At a ceremony last week to mark the opening of the $700-million USC Village, C.L. Max Nikias, the university’s president, spoke at some length about the architecture of the new complex and what he called “USC’s extraordinary physical metamorphosis” in recent years. [...]
Then came his ringing conclusion: “And let’s always remember, the looks of the University Village give us 1,000 years of history we don’t have. Thank you, and fight on!”
— latimes.com
"Even delivered in a vacuum it would have been a remarkable statement," Los Angeles Times architecture critic Christopher Hawthorne remarks. "The president of the leading private university in Los Angeles taking up, as a rhetorical cudgel, one of the laziest clichés about the city, that it has no history to call its own."
32 Comments
Looks like a slightly nicer version of the apartment complexes our firm reviews.
Those statements (and the buildings) perfectly fit USC's ambition for fake aristocracy.
would you think somebody paid for those statements? falling back to my not understanding the value of a paid writer's opinions on somebody's work; but hey, that's just me, never heard of architecture critics outside academia until I moved to the US.
Where are you from if you don't mind me asking? Usually, every major newspaper has an art and architecture critic/cultural reporter in their staff around the world. They write critical commentary for the public interest.
I'm from Chile, and yes, there is commentary, but it's usually authored by an architect , most of the time an academic. There is also the sunday paper "house and garden" commentary, but that is oriented to a broader public. I don't know, looks like many other things that are done differently elsewhere and have become so ingrained in american culture that asking "why" is seen as an insult. sorry to disturb the status quo even so faintly.
Though a little naive, your comment was not an insult. At least not to me. The USC project has been in the press and architectural community for a couple of years now and the piece you are commenting on is not the writer's first on this development in USC campus. The project represents a particular retrogression for urban design and to the architecture community in Los Angeles who expects a progressive step from an academic institution with means and resources.
Btw, in this country or anywhere else for that matter, you need not be an architect nor an academic to write about architecture.
not you, on the other tread, somebody called me willfully ignorant; I know you don't need to be an architect to write about architecture, but I trust less the opinion of a pen for hire than an actual practitioner or instructor of the discipline that is being written about. My own shortcoming, I wouldn't dare writing about fashion design or food without cooking or making some clothes before.
have you seen a critic of engineering ever?other than public commentary?
Engineering is not one of those disciplines that have immediate relation to humanities like architecture does. Architecture is a cultural and social realm as much as other things, therefore, it engages cultural critics who may or may not have a formal education in it. However, I assure you the people who are professionally writing about architecture for newspapers or magazines and not have a formal architectural education, have tremendous knowledge of the subject and a very wide one to one network with architecture community. In fact, some of the best architectural critics I am aware of, are the ones who are coming from writing and other cultural backgrounds. You have to back up your opinions with engaging discussions, otherwise they are just personal opinions you can keep it to yourself. Because most people have them. The trick is being able to voice them in a valuable way to the public. Then you are a critic who knows how to paint with words.;)
Who are these best architecture critics with "other cultural backgrounds"? The author of this piece does have an arch background, I'm not sure who you are referring to since the general state of popular arch criticism is very dismal, and most writers at major publications use the "arch critic" title to cover generic city politics
Do your homework and look it up. If you did, you would not ask the question just like that. There are quite a few and some of them are popular writers known to many.
Though, I agree on the "dismal." But I am not so sure if it's the critics fault or the general production of "architecture."
I do know the answer (there's more music critics dumped in architecture journalism than architecture experts), just confirming you don't know what you're talking about. There's plenty of good architecture out there, but amateur critics don't have a clue.
Ugh. Another one of those internet warriors.
...Already accusing that others that they don't know what they are talking about.. Well, what do you have to show for?
"some of the best architectural critics I am aware of, are the ones who are coming from writing and other cultural backgrounds." So who are they? You can't name any. probably because here aren't any
I told you to go do your homework, they are there. I don't feel like educating such a vitriol like you. But here is a clue. Go back locally in Archinect about 15-20 years and you will see some damn good critics who are still around. The people I worked with. And that's just a partial list.
Archinect is prob 99% architects or those very close to it. Think we are talking about general newspaper or media arch critics, which you still haven't named any. I didn't make the statement so I'm not in position to research and defend it.
I don’t particularly mean writers who constantly write about popular star arch buildings. I am a little weary about them. If you think I am about the celebrate any of those people, you have some preconceptions of who I am. Nor, I am a fan of dime a dozen celebratory articles in certain (read majority) of magazines, websites and newspapers either. I like writings of architecture by certain people both with or without architectural background. I like reading articles which illustrate ideas, painting a picture of architecture and urbanism, and then interacting with those within the piece, imaginative criticism. It is not that important to me as you are making whether or not architect or nonarchitect. As long as a piece of writing about architecture, urbanism, art and culture captures my attention, I read. I sort of grew up in my early twenties reading Esther Mc Coy, Bob and Denise, Reyner Banham, Charles Moore, John Chase, Donald Judd, Rem Koolhaas/Delirious New York, later, Mike Davis, Ed Soja. I must hi-five Giovanny Brino for his critical essays, one of the best books about Los Angeles… and the list goes on and jumps to other continents and disciplines I like reading what my friends and friends of friends write. I like Bryan Finoki, Javier Arbona, Geoff Manaugh, Heather Ring, John Jourden (past editors here) Kazys Vernelis, Curt Gambietta, Paulette Singley, Anthony Carfello, Aris Janigian.., I like Benjamin Bratton, I like few good critics from Turkey like Omer Kanipak who I think should write more. There are so many out there, very good ones and I cannot possibly mention all. I don’t really read Jeff Kipnis all that much but I know he is very good, sort of Benjamin Buchloch of architecture. Similar words for Sylvia Levin, once she compared herself to Rosalind Krauss, I don’t think so. I really like Sanford Kwinter. I don’t necessarily follow or read block buster pop star critics on corporate type architecture but if I see a funny one, why not. From time to time I would enjoy Nicolai Ouroussoff for his funny bursts of angst. I liked this particular one we were supposed to response but side tracked, hi five to Chris Hawthorne too for being so right on about these USC buildings, he is a good critic most of the time and I find him creative. There are tons of people who can write well I can't possibly know or read. I feel like a sucker for responding to your troll like posts with this longish train of thought, but maybe I can turn it into a piece for a few bucks that they pay you these days. And, why would you want to know these names from somebody you excitedly declared “don’t know what you are talking about”? That’s an old cliché declaration that went around the early years of school, a quick way to validate ourselves and aggressive attempt to become a member of so called in the know critical puppies club. Baby steps to arrogance that most of us visited and some never grew out of. I don’t wish that for you and know how old you are, but if you already aged a little like that, I am sorry, but you could move on. Have a nice day.
it's very telling that institutions have retreated to faux-traditionalism (again)--it's a total cultural failure of media, modernism and the public. Where is the Louis Kahn of this generation? It seems most progressives have given up on architecture, instead moving into this bland neoliberal big urbanist movement (CityLab, NYTimes). (Of course there are designers that do great work in this area, but they are absent from popular discourse)
There are enough Louis Kahn's around. Its a pity that the types of clients that hired the Louis Kahns of the world have disappeared.
I agree that the buildings at USC are a terrible disappointment. And I agree that the fault lies with the client, the school itself. However, i think that the mistake they made was NOT in choosing to pursue traditional architecture. There is a wonderful tradition of beautiful collegiate brick Romanesque on the USC campus they could have tapped into and extended.
The mistake was in not choosing an architect able to give them the thoughtful traditional architecture they sought. There are many, many firms they could have engaged for this project that have the training and the passion for this kind of work. Porphyrios, for example, or Allen Greenberg.
So you are right, Chemex. They did get "faux-traditionalism". Too bad.
Yes, either they could have done Romanesque in line with their tradition, or at least tapped only of many architects who blend traditional references with contemporary design practices. I'm not sure if there are any Marlon Blackwells in California, but it's a problem of media that we don't know any.
Part of the issue is that the project was on a very short schedule that demanded a lot of pre-fab. So, huge project on time, but in Lego Gothic. It's a once-in-a-generation opportunity tragically squandered.
edit: "Le-gothic"? "Lego-thic"? "Le-go-thic"?
Mall architecture.
Yep.
How should we live (at college)? Yale University’s dependence on neo-gothic architecture underestimates its students’ adaptability
Orhan, I'd argue that most students couldn't give a rip about the style of architecture they occupy at a place where they're so busy doing a jillion things all at once.
It's their parents, alumni, donors, and the outside world who make up the audience for this particular form of branding.
Citizen, no doubt. We know the game here. It is a well advertised kitsch aristocracy marketing all around. And, the kids rub it off too.
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.