Guest Lecture series can come off as a curated compilation of associative value – you lecture at our institution, and both of our statuses get bumped upWhat purpose do guest lecturers serve? This semester, SCI-Arc has had a very impressive line-up of architects come speak, often drawing packed crowds of bespectacled, black-draped youths, eager to lap up something, anything inspiring. Glancing at the schedules of our Get Lectured series over the semesters, certain names crop up repeatedly, as the So Hot Right Now lecturer that serves as much as a display of academic-industrial clout, in compiling the right who’s who, as it does genuine intellectual curating. Guest Lecture series can come off as a curated compilation of associative value – you lecture at our institution, and both of our statuses get bumped up (hopefully) as a result. It's likely this isn't the whole intent, but it is the dominant impression.
But when the hammer falls and the actual lecturer opens their mouth, the results aren’t so consistent. At the many SCI-Arc guest lectures I’ve attended, and viewed online through their much-appreciated media archive, the styles have varied widely, from polemics delivered with little media accompaniment, to dense PowerPoints of the architect’s work, narrated in an even denser tone.
A lecture more of the latter group was given last week at SCI-Arc by Craig Dykers, founding partner of the absolutely So Hot Right Now firm, Snøhetta. Dykers’ lecture took place on March 11, and the honest reason that our coverage is only coming out now is due to my utter inability to find anything newsworthy within it. Here is a fascinating architect, whose work A Google search would have turned up about the same.designing giant institutions – SFMOMA, the Norwegian National Opera and Ballet in Oslo, Times Square’s redesign, the freakin’ 9/11 Memorial Museum Pavilion – has won much deserved praise. According to SCI-Arc’s promo, Dykers’ lecture was going to explain how, in his work, “design as a promoter of social and physical well-being is supported by ongoing observation and development of an innovative design process. Snøhetta often works to create contemporary architecture seeking to avoid segregation and disassociation.” Poised on that heady and exciting edge, my expectations were somewhat high. What was delivered was a slideshow of recent and upcoming projects, accompanied by sometimes humorous anecdotes of unexpected ways people interacted with their buildings – a couple having sex on top of the Oslo opera house, a daredevil motorcyclist zooming around the building – and not much else. A Google search would have turned up about the same.
In a way, lectures are like art. They can affect and inspire some while leaving others completely cold, in ways both anticipated and impossible to prepare. And so while I was what I hope for, especially for schools of higher statuses, is a refreshed attention to guest lecturers that surpriseindifferent to Dykers’ lecture, I’d guess that there are those who were gifted a nugget to work with, or were truly moved. But what I hope for, especially for schools of higher statuses, is a refreshed attention to guest lecturers that surprise, rather than perpetuate celebrity. Instead of being Sony, or EMI, try being Warp, or Sub Pop – seek out the small and fledgling and shine a light on their best values. The unexpected could be very inspiring, especially for students.
Former Managing Editor and Podcast Co-Producer for Archinect. I write, go to the movies, walk around and listen to the radio. My interests revolve around cognitive urban theory, psycholinguistics and food.Currently freelancing. Be in touch through longhyphen@gmail.com
35 Comments
It kind of goes along with an increased affection for celebrity in our culture today. A lot of people seem to look at our most successful members of society as prophets rather than fortunate business executives.
In architecture it seems to manifest most clearly in the presence of the "star-architect." With younger generations falling over themselves to impress or be recognized by this (established) authority. In hopes of finding... I'm not sure.
Appreciation? Status? Fulfillment?
I'm not sure if I'm projecting here, or oversimplifying maybe, but it seems many people are attending guest lecture series in an effort to be seen going, instead of going somewhere on their own.
I'm not sure it's the lecturer's responsibility to say things that are "newsworthy." I always appreciate the chance to see a more detailed view of the process than the high speed news media produces. Out in the real world, a respect for craft and thoughtfulness is rare so appreciate these things when you can. Even so, Sci-arc seems to veer on the side of spectacle, like the architecture they value. talking about architecture in a substainative and interesting way is a challenge, snohettas technique is probably the only way really
I rarely attended lectures in Grad and Undergrad for all the reasons Amelia lists, and mainly I knew the architects were just going to show us their work, which was already published out the ass anyway.
Most memorable lectures, once at Kansas in 2000ish and UPenn around 2006 was Sanford Kwinter. Both times I left the lectures with an ass load of notes and research to do....
The other lecture was Glenn Murcutt within a week of the announcement that he had received the Pritzker (2002). The room was packed. After people gawking at the school flyer promoting his lecture, a picture of a reflecting pool in front of a cool looking house, and many people guessing what it all meant - his lecture couldn't have been more down to earth when talking about his work - practical, functional, and no pompous theories.
I remember two points - the reflecting pool was there to put out a fire if need be, given it's isolated location in Australia...
point two - quoting his father I think - Start your career the way you want to end it.
I saw Glenn Murcitt at that time too. Perhaps it isn't a coincidence that when the lecturer is down to earth and practical, his work is more enlightening. I would have thought Snohetta would come from that branch, perhaps that is why he is interested in the real visceral experiences, though in lecture form they become exaggerated. Then again Snohetta "got big" and is perhaps not the same kind of firm they used to be... Now they do "branding" lol
It used to be very interesting and educational back when Shelly Kappe and sometimes students organized the lecture series at Sci Arc in 70's. It really made the school known internationally. They were more educational and debates were real.
Group of us formed an activist group at that time called 'ABC' after the initials of our last names, Ayyuce, Baer, Chavkin. ABC also spoke to an early Italian anarchist movement. All this stuff was serious. Eric Chavkin penned a statement called "Sexual Intellectual" on behalf of ABC before a young Bernard Tschumi lecture and it was distributed to the audience. Sexual Intellectual was an early warning and counter-action manifesto against the newly developing starchitect trend, circa 1981.
At one time, Venturi Rauch Scott Brown exhibition was hijacked and held captive for two months to call attention to postmodernism debates.
Yes, today you have an audience of trendy stargazers gullibly sitting in the audience and expecting to be enlightened by their idols and potential networking connections. Serious debates, questioning, and even simple boycott are nowhere to be seen. If you ask a question you are cowardly made fun out of and treated as a troublemaker, which for me is a welcome rejection.
If you have time, browse the late seventies and early eighties Sci Arc lectures. I know similar ones exist elsewhere.
Today, the brand making is observed, heroes are idealized and worshiped. The rest is about promotion and large sums of tuition paying student market competition. The current generation of architectural discourse is too conservative and lives on by boosterism and self-promotion. Dissent is looked as antisocial and written off while pictures of the complacent masses are the shallow proof of the in-ness. I won't say this is an ill development but certainly it is less productive for the things that matter.
If you ask a question you are cowardly made fun out of and treated as a troublemaker, which for me is a welcome rejection.
I mostly remember it the other way around, where there was often a great deal of skepticism from the audience that manifested in fairly serious arguments in the Q&A...
^ That is possible and happens that way as well. Watch the end of this lecture. Actually this is one of rare and very well delivered lectures.
Are you talking about specific Moss Gehry talk? I wasn't particularly and haven't seen it.
I co founded a lecture series at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale back in 2001-2003, and have stayed in touch with the committee over the years, the biggest obstacle we have is the limited number of talented architects who are out lecturing and are comfortable traveling to our corner of the Midwest and speaking in front of an audience they don't know. It takes 2-3 days out of a work week for a lecture to travel speak visit campus studios and travel back.
As for selecting hot to trot fashionable architects they can be expensive and one speaker may call for 15-80k in honorarium fees plus hotel and other expenses. What we often did was send out invitations 9 months in advance to architects we had cross disciplinary interest in so the auditorium was not filled with designers but other folks as well. But even with 9-10 months we had cancellations as firms land major projects and get supper busy or other more prestigious or convenient schools double book and we get canceled out.
The first lecture we did with he speaker series was M. Graves excellent cross over with architecture, art and Industrial design, but he was expensive over 50% of the budget for two departments. Others spoke for traveling expenses and a modest donation to a charity like James Wines, One tactic we did employ was to invite architects who were working on or competing for major projects on campus to speak and this helped stretch our budget as they often did this for free or just travel expenses.
We always tried to have the guest lectures on campus for the entire day, visiting studios and sometime giving multiple talks on a variety of subjects, we also aimed for crossover into other disciplines that were also relevant to the capstone studio in 2003 we were designing a fisheries life science lab and aquarium so we had several designers of zoos and aquariums as well as biologist and even veterinarians take part in speaking or in panel discussions. We reached and had co sponsors in Mechanical Engineering (they were into the massive life support systems needed in zoos and aquariums), Biology, Ecology, Architecture, Horticulture and interior design. But this probably is an anomaly for a lecture series where we were focusing in on technical as much as design aspects of a particular building type, and all of the relevant disciplines that come together for a successful project.
Just a perspective SI-arch is not the end all to be all of lecture series and they are not even the only ones in town.
I do think a constant steady stream of ideas, especially those outside of your current way of thinking, can only add to your education and professional development not hinder it.
Over and OUT
Peter N
^^ I was talking with respect to the lectures I went to in grad school at Michigan a few years ago. Some were well received, many were received quietly with interest but general skepticism, and a few turned against the presenter. I never saw the "today" you speak of.
There are still chances.
It sounds to me according Orhan and the likes of Glenn Small that Sci-Arc isn't all that radical or honest anymore.....it's like a punk band gone mainstream because everyone caught on 25 years later and the people who were there at the genesis are now angry because punk became pop.....sell-outs as they would say.....
Thank you here is your quarter go put it in a washing machine. And, how many houses you designed last weekend? Is this a group session?
You really are old. A quarter won't get you jack shit these days. Your punk band is now pop culture, it's 2015 and not 1981. The lead singers are now 60 years old with 40 year old memories of the good ol' days.
you are drunk again? and have a personal chip against me? i don't remember addressing you previously in this thread.
i hope you survive to be my age still can talk about architecture. go back to your 25th design project just today.
Well I'm old too. But my girlfriend is younger than you. I dont mind 'mentoring' the present generation. When you got it you got it forever...The flipside to that record is 'once a chump always a chump'. See you in my rear mirror, chump.
Really though, attacking people and insulting them because they are old, says everything about this charlatan.
But SCI-Arc really *isn't* radical anymore, is it? It sure as hell was back in the 70s-early 80s, but everyone else has caught up, it seems. Woodbury is the most radical program I know of these days.
Back to Amelia's article, I do think the quality of lecturers varies WIDELY, just as the teaching ability of many of the most in-demand names varies widely. Sometimes a studio with a famous architect, a So Hot designer, just sucks because they honestly are terrible at teaching. Teaching is a skill, and I think giving a good lecture is a skill that's much more easily learned than is teaching. (Especially design - I'm a pretty good teacher, of various architecture-related things but I am a terrible teacher of design studio.)
I love growing older, mentally. Every day is more interesting than the next, and things start to make sense.
I'm so old, I attack myself.
What's radical is not worrying about being radical. Once you're done smashing every norm and you are left with nothing to rebel against, we can focus on people's needs. No big agenda or ideology, just doing things that make people happy and don't harm the earth.
Being older is awesome, only because the sugar of youth never tastes as sweet as the first time, but the other tastes that open up are more than worth the aches and pains.
Orhan I made an observation based on your rants and Glenn Smalls blog and you insulted me with your quarter comment,you had it coming.....don't dish it out if you can't take. We have already established elsewhere on archinect that you are essentially racist and hate the world you live in - all because some people made judgement decisions about your often radical if not hate filled posts against the very civilization you enjoy and live in..........yes back to Amelia post, what would be a lecture Orhan would approve of that isn't old? What should a lecture be? Radical isn't all that interesting anymore, it's kind of trendy isn't it. One moment you are criticizing Jla-x for knocking VSBA and another you note a hijack of a lecture on post-modernism was special? All seems duplicitous and why is 'radical' important? What would a kid wanting to become a member of civilization as an architect get out of it.
You are taking things out of context lumping them together and misreading. Olaf design chump. Age 18, buildings realized, 2000.
My post about Amelia's article was to illustrate a certain level of energy that was around those lectures which doesn't exist anymore. At least commonly. I understand that was a while back but that doesn't mean we shouldn't ever bring it up. I fail to understand why such a story from the actual events in the past and relevant history caused such a personal reaction? It is a poor response and an uncalled attack on my persona again. This seems to became a common bully practice by few in this forum. Glen Small and I are friends. I don't particularly read his blog unless he specifically sends me a link to read a particular post of his and I call him back to response if necessary. Why would something like this raise people's feathers I can't know. Calling people old and irrelevant is ugly and uncalled for. Afterall, you are looking at a picture taken during a conversation held by two architects in their prime mature years of architecture production. You can respond to that and other issues instead of attacking me personally with a cowardly ad hominem.
and I re-state - Orhan I made an observation based on your rants and Glenn Smalls blog and you insulted me with your quarter comment,you had it coming... (old testament, you know eye for an eye....)
but you turned the other cheek, bravo!
You (and older people) have to understand how meaningless the year 1968 is to us, and presumably you as well, since I know you're not that old.
What 'spirit' would you like this generation to have? the same one you had? maybe the 'spirit' has moved to other places. Maybe those that are 'into it' don't even bother showing up at those lectures or even study architecture.
maybe 'radical' is best left to people who can actually deliver something 'radical', like Frank Gehry?
The problem with 'radical' in architecture is it's a slight 'joke'. It's a profession that defines structure and the environment. 'starchitects' are closer to 'radical' than any student with a supposed 'radical' spirit.
hey chump (is that your real name?), say something informative and not personally desperate. don't embarrass your generation any further. you are all vitriol and no substance.
desperate? followed with an insult as usual.
You earned it enjoy your chump change.
so let's re-cap -
Olaf make observation.
Orhan say use quarter buy wash in machine.
Olaf call Orhan name.
Orhan call Olaf name
Olaf ask Orhan question.
Orhan say not much.
Olaf ask question.
Orhan not smart, say stupid stuff and call Olaf name
Olaf confused but give applause.
Orhan make less sense.
......off to the Nursing home for you!
you want to make Sci-Arc 'radical' and full of energy, have this Justin Shubow give a talk.
Olaf dare the washed-out Orhan to be 'radical' again and invite Justin Shubow to give a talk at Sci-Arc, this way Orhan can feel like it's 1981 again!
Didn't that guy crash land his toy plane /\ Is that John McEnroe?
Thank you Orhan for kind suggestions for the younger generation. We appreciate your deep insights into life.
Olaf now go make revolution, he do architecture.
My post was not about olaf nor Orhan. It was about a certain atmosphere some lectures were delivered from a very relevant past, involving SCI Arc and I delivered it with certain events that actually took a place with a language I chose to tell the story. Ffor some reason you couldn't take it and called me in a condescending and an ugly way as if that was a criterion. It reflected your inner arrogance and juvenile angry self against old people and I called it.
Now you really fucked yourself you chump change, you ain't worth any further comment. And your graphics are boring.
you got all that from
"It sounds to me according Orhan and the likes of Glenn Small that Sci-Arc isn't all that radical or honest anymore.....it's like a punk band gone mainstream because everyone caught on 25 years later and the people who were there at the genesis are now angry because punk became pop.....sell-outs as they would say....."
was the Analogy of the punk band gone mainstream that offensive to Orhan? because every post on Archinect is Always about Orhan. I didn't just jump to that conclusion, I read your conversation with Natematt, which I won't re-hash, scroll-up.
__________I recapped because for whatever reason you either have a learning disability or just choose to ignore the facts of the conversion.
I this Sci-Arc should have Orhan and Shubow debate 'radicalism' at one of these lecture and I'll have Carott Top Hi-jack what will surely amount to completee non-sense....hence a Snohetta lecture probably would be much better?
That's a great suggestion. These kinds of conversations are happening all over the culture, and as much as some would like to pretend or wish they weren't happening, they are. It's made all the more relevant because or our on-going urban renaissance. It was easy to dismiss those old buildings and the lessons they might teach if it was left in the dumpy old city, but those cool office parks just ain't that cool anymore.
If you want to stir things up in schools and actually reflect the living culture out there, it would behoove Sci-Arc to re-kindle the "what is legitimate" debate instead of keeping your ears covered. Human cultures and itheir respective traditions are like weeds, they keep coming back and grow in any crack you leave them, so why not turn them into garden ornaments?
Bring in historians, traditionalists, craftspeople, transit advocates and all sundry folks interested in how we live. You'll be considered the most open minded and progressive institution in the country, even dressed in all black.
Yup Thayer-D. I absolutely agree!.........for me as an analogy crazy liberals are just as fundamental as staunch conservatives and it's not that 'radical' to be one or the other. ............. Rather, radical is to incite a major conflict that quickly exposes the truth of the current condition.......I might kid about Justin Shubow a bit, but if he was offered a lecturing opportunity at Sci-Arc I might just get on a plane and fly across country to see the truth come out in battle. ............like it or Orhan vs Olaf does same quickly, the polar perspectives are quickly exposed and the debate rages. Perhaps this is the 'spirit's 1981 that Orhan wants, since he does shout a lot on Archinect?.....of course Vado retro maturity to attack oneself is the least we ask of any citizen in this country.
WOODBURY should invite Patrick Schumacher to lecture on architecture and politics.
Exactly. Mix it up. Get messy, and see what comes out. History shows wonderful things come out of the friction of differing ideas p rubbing up against each other. It involves giving up some hard won status, but if that's what your after, imagine how cool you will be perceived if you actually did what you profess to do!
well, Thayer-D, careful, paranoid, insecure, and smart people with Agendas don't put people like me in a position to do what I profess!
but this Eric Owen Moss post on Archinect looks intriguing....maybe he can make it messy (haven't read it yet)
Student lecture series we organized, circa 1981. PE refused the regular lecture series with other architects but jumped on the opportunity to lecture with these guys... Free of charge and buying his own ticket! The power of curating the right people. These artists are still relevant as hell today, all of them are highly influential and radical in their own art.
Photo: Orhan Ayyuce
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.