Architects: Artists or Entrepreneurs?
In Edwin Garner's article, "Revising Practice," he says, "The
paradox of the architecture school is that is doesn’t demystify architectural design, but
actually mystifies architectural design." Garners goes on to say that, "The idea that architects are also entrepreneurs, which
in my opinion is the most fruitful way to constitute new forms of practice and reinvent what
architecture can do in engaging reality, seems to be an idea which is unable to enter the
academic world..." Could this divide between theory and practice be the reason architects struggle to discern between the "thinkers" and the "doers"? Projective architecture supports the idea that designers react to reality rather than autonomy, but how can we consistently employ this balance between both theory and practice?
I agree with Garner's thoughts on architects as entrepreneurs and not just designers. I think the answer to the question of, "How can we consistently employ this balance between both theory and practice", lies within ourselves. As students and professionals, what we claim our niche to be (if we have one) is our decision. We've seen numerous architects who design+sell both buildings and furniture for example. I think entrepreneurship can occur at different scales as well. It can mean leading the way in the development of a new smart facade, introducing a new line of designer desks, or the advancement of a biological material. Because architecture is so heavily effected by a wide variety of influences and conditions, it seems as though entrepreneurship should come easy.
ReplyDelete