Actually, i don't think the taxpayers/fed govmnt. pays for it - I'm pretty sure ALL presidential libraries are built with private funds.
Personally, I agree with the notion that you express your view of the world, and thus your ethics, via the people you take money from. I for one would never take a commission to design anything for this reprehensible administration. I mean hell, we turned down a job for a person who mistreats their illegal immigrant staff people in front of guests!
As for RMStern, I don't see that he has anything to lose by taking this commission, though if he IS gay, I'd say he's going against his own interests in principle, though not in business.
according to wiki, it's a little of both. there are official NARA libraries and then there are some that were built by private foundations, state govs, or other. but since the presidential records act, when the president's papers were determined to be federal property instead of private property, the libraries have been built under the jurisdiction of the NARA.
FDR's was built through fund-raising, under hoover it was set up that construction was to be privately funded but maintenance federally funded. but then the laws changed again in '78.
The Presidential Records Act of 1978 established that the Presidential records that document the constitutional, statutory, and ceremonial duties of the President are the property of the United States Government. After the President leaves office, the Archivist of the United States assumes custody of the records. The Act allowed for the continuation of Presidential libraries as the repository for Presidential records.
The Presidential Libraries Act of 1986 also made significant changes to Presidential libraries, requiring private endowments linked to the size of the facility. NARA uses these endowments to offset a portion of the maintenance costs for the library.
and: In March 2005, the Archivist of the United States and John Taylor, the director of the privately run Nixon Library & Birthplace Foundation, exchanged letters on the requirements to allow the Nixon Library to become the twelfth federally funded Presidential library operated by the NARA by 2007.
...he can do whatever he wants, but i could not do it. i like to incorporate the individual in the things i think and hope to create, it would be difficult for me to craft a narrative around this guy, the lies, the hipocracy, the invasion of civil rights - how or what could i create that was intellectually reflective of the person that occupied that position, how can i separate the man from the office and subsequent library? call me what you want, i just am not that good at lying.
Seems like a great fit to me. Stern's architecture is rather boring, imho, without much depth. I assume it'll be ugly and that's appropriate. On the good side, Stern's ugly is at least understated.
A job is a job, business is business. Anyone that thinks otherwise won't be running a business.
seems to me that i've seen stern's version of cowboy/collegiate vernacular already. can't remember what college/university, but it was published 2-3 yrs ago. that's kind of what i'm expecting here.
guess what the truth is if you work in an office you are going to eat your values quickly. unless you have your ultimate politically attuned office environment(to your politics that is) you will get to do fast food joints, strip malls, fugly houses, bigger malls, prisons, etc. it all sucks. so does not having a paycheck. if you are in a position where you don't have to compromise, you have positioned yourself well. if not, you are like most of us.
A job is a job, business is business. Anyone that thinks otherwise won't be running a business.
But in every business, the people you do work for now impacts who will decide to work with you in the future. Your reputation is everything, and in this business of architecture it's the only thing you have.
Which is why, in Stern's case, doing this job might be a great business decision.
The Ritz Carlton that he designed in Dallas actually isn't so bad. Is it Architecture, no, but it is nice to look at. It has detailing that you wouldn't believe, and is very much an art deco sort of tower that fits into the region. I haven't been inside, I am an intern you know, but the outside is nice.
As for what could possible go up at SMU, well, it will probably be along the lines of Georgian Colonial; SMU is VERY strict about the building styles on campus. Expect red brick, and white columns. Sorry, no cedar shingles.
And Steven, that second image looks like a LaQuinta.
if you run your business you may be able to be more selective. but you may need that job to sustain your own life and well being. i am not saying that we should just bend over and take it everytime, but i quit a job once for principle and, although it felt good at the time, the result was a personal financial mini disaster. it would great of course to be selective and hire your clients instead of vicey versey.
Ideally, architects would be selective about the kinds of jobs they take on. We've presumably all worked on jobs that are a tiny bit distasteful--most of us just sucked it up and did the job. But I think it's important to distinguish between the slightly distasteful and the outright offensive.
For instance, I might design a fast-food restaurant, but I wouldn't design the Halliburton mega-headquarters. I believe there's a huge difference.
I'm definitely not anti-business. I've worked for and with clients whose values differed drastically from my own. But a 7,000 sf house in the hills is not a monument to a political ideology. It just a big house.
Whereas a presidential library is is on some level an ideological monument.
Its not an ideological monument, its a historical museum/library that catalogs 8 years of US History. It keeps information from the last 8 years of american politics. Whether you agree with his ideology or not, it is now historical information that should be preserved.
Presidential Libraries are not libraries in the usual sense. They are archives and museums, bringing together in one place the documents and artifacts of a President and his administration and presenting them to the public for study and discussion without regard for political considerations or affiliations. Presidential Libraries and Museums, like their holdings, belong to the American people.
So you think that this library WILL include the Abu Ghraib photographs, for instance? And exhibits on everything GWB did wrong in office, all the partishanship? I doubt it. It won't be apolitical, because GWB is not apolitical.
Naked dog piles at abu grahb are in the bigger picture, not really anything bad. Its not like the administration was sawing off heads of journalists or allowing media companies to conglamerate and control regional news outlets like other administrations
No, you're right. It was just a frat-house style stunt. The guys in the picture were willing participants. It was all fun and games. "Not really anything bad."
This administration's actions and policies allowed Abu Ghraib to happen.
and if thats really that bad, in the global context of black market criminal empires, oil and food warlords, radical islamic extremism, the worst human rights violations our military could come up with is the naked dogpile, then we have turned into a sack of jello. For all we know abu ghraib was ordered, seems like perfectly acceptable means of interogation within a specified warzone. No one getstheir head sawn off or anything like that.
most architects should check with archinect before accepting any commissions
if i was a famous architect, and got a letter from the school i went to telling me i shouldnt accept a job, i would say yes, as long as you give me a completely similar commission, along with more money
then i would laugh for about an hour, then use the letter to wipe my ass. feel free to write him a note showing your disapproval, but dont expect him to care what you think
farwest, it includes documents from the entire bush administration. yes it will include abu gharib images, as it is a historical document. have you ever visited a presidential library? to me it seems like you havent. you really should before you talk about what you think they have. the clinton library has millions of documents, ranging from public policy to miniscule emails and memos.
and once again, the library isnt about partisanship, its a record of what was done while bush was in office.
if youve been to the clinton library, you will see it includes everything, including his impeachment and his monica lewinsky affair.
yes, perhaps the exhibit designers will not focus on this, but the information will be there. as rationalist pointed out early in the conversation, its not about the architect who designs this museum, its more with the exhibit designers to how they portray the ups and downs of his administration.
Full disclosure: I haven't been to a presidential museum. If they have every document in them, including the bad ones, then great.
I also can't object to a private individual accepting a commission, any commission. You're right there.
I went to Yale while Stern was there. I knew him, even liked his curmudgeonly vibe. (Incidentally, there was a student protest when he was hired.)
What irks me is that, since he's the dean of the school, a commission that he accepts in some sense links the school itself (and by default, me and every other student that went or goes there) to that commission. That's what I feel uneasy about.
Every article we read about the George W. Bush Library from now on will say "Robert Stern, architect of the GWB Library and dean of the Yale School of Architecture." Linked by default.
What is to say that Stern doesn't like Bush? I mean, if he does, then what? I think if he was publicly anti-bush, then this would be hypocrital and bad for his reputation, but if he likes Bush, why shouldn't he design it? It just mean that you may no longer like Stern.
". . . since he's the dean of the school, a commission that he accepts in some sense links the school itself (and by default, me . . ."
Would you be happier with a dean who was not allowed to practice while he held the position? I don't see any other condition that would address your problem with this.
It sounds like you're troping your own reaction to this onto the public in general. Not everyone will have the same political stance as you. Not everyone will see this as an unredeemable blight on your alma mata. I suspect about 98% of the public at large won't remember Sterns name 2 minutes after the read the article.
I recall seeing an article about how these Librarys are financed awhile back, just can't place it at the moment. It seems that the majority of the funding comes from the Private Sector.....so I would be lead to believe this has alot of major defense contractors standing in line to give back some of their excess profits. So who ever takes the job is in bed with alot of people if that is truely the way it is financed.
Wouldn't it be so cool that he couldn't raise the money to build the thing.
maybe write stern a letter saying he should take a poll of all alumni and former students about any commission he is thinking about taking
and he is only allowed to accept those with a majority vote
i dont see how this link between bush and your school will mean anything. will someone claim you like bush because you went to yale? and why would you actually care?
beefeater, you might be right about the no partisanship deal, but don't forget, this douche plays by his own rules and is infused by the inescapable delusions of grandeur.
aren't all leaders guilty of megalomania though? I really don't see what the big deal is, its a public archive for important pieces of U.S. history. I think the choice of stern matches the Conservatism of the current admin. I don't like Busg, but he needs a library and these structures are usually charged with a level of politik that is usually beyond the scope of a normal project.
i'm surprised at the hostility that farwest is getting, but then the question also seems to be about several things at once. ok there's a caveat that maybe stern loves bush and so there's no hypocrisy or that the library will not be a de facto shrine, but on the issue of hyporcrisy itself people are ok with it.
going back to rationalist's house analogy, it's completely not a matter of designing a house for someone because they have bad taste, but not designing a house for someone because their actions have killed. i mean really, how simple can it get?
on business decisions, it's probably a good one if your business is all about making money, it's probably a bad one if you think your business is responsible to more than the bottom line. obviously there are exceptions, but the conversation seems to be "if you are well off enough to choose, would you design for X?".
this profession can't help being political, you will mostly be doing buildings for the rich and powerful, that shouldn't stop you from having an opinion on what they do and acting accordingly.
"someone has to design it, and wouldn't you rather it be done well?"
isn't this really a form of blackmail? the point is if you disagree with what the client represents, your participation will only ever be one of ad hoc reform, possibly compromised by the overall political picture.
Without stating a position on either GWB or Stern, don't you think that Stern's position as Dean at Yale should preclude his firm to taking politically charged projects? That the GWB library does constitute as an abnormally politically charged project? and that will reflect (positively or negatively, depending on your position) on the Architecture department at Yale?
I personally think that it would have been wise to have not accepted the project, i'm sure that Stern's office doesn't need it, after all. but that's just my opinion.
...look, i only have a problem with the library because it will lack intellectual and creative honesty, but then i guess that's why you'd want stern. the only better choice would have been graves, i mean he could have marketed target all over the thing.
Should Stern be Chastised for taking the Bush Library job?
Actually, i don't think the taxpayers/fed govmnt. pays for it - I'm pretty sure ALL presidential libraries are built with private funds.
Personally, I agree with the notion that you express your view of the world, and thus your ethics, via the people you take money from. I for one would never take a commission to design anything for this reprehensible administration. I mean hell, we turned down a job for a person who mistreats their illegal immigrant staff people in front of guests!
As for RMStern, I don't see that he has anything to lose by taking this commission, though if he IS gay, I'd say he's going against his own interests in principle, though not in business.
stern has plenty of experience doing buildings for theme parks - i think he'll do just fine here.
think he'll take a fall?
Let the man design the library, sheesh.
Wha, Stern is gay?! Wow, that explains so much!
according to wiki, it's a little of both. there are official NARA libraries and then there are some that were built by private foundations, state govs, or other. but since the presidential records act, when the president's papers were determined to be federal property instead of private property, the libraries have been built under the jurisdiction of the NARA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_library
FDR's was built through fund-raising, under hoover it was set up that construction was to be privately funded but maintenance federally funded. but then the laws changed again in '78.
The Presidential Records Act of 1978 established that the Presidential records that document the constitutional, statutory, and ceremonial duties of the President are the property of the United States Government. After the President leaves office, the Archivist of the United States assumes custody of the records. The Act allowed for the continuation of Presidential libraries as the repository for Presidential records.
The Presidential Libraries Act of 1986 also made significant changes to Presidential libraries, requiring private endowments linked to the size of the facility. NARA uses these endowments to offset a portion of the maintenance costs for the library.
and:
In March 2005, the Archivist of the United States and John Taylor, the director of the privately run Nixon Library & Birthplace Foundation, exchanged letters on the requirements to allow the Nixon Library to become the twelfth federally funded Presidential library operated by the NARA by 2007.
farwest....he might decide to go green and use, "Hardie Shingles"
...he can do whatever he wants, but i could not do it. i like to incorporate the individual in the things i think and hope to create, it would be difficult for me to craft a narrative around this guy, the lies, the hipocracy, the invasion of civil rights - how or what could i create that was intellectually reflective of the person that occupied that position, how can i separate the man from the office and subsequent library? call me what you want, i just am not that good at lying.
it would be difficult for me to design anything for an president/congressman/government puppet, but hey I gotz to pay teh mortgage.
I'd do it. What a delightful opportunity for a sublime, infinite space with no documents or books to muck it up.
hardie shingles qualify a green?
funny, i woulda thought western red cedar might be a little greener.
isn't there something undemocratic about refusing to play with kids you don't like?
Its too bad people no longer try to understand each other and focus on hurling vitriol... you know what they say about 2 wrongs.
Seems like a great fit to me. Stern's architecture is rather boring, imho, without much depth. I assume it'll be ugly and that's appropriate. On the good side, Stern's ugly is at least understated.
A job is a job, business is business. Anyone that thinks otherwise won't be running a business.
seems to me that i've seen stern's version of cowboy/collegiate vernacular already. can't remember what college/university, but it was published 2-3 yrs ago. that's kind of what i'm expecting here.
guess what the truth is if you work in an office you are going to eat your values quickly. unless you have your ultimate politically attuned office environment(to your politics that is) you will get to do fast food joints, strip malls, fugly houses, bigger malls, prisons, etc. it all sucks. so does not having a paycheck. if you are in a position where you don't have to compromise, you have positioned yourself well. if not, you are like most of us.
But in every business, the people you do work for now impacts who will decide to work with you in the future. Your reputation is everything, and in this business of architecture it's the only thing you have.
Which is why, in Stern's case, doing this job might be a great business decision.
The Ritz Carlton that he designed in Dallas actually isn't so bad. Is it Architecture, no, but it is nice to look at. It has detailing that you wouldn't believe, and is very much an art deco sort of tower that fits into the region. I haven't been inside, I am an intern you know, but the outside is nice.
As for what could possible go up at SMU, well, it will probably be along the lines of Georgian Colonial; SMU is VERY strict about the building styles on campus. Expect red brick, and white columns. Sorry, no cedar shingles.
And Steven, that second image looks like a LaQuinta.
if you run your business you may be able to be more selective. but you may need that job to sustain your own life and well being. i am not saying that we should just bend over and take it everytime, but i quit a job once for principle and, although it felt good at the time, the result was a personal financial mini disaster. it would great of course to be selective and hire your clients instead of vicey versey.
I quit a job because I didn't want to spend three years of my life working on a Woman's State Prison with NBBJ...
Ideally, architects would be selective about the kinds of jobs they take on. We've presumably all worked on jobs that are a tiny bit distasteful--most of us just sucked it up and did the job. But I think it's important to distinguish between the slightly distasteful and the outright offensive.
For instance, I might design a fast-food restaurant, but I wouldn't design the Halliburton mega-headquarters. I believe there's a huge difference.
I'm definitely not anti-business. I've worked for and with clients whose values differed drastically from my own. But a 7,000 sf house in the hills is not a monument to a political ideology. It just a big house.
Whereas a presidential library is is on some level an ideological monument.
Its not an ideological monument, its a historical museum/library that catalogs 8 years of US History. It keeps information from the last 8 years of american politics. Whether you agree with his ideology or not, it is now historical information that should be preserved.
Taken from the Government Archives website:
Presidential Libraries are not libraries in the usual sense. They are archives and museums, bringing together in one place the documents and artifacts of a President and his administration and presenting them to the public for study and discussion without regard for political considerations or affiliations. Presidential Libraries and Museums, like their holdings, belong to the American people.
So you think that this library WILL include the Abu Ghraib photographs, for instance? And exhibits on everything GWB did wrong in office, all the partishanship? I doubt it. It won't be apolitical, because GWB is not apolitical.
well i think the nixon library has the watergate tapes in it, so one never knows, does one?
hell, I'd design it, and I hate Bush. It's an archive its not a monument to him.
...OKAY but it is a monument to his actions.
I would care even less
I think Stern should be applauded for landing the job.
Naked dog piles at abu grahb are in the bigger picture, not really anything bad. Its not like the administration was sawing off heads of journalists or allowing media companies to conglamerate and control regional news outlets like other administrations
No, you're right. It was just a frat-house style stunt. The guys in the picture were willing participants. It was all fun and games. "Not really anything bad."
This administration's actions and policies allowed Abu Ghraib to happen.
and if thats really that bad, in the global context of black market criminal empires, oil and food warlords, radical islamic extremism, the worst human rights violations our military could come up with is the naked dogpile, then we have turned into a sack of jello. For all we know abu ghraib was ordered, seems like perfectly acceptable means of interogation within a specified warzone. No one getstheir head sawn off or anything like that.
most architects should check with archinect before accepting any commissions
if i was a famous architect, and got a letter from the school i went to telling me i shouldnt accept a job, i would say yes, as long as you give me a completely similar commission, along with more money
then i would laugh for about an hour, then use the letter to wipe my ass. feel free to write him a note showing your disapproval, but dont expect him to care what you think
stern can accept any commissions he wants to
evilplatypus, are you secretly rush limbaugh?
yes
this is one of the worst things you could do for your rep.
farwest, it includes documents from the entire bush administration. yes it will include abu gharib images, as it is a historical document. have you ever visited a presidential library? to me it seems like you havent. you really should before you talk about what you think they have. the clinton library has millions of documents, ranging from public policy to miniscule emails and memos.
and once again, the library isnt about partisanship, its a record of what was done while bush was in office.
if youve been to the clinton library, you will see it includes everything, including his impeachment and his monica lewinsky affair.
yes, perhaps the exhibit designers will not focus on this, but the information will be there. as rationalist pointed out early in the conversation, its not about the architect who designs this museum, its more with the exhibit designers to how they portray the ups and downs of his administration.
Full disclosure: I haven't been to a presidential museum. If they have every document in them, including the bad ones, then great.
I also can't object to a private individual accepting a commission, any commission. You're right there.
I went to Yale while Stern was there. I knew him, even liked his curmudgeonly vibe. (Incidentally, there was a student protest when he was hired.)
What irks me is that, since he's the dean of the school, a commission that he accepts in some sense links the school itself (and by default, me and every other student that went or goes there) to that commission. That's what I feel uneasy about.
Every article we read about the George W. Bush Library from now on will say "Robert Stern, architect of the GWB Library and dean of the Yale School of Architecture." Linked by default.
I think clinton's library is damn fine lookin' if i do say so myself.
can they build prison cells in a presidential library to hold the ex-president? and if they haven't i think that could redeem stern.
What is to say that Stern doesn't like Bush? I mean, if he does, then what? I think if he was publicly anti-bush, then this would be hypocrital and bad for his reputation, but if he likes Bush, why shouldn't he design it? It just mean that you may no longer like Stern.
". . . since he's the dean of the school, a commission that he accepts in some sense links the school itself (and by default, me . . ."
Would you be happier with a dean who was not allowed to practice while he held the position? I don't see any other condition that would address your problem with this.
It sounds like you're troping your own reaction to this onto the public in general. Not everyone will have the same political stance as you. Not everyone will see this as an unredeemable blight on your alma mata. I suspect about 98% of the public at large won't remember Sterns name 2 minutes after the read the article.
Yale is so 20th century
I recall seeing an article about how these Librarys are financed awhile back, just can't place it at the moment. It seems that the majority of the funding comes from the Private Sector.....so I would be lead to believe this has alot of major defense contractors standing in line to give back some of their excess profits. So who ever takes the job is in bed with alot of people if that is truely the way it is financed.
Wouldn't it be so cool that he couldn't raise the money to build the thing.
not to mention bush went to yale...
maybe write stern a letter saying he should take a poll of all alumni and former students about any commission he is thinking about taking
and he is only allowed to accept those with a majority vote
i dont see how this link between bush and your school will mean anything. will someone claim you like bush because you went to yale? and why would you actually care?
beefeater, you might be right about the no partisanship deal, but don't forget, this douche plays by his own rules and is infused by the inescapable delusions of grandeur.
aren't all leaders guilty of megalomania though? I really don't see what the big deal is, its a public archive for important pieces of U.S. history. I think the choice of stern matches the Conservatism of the current admin. I don't like Busg, but he needs a library and these structures are usually charged with a level of politik that is usually beyond the scope of a normal project.
i'm surprised at the hostility that farwest is getting, but then the question also seems to be about several things at once. ok there's a caveat that maybe stern loves bush and so there's no hypocrisy or that the library will not be a de facto shrine, but on the issue of hyporcrisy itself people are ok with it.
going back to rationalist's house analogy, it's completely not a matter of designing a house for someone because they have bad taste, but not designing a house for someone because their actions have killed. i mean really, how simple can it get?
on business decisions, it's probably a good one if your business is all about making money, it's probably a bad one if you think your business is responsible to more than the bottom line. obviously there are exceptions, but the conversation seems to be "if you are well off enough to choose, would you design for X?".
this profession can't help being political, you will mostly be doing buildings for the rich and powerful, that shouldn't stop you from having an opinion on what they do and acting accordingly.
"someone has to design it, and wouldn't you rather it be done well?"
isn't this really a form of blackmail? the point is if you disagree with what the client represents, your participation will only ever be one of ad hoc reform, possibly compromised by the overall political picture.
Without stating a position on either GWB or Stern, don't you think that Stern's position as Dean at Yale should preclude his firm to taking politically charged projects? That the GWB library does constitute as an abnormally politically charged project? and that will reflect (positively or negatively, depending on your position) on the Architecture department at Yale?
I personally think that it would have been wise to have not accepted the project, i'm sure that Stern's office doesn't need it, after all. but that's just my opinion.
...look, i only have a problem with the library because it will lack intellectual and creative honesty, but then i guess that's why you'd want stern. the only better choice would have been graves, i mean he could have marketed target all over the thing.
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.