Re: Re: The Challenge of ‘Art’
My thinking was that since this place here is a forum on Irish architecture per se – I know there’s a lot of other things quite extraneous to architecture on it also, but none as complex as art – that you’d be better off going to some forum dedicated to art or else just stick to the “challenge of architecture”.
I would agree with most of what you’re saying on what’s presented in some exhibitions — I’m often disgusted at what some gallery managers allow on their walls, as well as what good stuff they deny space to. Personally, I take no notice of newspaper critics or even gallery programmes : that’s “marketing” (nothing like it really) by pseudo-sophisticates to increasingly educated punters.
But we’ll get no change from the forum here on this issue.
On “the challenge of architecture” : well, it’s not an easy score at all, is it ?
Non-professional critics can have their pitches dismissed into the crowd due to “ignorance” or lack of “aesthetic sense”.
Criticism from within the profession is rare and usually very subtle, owing to the profession’s code and the likely possibility of the challenged architect turning things around in his favour by acting the “very upset” Timid Timothy.
The most viable way in which both professional members and the public can express their views on new buildings could be the annual RIAI awards.
Of course, the RIAI management handsomely obstruct the public input to the “public” award.
And it appears from anecdote that the RIAI senior members themselves choose the “architect’s building of the year” prize.
There you go.
It’s been said before on this forum that public engagement with the subject of architecture as well as the education of people on the benefits of good architecture could help provide more work to architects.
But the relationship cannot be all one-way.