Many non-architects have found it difficult to understand the show, which is titled “Make New History” and displays more than 140 designs from over 20 countries at the Chicago Cultural Center, 78 E. Washington St. The wall labels, which are supposed to help viewers understand what they’re seeing, are often written in jargon-laced archi-babble. Without guides to translate, many visitors would be lost. It’s the equivalent of putting a hurdle between the audience and the material. — The Chicago Tribune
Disengaged from the public, inaccessible, and impenetrable are just some of the newly minted adjectives being used to describe Chicago's second Architecture Biennale, Make New History.
This should not come as a surprise, the show has had a lackluster reception on multiple fronts and while the premise of 'Make New History' sounded titillating to say the least, it called upon much of the same makes of the last history, and even further, participants of the previous Biennale to produce and make it.
Such is a challenge for Exhibitions, Biennials and Triennials, with the endless cacophony of manifestoes, criticality and production erupting within our discipline, it is not the presentation that is in need but engagement. What and how can the general public learn from the prolific production of 'vertical cities' or 'super models' if they have no way into the discussion or our insider perspective and thus are left with a sensation of an architectural exclusivity, narcissism and self proclaimed importance.
4 Comments
I will see the exhibit next week. Typically when I hear complaints about archi-speak, the jargon isn't any more challenging than what you will find in any academic publication.
Is this the correct link? Currently seems to be linking to the (already posted) piece re: SHoP Architects, new 800-foot-tall, $900 million two-building in Detroit? Or is that just me?
It terms of language accessibility, I wonder how the Chicago Biennale compares to Venice.
You call it jargon, I call it bullshit, posturing, or good old shit talking. The inability to clearly communicate an idea to the public doesn't "cause" a disconnect, but is rather a symptom of a deeper disconnect and lack of substance in the architecture itself. False promises and exaggerated claims. Architects are very trump-like in their overselling and under delivery. Complication replaced complexity.
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.