What do you guys think of their work? Is Stanley Tigerman still an influencial force in the Chicago scene. Or has the younger offices (Gang, Urban Lab, Ronan) taken his place? I don't care too much for the post modernism but he's seems to be a leading figure in Chicago? Has anyone ever worked for him before? What is his practice like?
yep, stan the man is still DA MAN, in chicago... everyone bows to him. including the names, you mentioned. just for your info - those names are where they are partly because they were on stanley's self-promotion list.
as for working for him. ummm.... ive heard horror stories. and i expect nothing less from stanley.
he still does interesting stuff and he indeed is interesting... but i think firm mostly does homes for "suburban princesses..." led by mccurry.
Wait a minute - working in Chicago I can honestly say his candy-ass has never been an influence at any firm or project or any aspect of anything weve ever done. Just look at this jem...
excuse me while I rant, but Im glad someone has asked.
The fall from grace of the Chicago Architect is due to this man and group of young architects from the mid 70's my proffessors adored, and their overly intelectualized writings. Someone started reading Verilio and decided this was relevant to architecture, and an architecture of meaning through associations and vocabulary and blah blah blah spilled out. However this disease didnt start here alone, it was manifesting itself all over the world.
Previously the architecture of Chicago was pragmatic - this was it's edge, itsa almost "un"architectural. What Tigerman and company did was strip Chicago of it's place as an architectural capital and for this they can not be forgiven. At the percise moment when when they could have solidified our raw and unabashed architectural method, they gave in to the Ivy League style police. Shame, Shame, Shame.
Without a doubt, he is still an influential force on the Chicago scene.
He has an incredible network and is generally though to be a person to be in good favour with (if one cares about that sort of thing).
Is he relevant? I think not, and would argue he's a good 12-15 years
past being so. Not everyone bows to him; his former protege, a certain design leader at Perkins & Will certainly doesn't.
i agree with you that he is influential but not as relevant as he once was.
i use to think the same about RJ. but...... dont want to go into details, but i know FIRST HAND that the stanley still carries some weight in the PeeWee salt mines, especially when it comes to R.
i agree with you that he is influential but not as relevant as he once was.
i use to think the same about RJ. but...... dont want to go into details, but i know FIRST HAND that the stanley still carries some weight in the PeeWee salt mines, especially when it comes to R.
It's a good thing I can't find a picture of his monstrosity of a library at Roosevelt and Blue Island. The one that is now a bank (which has mercifully repainted it from its original gaudiness).
Tigerman is well past any relevance, and the only reason he has any sizable impact on the Chicago community is because of Archeworks (which I consider to be a useful institution). While its true that there are many who still cling to his boot-straps, they are, as a sweeping gneralization, not the people making an impact in the design world.
There's a serious generation gap at work here, as well. Those coming out of school now, by and large, have an overwhelmingly negative view of Tigerman and his "profound impact" over the last several decades.
But I'd be interested in hearing how Martin Felsen and Sarah Dunn (UrbanLab) got where they are today thanks to Stan the Man's support. Or Ronan, for that matter. Gang is really the only one who has benefited from his good graces, but I would go so far as to say that the work of her firm is plenty good enough to achieve prominence (atleast in the weakened Chicago scene) WITHOUT his "patronage."
That said, I'd be interested in hearing from Pamela, who writes the Archeworks blog here.
let me add to that...
I go to school to learn with Stanley as one of the educators from the many at Archeworks...
I don't work for Stanley...
The facilitators for my group are both connected to Stanley and Eva...
one had him at UIC however many years ago, and the other works with Eva at P&W, and thru Eva you have Stanley...
as for as stanley goes, i like the old guy. he prods people to think and design in a socially responsible way. as far as working for him, he’s old school. its his office and its his way. his work is fun. not all architecture has to be breathtaking, look cool or have a bunch of weird angles. fun fact- margaret mccurry is one of the most published persons in the esteemed magazine, architectural digest. and though they share the same office space margaret and stanley rarely collaborate. he has his firm and she her’s.
I am also at archeworks this year although not in Pam's group. I've been going back and forth on my view of Stanley. I worked with Jeanne Gang and first was introduced to him by Jeanne as the founder of Archeworks along with Eva. So my initial view of him was favorable.
Since I've been at Archeworks and partaked in his ethics class I had mixed feelings. I can see where "." (aka Evilplatypus) is coming from. I at first resented having the long-winded discussions that left me thinking what's this have to do with anything? However, now the remaining month of that class will be structured to address ethical readings as they apply or don't to our group project. Mine happens to be the community school project.
I guess for me I've heard complaints and praises, I like his constant prodding and pushing, his passion for what archeworks is about. However, as far as I can tell yes he isn't really relevant except through archeworks. Which is the apropos creation that maybe will get him off the shit list he got on himself in years back. As far as that's concerned I really don't define him by what he has done (his architecture, his time at UIC,etc.), because I don't know about it enough nor care. My involvement with him for me has been more in seeing what he doesn't do but allows other to engage (archeworks projects, exhibits he curates and brings in people like Jeanne to work on, etc.) and therefore I think he's great and important to Chicago though indirectly.
Is Stanley still around? I've seen a lot of cool architecture in the city as of late so I can't imagine he is having too much influence in Chicago. It's the 21st Century for goodness sake. Why are they still doing those one room school house and barn inspired buildings? His new projects are straight out of Architectural Record circa 1982. It's like a fucking time warp or something.
Nov 13, 05 3:07 am ·
·
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.
Tigerman McCurry Architects
What do you guys think of their work? Is Stanley Tigerman still an influencial force in the Chicago scene. Or has the younger offices (Gang, Urban Lab, Ronan) taken his place? I don't care too much for the post modernism but he's seems to be a leading figure in Chicago? Has anyone ever worked for him before? What is his practice like?
yep, stan the man is still DA MAN, in chicago... everyone bows to him. including the names, you mentioned. just for your info - those names are where they are partly because they were on stanley's self-promotion list.
as for working for him. ummm.... ive heard horror stories. and i expect nothing less from stanley.
he still does interesting stuff and he indeed is interesting... but i think firm mostly does homes for "suburban princesses..." led by mccurry.
Wait a minute - working in Chicago I can honestly say his candy-ass has never been an influence at any firm or project or any aspect of anything weve ever done. Just look at this jem...
excuse me while I rant, but Im glad someone has asked.
The fall from grace of the Chicago Architect is due to this man and group of young architects from the mid 70's my proffessors adored, and their overly intelectualized writings. Someone started reading Verilio and decided this was relevant to architecture, and an architecture of meaning through associations and vocabulary and blah blah blah spilled out. However this disease didnt start here alone, it was manifesting itself all over the world.
Previously the architecture of Chicago was pragmatic - this was it's edge, itsa almost "un"architectural. What Tigerman and company did was strip Chicago of it's place as an architectural capital and for this they can not be forgiven. At the percise moment when when they could have solidified our raw and unabashed architectural method, they gave in to the Ivy League style police. Shame, Shame, Shame.
Without a doubt, he is still an influential force on the Chicago scene.
He has an incredible network and is generally though to be a person to be in good favour with (if one cares about that sort of thing).
Is he relevant? I think not, and would argue he's a good 12-15 years
past being so. Not everyone bows to him; his former protege, a certain design leader at Perkins & Will certainly doesn't.
under...
i agree with you that he is influential but not as relevant as he once was.
i use to think the same about RJ. but...... dont want to go into details, but i know FIRST HAND that the stanley still carries some weight in the PeeWee salt mines, especially when it comes to R.
under...
i agree with you that he is influential but not as relevant as he once was.
i use to think the same about RJ. but...... dont want to go into details, but i know FIRST HAND that the stanley still carries some weight in the PeeWee salt mines, especially when it comes to R.
spiderdad
what have you heard of in terms of people working for him. What horro stories
horror stories just look at the work he is producing now. oh the horror of the unchanged mind, its like harriet meier according to Bush.
http://www.tigerman-mccurry.com/framesets/recentstanley.htm
It's a good thing I can't find a picture of his monstrosity of a library at Roosevelt and Blue Island. The one that is now a bank (which has mercifully repainted it from its original gaudiness).
Tigerman is well past any relevance, and the only reason he has any sizable impact on the Chicago community is because of Archeworks (which I consider to be a useful institution). While its true that there are many who still cling to his boot-straps, they are, as a sweeping gneralization, not the people making an impact in the design world.
There's a serious generation gap at work here, as well. Those coming out of school now, by and large, have an overwhelmingly negative view of Tigerman and his "profound impact" over the last several decades.
But I'd be interested in hearing how Martin Felsen and Sarah Dunn (UrbanLab) got where they are today thanks to Stan the Man's support. Or Ronan, for that matter. Gang is really the only one who has benefited from his good graces, but I would go so far as to say that the work of her firm is plenty good enough to achieve prominence (atleast in the weakened Chicago scene) WITHOUT his "patronage."
That said, I'd be interested in hearing from Pamela, who writes the Archeworks blog here.
.mm
I've kept quite on purpose...email me if you have an exact question
let me add to that...
I go to school to learn with Stanley as one of the educators from the many at Archeworks...
I don't work for Stanley...
The facilitators for my group are both connected to Stanley and Eva...
one had him at UIC however many years ago, and the other works with Eva at P&W, and thru Eva you have Stanley...
as for as stanley goes, i like the old guy. he prods people to think and design in a socially responsible way. as far as working for him, he’s old school. its his office and its his way. his work is fun. not all architecture has to be breathtaking, look cool or have a bunch of weird angles. fun fact- margaret mccurry is one of the most published persons in the esteemed magazine, architectural digest. and though they share the same office space margaret and stanley rarely collaborate. he has his firm and she her’s.
I am also at archeworks this year although not in Pam's group. I've been going back and forth on my view of Stanley. I worked with Jeanne Gang and first was introduced to him by Jeanne as the founder of Archeworks along with Eva. So my initial view of him was favorable.
Since I've been at Archeworks and partaked in his ethics class I had mixed feelings. I can see where "." (aka Evilplatypus) is coming from. I at first resented having the long-winded discussions that left me thinking what's this have to do with anything? However, now the remaining month of that class will be structured to address ethical readings as they apply or don't to our group project. Mine happens to be the community school project.
I guess for me I've heard complaints and praises, I like his constant prodding and pushing, his passion for what archeworks is about. However, as far as I can tell yes he isn't really relevant except through archeworks. Which is the apropos creation that maybe will get him off the shit list he got on himself in years back. As far as that's concerned I really don't define him by what he has done (his architecture, his time at UIC,etc.), because I don't know about it enough nor care. My involvement with him for me has been more in seeing what he doesn't do but allows other to engage (archeworks projects, exhibits he curates and brings in people like Jeanne to work on, etc.) and therefore I think he's great and important to Chicago though indirectly.
Is Stanley still around? I've seen a lot of cool architecture in the city as of late so I can't imagine he is having too much influence in Chicago. It's the 21st Century for goodness sake. Why are they still doing those one room school house and barn inspired buildings? His new projects are straight out of Architectural Record circa 1982. It's like a fucking time warp or something.
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.