Sydney architect Robert Harwood is apparently fed up with being compared on price point and capability to building practitioners who aren’t registered architects.
The director of Harwood Architects and founder of My Architect is petitioning the Australian Institute of Architects CEO Jennifer Cunich to do more to protect the architecture profession from non-architects passing off their work and capability as that of an architect.
— architectureanddesign.com.au
"Harwood is particularly concerned with non-architects using the title ‘architect’ in their name or the words ‘architectural services’ in advertising."
Related stories in the Archinect news:
23 Comments
Like MD hate being compared to Naturapath, Chiroprators or TCM practitioners. Some people even call dietitians, doctors.
It would be nice to put a legal use to it. I mean, I even find it annoying even when it is used in context that is clearly not building-related. e.g."So and so are the architects of this year's breast cancer awareness marathon."
I'm not sure if it is right (you can't stop Dr. Dre from calling himself "doctor" after all), but it would make our life easier.
What about the AIA-Australia running an architectural services firm?!
what a hero
good, fucking building designer hacks. i gather he's been reading Ballskid too.
"I'm special! No one else can use my special word."
In this context, it's not a special word, it's a legal term. No one else can say they're married to my husband, legally. But I can say things like "I'm married to my work!" because in that context it's not a legal term.
fyi, generally speaking, those who do not intend on legally aquiring the title Architect have zero fucking clue about the legal process of design through construction. i mean zero, like nearly half retarded. its fine to be a clueless designer, client rep, project manager, design-builder, until of course the shit hits the fan, and then you are shit out of luck.
the point in this news post is as a REAL architect you cannot compete with people who are not technically liable for anything, yet liable for everything including possible criminal charges since they claim control of the scope....and this is where business meets law. the architect technically has processes to follow to ensure a legal job is executed, and therefore often hinders what might be more profitable means and methods for executing the project.
Olaf, anyone who does anything can be held liable. The idea that only a licensed person is liable is FALSE. Ask an attorney if you don't belive me. If Architects, Designers, chimpanzees, etc are all allowed to design houses under the law than they are all engaging in the same service. To suggest that we should call pizza triangular cheesy bread by anyone who is not a licensed chef is retarded. That's essentially what is being suggested. Architecture is architecture whether designed by a licensed architect or not. we are talking about people who do the same thing and are not able to call it the same thing. In Australia building designers are very common from what I understand. Let's do a thought experiment. If I took a nice house and asked whether it was a result of architectural design, and you replied yes, would your answer change if I Revealed that it was designed by a designer? Would it cease to be architecture?
Don't use "retarded" as a pejorative.
jla-x, Olaf didn't say non-licensed people aren't liable. He said licensed people *are held to a higher level of liabilty* than are non-licensed people, which is true.
Are houses architecture?
Is self-administering ibuprofen practicing medicine? Or, in other words, what does that have to do with anything?
jla-x, was flw an architect?
Yes
jla-x, this isn't about the word "architecture". It's about the word "architect" *when it is being used as a title*. That's it. You are, legally, or you aren't.
So if houses are "architecture," and one can legally design houses, then aren't they legally practicing "architectural design"? Isn't it a bit dumb to prevent them from accurately portraying their perfectly legal practice of "architectural design"? The article states that he is against the people using the term "architectural" btw. To push it further into the dangerous land of common sense, isn't it also logical to assume that a person who legally practices "architectural design" is an "architect" since that's the most accurate term available that explains the role of one who designs "architecture"?
get your license then you don't have to argue semantics ever again.
What exactly are "legal credentials" and what do they have to do with projects that fall outside of the architects exclusive practice? If an architect and industrial designer are both designing a chair aren't they both acting as furniture designers? If an architect and a chimpanzee are both designing a house (which is legally the same as a chair since neither require a license) aren't they both acting as architectural designers if its agreed that a house is a piece of "architecture"? Isn't an architectural designer synonymous with an architect?
I have no issue with "registered architect" being a protected title, but to suggest that a person who designs a house is not an architect is very petty and insecure. The funny thing is, to paraphrase something someone else wrote "as soon as some famous foreign "architect comes to town every goes belly up looking for a tummy rub."
It's not the semantics that bother me chigurh, it's the annoying people who are constantly trying to squeeze out competitors. If the work itself doesn't elevate you above lowly designers and is indistinguishable from their work, then what value does the title have? Why should anyone hold you at a higher esteem?
Sound like a bunch of cab drivers bitching about uber...
By "you" I don't mean you personally...just architects in general...
q summed up my point exactly....jla-x the non-licensed are not competition unless they pretend to be something they are not, and that is this article's point.
Dear Mr. Harwood,
on your own website www.harwoodarchitects.com/projects.php you list e.g. a project in Bali. Are you a registered architect in Indonesia? If not, aren’t you also misrepresenting as an architect? You also do not list any details regarding your projects on this site. Can you provide details?
Regarding your website www.my-architect.com.au/your-architect.php: Is Ms. Renata Santoniero a registered architect? If not, is the use of the word Architectural legally permitted?
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.