Architect as Detective: architects who conduct research and deploy strategies to reveal the unknown, finding clues to “discover” projects where they were thought not to exist.ģ. Architect as Initiator: architects who seek out ways to initiate and fund their own project through forms of creative entrepreneurship or by forming new processes of collaboration.Ģ. To start addressing many of these issues, we organized a symposium at the University at Buffalo, State University of New York in 2012-which was then expanded into the book-that focused on three themes:ġ. These emerging issues are ultimately asking us a number of questions: How can architecture transcend its status as a “service” industry to move beyond primarily serving those who can afford it? How can architecture be more inclusive of diverse interests and audiences? How do we initiate work on projects that advocate for what we believe is important and urgent? Added to that, there is a growing sense of urgency around pressing issues today-whether they are economic, political, or ecological issues-that influences practices in different ways and provokes designers to confront our own disciplinary priorities and assumptions. We see an increasing number of designers who are engaging in broader collaborative relationships and finding forms of enabling outside of these dominant modes of practice and actively redefining the role of sponsorship in architecture and design. In initiating Beyond Patronage, we were interested in what we perceive to be a shifting landscape of patronage today. These established forms of patronage tend to feed a system in which dominant cultures remain dominant. Yet, we have to be aware that embedded within these relationships are power structures that tend to give advantages to wealthy patrons and people connected to them and established networks and circles (such as “old boys’ clubs”). Today, conventional patronage is still thriving, and, of course, it is necessary to maintain the profession. Key relationships between architects and private clients have enabled the development and realization of some of the most significant canons of work. Patronage-or relationships between clients (patrons) and architects (those in service to the patrons)-has indeed been the defining role in our understanding of architectural practice. As we well understand, the profession of architecture centers on the conventional notion of “patronage” and is shaped by its implications. This preoccupation with underacknowledged or alternate “subjectivities” has led me to consider the scope of architectural audiences and agencies more broadly-in terms of both human and nonhuman subjects.įocusing and expanding on these issues of redefining audiences and stakeholders, I coedited (with Martha Bohm and Gabrielle Printz) a book, titled Beyond Patronage: Reconsidering Models of Practice (Actar, 2015). In my work, for example, I place particular emphasis on exploring the inclusion of nonhuman species in the built environment. I would like to push this a step further and propose that we take up the notion of architectural subjectivity in a more expansive sense, not only identifying specific groups to assist but to reconsider the pluralities of subjectivity itself. But what does it mean for architecture to be a form of advocacy? Certainly, one could identify important concerns and address them through community-oriented design processes that engage particular (and often underrepresented) stakeholder groups this mode of working is common among architects who stand as advocates. One might find readily the term “advocate” in the realm of law, politics, and activism. To be an advocate is to defend the cause of another or to support the interests of another.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |