Faced with lawsuits and a growing mountain of damning research, New York City officials decided last month to ban solitary confinement for prison inmates 21 and younger. Just a few weeks earlier, the American Institute of Architects rejected a petition to censure members who design solitary-confinement cells and death chambers. [...]
What are the ethical boundaries for architecture?
— nytimes.com
Previously:
39 Comments
What would have been interesting is if he actually featured a prison and discussed the role of "architects." Kimmelman again falls back on the lazy idea of "architects"... "architects need to take a stand if you want respect!" what design firms actually work on these projects? Oh, right, Kimmelman doesn't even care to actually "report", just calls up the AIA, which is the voice of all architects....obvi
Didn't take long for Kimmelman to shift from design to politically driven articles, desparate for twitter love.
Again, Kimmelman is exploiting terms for a kind of fake ethical debate. As if Perez Hilton's ethical choices represent "journalists" as if there should be a journalist ethical rebuking of Perez Hilton. AIA doesn't represent "architects" and even if they claim to do so, you can understand why they don't get involved in every political issue so they can fall down the rabbit hole of the polarized politics as entertainment crowd.
Seriously, show me the developers of these prisons. If there are architects involved, they are the ones trying to humanize the place... if you don't like solitary, then change the law.
Can the NYTimes get an architecture critic?
...should we also ban architects who build churches because of the rampant sex abuse of minors?
Is there no big book of government standard that dictates the design of correctional facilities anyways? Should the criticism be directed to existing standards rather than those making a living translating them into program?
Although I like the organization of the clock, window, and 3 glory-holes in the pic above. Good fen-shuay throughout but there needs to be an interior designer's touch too. Maybe place a book case awkwardly blocking half of that far-right window.
More Tadao Ando or Frank Gehry designed solitary confinement please. Maybe I lost my subscription to Execution Design Digest.
I never read Kimmelman...
Whether you agree any type of structure should be banned/restricted or not, the AIA would be the ones to do it. What else could self-regulation possibly mean? We're a profession until it comes to a controversy of ethics - then it's up to the government to regulate us, apparently.
Most architects don't have time to lobby the AIA everytime a political controversy comes up. Maybe reporters should do a better job telling us who is doing this work instead of posturing.
What are you saying, exactly? Because "we're too busy" is a poor excuse for inaction. And a writer need not provide and support every side of a debate. While I'm on the topic, your comparison to journalism earlier was really bad. Journalism is not a profession, and Perez Hilton is not its regulatory body. If it was, then yes, PH could speak for journalists.
"...should we also ban architects who build churches because of the rampant sex abuse of minors?"
Probably not. A less snarky suggestion might be banning architects from designing child sex dungeons in church basements.
Haha, architects are so funny. You have no problem working on competitions for free, but heaven forbid your professional organization might disallow you from taking on certain kinds of paying work!
An important topic but Kimmelman covers it in the least interesting least illuminating way.
It's okay you missed the point, Darkman, chances are even if he answered "all" your ridiculous questions, you'd still be criticizing.
As for the dumb, stupid, insanely naive comment about churches, well, that's your own pile of shit to sort through.
@Lightperson, if you really do want to know what firms (or some of them at least) that do this kind fo work, read Mimi Zeiger on same topic in The Architectural Review. Personally, i think it is a better analysis/discussion than Kimmelman's anyways...
There you will read that firms include architects DLR Group, LKA Partner or San Francisco-based practice KMD Architects.
Also beta, unless i am missing something Darkman didn't even post on this thread/story?
I never read Kimmelman...
I never read the NYT.
Lightperson = Darkman
If you don't have a solitary confinement room, where do you put the guy who's insane and should be in a hospital (a very secure hospital), and has decided to smear his feces all over himself and the walls and the windows and ceilings and lights and doors and beds and sheets and - well you get the point.
Maybe there is a need for solitary confinement for certain individuals at certain times. Perhaps a better thing to focus on would be the abuse of the use of solitary confinement by prison officials and the fact that We The People choose to ensure that the so-called rehabilitation system focuses (through our wishes - it's a "democracy" remember) on ensuring that the primary thrust of incarceration is punitive rather than rehabilitative.
The idea that this is somehow related to Architecture, or even the profession that has trademarked the word "architecture" is beyond ludicrous. Hey here's an architect thought: In that Death Chamber put a window in so that the last thing the poor soul sees is some sunlight, or a cloud, or the moon or something. Not one-way glass so that people can watch, but not be seen ("I don't want him to look at me."). The condemned gets to watch themselves be executed in four or five mirrors. It's like a funhouse at a carnival. Or is it the ultimate nod to narcissism in our culture?
Is that rubber baseboard? Rubber f'ing baseboard? Wow. The State effecting its most severe form of authority, in the name of Justice, in a 8' high room painted all beige with crappy light, vinyl tile, and rubber base. Wow. How much more hideous can it be? I think that room verges on the "Cruel albeit not unusual punishment".
Don't worry - Architects already don't design death chambers.
That brown carpet does however tie the place together nicely.
Clearly the NYTimes thinks that political correctness solves societies ills, and that they can mandate superficial ethical reforms to every organization.
Thanks Nam Hendersen. If you want to have a discussion about the deeper and more problematic and political issues behind the prison industrial complex, fine. But if you don't want to change the law, AIA mandates aren't going to stop the problem. This disengenious media narrative that architects are somehow gods responsible for all societal ills or a false debate on "architectural ethics" is definatley not going to solve the problem.
The NYTimes could be used to highlight and promote the good and highlight the bad (specifically, and who is responsible) instead of demagoguery. Perhaps instead of easy, feel good quotas or AIA mandates, architects could be asked to come up with a creative solution to the problem of prisons.... oh but nobody asked.
There is a more nuanced debate about the firms working on prisons, who view it as humanizing these places. Even if you don't like solitary confinement or execution chambers, Kimmelman rehashes the old Zaha linkbait in a different form. The NYTimes doesn't mandate architectural standards, the law does. If you really care (Kimmelman I'm really sure he does... ha), then work on the bigger issues behind the prison industrial complex.
From the AR article: "For architects, such facilities should fall within ethical bounds if they house inmates for under 15 days but it is an awkward position, one that pivots on the veracity of client-side reporting. An architect may design within the code only to find that post-occupancy use pushes into torture territory. The AIA’s stance recognises that enforcement of the 15-day rule is potentially a difficulty beyond an architect’s reasonable control."
How can an architect be "ethically" responsible for how long a solitary chamber is used? It is a can of worms. Of course Kimmelman didn't include this part, clouds his simple argument.
But the feeling the casual readers gets is, architects are all pro-death chambers. Ok. Let's just admit that Kimmelman doesn't know anything about architecture.
I love how Darkman answers his own questions. It is a slippery slope, that's why architects shouldn't be involved. If we withhold design services, will these horrible places get built? Yes, but like the medical profession, which doesn't get involved in lethal injections, and the Prison Industrial Complex has to concoct their own witches brew to perform their death sentences, maybe these same dunces will design and build the houses of death they are so enamored with.
A prison designed by FG...wouldnt that violate the "convention against tourture" ?
I'm referring to the slippery slope of dictacting an ethical connection between architects and what people do in places that are already deamed lawful. Architects, if they are involved in prisons at all, are probably the only good voice, albeit a tiny one, in the whole industry. Not that what is being built can even be considered architecture, or the architects architects.
Getting architects out of the industry might be a good pr move, but doen't really help the people--prisoners--that you claim to care about.
It's better to look at this from a greater context of what is happening in the far left media now. Even a libral person should be disheartened at the media narrative now--the boogieman of the police, or the architect, or the white-male who is always up to no good...
In a lecture last year Paul Goldberger mentioned how Arch criticism at the Times has been like a pendulum that swung from design culture and political culture... from Ouroussoff to Kimmelman. They were somehow both inadequate.
The only real criticism is when you actually go to a place and describe what you see and hear without prejudice. Even with his faults i prefer the positive message of Ouroussoff to the PC Kimmelman, at least Ouroussoff believe in the power of the specific building and was a futurist. Kimmelman is afraid to praise anything resembling technical or design bravery for fear of getting offed by feminist twitterati.
The Architectural League's discussion about the Folk Art Museum provided some of what the NYTimes regularly fails to do. Instead of casting a villain, victim and a hero, the Arch League allowed multiple valid perspectives to be aired and challenged in great detail.
Light, the NYT cannot mandate anything, they are a paper. The AIA cannot mandate beyond the architects it governs. The point is not to stop unethical practices from taking place by blocking the construction of their facilities. The point is to take an ethical stand in the hope of contributing to a sea change.
"This disengenious media narrative that architects are somehow gods responsible for all societal ills..."
No one has written this and I doubt anyone believes it.
"architects could be asked to come up with a creative solution to the problem of prisons.... oh but nobody asked"
Again, what a passive, boring view of architecture as a profession. You wait to be asked before deciding to effect positive change?
"Even a libral person should be disheartened at the media narrative now--the boogieman of the police, or the architect, or the white-male who is always up to no good... "
Now we're getting somewhere. This is all about persecution of the police, the architect, the white man! No wonder you have no interest in proactive social change, you think the status quo is A-OK, even the natural state of things?
"The only real criticism is when you actually go to a place and describe what you see and hear without prejudice."
This is impossible.
"Kimmelman is afraid to praise anything resembling technical or design bravery for fear of getting offed by feminist twitterati."
You're really drinking the Kool-aid now. Feminist conspiracies are a funny manifestation of mens' fears.
Cocococo,
I consider myself a liberal and I can definitely relate to the sentiment behind this effort. However, I am also on the look out for well intentioned half-baked actions that may be counterproductive and reputation-damaging in the long run. When I read Kimmelman's pieces I get the sense that he is detached from the muddy reality of practice and detached from the responsibility of having to make the best decision possible after all things are considered. Its not so different from the distant detail-less criticism of you might hear from online armchair non-architects.
I was just looking at an old 1920s building that had a plaque in the entrance listing the client on top, the developer, and architect. I wish this practice continued in all buildings.. in prisons at least the inmates would know who made their new home.
Well, the NYTimes is trying to dicate to the AIA, when it says you must do X. It's kind of a top down media narrative that overvalues the importance of easy answers. Oh, let's get the AIA to make an empty statement about this issue to make everyone feel better. I don't discount the importance of architects, but they can only improve the situation when the reigns are given fully to them.
It's no wonder they are pushing back from this political can of worms. Who knows what the far left will be trying to push forward next. Banning work on any conservative program? Perhaps architects will only be able to work on houses within a square mile of public transportation. What other form of McCarthyism will they think of next?
Well, my other thoughts are sort of in line with current cultural criticism, and aren't controversial or unknown (in regards to Ouroussoff, just look it up on Google if you don't like the reality). If you want to have a more nuanced debate on prisons and the role of architect fine, but let's not cast villians when not everyone even agrees.
I am not okay with the statis quo, and many architects probably fall on the progressive side that is trying to build a better world. Playing gotcha games in the media doesn't really solve the problem. I'm just glad i'm not commenting on NYTimes, would only confirm the Kimmelman brand of archi-politics as sound and fury, the currency of the new media. The media had to really dig deep here to find something to be fake-mad about.
This article is much more sympathetic to the real impulse of architects trying to find out a way to maximize their impact in a complex and compromised world:
https://harvardmagazine.com/2015/03/good-design
... and the warden asked The Architect if he had any final words before the sentence was carried out.
The Architect had been convicted of doing in a client and a value engineer after what he continually described as a "project meeting that went a little off the rails." The Architect looked up at the Warden, "Yes."
"What would you like to say?" asked the Warden.
"Either that cove base goes, or I do."
I might be wrong but I thought in that PODCAST with the LA architecture crit on archinect, that unlike the old days of the newspaper it's a lot harder to make a living and get the readership etc....I would suggest Kimmelman is essentially a blogger on a good website maybe?.......maybe our standards for that level of criticism just can't be met anymore....Nevermind media or journalism....I am not old enough to know if today's media is any worse than the past.
@Lightperson, maybe i misinterpreted your meaning but don't you think it is a bit disingenuous for you to write "The media had to really dig deep here to find something to be fake-mad about", since ADPSR / Raphael Sperry have been fighting this at least 2012?
Yeah, because the FAAAAR Left are the only Commies in this fight.
Darkman, when you're full of shit, it really does pour out the top of your dome. Neo-con hack.
Again, the problem is with the larger prison system and its use of these methods (and my problem is how the media is jumping in to diss "architects"). The petition is different, because it seems to be led within the community of architects. Even if they ban this, fine, it doesn't really solve the issue of how these solitary chambers are used. (UN says +15 days equals torture, -15 not?) Ok. If architects want a feel good solution via tha AIA, fine, but when the NYTimes starts "calling out" architects, instead of the prison industrial complex, that is what is disengenious. Oh, those sexist, starchitect torturers are at it again? It's kind of a critique of the media, where any controversy and a villian is good for their bottom line.
My problem is when the media points the finger at all architects as somehow being responsible for these systems.
Why are conservatives are so thin skinned, and unwilling to accept responsibility, I mean, it's not like the Code of Hammurabi is going to bite us in the ass.
If I'm a neocon because i find this demogaugery and feel good superficial solutions to the prison industrial complex, so be it. The reality is that both dems and repubs have no interest in getting to the root of these problems and reforming the entire system.
The root of these being the lack of affordable housing, education and jobs for poor people. It costs much less to build affordable housing than to house inmates.
We house more people in this country than some of the most backward repressive regimes in the world, but we're the moral ones. More black men are in prison, mostly for drug crimes, than just about any point in our history, but republicans always say, history be damned, go read the book "The New Jim Crow", republicanism, and their policies toward black america, from the mid-1970's forward, around economics, and drug laws, were/are the seeds, and now we are seeing crop born of that racist plantings.
Here's a thought: there are more black people in prison now than were slaves in 1860 many for low level crimes steming out of systematic injustice. That apparatus was largely constructed and expanded by liberals like Truman and Bill Clinton (see the "First Civil Right"). The civil rights movement is another feel good story, until you realize how little has really changed. Meanwhile Kimmelman is looking for easy answers--I don't know what the solution is, but the only promising development in our history has been architecture and technology, so maybe there is a solution there somewhere.
Thanks for the info, looks like a good read, and certainly more ammo for leftists to take the Democrat centrist to task, for trying to win elections by posing as Republican lite.
@Lightperson, again not to be thick, but it isn't the media the way i read it. Rafael Sperry AIA, is an architect and he is one "pointing the finger" as it were...
That being said, do agree that there are obviously larger systemic issues in play.
Leoben, Austria
NY Times
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.