Extra Extra won’t focus on memes but try to illustrate problems through them. To that end, the looser conditions of a column allow for visible cracks in my positions. Unanswered questions are welcomed. Criticisms formed on a mimetic hunch can be built up. Nothing here is too polished, neither is it expected to be.

As architecture culture breaks into architecture cultures, let's explore the fissures. Tomorrow, we begin together the construction of a constituency.

The critique. It is the stage for posturing, crying, and occasional gratification. It isn’t always productive. In fact, there are many water cooler conversations across the discipline hoping to shape the critique into something different: Is there a way to make it less ‘cringey’? Less of a ‘to do’? Less of a ‘spectacle’? At this point it seems that if students wish to change this dynamic it is going to have to be self motivated. Because even though it is cited as the biggest source of pain and frustration in architecture school, the format of the critique is not changing any time soon. There are good reasons why — the format itself as a performance is a form of legitimation. It validates the work of the students in front of outside colleagues. It forms a public display of evidence — through the work itself and the conversation — that knowledge is being transferred.

...the final jury in architecture schools have quite literally made, and subsequently protected, the careers of some leading critics. 

It also forms a collective bubble around those who stake a claim to be a part of a disciplinary discussion. In other words, the jury may be open and available to the public but the language, topics, rules, and overall in’s and out’s are otherwise secret. (I have a feeling this gap is also evident in the ability of anyone to read and digest this column itself!) Because of this, the final jury in architecture schools have quite literally made, and subsequently protected, the careers of some leading critics. There are also good reasons why this is the case and I am not suggesting we must smash all forms of the juridical culture we have established — If anything I am advocating we double down on an absolute dedication to productive conversations involving myriad viewpoints and respectful language.

However, if a student wishes to increase their chances of constructing this type of dynamic, the first step is to understand the critique as a form of trial. This process is eloquently described by John May in the piece Under Present Conditions Our Dullness Will Intensify. May describes the critique as it revolves around pieces of evidence given to support certain conclusions. Rhetoric is used to pronounce a claim about the field or its history. And finally this is all sewn together with a type of performance. Think about every great trial on a tv show or movie that you’ve seen recently. Drama, accusations, and emotion all compile to present a case, and it is up to a jury to decide if there will be guilt or innocence. While sometimes it can feel this dramatic in school, in architecture guilt or innocence is answered individually by one’s chosen constituency within the discipline. In other words, the subsequent inclusion or publication of one’s work as a student may better indicate how you performed than a letter grade.

But there are limits on what this spectacle can create. Consider the spatial effect generated by the interview desk in Andy Kaufman’s special which aired on PBS in 1983. Here he is shown interviewing his ex girlfriend, played by Elayne Boosler, and the power dynamic shift is hilarious to witness. Elayne makes quick work of the desk, revealing it to be little more than overcompensation. You don’t want a critique performance to come off too strong or desperate!

As an alternative example, I’d like to present this image which was originally sent to me by a rogue agent in the pacific northwest before becoming a meme. This is a type of performance which seeks to alleviate the rigid conditions in which these conversations typically take place. It signals a conversation can occur that is a little less serious which should lead to a more productive and respectful discourse. Specifics in the image notwithstanding, this is surely incendiary attire for a student wishing to alter the power dynamic of the jury. I’m looking forward to seeing more varied examples in my inbox.

To conclude I would like to borrow a phrase from Natalie Wynn via her Youtube Channel Contrapoints “The twenty-first century is an aesthetic century. In history there are ages of reason and there are ages of spectacle, and it's important to know which you're in. Our America, our internet, is not ancient Athens, it's Rome. And your problem is you think you're in the forum — When you're really in the circus.”