Copy

.-.     .-.     .-.     .-.
AVERY\ SHORTS\  AVERY\ SHORTS
'     `-'     `-'     `-'

.-.     .-.     .-.     .-.
AVERY\ SHORTS\  AVERY\ SHORTS
'     `-'     `-'     `-' 
 
***************
* S01         *
*             *
*             *
*             *
*             *
*             *
*        E02  *
***************
***************
* The         *
* ARCHITECT   *
* AS POLICY   *
* WHISPERER   *
* BY          *
* Peter       *
* Swinnen     *
***************
“Architecture finds itself in the paradoxical situation of being more popular than ever before while at the same time being exposed to total decline... never before did architects have so little influence on the actual work of constructing buildings." [1]

It could be also argued that architects have never had so little influence on the making of society altogether. Perhaps it’s finally time to cast off the burdensome shell of the crypto-figure that is the private architect – a practitioner with a false need to affirm their identity in their work. Society’s complexity demands a spatial practice that can act as catalyst for societal programs, rather than as a means to produce and showcase one-off spectacles. The architect has become too slow, too heavy, and too duplicitous to maximize the social good.

The relevant task ahead for the architectural discipline – as a theoretical environment, an educational model, and an effective building practice – is to seriously question WHEN architecture comes into play within societal processes. Is its role simply to answer (or react to) a brief, or can it prefigure this brief, or even the client for that matter? How proactive and unsolicited can architecture be? How can it avoid a mere troubleshooting reflex? Can architecture (help to) set political and policy agendas? Can or should the architect perform as a policy whisperer?

It wouldn’t harm us, as architects, to regain some anonymity, to seriously practice ethical ghostwriting. It wouldn’t hurt for the architectural discipline to be inhabited by cooperative figures rather than solipsistic characters. We need to be spatial specialists who challenge public and private clients to achieve maximum societal benefits – rather than perform as their private architectural jesters. 
 
[1] Harry Gugger and Aurélie Blanchard, eds., Swiss Lessons: Teaching and Research in Architecture (Zurich: Park Books, 2014), 158.
_/"-._/"-._/"-._/"-._/"-._/"-._/"-._/"-._/"-._/"-._/"-.
Want Avery Shorts in your inbox? Subscribe!

Want Avery Shorts in your friends inbox? Forward!
Too much thoughtful discourse clogging your inbox? Unsubscribe
 
Want this email in your browser? View in browser!
...____.....Avery Shorts
../    /\...is a project of
./____/__\..Columbia Books on 
.|    ||||..Architecture and the City
.`¸*¸*.*..*.editors@averyshorts.com







This email was sent to <<Email Address>>
why did I get this?    unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences
Avery Shorts · 407 Avery Hall · 1172 Amsterdam Avenue · New York, NY 10027 · USA

Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp