He is not a celebrity architect - not one of the names that show up on short lists for museums and concert hall projects or known outside of architecture circles. He hasn’t designed many buildings; the one he’s best known for is a thermal spa in an Alpine commune. And he has toiled in relative obscurity for the last 30 years in a remote village in the Swiss mountains, out of the limelight and away from the crowd.
But on Monday, the Swiss architect Peter Zumthor, was to earn the highest recognition of his profession: the Pritzker Prize. NYT & Bustler
31 Comments
yes! well deserved.
NYT posted images for nouvel last year, what gives?
deserved indeed!
I'm currently uploading images to my flickr set of three of his works, Kolumba, the chapel and KUB.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cisar/collections/72157616667748016/
awesome! totally awesome!
thats a good selection. but really.. is zumthor that "obscure?" he's one of the architects i recall knowing about early in my undergraduate education, and everyone on this board seems have put his name forth every year around this time in the "who will win the pritzker this year" thread..
so.. hardly obscure.. certainly a more modest architectural project they picked.. but again, not something that is unheard of.. of the past 14 selections he is among the company of other less boisterous architects: richard rogers, paulo mendes da rocha, renzo piano, sverre fehn, rafael moneo.
but a great pick. very nice work.
Hot damn. I'm so happy Zumthor won. As I said on the discussion thread, his work represents everything that I think is important and beautiful about good architecture. So, so happy - congratulations!!
great choice! a living genius! victory to fundamentals and craft over photoshop and flash!
but the pritzker, that professes itself to be the global Nobel prize for architecture has continued its fixation with the 'north atlantic club'. we need to look beyond the western hemisphere and to asia, africa, and award living genuises from there who have tirelessly addressed some of architectures most pressing concerns- poverty, population, environmental degredation...for this prize and the profession to remain relevant, lets grow beyond out current realms of fascination and reverance and embrace the future.... whatever happened to charles correa? kenneth yeang? surely they have addressed some of architecture's most pressing issues better than most architects awarded or living in obscurity, and have built every possible typology in the most diverse contexts. hopefully next time. but great for zumthor!
tange, barragan, niemeyer, maki, murcutt and mendes da rocha aren't "north atlantic"
to be honest, the only african or middle eastern architects i can think of would be hassan fathy or nader khalili. i don't think it's ever been awarded posthumously. correa maybe in the mid 80s but he got passed over.
Well deserved, but it was kind of predictable... I find the Pritker Prize so redundant...
by 'north atlantic', i mean people who work in the familiar mold of western architecture. each and every person you mentioned has very strong ties to the north atlantic clb- as academics, some studied here, many built alot of famous works here. work that has been published frequently in the western press. and yes, people who are overwhelmingly modernist, which is essentially a western (north atlantic) construct. some remain oddities even in their own home countries. it would be nice to see other 'forms' of architecture, and other discourses rewarded too.
perhaps the term 'north atlantic' club was taken too literally. murcutt , for all practical purposes is from a western culture. maki spent many years studying and building here and continues to do so. mexico and brazil are essential western cultures, their indigenous ideas have long been supressed by essentially western ideas and thoughts.
coming to the notion of the architecture award, the notion of the superstar architect is essentially a western concept, i would rather have buildings get rewards. which is why i feel that the aga khan prize is probably the most meaningful and relevant prize in the profession. it has been won by buildings and architects from almost every corner of the world, buildings for the poorest , and some for the very richest. it rewards good architecture , beyond specific personalities.
but hey! the pritzker is hardly a world prize. so this is fine i guess. just my opinion! once again, zumthor deserves this prize.
well, i wouldn't call the aga khan award more meaningful and relevant than the pritzker or the riba gold. it's muslim-centric, thereby excluding a significant portion of incredible projects (churches, chapels, synagogues, budhist temples). and project-centric, the alexandria library won, but it was snohetta's first project.
i'd say the aga khan is more similar to the mies van der rohe award, which recognizes a project, and not a career (usually)
"correa maybe in the mid 80s but he got passed over. "
Correa is still alive.
How can you hold up the Aga Khan prize as the essential "world-wide" architecture prize? Isn't it limited to projects that advance and promote Islamic study?
Like others, I believe this Pritzker is long overdue... and I like the idea that we have an award dedicated to a body of work, rather than one single project. There is a lot of coverage out there for sole projects -- and very little reward for consistently, sometimes quietly, pursuing the craft of excellent architecture, in project after project after project. A life-time achievement award is a wonderful thing to have.
his pinnacle was in the 80s, when he won riba gold.
like i said, i think the aga khan is more relevant because it rewards good architecture over individual personalities. if you look at the awards list of the aga khan,it has people from every corner of the world, who have made all kinds of buildings, including norman foster, jean nouvel, louis kahn, cesar pelli from the north atlantic club! sure it is centered on societies which are either islamic, or have some connection to the muslim world. but it is still a much more global architecture award than the pritzker and the mies van der rohe.
judging by the fact that utzon won the pritzker just before he made his way to heaven, i think correa has a great chance. besides he is busy building within the boundaries of the north atlantic club currently, in portugal, canada and the united states. this will surely help his cause. he has won every other major architecture prize-aga khan, riba gold, premium imperiale, and many others, which explains his more world wide relevance, than almost every other architect who has won the pritzker.
once again however, this is a moment to celebrate Peter Zumthor.
I'm sooooo happy. This is a great day for the entire architecture profession.
easy there fulcrum... its really a great day and a day to celebrate for peter zumthor and his family, and to a lesser extent his clients and office.. but other than the novelty of it.. do you really care that much or have that much invested emotionally in who wins these things?
i kinda feel its like the oscars or any other award show.. fun to read about.. unless i or a friend of mine wins, i dont think about it five minutes after its announced.
Tone down the cynicism, there, bigbear. I'll reiterate what manta said so eloquently above:
I like the idea that we have an award dedicated to a body of work, rather than one single project. There is a lot of coverage out there for sole projects -- and very little reward for consistently, sometimes quietly, pursuing the craft of excellent architecture, in project after project after project. A life-time achievement award is a wonderful thing to have.
The Pritzker is not a beauty pageant prize, or to be more topical, it's not an AIA Award.
wish geoffrey bawa were alive....sigh!
a salute to zumthor. the pritzkers finally decided to award someone of real merit after the laughable people in the past years-
come on, raymonde. i love zumthor, and this is an exciting decision, but no reason to disparage nouvel, rogers, or mendes de rocha!
Not to upset a few folks here but I'm happy also. Love the Thermal Baths project and well deserved win. I got my money on Adjaye next.
1980 luis barragan
1988 oscar niemeyer
1995 tadao ando
2009 peter zumthor
i salute these four. since someone felt like commenting on my comment. this is my opinion. the end. you can choose who you like, or hate, or whatever. it's your life.
i don't give a damn about any of the rest. some are good, some are okay, some are a sick joke (starting with philip johnson, the first recipient). this should be a reward for greatness, or something that lifts the profession to what it could be- not some kind of fame game.
isnt it unfortunate that people as young as adjaye are considered favorites for a pritzker. goes to prove that the prize is more than ever about current fads, and not so much about a lifelong commitment to ideas. you know what, he might actually win. another reason why the pritzker is increasingly irrelevant. all you need to do is have your work in the maxiumum number of glossies, go for lectures to the elite school, teach in them, be all over the internet , and you are in contention.
very soon, the way this prize is headed, ven mere paper architecture, will make you eligible. as long as your work is in the magazines and you are seen at the gsd, cornell, princeton, aa. , columbia and the like.
award great buildings, and if you are to award an individual, make sure it is for lifelong acheivement. not a sudden rise in fame.
seewosagoor there is so much that I disagree with on your posts, albeit some has already been refuted - most notably the Aga Khan as a reference of a more Global architectural award. The truth is that the Pritzker is not perfect, which no one is disagreeing with but the organisers are all North Atlantic as you've stated but the jury members are consistently chosen from the non-US. In fact Correra has served as a jury member before - and I have joked once before on this forum that I sure way NOT to get the award is to be a judge. But I digress.
I think it is relevant that we have awards that honour lifetime contributions, and in the case of the Pritzker there is no other criteria so it makes a barefoot kid from the Caribbean (ie. me) believe with consistently strident works that he can won day place his region on the architectural map (I wouldn't be able to win an Aga Khan because the muslim population is less that .05% regionally)
Also a few corrections modern is not a North Atlantic concept... relook at your history particularly the cited nucleus of modern origins. And having persued some education or having a building in the west does not make one North Atlantic
Nonetheless I agree with the argument that the award needs to better reflect it's global outreach however that comes down to us as the worldwide community of architects/designers/students to nominate persons we see fit... did you nominate Correra... I don't remember seeing his name on the list of those nominated. Anyway... I personally believe Steven Holl should of won before Zumthor only because his projects have been more global. Additionally Holl IMHO reflects the idea, more than Zumthor, of what a architect should be <- I won't validate that last point here, perhaps the titled of it's own thread or architectural school debate.
I don't believe the Pritzker should be a political prize. It should reflect the quality of the work, period. Squabbles about whether enough architects from the developing world have been included are ridiculous.
Zumthor deserves the prize as much as anyone. I believe that Holl has contributed more to the evolution of the profession over his lifetime. But Zumthor's work is exquisite and more finely detailed and well-considered than any other (well-known) architect out there.
Save the Adjaye discussion. And paper architects, get your own award. You could call it the Virtual Pritzker. The Pritzker should be about the quality of built work.
i'll dive in on your point, too, tecnho. similar to what farwest says, i guess. holl teaches and is more generous with describing and showing what he does. zumthor does beautiful work but is much more selfish with his time and protective of his ouevre. this isn't bad: his work is precious because that's how he's thought about it from the beginning. just different from the more demonstrative/open way that holl puts his work out there.
holl in 2010!
architechnophilia,
most of the jurors from non western countries who sit on the pritker jury have strong ties to the west and its modernist traditions. it is interesting to note, that one of the main reasons correa was on the jury is that he is very well connected to the west, and in particular to the north atlantic club, academically and professionally. early on in his career, he worked purely in the modernist way, and only after a few decades of being back in india has his language acquired a more local flavour. sadly, correa is more tied to the west than he is to india, in so many significant ways. the other juror from india, bv doshi is still very much a modernist, although having worked so closely with corb and kahn.he too has resonded to his india context in later years. unfortunately, they, along with other jurors from the west have seldom stepped out and picked someone whose work strays too far from the western-modern way of doing things. i think this generation will have to pass out for new thinkers from other parts of the world to have a greater say in architecture and architecture prizes.
in many ways the pritzker is representative of the west's continued domination of the architecture world. modernism is a western construct in the sense that when modernism was being thought about and its ideas framed, it was only the west that was free and progressing, the rest of the world was under the domination of the west. so it is natural that most of those early ideas were unique and particular to western thought and habit and had nothing to do with the colonies. those ideas are still dominant, so hopefully a generational change and a globalised world will allow for other ideas to be part of a more global debate and appreciation of architecture.
sounds like you're saying that if someone has made it out of their country enough to be known internationally and be active beyond their immediate region that they're "too western", ramg. as soon as we've heard of them, they're sullied: too western-modern? is your favorite music also by bands no one has heard of?
if work is good enough to be recognized on a global stage, it's likely not going to be the work you're championing. globalisation has seldom been about discovering and celebrating precious secrets and has been more about finding commonality in the values of the diverse world community.
searching out and celebrating marginalized architecture/architects - though it would be good for someone to do - is really not the pritzker's mission.
congrats Peter Zumthor! well deserved 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.