Vietnam memorial – I was going to call last week when it was discussed with the designer.

As the sister of a person who died in Vietnam and is on the wall, just want to go on record as absolutely hating this monument. Have from the first time I saw it. It’s just borrows from the memorial of the Pacific, but entirely negative – black, below ground, etc. Every other monument to soldiers who have given their life is positive – above ground, beautiful, white.

No discussion of the everyday importance of architecture would be complete without at least mentioning the emergence of the Universal Design movement over the past 20 years. Also known as Inclusive Design, or Human-Centered Design, this is the simple idea that the built environment should be designed in a way that is maximally usable by everyone: young and old, short and tall, disabled and non-disabled, and so on. In Boston, we have a world-renowned organization called Institute for Human-Centered Design that is leading the way to promote this important philosophy.

I am a big fan of Gaudi. Can you talk a little about him?

I live in New EnglNd and it’s sure not for the weather- it’s largely for the architecture of living here! The homes have good bones, real character, history and certain respect for craft and for those who live in them. My home is 150 years old and I expect will be for another 150- and not week goes by that I don’t appreciate the original designer and builders who made it.

Regarding underground architecture. The mansueto library at Uchicago is a planned underground extension using a sweeping glass dome. http://mansueto.lib.uchicago.edu/

I live in Buffalo NY. We are known for our architecture. There was recently a large museum project. Gwathney-Seagal designed a very large musuem, The Burchfield Penny, on a landscape desigened by Olmsted with a large phychiatric institution designed by Richardson. Olmsted and Richardson collaborated on this project. Why wasn’t there any critisism from the national/international architecture community about this?

Blend the earth with buildings? Check out Hundertwasser.

Mr. Goldberger touched upon the dichotomy that architects face: they intuitively wish to design a great, or good, structure, but they must also be business people, responding to clients and communities, and also responsible for a business and employees. Very few architects in the world have the celebrity to get away with truly artistic or cutting-edge design. I’m wondering whether you could address what design qualities a regular architect should strive for, and also, what clients and communities can do to encourage better and timeless designs in cities and towns across the U.S.?

Regarding underground architecture, the Australian Houses of Parliament are convened in a building under an artificial hill in Canberra. Large slots in the crown of the hill allow daylight into the legislative chambers, and allow ordinary Aussies to literally look down on their lawmakers. The hill is covered in native grasses, and casual passers by might not even notice the huge building concealed beneath.

It’s anything but green, but the new Yas Marina Grand Prix cicuit in the U.A.E. is spectacular to say the least. There’s a stunning hotel that bridges the track, Ferrari World,…
Also check out the Malaysian circuit in Saipang. Gorgeous!

Question for either of the guests (do these comments get read live?).
In a virtual age, can you comment about virtual architecture’s effect on the architectural profession? People pay real money to buy virtual real estate, virtual space–space that they actually decorate, “move around in”, and display to others. Is this an extension of traditional architecture? Will this affect how we view architecture? Thank you.

Computer-generated and designed architecture is sterile; and the more of it that is produced, the less architecture matters. Nothing that a computer can concoct will ever match the grandeur found in such structures such as the medieval European cathedrals. The more human architecture is, the more it will matter to humans.

Goldberger’s comment about preserving the less than perfect buildings in the urban environment reminds me of what Jane Jacobs said about the buildings in cities, “new ideas require old buildings.” Not everyone starting out a new business or enterprise can afford the best spaces–less desirable buildings must exist in even our most prized cities for the ideas of the future to be developed.

It’s Veterans Day and we have wars going on on in Iraq and Afghanistan and this is the show?

I like good architecture but on this day in this time is this the right show considering all that is going on?

In my view, one big reason for the low quality and heartlessness of the majority of new housing is that it is built by speculative builders. The wonderful old houses we love were built by way of a contract between a builder and an owner; people who knew one another, and were part of a community. Before, building was done with an eye to future generations. Now, it is done more with an eye for the terms of the mortgage, construction loan, or quarterly report.
Richard Meier is wrong that it is the absence of an architect’s involvement. In fact, the contemporary architects’ lack of familiarity with the building process, and lack of actual experience with methods and materials, has a lot to do with many poorly made, short lived buildings.
For thousands of years, architects rose up from the ranks and experience of the building crafts; these days, very much less so.

a few brief comments…
For Patricia who hates the Vietnam memorial in Washington, I’d mention that the associations of black with bad and white with good are entirely arbitrary; bones are white, ghosts are often depicted as white, the pallor of illness is white, many parasitic and destructive organisms are white; and if the Vietnam memorial’s decent into the ground parallels the decent of our nation into a catastrophic war which still can’t be explained appropriately, then so much the better for it and for us.
I agree in general with Mr. Weatherall’s comments that architects emerge from their education largely unfamiliar with actual construction. A notable exception are the programs which emphasize work-study, periods when apprenticing architects must work in their field and experience the actual construction process. My son, now an architect, was in such a program, and as a result understands this process quite well. I would add though that such understanding does not guarantee a comprehension of the varying effects of differing spaces, colors, textures and proportions on humans.

Architectural Record, the monthly magazine of the AIA gives a view on the day to day progress of the profession. I enjoy reading the publicly available copy at the library each month. It is a big topic and one by which people feel intimidated.

To stand up and say something is rubbish even though AutoCAd can spit out a design that won’t fall down (think Frank Gehry here) would be the equivalent of saying the emperor had no clothes.

Civic buildings are one of the few venues where the public can engage in how their community looks. It’s important. More people should take such interest.

Finally there’s this:

http://www.architecture5cents.com/

“No project is too small for big ideas.”

As a former Art History prof and widow of an architect, I believe architecture is the finest of the art disciplines. The Greeks called it that because it was the “highest form of construction.” My favorite styles are the Gothic and the Modern, both of which exemplify courage, technical expertise, and creativity. The Bauhaus and International Style architects such as Mies and Le Corbusier were idealists hoping to better the lives of people through their work. Postmodernism, on the other hand, is a sad chapter in architectural history. With its penchant for trivializing architecture by hackneyed copying of past styles and the use of a hodgepodge of materials,it trashes a noble profession. Frank Gehry, with his dramatic organic forms, is one of the rare exceptions.

errare humanum est…oops, I spoke too soon yesterday… Invisible cities” is by Italo Calvino, not Paul Virilio! My apologies, error amended.

Italo Calvino on his “Invisible Cities” speaks of the intangible dimension that Mr Goldberger mentioned on his interview. If you have not read it yet, put it on your to-read-list. Enjoy!

[...] Click here to listen [...]

It seems that some of Frank Gehry’s work has some problems. One that comes to mind is the Ray and Maria Stata Center he designed for MIT. They are suing him for a host of design flaws such as leaking roofs, and mold. Apparently there is no sound proofing in the building. In some rooms the lean of the walls cause vertigo. The main critique is that it is poorly designed for day-to-day use.

[...] Why We Need Architecture: Paul Goldberger, WBUR On Point Radio. [...]