it's been a long couple of weeks - massive proposals, a respiratory illness, responding to people coming off the last couple of posts. hopefully, we're finally back on schedule.
for some weekend reading, this piece in the nytimes today sums up the cultural trend that the architectural profession finds itself in quite well. anyone feeling lucky?
to be sure, there are some absolute 'lottery winners' in practice - oma has a long history of cycling through many future studio owners. so has steven holl (see aro, lorcan o'herlily, narchitects just to name a few). of course, for every firm who's founders graduated from a 'star' atelier, there's a dozen who didn't. the rub probably is in this question: how 'famous' can those firms become without the inherent advantage of tapping the existing media systems? the answer is probably 'as far as their work/reputation/etc. will take them'. that's another study for someone else to take up.
what all this points to is an acceleration of clear 'winners' and 'losers' in the system, something which cannot be healthy over the long term. at the very least, it seems difficult for such a system to promote an overall quality and consistency to the built environment - if anything it'll encourage even more aggrandized and spectacular 'one-offs' which seek to get attention in the media....
Central to the blog is a long running interest in how we construct practices that enable and promote the kind of work we are all most interested in. From how firms are run, structured, and constructed, the main focus will be on exploring, expanding and demystifying how firms operate. I’ll be interviewing different practices – from startups to nationally recognized firms, bringing to print at least one a month. Our focus will be connecting Archinect readers with the business of practice.