Architects Talking Architecture

Architects Talking Architecture

To illustrate our article about ArchDaily, here is a selection of their most dubious quotes and a critical response to ArchDaily's comments on Twitter and Facebook.

share this article

For the article “The Day Architects Stopped Reading Newspapers” we made a selection of “Architects’ Descriptions” from the biggest architectural blog in the world: ArchDaily. Here is a selection of the most dubious quotes around three Usual Suspects: ‘context’, ‘public space’ and ‘sustainability’.

The article is followed by a response to the comments of editors and authors of ArchDaily on Twitter and Facebook.

On Context

Architects Talking Architecture

Arte’s Towers – Spark Architects

“The geometry and composition of the towers is inspired by the dramatic surrounding land and seascapes mediating between the steeply rising verdant mountain and the flowing currents of the Malacca Straits.”

Arte’s Towers – Spark Architects – ArchDaily 2013

Architects Talking Architecture

Batumi Aquarium – Henning Larsen – ArchDaily 2010

“Batumi Aquarium is inspired by the characteristic pebbles of the Batumi beach – the residue of dynamic seas continually shaping the shorefront throughout millennia. The building will be situated in the Georgian port of Batumi and will stand out as an iconic rock formation – visible from both land and sea.”

Batami Aquarium – Henning Larsen – ArchDaily 2010

Architects Talking Architecture

Zhongwei Cultural Complex – HO&Partners – ArchDaily 2013

“The contemporary design of the main centres aims to characterize the city’s modernization, whilst capturing local cultural references. The building facades pay homage to local stone paintings and weaving patterns of sand-barriers found in regional deserts. Building materials further associate with local surroundings through different textures and colour palettes.”

Zhongwei Cultural Complex – HO&Partners – ArchDaily 2013

On Public Space

“Small decisions draw the line between a more communal versus a typical residential building. Take, for instance, the idea of allowing all apartments to share a single large lobby surrounded by a 2000sqm shallow body of water accessed from four separate circulation cores. Every time a resident comes home he is reminded of nature’s presence and welcomed by a crowd of people inhabiting the populated structure.”

Beirut Terraces – Herzog&DeMeuron – ArchDaily 2013

Architects Talking Architecture

Hanking Nanyou New Town – Jaeger&Partner – ArchDaily 2012

“The design aims to establish community character through the creation of a three-dimensional urban space that provides its users with ease of access to living, leisure, culture, and work.

The design process included considerations to retaining historical and cultural aspects of the site. The project implements an interlaced grid system that blends the current orthogonal urban fabric to a historical diagonal axis. Furthermore, the site’s current educational and hospital facilities are preserved as they are integral to communal development. Lastly the introduction of new cultural elements and the transformation of old housing into an Art Village greatly enrich the urban atmosphere.”

Hanking Nanyou New Town – Jaeger&Partner – ArchDaily 2012

Architects Talking Architecture

Bratislava Culenove New City Center – Zaha Hadid – ArchDaily 2013

“The design for the Bratislava Culenova New City Center by Zaha Hadid Architects is based on a dynamic field strategy which aims to organize the city’s new city center program along a gradient of circular and elliptical patterns. In a series of larger tower extrusions, a fluid field emerges from its underlying matrix to activate the ground throughout the whole site and provide public spaces of the highest quality.”

Bratislava Culenove New City Center – Zaha Hadid – ArchDaily 2013

On Sustainability

Architects Talking Architecture

Trans Ganga Masterplan – Studio Symbiosis – ArchDaily 2012

“Sustainable city design has been imbibed in the planning at two levels. Firstly at the design level elements required to make a city sustainable have been grafted in the master plan. Secondary at the implementation stage green roof, earth cooling, solar panels, ground water recharge, waste management have been proposed.

At the heart of the master plan an auto expo is located, sitting amidst the central green. The auto expo is designed as an iconic building creating a prominent visual marker”

Trans Ganga Masterplan – Studio Symbiosis – ArchDaily 2012

“The architects are honored to have the opportunity to plan a world-class financial center in Istanbul – a city that historically has been such a dynamic global center for commerce. Their master plan provides a framework for developing a sustainable financial center in a way that blends human need, environmental stewardship and economic viability into a new global model of urbanism rooted in Turkish culture.”

New Istanbul International Financial Center – HOK – ArchDaily 2013

Architects Talking Architecture

Meixi Lake New Town – KPF – ArchDaily 2012

“The master plan seeks to establish a paradigm of man living in balance with nature. A densely concentrated urban plan, packed with a full variety of functions and building types, is integrated with mountains, lakes, parks and canals, resulting in an environment that promotes both health and prosperity.”

Meixi Lake New Town – KPF – ArchDaily 2012

— Update: Response to ArchDaily, 13th of April 2013 —

A few days ago, editors and authors of ArchDaily responded to my critical take on the website’s contents, stating that ArchDaily has more to offer than the project descriptions and promotional talks on which I focused in my article. I would like to emphasize here that I did not say everything on ArchDaily is bad. However, I do think ArchDaily highlights too many bad projects, cheesy renders and bombastic promises, often without any critical note by the website editors (see the examples above).

Unfortunately, the frequency of bad content blurs my view on the more informed and critical articles ArchDaily publishes. It is rather unclear whether I am reading ArchDaily’s selection of ‘best practices’ (what are the criteria for republishing project descriptions?), or an architectural firm selling their product.

Of course I understand that it is exactly this high frequency of content that makes the site so well visited – and the articles so well read. The consequence of this working method however is that the critical views blur in with some low quality selling-talk.

We might argue ArchDaily is more like a popular newspaper: showing what happens in the world by publishing a mix of opinion articles and simple news facts from news agencies, edited by a team of well-informed and experienced reporters and journalists.

But unfortunately this is not what ArchDaily does. The project descriptions lack a crucial element: critical journalism. If the editors do not engage in fact checking and source analysis but simply publish project descriptions written by the architects themselves, then the worst projects can sound like heaven – and ArchDaily’s mission of educating and inspiring is endangered. To put it bluntly: every editorial board, blog or newspaper is as good as its worst article.

And that is why I did not criticize all content on ArchDaily, but highlighted those posts that never should have been published without a critical attitude. When taking into account last year’s mission statement by the founders of ArchDaily, I think there is room for improvement.

Jan Loerakker is an architect and recently joined Failed Architecture. He worked as a researcher for a.o. Design as Politics and Crimson Architectural Historians and is currently working for Gottlieb Paludan Architects in Copenhagen.
jan loerakker
@Mitsko Thanks for your comment. I agree with you that when you skim through AD you might find something you like, but in this piece I wanted to point at two things: 1. That the fast amount of unedited posts blurs your view on the good pieces and 2. That people should be very aware that the descriptions are written by the architect's PR and are not edited or crittically reviewed. Which sometimes leads to ridiculous texts. Moreover, we don't try to be just negative at FA, and like other critical blogs or quality journalism, see for instance Uncube and Der Spiegel in our latest FA Recommends: http://dev.failedarchitecture.com/2013/06/fa-recommends-5/?wprptest2=1
MitskoBice
but there is also another truth that majority of the ArchDaily readers are just viewers which are skimming over its vast content. They read articles rarely and only when they are specially attracted by something while they reject even to give a further look at most of the posts. It is a democratic platform where you can find a lot of things but you have to value them by yourself and give a final judgment in accordance with your own preferences. Just as You said it is OK if you want to quickly see what is happening at the architecture world at the moment. It renders the reality which we have to accept and than criticize and try to improve it. Maybe You could suggest some of the more quality blogs and newspapers instead of just criticazing the "bad" ones.
Mark Studholme
As Editor-in-Chief of Archello which actually allows architects and designers to upload their well written project descriptions themselves and clearly defines itself as a platform, I would like to let you in on a secret. The reason why there is very little critical architecture journalism is that when a writer/publisher does criticise an architect all of a sudden they stop receiving those crucial press releases that need to be put online before any other blog/platform does. Its a race to be the first with the news. You have Google to thank for that. And the architects for so easily falling out with critics.
dubravka
the worst thing is, that arch daily is not even the worst in the practice of just copy/pasting the text they get from pr offices of developers or architectural offices. i have been writing on this a bit in analysis of how zaha hadid's controversial projects for dubrovnik and belgrade have been covered on dezeen - just dry project descriptions and focus on forms, and totally oblivious to the controversies (eg. referring to the master plan that was not passed in the case of dubrovnik, that was, at that time, rejected by the county, or in case of belgrade literally just copy/pasting the endorsement text of a pr agency hired by the developer). i completely agree with your comment, that the only way for architecture/architects to regain some credibility is to become less fascinated with the sexy and more with the community.
add comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related

UNStudio Tried Riding the Open Source Wave, but Failed

2013

Is the Architectural Profession Still Relevant?

2013

ArchDaily and Architecture Criticism

2014