Witold Rybczynski, the architect and emeritus professor of urbanism at the University of Pennsylvania, complained recently about “starchitects” who often work in cities they are unfamiliar with, creating buildings that are out of sync with their surroundings. In an interview, he argued in favor of local architectural talent, or “locatecture.”
Are superstar architects ruining city skylines?
— NY Times
In this "Room for Debate" at the New York Times, Allison Arieff, Vishaan Chakrabarti, Beverly Willis, and Angel Borrego Cubero all provide their opinions on the much-used and controversial portmanteau.
16 Comments
"Further, Rybczynki's argument about “locatecture” is very nostalgic and not reflective of the global realities of the last several decades. It’s nearly impossible to define a “local” architect anymore. Communities of architects exist within -- but also far beyond -- local boundaries."
True, but I think his point is more about understanding a place as unique rather than being a fourth generation local. It's about building on what makes that place special or unique. Granted, it might be impossible given the program of a 100 story tower, but looking at the criticism of the new SF skyscraper, it's clear he's hit on a nerve. But rather than address or simply study this point further, starchitects tend to gloss this over.
"Focusing on the "starchitect" misses a more important point: Are buildings being designed as unique sculptural objects or do they work symbiotically with what surrounds them? I agree with Rybczynki that there is not enough attention paid to how a building works within a neighborhood. That, however, tends to be a problem for architecture generally."
Yes, then let's adress the problem if we're on the same page. Why do architects tend to ignore their surroundings? Becasue they are taught to do so. Many break out of the building as sculpture indoctrination they recieve at most schools, but most of them, and especially starchitects pride themselves on standing alone, regardless of how many interns are cranking the stuff out. So no, starchitects aren't ruining city skylines...afterall, they said the same about the Eiffel tower and the Pyramid building in SF. But consistently holding them out as the example isn't helping to foster a sense of place at any scale.
Another pointless debate. I get what Ribs is going at here, but anti-gerhy tirades are so 2009. Yeah starchitecture is bad,whatever that means... And yet it was always a media creation. Just like this article. Turns out when you judge each building on its own some are great and some aren't.
Such a hacky over simplistic piece, what do you expect from Ribs.
Darkman touches all the bases.
I like one of the comments under Beverly Willis' piece: Do we need superstars in ANY area? I think there are good arguments to be made both ways.
The best part of this post is how quickly Rybczynki is dismissed. The fear of many architects to be judged by those that haven't been "schooled" properly is absolutely fascinating. Rib's must be one of those unqualified people, like Jane Jacobs, David McCullough, James Kunstler...etc. Damn right wing conspiracy!
Rybczynski is an Architect/Professor. Not exactly an everyman. Perhaps you should read more, such as the recent Rybczynski written "How Architecture Works," which reads at a 5th grade level.
As I've said before, buildings should be judged individually by those that occupy them, not under the umbrella of anti-architect words like "starchitect" which is just a means by which the media can build up and then tear down.
I stopped reading at "Witold Rybczynski".
Related: I seem to remember that the term 'starchitect' originated here on archinect, circa early aughties. Can anyone verify that?
But Rybczynski represents a point of view that's almost entirely absent in the hallowed halls of academia or for that matter here on archinect. Starchitects have always been and always will be, that's besides the point. There's a ton of literature, if you'd be so interested in reading things outside your cloistered world, that would explain things better, but as your view on women make clear, your thinking is a closed book.
By your logic, only a child psychiatrist could speak to a child in a soothing way or a gourmand about what is good food, or a trained musician on the qualities of harmonys. Not every profession requires a PHD to understand or speak on intelligently as you surely know, but you play this game about credentials becasue you fear opening yourself up to criticism from those who actually have to live in the environments we design. Try addressing the actual points rather than reacting like a 5th grader with dumb insults.
My view on women is the same as architects... Starchitect and Feminist are just words. What do you actually do? Lena Dunham and the feminist brigade criticize anyone who doesn't label themselves as a feminist and yet her show is all about being naked and sex talk. What kind of feminism is that? The same kind that dig up patronizing and insulting articles about female architects so they can ask them how sexist the profession is, caring little of the content of their work.
And the shots at cloistered academic jargon is a great reminder of our growing idiocracy and the marketing / pr idiots that feed the concept that we should speak to a wider audience. Why? People aren't stupid. They already figured out that most modern buildings suck, just by themselves. They don't need Ribs to tell them how great Alvar Aalto and how bad Gehry is. Or how localism is always good and outsiders are always bad. These are over simplistic arguments for simple minds, What we need is a way to actually build better in today's world of pr fluff and fake controversies and arguments. If you want to know how to do that, you actually have to read the hard stuff, not some light reading. Or go look at buildings and figure it our for yourself.
@Darkman -- The "type(s)" of feminism "all about being naked and sex talk" are often called sex-positive and body-positive feminism.
But they're not just "about being naked and sex talk" I should add..
Personally, I don't think much about Lena Dunham's show, but I'll leave your issues with the "feminist brigage" speak for itself. As for what I do, what difference does it make?
"And the shots at cloistered academic jargon is a great reminder of our growing idiocracy and the marketing / pr idiots that feed the concept that we should speak to a wider audience. Why? People aren't stupid." Yet there's a growind idiocracy with simple minds? Wow, if only we could all be as self aware as you seem to be.
"They already figured out that most modern buildings suck, just by themselves." No shit. That's why speaking clear English (not to be confused with 5th grade jargon) is actually useful for a public full of every kind of bullshit jargon.
"What we need is a way to actually build better" Then why not propose how we could do that? I'd love to hear constructive ideas for a change.
"If you want to know how to do that, you actually have to read the hard stuff, not some light reading." Yeah man, just the hard stuff for hard men. If you don't read what you like to read, your a sissy, right?
Sex positive feminists... Yes please!
Well it's a free country so you can hire Joe the Plumber and I'll hire Steven Holl who writes weird prose with wacky words. And is proof that some starchitects make good work, at least sometimes.
There are stars in every field, it's only in architecture that it is a pejorative.
The answer to better building may start with better media. Unfortunately places like this, and the clickhole journalism of today--even via the NYTimes-- may have to be replaced with something better.
Now back to reading hard men type stuff.
So my only choices are Joe the Plumber or Steven Holl. There's a Joe the Plumber America and a Steven Holl America. How nice it must be to live in such a black and white world.
Enjoy your hardmen men type stuff.
aren't cosmopolitan cities, at least to some extent inherently "out of sync" within themselves?
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.