The Joy Of Architecture: Does Fun Follow Form, Function Fear & Finance?

Where is the fun in contemporary architecture? As a process, creating buildings seems to revolve around function, finance and fear rather than freeing things up for flexible flights of fancy. To add insult to injury 99% of the time the end product is uninspiring and distinctly average. So do architects actually enjoy what they spend most of their time doing?

Through building we create new realities, and in doing so we have a choice whether we make earthbound Heavens or accidental Hells. In the C21st can architecture be rediscovered as a liberating and democratising force able to help create a better world for all, with buildings standing for a celebration of life itself?

What makes a building a piece of ‘Architecture’ should help define what ‘A Joy In Architecture’ is, and yet in answering this question a trap can be seen to await designers, because a kind of ‘Joyless-ness’ frequently ends up being the result of their labours, be it in the nobility of obsessively-detailed-material-craft at one end of the spectrum, or the gimmickry of brightly coloured ‘tack on’ shapes at the other.

It seems that in Britain today, rational and formulaic brick boxes have become a lazy shorthand for design quality and appear to be the height of our collective ambition. Tasteful, inoffensive aesthetics are the order of the day and whilst this might please planners looking for ‘something that fits in’, do the general public agree? More conservative organisations argue that people crave traditionalism as a return to a golden age of architecture, but buildings should be about more than just an external aesthetic. These are the places we live and work within and the quality of every space we occupy has an emotional & psychological impact on us in our daily lives.

Is it any surprise that we’re in this position when the built environment is seen first and foremost as an investment opportunity rather than an opportunity to create amazing places and spaces? Where’s the joy in Architecture?

Speakers:

Dr Jane Clossick, London Metropolitan University (Chair)

Lee Ivett, Baxendale Studio

Lara Lesmes and Fredrik Hellberg, Space Popular

Alpa Depani, London Borough of Waltham Forest

Francis Terry, Francis Terry and Associates

Alfredo Caraballo, Allies & Morrison

Procurement is a pain. For architects seeking work in the public sector, progressive design & building knowledge is often overlooked for the cheapest and quickest means to meet the end. The requisite qualification seems to be held within organisations and methods that are perceived as being ‘risk adverse’ and in those parties who can offer fees that are just crazy small. Part of this problem is how the public sector is required to comply with OJEU standards and the accompanying bureaucracy.

The alliance between private and public bodies, whilst deemed necessary in our current times, remains unperfected and flawed. If a post-Brexit economy is to be better as some proclaim, then will Britain’s public sector both simplify and open up its tendering procedures to alternatives, so that maybe architects with smaller, more dynamic and hungrier practices can win a job once in a while? Can public projects take on a new dimension through their delivery. We doubt it. The clues are in the Grenfell tragedy: a multitude of invested interests, subcontracts and cutting corners at many levels being a structural problem through its procurement.

The bidding for public work may be competitive and no doubt in many cases ‘rigged’ through frameworks of bidding, so we ask if there is scope for new forms of competition, new ways of assessing what is of value, and how to ensure a culture of attaining value for money exists and becomes the norm. Can there be a public sector emancipated from conservatism, blown budgets, and the inefficiencies and fears of Little Britain politics?

Speakers:

Russell Curtis, RCKa (Chair)

Rae Whittow-Williams, Greater London Authority

Merlin Fulcher, Architects' Journal

Hilary Satchwell, Tibbards

Lisa Woo, Enfield Council

Awards: What Are They Good For? Absolutely Nuthin’!

What is the point of Architectural Awards? Is it to win more work? Boost the ego of architects? Share beautiful projects with the general public?

The proliferation of Awards means that they have become something of an industry within an industry and we are all guilty of seeking validation by submitting projects to be judged, despite knowing that more often than not, we will miss out. Why do practices put themselves through this lottery? Meeting an Award’s criteria and putting projects forward for consideration is often costly and the benefits can often be hard to see.

We’re told that a win will propel a studio into the limelight, however since it's doubtful if many people outside the profession will ever know about it, there remain questions about the advantages or purpose of this 'new found fame'. Do awards truly reflect actual quality in architecture, or in being seduced by appearances do they end up rewarding and therefore masking bad architecture?

Meanwhile the same cabal of practices seem to be hoovering up the majority of the prizes and they’re often to be found on judging panels themselves. Are architectural awards rigged or politicised to reflect sentiment, the times, or worse; maintain a balancing act by responding to the kind of project/practice that won previously.

Should we be judging buildings like you do films, music or books anyway? It’s not as if anyone in their right mind is going to commission another version of a design thats already won an award. Awards, what are they good for?…...Absolutely nuthin!

Speakers:

Peter Smisek, ICON (Chair)

Marcus Fairs, Dezeen

Rab Bennetts, Bennetts Associates

Veronica Simpson, Journalist

Fliss Childs, Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios

Long hours and low pay are standard, all-nighters are a badge of honour, and leaving on time is derided as lacking the necessary commitment and 'working by the clock’. Why is architecture as a profession so notoriously tough on staff: Is it passion for the craft that piles on the pressure? An old-school macho mentality? Or does it all stem from the competitive unit/crit-system in education?

In turn architects are themselves part of a broader property investment and construction industry that can be combative and confrontational in its pursuit of control and profit such that it can often feel like a thoroughly unpleasant environment to work within.

Abuse comes in many guises with bullying, intimidation, discrimination, harassment, humiliation, misconduct and defamation. It operates in areas from the financial, to the emotional and the psychological. With abuses of power, rank, process and statistics, is it not the overall system in which architects find themselves the most significant thing being abused?

What needs to be done? Who is being marginalised in practice? Who is creating a work environment that's open to and safe for all? Who are the real bullies?

Speakers:

India Block, Dezeen (Chair)

Fiona Scott, Gort Scott Architects

Sarah Castle, IF-DO

Tyen Masten, Phase 3

United Voices of the World's Section of Architectural Workers

Architecture has a difficult relationship with privilege. Everyone knows the profession is not diverse enough, which is not surprising given the fees and the length of time it takes to study. The general public see the image of the architect as aloof but when education was free we saw the rise of the working class architect. Norman Foster describes his childhood on the wrong side of the tracks in Manchester and now he is a global powerhouse. Could someone rise to prominence like this today or is the system rigged for Hooray Henrys and Sloane Rangers?

Young practices are emerging which directly address the public good but some see this as another form of patronage to ease the guilt of a design-conscious elite. Should we challenge the status quo or accept that the master/servant culture which runs through British DNA is an inescapable fact of life?

Speakers include:

Helen Parton, Journalist (Chair)

Ab Rogers, Ab Rogers Design

Ziona Strelitz, ZZA

Lee Ivett, Baxendale

Tahera Rouf, RCKa

The architectural community is very upset about climate change. They have banded together and done a petition and everything. Problem is, all the big name practices that started it are using a hell of a lot of concrete and building beautiful airports and energy-guzzling skyscrapers. Also, some architects went along to Waterloo bridge and joined a protest party but what did it achieve? It’s high time we made a difference as an industry but actions speak louder than words and buildings can make more of a statement than statements alone.

Speakers:

Jan-Carlos Kucharek, RIBAJ (Chair)

Julia Barfield, Marks Barfield

Paul Finch, World Architecture Festival

Maria Smith, Interrobang

Tom Bennett, Studio Bark

We’ve had enough of the straight white male dominating the development industry. We need more diversity in leadership positions to invest in the places that will stand the test of time.

Things are beginning to change but from boardroom to building site, investors to interns, the gender imbalance across the built environment is a problem for everyone.

Are we satisfied that only 19% of board members of property industry companies are women? That only 1.3% of BAME groups work in the property industry? Or that 99% of all construction workers are male? Having more diverse decision makers will ensure that past mistakes aren’t repeated.

From everyday sexism, glass ceilings, wolf whistles, “banter” and mansplaining, the industry has a lot to change. How can we ensure that women are applying for jobs in the built environment, staying in them and prospering in the profession? What changes can be made to better reflect the diversity that are the foundations of the city itself?

Speakers:

Christine Murray, The Developer (Chair)

Danna Walker, Built By Us

Chris Brown, Igloo

Angharad Palmer, Pocket Living

Emily Lawrence, Jestico + Whiles

In the information age knowledge is power and architects now seem unwillingly to part with their juicy titbits. Back stories, Chinese whispers and insider information were once regularly traded as part of an intricate network of professional gossip. The act of giving away secrets was generous but architects could often expect information in return but in recent times many practitioners see their peers as competition and architectural opinion seems sanitised as a result. Is this a failing of our times, where gossip can no longer be seen as a catalyst to new ideas, new debates, new worlds?

If you’re not part of the in-crowd there’s a good chance you’re missing out on jobs and opportunities because of the fear of nasty rumours and misinformation leaving an indelible mark. So, should architecture bring back the outrage and the Machiavellian intrigue to rumble things up and make our designs and propositions more cutting, more interesting, more fun? The truth? You can’t handle the truth!

Speakers:

Nigel Coates (chair)

Sir Peter Cook, CRAB Studio

Sadie Morgan, dRMM

Leanne Tritton, Ing Media

Amanda Baillieu, Archiboo

Why does British Housing Look So Mean & Nasty?

There is an unattractive truth about British housing: the vast majority of it is really ugly. The built environment industry is very good at heaping praise on innovative, game-changing projects with awards and extensive coverage in the media but in reality these schemes serve the smallest fraction of the population. On top of this, we are a nation obsessed with the outward appearance of our housing and ‘fitting in’ which drives planning conditions and results in mediocre responses to complex settings. And all this taking place during the one of the worst housing crises we’ve ever known!

There’s a frontier land out there of dodgy cowboy builders and racketeer businessmen. Who will ride in and save the day? Developers with a conscience who also know how to turn and profit? Architects with some backbone to stand up to their cost-cutting clients? Local authorities that have the wherewithal to game the system? It’s time to saddle up and find out…

Speakers:

Claire Bennie, Municipal (Chair)

Jonny Anstead, TOWN

Paul Karakusevic, Karakusevic Carson Architects

Annalie Riches, Mikhail Riches

Cany Ash, Ash Sakula Architects