68. Take a lesson from SANAA

cartoon credit: http://klaustoon.wordpress.com/category/pritzker-prize/

First let me extend my sincere congratulations to SANAA on the announcement that they will recieve the Pritzker.
One of the first things I did after I learned the news was to type in SANAA into Google to find out something more about them. I already know their work very well, but what about Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa? how did they become so famous? How did they do it? One thing I knew was that success leaves clues and I was intent on finding out.

My guiding question: what can we learn from these two?

Here is what I found:

1. Ryue will be only 44 years old when he receives the Pritzker. That's perhaps the youngest to ever receive the prize. He has beaten out some of the heavy weights who have been around on the waiting list for a long time, including Peter Eisenman, Daniel Libeskind, Steven Holl, and even his former boss Toyo Ito. How did he do it?

First he worked for a famous architect while he was in school. An invaluable credential needed to become a famous architect yourself. Almost every famous architects have learned the trade under a master. Ryue did this early in his academic career. Both he and Kazuyo apprenticed under Toyo Ito. When Kazuyo started up her own firm, he had the good sense to go off and work for her too. Another good reason to work for a famous architect; You will meet people who could become your future partner there.

Secondly he read my blog and took it to heart. When he felt the need to break out on his own he was able to be open and coachable. He must have understood at some point in his decision making process that to unite & conquer was better the one man against the world philosophy. He accepted the offer to partner up with Kazuyo where they were able to achieve much more together than apart.

2. We can see that there is some truth to Jeffery Kipnis' observation on the development stages of a famous architect. SANAA's history is but a variation on it.

• STAGE ONE [unbuilt break through projects]: Although SANAA's break through came with multiple projects that were actually all built. They definitely had a break through stage where they were getting published a lot and it attracted the attention of just the architectural community.
• STAGE TWO [Exhibitions]: we can see after 1993 the office was inundated with not just exhibitions but also awards. I would argue that stage two is as much about awards as it is about exhibition. Largely speaking, its about being recognized by outside entities: amassing symbolic capital. You will see that this also includes invitations to lecture and/or teach at renowned collages and universities as well. An invitation to teach at Harvard is pretty much a status symbol that every famous architect receives when they near or cross the line into fame.
  
• STAGE THREE [a seminal built project]: Again, SANAA were never paper architects at any points in their careers unlike Peter Eisenman, or Zaha Hadid, so their work has always combined artistic, pragmatic and intellectual elements from the very beginning and then matured over time. However, one could point to the O-museum as a significant commission that gave them the opportunity to develop these elements in their work more freely.

3. SANAA remained true to themselves. In a climate where most firms kind of rush to follow the latest fad, they rely focused on becoming experts on their own way of doing things. Now that the climate is such that bombastic architecture is associated with the greed and excess that caused the financial crisis, the Pritzker committee is now turning its focus in the opposite direction which is just where SANAA happens to be.

4. And most importantly did you check out Kazuyo Sejima's eye wear. This lady paid attention to her glasses and her clothes and that's no joke.




Conrad Newel

NOTES ON BECOMING A FAMOUS ARCHITECT
Liberating Minds Since August 2007

------------------------------------------------------
Road Map to Fame : SANAA Architects
KEY:
BLACK-BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
BLUE- COMISSIONS
RED- SYMBOLIC CAPITAL: AWARDS, EXHIBITIONS & PROFESSORSHIPS



1956
KAZUYO SEJIMA born in Ibaraki prefecture, Japan


1966
RYUE NISHIZAWA Born in Kanagawa Prefecture, Japan


1981
KAZUYO graduates from Japan Women's University with a Masters Degree in Architecture & starts working in Toyo Ito's office




1987
KAZUYO Established Kazuyo Sejima & Associates and hires RYUE as one of her first staffers


1988
Kazuyo Sejima & Associates receives their first major award: Project selected for the Kajima Award - MCH House Kajima Prize

1990
RYUE Graduated from Yokohama National University with a Masters Degree in Architecture
More accolades pour in as the office's work is selected for the exhibition "Last Scene in Architecture" (Touko Museum of Contemporary Art, Tokyo) and receives an Honorable Mention for the SD Award for La Maison de la Culture de Japon, Paris, SD Review

1992
Awarded JIA Prize for Best Young Architect

1993
The Office now begins to gain momentum in its popularity as they recognized for several awards and exhibitions: LABYRINTH New Generation in Japanese Architecture (Sezon Museum of Art, Tokyo, Hyogo)
KAZUYO SEJIMA 12 PROJECTS (Gallery-MA, Tokyo)
Japanese Contemporary Design (National Museum of Modern Art, Seoul)
Third prize, Yokohama International Port Terminal Design Competition
Grand Prize, Commercial Space Design Award '94 for "Pachinko Parlour I & II"



1995
Ryue Nishizawa expresses that he wants to go off and establish his own office. Kazuyo convinces him to stay and offers him partnership. Kazuyo closed Kazuyo Sejima & Associates and the two established a new office with the name SANAA [an acronym derived from the names of both partners.]
SANAA = Sejima + And + Nishizawa + And + Associates



Recieves the Kenneth F. Brown Asia Pacific Culture and Architecture Design Award
University of Hawaii for "Saishunkan Seiyaku Women's Dormitory"
Construction begins on the O Museum - 1995 to 1999 - Nagano, Japan

1997
KAZUYO becomes Visiting professor at Japan Women's University, at Tokyo Institute of Technology, at Tokyo Science University

RYUE Established his own office [Ryue Nishizawa architect] for doing small scale works [private houses, etc] but still remains partner at SANAA

Wins the "International Competition for the World Buildings" in Salerno
K-Building, Ibaraki, Japan
N-Museum, Wakayama, Japan
M-House, Tokyo, Japan

1998
De Kunstlinie Theater & Cultural Center - 1998 to Present - Almere, Netherlands

1999
21st Century Museum of Contemporary Art - 1999 to 2004 - Kanazawa, Ishikawa, Japan

2000
Both are invited to become visiting Professor at Harvard GSD, Cambridge, USA


Erich Schelling Architekturpreis
Work was included in the exhibition "City of Girls" in the Japanese Pavilion at the 2000 Venice Biennale


Work exhibited in the Garden Cafe at the 7th International Istanbul Biennale, Istanbul, Turkey

2001
KAZUYO accepts Professorship at Keio University, Tokyo, Japan & Visiting professor at ETH in Zurich


La Biennale di Venezia, 7th International Architecture Exhibition"City of girls" Japanese Pavilion, Exhibition Design, Arsenale, Venice, Italy
PRADA Beauty ISETAN, Tokyo, Japan (until 2002)

2003
The New Museum of Contemporary Art - 2003 to 2007 - New York City, New York
Zollverein School of Design - 2003 to 2006 - Essen, Germany
Christian Dior Building, Omotesando COMPLETED \ Tokyo, Japan
Naoshima Ferry Terminal - 2003 to 2006 - Kagawa, Japan

2004
Awarded the Golden Lion for the most remarkable work in the exhibition Metamorph in the 9th International Architecture Exhibition, La Biennale di Venezia in 2004

2005
Rolf Schock Prize in the visual arts
Recieved the 46th Mainichi Shinbun Arts Award (Architecture Category)

2009
Serpentine Gallery Pavilion - 2009 - London, England
Rolex Learning Center at the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne - 2004 to 2010 - Lausanne, Switzerland
kazuyo sejima appointed director of the venice architecture biennale 2010

2010
Awarded the Pritzker Prize

67. all you need is a piece of paper, a pencil and a desire to make architecture

Architect Raimund Abraham, widely known as an inspiring educator among architects and former students fortunate to have been taught by him, was killed in a car crash in downtown Los Angeles early Thursday morning.[March 3, 2010]

"Earlier in the evening Raimund delivered a powerful lecture at SCI-Arc, re-stating his enduring love for architecture and his willingness to fight for the design discourse as he defined it," reported Eric Owen Moss.

Below are a few statements from that lecture:

R.I.P Raimund Abraham 1933-2010

• architecture does not have to be built; it can be written, it can be drawn, it can put in model form
• what happens when you build, you enter a domain which forces you to defend your ideas against unlimited number of hostile forces
• When I talk about providing an alternative way to making architecture, what I means is you don't have to be a slave in a corporate office, or a groupie of a celebrity architect because all you need is a piece of paper a pencil and a desire to make architecture

66. Seven ways to [verb] the Starchitect System

While doing research for one of my posts, I came across this very interesting synopsis of the starchitect system, made by a commenter on archinet. I thought it was a particularly insightful observation and could not resist posting it here.

Th starchitect system [a working and evolving description]:

1. Architect makes a new form and discovers innovative way to build it
   
2. The form-building gets press
   
3. The architect becomes a pseudo-celebrity and the building becomes a "style"
   
4. The architect starts using the same bag of (increasingly superficial) formal tricks in all consequent projects.
   
5. The press (including architectural) give up really engaging criticism and if said architect does anything, it is celebrated as the coming of the messiah for a city, building type, etc...
   
6. The public come to think of that "style" as architecture
   
7. Lesser known architects follow the public's new tastes
   
8. "Architecture" loses yet another battle.

While the above description is of one person's definition of the starchitecture system, below is a few responses on how to engage it (or apply a verb to it). The comments are from the same archinet thread reacting to Phillip Nobel's article in Metropolis Magazine "Anti-Starchitecture Chic". The original thread has a lot of interesting moments but all in all a chaotic stream of chatter that was difficult to follow. So I have tried to categorize them into some common themes and consensuses, while trying to keep the flavor and flow of the conversation. The assembled responses below has been selected not necessarily because I agree with them but because they are provocative and interesting within themselves. I enjoyed the candidness and [for better or for worse] it is an interesting demonstration of the logic of the collective.

1.FLIP THE SYSTEM - FUCK THE SYSTEM

-I am tired of media hype being the primary goal of starchitects. I rather have social and environmental guru's or genius's like Bill McDonough, Cameron Sinclair, or Ed Mazria getting all the attention, since they are creating the future for our planet. Rem, Gehry and their like won't save the earth or create a better society, but there are architects and designers who will. Lets celebrate them instead.

until then: 'fuck Frank Gehry' and while I'm at it, fuck Zaha

- completely agree, but I also feel like these "gurus" should be built into the code of the profession not the anomalies. The current system would not allow that

-Well, then fuck the system. The only truly credible course may be to reject the very idea of using yourself as a brand, (and) to work and work well...to me that's integrity.

2. DON'T UNDERESTIMATE THE SYSTEM

-Isn’t it too easy to say that it doesn’t matter? For example Ghery can write contracts unlike most architects out there. The result is that you and I will never be able to compete with him in control of a project, etc... And at what point does the drive for fame (to be able to write contracts and make money like Ghery) turn into the superficial drive for the next cool form? When is it gimmicky?

I am using Ghery as an example I could say Zaha, Libeskind, OMA,

-Just to mix things up a little, we should also remember that since the Bilbao effect, the marketing and exposure that comes with a "starchitect" translates directly into $$$ to clients and the area. It goes beyond architect/starchitect worship...it's also public/event worship...also, I like to admire talented architects...both starchitects and local unknown architects...I think it's a natural process in our profession.

-The 'average person' is not the average client for a major architectural project. Most corporations, museums, libraries, etc are looking for star power these days.... Chipperfield and Holl's recent museum projects are good examples, as are projects at major universities (Vincent James at Tulane, Rem at IIT, Holl in Iowa) and most of the Asian projects that we hear about over here. You can bet that none of these clients is simply taking proposals and picking the ones they think will be best for the job. They're looking for recognition by association.

-...In general, I think we're painting this picture with a fairly broad brush, basically assuming that clients are lamely saying, "I want a Gehry" or "I want a Meier." On the contrary, most clients are quite savvy about the architect they are selecting. The client that chose Meier for the high-end condos in Chelsea chose him because he knew he could market that name to architecturally-conversant wealthy home buyers. Could he have done the same with Gehry? A museum that selects Holl, let's say Chiasma, knows that Holl will provide a design of a significant quality that will potentially complement the art displayed. moreover, let's be honest, the starchitect 99% of the time is flat-out a better designer than Joe Blow architect. It is more than a name these clients are buying, but clearly the name doesn't hurt either.

3. INFILTRATE THE SYSTEM

-We also must acknowledge that there's often a separation between the fame and the actual design being created by some of these architects we're alluding to.

What I'm getting at is that, for example, the first thing Karim Rashid (Asymptote's Hani Rashid's industrial designer brother) did after graduating school was to hire a PR manager. PR is the name of the game....

...I don't care either way for 'starchitects.' If somebody's doing good work, whether they're a media darling or not, I'm interested. It's easy to criticize those who've risen to fame.... that's the way the game is played right now, and it's not going to change for a little while yet....

-Media and marketing is everywhere today...architects choosing to ignore opportunities for public exposure for a sense of "integritry" just reflects our profession's inability to function in today's world...the starving mysterious missunderstood eccentric artists.

...and except for maybe Phillip Johnson, I doubt any architect or starchitect " seeks fame for fame's sake", they seek fame so they can get commissions with less restrictions than we do. ...

why can't we improve and educate, but also Dazzle!?

-Being an architect, I assume you need to find ways to get your ideas built... star/non starchitect system, whichever ways works for you, I do not see any evil beings in either of the systems. I always think is more efficient to have a PR or agent works for you, so you have more spare time to work on design rather than socialising with the press.

4. ACCEPT THE SYSTEM

- I have no problem with the whole "starchitect" system. We live in an age where media is king. The majority of our thoughts and opinions are based from this. I would rather hear about a designer in the media than another vapid story on Hollywood celebrity. The "starchitecture" system has always filled that media gap no matter if it is sensationalist or not. "No press is bad press" What would Metropolis rather write about?

You need a human face behind the buildings.

5. BEWARE THE DANGERS OF THE SYSTEM

...this is my greatest fear, and Libeskind is a great example of (it): innovation turned to kitsch. Seems like the question that arises is: What is worse for the profession; not playing the PR game, or becoming kitschy?

6. BLAME THE MESSENGERS IN THE SYSTEM

-Architecture business unlike others like fashion designer/hair dresser, mostly clients do not come back for more... therefore exposure is part of the survival tactic to expand the network... some become more "loud or stylistic" in the market and become labeled as star... I wouldn't blame the market nor someone being a star for producing work which I do not like... that's reality!

Its not the architects its the coverage of the architects. Its the misdirected hero worship of the architects. These are not fucking rock stars okay. They are very talented people running businesses that require exposure to be successful. Don't blame them. blame the ridiculous media and the namedropping starfuckers

-Has Rem not worked hard? You think Zaha didn't pay her dues?

-...the burdens may be different. Maybe they don't have to hunt down the work, but they have to pick the projects that will keep them going, maintaining the reputation. They have to make each project measure up to the previous work and the expectations that work has created...

7. DECENTRALIZE THE SYSTEM

...I am proposing that one has to go out there and work with others. Connect in ways that were not possible before, and in that way define how we work. However, I am not advocating for a communal ideal either. What I can see happening is a series of “free agents” coming together for projects with other “free agents” placing the importance on the individual project itself, then moving on and doing other projects. How you would get projects and answer RFP’s, not sure....

-...Exactly! the media as process and method of working, not as glossy images and name dropping.

...But still, it is nice to hold hands and sing kumbaya we are the future, but what are the problems; who signs the drawings? Will there be drawings to sign? Copyrights and intellectual property?as Nobel mentions the starchitect system also works because clients want it, how do you change that economic reality?...

-I agree that the future model of architectural practice lies within open source collaboration, especially within the context of new media technology and building information modeling, but even within this model, I don't think old hierarchies and star-architects will go away unless you look at and address the incentives that perpetuate this system whether economic or the simple desire for fame.

What is the first step? To do away with the pritzker prize?

-Perhaps, but who would turn down the pritzker?

Celebrity isn't going anywhere. In fact it will likely only become more extreme with increased accessibility to media