I think all of these points are really well made, especially jaja's. As much as I hate to admit it, this is the state of things so I suppose you have to ask yourself, do we fight it head on, subvert it from the inside, or give into marchitecture alltogether. I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but Robert Venturi seemed really on to something when he suggest that urban sprawl is here to stay and that architects need to learn to adapt to the new urban environment in America. New York is dead, Las Vegas is in and that is something we have yet to take advantage of. We are totally brianwashed in college, taught to think that as the experts, it's our job to tell the clients what they want, not the other way around.
I once stumbled across the principal at a major commercial firm in Atlanta years ago shopping for electronics. His name was Niles Bolton, and he told me that 99% of the time your gonna have to design marchitecture to feed your firm and keep yourself going, but every once in a great while a client will come along that will actually listen to you and there's your chance to do something great. I'm not sure how true that statement is but it's always sounded right to me. Some of his work is bad, but then again some of it is rather special.
We need to stop playing the "straving artists" and reclaim our dignity. We spend more energy towards what we do than any other profession, and we spend as much time in training as doctors and lawyers, it's time we were given our due, rather than scraping out existences at the pit of society, we need to stop talking to regular people like they're retarded children. We need to play the game and change the rules from the inside, if we don't sprawl is gonna get worse, marchitecutre more widespread and our profession more irrelevant. We can't win this thing head on, but take it from behind, a trojan horse so to speak, and we can get back our relevance and shape our own future for once.
btw. Pastels and Khakis are the common corporate architect "uniform" in the south, just as is all black is the common "uniform" for boutique firms in New York
really though, this arguement about 'giving clients what they want' is a totally dead end arguement. there's no legitimate arguement to make in the face of shitecture like the evans groups except to basically give up on these sedentary diabetic designers and their clients. it's a free country and we shouldn't cry over the spilt milk of brainless clients and spineless architects. screw them.
The reason that architects "aren't paid enough" is that the public isn't educated enough about design and thus doesn't know the true worth of architects. People like the Evans group only perpetuate the public perception that architects are only there to provide the necessary drafting strokes on the computer to build what the client already "has in mind." If you say that we should design what the client wants, then you are assuming the client has any concept of building and design and reality, and they don't. Way to trap the world in slovenly holes. By that logic we'd all be still in grass huts, because group consensus said that that's what was best. Progress depends on the solitary innovator who thinks about the preconceived box. We are those solitary innovators, and progress depends on US.
We need to stop playing the "straving artists" and reclaim our dignity
But there is enormous dignity in being a starving artist!
I think I'm not the only one who has considered working for Toll Brothers to try to "change things from the inside". But after having read some stories from people here who have sorta tried that, and after reading that in-depth article on Toll Bros that was posted here a few months ago, I think it's an impossible task. The goals of Toll Bros and firms that work similarly are so far away from the professional goals I have for myself. Two totally different worlds.
But! There will always be a market for what I do - very small, expensive, totally custom work. It's a very small market, so I'll never get rich, but getting rich isn't one of my goals.
I wish there was on overall greater level of awareness in our society of "quality" - be that quality design or education or food or whatever. Some people can make money off the market's desire for cheaper and faster. I'm not one of those people. But I'm happy going to work every day and that's what is important to me.
On another note, I will never respect an architect who wears a "pastel and khaki uniform" or a "black turtleneck uniform" either for that matter. The whole point is to have a sense of style. (See "what does your office dress like' thread.)
The weird thing, lb, is that honestly people seemed to value quality a lot more in the past; I'm not normally one of those nostalgic types, because frankly I think human history has been nothing but drudgery in any age, but it really does seem like people no longer understand that you pretty much get what you pay for (in most cases), and their fathers DO understand that.
And myriam my LOL post was about the notion that first you must think "about" the box in order to then think "outside" the box. My brain and hand-eye coordination has just gone all to chaos.
But yes you're right. "You get what you pay for" is really shrugged off by most people these days. Except maybe Mac fanatics. And a very few enlightened clients of mine.
But how do we attack this thing dead on? I'm not suggesting we completely succomb to the will of the market, just try and change "marchitecture" to architecture. In the similar vein that architecture was mutated, use sprawl and the strip to our advantage, adapt and change with the times and stop living in past ideals of socialist utopias that so epitomised old modern architecture. We need to embrace chaos and change. So how the hell do we attack this stuff dead on, because its obivious we're losing the battle. Unless your designing museums, and that is the WORST that could happen to us. We're being relegated to design cultural spaces that only a small percentage of the overall population gives a flying crap about. Meanwhile the real war is happening in the housing/commercial sector. Its almost like we're missing the fight.
Schittenfahrt, I like your wurst and schachtel architecture better! Although I think the evan's group must be commended for their "thick skinnedness". We've all got to market ourselves somehow....I must admit, I don't mind the soundtrack...can't stand the transitions though. Also, one must make consessions on style for a firm where everyone looks like they are in their 60s...
not everyone is in a position to chose the kinds of work they do so can't get too doggymatic about the deal.
and yet i have this ick feeling like i am watching a performance piece on pedophilia with live simulated sex and real kids...is it art or are they really engaging in a bit of nastiness...?
Since everyone is anti marchitecture, what is good architecture? Does everyone here work for gehry? Can someone ad an image of their own work to get an idea of what level of architecture we have to aim for?
That was just terrible!! ... Would never work in a firm like that!! but then again, the dimwits working there probably make twice the amount of money that we do !! ... At least me!!
let's go and take over their happy village,
torch their shacks and piss in their mercedes.
i'll procede to force mr evans to eat s,m,l,xl page by page, covers included.
fucking disgusting piece of shit.
amazing video... how come I've never heard anything about Don Evans, one of the most "influential architects of the US" (sic)?
really, while here -south Europe- there are some crap like that too (those chic greek entablatures, columns and other classic roman paraphernalia) the state of "popular" architecture isn't that bad... I mean, usually the most "anti-progressive" buildings you'll find just follow the aesthetics of the traditional and vernacular mediterranean architecture, and that's got more to do with adapting old construction techniques to contemporary needs than disguising houses with styles, -isms and capitals made out of plaster or white cement.
And that thing about being in a garage imagining Maya blobs? .. I've worked in three normal -or standard- offices and I've never done anything as bad as what the Evans group do nor psychedelic avantgarde blobs or parametric experiments.. looks like you're confronting the two extremes of the architecture office's spectrum.
the EG firm is completely unbelievable... it looks like a parody, a Monty Python's sketch, specially the boulevard of the broken dreams.. lol .. I took a testimonium of the "Small town ambience" .. :
really, from an outsider -european- point of view, is this for real? is true what abra says of this representing the 99% of the housing industry of the US? .. are things that bad? to the point of changing the profession's name to .. this?
not that everything in Europe is golden but this video -and some opinions in this thread- is frightening .. we'll send Per to America.. you need more 3d honeycomb and less architectural perversions like that Evans' crap.
"the people only want what they've been told to want. the real problem with our profession is that we keep letting ourselves be pushed aside when it comes to telling the people what to want"
i've read some pretty dumb posts and some pretty arrogant posts on this forum before, but i'm pretty sure the quote above is about the dumbest and the most arrogant so far
i feel sorry for any professional who presumes our clients and our users are unthinking idiots, unworthy and unqualified to make up their own minds about the environment in which they live
and we wonder why the public doesn't respect us and the work that we do !
The statistics for architect-designed buildings in the world range from 2% of total buildings through to 10% depending on where you are [I saw an interview last week with Glen Murcutt who stated the 2% figure].
Of that figure, you might say that 10% of that is any 'good' at all. This means that not only is architecture a niche profession but, like other professions, 90% of the work is shit anyway.
The market is already getting what they want, or put specifically, the majority of the market is getting what they want or deserve. This market is served by the Evans Group and their ilk, and the evidence of this is obvious.
So by us, who presumeably have an interest in creating what we might deem 'good' architecture, giving in to some kind of idea about giving the public what it wants is folly and not necessary.
If anytihng, we should be pushing for more 'architecture', and less Evans Group crap, for consolidation and stengthening, rather than dilution and disneyfication.
... "So by us, who presumeably have an interest in creating what we might deem 'good' architecture..."
i must say that i find your views - and the views of the other writer who i quoted above - to be uncomfortably elitist ... the visitors to this forum have nothing resembling a consensus about "good architecture" ...
in my humble opinion, views of the sort you put forward do nothing but further increase the divide between the public and our profession
because it is hard to get the public's attention, and even harder to craft and deliver a message that resonates with the public, a significant part of our profession has simply abandoned any pretense of trying to elevate the public taste ... my god, that's like doctors throwing up their hands and quitting because infectious disease seems difficult to erradicate
where's our damn backbone ? if we're interested in doing something that elevates society and improves lives, how can we in good conscience simply wallow in theoretical exercises aimed soley at producing a few good "artsy" buildings.
Dec 11, 05 5:53 pm ·
·
Ach, das Jugendstil heute!?
Entwürfe für die Schneckenhäuser von Schlittenfahrt
Certainly, good architecture is up for debate, which is why I intentionally did not go into what that is, and emphasised it as a notion. or intent of the profession. The least that you can define good architecture as, is that which is not crap.
When you occupy just 2-10% of an industry, as we do, you are by definition the elite. My argument, is that you dont capitulate in the face of this but maintain and focus on higher standards, and leave the market to get their bullshit from the bullshit provider, who by and large are not architects anyway.
I think you and I agree to an extent - its just that I don't see the alternative, as you seem to, being blobs.
From my experience, what the public expect from architects, is architecture, not marketecture.
perhaps i don't understand digger, so hopefully he can clarify a little better the argument. i find the statement you find so appalling, actually on point. the firm referred to and one i worked for about a week really didn't produce architecture, they really did not treat the client as individual. the marketing department for the Kara Homes, K. Hovnanian, Toll Brothers did some overly simplistic market studies - probably based on polling data - and we designed buildings to satisfy a nebulous, and ever fickle "public". you know the public that decides whether or not ally mcbeal should eat at BK or McDs. that audience does not want to be engaged with the design process, they have Trading Spaces and other tv shows to tel them about design, that public is not interested in becoming engaged in urban design, new urbanism and the like, they want quaint, neo-victorian-shabby-chic-sentimental homes that harkens back to a time they were not even around to witness.
so yeah, i do think the public needs to become alot more educated when it comes to the built environment, not just the Gehry's, Eisenman's, Mayne's, Hadid's, but the Sambo's, Murcutt's, and the Cameron Sinclair's of the world. dwell, and ready-made may be a start for those budding design groupies within the public realm, but they are hardly the methods of carrying the discussion to the broader public.
i can only speak for myself and my own career ... i did not become an architect to build monuments to my own ego ... rather, i became an architect to use my education and talents in the service of my fellow man ... to use what i know to improve the city i inhabit and the neighborhood in which i live ... along the way, i'd like to have some fun and provide well for my family and prepare for my own retirement ... by most standards, i have been very successful ... my work is respected both by my colleagues and by my peers ... i run a successful business ... i'm a fellow in the institute ... and, i expect to die happy without every having my photograph in architectural record or some such magazine
my view of architecture -- and the role of architects -- is rather expansive ... it may be true that architects are not responsible for the preponderance of buildings in the world ... but, in MY world (i.e. the US) i believe the percentage is much, much higher ... i believe that i, and my colleagues in the profession, have the capacity to improve the world in which we live ...
but, to do so we have to decide to step up to the plate more ... we have to become involved in the world outside our own little practices and project a point of view, responsibly and clearly, that architects and architecture is a benefit to mankind, not just a way to make buildings more expensive or a way for us to become famous ... we have to define our work in the context of our clients and our users ... which is NOT to say i would ever want to do the kind of work done by The Evans Group ...
to have impact, architects have to stand up for what we believe across a broad front ... it can't just be a few small voices shouting in the darkness ... what i was replying to above was a perception that too many people here have just thrown up their hands in resignation because it is hard to change the public's perception of what we can do for them ... yes, it is hard ... but, it's not impossible for us to make progress if we work together and make our case from the perspective of what's in it for our clients, and our users, and our communities.
Check this firm out
I think all of these points are really well made, especially jaja's. As much as I hate to admit it, this is the state of things so I suppose you have to ask yourself, do we fight it head on, subvert it from the inside, or give into marchitecture alltogether. I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but Robert Venturi seemed really on to something when he suggest that urban sprawl is here to stay and that architects need to learn to adapt to the new urban environment in America. New York is dead, Las Vegas is in and that is something we have yet to take advantage of. We are totally brianwashed in college, taught to think that as the experts, it's our job to tell the clients what they want, not the other way around.
I once stumbled across the principal at a major commercial firm in Atlanta years ago shopping for electronics. His name was Niles Bolton, and he told me that 99% of the time your gonna have to design marchitecture to feed your firm and keep yourself going, but every once in a great while a client will come along that will actually listen to you and there's your chance to do something great. I'm not sure how true that statement is but it's always sounded right to me. Some of his work is bad, but then again some of it is rather special.
We need to stop playing the "straving artists" and reclaim our dignity. We spend more energy towards what we do than any other profession, and we spend as much time in training as doctors and lawyers, it's time we were given our due, rather than scraping out existences at the pit of society, we need to stop talking to regular people like they're retarded children. We need to play the game and change the rules from the inside, if we don't sprawl is gonna get worse, marchitecutre more widespread and our profession more irrelevant. We can't win this thing head on, but take it from behind, a trojan horse so to speak, and we can get back our relevance and shape our own future for once.
btw. Pastels and Khakis are the common corporate architect "uniform" in the south, just as is all black is the common "uniform" for boutique firms in New York
I'm reaching for a razor blade and rolling up my shirt sleeves as the voiceover guy speaks.....
cutting edge stuff, no doubt about it. tee hee...
my eyes feel are slightly watery right now, not sure if it's from laughing or crying though...
really though, this arguement about 'giving clients what they want' is a totally dead end arguement. there's no legitimate arguement to make in the face of shitecture like the evans groups except to basically give up on these sedentary diabetic designers and their clients. it's a free country and we shouldn't cry over the spilt milk of brainless clients and spineless architects. screw them.
rather be poor than be a whore.
The reason that architects "aren't paid enough" is that the public isn't educated enough about design and thus doesn't know the true worth of architects. People like the Evans group only perpetuate the public perception that architects are only there to provide the necessary drafting strokes on the computer to build what the client already "has in mind." If you say that we should design what the client wants, then you are assuming the client has any concept of building and design and reality, and they don't. Way to trap the world in slovenly holes. By that logic we'd all be still in grass huts, because group consensus said that that's what was best. Progress depends on the solitary innovator who thinks about the preconceived box. We are those solitary innovators, and progress depends on US.
But there is enormous dignity in being a starving artist!
I think I'm not the only one who has considered working for Toll Brothers to try to "change things from the inside". But after having read some stories from people here who have sorta tried that, and after reading that in-depth article on Toll Bros that was posted here a few months ago, I think it's an impossible task. The goals of Toll Bros and firms that work similarly are so far away from the professional goals I have for myself. Two totally different worlds.
But! There will always be a market for what I do - very small, expensive, totally custom work. It's a very small market, so I'll never get rich, but getting rich isn't one of my goals.
I wish there was on overall greater level of awareness in our society of "quality" - be that quality design or education or food or whatever. Some people can make money off the market's desire for cheaper and faster. I'm not one of those people. But I'm happy going to work every day and that's what is important to me.
On another note, I will never respect an architect who wears a "pastel and khaki uniform" or a "black turtleneck uniform" either for that matter. The whole point is to have a sense of style. (See "what does your office dress like' thread.)
Good post, myriam.
*solitary innovator who thinks OUTSIDE the preconceived box.
Although I suppose that do that, one must think about the box in the first place. Ahh well. Typo.
Schachtel Architektur
The weird thing, lb, is that honestly people seemed to value quality a lot more in the past; I'm not normally one of those nostalgic types, because frankly I think human history has been nothing but drudgery in any age, but it really does seem like people no longer understand that you pretty much get what you pay for (in most cases), and their fathers DO understand that.
LOL myriam. Is everyone suddenly really cold and tired? It took me like fifteen minutes to type that last post, damn cursor kept skipping all around.
And myriam my LOL post was about the notion that first you must think "about" the box in order to then think "outside" the box. My brain and hand-eye coordination has just gone all to chaos.
But yes you're right. "You get what you pay for" is really shrugged off by most people these days. Except maybe Mac fanatics. And a very few enlightened clients of mine.
I'm also curious, Harold, thread starter, what do you think? Do you work at Evans Group, as I suspect you do?
But how do we attack this thing dead on? I'm not suggesting we completely succomb to the will of the market, just try and change "marchitecture" to architecture. In the similar vein that architecture was mutated, use sprawl and the strip to our advantage, adapt and change with the times and stop living in past ideals of socialist utopias that so epitomised old modern architecture. We need to embrace chaos and change. So how the hell do we attack this stuff dead on, because its obivious we're losing the battle. Unless your designing museums, and that is the WORST that could happen to us. We're being relegated to design cultural spaces that only a small percentage of the overall population gives a flying crap about. Meanwhile the real war is happening in the housing/commercial sector. Its almost like we're missing the fight.
unlock the Schloß
"The Wurst is yet to come!"
Schittenfahrt, I like your wurst and schachtel architecture better! Although I think the evan's group must be commended for their "thick skinnedness". We've all got to market ourselves somehow....I must admit, I don't mind the soundtrack...can't stand the transitions though. Also, one must make consessions on style for a firm where everyone looks like they are in their 60s...
Herr Kutsky, Ãœberarchitekt
not everyone is in a position to chose the kinds of work they do so can't get too doggymatic about the deal.
and yet i have this ick feeling like i am watching a performance piece on pedophilia with live simulated sex and real kids...is it art or are they really engaging in a bit of nastiness...?
That music playing when you launch the website is by Thievery Corporation ("Focus on Sight" from the Mirror Conspiracy album), copyright 2000.
I have a strong suspicion the Evans Group didn't quite ask permission to use that music...
I smell a copyright violation!
Since everyone is anti marchitecture, what is good architecture? Does everyone here work for gehry? Can someone ad an image of their own work to get an idea of what level of architecture we have to aim for?
beautiful, frankencense.
That was just terrible!! ... Would never work in a firm like that!! but then again, the dimwits working there probably make twice the amount of money that we do !! ... At least me!!
Sad to add... but Jaja's right.
Like I always say :-
"Good taste is inversely proportional to wealth"
Hell I should make that my signature!!
let's go and take over their happy village,
torch their shacks and piss in their mercedes.
i'll procede to force mr evans to eat s,m,l,xl page by page, covers included.
fucking disgusting piece of shit.
amazing video... how come I've never heard anything about Don Evans, one of the most "influential architects of the US" (sic)?
really, while here -south Europe- there are some crap like that too (those chic greek entablatures, columns and other classic roman paraphernalia) the state of "popular" architecture isn't that bad... I mean, usually the most "anti-progressive" buildings you'll find just follow the aesthetics of the traditional and vernacular mediterranean architecture, and that's got more to do with adapting old construction techniques to contemporary needs than disguising houses with styles, -isms and capitals made out of plaster or white cement.
And that thing about being in a garage imagining Maya blobs? .. I've worked in three normal -or standard- offices and I've never done anything as bad as what the Evans group do nor psychedelic avantgarde blobs or parametric experiments.. looks like you're confronting the two extremes of the architecture office's spectrum.
the EG firm is completely unbelievable... it looks like a parody, a Monty Python's sketch, specially the boulevard of the broken dreams.. lol .. I took a testimonium of the "Small town ambience" .. :
really, from an outsider -european- point of view, is this for real? is true what abra says of this representing the 99% of the housing industry of the US? .. are things that bad? to the point of changing the profession's name to .. this?
not that everything in Europe is golden but this video -and some opinions in this thread- is frightening .. we'll send Per to America.. you need more 3d honeycomb and less architectural perversions like that Evans' crap.
i've read some pretty dumb posts and some pretty arrogant posts on this forum before, but i'm pretty sure the quote above is about the dumbest and the most arrogant so far
i feel sorry for any professional who presumes our clients and our users are unthinking idiots, unworthy and unqualified to make up their own minds about the environment in which they live
and we wonder why the public doesn't respect us and the work that we do !
The statistics for architect-designed buildings in the world range from 2% of total buildings through to 10% depending on where you are [I saw an interview last week with Glen Murcutt who stated the 2% figure].
Of that figure, you might say that 10% of that is any 'good' at all. This means that not only is architecture a niche profession but, like other professions, 90% of the work is shit anyway.
The market is already getting what they want, or put specifically, the majority of the market is getting what they want or deserve. This market is served by the Evans Group and their ilk, and the evidence of this is obvious.
So by us, who presumeably have an interest in creating what we might deem 'good' architecture, giving in to some kind of idea about giving the public what it wants is folly and not necessary.
If anytihng, we should be pushing for more 'architecture', and less Evans Group crap, for consolidation and stengthening, rather than dilution and disneyfication.
... "So by us, who presumeably have an interest in creating what we might deem 'good' architecture..."
i must say that i find your views - and the views of the other writer who i quoted above - to be uncomfortably elitist ... the visitors to this forum have nothing resembling a consensus about "good architecture" ...
in my humble opinion, views of the sort you put forward do nothing but further increase the divide between the public and our profession
because it is hard to get the public's attention, and even harder to craft and deliver a message that resonates with the public, a significant part of our profession has simply abandoned any pretense of trying to elevate the public taste ... my god, that's like doctors throwing up their hands and quitting because infectious disease seems difficult to erradicate
where's our damn backbone ? if we're interested in doing something that elevates society and improves lives, how can we in good conscience simply wallow in theoretical exercises aimed soley at producing a few good "artsy" buildings.
Ach, das Jugendstil heute!?
Entwürfe für die Schneckenhäuser von Schlittenfahrt
Mein Architekten
digger,
Certainly, good architecture is up for debate, which is why I intentionally did not go into what that is, and emphasised it as a notion. or intent of the profession. The least that you can define good architecture as, is that which is not crap.
When you occupy just 2-10% of an industry, as we do, you are by definition the elite. My argument, is that you dont capitulate in the face of this but maintain and focus on higher standards, and leave the market to get their bullshit from the bullshit provider, who by and large are not architects anyway.
I think you and I agree to an extent - its just that I don't see the alternative, as you seem to, being blobs.
From my experience, what the public expect from architects, is architecture, not marketecture.
perhaps i don't understand digger, so hopefully he can clarify a little better the argument. i find the statement you find so appalling, actually on point. the firm referred to and one i worked for about a week really didn't produce architecture, they really did not treat the client as individual. the marketing department for the Kara Homes, K. Hovnanian, Toll Brothers did some overly simplistic market studies - probably based on polling data - and we designed buildings to satisfy a nebulous, and ever fickle "public". you know the public that decides whether or not ally mcbeal should eat at BK or McDs. that audience does not want to be engaged with the design process, they have Trading Spaces and other tv shows to tel them about design, that public is not interested in becoming engaged in urban design, new urbanism and the like, they want quaint, neo-victorian-shabby-chic-sentimental homes that harkens back to a time they were not even around to witness.
so yeah, i do think the public needs to become alot more educated when it comes to the built environment, not just the Gehry's, Eisenman's, Mayne's, Hadid's, but the Sambo's, Murcutt's, and the Cameron Sinclair's of the world. dwell, and ready-made may be a start for those budding design groupies within the public realm, but they are hardly the methods of carrying the discussion to the broader public.
i can only speak for myself and my own career ... i did not become an architect to build monuments to my own ego ... rather, i became an architect to use my education and talents in the service of my fellow man ... to use what i know to improve the city i inhabit and the neighborhood in which i live ... along the way, i'd like to have some fun and provide well for my family and prepare for my own retirement ... by most standards, i have been very successful ... my work is respected both by my colleagues and by my peers ... i run a successful business ... i'm a fellow in the institute ... and, i expect to die happy without every having my photograph in architectural record or some such magazine
my view of architecture -- and the role of architects -- is rather expansive ... it may be true that architects are not responsible for the preponderance of buildings in the world ... but, in MY world (i.e. the US) i believe the percentage is much, much higher ... i believe that i, and my colleagues in the profession, have the capacity to improve the world in which we live ...
but, to do so we have to decide to step up to the plate more ... we have to become involved in the world outside our own little practices and project a point of view, responsibly and clearly, that architects and architecture is a benefit to mankind, not just a way to make buildings more expensive or a way for us to become famous ... we have to define our work in the context of our clients and our users ... which is NOT to say i would ever want to do the kind of work done by The Evans Group ...
to have impact, architects have to stand up for what we believe across a broad front ... it can't just be a few small voices shouting in the darkness ... what i was replying to above was a perception that too many people here have just thrown up their hands in resignation because it is hard to change the public's perception of what we can do for them ... yes, it is hard ... but, it's not impossible for us to make progress if we work together and make our case from the perspective of what's in it for our clients, and our users, and our communities.
agreed.
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.