>If the associate architects were capable of bringing whatever the 'name'
brings to the project, why would they accept the anonymous position?
Shouldn't we admit that all too often the associate firms have elected to
fill their offices with draftsmen (or their modern electronic equivalent)
for economic reasons and openly abandoned any hope of making significant
contributions to the future of architecture?
Without minimizing the productive work of those in the trenches, do we
really want to valorize the corporate side of architectural production?
1. the corporate style is what keeps architecture solely from being the
reserve of the idle rich (not that it isn't close already). Gosh, I can't
wait for the latest breathless meanderings from the Hariri's or Henry
Smith-Miller, Asymptote or Michael Saee. They are _so_ much better than
Perkins Will. The world would stop and collapse if the former went away,
but if we could banish the likes of Perkins Will, then think of what
strides we could make in school design! Woo-ha. r+ma will cleverly point
out that he is talking about the faceless 200+ person firms that most of us
can't even think of, HLW, etc (ever met someone from Perkins and Will? they
are as corporate as they come, but at least they know to get a sign off for
a change order)., but hey, I never realized they were stealing work from
the likes of Steven Holl. Guess what, bob, there are only so many ways to
review and approve shop drawings (and if one spent time in new york design
firms, one would know that lots of the 'designers' don't even know one).
Oh, wait the Stretto House didn't need shop drawings (though I would bet
from the presentation material I've seen that Holl shop is great at
production). Most of the name places escape this, true, but there are
hundreds, if not thousands of residences and small commerical projects
pushed out of this area every year and I'd bet my drafting hand that most
wouldn't be hurt (from the acquistion of work to contract writing to design
to production to expediting, bidding, construction and administration to
the mechanics of running a firm) by some exeperience in the 'corporate
style' (not without its own problems).
2. In the case of the wexner Trott's firms has done respected and noted
work in southern ohio and elsewhere for years. Are we really to believe
that all the associates did was wait for the latest sk from Eisenman's
design studio at osu that drafting furiously to solve problems between
softball practice for the summer league in central park, glossy unpaid
internships and glory in one's future (even if it is only the Gold Bar).
3. At least Sorkin writes intellegently about issues of design and
otherwise. Leb's latest work seems to be pimping for KPF (and the
destruction of Columbus Circle) and David Copperfield.
n musolino
10019
brings to the project, why would they accept the anonymous position?
Shouldn't we admit that all too often the associate firms have elected to
fill their offices with draftsmen (or their modern electronic equivalent)
for economic reasons and openly abandoned any hope of making significant
contributions to the future of architecture?
Without minimizing the productive work of those in the trenches, do we
really want to valorize the corporate side of architectural production?
1. the corporate style is what keeps architecture solely from being the
reserve of the idle rich (not that it isn't close already). Gosh, I can't
wait for the latest breathless meanderings from the Hariri's or Henry
Smith-Miller, Asymptote or Michael Saee. They are _so_ much better than
Perkins Will. The world would stop and collapse if the former went away,
but if we could banish the likes of Perkins Will, then think of what
strides we could make in school design! Woo-ha. r+ma will cleverly point
out that he is talking about the faceless 200+ person firms that most of us
can't even think of, HLW, etc (ever met someone from Perkins and Will? they
are as corporate as they come, but at least they know to get a sign off for
a change order)., but hey, I never realized they were stealing work from
the likes of Steven Holl. Guess what, bob, there are only so many ways to
review and approve shop drawings (and if one spent time in new york design
firms, one would know that lots of the 'designers' don't even know one).
Oh, wait the Stretto House didn't need shop drawings (though I would bet
from the presentation material I've seen that Holl shop is great at
production). Most of the name places escape this, true, but there are
hundreds, if not thousands of residences and small commerical projects
pushed out of this area every year and I'd bet my drafting hand that most
wouldn't be hurt (from the acquistion of work to contract writing to design
to production to expediting, bidding, construction and administration to
the mechanics of running a firm) by some exeperience in the 'corporate
style' (not without its own problems).
2. In the case of the wexner Trott's firms has done respected and noted
work in southern ohio and elsewhere for years. Are we really to believe
that all the associates did was wait for the latest sk from Eisenman's
design studio at osu that drafting furiously to solve problems between
softball practice for the summer league in central park, glossy unpaid
internships and glory in one's future (even if it is only the Gold Bar).
3. At least Sorkin writes intellegently about issues of design and
otherwise. Leb's latest work seems to be pimping for KPF (and the
destruction of Columbus Circle) and David Copperfield.
n musolino
10019