shadow

“Let’s hope they get a big international name in to do the job; Norman Foster, Frank Ghery, Daniel Leibeskind or whoever….but I hope they just don’t settle for Scott Tallon Walker & Co. “

This thread should read “Save the City”, and perhaps we might avoid the disasterous move to elect to chose an architect via reputation rather than the response. This is why architectural competition is so important. Instead of inflated egotistic creations we might actually recieve quality architecture and perhaps surprising architecture. How will be engender an architectural culture here if we automaticaly believe that only an international signature architect will do.

Similarily limited competitions are equally problematic since it tends towards the same problem indicated above, slightly wider pool.

Obviously this does not mitigate against the problems of a poor or uninformed jury.

The reason i raise the probelm of the thread title relates to the possibility of retainign the existing site.

Both the choice of an architectural response as well as site should be thought of in relation to the city as a whole. Where should the abbey be and how it relates to the matrix of urban spaces around it is vitally important. The axis along the liffey where a series of cultural artifacts are linked is perhaps the best solution for the whole city, but to decide upon the issue soley from a property perspective will be damaging ot the potential of the national theatre.

I understand that at the poorly subscribed Deyan Sudjic Lecture the results were quickly read out. Even though, (hearsay only) 15 people heard these results they could theoretically tell 15 people each and eventually exponentially everyone would know. Say one of those people posted the results on this web site, it could not be considered “in the media” or published in the traditional sense.

The RIAI have been inundated with complaints regarding this competition. We have also found the material problematic. As well as the lack of baseline information the time scale is short by international standards and the brief very directed to a type of solution.

This is perhaps the most difficult question that an architect is requested to answer. How long is a piece of string? Each site, programme, builder, architect and other combination will conspire to provide a building that is more expensive than expected. Broad outline costs of between €900 and €1200 per sq metre for a “typical” 2 storey residence are only accurate when the actual project is completed. Extras such as kitchens, bathrooms and other accessories often distort this reality. The only way to achieve real savings and real architectural invention is to encourage alternative means of expression and construction. Most clients are however not brave when investigating this option since it means departing from the known and the representative values of the society at large. If re-sale is the end view this is perhaps one of risk, even though “architect designed” is often used as a byline in the sales brochure. Perhaps “architect designed” does incur an added value component. As for commissioning such work, perhaps clients of the above persusaion, interested in commissioning new work (even budget work) could ask the RIAI or AAI to run a small design competition (open) to investigate this activity and to provide innovative solutions.

Architecture has visual attributes but does not appeal to one sense. The loss of a haptic understanding of our world is a key concern. By reducing the concerns of a building, or city to that percieved by the sense of sight (in turn translated and rationalised by the brain) is both misleading and removes the potential richness of experience. In reply to the question of a text, book or other area worth exploring one possible source is Bloomer Moore’s “Body Memory Architecture”. 20th century modernism took inspritation from the painting and sculpture movements that emerged in Paris, Milan, Utrecht and Moscow. What architecture would have been possible if the model was the 20th century novel instead? What possibilities? Would the architecture of Hadid, Eisenmann & Tschumi be different, or would they have emerged earlier???? Would our cities have retained the richness of previous generations with the radical and critical interventions of contemporary life? Instead we have had one narrow “perspective” after another, promulgated as a higher ideal….

The rules for photographing objects, buildings, installations and other areas of non-public activity are clear. If, positioned on a public highway, footpath or other public realm you may freely undertake to record that which may be seen. If you require a certain vantage point which is only available form private land, the IFSC may be considered as such, you may require permission. These are often clearly identified on DOD and MOD sites on posters at the periphery of the site. In recent years the paparazzi have trampled over this simple rule by the use of ultra high powered lenses, invading the privacy of individuals. Where “public” spaces are concerned, nothing is as it seems. In the situation of being able to cross an urban square or laneway does not confer upon it public rights. A commercial company may decide it is in its interests to promote a public activity (for profit or other means) but also have the right to control the activities within that space.