arco13 grace quah

1

THE SUBALTERN STUDENT OF ARCHITECTUREGrace Quah

A R C O 1 3

My

loca

l, Im

age

Cha

mbe

r, B

A A

rchi

tect

ure

desi

gn w

ork:

by

Gra

ce Q

uah

3

THE SUBALTERN STUDENT OF ARCHITECTUREGrace Quah

Three years ago I declared to my friend that I intended to study architecture at university. She assumed I was going to spend three years digging for bones.I believe this is telling anecdotal evidence that suggests that there are widely misguided assumptions of what it means to study architecture (and archaeology for that matter).

I am very close to the end of my three-year degree studying architecture and whilst some of my initial assumptions of an architectural education have been met, ex-ceeded, and some fallen short, others have revealed much more of the nature of the professional education I had invested in three years ago.

According to postcolonial intellectual Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, the ‘subaltern’ can be defined as: ‘a position without identity’.1

Western culture conjures notions of the architect as professional expert. These notions pervade the minds of prospective students: they are desperate to identify with the romantic scientific notion of the architect’s iconic work displayed on a pedestal and the cult of genius. This leads to, in many cases, a decision to study architecture based on misguided assump-tions of what architects actually do, and a compromise between a professional career and a creative vocation.

In the situation of the ‘subaltern’ architecture student, who has become disillusioned with the state of the self- serving profession and design’s economic paradox, but who has been subjected to three years of studio acculturation, what are the student’s intentions for involve-ment with architecture? Is there a realistic possibility for design practice that eschews the notion of the architect or designer as professional?

This essay has been part of an ongoing personal investigation into the potentials of pushing architectural knowledge beyond the limitations of the architectural profession and exploring and critiquing, a multiplicity of design and spatial practices. It aims to ultimately re- evaluate the discrepancies between initial perceptions and after thoughts of an architectural educa-tion, with the aim of pursuing my own cultural identity and graduate lifestyle.

1 Lecture by Gayatri Spivak called The Trajectory of the Subaltern in my work, at Colombia University 2008, [www.uctv.tv] accessed 12.11.12

THE SUBALTERN STUDENT OF ARCHITECTURE: Grace Quah

The Unspoken and Unspeakable

‘The point of such stories is that they unconsciously reveal not only the fundamental value- system on which architects operate, but the narrowness of that system, and the unspoken- or the unspeakable- assumptions on which it rests.’1

Introducing the ‘Subaltern’

Lack is the void on which individual human identity and desire is built.2

According to postcolonial intellectual Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, the ‘subaltern’ can be defined as: ‘a position without identity’.3 Her work is involved in tackling the ethical dilemma and methodological challenge of the oppression of disempowered subaltern groups in the postcolonial world.4

The term ‘subaltern’ is useful because it is flexible; it accommodates social identities and struggles that do not fall under the reductive terms of ‘strict class analysis’.5

“I like the word subaltern for one reason. It is truly situational.”Gayatri Spivak, 19906

With this in mind, I will be proposing an argument for the notion of the disenfranchised stu-dent within contemporary British architectural education: the notion of a ‘subaltern’ student of architecture. Key to Spivak’s definition of a ‘subaltern’ is a position without identity, “no one can say ‘I’m a subaltern.’” A lack of social and political consciousness is key to her in-terpretation and this unawareness is what differentiates the ‘subaltern’ from the ‘oppressed’. The ‘oppressed’ are aware of their oppression and therefore have access to a revisionist history however the ‘subaltern’ does not. I define the ‘subaltern’ architecture student as a student subordinated, lacking a coherent political and unique cultural identity and instead subsumes an identity that is shaped and moulded within the confinement of architecture school.

This essay intends to use a range of material in order to address many discrepancies with the perception of the role of the architect, from pedagogy to practice, from student to civilian

1 Banham, R, A Black Box: The Secret Profession of Architecture in A Critic Writes, Essays by Reyner Banham, University of California Press, London, 1996, pp. 294

2 Ruedi Ray, K, in Bauhaus dream house: forming the imaginary body of the ungendered architect in Architecture: the subject is matter, edited by Jonathan Hill, Routledge, London, 2001, pp.162

3 Lecture by Gayatri Spivak called The Trajectory of the Subaltern in my work, at Colombia University 2008, [www.uctv.tv] accessed 12.11.12

4 Morton, S, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Routledge, London, 2003, pp46



5

to practitioner. In doing thus, it also intends to explore the extent to which a philosophical approach to education in architecture exists and its effects on the project of construct-ing a self one can call one’s own. It aims to critically appraise the role of an architectural education in supporting the learning of individuals and providing the environment in which to nurture their individual talents. This will then raise questions over what an education of architecture should consist of, the recovering of a ‘subaltern’ consciousness and its implica-tions for the ‘subaltern’s’ future involvement within the traditional architectural model for practice that is currently synonymous with the profession.

Artistry and Anguish

enthrall1. to hold spellbound; enchant; captivate2. Obsolete to hold as thrall; enslave7

To understand the cultural impact of architectural pedagogy within the UK, it is pertinent to understand a student’s motives for undertaking an architectural education. The process is one of first planting the seeds for enthrallment and persuasion.

Western cultural notions of ‘the architect’ pervade the minds of prospective students: they are desperate to identify with the romantic scientific notion of the architect’s iconic work displayed on a pedestal and the cult of genius. This is encouraged by architecture’s ‘liberal arts program’: ‘inventing’, ‘experimentation’, ‘spatial thinking’ and a way to look at the world, that’s not just about buildings. This gives a meagre hint of the ‘secret value system’8 and inescapable identity- forming habits that proliferate within the architectural studio, once a student reaches architecture school.

The profession is now dominated by the cult of genius, which is perpetuated by the prolifera-tion of the architectural icon, particularly in recent years. Corporate interests reflect the contemporary social and political order that surrounds the architecture profession in the 21st century. The architectural critic is alert to when buildings becomes logos for power or a mendacious dazzling distraction9 meanwhile the wider public are unaware. Architecture as marketed to the public retails spectacular surface or gestures to a civic role without really fulfilling it10. This results in students committing to the mythical identity of the sole architect as hero- author.

Architecture also desperately clings to the image of the heroic architect, Howard Roark in

7 http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/enthral

8 Banham, R, A Black Box: The Secret Profession of Architecture in A Critic Writes, Essays by Reyner Banham, 1999, pp295

9 Foster, H, The Art-Architecture Complex, Verso, London and New York, 2011, pp.11

10 Foster, H, The Art-Architecture Complex, Verso, London and New York, 2011, pp. 11

Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead in an attempt to attract prospective students with the notion of the architect as ‘artistic messiah’, a person of marked creativity, creativity so strong it can seem a primal or religious force.11 Elizabeth Gilbert questions the association of creativity with suffering: the notion that, ‘artistry in the end will always lead to anguish’.12 This impres-sion is inbred into western society and introduces the prospective architecture student to the notion of intense lifestyle sacrifices, which they will later inevitably endure. This perception of architecture culture, focusing on the significance of the individual ‘hero architect’, is a misleading assumption perpetuated by architecture school admissions and reflected in the opinions of the parents, from the schoolteachers to the students themselves. As Cuff remarks in Architecture: The Story of Practice, ‘thus all individuals who are part of the deci-sion hold strong social stereotypes of architects: stereotypes that are relatively ill informed and go unexamined.13 The older generations of architects are holding on to this notion that mimics a façade of the profession’s prestige to its uninformed civilian audience.

In many cases, choosing to study architecture is based on many misguided assumptions of what architects actually do, and a compromise between a professional career and a creative vocation. Teachers and parents steer toward architecture those young men and women, good in art, but needing to earn a living; students themselves often choose an architectural career by process of elimination, “I didn’t want to be a doctor or lawyer”.14

‘What I was more worried about was the attitudes, prejudices, beliefs I might have picked up from them (her parents) subconsciously or before I was old enough even to know what I was learning. Effectively I had to question everything I believed, and never accept my own instincts.’Lynn Barber, An Education15

From this point onwards, the student becomes enthralled with the notion of becoming an architect. Ken Robinson explains how we are as a society also, ‘enthralled to the idea of linearity in education… its starts here and you go through a track and if you do everything right you will end up set for the rest of your life…and this results in a manufactured form of education’.16

11 Lamster, E, Architecture and Film, pp. 27

12 Gilbert, E, Your Elusive Creative Genius [http://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_gilbert_on_genius.html] assessed 12.02.2013

13 Cuff, D, Architecture: The Story of Practice, MIT Press, USA, 1991, pp.117


15 Barber, L, An Education, Penguin, London, 2009

16 Ken Robinson, Bring on the learning revolution!, TED talk, filmed February 2010 [http://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_rob-inson_bring_on_the_revolution.html] accessed 3.02.2013

7

Represent and Imitate

‘We represent and imitate all articulate sounds and letters, and the voices and notes of beasts and birds.’ 17

In choosing to study architecture, students are opting for a lifestyle, as much as a university degree or and career choice. Students are socialised into the profession by exposure to a strong assimilating architectural culture, largely based around the architecture studio. Cuff refers to the studio as ‘the core of architecture education’18 that serves as much a place for acculturation through functional as well as symbolic means.

Architectural culture is inculcated into students through a system of values and practices; through formal and informal, through conscious learning but also through the impregnation of latent habits. The value system is predicated on aesthetic, motivational and ethical beliefs while practices include language, deportment and dress. Cuff uses the work of Bledstein to analyse occupational settings as cultural systems. In The Culture of Professionalism, Bledstein describes, ‘a general theory of professions with power over certain worldly experi-ences within their jurisdiction’…resulting in a ‘cultivated elitism’ by ‘providing society with explanations and turning morals in science’.19 Hamdi supports this by saying; ‘we tended to our public (when we did at all) with benevolent paternalism…who we treated as consumers of, not partners to, our planning.’20 This cultivated elitism is clearly demonstrated by Mark Howland’s essay, On Becoming an Architect, ‘we were the imaginative professionals with certified taste.’21

“Why is it we enter [architecture school] with incredibly diverse backgrounds, interests and friends and we leave here with the exact same handwriting, muttering a language that prevents normal communication and exchange with almost anyone outside of our future profession – and we like it this way?”

Victoria Ellis, University of Illinois22

I have heard numerous accounts of outside student assumptions of “the studio” (a phrase which has been greeted with sarcasm or bewilderment from students outside the subject) as a glamorous or mystifying place. As Cuff adds, ‘’arkies’ stay up late, are never home, spend

17 Bacon, F, The New Atlantis.The Harvard Classics. 1909- 14.


19 Cuff, D, Architecture: The Story of Practice, MIT Press, USA, 1991, pp.118 from Bledstein, BJ, The Culture of Profes-sionalism, The Middle Class and the Development of higher Education in America, WW Norton and Company inc. New York, 1976

20 Hamdi, N, Small Change, Earthscan, UK, 2004, pp.120

21 Howland, M, On Becoming an Architect, 1985, pp. 4 in Cuff, D, Architecture: The Story of Practice, MIT Press, USA, 1991, pp.118

22 Webster, H, Architectural Education after Schon: Cracks, Blurs Boundaries and Beyond, [http://www.cebe.heacademy.ac.uk/jebe/pdf/HelenaWebster3(2).pdf] accessed 28.12.12, pp.67

Exp

lorin

g al

tern

ativ

e sp

atia

l stra

tegi

es: b

y G

race

Qua

h

9

all their time in the studio and belong to a clique of other architecture students’.23 The notion of creativity and its consequent suffering resurfaces: students legitimise their commitment to the course by proudly declaring the number of hours they have been working solidly, without sleep. Mark Howland reminisces on his education in architecture: ‘the long hours of work in a common studio space forged us into a close knit group of men and women who were marked by our dedication, endurance and talent.’24 The ‘decline of idiosyncrasy’25is a com-mon result of this process. There is a secret pride in the imitation of professional sacrifices, which is dangerous to individual identity. Students immerse themselves fully in the lifestyle of the architect as well as assimilating with professional values. In this sense, an architectural education acts as a kind of self- fashioning: the process of constructing one’s identity and public persona according to a set of socially acceptable standards.26 Stephen Greenblatt proposes the notion of education as self- fashioning:

‘We very often strive towards becoming what we want to be and not who we are. The image we have of how we would like to be, then, is very much influenced by aspirations and ego ideals that do not necessarily stand in harmony with the totality of our personality.’ 27

Joining the ranks of a professional occupation is surely the epitome of the notion of ego ideals and the process of self- fashioning. Psychologist Carl Jung supports this. He refers to ‘persona’ as, ‘a mask or appearance that one presents to the world…or the self as self construed’.28 He also stated that the notion of persona is a compromise between the indi-vidual and the collective.

‘Thank God I’m Jung and not a Jungian’29

The above quote by Jung indicates his jaundiced view of people who form a persona by identifying with his ideas and methods. He stated that the development of individuality is part of human nature and is both inspired and guided by a genuine striving for the search for wholeness, for ‘integration of the personality’ and is ‘the psychological process that makes a human being a individual - a unique indivisible unit or whole person’ known as ‘individuation’.30 This embodies the notion of education as a lifelong process of human development rather than simply a mere training in gaining certain knowledge or skills. Furthermore, the romantic view of bildung, which is the German tradition of self- cultivation,


24 Howland, M, On Becoming an Architect, in Cuff, D, Architecture: The Story of Practice, MIT Press, USA, 1991, pp.5


26 Self- actualization [http://www.holisticeducator.com/selfactualisation.htm] accessed 20.11.12

27 Jacoby, M, Individuation and Narcissism: the psychology of self in Jung and Kohut, , Routledge, 1990 London, pp.95


29 Stein, M, Individuation: Inner Work, Journal of Jungian Theory and Practice VOL. 7NO. 2005 [http://www.junginstitute.org/pdf_files/JungV7N2p1-14.pdf] accessed November 2012, pp. 4

30 Stein, M, Individuation: Inner Work, Journal of Jungian Theory and Practice VOL. 7NO. 2005 [http://www.junginstitute.org/pdf_files/JungV7N2p1-14.pdf] accessed November 2012, pp. 6

defines the purpose of education as personal and cultural maturation31, with maturation described as a harmonisation of the individuals mind and heart and a unification of selfhood and identity with the broader society. Philosophy and education are fundamentally con-cerned with the development of a person’s character and how that prepares him/her to lead a good life.32

One must then question the extent to which the current architectural education system allows its students to meet their own cultural and educational wellbeing, for example to what extent does this allow students to think for themselves as autonomous individuals and not as products of a manufacturing line of model architectural students. Ken Robinson notes that we are all enthralled to the idea of conformity in education, ‘teaching children in batches’.33 How can we strive for ‘individuation’ if the education system puts conformity be-fore the individual wellbeing of its students? Hamdi supports this in stressing the importance of ‘educating the intellect, and also the heart and the spirit of the mind.’34

I argue that there is a prescribed homogenous culture in architecture school, resulting in a disenfranchised or ‘subaltern’ student who is characterised by a lack of self or individuality that allows them to distinguish themselves from other architecture students. The resulting irony is of an educational institution whose main objective is to produce original and creative designs through a cohort of culturally indistinguishable students.

“…On affirming the possibility of making something of ourselves through our own merits, what keeps us from becoming another person? All we have to do is imitate the sort of person we would like to be...We participate as inferiors in projects and programs designed by others, trusting their will and intent because, by doing so, we may just get something which, after all, is better than nothing. And once we are seduced by their routines, by their logic of cause and effect, by their brand of best, we find ourselves admitting that our own ways, our traditional wisdoms, habits and even belief systems are second-best.”

Richard Sennet in Respect: The Formation of Character in an Age of Inequality35

It is a totality of corporeal and cognitive behaviours, a holistic experience of architectural culture that is indoctrinated so strongly. Students experience architectural education, as the sum of its explicit and hidden dimensions and it is this total experience that effects the development of students from novices to professional architects.36

31 High culture is being corrupted ny a culture of fakes [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/19/high-culture-fake] accessed 02.10.2012

32 University of Stanford [http://www.stanford.edu/dept/undergrad/cgi-bin/drupal_ual/esf] accessed 20.11.12



35 Hamdi, N, Small Change, Earthscan, UK, 2004, pp.44, from Sennet, R, Respect:The Formation of Character in an Age of Inequality, Penguin, London, 2004

36 Webster, H, Architectural Education after Schon: Cracks, Blurs Boundaries and Beyond, [http://www.cebe.heacademy.ac.uk/jebe/pdf/HelenaWebster3(2).pdf] accessed 28.12.12, pp.66

11

This rejection of individual identity (‘men formed by a certain school have in common a certain cast of mind’37) in place of a facade of professional identity results an architectural culture dependent on the dominant mainstream model of praxis: the capitalist archetype. The hegemonic pedagogical model of architecture responds to a profession that privileges the expert elite: the UK can still only claim to have produced no more than 200 top-flight creative designers.38 Less than 1 per cent of all architects become the familiar icon- produc-ing Zahas and Normans that the public come to know, this in turn, continues to fuel the ongoing sense of an autonomous and self referential profession. Therefore, the creation of future architects through this dominant form of architectural pedagogy is bound to result in disappointment: with the lack of jobs (as a result of the dependence on market forces) and the lack of opportunities for self- expression endlessly encouraged by studio culture. What ensues is a students’ disillusionment with the expectations of their architectural education and the reality of the workplace.

Not only does the dominant model of capitalism have mass repercussions for the education and cultural wellbeing of thousands of undergraduates, but it is responsive to and ought to have serious consequences for, the way in which professional praxis operates, who it oper-ates for and contemporary architectural and spatial praxis.

The profession has been characterised for some time now by a ‘drifting away from democracy’.39 It is subservient to corporate power and is dependent on neo-liberalism and globalization, contributing greatly to a commoditised British culture.

With this state of the profession in mind and the pressure to earn an income, students are re-evaluating their position within the architectural profession’s hierarchical system. The principle message that experience is everything within the profession is clear from the fact that the prime of an architect’s career is after 50. ‘Forty-year-old architects are hailed as bright young up-and-comers.’40 There is concern in the notion of working up the architectural ladder after being absorbed and immersed in the creative outlet that is an architectural education when met with the drudgery of starting at the bottom of the ladder. There are two extremes: spending your working life mainly on CAD in the hope of one day becoming the director or partner who has earned their right to squiggling concept designs on a napkin. Many students want to preserve the freedom of creativity that the architectural studio has given. In reality, are you not less creative as a director of a practice, when it becomes a more managerial position? When you are less involved in the design process itself and more concerned with meeting clients and representing your eponymous studio to the wider public?

37 Grenfell, MJ, Pierre Bourdieu, Education and Training, Continuum International Publishing group, London, 2007, pp.96

38 ‘Architectural Education, Deeply Flawed’ by Bryan Avery of Avery Associates, published in Building Design in June 1992

39 ‘We are drifting away from democracy’ by Wouter Vanstiphout, Building Design, 2012, pp.7

40 Blake, E, The Future of Architecture, Vice Design Week [http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-future-of-architecture?utm_source=vicefb] accessed 28.01.2013

Glo

bal v

ersu

s lo

cal c

onte

xts:

by

Gra

ce Q

uah

13

The notion of ‘otherness’ within this hegemony of architecture surfaces: there is little author-ity for the common man within this capitalist model. He is dependent on the markets and the expertise of architects for the design of public space and facilities, arguably resulting in the disenfranchisement of the citizen as well as the student, ‘civilian interference isn’t exactly welcomed by the profession’.41 Alistair Parvin of 00:/ speaks of, ‘design’s economic paradox: as a society we have never needed design thinking more but architecture is unemployed.’42 Hence, if the dominant economic model for architectural practice is failing to benefit the profession and there are clear discrepancies between architectural pedagogy and the pro-fession, is there a possibility for design practice which eschews the notion of the architect or designer as professional?

Profession versus Practice

‘The question facing practice is: how much structure will be needed before the struc-ture itself inhibits personal freedom, gets in the way of progress, destroys the very system which it is designed to serve, and becomes self- serving?

Nabeel Hamdi in Small Change43

In the situation of the ‘subaltern’ architecture student, who has become even more disillu-sioned with the state of the elite profession through the experience of three years of studio acculturation, what then are the student’s intentions for involvement with architecture?

There has been recent talk of ‘social design’ creeping into the mainstream, indicating that a legitimate shift in socially responsive architecture and design has indeed arrived/one that eschews the image of the architect as individual hero, replacing it with an idea of architect as agent, acting and collaborating with, and on behalf of, others.44 Jonathan Hill has explored subverting the archetypal notion of architect: the notion of the privileged ‘expert’. He has argued that this notion of ‘expert’ separates the architect from reality. In Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and the User, ‘…anyone wanting to produce architecture should, first, discard the preconceived boundaries of the discipline and second, be prepared to learn from architecture wherever it is found, whoever it is produced by.’45 This encourages a more open- minded approach providing a more socially, culturally and politically relevant design approach for our time.

41 We are drifting away from democracy’ by Wouter Vanstiphout, Building Design, 2012, pp.7

42 Parvin, A, Architecture for everyone, by everyone, TED Talk, July 2012 [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09QyFJXrPB4] accessed 18.02.2013

43 Hamdi, N, Small Change, Earthscan, UK, 2004, pp.xviii

44 Hunter, W, ‘Social Design’ creeps into the mainstream: Is it here to stay and in what way? March 2012 [http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/dpublog/2012/03/19/social-design-creeps-into-the-mainstream-is-it-here-to-stay-and-in-what-way/] accessed 28.01.2012

45 Hill, J, Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and User, Routledge, London, 1998, pp147

‘In reforming the processes of production and representation…the emphasis shifts away from the institution and towards the act of production itself.’

Jonathan Hill, Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and the User46

Terms such as ‘spatial agent’, ‘guerrilla architect’ and ‘the double agent’ have been coined in recent architectural debate and have begun to monopolise design conversation. Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture has explored ways in which the notion of this alternative model is radically reframing the profession and cultural identity of the architect. With the view that architectural production is a process that has become saturated with ide-ology, a less formalised area of design would require new skill sets, qualitative social under-standing and new perceptions of what it means to be a practitioner.47 The romantic view of what architectural pedagogy can do for the student is challenged by this gradual shift in the architect’s status in society, the less gradual but catastrophic post-Lehman collapse of value systems all around us, subsequent attacks on the perception of worth and value assigned to the arts, culture, and generally speaking all symbolic capital around us.48

Indeed, a new alternative praxis is needed, ‘the centre has been found wanting’49.

This suggestion of an alternative design model would provide the ‘subaltern student’ with the opportunity to put his/her knowledge of architecture into a broader social context and in do-ing so, recuperate their political voice and will through a critique of the elite representation. Spivak encourages us how to consider that ‘the agency of change is located in the insurgent or subaltern’ and in doing so consider how to ‘recover a pure ‘subaltern’ consciousness’.50 It is the duty of the ‘subaltern’ student to recover a ‘subaltern consciousness’ by developing new ways to practice architecture whilst architectural pedagogy should inform prospective students, of these alternatives.

I will now define the ‘subaltern student’ as the point at which students must make a con-scious decision between entering into the mainstream architectural profession or become an ‘agent: no longer obligated to construct’51, and in doing so redefining what the term ‘archi-tect’ and ‘architecture’ mean to our generation of potential ‘agents’. Do I eschew the well- trodden trajectory of devoting five years of my life to an established firm before embarking on a decade of house extensions, competition entries and teaching on the side? 52



48 Association of Architectural Educators [http://www.ntu.ac.uk/adbe/document_uploads/130031.pdf] accessed 3.02.2013

49 Awan, N, Schneider T, Till, J, Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture, Routledge, Oxon, 2011, pp.27


51 Hyde, R, Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, New York and London, 2011, pp.77

52 ‘Assemble’s team building is a glimpse of the future’ by Ellis Woodman, published in Building Design, November 2012, pp.10-13

15

For those who have experienced the ‘subalternity’ of an architectural education, it is impor-tant to note that an emerging type of multidisciplinary practice such as Assemble (a group of practitioners based in London, recently debated for their temporary and self built architec-ture in the capital) do not contain any individuals with more than a part II “RIBA validated” qualification, much less a part III. Thus in this case, Spivak’s notion of the recovery of the notion of ‘subaltern consciousness’ lies in valuing an education in architecture as a learning process in its own right. There is a potential for prospective students entering architecture school with a different cultural agenda than the majority of those today.

There are emerging practices such as Assemble, multidisciplinary in scope, which cheer-fully lack ARB registration. While some are completing their diplomas, others voice a militant resistance to the idea of resuming an institutional education. Other practices such as Practice and We Made That, whose members are in their mid- late twenties and not long left university, seem to be following a similar trend. Noticeably, the names of their practices are not made up of individuals’ names, like so many of the star- architects who eclipse their eponymous studios. This generation of younger practitioners design co- operatively and have idiosyncratic approaches. Many of their creations are ephemera, temporary structures, things the PR world has called pop- ups, whose short lives leave an impression on the memory.53

However, Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture argues against the notion of ‘an alternative’, as “in critiquing the norm… the alternative is necessarily reactive…and thus may remain in thrall to it.”54 As Stephen Morton emphasises on the topic of otherness and in relation to Spivak, ‘the other is relegated to a place outside of or exterior…yet it is in this founding moment of relegation that the sovereignty of the self or the same is constituted.’55

‘…Often, as in any binary structure, the alternative becomes bound by exactly the terms of reference that it would wish to escape’56

Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture

This would suggest that ‘spatial agents’ have ambitions to present a legitimate new para-digm for praxis rather than merely a reaction to established ‘mainstream’ practices or indeed alterity for its own sake: Saussure argues that in the process of mean making (signification) something is defined in relation to what it is not.57 However considering this binary opposi-tion, one would question what right has the centre to control the ‘margins’ following the global financial and environmental crises and its concomitant social divisions?

53 Moore, R, Meet Britain’s brightest young architects, The Guardian online [http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/jan/09/young-architects-cineroleum-franks-hastings] accessed 28.01.2013


55 Morton, S, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Routledge, London, 2003, pp.37


57 Morton, S, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Routledge, London, 2003, pp.26

On the other hand, the media hyperbole and enticing rhetoric (self built projects are an anti-dote…escaping micro- station lethargy58) surrounding ‘spatial agency’ (which itself becomes a buzzword) spurred on by more recent publications such as Rory Hyde’s Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture and riding on the work of Cedric Price, results in criticisms that this potential paradigm for practice must deal with in order for it to convince architectural stalwarts of its critical relevance.

In William Hunter’s article, ‘Social Design creeps into the mainstream: Is it here to stay and in what way?’ on MoMA’s recent exhibition called Small Change Big Change, he explores the extent to which a possible co- opting of the outsider activists and true agency of architecture, by the object driven mentality of the mainstream protocols, is a threat to pure potential.59 He goes on to say that true agency would have a huge impact on the methodol-ogy of practice and ‘if the representations and viral publishing of this movement is lazily glorified sans the critical rigor they deserve, then the larger cause of shifting an agency for practice will be lost’.60

Furthermore, there has also been a recent surge in the commercialisation of a number of temporary structures in London that risk associating corporate branding with the work of this new generation of multidisciplinary practices. Much of this type of architecture has spawned from the adaptation and transient nature of the 2012 Olympics.61 The enduring attraction of something temporary is in many ways an obvious marketing tool62…where pop up offers a sophisticated branding tool in which a deeper social agenda is lost.

In a letter to the Editor of Building Design from November 2012: Assemble are accused of being a ‘bunch of rich kids being indulged’ whilst ‘their privileged position gives them the space to “act out”…whilst being insulated from the constraints of the real world’.63 Many have been quick to dismiss these practices as ‘middle class kids indulging in a hobby’.64 It can be said that some of these practices are formed from some of the UK’s top art and academic institutions and further ‘have the space to act out’ using London as a cultural base in order to experiment. Indeed, Rowan Moore in his article, ‘Meet Britain’s brightest young architects’ makes it clear that, ‘there’s a danger that architecture like this could become a delightful middle class game’.65 Whilst this suggestion has been made, one might question that the training to become a qualified architect costs thousands of pounds in any case,

58 Moore, R, Meet Britain’s Brightest Young Architects, Guardian 09.01.2011 [http://www.guardian.co.uk/artand-design/2011/jan/09/young-architects-cineroleum-franks-hastings] accessed 3.02.2013



61 Fieldhouse, E, Pop Ups 2012 Temporary Structures in London, Blueprint Magazine, January 2013

62 Fieldhouse, E, Pop Ups 2012 Temporary Structures in London, Blueprint Magazine, January 2013

63 23.11.12 letters to Building Design ‘Just a bunch of rich kids?’ pp.8

64 Assemble team building is a glimpse of the future- 7 November 2012, BD, pp.11

65 Moore, R, Meet Britain’s brightest young architects, The Guardian online [http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/jan/09/young-architects-cineroleum-franks-hastings] accessed 28.01.2013

17

worsened particularly by the government’s decision to raise tuition fees to up to £9,000 a year.

In the case of practitioners such as Assemble, a more grassroots approach to design would provide a more convincing case for those who question the legitimacy of a shift to a more socially responsive architecture. In contrast, Wouter Vanstiphout writes in Building Design in July 2012: ‘architecture veers wildly between subservience to corporate power and neo- an-archist bottom up experiments’,66 clearly a balance is desperately needed between the two. Therefore if the ‘subaltern student’ takes the path of the ‘agent’, the change in values would allow for the emergence of a new type of architect or practitioner as a result: one who in fact aligns themselves both with the ‘rebels’ and almost sub cultural modes of practice but also with the dominant class? Mel Dodd suggests the role of the architect as ‘activist as well as an entrepreneur.’67 In this sense, a kind of hybrid practitioner could evolve through a gradual transformation in which the form is retained but the substance is replaced. Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture advises, ‘in our context this means avoiding the tempta-tion to ditch the traditional architectural skills of design and spatial intelligence, but instead seeing how they might be exploited in different ways and contexts.68

Whilst Bledstein declares that, ‘the culture of professionalism requires amateurs to trust in the integrity of trained persons and to respect their moral authority’69, Mel Dodd from ‘socially engaged art practice’ Muf says, ‘[as an architect] you get pigeonholed into the production of buildings alone…this idea that you’re somehow an expert because you design buildings always makes me feel a bit uncomfortable.’70 In Wouter Vanstiphout’s words, this could provide the opportunity to, ‘drastically open up the closed, professional, jargon- laden debate about architectural quality and legitimacy to the public, towards an even popular, debate.’71

“Cedric Price would say, ‘the answer may not be a building’. I would go further- there may not be a answer.” Mel Dodd of Muf72

Arguably, those deeply committed to mainstream architectural practice will never be satis-fied with any definitions of agency. The radical notion of the ‘subverting reader breaking down the distinction between the author/architect/professional and the reader/user/ama-teur’73 may be pertinent to only a new generation of architecture students, willing to risk their

66 ‘We are drifting away from democracy’ by Wouter Vanstiphout, Building Design, 20th July 2012



69 Bledstein, BJ, The Culture of Professionalism, The Middle Class and the Development of higher Education in America WW Norton and Company inc. NY 1976, pp.90


71 ‘We are drifting away from democracy’ by Wouter Vanstiphout, Building Design, 2012, pp.7



reputations and experiment. The ‘subaltern student’ must be willing to misbehave, to ask difficult questions, not to settle for unemployment or drudgery but to look for other applica-tions of architectural thinking.74

Design’s Paradox

disillusioned adjhaving lost one’s ideals, illusions, or false ideas about someone or something; disenchanted75

In critiquing the misguided assumptions of the architect by the wider public, it is important for the subaltern student to realise that they are complicit in the perpetuation of this myth, as it was the same notion of the creative professional that lured them into an architectural education in the first instance. However, with this realisation comes an understanding that we have the responsibility and a certain influence to affect change within the profession and future practice, in the hope of preventing many, though not all, prospective students follow similar and inevitably disillusioning paths. The study of architecture for three years at university has taught me to reject the profes-sional understanding of what it means to be an architect but to embrace the possibilities of what it means to practice architecture. I echo the position of Reyner Banham: ‘his argument is with architects not with architecture; he despairs of the former while yearning for the promise of the latter.’76 To quote Banksy: ‘there’s nothing more dangerous than someone who wants to make the world a better place’.77 This is in line with Mel Dodd’s view that the traditional model of the architect as expert professional possesses concomitant character-istics of paternalism, ideology and the striving for constant amelioration, ‘practice makes perfect’. This pertains to the dangerous notion that if you do something enough times, a cer-tain ideological model can be applied to any given spatial situation resulting in the produc-tion of architecture as a repetitive process, refined and refined again, and therefore heavily dependent on experience. Dodd comments, ‘you can’t generalise, assume or overlay ideas about improvement without understanding the context of your own prejudices.’78 Therefore I believe that when we stop, as students, of being so preoccupied with the notion of the defensive professional trying to solve problems, we can begin to collaborate and design effectively, in a way that reflects the social and cultural concerns of our generation.

74 Parvin,A, How to be a Good Architecture Student? Be Bad [http://subutcher.posterous.com/how-to-be-a-good-architec-ture-student-be-bad] accessed 29.01.2013

75 Collins Online dictionary [http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/disillusioned] accessed 25.02.2013

76 Till, J, Architecture Depends, pp.8 in Banham, R, A Black Box: The Secret Profession of Architecture in A Critic Writes, Essays by Reyner Banham, University of California Press, London, 1996, pp. 294

77 [http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/28811.Banksy] accessed 22.02.2013

78 Hyde, R, Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, New York and London, 2011, pp. 82

19

“A lot of people never use their initiative because no one told them to.”Banksy79

A scattering of manifestos offer students feel-good plans devised in bouts of blog-inspired reflection on what ‘rules’ can be applied to achieve successful design. Paradoxically, many designers have a habit of outlining precise rules of ways to practice ‘good’ design, but then within said rules, are usually a majority, whose aim is to question accepted paradigms and the status quo.

Hence, I would describe my relationship with my architectural education as paradoxical. This unique form of pedagogy, whose current aim is to mould the professional creative through the vehicle of the assimilating design studio, provides a much higher level of contemplative and absorptive learning than other creative and professional courses of study. I believe then that the key to understanding this process of learning is to follow the recom-mendations of Ken Robinson who says that it is necessary to ‘disenthrall ourselves’, remove ourselves from the ‘tyranny of common sense’ and in doing so move towards innovation.

‘Innovation is doing something that people don’t find very easy…things that we take for granted…things that we think are obvious- the tyranny of common sense…that’s the way its done’

Ken Robinson80

In terms of the education system, he states that ‘life is organic not linear’ so why do we champion an education system where students are put through a process of ‘manufactured learning’. This is supported by Doreen Massey who talks of that way in which space is the ‘sphere of the possibility of the existence of multiplicity; that is space, ‘as the sphere in which distinct trajectories coexist; as the sphere therefore of coexisting heterogeneity’.81 If then, the nature of space is so diverse and the process of designing it encompasses so many social and cultural dimensions, why homogenise education? I believe in doing so, professional status aims to safeguard control through teaching. This results in a static edu-cation system. Instead, I argue that architectural pedagogy needs to expand to encompass the potentials that spatial practice can offer and not to be afraid to engage with notions of empowerment, ownership and mutual knowledge. Hamdi notes how this would encourage, ‘new forms of partnership and governance based on networks not hierarchies’.82 One way of achieving this is to realise that it is important for the ‘subaltern’ student to over-come their disillusionment with architectural education and its consequences for practice and the profession. They ought to allow any new perspectives they have regarding this,

79 Bennet L, 10 Things they don’t teach you in architecture school, Archi- Ninja, [http://www.archdaily.com/280028/10-things-they-dont-teach-you-in-architecture-school/] accessed 20.02.2012


81 Massey, D, For Space, Sage Publications, London, 2005, pp.13


to analyse and influence their current perspective rather than surrendering their previous values or and ideals completely.

There are further questions when taking into account a new paradigm for spatial practice. Is ‘agency’ a more suitable or subversive term than ‘practice’? How do we go about teaching ‘qualitative social understanding’? Mel Dodd advises that we would not need to unlearn our training but to apply the same sets of skills and knowledge differently and in a way that acknowledges the expert knowledge of other people, the notion of the ‘expert citizen’.83

It is crucial to stress that educational methodologies ought to be polarised along a con-tinuum from the didactic to Socratic ‘midwifery’; that is from putting things in the learner’s mind to bringing out something from within the learner.84 This could be a way in which an individual could allow his or her own cultural background to inform their studio work but at the same time allowing architectural training to aid the communication of these thoughts. This is supported by Hamdi who argues in Small Change, ‘it follows ‘the Freirian concept of “conscientisation”, calling for raising the self reflected awareness of people (including our students) rather than educating or indoctrinating them, for giving them power to assert their “voice” and for stimulating their self- driven collective action to transform their “reality”…’85 In this way, the integrity of education is preserved within a pedagogical strategy that nurtures individuality.

“There is no such thing as a neutral educational process. Education either functions as an instrument that is used to facilitate the integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity to it, or it becomes ‘the practice of freedom’ the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world.”86

Paolo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed

As Freire states, there is no such thing as a wholly neutral educational process. To a large extent, socialisation and acculturation takes place in any institutional education to some degree and to an alarming degree especially in that of a professional education. It can be said that the function of education can be categorised through a dialectical opposition between education as passing on the logic of the present system to a younger generation and bringing about conformity to it or on the other hand, allowing individuals to be autono-mous. However, I disagree with Freire to the extent to which he states that a simple binary structure of the two exists. I believe there are many ways in which students can engage in

83 Hyde, R, Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, New York and London, 2011, pp. 78

84 [Ed] Jones, RA, Clarkson, A, Congram, S and Stratton, N, Education and imagination: post- Jungian perspectives, Routledge, London, 2008, pp.67

85 Hamdi, N, Small Change, pp.128 from Rahman, MA 1995 ‘Participatory development: towards liberation or co- opta-tion?’ In Craig, G and Mayo, M (eds) Community Empowerment, Zed Books, London, pp.25

86 Freire, P, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Penguin, 1996, pp. 16

21

‘a practice of freedom’ and still adhere to the ‘logic of the present system’ and vice versa. I believe this is a state wherein individuals are ‘self- individualised’, according to Jung: ‘those who are adapted to life within a culture but are unspoiled in the process of acculturation.’87 It can then be said that imagination and education are a contradiction. How can one teach individuals to think for themselves? Surely it is the way an individual actively responds to an institutional education [such as architecture studio culture] rather than the fact that they have been subject to it, says more about their character, identity and what kind of person they are. This is a lesson not able to be taught by others or by a formal or informal educa-tion, but potentially rather by a form of auto- didacticism whereby an individual takes respon-sibly for their own learning. Alternatively, and following on from Freire, human beings are learning all the time. As Freire posits in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, ‘people educate each other through the mediation of the world.’88 Therefore the student of architecture should not rely solely on his/her architectural education to shape his/her values and practices and instead be open to a variety of cultural influences. Whilst an occupation plays a large part in our lives, we have the individual responsibility to decide how much of ourselves we are willing to invest in them and equally how much we are willing for them to shape our ever changing identities and diverse lifestyles.

“Let [the student] be asked for an account not merely of the words of his lesson, but of its sense and substance, and judge the profit he has made by the testimony not of his memory, but of his life.”Michel de Montaigne89


88 Freire, P, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Penguin, 1996, pp. 14

89 University of Stanford [http://www.stanford.edu/dept/undergrad/cgi-bin/drupal_ual/esf] accessed 20.11.12

Bibliography

Books

Awan, N, Schneider T, Till, J, Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture, Routledge, Oxon, 2011

Bacon, F, The New Atlantis.The Harvard Classics. 1909- 14.

Banham, R, A Black Box: The Secret Profession of Architecture in A Critic Writes, Essays by Reyner Banham, University of California Press, London, 1996

Barber, L, An Education, Penguin, London, 2009

Bauman Lyons, How to be a Happy Architect, Black Dog Publishing, London UK, 2008

Bledstein, BJ, The Culture of Professionalism, The Middle Class and the Development of higher Education in America, WW Norton and Company inc. New York, 1976

Cuff, D, Architecture: The Story of Practice, MIT Press, USA, 1991

Deleuze and Guattari, Anti- Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophenia, The Athlone Press, London, 1984

Flusser, V, The Shape of Things: A Philosophy of Design, Reaktion Books Ltd, 1999

Foster, H, The Art-Architecture Complex, Verso, London and New York, 2011

Freire, P, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Penguin, 1996

Greenfell, M, Pierre Bourdieu Education and Training, Bloomsbury Publishing, London, 2007Hamdi, N, Small Change, Earthscan, UK, 2004

Hill, J, Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and User, Routledge, London, 1998

Hyde, R, Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, New York and London, 2011

Jacoby, M, Individuation and Narcissism: the psychology of self in Jung and Kohut, , Rout-ledge, London, 1990

[Ed] Jones, RA, Clarkson, A, Congram, S and Stratton, N, Education and imagination: post-

23

Jungian perspectives, Routledge, London, 2008Lamster, M, Architecture and Film, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 2000

Massey, D, For Space, Sage Publications, London, 2005

Miessen, M, & Basar, S, Did someone say participate? MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachu-setts, 2006

Morton, S, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Routledge, London, 2003

NAi Publishers, Architecture and Legitimacy, Rotterdam, 1995

Pevsner, N, An Outline of European Architecture, Penguin Books, 1990

Rand, A, The Fountainhead, The Bobbs- Merrill Company, USA, 1943

Ruedi Ray, K, in Bauhaus dream house: forming the imaginary body of the ungendered architect in Architecture: the subject is matter, edited by Jonathan Hill, Routledge, London, 2001

Schmacher, P, The Autopoiesis of Architecture: A new agenda for Architecture, Volume II, John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2012

Schon, D, The Design Studio: An Exploration of its Tradition and Potential, RIBA Publica-tions, London, 2005

Sennet, R, Respect: The Formation of Character in an Age of Inequality, Penguin, London, 2004

Spivak, G, Can the subaltern speak? in Nelson, C and Grossberg, L, Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, 1988

Till, J, Architecture Depends, Routledge, London, 2011

Articles

Avery, B, ‘Architectural Education, Deeply Flawed’ in Building Design in June 1992

Bennet L, 10 Things they don’t teach you in architecture school, Archi- Ninja, [http://www.archdaily.com/280028/10-things-they-dont-teach-you-in-architecture-school/] accessed 20.02.2012

Blake, E, The Future of Architecture, Vice Design Week [http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/

the-future-of-architecture?utm_source=vicefb] accessed 28.01.2013

Fieldhouse, E, Pop Ups 2012 Temporary Structures in London, Blueprint Magazine, January 2013Hunter, W, ‘Social Design’ creeps into the mainstream: Is it here to stay and in what way? March 2012 [http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/dpublog/2012/03/19/social-design-creeps-into-the-main-stream-is-it-here-to-stay-and-in-what-way/] accessed 28.01.2012

Hunter, W, ‘Alternative Routes for Architecture’ by, Architects Journal, October 2012Moore, R, Meet Britain’s Brightest Young Architects, Guardian 09.01.2011 [http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/jan/09/young-architects-cineroleum-franks-hastings] ac-cessed 3.02.2013

Schneider, T, Till, J, Beyond Discourse: Notes on Spatial Agency, Footprint, Agency in Archi-tecture: Reframing Criticality in Theory and Practice, 2009, pp.97-11

Scruton, R, High culture is being corrupted by a culture of fakes [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/19/high-culture-fake] accessed 02.10.2012

Vanstiphout, W, ‘We are drifting away from democracy’ in Building Design, 20th July 2012Webster, H, Architectural Education after Schon: Cracks, Blurs Boundaries and Beyond [http://www.cebe.heacademy.ac.uk/jebe/pdf/HelenaWebster3(2).pdf] accessed 28th Decem-ber 2012

Perspecta 44: The Yale Architectural Journal, Domain, Canada, MIT Press, pp.161

Letters to The Editor, Building Design, ‘Just a bunch of rich kids?’ 23rd November 2012 pp.8

Assemble team building is a glimpse of the future, Letters to the Editor, Building Design, 7 November 2012, pp.11-12

Websites

Lecture by Gayatri Spivak called The Trajectory of the Subaltern in my work, at Colombia University 2008, [www.uctv.tv] accessed 12.11.2012

Stein, M, Individuation: Inner Work, Journal of Jungian Theory and Practice VOL. 7NO. 2005 [http://www.junginstitute.org/pdf_files/JungV7N2p1-14.pdf] accessed 20.11.12

Stanford University website [http://www.stanford.edu/dept/undergrad/cgi-bin/drupal_ual/esf] accessed 20.11.12

Self- actualization [http://www.holisticeducator.com/selfactualisation.htm] accessed 20.11.12

25

www.unistats.direct.gov.uk

Association of Architectural Educators [http://www.ntu.ac.uk/adbe/document_up-loads/130031.pdf] accessed 3.02.2013Collins online dictionary [http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/disillusioned] accessed 25.02.2013

Good reads quotes [http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/28811.Banksy] accessed 22.02.2013

Videos

Ken Robinson, Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity, TED Talk, filmed February 2006 [http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html?quote=92&utm_expid=166907-14&utm_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ted.com%2Fsearch%3Fcat%3Dquotes%26q%3Dken%2Brobinson] accessed 3.02.2013

Lecture by Gayatri Spivak called The Trajectory of the Subaltern in my work, at Colombia University 2008, [www.uctv.tv]

All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace, [http://vimeo.com/27393748]

Ken Robinson, Bring on the learning revolution!, TED talk, filmed February 2010 [http://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_bring_on_the_revolution.html] accessed 3.02.2013

Parvin, A, Architecture for everyone, by everyone, TED Talk, July 2012 [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09QyFJXrPB4] accessed 18.02.2013

Film

The Fountainhead, 1947 film directed by King Vidor

Radio Programmes

Woman’s Hour on Ayn Rand, BBC Radio 4, 23.08.20

DISCUSSION

For general enquiries about the School please contact us directly:

School of Architecture, Design and EnvironmentFaculty of ArtsUniversity of Plymouth Drake Circus Plymouth PL4 8AA

Telephone: +44(0)1752 585150email: [email protected]

ARCO: Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License

arco13 grace quah

Documents

subaltern architecture

term subaltern

ba architecture design

gayatri spivak

architectural profession

architectural education

professional education

architects iconic work