Old Guard and Young Guns
A teaser for the upcoming film Archiculture. The official trailer, which debuted in New York last night, will be available at a later date. (Teaser from arbuckle industries on Vimeo.)
.
Last night, in the double-height space of the Center for Architecture’s basement, six panelists gathered to discuss the present and future of the profession in a conversation titled “Architecture Education vs. Professional Practice.” The roundtable discussion was inspired by the film Archiculture—a feature-length documentary by Ian Harris, who also moderated the discussion, and David Krantz—and it concluded with its trailer. (A catered party, with a DJ and live band followed.)
Archiculture, which should premier next summer, follows five architecture students during their final semester at school. From the look of it, the film is concerned as much with the personal decisions of its protagonists as the wider implications of those decisions: namely, what it means to practice architecture today, and the successes and shortcomings of academia in preparing students for the professional world. Krantz punctuated the discussion with short clips from the movie, and those snippets helped instigate a conversation that began with the role of technology in the profession and ended with a review of the job market and its implication for new graduates.
On the panel were the architects Billie Tsien and Gregg Pasquarelli, the educators Ted Landsmark and Bill Morrish, and Giancarlo Tramontozzi and Dionysios Neofitidis, two of the students interviewed in the film. The discussion covered some expected territory (Frank Gehry, Revit, green building) and some slightly less familiar ground (politicized architecture—Pasquarelli, his tongue in cheek, proposed an architects’ lobby in Washington). Not surprisingly, Landsmark, the president of Boston Architectural College, and Morrish, the dean of Parsons the New School for Design, both criticized the academic accreditation process and an architectural licensing process they agreed was “obsolete.” Both also outlined what they saw as positive developments in academia, including a trend toward a more humanitarian practice and, Landsmark noted, a move away from an overly theoretical view of the discipline. In citing the recession as an opportunity for young professionals, Pasquarelli ended on a hopeful note for the many young architects in the hall. And, for the pessimists, the open bar lasted through the evening.









Political Hardball: Part 2 Updated
Remembering Frank Lloyd Wright’s Bijou
It’s Show and Tell Time for Building Product Manufacturers
Q&A: Kevin Shanley
Political Hardball: Part 2
SOM and CASE Invent a New Interface
A New Humanism: Part 18
The Green Team Part 13: Game, Sett, Match
On the Road with the Rudy Bruner Award: The Steel Yard - Providence, RI
Designing from Nature



This is so stupid. Not every architect has to be a loser and waste all of their time in studio. I learned a ton, got great grades, and still had time to go out almost every night in college. How can you know what the world wants if you never experience it?
Oh and I’m sure all of my colleagues who wasted their whole college experience working non stop on projects and thesis are real happy in this economy now that no one will hire them for at least 6 months to a year.
Comment by Mark — September 4, 2009, @ 8:20 am
So, Mark, who didn’t waste time in studio and went out partying every night, do you have a job as an architect? I wonder why.
Comment by John — September 4, 2009, @ 9:37 pm
Hmm tried to respond but it wouldnt let me. Lets see if it works this time.
No sir, I am pursuing another interest in NYC while the economy recovers. That way I dont have to get stuck in some crap firm. But thats ok you keep trying to convince yourself it was all worth it. But dont try to sound so privileged in ur attempts to insult me. The point of that first post was that regardless of the work done everyone is in the same boat, but some wasted 5 years of their life on fruitless ventures.
Comment by Second — September 6, 2009, @ 6:23 pm
complete propaganda. Architecture as it exists today, a marketing machine favoring a few elite, is in its final throes. As the majority of offices are shriveling up and the vanguard is trying to convince skeptical clients about how essential they are, everyone is asking, does this really matter? Architecture became trapped in its own cult of personality and continues to feed upon the same circular. specious arguments trying to making the case that architects and only architects can ‘make your project happen!’
These days it’s really just a bunch of hacks borrowing technology from other fields especially product design and forcing it onto primitive steel structures. They talk about the programs they use like they invented them or actually know what they’re about. It’s a field desperately trying to reinvent itself while lacking the proper discipline to really learn anything new. Take ‘green’ architecture for example. It’s really funny watching architects trying to don the mantle of sustainability while knowing scarce little about it.
Comment by Kevin — September 8, 2009, @ 10:38 am