Comments on: Architects and Autocrats

By: rodger

rodger — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 00:40:49 +0000

see NBFA's response to this article http://famousarchitect.blogspot.com/2008/07/56-listen-to-little-devil-on-your.html

By: M_s

M_s — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:32:50 +0000

Your article reminds me of Philip Johnson's quote that "architects are whore".

Architects try to speak like moral philosophers and act like humble artists. Still they cannot disguise the fact that they are just one of those businessmen/women constantly looking for opportunities.

Especially to the STARS that you mentioned, together with their giga-egos, why would they let their one-of-the-lifetime projects slipping away? Please tell me who wouldn't want to be THE designer for the Olympic stadium or the CCTV headquarter in the "not-quite-democratic" China?

However, I would have respected these people a little more if they had given you a straight forward answers.......

By: Tan Boon Tee

Tan Boon Tee — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 06:21:35 +0000

I read your article with strong reservation, and am flabbergasted by your assertions that:
1. Prominent architects are flocking to work for not-quite-democratic states like China and Russia;
2. Good architects are working with bad leaders.

Since when did architecture become a monopoly of the democratic countries? Architecture is above and beyond politics. Architects can go anywhere anytime to work with anyone they like, as long as their work is appreciated and looked up to.

Do architects need to bother about the political affiliation or vision of their clientele? What's wrong with working for leaders who can pay even though uncannily perceived as bad by the so called democratic regimes?

It is rather unfortunate (perhaps to a certain extent moronic) that some people would want to force the issue and mess up architecture with politics (they just belong to separate domains).