Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2011
Abhiram Sharma
A/1970/2007
SCHOOL OF PLANNING AND ARCHITECTURE, NEW DELHI || Guide: Mr. Amit Khanna || Coordinators: Dr. Ranjana Mital & Prof. Jaya Kumar || || External Examiner: Prof. Sambuddha Sen ||
What inferences can be drawn on the workings of the Pritzker Prize by analyzing the career and works of previous laureates?
architecture needs some good press badly... we have to tell people sufficiently loudly, clearly and repeatedly what good architecture is, even if it means trespassing individual freedom... right now, it smells like bad marketing..." -Mr. Manoj Mathur.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I have bothered, tortured and frustrated many people in these last few weeks. This is more an apology to them. I must mention, firstly my family- my parents for supporting me and encouraging me always. And my sister, for correcting my every little mistake, and reminding me every day of my pending deadlines. Next- I must thank my faculty, for putting those deadlines. This project was possible only because of the guidance I received from them. And lastly, I thank my friends, for always being there when I needed them. I would like to acknowledge the following people especially: Alkananda Yeshwanth and Anshu Chaurasia, without whom this dissertation would not have been possible.
Contents
1. Chapter 1 : Prologue......................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Need Identification: ............................................................................................................................ 4 Scope And Limitation: ......................................................................................................................... 4 Research Methodology: ...................................................................................................................... 5 References .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2. Chapter 2 : The Pritzker Selection Process ....................................................................................... 9 The Secretive Process ......................................................................................................................... 9 History- The Last 33 years ................................................................................................................. 11 Insider Scoop ..................................................................................................................................... 12 References ........................................................................................................................................ 14 3. Chapter 3 : Architects Honored- A Visual Atlas .............................................................................. 16 Philip Johnson- 1979 ......................................................................................................................... 16 Luis Barragan- 1980 .......................................................................................................................... 16 James Stirling- 1981 .......................................................................................................................... 17 Kevin Roche- 1982 ............................................................................................................................ 17 I.M Pei- 1983 ..................................................................................................................................... 18 Richard Meier- 1984 ......................................................................................................................... 18 Hans Hollein- 1985 ............................................................................................................................ 19 Gotfried Bohm- 1986 ........................................................................................................................ 19 Kenzo Tange- 1987 ............................................................................................................................ 20 Gordon Bunshaft- 1988..................................................................................................................... 20 Oscar Niemeyer- 1988 ...................................................................................................................... 21 Frank Gehry- 1989............................................................................................................................. 21 Aldo Rossi- 1990................................................................................................................................ 22 Robert Venturi- 1991 ........................................................................................................................ 22 Alvaro Siza- 1992 ............................................................................................................................... 23 Fumihiko Maki- 1993 ........................................................................................................................ 23 Christian de Portzamparc- 1994 ....................................................................................................... 24 Tadao Ando- 1995 ............................................................................................................................. 24 Rafael Moneo- 1996.......................................................................................................................... 25 Sverre Fehn- 1997 ............................................................................................................................. 25 Renzo Piano-1998 ............................................................................................................................. 26 Norman Foster- 1999 ........................................................................................................................ 26 Rem Koolhaas- 2000 ......................................................................................................................... 27 Jacques Herzog & Pierre de Meuron- 2001 ...................................................................................... 27 Glenn Murcutt- 2002 ........................................................................................................................ 28 John Utzon- 2003 .............................................................................................................................. 28 Zaha Hadid- 2004 .............................................................................................................................. 29 Thom Mayne- 2005 ........................................................................................................................... 29
Paulo Mendes da Rocha- 2006 ......................................................................................................... 30 Richard Rogers- 2007 ........................................................................................................................ 30 Jean Nouvel- 2008............................................................................................................................. 31 Peter Zumthor- 2009......................................................................................................................... 31 Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa- 2010 ........................................................................................... 32 References ........................................................................................................................................ 33 4. Chapter 4 : Analysing Possibilities .................................................................................................. 37 Popularity implies Pritzker ................................................................................................................ 37 How Old Do You Have To Be? ........................................................................................................... 40 Geopolitical Breakdown .................................................................................................................... 41 What Do You Have To Build? ............................................................................................................ 42 Be a Man of Letters ........................................................................................................................... 43 Go Back to School ............................................................................................................................. 43 The Classical Faux-Pas ....................................................................................................................... 44 References ........................................................................................................................................ 44 5. Chapter 5 : Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 46 The Pritzker Formula ......................................................................................................................... 46 Indian Architects: Wanted! .............................................................................................................. 47 And The 2011 Pritzker Goes To ...................................................................................................... 48 Concluding Remarks.......................................................................................................................... 49 References ........................................................................................................................................ 50 6. Appendix A ..................................................................................................................................... 51 7. Chapter 6 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 55
Chapter 1 : Prologue
Introduction
Writing about music is like dancing about architecture
Martin Mull, an American comedian.
Writing this dissertation was not easy. And that is despite the fact that there is probably less that had to be written on architecture, than on the people involved in its creation. Reading and writing about people is after all one of the many ways of understanding their work better. And, considering the people that have been awarded the Pritzker so far, it is definitely an interesting way to do so. The Pritzker Prize is undoubtedly architectures highest honor. It needs no introduction. It has only grown in popularity with each year in the past three decades of its existence. The Prize is considered to be an equivalent to what the Nobel Prize in architecture would have been. The Pritzker seeks: to honor a living architect whose built work demonstrates a combination of those qualities of talent, vision and commitment, which has produced consistent and significant contributions to humanity and the built environment through the art of architecture". The credo as stated, on the Pritzker prize official site, by the Hyatt Foundation. In a profession that prides itself on creativity, it could be argued that competitions are unnecessary, if not harmful. As the architectural critic Martin Filler (1999) pointed out in good humor, these competitive standards would help in prompting feelings of superiority, envy, and inadequacy among artists already prone to such low and distracting emotions. But high-priced awards, particularly in architecture, have proliferated in recent decades. Despite whatever shortcomings every competition may have, one cannot deny the fact that they bring a huge amount of publicity with them, and generate news. They generate an architectural awareness among the general public. 1
Architecture as a profession is known for the rivalry among practitioners and their fights for every commission that might come their way. Competition is a part of every practicing field. Even though, Piano might shrug and say Competition? I dont know what you are talking about and continue in his charming Italian manner I mean, what I do is I steal from them pointing at the other Pritzker laureatesFrank Gehry, Zaha Hadid, and Jean Nouvel on a discussion with TV show host Charlie Rose (Nouvel, Gehry, Hadid, & Piano, 2008). Piano owes much in his career to the competition he
won, along with Richard Rogers, for the Pompidou Centre in Paris at the age of 34. And, jokes apart, his work are sufficient proof of his ingenuity. The Pritzker Prize is a recognition conferred on the architect. It does not highlight any particular work of his. It is similar in this to the lesser known Baburao Mhatre Gold Medal, presented by the Indian Institute of Architects. Other similar international awards presented to architects include the RIBA and AIA Gold Medal. The judging criteria for an award of this category, let it be category A, are of interest here. The other category- category B- of awards would include those that are given for a particular project. They would include competitions for design proposals, and also those that evaluate built work. An example of an award presented annually for the first subcategory is the eVolo skyscraper design contest; while an example of the second sub-category would be the famous Aga Khan Award. Competitions are also held to evaluate proposals, before settling on an architect to entrust with the task of building. Of the above types of competitions, it is only those that fall under category A which maintain unchanging criteria for selection every time they are held. The Pritzker Prize (a category A competition) also has a relatively constant jury- one that does not change every 2
Year. It facilitates in the understanding of what makes an architect successful- according to the jury- by studying the previously chosen architects. The debate on what really makes good design is never ending. With there being an infinite amount of uncaliberated yardsticks to measure from, everyone rightly has his/her own point of view. This dissertation includes a study of all the winning architects since the inception of the prize. The research question that this dissertation aims to answer is: What inferences can be drawn on the workings of the Pritzker Prize by analyzing the career and works of previous laureates? While answering this question, there are other related questions that will be looked into, such as: (a) What could be the reasons for the absence of Indian architects? (b) Are there any emerging trends in the awarding of the prize? And, lastly, (c) Who is likely to win the prize in 2011? The Pritzker Prize has influenced the creation of the term Star-chitects. There is an exaggerated image of the architect that is projected by the media. And, it is at this point that one must read what Sudjic (2006, p.7) has to say in his polemic The Edifice Complex: 'Architecture has always been dependent on the allocation of precious resources and scarce manpower. As such its execution has always been at the discretion of those with their hands on the levers of power rather than that of architects. Pharonic Egypt did not devote the surplus from its harvests to the construction of the pyramids, rather than to road building or abolishing slavery, because of any creative urge of the Pharaoh's architects.' Here Sudjic points to the role architects play as puppets in the hands of those with power and wealth. He further reasons that it is the genetically predetermined destiny for the architect 3
to do whatever is in his reach in order to build(2006, p.8). And that in order to build, he must bow and produce what the client wants. The fact that the client knows what he wants is implicit in Sudjic's statements. This dissertation is an attempt to study the workings of the pritzker prize- The Politics of the Pritzker. Taking only the pritzker as reference, this is a study of what makes an architect & his work successful- according to the jury.
Need Identification:
This dissertation looks at the architectural profession from a different viewpoint: that of its most popular award. The literature survey carried out was based on an extensive study of material from a mlange of sources. It presented the finding that there have been only three books that deal with the works of the Pritzker winning architects published so far. Of those, two of them only carry information about the architects that won in the first twenty years of the prize. The third book is more up-to-date, and features the architects accounts and explanations of their work. What is missing is a comparison between the architects. What is available is a huge amount of documentation. It ranges from published material in magazines, and books to informal blogs, video interviews and graphics. This dissertation would look into not only the built work, but also the architect behind the work, ie. The question: what is it that makes a person win the Pritzker?
prize winning architects. Maybe a few other architects would also have to be studied- those that are likely to win in the next decade. The study will include all thirty five architects that have so far been awarded the prize. The limitation in this study would be that the source of most of the information is secondary.
Research Methodology:
The research has been divided in two parts. The first part concerns itself with documenting and analyzing the body of work built before the architects won the prize. This is presented here with the help of photographs and drawings. A brief summary of the general view that is held of the architect by the critics in the media is presented alongside. Examples have been drawn, wherever possible from the book Precedents of Architecture, by Clark and Pause (2005) in which they have shown that certain patterns and formative ideas persist through time, with apparently no relationship to place. The second part deals with the analysis of data collected to test certain hypothesis. Using data available about the 35 previous laureates, the author has tried to draw out any similarities that might help explain more about the Pritzker prize and the successful architects. Data that has been looked into include:
Popularity Age Nationality Number of completed projects Building Typology Books Published Style of work
There was also n attempt to interview some of the previous and/or current judges. All of the data collected has been presented graphically as far as possible. The author would have liked to look at other possible factors of success, for example similarities in working style and a dependence on drawing for exploring ideas. Brian Edwards, in his book Understanding Architecture through drawing (2008), puts forward his findings on a survey conducted on British architects. He writes that a surprising number of experienced and successful architects (including Lord Foster) kept a personal sketchbook. There are sure to be many more such similarities, but, owing to the constraints of time, were unfortunately not looked into.
References
Clark, R. H., & Pause, M. (2005). Precedents in Architecture- Analytic Diagrams, Formative Ideas and Partis (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons Inc. Edwards, B. (2008). Understanding Architecture through Drawing (2nd ed.). The Cromwell Press. Filler, M. (1999, April 26). Eye on the prize. The New Republic . Frederick, M. (2007). 101 Things I Learned in Architecture School. The MIT Press. Goldberger, P. (2003, November 12). Architecture Criticism: Does It Matter? Retrieved November 2010, from Lecture at the Butler University, Indianapolis: http://www.paulgoldberger.com/lectures/12 Khanna, A. (2001, February). Architecture: Inconsequenstial. 59. Unpublished Dissertation School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi.
Nouvel, J., Gehry, F., Hadid, Z., & Piano, R. (2008, June 5). A discussion with Pritzker Winners. (C. Rose, Interviewer) Sudjic, D. (2006). The Edifice Complex: How the rich and powerful shape the world (2nd ed.). Penguin Publishing.
present during jury deliberations which usually take place during the first months of the calendar year. The jury members are recognized professionals in their own fields of architecture, business, education, publishing, and culture. The most important and first hand source of information is the media kit published by the pritzker foundation. The media kits are published yearly with the announcement of the honored architect. They are organised into:
Announcement Biography Jury Citation Essay Selected works
Although the announcement makes a point to quote the key note of the jury citation, the Jury Citation itself is written for a more informed audience- and deals only with the architects work. The jury citation is short and to the point, it rarely exceeds 500 words. The essay comes next, and this is comprehensive. The essay is usually written by a renowned critic. People that have written include: Ada Louise Huxtable, Kenneth Frampton, Colin Amery and Deyan Sudjic. The essay eloquently summaries the entire body of finished work of the laureate. They are full of praise of the best features of the architects built work. The description of selected works by the architect is a new addition to the media kit issued by the foundation. The award consists of $100,000 (US) and a bronze medallion. The award is conferred on the laureate at a ceremony held at an architecturally significant site. The presentation ceremonies move around the world each year, paying homage to the architecture of other eras and/or works by previous laureates of the prize. As the ceremony locations are usually chosen each year before the laureate is selected, there is no intended connection between the two. 10
The invitation-only event is attended by international guests and guests from the host country. The ceremony itself normally consists of welcoming remarks usually from a dignitary of the host country; comments from the jury chairman; the presentation of the prize by Thomas Pritzker; and an acceptance speech from the Laureate. The bronze medallion awarded to each Laureate of the Pritzker Architecture Prize is based on designs of Louis Sullivan, famed Chicago architect generally acknowledged as the father of the skyscraper. On one side is the name of the prize. On the reverse, three words are inscribed, firmness, commodity and delight, recalling Roman architect Vitruvius' fundamental principles of architecture of firmitas, utilitas, venustas.
Lacy, who was on the jury previously is quoted below: We would ride in numerous vehicles to see two dozen buildings by architects from Italy, Switzerland, the U.S.A., Finland, Spain, and the Netherlands. This demanding tour would include a dramatic snowstorm in Helsinki, a riotous celebration of Carnevale in Basel, motorboat rides on the canals of Venice and Amsterdam to approach key buildings from the water, and side trips to spectacular classics such as the restored Chiesa dei Miracoli in Venice and in the Netherlands the famous Schroder house by Rietveld, a masterful city hall by Dudok, and the Educatorium by Rem Koolhaas.
Insider Scoop
As part of research on the jury, a questionnaire was prepared, and mailed to the present and previous members of the jury. Unfortunately, there was no response, barring the communication with Miss Martha Thorne, Executive Director of the Pritzker jury. Miss Thorne is the only member of the jury who does not vote in its proceedings. She assists the jury in its work. Initially reluctant to part with any information, she politely explained that the internal workings of the prize are private, and that the discretion allowed the jury to conduct its mission without the interference and pressure of outside sources. However, on further questioning, she did answer some of the questions, as quoted: (personal communication, Jan 2, 2011) 1. How is the built work of nominated architects put across to the jury? Are they shown photos, videos, and drawings of the buildings? If only you could provide any hints regarding how the jury is informed. 12
Miss Thorne: The jury has a wealth of information, as you can imagine. They travel, they read a lot and of course consult journals, publications, images, videos and other media. I prepare the documentation for the meetings and try to keep this consistent and manageable, with the purpose of providing a visual summary of all that has been gathered and seen throughout the year. 2. Are there any changes, or emerging trends for the future that you see? Miss Thorne: I think that the basic parameters of the Prize will remain the same, even if the jury decides to highlight or respond to certain issues from year to year. The jury citations may become more specific and even longer, so as to explain clearly why the Jury selected one candidate or another. -I think that the jury (is) and will look very much more in depth at works from distant places. The Jury members travel a lot alone and even together, so I believe that they are trying to understand what is going on in many contexts around the globe. I think that we may see more variety in the profiles of the winners. In the early years it was often one man who won the prize. Recently partnerships ( and many even teams) may be considered. 3. Whom do you personally think might win the Pritzker this year? Miss Thorne: I have learned in my 5 years working with the Pritzker Prize Jury not to predict who might receive the award. (I have usually been wrong.) The jury approaches the question each year with a fresh and open mind, so it is very hard to know who might be selected. It is only after the deep and long discussions that a winner is selected. 4. How was your experience while on the committee? Is there anything you would like to add? 13
Miss Thorne: I am privileged to assist the jury in its work. As Executive Director, I do not vote or express my opinion about architects or architecture. I can assure you that the jury takes its work very seriously and with great dedication. They are a unique, highly intelligent group of individuals that understands the importance of architecture and the role of the Prize. The other questions that were left unanswered included questions relating to the method of nominating the short-listed candidates, and selecting the winner. What is of particular interest in her reply is what she mentions about the change in the jurys attitude towards considering more than one architect. They are now likely to give more importance to teams, and partnerships. They are also more likely to look at architects from countries that have not featured on the list yet. There is also some information gathered as to how the discussions are held by the jury. The meetings of the Jury- where she provides the visual documentation that is shown, likely happen after November of the previous year, till which time they are open to new nominations. They probably meet frequently and decide on whom to pick by the month of February- March, when the winning candidate is declared. The declaration is usually made on the 31st of March.
References
The Pritzker Architecture Prize. www.pritzkerprize.com Retrieved on 14 October, 2010.
14
The roster of Pritzker laureates -- ranging from Richard Meier to Robert Venturi, Frank Gehry to Kenzo Tange -- has something to offend nearly every taste.. Herbert Muschamp (Architecture critic)
15
16
17
20
24
Renzo Piano-1998
In my architecture, I try to use immaterial elements like transparency, lightness, the vibration of the light. I believe that they are as much a part of the composition as the shapes and volumes. - Renzo Piano, Prize acceptance speech. The Jury citation was quite predictable. They praised him for being equally at ease with historical antecedents, as well as the latest technology, he is also intensely concerned with issues of habitability and sustainable architecture in a constantly changing world The array of buildings by Renzo Piano is staggering in scope and comprehensive in the diversity of scale, material and form. Valuing craftsmanship, not just of the hand, but also of the computer, Piano has great sensitivity for his materials, whether using glass, metal, masonry or wood. (The Pritzker Jury, 1998)
26
28
29
30
31
32
References
Filler, M. (1999, April 26). Eye on the prize. The New Republic . The Pritzker Jury, 1979. (n.d.). Philip Johnson: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1979/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1980. (n.d.). Luis Barragan: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1980/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1981. (n.d.). James Stirling: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1981/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1982. (n.d.). Kevin Roche: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1982/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1983. (n.d.). I.M. Pei: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1983/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1984. (n.d.). Richard Meier:Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1984/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1985. (n.d.). Hans Hollein: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1985/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1986. (n.d.). Gottfried Bohm : Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1986/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1987. (n.d.). Kenzo Tange: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1987/jury.html 33
The Pritzker Jury, 1989. (n.d.). Frank Gehry: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1989/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1990. (n.d.). Aldo Rossi: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1990/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1991. (n.d.). Robert Venturi: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1991/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1992. (n.d.). Alvaro Siza: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1992/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1993. (n.d.). Fumihiko Maki: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1993/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1994. (n.d.). Christian de Portzamparc: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1994/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1996. (n.d.). Rafael Moneo: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1996/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1997. (n.d.). Sverre Fehn: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1997/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1998. (n.d.). Renzo Piano: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzekr Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1998/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1999. (n.d.). Norman Foster: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1999/jury.html 34
The Pritzker Jury, 2000. (n.d.). Rem Koolhaas: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2000/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2001. (n.d.). Herzog & de Meuron: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2001/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2002. (n.d.). Glenn Murcutt: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2002/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2003. (n.d.). John Utzon: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Prizker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2003/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2006. (n.d.). Paulo Mendes da Rocha: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2006/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2007. (n.d.). Richard Rogers: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architechture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2007/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2008. (n.d.). Jean Nouvel: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2008/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2009. (n.d.). Peter Zumthor: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architechture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2009/jury.html
35
Architecture seems to be entrenched in two equally unfertile fronts: Either naively utopian or petrifying pragmatic. We believe that there is a third way wedged in the no mans land between the diametrical opposites. Or in the small but very fertile overlap between the two. Bjarke Ingels
36
37
The above data points to a clear difference in the popularity of Pritzker winning architects over non-winners. The average search volume of all Pritzker winning architects is 14.57. The average search volume of Pritzker winning architects in the last decade is 17.18. It could be argued that the winning of the prize itself was responsible in increasing popularity. To check if that is true, data with reference to time was collected for the last six years since Google has been measuring. Table 3 shows popularity for the architects awarded the prize after 2004. From the graph, it can be seen that while Jean Nouvel (in red) has fairly remained constant on the popularity meter- barring the spike that winning the prize gave him, Richard Rogers (orange) has actually had a steady decline in numbers. What is surprising is that there is hardly any indication of his winning the Pritzker in the year 2007 on the graph. Winning the Pritzker has not had any major affect on Zumthors popularity either (aqua), other than the spike in 2009. He seems to have remained as popular as he was in the three years before winning the prize. The Pritzker has made a marked difference only to Thom Mayne and Paulo Mended da Rocha (blue and green respectively), both of whom were below Googles threshold of measuring search volumes before being honored. Therefore, it is not known exactly how unpopular they were. Along with the simple comparison of search volumes, a distribution curve was studied. It has thrown up an interesting graph, a little different from what might be expected. On plotting the graph for number of architects (on y-axis) against their popularity (on x-axis), the result is shown in Figure 4b on the following page:
38
18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 to 5 6 to 15 16 to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 to 55
To check for any trends in the last 10 years of the history of the prize, the popularity was plotted against time. It shows that there is no trend towards or away from choosing popular architects.
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Popularity with Time Line
The method employed to obtain the data, and the raw data itself, is discussed in further detail in Appendix A.
39
40
Geopolitical Breakdown
It is quite easily evident from the map on the facing page that most honoraries have been from the developed countries. The exceptions to this are only two architects from Brazil (Niemeyer, and Paulo Mendes) and one from Mexico (Barragan). A third of them were practicing in the United States. For comparison, a map of the world with information on developed, developing and under developed countries is provided alongside. It was found that the geographical distribution of previous honoraries matches the world map indicating Human Development Index more closely, so that map has also been provided underneath. There seems to be a clear bias towards American architects from first glance. America is a developed country, and also the worlds third most populous country. It has about two thirty thousand architects (2010 Statistical Yearbook of the US Census Bureau). The amount of construction that has happened there, and the scale of the projects beats all other countries. The Phaidon Atlas, 2006 quotes some important statistics: Japan leads in the number of architects as a percentage of population, having 240.4 architects per 1,00,000 people. Britain has 54.1 architects per 100,000; France 47.7 ; Germany 144.7 ; Russia only 8.3 (which explains its absence from the scene). This is what Rem Koolhaas has to say about the profession, and architects: They are confronted with an arbitrary sequence of demands, with parameters they did not establish, in countries they hardly know, about issues they are only dimly aware of, expected to deal with problems that have proven intractable to brains vastly superior to their own. Architecture is by definition a chaotic adventure. Rem Koolhaan & Bruce Mau. S, M, L, XL. 1995 (from Architect: The works of Pritzker Prize winning laureates in their own words, 2010, p. 128) 41
studied as reliable sources of data for this field was not available. It has primarily been collected from the official websites of the architects, wherever possible. At other places information from websites such as Wikipedia had to be relied upon. Studying the numbers does not reveal any patterns.
Be a Man of Letters
I like my architecture to speak for me - Gordon Bunshaft, (as quoted by Blum, B.J. (1990), referenced from Architect: The Work of the Pritzker Prize laureates in their own words (2010)) The other architects apparently believed in writing, talking and teaching about their work. Almost all architects that have won the Pritzker had had their books published since early in their career. The books typically deal with their philosophy, and explain much about their work. Many are quite interesting to read, and hugely popular within the architectural community. Books written- such as Complexity and Contradiction- by Robert Venturi and Scott Brown; Thinking Architecture- by Peter Zumthor, and S,M,L,XL by Koolhaas, to name a few- help explain the work and thinking in greater detail. There are only three exceptions to the list of those that had published matter- Gordon Bunshaft, Richard Meyer and Kevin Roche. All of them were nominated in the first decade of the Prize. The architects Paulo Mendes da Rocha and Christian de Portzamparc had books published in Portuguese and French respectively.
Go Back to School
Another common trend seen was in that the architects had been giving lectures at architecture schools around the world. This probably helps them grow their network, and stay in touch with the academic side of the profession. It is also likely to help them be ethical- as they have 43
to maintain a position of responsibility, and serve as role models to their students. The 85 Pritzker winner, Hans Hollein (Architect, 2010) reiterated a common perception, when he said that it was not possible to teach a student to become an important architect. There is no secret to it, but just work and ideas.
References
Peltason, R., & Ong-Yan, G. (Eds.). (2010). Architect: The work of the Pritzker Prize Laureates in their own words. Black Dog & Leventhal Publishers. Phaidon. (2004). The Phaidon Atlas of Contemporary World Architecture. Phaidon.
44
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION
I am not expecting you to be sitting in some dark corner of the world making earth shattering discoveries for your dissertation Dr. Ranjana Mital
45
Chapter 5 : Conclusion
The Pritzker Formula
Sugar, spice and everything nice. These were the ingredients chosen to create the perfect little girls. This is a dissertation. Not a cartoon on pre-teen girls. But, the show must go on. The data looked into has thrown up quite a few surprises, along with other expected and well known bits of knowledge. What is worth mentioning before the conclusions drawn from the research is what has been learnt on the way: that there is more that is responsible for how far you go in the profession than just the lines you draw. This does not mean that talent and skill are unimportant. What is equally important, if not more, is publicizing your work and yourself. In the end, the best designs are the ones that are built- not those that remain on paper. No matter how superior they might have been if built. The best architects are those that win. There are no earth shattering discoveries made. The study suggests that there is much in common in the professional lives of previous laureates. The fact that all of them had built a museum by the time they were honored is not coincidental. There are two main reasons for this: As they are a part of the cultural fabric, these projects give its creators instant public recognition. And the second reason is perhaps the more important reason: because a commission for a museum is almost always given on the basis of a competition. One that is usually open to all. Buildings such as a museum or a church are expected to be sculptural buildings that reflect culture. Working on such a building also offers much freedom to the designer- functional requirements are few. The other findings relate to what the successful architects have been found to do outside of their studios: teach at schools of architecture, and publish theory. X out of the 35 architects
46
had taught in some or the other college before they received the prize. X of them had teaching experience in an American university. It would be fair to assume that this helps in establishing contacts, and also keeps them updated. The books they publish increases their popularity, and provide explanations of their work. Published books include manifestos, polemics, catalogues, and such books. Of the many books published by the Pritzker winning architects- Robert Venturis Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture, and Peter Zumthors Thinking Architecture are well known and critically acclaimed. Others such as Rem Koolhaas, and Renzo Piano have also written much on the work they have built. The above findings point to a professional roadmap where one must work at competitions for museum buildings. And, at the same time publish ideological works/ polemics. Preach at American universities, and, if possible, also find something to build there. All said and done, remember to NEVER make the mistake of designing anything visually similar to classical/traditional architecture.
47
For now, I believe that Steven Holl is most likely to win, but I wouldn't be surprised if Toyo Ito took the place instead.
Concluding Remarks
Paul Goldberger points that no building can be viewed solely through the lens of aesthetics, or at least it should not. Architecture criticism, he says, is aesthetics, politics, sociology and it is culture, and that all these things are intertwined. Every object has an aesthetic presence and a social one at the same time, every object is both a physical thing and a political thing, and it has to be understood and criticized as both. It is not one or the other, but both, all the time A quote from an article by him would be a fitting end to this study: Often, indeed, critics portray the story of building as a kind of Western, as a cowboys-and-indians drama between the good guys - the architects who want to build great and special things - and the bad guys, who are the developers and the politicians who get in the way and force compromises and slice budgets and ruin everything If only things were so simple, and if only architecture with a capital A were such an unfettered good, such a noble thing to uplift us all - and if only everyone who makes money were such an obvious evil Well, if only it were so simple. I am not naive about the pernicious effect of money on the culture, and I do not mean to be complacent about it, but I do think one has to be realistic about the complex forces at work, particularly in a field such as architecture. I have read some architecture criticism that seems to suggest that, if only the evil corporate and political forces were not blocking their will at every turn, then all of the people, left to their own devices, would be screaming for more buildings by Zaha Hadid and Rem Koolhaas and Diller & Scofidio - and that if we only had more buildings by them and by other architects, then we would all be living in paradise. 49
References
Goldberger, P. (2003, November 12). Architecture Criticism: Does It Matter? Retrieved November 2010, from Lecture at the Butler University, Indianapolis: http://www.paulgoldberger.com/lectures/12
50
Appendix A
Google Trends is a feature google provides to internet users free of cost to allow them to view data on google search volumes. This service provides data on global search habits since google has been up, ie, from 2004 onwards. Google Trends allows you to compare search volumes for five terms at a time. So, to do a comparison between the Pritzker Laureates of the last three decades, an architect was kept common to all the search result comparisons. The architect kept common in all the queries made on Google Trends for this dissertation was Paulo Mendes da Rocha. The reason selecting him is because the search volumes for many architects were too low to be measured by google, and, of the winning architects, Paulo Mendes was found to have had the second lowest recordable search voulumes. The lowest recordable search volumes were for I.M Pei, who was not selected for comparison purposes because he was nominated a long time back, in 1983, the fifth Laureate. There could be a small amount of inaccuracy in the data, but it is the best indicator of global popularity till date. Google declares that the data Trends produces may contain inaccuracies for a number of reasons, including data-sampling issues and a variety of approximations that are used to compute results. This is what Google describes its service as (retrieved from http://www.google.com/intl/en/trends/about.html) Google Trends analyzes a portion of Google web searches to compute how many searches have been done for the terms you enter, relative to the total number of searches done on Google over time. We then show you a graph with the results th Search Volume Index graph. Located beneath the Search Volume Index graph is the News reference volume graph. This graph shows the number of times the topic appeared in Google News stories. When Google Trends detects a spike in the volume of news stories for a particular search term, it labels the graph and displays the headline of an automatically selected Google News story written near the time of that spike. The data as recorded is shown in the following pages:
51
Peter Zumthor Jean Nouvel Richard Rogers Paulo Mendes da Rocha Thom Mayne
9 37 28 1 1
Zaha Hadid John Utzon Glenn Murcutt Herzog & de Meuron Paulo Mendes da Rocha
55 0 1 31 1
Rem Koolhaas Norman Foster Renzo Piano Sverre Fehn Paulo Mendes da Rocha
26 50 54 0 1
Rapael Moneo Tadao Ando Christian de Portzampac Fumihiko Maki Paulo Mendes da Rocha 52
3 33 0 0 1
Alvaro Siza Robert Venturi Aldo Rossi Frank Gehry Paulo Mendes da Rocha
10 2 9 54 1
Gordon Bunshaft Oscar Niemeyer Kenzo Tange Gottfried Bohm Paulo Mendes da Rocha
0 25 2 0 1
Hans Hollein Richard Meyer I.M. Pei Kevin Roche Paulo Mendes da Rocha
0 21.5 0.5 0 1
James Stirling Luis Barragan Philip Johnson Sejima (&) Nishizawa (SANAA) Paulo Mendes da Rocha 53
2 8 18 0 1
2004 Zaha Hadid 1998 Renzo Piano 1989 Frank Gehry 1999 Norman Foster 2008 Jean Nouvel 1995 Tadao Ando 2001 Herzog & de Meuron 2007 Richard Rogers 2000 Rem Koolhaas 1988 Oscar Niemeyer 1984 Richard Meyer 1979 Philip Johnson 1992 Alvaro Siza 2009 Peter Zumthor 1990 Aldo Rossi 1980 Luis Barragan 1996 Rapael Moneo 1991 Robert Venturi 1987 Kenzo Tange 1981 James Stirling 2006 Paulo Mendes da Rocha 2005 Thom Mayne 2002 Glenn Murcutt 1983 I.M. Pei 2010 Sejima (&) Nishizawa (SANAA) 2003 John Utzon 1997 Sverre Fehn 1994 Christian de Portzampac 1993 Fumihiko Maki 1988 Gordon Bunshaft 1986 Gottfried Bohm 1985 Hans Hollein 1982 Kevin Roche
55 54 54 50 37 33 31 28 26 25 21.5 18 10 9 9 8 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Those that didn't make it. Yet.: No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Name Santiago Calatrava MVRDV (firm) Steven Holl Toyo Ito Daniel Libeskind Mario Botta Shigeru Ban Peter Eisenman David Chipperfield Coop Himmelblau (firm) Greg Lynn Caesar Pelli Sou Fujimoto Moshe Safdie Snohetta (firm) Bernard Tschumi Henning Larsen Lois Kahn* Geoffrey Bawa* Haffez Contractor Charles Correa Hassan Fathy*, Laurie Baker* Search Volume 30 21.5 16.5 13.5 12.5 12.5 7.5 5 4.5 2.5 2.5 2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 17.5 0 0 0 0
54
Chapter 6 Bibliography
Clark, R. H., & Pause, M. (2005). Precedents in Architecture- Analytic Diagrams, Formative Ideas and Partis (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons Inc. Correa, C. (1997). Charles Correa. Thames & Hudson. Edwards, B. (2008). Understanding Architecture through Drawing (2nd ed.). The Cromwell Press. Filler, M. (1999, April 26). Eye on the prize. The New Republic . Frampton, K. (1997). The Work of Charles Correa. In C. Correa, Charles Correa (pp. 8-16). Thames & Hudson. Frederick, M. (2007). 101 Things I Learned in Architecture School. The MIT Press. Goldberger, P. (2003, November 12). Architecture Criticism: Does It Matter? Retrieved November 2010, from Lecture at the Butler University, Indianapolis: http://www.paulgoldberger.com/lectures/12 Holl, S. (2005). Thin Ice. In J. Pallasmaa, The Eyes of the Skin- Architecture and the Senses (pp. 68). Wiley-Academy. Huxtable, A. L. (2009, April 2). A conversation with architectural critic Ada Louise Huxtable. (C. Rose, Interviewer) Huxtable, A. L. (1989). Frank Gehry 1989 Laureate Essay: On Awarding the Prize. Khanna, A. (2001, February). Architecture: Inconsequenstial. 59. Unpublished Dissertation School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi. 55
KLAUS. (2010, April 7). Pritzker Prize 2010. (NopasSANAA). Retrieved October 16, 2010, from KLAUSTOON: http://klaustoon.wordpress.com/2010/04/07/pritzker-prize-2010-nopassanaa/ Lieberman, P. (2003, February 23). Building Resolve. Los Angeles Times . Muschamps, H. (1996, May 19). Pritzker Prize Offers Opportunity to Ponder Foundations of Architecture. Retrieved January 30, 2011, from Albany Times Union: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-157132315.html Naredi-Rainer, P. v. (2004). Museum Buildings- A Design Manual. (A. Schnell, Ed.) Birkhuser. Newel, C. (2009, May). 60. Play Peter, the Pritzker Peddling Hermit Genius. Retrieved January 8, 2011, from Notes on Becoming a Famous Architect: http://famousarchitect.blogspot.com/2009/05/60-play-peter-pritzker-peddling-hermit.html Nicolin, P. (2010, November). Foster Unplugged. Arbitaire , pp. 158-167. Nouvel, J., Gehry, F., Hadid, Z., & Piano, R. (2008, June 5). A discussion with Pritzker Winners. (C. Rose, Interviewer) Peltason, R., & Ong-Yan, G. (Eds.). (2010). Architect: The work of the Pritzker Prize Laureates in their own words. Black Dog & Leventhal Publishers. Phaidon. (2004). The Phaidon Atlas of Contemporary World Architecture. Phaidon. Piano, R., & Pizzi, E. (2003). Renzo Piano. Birkhuser. Sudjic, D. (2006). The Edifice Complex: How the rich and powerful shape the world (2nd ed.). Penguin Publishing.
The Aga Khan Award for Architecture. (1995). Architecture Beyond Architecture- Creativity and Social Transformations in Islamic Cultures. (C. C. Davidson, & I. Serageldin, Eds.) Academy Editions. The Pritzker Jury, 1980. (n.d.). Luis Barragan: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1980/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1981. (n.d.). James Stirling: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1981/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1982. (n.d.). Kevin Roche: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1982/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1983. (n.d.). I.M. Pei: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1983/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1984. (n.d.). Richard Meier:Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1984/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1985. (n.d.). Hans Hollein: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1985/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1986. (n.d.). Gottfried Bohm : Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1986/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1987. (n.d.). Kenzo Tange: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1987/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1989. (n.d.). Frank Gehry: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The 56
Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1989/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1990. (n.d.). Aldo Rossi: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1990/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1991. (n.d.). Robert Venturi: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1991/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1992. (n.d.). Alvaro Siza: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1992/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1993. (n.d.). Fumihiko Maki: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1993/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1994. (n.d.). Christian de Portzamparc: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1994/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1995. (n.d.). Tadao Ando: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1995/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1996. (n.d.). Rafael Moneo: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1996/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1997. (n.d.). Sverre Fehn: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1997/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1998. (n.d.). Renzo Piano: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzekr Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1998/jury.html
The Pritzker Jury, 1999. (n.d.). Norman Foster: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1999/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2000. (n.d.). Rem Koolhaas: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2000/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2001. (n.d.). Herzog & de Meuron: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2001/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2002. (n.d.). Glenn Murcutt: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2002/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2003. (n.d.). John Utzon: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Prizker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2003/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 2006. (n.d.). Paulo Mendes da Rocha: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 17, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2006/jury.html The Pritzker Jury, 1979. (n.d.). Philip Johnson: Jury Citation. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from The Pritzker Architecture Prize: http://pritzkerprize.com/laureates/1979/jury.html Unwin, S. (2009). Analysing Architecture (3rd ed.). Routledge. Unwin, S. (2010). Twenty Buildings Every Architect Should Understand (1st ed.). Routledge. Venturi, R. (1977). Complexity And Contradiction in Architecture (2nd ed.). The Museum of Modern Art Papers on Architecture. Zumthor, P. (2006). Thinking Architecture (2nd ed.). Birkhuser Architecture 57