contribute to it. Like a historical pendulum, the focus of the architecture discourse seems to move away from the universal and generic and back to the local and the specific.

No matter how beautiful, noble and ‘necessary’ this ambition perhaps is, it remains unclear how this shifted gaze facilitates the step from ‘intellectual ambition’ to an actually tangible reduction of inequality, to real affordability, to real climate adaptation, as the introductions state. Will homes become cheaper to live in if they are designed with the described attitude in mind? Will they be better insulated or offer more space for urban nature? Will they become zero-onthe-meter more quickly?

Even more than an effort to convince its audience that this other attitude is a ‘better’ way to realize these social ambitions, Rewriting Architecture is a sincere appeal to architects to relate to the challenges they work on with an inquisitive, open mind. Rejecting black-and-white thinking, the book advocates a middle course between a ‘compulsive’ avant-gardism that questions everything on the one hand, and a suffocating cuddling of what is already on the other. Both attitudes can, regardless of the architecture, result in an ‘A’ energy rating, be affordable (rather often, they are not) or result in a green roof and some obligatory birdhouses to tick the ‘nature inclusive’ box. Beyond labels and ticked boxes, the editors advocate an active, involved practice in which shades of grey can be discovered and the critical reflection on which shade of grey is the most desirable is determined in the process. Not only the product, but the practice itself has value.

‘Real’ impact on living environments can be expressed in different quantities than the ones we are used to. Not revolution, but evolution. No shock-andawe architecture, but intelligent guerrilla. By working bottom-up, from what Ouburg calls ‘the swamp’ of reality in his introduction, architecture can be more than a cynical commentary from the cultural side lines: it can once again be an active voice in society.

Floris Alkemade, Michiel van Iersel, Jarrik Ouburg, Mark Minkjan (eds.), Rewriting Architecture: 10+1 Actions/ Tabula Scripta. Valiz (2020)

This article originally appeared in Dutch on the Archined website on 2 February 2021; see archined.nl/2021/02/ tabula-scripta-een-andere-kijk-op-het-ontwerpvak/

PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT

Last year, students not only learned online rather than at the Academy, but many of them also worked in the digital domain. Experiences are mixed. Professional Experience Coordinator Nico van Bockhooven advocates a continued openness to online possibilities once the pandemic is over.

Text NICO VAN BOCKHOOVEN

In addition to their studies, students at the Academy of Architecture work in an architecture office during the day, gaining professional experience that earns them half of their credits. The conditions to which students’ work placements have to comply and the skills they have to learn there are described in the External Curriculum.¹ An appendix to this curriculum lists eight professional qualifications. These qualifications comprise four general professional qualifications (Positioning, Organizing, Interpersonal Skills and Communicating) and four professional qualifications (Enterprising, Designing, Preparation Realization Phase and Supervision, Implementation and Execution).

Students have relatively little contact with the business side of the profession. To increase the knowledge and especially the awareness of the business side of our profession among our students and to stimulate them to also discuss this side of the profession with their employers, we offer the practice module Design & Management in the third year and Design & Entrepreneurship in the fourth year. Broadly speaking, Design & Management centres on the process after a commission has been acquired, with the focus on managing the design process; Design & Entrepreneurship centres on the process before a commission is obtained, with the focus on preparing an offer.

DESIGN & ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Several years ago, Thijs Meijer proposed a lecture series on management. Thijs graduated as an architect from the Amsterdam Academy of Architecture and is fascinated by the business side, in which he has specialized. Over the years, this series has developed into the practice module Design & Entrepreneurship. The module, which focuses on the positioning of designers and on preparing (financial) offers, is a compulsory fourth-year course. The module combines theoretical input and workshops. Thijs himself, a number of workshop supervisors (Martin Frederiks, Frans Boots, Annegien van Dijk, Menno Moerman and Thijs) and various guest speakers provide theoretical input by giving short lectures. Marianne Idiarte delivers a lecture on acquisition and positioning, this year larded with a practical example of one of our alumni, David Tol. Leon Theunissen, former partner at VMX architects and currently a property developer at DubbeLL, treated this year’s students to a lecture about the relationship between client and designer. He discussed this from the client’s point of view, drawing on his experience as a property developer, and from the contractor’s point of view, drawing on his experience as a partner at VMX architects.

In this module, students work on an offer in small groups of about five people. To this end, the workshop supervisors write a tender on the basis of an anonymized and simplified real commission. The composition of the groups is as interdisciplinary as possible, mixing Landscape Architecture, Urban Design and Architecture. Each group makes an offer that pays attention to financial and organizational aspects and they also choose a position. At the end of the series, each group makes a short pitch to present the offer and the ideas behind it.

DESIGN & MANAGEMENT

Whereas Design & Entrepreneurship primarily centres on the process before a commission is obtained (positioning, acquiring, making an offer), the practice module Design & Management, which is taught in the third year, centres on the process after a commission has been acquired and on all things involved in the process of bringing it to a successful conclusion. It is not primarily about management tools, although some are discussed; the emphasis is on managing the design process. For this module, we asked Alijd van Doorn to generate content and to moderate the module.²

This module also combines theoretical input and a practice-oriented assignment. The theoretical input is provided by Alijd. In addition, this year’s edition featured a number of guest speakers who, each from their own point of view, shed light on the managing of the design process.

Dafne Wiegers is a young alumna of the Academy. She talked about her role at AHH – originally the office of Herman Herzberger – at which she became an executive partner and board member shortly after graduating. She gave the students her views on the importance of knowledge of the business side of the profession, not as a goal in itself, but in order to move forward and grow as an architect and as an office. A second alumna, Nyasha Harper-Michon, also has a special interest in the business side of the profession. She told an inspiring story about the importance of management, the heart of which was: Know what you want to do and surround yourself with people with complementary skills and tools. Garden designer and researcher Joost Emmerik’s lecture outlined how to successfully manage the design process as a solopreneur. Mathis Güller of Güller Güller Architecture Urbanism, finally, explained how he organizes and shapes large-scale urban projects and commits stakeholders to his story. He also talked about how difficult it is to do so successfully at the moment, given the limitations caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. These guest speakers illustrated Alijd’s theoretical story with a wide range of views on managing the design process.

An important part of this practice module is that the students get to work with the content themselves, under the guidance of a number of coaches (Martin Fredriks, Dick de Gunst and Chris Luth for Architecture, Leon Emmen for Landscape Architecture and Jaap Brouwer for Urban Design). In the workshops, students select a project on which they are already working at their offices. The variety of projects that the students bring to the table is substantial, from small-scale to large-scale. The plenary lectures are interdisciplinary. During the workshops, students work on assignments in disciplinary groups of approximately eight to ten people. They see each other’s work and learn from it. At the outset, we ask the students what the most important management constraints of their projects are. In a number of workshops, they subsequently make an analysis of their own project and process, looking at the influence of the brief, money, time, office organization, project organization and collaboration. Finally, they come up with improvement proposals for the process in regard to the most important management limitations.

Because students analyse projects they are working on for their employer, they also collect information from their employer. This sometimes leads to