The Co. Di. Arch. (a private committee created to defend the architects' interests), based in Milan, presented to the Italian Minister of Culture the following suggestions for architecture competitions:
1 - The jury discussions should be public and with vote open. The participants and the public can attend the discussion, but have no right to intervene. However, the jurors, if they wish, can ask questions to the participants in explanations of their proposals.
2 - The ideas competition should ask only for one drawing board (A0 or E format) and one page (A4 or Letter format) of description of the proposals. The capacity of synthesis, in architecture, is always expression of quality, would be sufficient to remember that only one drawing board was used by Le Corbusier to publicly illustrate his Plan Voisin.
3 - The currently (fake) anonymous system should end. “Architecture needs a father and a mother to born” Filarete wrote in his XVth century “Trattato di architettura”.
4 - The number of architects in the juries should be reduced. A today work of architecture conveys elaborated and diversified knowledge, and the “artistic sensibility”, it is known, can be stronger in an illiterate than in a graduate.
What does the people of this community think about that suggestions?
kinda usefull, since the last 5 big ones have been awarded to foreigners (an big shot ones)
but also kinda useless, since italian architecture sucks dicks...i mean, you can change the rules, but tthat doesnt make the italian architectural situation any better or the italian proposals any stronger....
Jul 27, 04 11:19 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.
Competition rules
The Co. Di. Arch. (a private committee created to defend the architects' interests), based in Milan, presented to the Italian Minister of Culture the following suggestions for architecture competitions:
1 - The jury discussions should be public and with vote open. The participants and the public can attend the discussion, but have no right to intervene. However, the jurors, if they wish, can ask questions to the participants in explanations of their proposals.
2 - The ideas competition should ask only for one drawing board (A0 or E format) and one page (A4 or Letter format) of description of the proposals. The capacity of synthesis, in architecture, is always expression of quality, would be sufficient to remember that only one drawing board was used by Le Corbusier to publicly illustrate his Plan Voisin.
3 - The currently (fake) anonymous system should end. “Architecture needs a father and a mother to born” Filarete wrote in his XVth century “Trattato di architettura”.
4 - The number of architects in the juries should be reduced. A today work of architecture conveys elaborated and diversified knowledge, and the “artistic sensibility”, it is known, can be stronger in an illiterate than in a graduate.
What does the people of this community think about that suggestions?
i think that always a good competition is based in having a good jury...and of course, not doing a competition with an already "selected project"
kinda usefull, since the last 5 big ones have been awarded to foreigners (an big shot ones)
but also kinda useless, since italian architecture sucks dicks...i mean, you can change the rules, but tthat doesnt make the italian architectural situation any better or the italian proposals any stronger....
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.