Next Wednesday, January 13, the 2016 Laureate of the Pritzker Architecture Prize will be announced. The winner will receive the Pritzker's bronze medal, $100,000, and an avalanche of "what does this mean for architecture" media attention.
Check back here for the winner announcement first thing Wednesday, but until then, revel with us in the contentious practice of Pritzker-Predictions! Our top 6 picks follow:
Steven Holl: the perennial prediction
↑ Sifang Art Museum in Nanjing, China
Holl seems like an obvious choice, and his name has certainly echoed before in prediction lists. His work is known for its impressive light choreography and has a far-reaching global roster of projects, most recently including the Reid Building expansion at the Glasgow School of Art and the Nanjing Sifang Art Museum in China.
DS+R: the buzziest
↑ The High Line in New York City.
If buzz were the judge, DSR would be a shoe-in. Their work on the High Line received criticism veering on rapturous, and while their Broad Museum wasn’t as widely beloved, they did make a building out of fog. A cocktail of intellectual urbanism, cultural icons and conceptual think-buildings could be worth the Pritzker’s $100,000.
Kengo Kuma: the safe option
↑ The Great Bamboo Wall in Beijing
Putting aside for now the coup d’ZHA that is the Tokyo Olympic Stadium, Kengo Kuma’s projects show what the Pritzker has dug before – a modernist sensibility applied with a distinctive commitment to the architecture of a given place (in this case, Japan). Plus, he’d be the first Pritzker-winner to have designed a Starbucks.
Santiago Calatrava: the drama king
↑ Ciutat de les Arts i les Ciències in Valencia, Spain
On the heels of Frei Otto’s 2015 win, Calatrava’s engineering marvels and infrastructural projects, while not always the most critically well-received, could be his advantage over the others.
David Adjaye: fresh and fierce
↑ Sugar Hill Housing Project in Harlem
Adjaye wouldn’t be the youngest Pritzker-winner (Ryue Nishizawa holds that title from SANAA’s 2010 win), but at 49 he’s already put together a very impressive portfolio of projects with positive connections to both the art and social welfare worlds.
Michael Maltzan: the Wildcard
valerio o
↑ Star Apartments in Los Angeles
The Los Angeles-based architect has done much for social programs in the city, working with the Skid Row Housing trust on multiple permanent residential housing projects for the formerly homeless. His aesthetic is immediately recognizable and has been praised for its potential to elevate design standards for social housing in general. But, he’s still the total wildcard.
63 Comments
If DSR gets it I will cry literal tears of frustration and dismay.
With all respect, I hope you're exaggerating (or even kidding), Donna.
These awards and their ilk--Pritzker, Oscar, Pulitzer, Nobel, take your pick-- are at least as reflective of fashion and politics as they are of actual accomplishment. When someone I like wins: hey, good for them. When they don't: hey, that's the way it goes... maybe next year.
Keep in mind who bestows these big awards: without casting aspersions here, they are variously colleagues, competitors, critics and others each with an individual aesthetic, sensibility, and agenda. Why waste (much) time fretting if, collectively, they don't agree with you? That's time better spent elsewhere, in my opinion.
has anyone considered the potential of - despite the 2013 decision not to amend Venturi's 1991 prize to include Scott Brown - the jury electing to award DSB her own Pritzker?
The Pritzker is irrelevant.
Except as a marketing tool. Whoever "wins" will be busier than than a one-armed paper hanger for the next 20 years or so.
HOLL
Not DSR - not after what happened with their Berkeley Art Museum - discontinuities in the metal exterior panels on the northwest side
I trust the jury, made up of many of the best practitioners... Glen Murcutt, Benedetta Tagliabue, Richard Rogers (!). The media seems to dredge up the same "it" choices that real practitioners scoff at. Other than Holl and Adjaye, both deserving, (Calatrava may be too controversial), their choices are usually spot on.
would like to see SHoP, Tod Williams Billie Tsien, Holl. Adjaye, or perhaps Bohlin.
Holl...........damnit
Not kidding at all, citizen. DSR tore down the Folk Art Museum, which was an infinitely better building than any DSR has ever done (well, ok, the High Line comes close, but it's not really a building even though it does all the great things a building should do).
They earned the disrespect of their peers by disrespecting their peers.
But frequently in this world the bad guys DO win, and that bigger context is what would bring me to tears.
Not trying to be a contrarian here, Donna, but development decisions (including demolitions) are not made by architects, but by moneyed property owners.
You're right, it's true that bad guys win all the time --in many spheres. And I fully concede how disappointing it is to see someone you consider morally bankrupt win a big prize. (Look at it as a warm-up for November, when no matter who's elected, we're fucked.)
I don't think this jury mentioned above would reward a firm like DSR
development decisions (including demolitions) are not made by architects, but by moneyed property owners.
Architects can choose what commissions to take ... nobody is twisting their arms.
DS+R are becoming victims of their own success. 5 years ago they were, in my opinion, doing some of the most provocative work around, and really successfully riding the line between sculpture, engineering, and performance art. Post-Highline, they're a household name whose demand is starting to outpace their ability to deliver. The result is re-hashing old concepts (folded floorplates, 'lifted skirt' corners, etc.) and hokey missteps (Broad).
I don't see them winning. They're on the down-trend.
Holl would be a good choice in a 'lifetime achievement' sort of way. Adjaye would be a nice nod to the new generation. No clue who they'll choose, but the announcement will be a fun birthday present to me.
I followed their work up to the Highline. I agree, they are victims of their own success.
/\ and DSR doesn't exactly have to take any work to pay the bills, i'm fairly certain.
Holl is the best by far. He does great new work, never the same, but def his. Knock on Calatrava is he repeats himself a bit.
Was disappointed in the choice last year. Otto Frei a bit too Bucky Fuller, zero poetry. Too bad Enric Miralles is gone...
What Miles said. DSR could have walked away from the MOMA expansion. Which, by the way, seems to be going nowhere fast and is probably such a clusterfuck of overcrowded circulation paths that no matter WHAT they propose won't be a success.
Holl should get it this year, for sure. Adjaye's work is compelling but he's also very young.
citizen I also want to remind you: no matter who is elected for USPrez, we're fucked, but SOME candidates will fuck SOME members of the community far, far more violently than others will. There *is* such a thing as lesser of two evils.
Holl should win, Adjaye is an average architect.
According to my sources it is Safdie.
But I don't think so.I'm for Safdie. Nice guy, pragmatic but poetic, untrendy but distinct style. Certainly a solid career of making architecture out of good buildings.
The last few years have shown a preference for architects doing their own thing without much notice outside architecture circles. I think DSR, Calatrava and Holl are all too big-name for the jury's tastes. Adjaye too, though I wouldn't rule it out as he matures. Kengo Kuma totally fits the mold. A lot of East Asian winners recently. I don't see what Michael Maltzan does as being quite so aesthetic as most laureates.
I could also see Dominic Perrault or Alberto Campo Baeza, for simply doing a lot of elegant spaces within a fairly local context. If Holl belongs on the list, then so does Ben van Berkel. But unless the jury has changed I don't they are looking at that kind of work.
Safdie is clearly head and shoulders above the rest if you consider sustainability, suitability to purpose, etc., and has been for over 40 years.
I consider myself quite versed in famous architects or architects who are achieving enough to be noticed.
granted I was born one year before the Pritzker, but at least 3 Names I had no clue who they were and what they did, and 2 only vaguely familiar with.
if not Holl, Safdie and even Calatrava.
Think BIG will win. He has changed architecture, made it more fun, awesome, and playful.... according to a TED talk I saw somewhere.
The Pritzker Prize will always be conservative in sense that it should be recognition of an oeuvre of work over time. Architects with a short list of built buildings, e.g. Peter Zumthor, can win, but this is the exception rather than the rule (and Zumthor really did deserve the prize, his significance for contemporary architecture is undeniable). So, Diller Scofidio + Renfro, who may well win someday, as i see it, do not have enough built work to their credit. Their Blur-building at Yverdon-les-Bains, Switzerland is more than enough to their credit even so. And Donna, I may say that I grieve with you over demise of the Folk Art Museum by Williams and Tsien, but holding this against DS+R would be unfair. Put another way, why did the Folk Art Museum put itself in the way of MoMA's obvious expansion plans? I admire the Williams and Tsien building in retrospect enormously, but in wake of the financial crisis, the American Folk Art Museum had to retrench. At least the collection is still here in New York, and that's what matters.
Dominique Perrault has designed some really extraordinary buildings, and his Berlin Velodrome is a masterwork for sure. Don't know if the rest of his oeuvre is convincing enough.
My first take on all of this, for now.
I think that Dominique Perrault's work is convincing enough. He has done a lot of interesting buildings starting from The Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris. He also just won the Praemium Imperiale for a reason. That is a prize that many people do not care, although it is important. Steven Holl is probably the closest option to win this year, everyone is expecting it. He has done many interesting projects. I feel that people are forgetting about other important architects which has pretty nice work too, such as Joao Carrilho da Graca, Paulo David, Aires Mateus, RCR Arquitectes, Tunon, Sean Godsell, and Juliaan Lampens. They are just less famous architects compared to the ones mentioned by other people. Still, they have done some impressive work.
DWLindeman, this has nothing to do with the decisions made by the Board at Folk Art Museum. It has everything to do with decisions made by DSR. How is it *unfair* to be upset with an architect who willingly takes on and designs a project that will knock down another architect's very important work? DSR could have walked away. They chose not to. I choose never to get over it (which I'm sure leaves them quaking in their boots /sarcasm LOL).
I would give the prize to David Adjaye for is fresh and fierce work, especially his Sugar Hill housing Project in Harlem. If there was ever a project with positive connections to both the art and social welfare worlds it was this one. Or maybe Michael Maltzan, whose aesthetics are immediately recognizable and for their potential to elevate design standards for social housing in general.
If not them, I hope Holl gets it for for his impressive light choreography and far-reaching global roster of projects. His work is striking.
I never even thought of Safdie. That would make me so happy.
Think it's Adjaye's year...
The Pritzker is actually at its best when it's pretty conservative. By that I don't mean rewarding aesthetic conservatism but honoring a compelling, lifetime body of work over flashy TED talks and Instagram posts. Even when the more provocative winners like Rem win, it's not until he had the built work to (almost) equal his intellectual endeavors like SMLXL. I actually rather like that, as opposed to handing out awards for the Next Big Thing every time.
For that reason, I too would cry if DS+R won but not for the reason of the Folk Art / MoMA fiasco. They just have not built a compelling building in years. Sure, the High Line is a treasure but that has as much to do with: 1. Field Operations who did the landscape design (despite the severe imbalance of publicity surrounding it); and 2. Hello, it's an elevated rail track through Manhattan! It's almost impossible to put a park up there and have it not be awesome and an immediate crowd-pleaser. Sorry but this was almost a shoe-in project to get a positive reaction. When they fly solo, their built projects in NYC, Boston, and now LA are a mess. The Broad already looks like a 1960's rainscreen with that horrible VE'ed glass dimple on one facade. The ICA in Boston does not work well as a museum and looks like it was detailed by undergrads. Don't meant to rant but I seriously hope the jury isn't actually considering them.
Adjaye is the most overrated designer in recent history...even more than BIG...
I agree that the highline was a sure fire win...too easy, and Corner was the real designer anyway.
If a white boy designed that treacherously awful housing project in Harlem they would be burned at the stake.
I do like some of his pavilions though...Most of his buildings aren't bad...they are mediocre...
Holl has the largest and most creative body of work.,.
FYI, there are actually quite a few other good DS+R buildings around: Lincoln Center Redesign (no Field Operations on that one), the Brown University Creative Arts Center, the recent McMurty building at Stanford University, and a soon to be completed museum in Rio should not be overlooked. They'll also have a residential tower and museum/performance venue finished in Hudson yards in the not too distant future.
I know this isn't the right jury for it, but what about someone like Werner Sobek?
Agree, Jason, that DSR's Lincoln Center is really good, as is Alice Tully Hall at Julliard. Both fantastic projects, though also both renovation projects. But, as an award for a lifetime of work how can the Pritzker jury NOT take into consideration that this body of work also involved tearing down another award-winning architect's work? IMO the Folk Art fiasco crossed a line that can't ever be uncrossed.
Hi Donna, I've taken part in preservation campaigns of significant buildings, including a Richardsonian building at my undergrad college, and more recently, the historic interior of Church of St Ignatius Loyola in Manhattan. I understand your consternation reg DS+R's decision against Williams and Tsien's American Folk Art Museum, but I question if their brief for MoMA could ever have integrated the Folk Art Museum's idiosyncratic plan with its many levels. If they walked away from the commission, who might have taken their place? A latter-day Charles Luckman (architect who designed Madison Square Garden where Penn Station once stood)? At least DS+R will (I think) spare us a repeat of those awful beige on beige velour-pebble panels that to this day grace MSG.
And as for DS+R at Lincoln Center: they ruined the plaza in front of Alice Tully Hall, which was perfect and immaculate already. Their little pavilion-restaurant there, which looks like Worlds Fair architecture, doesn't fit in, and everyone knows this. They requested that an original building be part of their brief, ergo this mistake. Their theater addition on the roof of Alice Tully Hall is wrong too, since it ruins the profile and so essential concept of Eero Saarinen's design, up to then the finest building of the whole complex.
It's true, even so, that their redoing of the main Plaza at Lincoln Center is a considerable success, and they even managed to improve on Philip Johnson's central fountain. Their drastic alteration of the Juilliard School is fascinating to look at, but this doesn't mean that all their design decisions in this case were inevitable.
NB, To correct significant error on my part, I've posted my previous comment again, with revisions, that is: I should have written: Vivian Beaumont Theater, and not Alice Tully Hall --DWLindeman
And as for DS+R at Lincoln Center: they ruined the plaza in front of the Vivian Beaumont Theater, which was perfect and immaculate already. Their little pavilion-restaurant there, which looks like Worlds Fair architecture, doesn't fit in, and everyone knows this. They requested that an original building be part of their brief, ergo this mistake. Their theater addition on the roof of the Beaumont is wrong too, since it ruins the profile and so essential concept of Eero Saarinen's design, up to then the finest building of the whole complex.
It's true, even so, that their redoing of the main Plaza at Lincoln Center is a considerable success, and they even managed to improve on Philip Johnson's central fountain. Their drastic alteration of the Juilliard School is fascinating to look at, but this doesn't mean that all their design decisions in this case were inevitable.
Just a reminder, the mission of the Pritzker is "To honor a living architect or architects whose built work demonstrates a combination of those qualities of talent, vision, and commitment, which has produced consistent and significant contributions to humanity and the built environment through the art of architecture."
I'm surprised I never hear Alberto Campo Baeza mentioned as part of the annual Pritzker speculation. His work is meticulously well constructed and timeless. Much more known in Europe than in the USA but that type of profile (well detailed, poetic buildings) seems to be in line with many of the winners so far this decade. That said, Shigru Ban two years ago + Frei Otto last year = very hard to identify a recent pattern.
Why not Tod Williams Billie Tsien? Would simultaneously recognize quality life of work over flimsiness of so many it-boy designers, while both criticism of DS+R, and also illuminate the gender issue (current jury is far from DSB philosophy)
Nate, would definitely support that call. Serious question though: are they well known enough outside the USA? (To be fair, that is also why I think DS+R would be unlikely.)
calatrava - fucking laughable
that maltzan project is horrific
Known outside the USA? Not sure if that is a valuable criteria. Wang Shu isn't known outside of China... Though TWBTS have done a few international projects, it's probably better to highlight those that stay close to home and don't email bonkers renderings to places they've never been
Also for an American prize, very few American winners, but like most design institutions has a extreme euro fetish
mario botta
Valerio Olgiati
Nate you and I have our disagreements but I like this phrase so much and think it sums up a LOT of what "international practice" is right now! LOLing
don't email bonkers renderings to places they've never been
David Chipperfield?
DSR just aren't very good. Their buildings are all thinking no feeling and for the most part their thinking is trendy and hokey. The Brood positively pales in comparison to the Frank Gehry Disney Concert Hall next door. I would be really disappointed if they were awarded the Pritzker prize. And Donna is right. They didn't have to associate themselves with tearing down the Folk Art Museum.
Since they only award the prize to living architects the list of the deserving is pretty small in my mind. If I had any say I'd award Valerio Olgiati or David Adjaye the prize.
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.