As mentioned on this site yesterday, from now on news will form into two streams, online contents will be linked to over at Spatial Propaganda devoid of comment or opinion. The reasons for this could well be self evident, but will nether the less be subject to an article at some point. Here at the home of Disparate Magazine the news feed will be saved for comment and news on upcoming issues.
Pretty straight forward, so after one day it seems appropriate to prove the new system by linking to some interesting news stories right here.
Last year we linked to a story when Karl Sharro of Blueprint magazine responded to an article by Rowan Moore in the Guardian calling for architects to stand up for themselves – here.
At the time we stated:
“Disparate wasn’t established to provoke revolution, or even to grab the coat tails of the first one to pass by, but I do strongly agree with the sentiment that people should speak out about their opinions.”
and while that still holds true, another three interesting and related news snippets caught our attention.
First, Simon Lucas, head of education and children’s services at cost consultant EC Harris:
“This is terribly provocative but if there’s not an increasing role for architects – well, OK. After the invention of the internal combustion engine there was no longer a role for oxen-pulled ploughs. No one said, ‘Should we keep on as we are because we’ve got lots of oxen?’ That’s an incredibly unkind analogy.”
BD online subscription required.
Then we saw that education secretary Michael Gove said: “We won’t be getting Richard Rogers to design your school. We won’t be getting any ‘award-winning architects’ to design it, because no one … is here to make architects richer.” link
Fortunately Sarah Wigglesworth had a platform (as well as the inclination and fortitude) to respond.
Stating “In the hands of talented architects and good clients, design can make places more pleasant to be in, improve absenteeism and ill-health and most importantly, make communities proud.” Sarah seems to hark back to week one of undergraduate studies – but is there a shame in this when the schism between the course of modern Britain and the importance of design seems at its widest?
Well aware that a backing of architects in a general debate on their essential merits can be construed as a backing of all architecture over and above anything else we would also like to draw your attention to this blog (a blog in the true sense). A blog by a man who thinks some buildings are good, but most are bad.
Disparate is not here to find a polemic or to generate a cause, we are here to fertilise debate. Architecture, both as a career and as a practice, has a lot of problems. Many of the problems come from the outside world and are exacerbated by the profession’s inability to coherently explain and validate itself. Architecture effects every single person in the world, there is no getting away from that. Building could be cheaper without architects, but it would be even worse – no really it would.
In order for architecture to be as fulfilling to the built environment as it should it needs to respond to the its problems, but it wont be able to do this in an environment where any analysis of these problems is seen as an admission of endemic failings. The challenge ahead is to support architecture as a profession while identifying the stifling issues that distort and marginalise it’s practice.