This is the question that Katharine Jose of Capital New York poses after attending the first night of lectures by recipients of the 2011 Architectural League Emerging Voices award.
This is the question that Katharine Jose of Capital New York poses after attending the first night of lectures by recipients of the 2011 Architectural League Emerging Voices award. 
"WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AN ARCHITECT TODAY VERSUS 30 years ago is different,” Benjamin Ball said over the phone from the Ball-Nogues office in Los Angeles. “The role is more. We do a very diverse set of things that wouldn't have. You can be called an architect, and you’re working completely within the virtual domain; you can be called an architect working within the domain of public art; you can be called an architect and you can be doing, you know, Habitat for Humanity; you can be called an architect and you’re making icons for the most powerful institutions in the world. You can be doing research on, like, pervasive sensing. - Read
3 Comments
super fascinating article, i really enjoyed the discussion of firm names and the metaphor or rock band names (and how that's cool or not).
based on the fundamental question of the article (are young architects ready to build) i can't help but compare the American architectural context in relation to the European architectural context and the focus of young designers--it seems that young European architects are much more focused on designing 'buildings' in the traditional sense of the word (although not necessarily with traditional forms). Looking at the PLOT/BIG/JDS scenario for example, which is a singular phenomenon even in Europe, but you have guys commissioned to do multi-family housing projects in their 20's and early 30's, and who now at the age of 36 is being trusted to design a 1,000,000 sf residential project in Manhattan, when many of these firms are just getting their first single family house projects. And it's not necessarily the US firms faults, because they are obviously very talented and intelligent. On the other hand I think the European architects are aided by highly supportive public/institutional support mechanisms (design competitions, subsidized internships, public funds for architectural design and research, etc) and the developers openness to fresh ideas.
o d b, not only is their support, but there are far fewer barriers to entering the profession in the EU. Students are not mired in loan debt and they have the distinction of being an Architect as soon as they graduate. Lawsuits are infrequent and insurance is also relatively cheap. After I read your comment, I have the feeling that Americans are doing it slightly wrong, but architects can't help that fact that we are a very litigious society.
dot, what you say is just partially true. While in Norway for example, yes you are a licensed architect as soon as you graduate and join the professional body, in Germany you must work and complete a number of requirements over the course of two years before you are legally allowed to use your title.
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.