IGS brings you the words of authentic industry leaders so you can better understand these powerful lifetime influencers and how their minds work. In August we spoke with Professor Martha Thorne; Dean of IE School of Architecture & Design and, Executive Director of the Pritzker Prize.
Here are the essential passages from our exchange:
IGS: What are the main challenges for Architectural education today?
MT: If I had to cite just three challenges of architectural education today, I would say technology, the need for more crossdisciplinary education and how to respond to real-world problems such as global warming. The onslaught of technology is changing the way we teach, learn, communicate, how we approach architecture and the structure and relationships within the architecture profession.
A second challenge is the tension between the traditional discipline of architecture and the new needs of society that could benefit from the processes and mindset of architects, and the third is the need for more holistic education. In some countries, architects are artists, in others great technicians, but in all cases, architects need to understand more deeply the context in which they are working, especially the economic or business context. Finally, at no time in history has our environment been under threat. The built environment is a major cause and potential solution to how we address and implement issues related to sustainability.
IGS: How is the IE School of Architecture meeting these challenges?
MT: We address these challenges in multiple ways. Perhaps the most unique ways are through our elective courses, a robust internship program, and blended learning. The electives are geared to allow students to intensively take a deep dive into, for example, landscape architecture, virtual reality or important fields adjacent to traditional architecture studies.
The internship program allows students to work half a day and study online, in real-time with their teachers and classmates, the other half of the day. We find that a connection between academics and the professional world is more positive than taking a year off to work. Students more readily see the connection with what they are studying and can also bring real-world challenges back into the classroom for discussion. Finally, in all our courses, sustainability underpins the work and discussions of students and teachers alike.
IGS: What words of wisdom do you give to your students in order to create a winning mindset on which they can build their careers?
MT: Our world is changing, professions are evolving and new ones being developed, the way we understand work, education and leisure time is also undergoing major shifts. Given these changes, it is important that students have an entrepreneurial mindset, are flexible in terms of professional careers, and develop skills and talents that can be applied to the many new situations that they will be facing.
Of course, it is necessary to approach any future professional challenge with a rigorous process and a highly honed skill set. In this vein, architectural education is especially relevant for its ability to get a grasp on complex problems, undertake research, imagine alternative futures, and evaluate the options. Students learn to do this while including stakeholders, those who will be affected by the new project proposal or idea, in the process. I would encourage students to develop skills that allow them to embrace new technology which can help in gathering data and interpreting it to understand complex issues on one hand. And, on the other, I would also suggest that they develop the ability to listen carefully, to read between the lines when they hear someone speaking, and to think outside of the box to question assumptions. By doing all this they can then use their creative spirit to suggest alternative paths for the future. In other words, knowing the tools of the trade (and there are many in the field of architecture and design) and combining these with soft skills that add value such as empathy, the ability to connect the dots and to not be afraid of criticism, throwing away ideas that don’t work and persevering until they are able to develop proposals that will meet multiple goals.
IGS: Architecture, like art, is subjective. In your learned opinion, what makes great architecture?
MT: First of all, I would disagree that art and architecture are subjective. Of course, there are individual interpretations both by the creator as well as by the client for the public. Not all expressions of architecture or all art are equal and we can certainly cite characteristics, especially of architecture which contributes to good architecture. We must remember that the purpose of architecture is to serve the public.
It is created to serve someone outside of the architect or the team in a real way. In contrast, art certainly can contribute to the culture of a community or a city but it doesn’t have the functional imperatives that architecture does.
When thinking about what makes good architecture, I believe that it must be a balanced combination of many things. Buildings and places must: serve their function well; do this sustainably; reflect the time and place in which the architecture is built; and be a good neighbor. Great architecture is also well constructed so that it will last. More and more we are evaluating architecture based on its entire life cycle performance, from cradle to cradle so to speak. Spaces created should communicate clearly to those who will use them, and include such values as protection, comfort, and be welcoming and understandable…. Finally, what separates great from good architecture is that which can touch the human spirit.
IGS: AI, robotics, the IoT and digital transformation are all disruptive technologies. There is a danger that if we all use the same design engines, the same drivers, we will all make the same mistakes and buildings will become same old, same old, thereby stifling the talent of the individual. What are your thoughts on this?
MT: Architects have never resisted technology. Just the opposite, they have often been leaders in the field. SOM created a computer group, an applied research group, back in the early 1960s. The design process, which embodies a spirit of invention and critique, can become even more powerful and the efficient and expanding use of technology. I do not worry about computers leading to uninspired standardized products. Rather, analyzing pertinent information rapidly, eliminate boring, rote tasks, and allowing the rapid sharing of information by all team members can lead to even better buildings and more creative architecture.
IGS: You recently referred to Dieter Rams “10 principles of good design”. We are now living in a vastly different age, 50 years or so on from Rams, so please give us “Martha Thorne’s 10 Principles of Good Design”. A brand-new set of commandments if you will.
MT: For architecture, I would still be guided by most of industrial designer, Dieter Rams, concepts who coined 10 principles of good design: innovation, makes a product useful, is aesthetic, makes a product understandable, unobtrusive, honest, long-lasting, good through the last detail, environmentally friendly, and as little design as possible. Perhaps I would disagree that architecture has to be unobtrusive. Sometimes architecture can form a strong contrast with an existing environment or surrounding that then has the ability to communicate and heighten the appreciation of both the old and new. Likewise, as little design as possible, I would agree that architecture that calls attention to itself or the architect just for the sake of publicity is too much design. However, sometimes monumental quality is called for and architecture, at times, needs to be a symbol of a community, a moment in history, an event, etc.
So I would keep eight of Dieter Rams commandments for design and add that architecture must be a “good neighbor”. When a new building is erected, it must be very sensitive to its context and add something to the community in which it is located, beyond just the building itself. This “good neighbor” quality could be the addition of something physical, like public space or something less tangible, such as an appreciation of the history or people who live there.
Spaces created should communicate clearly to those who will use them, and include such values as protection, comfort, and be welcoming and understandable…. Finally, what separates great from good architecture is that which can touch the human spirit.
Spaces created should communicate clearly to those who will use them, and include such values as protection, comfort, and be welcoming and understandable…. Finally, what separates great from good architecture is that which can touch the human spirit.
IGS: Moving forward, in the face of global warming and environmental degradation, what role do architects play in providing comfortable, habitable spaces for our future generations?
MT: Architects are key players in helping us find solutions for global warming. The profession as a whole and architects as individuals must take responsibility for what is built. However, it must be remembered that architects alone cannot change the world. While they may design our built environment, they do not commission it or pay for it. Therefore politicians, developers, other professions, and society, in general, must do its part to take very seriously the threats of global warming and proactively provide the resources and legal and ethical frameworks to tackle climate change together.
IGS: Architects have a reputation for being elitist, they’re called the “terribly terribly” brigade. Dollar bills and a “je ne sais quoi” sense of arrogance, Patrick Schumacher and his cringeworthy statement last year spring to mind. In your expert opinion, do architects have a moral obligation to provide affordable housing, in fact affordable work, rest and play to a large percentage of the world’s population that currently do not benefit from high performance mainstream all singing and dancing beautiful architecture?
MT: Your question is interesting. You are asking about the moral obligations of a profession to contribute to equality and democracy. This situation is not exclusively limited to architects what a larger question is across all professions and all of society. That said the history of the profession of architecture and the organization or structure of the profession has meant that it is more readily available two clients with the ability to pay for services. As other professions such as health or education are often thought of as Universal rights, architecture has not fallen into this category. So what can architects do? As a profession, architects should communicate the value they are able to add to the built environment. Architects do not have more obligations than other professions to work pro bono or to provide services for the poor and disenfranchised.
I do not believe that architecture has done a good job of communicating value it can add to society or how the built environment can favor the health and welfare of all. We have allowed our profession to be seen as a luxury and for the elite. There are a few architects who support this idea of being “the chosen profession for the chosen public,” but most architects view the profession as one of service. Refocusing the profession to communicate better and to be seen as a field which can make huge and necessary contributions to the betterment of society should be one of our goals. However, only when clients, politicians, and the society in general demand good services from architects and are willing to pay them for them, can we hope to be a profession for the majority and not for the minority, as it is today.
IGS: Not all architects regard folks less fortunate than themselves as something stinky that’s adhered itself to the bottom of their shoe, can you name one or two that have demonstrated compassion for the poor and needy in their work?
MT: There are many architects and firms that contribute generously to that goal of “service to humanity. There are different ways to do this and many different models. I will cite just a few. The practice of Alejandro Aravena, called Elemental, is a for-profit company with social goals. They are clear about what jobs they will take on and their backers and advisors help with their business model. Shigeru Ban tackles disaster relief projects by working pro bono. His high-end projects allow him a margin to work for free on others along with the collaboration of local firms and students, acting as “first architecture responders” to natural or man-made disasters. Austrian architect, Anna Heringer says that she “uses architecture as a medium to strengthen cultural and individual confidence, to support local economies and to foster the ecological balance.” She is invited by local authorities or groups at times, but often she does her own fundraising. Another model is that of Mass Design Group of Boston which has set up a not-for-profit structure within the firm, and at one time contributed 25% of its profits to respond to those most needy.
IGS: With 20/20 vision, what trends in architectural design can you see going mainstream next year?
MT: Trends in architectural design that I hope go mainstream in the coming year are ones that have to do with sustainability. I think we will see an evolution both in conceptual approaches to architecture as well as the use of materials. All could contribute to making our buildings more sustainable in terms of resources used, in construction resources used in the life of the building, lengthening the life of buildings, and allowing them to be recycled more effectively.
Technology, of course, is part of the equation. Prefabrication will allow us to save materials at the onset it allows more precision in the fabrication of materials and therefore last waste on-site. Conceivably technology will allow us to set up movable factories so that we do not have to transport building materials such long distances. There is no silver bullet, however, multiple steps used together will allow us to use our resources more widely as we move forward.
IGS: And finally, what are your thoughts about glass as a structural material? Does glass perform enough functions to satisfy your own creative mind? Or is there something you would like glass to do that it currently does not do…to your knowledge?
MT: Although I am not an expert, I believe that the glass industry has shown how it can evolve and innovate, more than some other industries related to our built environment. We use glass is numerous ways. It can be used structurally, as the “skin” or façade for buildings, as an additive to other materials for high-quality finishes, all in addition to the traditional uses for windows and doors. Glass is a very versatile and recyclable building material. What is even more exciting is how glass can contribute to realizing the “experiential” qualities of architecture. By using glass in creative ways, light becomes a defining quality of architectural space. Transparency allows for flowing spaces that can enhance the users’ experience in a building. I am sure that the glass industry will work more closely with others to find new uses and create better more sustainable products.