Re: Re: DDDA / Docklands Miscellany

Well Brian, I am extreemly gratefull that I have made my way through architecture school before you got your hands on it, I find the idea of studying economice apawling, and would think twice about doing architecture if that was the case.
I’ll admit perhaps to a lack of understanding of where you are coming from, but then understanding is a two way thing. I will try to find common ground, in terms of positive contributions to productivity, surley you a familiar with the concept that a happy worker is a productive worker, and you may also have heard of Sick Building Syndrome, ie negative physical effects that result from prolonged periods of working in exactly the kind of artifically lit, artifically ventilated, deep floor plans you call for. In architecture school we are though that 13m is infact the maximum any floor plate shoud be to ensure natural ventilation and light. It is about recognising the human factor of the “knowledge based economy” rather than the numbers and categories to which you constantly refer, it is the qualitive experience built around the individual and not the service of economics which architecture has at it’s core.
I do not necessarily disagree with a lot of what you have said, the incompetance of governament, the failure to implement the New Town concept, transport, etc; but you seem deluded as to what an architect’s role is. I think the simple enjoyment of being in a place is fundamental; I do not mean that in a flakey or abstract sense, I am not a flakey or abstract person, but the places you are proposing (and this is what architects do, to think about being in the place) regardless of efficiency, are horrible, depressing places to be, and should not be regarded as models that young architects aspire to.
(And as it happens I have frequently referenced Sennett)