Very dissapointing the way in which the Architecture Foundation set up the procedure to produce a shortlist.
It has of course produced a list of 'usual suspects'
The competition was set up like this (official text):
Entrants are asked to submit an A4 registration sheet and three A3 boards. They may also submit up to ten A3 sides of supplementary images (see full brief)
The three A3 boards must contain practice details, one single project of theirs which best illustrates both their abilities as an architect and their suitability for this project and a response to the following questions:
How, in a relatively small building, would you design for the range of actions and atmospheres, from the energy of a party to the intimacy of a drawing, that it will contain?
How should the design of this building enable it to welcome a diverse range of publics?
How could the building be open to interpretation and adaptation through the activities it will house?
How could the building project the presence of the Architecture Foundation, both in its immediate location and, with the help of the media, to wider publics?
Entrants are not asked to produce design proposals at this stage, and will gain no advantage by doing so.
Ok two practices are not the usual suspects I guess. AOC and Lacaton & Vassal.
Lacaton & Vassal I have two say do outstanding work and interestingly even though the AA is without a Chairman at the moment the school is still pretty much on the ball when predicting the new hot stuff, as the Lacaton & Vassal exhibition just opened in the AA gallery.
The AF website notes that the shortlist ranges from a Pritzker Prize winner to recent college leavers, so perhaps AOC are the youngest architects?
oh, well if they submit a project 'in detail' then it isnt blind. A blind compeititon is one where jurors do not know the identity on the entrants. But clearly they knew who they were selecting.
Sure that is a disappointing process but it is a transparent one. Entrants knew what they were getting into.
Nov 18, 04 12:08 pm ·
·
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.
6 Comments
Very dissapointing the way in which the Architecture Foundation set up the procedure to produce a shortlist.
It has of course produced a list of 'usual suspects'
who is AOC?
was it an 'blind' competition?
What do you mean by 'blind'?
The competition was set up like this (official text):
Entrants are asked to submit an A4 registration sheet and three A3 boards. They may also submit up to ten A3 sides of supplementary images (see full brief)
The three A3 boards must contain practice details, one single project of theirs which best illustrates both their abilities as an architect and their suitability for this project and a response to the following questions:
How, in a relatively small building, would you design for the range of actions and atmospheres, from the energy of a party to the intimacy of a drawing, that it will contain?
How should the design of this building enable it to welcome a diverse range of publics?
How could the building be open to interpretation and adaptation through the activities it will house?
How could the building project the presence of the Architecture Foundation, both in its immediate location and, with the help of the media, to wider publics?
Entrants are not asked to produce design proposals at this stage, and will gain no advantage by doing so.
Ok two practices are not the usual suspects I guess. AOC and Lacaton & Vassal.
Lacaton & Vassal I have two say do outstanding work and interestingly even though the AA is without a Chairman at the moment the school is still pretty much on the ball when predicting the new hot stuff, as the Lacaton & Vassal exhibition just opened in the AA gallery.
The AF website notes that the shortlist ranges from a Pritzker Prize winner to recent college leavers, so perhaps AOC are the youngest architects?
oh, well if they submit a project 'in detail' then it isnt blind. A blind compeititon is one where jurors do not know the identity on the entrants. But clearly they knew who they were selecting.
Sure that is a disappointing process but it is a transparent one. Entrants knew what they were getting into.
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.