British architect Sir David Chipperfield has been awarded the 2023 Pritzker Prize.
The Pritzker jury described Chipperfield as a "prolific architect who is radical in his restraint, demonstrating his reverence for history and culture while honoring the preexisting built and natural environments, as he reimagines functionality and accessibility of new buildings, renovations and restorations through timeless modern design that confronts climate urgencies, transforms social relationships and reinvigorates cities."
Chipperfield's work spans over four decades with over one hundred projects ranging from civic, cultural, and academic buildings to residences and urban masterplanning throughout Asia, Europe, and North America. When naming Chipperfield as the 2023 Pritzker laureate, the organizers singled out his Neues Museum restoration (Berlin, Germany, 2009) as demonstrating "Chipperfield’s discernment between preservation, reconstruction and addition" where "the novel is in conversation with the old, as architecture of the past is brought to the foreground, yielding moments of modernity."
Other projects by Chipperfield to recently appear in our editorial include the firm's reinvented Morland Mixite Capitale in Paris, the reopened Neue Nationalgalerie in Berlin, and the conversion of the historic Jacoby Studios in Paderborn, Germany.
"I am so overwhelmed to receive this extraordinary honour and to be associated with the previous recipients who have all given so much inspiration to the profession," Chipperfield said in reaction. "I take this award as an encouragement to continue to direct my attention not only to the substance of architecture and its meaning but also to the contribution that we can make as architects to address the existential challenges of climate change and societal inequality."
"We know that, as architects, we can have a more prominent and engaged role in creating not only a more beautiful world but a fairer and more sustainable one too," Chipperfield added. "We must rise to this challenge and help inspire the next generation to embrace this responsibility with vision and courage."
Jury Chair Alejandro Aravena added that "in a world where many architects view a commission as an opportunity to add to their own portfolio, [Chipperfield] responds to each project with specific tools that he has selected with preciseness and great care. Sometimes it requires a gesture that is strong and monumental, while other times, it requires him to almost disappear. But his buildings will always stand the test of time because the ultimate goal of his operation is to serve the greater good. The avoidance of what’s fashionable has allowed him to remain permanent."
The 2023 Pritzker Prize ceremony will be held in Athens, Greece in May.
As the 52nd laureate, Chipperfield will join the Pritzker's honorary list of winners, which in recent years included Francis Kéré (2022), Anne Lacaton and Jean-Philippe Vassal of Lacaton and Vassal (who collectively won the 2021 prize), Yvonne Farrell and Shelley McNamara of Grafton Architects (who collectively won the 2020 prize), Arata Isozaki (2019), Balkrishna Doshi (2018), RCR Arquitectes co-founders Rafael Aranda, Carme Pigem, and Ramon Vilalta (2017), Alejandro Aravena (2016), the late Frei Otto (2015), Shigeru Ban (2014), Toyo Ito (2013), and Wang Shu (2012).
42 Comments
In his acceptance speech does anyone think Chipperfield will thank the team that works with him to design such buildings?
Yes.
That's good to hear.
In the world of architecture, they say, David Chipperfield's won the prize today, The Pritzker, the biggest, the most prestigious, For his work, which is often called reductive.
He's an architect with a minimalist heart, Who believes in simplicity as an art, He strips things down to the bare essentials, And creates spaces that are truly quintessential.
But some may say he takes it too far, That his buildings lack personality, flair, That his designs are cold, clinical, and stark, And don't offer much to those who live or work there.
To Chipperfield, though, it's all about the form, The shape, the structure, the lines that transform, The space into something that's more than the sum, Of its parts, a masterpiece, when all is said and done.
So, congratulations to David Chipperfield, For winning the Pritzker, a great yield, Of recognition for his unique vision, And his dedication to architectural precision.
Rap this, please.
Well deserved!
and Safdie's moustache remains without.
It's time will come.
I don't know if it will.
You must have faith in the 'stache.
I've liked every building of his I've visited.
The Figge Art Museum in Iowa City is strangely good, quiet, restrained... incredibly "of" the Mississippi river, which it sits next to.
Excellent choice! Congrats to the whole team!
Love the quiet, almost silent nature of his works.
Chipperfield fits in well with Arevana era of plain modernism. And gives Pritzker a little celeb juice it has been missing.
But it's disturbing to see the anti-American bias in elite American design media. Critical regionalism, plain modernism are American vernacular. There are myriad American architects that should win (individuals and collaboratives), but never will -- they don't have the same exotic appeal.
I don't see any anti-American bias. I see great architects being recognized for their work. They just don't happen to be American.
I'd expect a country with about 5% of the world's population to have about 5% of the world's Pritzkers.
Yeah this is a really weird take.
Critical regionalism and plain modernism in the vein of a new vernacular architecrture has been awarded many times in the past - Peter Zumthor and Glenn Murcutt in particular as a recent example, Sverre Fehn (and to a lesser extent, Alvaro Siza) prior to that. At schools that focus on teaching this particular theory, those are all mandatory reading.
If your main complaint is that it's not specifically an American winning for that line of work ... I don't really know what to say?
It's hard to explain or understand. What is the bias against American architects? I see it throughout the media, museums, etc. Despite the many talented architects, American architecture is always presented, by elites, in terms of crisis. Maybe it's a political bias against US firms seen as too corporate. They always gravitate towards the more brutalist kinds of plain modernism that echoes the starkness of socialism.
Glenn Murcutt was like 20 years ago. Don't think they have ever awarded a plain modern / critical regional American architect, despite its origin in the US. That's odd. Just a few post-modernists.
There have been 44 Pritzker awards. Of those eight where American architects. The last to win was Thom Mayne in 2005.
If you're going make accusations about the Pritzker being bias against americans make sure you you actually have your facts correct before you spout nonsense and make yourself look like a fool.
Why is your automatic assumption that it is a bias against American architects?
Critical regionalism, if anything, is arguably more aligned with Scandinavian design than American - which is probably indicative of the fact that Fehn was awarded the prize (I would argue that Zumthor's work is also much more in the world of scandinavian design as well, despite being a Swiss national). Not to mention that Frampton is himself actually European.
You don't really seem to be making a coherent point.
I think there are two things at work here, neither of which are evidence (imo) of anti-american bias.
First, the simple fact that less than 50 Pritzkers have ever been given out. There are easily ten times as many top-tier architects working in the US right now than there are pritzker laureates in all of history. Given the extremely narrow scope of the prize - one person or firm for the whole of global architecture for an entire year - it's inevitable that more people will exist who justifiably deserve to win a pritzker than will ever be able to.
Second, quoting Kate Wagner "The Pritzker Prize still matters simply because it has the potential to change architectural discourse, and its issuance remains one of the few days of the year when architecture breaches its niche audience and into the general news." I think the jury, usually, recognizes the implication of their selection in this context and in the past decade has used the platform to highlight corners of the profession - both geographically and philosophically - who've been denied the spotlight for too long. Incidentally I think Chipperfield is a step back from that philosophy, but I think it still drives the decisions in the longer term.
What I see here is looking at an absence of America-centric bias and mistaking it for anti-american bias
If you're looking for bias it's in favor of modernist designs. That said, his work is a lot better than the standard modernist sculpture.
The Kate Wagner piece unintentionally reflects the bias that Pritzker has been showing for a long time. It's the same scarcity mindset that sees architecture as a message, not a thing in itself, one where one building review, show, award has to represent a thousand others. Her conclusion, that a white male architect that doesn't yell socialism from the rooftops surely can't represent humanism, is nonsense.
It all goes back to the MoMA's false narrative pushing the idea that modernism started in Europe and not America. Frank Lloyd Wright was the inspiration to all of the early classical modernists. This narrative continues throughout MoMA, NYT, Pritzker, even American architecture institutions.
Nothing of what you just posted is accurate or true. Your lack of knowledge is disappointing. Your attempt to support your opinions with this lack of knowledge is embarrassing and shameful.
What did I say that's untrue? Tell me which one American plain modern or regional modern architect won the Pritzker?
The bigger problem here is the claim that there is no American culture. Yet the modern age was built by the US.
Of course, if they do give it to an American, it will be outside of the talented modern architects -- they'll do a crisis or social justice narrative curator or critic. Remember the Pritzker family are super libs.
I don't think you're upset that the pritzker jury is "biased" (which, it's impossible not to be) I think you're upset that their bias doesn't align with your own. And to that I say, why should we care?
Why should we care that liberal elites no longer care about American architecture? Oh to be a part of the global elites, who have never even been to middle America, but are happy to sell it out to Chinese slave labor, which ironically can then sponsor the next three MoMA shows about the beauty of Chinese regional modernism and European socialism.
Didn't take long before you started saying the quiet parts out loud, did it?
what in the flying fuck ?
I think this is x-jla's new profile.
That or Eamez is just a racist punter with the intelligence of a zucchini.
Why is it racist to criticize the CCP and global elites? You a fan?
Look, a stupid zucchini.
I don't give a f--- aboutt the Pritzker. I won't get one. You know, a boring name (nothing exotic sounding), no exoctic accent, etc. I'd more likely get the Prickster Prize. Chipperfield's work is certainly fits into the Pritzker 'club'.
It has nothing to do with your boring name or non exoctic accent though Rick.
Chipperfield's work is quite... conservative, considering previous winners, whose work were all groundbreaking or sheer-minded in one way or another. It's a bit of a let-down that, considering the various shifts we're seeing in architectural and sociopolitical culture across the world right now.
I know, being a little facetious but of course if I was licensed, it wouldn't make any real difference. Sure, it's involves factors other than boring name or non exotic but there tends to be a general trend that they have to be starchitects, and its almost like to be a starchitect, if your name is boring, you need to change your name to sound more exotic and flamboyant in that "starchitecture" culture much like in the shallow 'fake people' culture of the fashion designers. That would make me puke and be an insult to me to be awarded a Pritzker Award if it was actually that bad. On the other hand, it's good that the people awarded aren't making the absolute worst pile of shit designs. People can argue whether their work is good or crap. Chipperfield's work is actually alright. Granted, some of the past awardees were certainly more "groundbreaking" or "sheer-minded" as Jovan said, or even lets say.... pushing the limits of engineering and borderline dangerous and sometimes, problematic. As a designer, I would likely be more conservative and looking to apply sound building science (I'm using it liberally to include architectural engineering but the collective sciences applicable to buildings).
Not explicitly criticizing individual works and individual architects awarded.
Donna, this one is for you!
Verse 1: David Chipperfield, a name that's making waves Winning the Pritzker Prize, his talent surely saves Architecture so supple, taught and smooth stone His minimalism dazzles, the eye is never alone
Chorus: Chipperfield, Chipperfield, a true visionary Pritzker Prize in hand, he's now legendary His work is a wonder, a sight to behold A true master, his talent never grows old
Verse 2: He's designed buildings all over the globe His style is unique, his vision probes Into the future, where design is bold Chipperfield's work is something to behold
Chorus: Chipperfield, Chipperfield, a true visionary Pritzker Prize in hand, he's now legendary His work is a wonder, a sight to behold A true master, his talent never grows old
Verse 3: From museums to homes, his work is sublime Chipperfield's architecture stands the test of time With each project, he pushes the boundaries His minimalism inspires, his vision astounds me
Chorus: Chipperfield, Chipperfield, a true visionary Pritzker Prize in hand, he's now legendary His work is a wonder, a sight to behold A true master, his talent never grows old
Outro: David Chipperfield, a name we won't forget His talent and vision, the world will never regret Congratulations on your Pritzker Prize win Your work inspires us all, your legacy begins.
Who are we talking about again?
the use of "plain modern" here is new to me and totally hilarious.
Yeah, if Eamez wasn't such an ignorant bigot this would be a funny parody of a clueless elitist.
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.