Prima Donnas vs. an Old Woman
Popular Social Opinion: "Damn Architects!"
Architects have the reputation of being...well architects: egotistical, selfish, prima donnas with no perception of reality. Treating every idea that pops into their head as a spark of genius, as if they were the King Midas of forms and space. Doing what they please and taking no consideration of the clients wants and needs. In most cases, this is not true, but Starchitects and Hollywood like to keep this image painted in the public's mind.
The Architect (2016) - Trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn9pk_186P4
I believe the architects that ride this stereotype have a mindset that what they do is revolutionary and will change the way people see, think, feel, and live through their piece of structural art. What they are creating will have a major impact on the users, and ultimately push society into a new (Utopian) direction. Now while this approach to design has it's merit, they tend to fantasize about their perfect world and forget about the rest of societies own dreams and aspirations (and actual needs...because those are also important).
Devil's Advocate: "I am surrounded by idiots."
Society does not always know what they actually want. They may lack the understanding of conceptual "spitballing" and grasp on to the tiniest of details and run with it as if what was proposed was signed and sealed. Perhaps this could be avoided through repeated public gatherings for discussions about planning and design, or explaining ahead of time what the goal of the meeting is actually focusing on...and perhaps it is something we cannot avoid and will have to deal with as architects for all of eternity.
My first interaction with this sort of conflict was with the first architectural firm I worked for. We had a new elementary school going up in small town west Texas that was a 6 hour drive from the office to the town. We were limited on site visits and town forums to talk with the school board, staff, parents and public about what we were intending to do for them. It was the first open meeting with floorplans assorted drawings near completion. The meeting was to discuss the building layout, children safety, resources of the school and how the children will interact in the different classrooms, etc. We open the floor for questions and comments. No serious or major reactions from the crowd that would risk jeopardizing us to rethink our strategy...not until that old woman in the back of the room began to ask about the carpet in the library. For ten minutes we explained to the troubled lady that her topic of discussion was not developed yet and the meeting we were having that night was not about color pallets and finishings. Yet she persisted to make her point that the library needed carpet. The rest of the night was uneventful and concluded with a long 6 hour drive back home.
We would later rant unanimously that the topic the old woman brought up was absurd and a complete waste of our time, we knew the library was going to have carpet down the long haul but that was not important to talk about at THAT meeting. Maybe we could have prepared the woman ahead of time by explaining thoroughly what type of response we were looking for. Maybe she would have brought it up regardless. Some people you just can't reason with. In the following year we completed the school with little changes from what we had originally proposed, the town was happy with the end result, and yes...we put carpet in the library.
Architects have the reputation of being...well architects: egotistical, selfish, prima donnas with no perception of reality. Treating every idea that pops into their head as a spark of genius, as if they were the King Midas of forms and space. Doing what they please and taking no consideration of the clients wants and needs. In most cases, this is not true, but Starchitects and Hollywood like to keep this image painted in the public's mind.
The Architect (2016) - Trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn9pk_186P4
I believe the architects that ride this stereotype have a mindset that what they do is revolutionary and will change the way people see, think, feel, and live through their piece of structural art. What they are creating will have a major impact on the users, and ultimately push society into a new (Utopian) direction. Now while this approach to design has it's merit, they tend to fantasize about their perfect world and forget about the rest of societies own dreams and aspirations (and actual needs...because those are also important).
Devil's Advocate: "I am surrounded by idiots."
Society does not always know what they actually want. They may lack the understanding of conceptual "spitballing" and grasp on to the tiniest of details and run with it as if what was proposed was signed and sealed. Perhaps this could be avoided through repeated public gatherings for discussions about planning and design, or explaining ahead of time what the goal of the meeting is actually focusing on...and perhaps it is something we cannot avoid and will have to deal with as architects for all of eternity.
My first interaction with this sort of conflict was with the first architectural firm I worked for. We had a new elementary school going up in small town west Texas that was a 6 hour drive from the office to the town. We were limited on site visits and town forums to talk with the school board, staff, parents and public about what we were intending to do for them. It was the first open meeting with floorplans assorted drawings near completion. The meeting was to discuss the building layout, children safety, resources of the school and how the children will interact in the different classrooms, etc. We open the floor for questions and comments. No serious or major reactions from the crowd that would risk jeopardizing us to rethink our strategy...not until that old woman in the back of the room began to ask about the carpet in the library. For ten minutes we explained to the troubled lady that her topic of discussion was not developed yet and the meeting we were having that night was not about color pallets and finishings. Yet she persisted to make her point that the library needed carpet. The rest of the night was uneventful and concluded with a long 6 hour drive back home.
I agree with everything and the position you took, especially when you played devil's advocate.
ReplyDeleteYou tell an interesting story. It really makes me think about the role the architect takes on when users get heavily involved throughout the design process. I think patience automatically becomes the key part of our role, which is ironic because architects aren't the most patient people.
ReplyDelete