Page
SOME IMPRESSIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT
by
MICHAEL DAVID SORKIN
B.A., University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois
June 1969
M.A., Columbia University
New York, New York
June 1971
SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF MATER OF ARCHITECTURE AT
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
June 1984
[c] Michael David Sorkin 1984
The author hereby grants to M.I.T.
permission to reproduce and to
distribute copies of /this thesis document in whole or in part.
Signatureofauthor
Michael Sorkin, Department of'Archit4Ettre May 8, 1984
Certifiedby
Imre Halasz, Prof. of Architecture, Thesis Supervisor
Accepted by
Rosemary Grimshaw, Chairman, Departmental Committee on
Graduate Students
OF rECOLOQy
JUN 1 1984
LIBRARIE3
,s
#1
Page #2
Some Impressions of the Department
by
Michael David Sorkin
Submitted to the Department of Architecture on May 8, 1984 in
partial fulfillment of the requiements for the Degree of
Master of Architecture
ABSTRACT
This thesis comprises a series of impressions of the
Department of Architecture, garnered after
a long absence from
M.I.T.
These impressions are meant as an intervention in the
Department's current self-analysis
and debate over the future
of architectural education.
Comments are drawn from the
experience of several visits, from discussions with students
and faculty, and from a reading of a number of the texts
produced as part of the on-going process of curricular review.
Additional commentary is provided on the author's sense of the
portrait of the Department currently dominant in the
profession generally. Finally, a number of suggestions as to
possible futures for the Department are provided.
Thesis Supervisor:
Imre Halasz
Title: Professor of Architecture
Page #3
Table of Contents
How I Came to Go to MIT...................................4
Looking Back At It
........................................11
Another Perspective
A
Visit
to
MIT...............
........................................
12
......................
19
A Reading Of A Departmental Text..........................25
What Is To Be Done?.......................................29
E nvoi...........................................
......................................
32
Page #4
This paper is no more than a series of impressions as
-
fragments
Department
recent
of several
of
It's
in
some senses,
it deals mainly with
traditional documentary
of
the
views,
in
Depa-rtment
friendly
a
In
stands apart
it
from
the
evidences of curricular review or
this
By contrast,
academic examination.
as
the constitution of the
this regard,
In
meant
current self-analysis.
the Department's
intervention
Department's image.
I've had with the
encounters
Architecture.
presented
highly
form.
filtered
are
These
my
or even the
verification
unbuttressed by statistical
a view
a memoir,
is
vaguer forms of consensus.
How I Came To Go To MIT
Since
this
is
a
origins.
When
decisions
about
memoir,
I was
where
included MIT among my
standard choices,
sent
Pennsylvania.
I
chose
for
"Harvard"
and
at
to
begin
with
undergraduate
apply
to
a
in
architecture
was
Harvard,
admitted
a number
some
sort of
to all
of
these
reasons:
cultural
making
my
school,
I
of the
Besides MIT, I
Columbia,
of
of
it was one
applications because
to
tale
short
1968,
one to the "top schools."
applications
Harvard
an
I'll
Yale,
schools.
because
epicenter;
it
because
and
I
was
of
Cambridge which seemed an experience not to be missed; because
I
had a high-school
friend who was there and urged it
on me;
Page #5
and
because
the
head
University of Chicago
friendly
of
the
first
year
program
was
a
graduate and presented the school as
to the life of the mind.
All of these reasons were
essentially peripheral to questions of architecture.
In
addition,
disincentives
my
choices
provided
by the
Philadelphia and Yale in
me
as
were
aided
other
New Haven,
utterly uninhabitable.
by
schools.
a
number
Penn was in
two localities
Columbia
of
that stuck
I never
really
considered, in part because of discouragement from people I
knew
there,
in
part
because
of
its
then
relatively
undistinguished reputation, in part because I was on the point
of deciding to delay going to architecture
graduate
studies
Columbia
where
really
being
in
a
I'd
literature
gotten
the running.
technical
thought that
liberal
in
the
arts
school.
fellowship.
at
MIT was never
because I was daunted by it's
This
both in
campus atmosphere would
type like
to pursue
and had chosen to do this
a plush
First,
school
myself and in
the
sense
that
be uncongenial
to
I
a
that I was worried that
the architecture curriculum would unduly stress scientific
subjects
which I was loathe to pursue.
who had been active
MIT seemed,
in
politically
in
Finally,
college
the phrase of the times,
as someone
days and before,
to be the belly of the
monster, rife with war research and repressive attitudes.
Page #6
So I went to Harvard and hated it almost immediately.
first arrived
When I
I was not out of sympathy with the general
line
of the place, the deracinated CIAM vision that stood in for
any
measured
architecture
its
familiar
with
with
and
graduate years.
was
adept
kind
at
that were
of
thought
and saw the locus of
analysis
during
of
my
I
had
become
undergraduate
and
characteristic of
my
previous
What shocked me immediately on arriving at the
the
to
-
me
-
grotesquely
discourse that was proffered.
faculty
art
I
I also instinctively associated the academic
setting and norms
experience.
the
days.
those
as primarily a social
disciplines
G.S.D.
in
ideology
low
level
of
the
Equally, I was shocked that the
with which I was having contact was so consistently
intellectually
underequipped.
What passed for analysis seemed
to me to be a scandal.
The degraded intellectual
pervasive.
history
The theory course was nothing of the kind;
course
structures
was
disorganized
jokes;
was
in
conducted
a necessary
and
as
(I'd
chronological
chore
incompetent,
the
the sociology was vulgar.
were hardly inspiring:
Wright
base of the school appeared all
but
the
the
litany;
teaching
instructor
the
butt
was
of
The heroes of the school
Sert was venerated while Frank Lloyd
lived for two years next to Robie House and had it
the blood)
was a pariah.
Studio was simply a summary of
Page #7
were
Formal criteria
these attitudes.
forced discussion back on bankrupt models.
held
my teachers
less
read and
no authority.
conscious
Not
than I of
absent which
largely
I was in
only were
the
a rage,
they seemingly
non-graphic components
of the architectural discourse, they were no designers, had no
More, they seemed too young, as
work, no position about work.
a group,
for
their
positions.
I'd
been accustomed
to
and
accepting of the hierarchies of expertise in great liberal
arts institutions and expected that these criteria were valid
as well at harvard (where
never
seemingly
at belonging
the self-congratulation
ceased.)
The
grew
experience
ever
more
loathsome and I grew ever more obnoxious.
Many of us that year
MIT presented itself as the alternative.
cross-registered for a variety of courses (which was difficult
given
Harvard's
discovery
thing.
of
an
prescribed
alternative
proved
to
the
simple
be a breath-taking
Once inside the doors of the place, I quickly realized
ideas about MIT were unfounded.
a number of my initial
that
curriculum) and
wasn't overwhelmingly
The orientation
species
of
seemed
idiosyncracy
to
technical, a certain
thrive,
and
the
social
outlook of the place - especially in the Planning Department was
-
in
large
measure
-
sympathetic.
My fears
about the
Institute as a whole were also assuaged by the discovery of an
old
friend
who
was
then
a
student
in
the
Linguistics
Page #8
whose tone
Department,
-
bracing
both intellectually
I resolved almost immediately
and politically.
switch -
I found
even initiating inquiries in
first
My resolve was strengthened
year.
late for that
my
to make the
too
semester,
the end
come
of academic year when my instructors at Harvard made it clear
was no longer wanted around there.
to me that I
During my MIT years
-
enjoyable
which were
of reasons.
for a number
probably
Certainly, I never was
at the school and missed out
with a "class"
able to identify
on some of the solidarity that seems so essential
architectural
identifications
and
Department
me
from
away
as
myself
a
the
I also
studio.
student
were
with
the
Planning
axis
an orientation which tended
instruction,
architectural
my main
historical/theoretical
the
with
school
the
within
a part of
As I mentioned earlier,
education.
in
identification outside MIT.
those
had
some
years
trouble
and
had
get it)
with little
conference
participation
of
to push
seeing
strong
Indeed, one of my main activities
during one year was organizing a Radical Environmental
(REDs,
I
This
never quite escaped the feeling of not quite fitting in.
was
-
in the main
which was held in
by it.
Design
the Department
but
All of which is to say that
my orientation within the profession of architecture, which
tended
years.
to
deemphasize
design,
was
retained
throughout
my
MIT
Page #9
One of the reasons for this,
resistance
this
(I
now
I think, was the small degree of
believe)
myopic
view
met
at
MIT.
Although more sympathetically, architectural design was still
held answerable
Indeed,
idea
-
at
the activity
about
seemed -
-
levels
to some sort
This is
not
of
physical
design was altogether ignored, simply that there
to me at
I
test.
sort
to say that the
-
any rate
to be a tacit
prior, always invocable question.
adepts,
of social
of design was infused with this
purpose.
component of
all
felt
comfortable
acknowledgment
of a
As one of the question's
manipulating
it.
It was not until
some years later that I came to see these manipulations as
evasions of something very fundamental as well.
Of course,
I
overstated and distorted
any means aim to imply that
any
design
ethos.
MIT was,
Indeed,
one
of
the case.
at that
my
' I
time,
early,
don't
by
barren of
galvanizing
experiences of MIT while I was still at Harvard, came through
a classmate of mine
first year studio.
who was
sitting
in
on Maurice
While there was a certain
Smith's
attempt on the
part of our instructors to portray the work that emerged as
hopelessly
eccentric,
its
made the switch myself,
took.
At
the
time,
charisma
shined through.
Smith's studio was the first
I was
impressed
by
the
rigor
When I
that
of
I
the
approach and stimulated by seeing issues of design treated
Page #10
with such discipline.
I became
a partial
I
convert.
say
convert because
the Smith-praxis was always suffused with a
quasi-spiritual
overtone,
self-indulgent
in
manner of literary
students
seemed
discipleship.
convinced
visible
to
fall
Smith's unorthodox and
expression and in
naturally
into
the way
patterns
of
And I say partial because I was never fully
that
the discipline
able (beyond the level
was other
of pedagogy)
than hermetic,
to see how it
all
never
"fit
in"
with the larger array of my concerns.
If
there was a problem with all
of this
Smith, his opinions, or his methods.
was
with
the
absence of
ethos,
other
There
conviction
to
any
or
was
The
difficulty, I think
in which they were
equally
strongly
embrace
this
and
simply
nothing
comprehensiveness
as design.
object
wasn't with Maurice
situated.
constituted
In
the
design
the Maurice method became isomorphic with the "MIT"
method.
itself
context
it
in
To my eye,
on
of
convincing
the
scene
in
its
identifying
to be a "designer" at MIT meant
particular ideology
terms
as
its
larger
both
at
the
level of
superstructure
which
embraced the dominant life style at the school at the time:
the bib-overalled,
which
seemed
carpentry,
to come
with the
rural,
craft-oriented
territory.
found this more than I was able to swallow.
manner
Metropolitan me
Page #11
I left MIT,
if
not precisely
stimulating
At parting there was no memory that struck me as
memories.
seminal
then, with happy
but
a
good
number
that
experience was not integrated
remained
one
of
seemed
constructive.
by any overall
fragments.
This,
The
impression but
indeed,
was
encountered the school during the time I was there,
in
part
part,
the
I
by
think,
school
either
the way I chose to
in
of the institution.
In truth,
seemed to be "about"
anything,
terms of some unifying polemic or even in
some
perceptible
the
idiom,
a
undercurrent
"design"
school.
"technical"
school,
really
prompted
receive my education and in
by the character
had never
vastly
predisposition.
school,
Still,
I
a
terms of
It was not,
"trade"
certainly
better than the
I'd
how
or
school,
thought
it
in
was
a
a
good
one I'd previously attended.
Looking Back At It
In
the years after
from
a
variety
emblematic:
I left
of
MIT,
I've approached
directions.
My
first
architecture
two
jobs
were
one working as an architect bureaucrat for the
City of New York administering/designing
in a community
based
program to open and run a large number of day care centers for
the
and
elderly
Department
firm
of
another
as
a
"consultant"
of the Museum of Modern Art.
"advocacy"
architects
which
had
in
the
Design
I next worked for a
grown
out
of
the
Page #12
Columbia University strike of
began to write regularly
produced
Quarter ly.
So
profession
Then I got a job teaching
on architectural
at the school,
the
character
established
itself
as
a
(currently Yale
Columbia,
the University of Texas,
lecturing);
general
critic
and
my
writing
as
the
interiors,
competitions,
galleries.)
relatively
I
offer
special
this
situation,
part
Uni.on,
in
the
practice:
previously
and Renssalaer plus very
(for
Voice);
Village
three
for
Association
involvement
Cooper
magazines and journals,
often
subjects,
Architectural
of
teaching
extensive
While there I
Association in London.
at the Architectural
the journal
1968.
many
and
professional
including a long stint as
and
paper
designing
(furniture,
architecture
prolegomena
as
for
evidence
one that has put me in
the
of
a
touch not
simply with developments in architecture and the character of
its
practice
but with a
large number
of
thinking about the problems and character
education" has
observations
been continuous
the
schools.
My
of "architectural
and practical
and I offer my
from that perspective.
Another Perspective
The years since I left MIT have been both a disaster and a
time of replenishment for the architectural
the
larger
social
construction
of
profession and for
the
very
idea
of
Page #13
architecture.
The reinvestment of a theoretical
basis for practice
of such
a basis) has been
of the art
for art's
of the idea of the relevance
striking.
Equally
motive within the
deformed the landscape
significantly
take
(or at least
these
developments
invigorating,
natural
to
and historic
be
the
larger
of
discourse has
the profession.
essentially
descriptions
of
reappearance
I
salubrious and
absences which were
endemic during the period when I was a student.
However,
such advances in consciousness have been balanced by
other tendencies which have a far less positive import, which,
indeed, in many cases have the effect of negating the positive
aspects
Most
of
the
new
prominently,
disappearance
openings
to
history,
I've
been
struck
the
idea
of
of
practice.
This
has
curricular,
faculty,
by
the
almost
architecture
proceeded
community
theory,
through
programs,
the
and
in
the academic environment.
for example, a striking growth
in
form.
complete
a
social
purging
involvement
the most manifest level and through many other
transformations
as
and
of
at
less schematic
I've noticed,
frivolous and artificially
de-socialized programs in design studios.
Recently, I had
lunch with the Dean
of the Yale School
of
Architecture and discussion came around to the state of the
schools.
After predictable exchanges about
the
growing trend
Page #14
the major
of all
my companion remarked that
to homogeneity,
schools, the one about which he knew virtually nothing was
no
seeing
in
professional
his
graduates
MIT
recall
for work
spot
sought-after
a fairly
office,
applicants
the
among
he could
that
fact
struck by the
He was particularly
MIT.
among
oriented graduates.
"design"
Of course,
on the one
One might,
remark cuts both ways.
this
hand, argue that MIT graduates feelingly disdain the corporate
design
the
other -
and
of
implication
graduates
were
the
to
seemed
this
remark
either
-
one
conclude
that
MIT
to
enter
the
unmotivated
Either way, however, the
which strikes me as reasonably
normally
might
$10,000 a year,
extra-mural
environment
perception is general.
be the degree
in my
is
of
products
the
of
observations
the
degree
to
of MIT from
which
this
Even more remarkable, though, seems to
to which there's
difference
have
institutions.
me as remarkable
What strikes
this
unspoken
students who are somehow an exception to the
training
expectation
which
might
one
and
vague
On
is in the fact that there is a perception that
widespread -
the
the
practice.
importance of the observation -
prestige,
be
unprepared or
real world of professional
MIT is
product.
however refined the expressive
setting,
resides.
no sense of the
Having
qualities
taught
at a
in
large
Page
number of schools now,
more,
MIT
it
is
and having been in
#15
contact with many
seems to me equally true of students and faculty
that
virtually
It's
a
school
without
a
reputation.
institutional cachet seems to reside almost entirely in either
ineffable
or
schools,
one
misinformed
notions.
understands,
It's
but
one
beyond
Alternatively, one hears of a technical
association),
about
"social"
issues
about
once
associated
with
faculty
that seems especially current.
the
this,
"good"
little.
reputation (guilt for
(some
the
of
form of nostalgia),
school,
about
nothing
The one exception seems to be
the history/theory component of the
school whose faculty seem
to
and
be
more
in
the
"public"
view
whose
reputation
is
undoubtedly advanced by the activism of the MIT Press as a
source of architectural texts.
I want to stress
a school
the
that
"different" from all
mounting
architectural
seem
I impute nothing negative to the idea of
interchangeability
education,
to be a quality
inclination
qualities
is
that
mindless pluralism,
theoretical
the others.
for
set it
difference
devoutly to
a
of
place
apart.
Indeed, in view of
the
institutions
of almost
be wished.
that's
deliberate
any
sort
The norm today seems
an empty formalism
or ethical underpinnings.
would
More, my
about
completely
of
own
the
to be a
lacking
Under the impact of the
current maunderings of the profession, even the formal aspects
Page #16
new formalism seem strikingly
of this
a general
beyond
little
of rationale,
want
There's
underdeveloped.
pap of
the weak
mindedness.
liberal
in two ways.
architecture
schools are (and should) be known
to say that
is
All of this
by the array
First
schools after
talking about
(we're
of forms
with which they're associated.
all)
And second, by the aura which surrounds and explicates such
production.
formal
with
The
tendency.
and
lively
the
else
to make anything
situation
an outsider.
stands
for,
seems
MIT
too
possible.
If
one
form and
resist
to
from the
least
at
only that
isn't
It
at
counts,
on both
classification
looks
is
architecture
within
tendency can be said to be conjoined
rationale,
the place
association
simply no escaping
discourse
articulate
architectural
of
There's
such
perspective
can't pin down what
one can't even begin
to discern what
it
like.
What about "Built
this the MIT method?
Built
think that
twin test
For reasons I've
contrived.
I think,
body of work actually
identified.
No
is
it's
exists,
persuasion -
simply has
visible
I
to the
The over-riding
Whether or not a
invisibility.
it
Isn't
to earlier,
alluded
Form has an ambivalent relationship
of tendency I've just
difficulty,
asks.
Form" an unseen interlocutor
not been
outside of
the
cogently
school
-
Page #17
been
has
embrace
offered
may
it
Towns
Hill
Italian
Japanese architecture,
traditional
that
mind
Never
behalf.
its
on
and Herman Herzberger, its coherence can hardly be adduced
of Maurice's
from a handful
unity condemns
of its
basis
epigrams.
it,
Indeed the epigrammatic
very
at the
least,
to the
suspicion of eccentricity.
Naturally,
the counter
an historical
is not meant as
of
corpus
its
argument can be posed that "Built-Form"
is
beside
the
about here is a pedagogy.
have
some
positive
My
sympathy.
and
"approach"
memorable
struck
me
as
construct, that the delineation
point,
what we're
that
talking
This is an argument with which I
experience
own
in
this
regard:
the
Built-Form
useful
analytically
both
was
student
a
as
an
and
efficient and purposeful means of organizing the discipline of
exercises.
class-room
It
also
seemed
provide
to
But
beginnings of a working method with larger possibilities.
it
was at this
not
only
edge that the Built-Form "idea" grew fuzzy.
offered
possibilities
the
too
incoherent
situation,
and
it
an
seemed
account
to
of
delight
It
its
in
a
vagueness which was not really consciousness expanding, simply
vague.
The fuzziness at the edge of Built-Form was (and
only
exacerbated
by
its situation within
is,
I think)
the school.
The
Page #18
agenda
otherness.
On the one hand,
but
it
other,
the
on
bear
to
seemed
always
Built-Form
it was the Departmental
not
transparently
nonetheless widely held.
One
had the
which,
department.
the
of
policy
bear the taint
were
that while
the
was never the official
it
Built-Form ethos was sanctioned,
position
articulate,
feeling
of
to a whole
an exception
was clearly
if
of norms
series
imprint
the
Built-Form
always
seemed
gifted and
like a child,
of underdevelopment,
to me to
expressive but not really able to stand on its own.
When I was at MIT there was simply no countervailing force in
design.
forces.
were
Admittedly, it was
out at Harvard
were
no
countervailing
about the absence of any alternatives
Department
it
But
vision.
stood
in
simply didn't provide
indeed,
alternative:
the Built-Form approach seemed almost
and
for
The knee-jerk pieties of modernism misunderstood that
handed
were all
a bad time
they
and by contrast
dazzling in its cogency
unexamined
the
isolation:
the
the kind of alternative,
kind of tension that could lead to refinement, that could give
both students and apostles perspective.
Although my footing in
like
is
the situation
of design education
components,
the
observation is
a little
the same today.
more or less
at MIT seems still
same
array
of
shaky,
structures
it
looks
The core
to have the same basic
and
influences.
Page
for
like
most
relies on the sporadic presence of visiting
other schools designers
MIT -
reasons,
or economic
educational
for
Whether
#19
major
its
be
may
this
While
alternative.
desirable at many levels, it lacks the pressure of more stable
from
More,
alternatives.
what
of
sequence
the
know,
I
visiting designers available at MIT seems to be a less than
staggeringly
charismatic
forcefulness
the
To my mind,
They must be able
a paramount attraction.
is
of such visitors
array.
to offer a cogency of approach that can be made manifest and
enough
a
within
absorbed
single
term,
an
articulate
that's
approach
experience.
to be tested against the datum of earlier
A Visit To MIT
Recently
around
I've
I've
a bit,
tried on
paid
two
talked
to
to
visits
a number
of
faculty
students.
and
these two occasions to take something of
semiotic pulse of the place,
just to
might be able to draw from the way it
for judging this
I've worked
of first impressions.
hard to come by.
struck me.
think,
My filters
strong and
of architectural
a professional
purveyor
And the impressions I received were not
The feel
visible character.
I
I've been around a lot
as a journalist,
the
see what inferences I
sort of impression are,
varied: I went to MIT,
schools,
prowled
Department,
the
of the school communicates
a very
Page #20
hadn't changed
any
Familiar faces and relationships
very much.
were everywhere.
fundamental
struck me as a place that
the school
perhaps,
Most strikingly,
The environment was likewise unaltered
of
ethos
The
way.
the
school
in
reproduced
itself in the physical environment in a manner consistent with
most
of my memories of earlier
the
place
triggered
of unaltered
second
visit
from the place
emanations
the
only reinforced
were
I already knew but the
of my being primed to receive signals
result
which
merely the result
think,
I
This was not,
familiar.
strikingly
reactions
of
array
an
A walk through
experiences.
conclusions
The
itself.
of the
first
in
regard.
this
One's
first
reaction
to
visit
of the space
quality
specific
a
to
it
levels, profoundly uncongenial.
the
Department
inhabits.
It is,
is
the
on many
To begin, one immediately
notices the weak physical relation of the department vis a vis
the
spatial
of the institute.
interests
Architecture is only
legibly present to a visitor in terms of the
codes by which MIT arrays its
components.
larger system of
The space of the
department is organized by and dominated by the connective
tissue
endless
of the
institute,
corridors
and
especially
the
drearily
the drearily
repetitive
big scale
of
institutional
lettering on the innumerable but precisely numbered glass-
Page
take
activities
place
behind
are
doors
those
all
whatever
that
is
feeling
initial
One's
doors.
paned
#21
somehow
ancillary to their position in the larger constellation of
spaces
The
ordering.
institutional
takes
always
character
struggle
a
terms of
form in
individual
any
of
with
the
spaces which dispose them, a struggle which is seldom decided
in favor of the peripheral event.
The Department (and school) is thus present as a series of
discrete interludes whose common features emerge as the result
of a
social
rather
is something of
Things are pretty much near.
place proximity.
the
of
particulars
But here
a bit
it's
the
cooptation
local
of
the
in
There is,
an overstatement.
first
There are also
the
common
The Department
of a shocker.
this
Naturally,
compact.
physical
than a
zones.
bulletin
board and other appropriations of spine space are surprisingly
of other units,
of a piece with kindred cooptations
same
sorts
business
that
Department.
its
of
fellowship
one
finds
announcements
in
the
and
Electrical
just
the
bureaucratic
Engineering
Architecture barely ventures forth from behind
closed doors.
to demonstrate
the
There
is virtually no display, no attempt
physical
forms
of
consensus.
Considering
architecture's subject matter, this is profoundly surprising.
Page #22
Behind
larger
however,
too,
the
at
main,
One
that in the corridors.
to
analogous
brick
punctured
casement
largely
The view is
structures oppress.
Here
different.
are somewhat
things
closed doors,
the
the
of
backs
the
in
look out,
neo-
classical wings whose frontal expression is reserved for a
a
It's
public.
different
is
the windows of the Department
Surely,
inescapably deadening.
that
view
a
view,
dreary
offer what is without question the worst prospect of any major
one
spaces,
is constantly
outside
and
Inside
school's.
architectural
confronted by
some
school's
the
version of what
can only be described as the enemy.
The
spaces respond
cramped,
pervasive,
rooms
jury
charmless
studio
spaces,
MIT
to limn: the library
about
lit,
there's
most
zones,
high prestige,
a
the
such as
to think about for a minute
What I'd like
the Dean's office.
the
crumminess
mean to dwell
really
inadequately
are
being areas of conventionally
exception
are
and I don't
which are no trick
particulars
of their
is
variously
most
architecture's
emblematic
construction, the ontogeny recapitulating the phylogeny of
Built
Form.
claim to
The studio constructions are the Department's
a physical
go to see;
character;
they're what
they're the only artifact
stand-ins for Gund Hall
or Rudolph's
available
students
visiting
to seek out,
building at Yale.
Page #23
When
came
I first
to
attractive
to
the
They
in
of opposition to the anality
some sort
debased
modernist
practice
in
contrast
to
were,
the
Corbuisianisms of other places,
a
of
imprint
kind
of
which
escaped.
recently
I'd
issue
standard
deracinated
a
formally rich and intricate,
Moreover, they seemed to bear the
of a grid.
warren instead
powerfully
To begin, they had a critical presence.
me.
They seemed to exist
of
mezzanines were
the
MIT,
practice.
social
settlements that were fascinating
the
Like
squatter
to many of us as symbols of
the struggle for an autonomous urbanism, the mezzanines seemed
shaping
to be the work of participant builders who were
of their
shaping ten or twenty square feet
at any rate
own destinies,
own destinies.
structures
-
their
The inference
-
looking
at
these
was that they enjoyed not merely the sanction of
the Department
but somehow
embodied
spirit.
its
And I think,
at the time, that it may have been true.
Returning to
years,
my
the
studios after
impression
had
shifted
the mezzanines depressed me.
in me, not the structures.
an absence
of close
dramatically.
Needless to say,
The
to
ten
sight of
the change was
These appeared almost exactly as I
remembered them, the scene of studios I had taken were only
minimally
modified.
But now they
stasis.
Their
seemed
to
symbolize not
potential
was
to
me
possibility
but
eviscerated.
Instead of offering that halcyon prospect of
Page #24
individual possibility they now struck me as structures
instead of opening out.
hemming in
oppression,
of
don't want
I
to overwork the metaphorical possibilities of the observation
but the mezzanines do strike me as having something in common
with the
state
building
on
the
There
the Department.
of
initial
of
strength
hasn't
been
much
perceptions.
And the
schematic
physical
price of complacency is atrophy.
The
situation
expression in
of
Department
the
Even in my day there was
other ways as well.
discussion about
constant
finds
the
social
lack of
school,
at the absence of a common zone of social
Indeed,
it
the
interchange
of
talk,
impetus
physical
no
there's
virtually no
atomizing
At one level,
things seem even worse.
almost unbelievable:
sign
of
of
those
and
From a look around and a
within the Department.
few conversations,
interaction.
conviviality
of
institutions
the
the
aspects of my time at MIT,
was one of the striking
absence
space at
to simply sit
place
physical
resistance
decentering
is
agenda of the whole place
it's
down
and
to
the
corridors.
The
And this
isolation.
seems terribly wrong.
Department
reveals
a
remember
something
Even a brief walk around
pervasive.
The sense of isolation is
structured
called
clusters
by
in
fiefdom.
I
seem
to
my day but some impetus
Page #25
disheartened
and
Department
separate
to occupy
subgroups seemed
sympathetic
the
I was amazed at the degree to which
proposition.
informal
relatively
that
beyond
well
things
driven
have
to
seems
which
to
extent
the
at
spaces around
(judging by my conversations) there seemed to be not just lack
To
my
bureaucratic
debilitating
personal
long
my
than
a deadly
disease,
of
signs
advanced
in
malaise
a
Nothing could reinforce this impression
creative environment.
more
showed
Department
the.
eye,
among them.
overt hostility
but relatively
of communication
experience
of
the astonishing
dedication on the part of the Executive Officer and his staff
to the hollowest kind of bureaucratic pettiness.
A Reading Of A Departmental Text
Many of the conclusions garnered from a physical perusal of
the Departmental
the
paper
working
Profession"
space are,
on
has
that
the
been
born out by a reading of
for me,
"Future
of
promulgated
the
with
Architectural
the
apparent
purpose
of
defining a position from which decisions about the
future
of
the
general
document
Department
impressions,
both in
implications.
can
I found this
its particular
I'd like
assessed.
be
To
begin
with
to be a generally depressing
expression and in
to conclude this
some discussion of this and several
intervention
its
larger
with
other documents that have
Page #26
been
the
the
of
result
review
current
curriculum,
of
organization, and ethos at MIT.
the presence
that
obvious
it's
To begin,
both
in
evocation of a "crisis"
Their
bears deep implication.
such documents
of
school and profession is reminiscent of previous crises and is
thus of interest both for its special circumstances and its
grandparent
course,
Like
the hallmark of
that
ethic
the
crisis
the
that
such crises,
all
of
of
reminded
is
one
strikingly,
of
that
is
the
Of
the "sixties."
of "relevance."
that time was the cry
dominated
Most
pattern.
a cyclical
in
incidents
with other
kinship
at modern
architecture's
origins, the crisis of the sixties was perceived in social
terms and the criterion that proponents of its critical thrust
among them) sought to introduce was one of
(myself certainly
justice
and compassion.
in terms
of
character
the
of
The implications were
structure
education,
architectural
of
the
nature
of
thoroughgoing,
practice,
the
architecture's
constituency, and finally the visible face of architecture.
of the role
the reinscription
architecture's
The
new
was surely responsible
because the crisis
say "finally"
of form in
I
for
matix of
the larger
activity.
crisis,
reflected
in
the
current
surge
analysis, seems likewise to be perceived as social
of
self-
in origins,
Page #27
but in
In
service but survival.
crisis,
the earlier
as in
a sense,
touchstones
the
But all
this is also a crisis of relevance.
not,
issue now is
The central
sense.
a far different
have been replaced.
The document proceeds from the premise
is
faced with a slackening off of "demand"
that
architecture
and
that
provide
must
architects
"services" more
to enhance
changing
opportunities
their
and "expand
to
requirements
in
Architects are urged to "diversify"
of the marketplace.
order
the
to
attuned
re-equipped
be
consequently
business
its
horizon."
Reading
one is
report,
this
In structure and
tone.
immediately struck by its
language, the study invents a universe of
discourse which describes only a single conceptual option.
From
the
business
marketing
content.
the
first,
problem, its
strategies
dismaying.
We're
rather
than
passing
through
a
in
seen
as
seen in terms of
major difficulties
quite exceptional
This is
is
architecture
of
"problem"
terms
of
issues
of
and quite exceptionally
period
which
in
there
has
been joined a vigorous debate about architectural poetics and
expressivity and nowhere does the document even marginally
acknowledge this.
The whole analysis is suffused with the
rhetoric of corporate enterprise.
production are
The means
of architectural
computer-aided design, team-playing, management -
emphasized
to
the
nearly
complete
disregard
of
Page #28
ends.
architecture's
humane,
poetic,
Nowhere does one read of the creation of
hectored
is
one
Instead,
environments.
constantly about the need to develop business skills
to meet
"changing" demand, whatever it might turn out to be.
I
shocking
find this
purports
to
and
hypothesis..
Second,
in
the architectural
of
future
to
investigation
its
confines
profession
a
single
supine willingness to promulgate a
its
eliminates the core of architecture
position that virtually
we've
of the
a study
be
First, in that it
on a number of levels.
known
historically
don't
I
it.
the
sound
to
mean
as
Luddite trumpet but the technocratization of the profession is
clearly
confronted.
currently
with which it's
not the only alternative
A report on the future of the profession might
well couch itself in terms of inventing strategies for the
preservation
of
increasing
offering
pressure
their
for
concerns
historic
of architecture's
the
in
light
instead
elimination
a focus on the dissipation of these ends.
of
Rather
than the dispassion of social homogeneity, a report might well
support the passions of creation.
I've
As I work through the various documents that
and formulate
my reactions
rising in myself.
analytic
propriety
I
to
them,
I
can feel
don't want to stray
but I
have
billed
these
collected
the anxiety
from the bounds of
pages
as
being
no
Page #29
bound to be
more than my own impressions and I therefore feel
study,
All this
all
been gone through
that's
And rituals, as everyone knows, have
ritual.
a
It's
before.
something
seems like
of the issues
and recharacterization
characterization
structuring,
that
those committees,
all
those interviews,
all
nothing to do with real investigation or change,
so
all
It's
do with stasis.
everything to
rituals have
like
hermetic,
The basic fact
the deck chairs on the Titanic.
rearranging
deja vu.
it's
At one level,
about what I'm feeling.
honest
seems to be that no amount of rearrangement of the same pieces
this
any serious reform of essential
in
can result
analysis
justifications
they're
seems
for
more
The
or
constellations
less
of
fesh
precisely as
are exactly
being looked at from a different
they're just
All
invention
the
about
be
doing things
done.
being
to
content.
part
the same,
of the sky.
What Is To Be Done?
One of
the things I learned when
I was at Harvard was the
tenacity with which mediocrity has a self-interest in its own
Things only began to change at that school when
reproduction.
a wholesale
purge was
somewhat different
core
MIT
is
a
more
in
motion.
although there's
ossification.
of
set
dynamic
The operation
one,
MIT's
a similarly
of
substituting
problem
seems
threatening
self-preservation
endless analysis
at
for
Page #30
simple
Nothing bears more
crying for serious change.
department is
self-analysis
voluminous
the
than
witness
conspicuous
that the
clear
to be
it seems
And yet
immobility.
represented in the welter of recent documents about what is to
is
question
The
done.
be
institutionalized self-analysis
situations
-
-
whether
action,
dramatic
as
instrument is
the
of
kind
this
whether
is
to be a substitute for
in
so
bureaucratic
many
to be a substitute
for
the
remedies
for
the
result.
to
place
my
hardly
it's
While
prescribe
legion difficulties that the various departmental
As these
impressions.
the Department
point up,
I'd
up,
pointed
have
reports
still
reports (and
venture
to
like
surveys and
the report of the
of Architecture
a serious
in
is
a
few
NAAB)
bind.
The physical and curricular dimensions of that bind need no
further
elaboration.
with
conflict
the object
eye,
the
fact
idea
that
of an
be
it must
faces,
any
"MIT
said that whatever
reverence
of no little
change
invisible.
new clothes.
More,
It's
must
Position"
that
strongly
come
is
into
held
This "position"
and fealty.
the MIT Position has come increasingly
emperor's
are
they
to the character of the Department.
central
is
the
by
exacerbated
Department
the
difficulties
However,
But to my
to resemble the
become so vague as to be nearly
although one gets the sense of holy writ,
it
Page #31
turns out to be a religion that lacks any codification of its
One is assured of its importance but nobody
sacred texts.
of the
many
Department's
debate.
of
MIT
refined
The
approach
assessed.
Yet I
fear this
do things
appear
to have
consensus
pluralist
components
seem dim.
model,
of
can
become,
this
means
In any event,
phrase about
in
a
truly
So fragmented
for practical
resignation
assault
perhaps a direct
and
light of
deficiencies be
prospects
the
profit the department
cannot help but
in the
Only
may be impossible.
Perhaps
the school.
the
about
singular
that's
is
what it
central issue
vigorously
should
department
to architecture.
this
view of
to engage
fails
it
This, it seems to me, should be the
discuss just
uninhibitedly
By confining itself to a list
deficiencies,
issue of its strengths.
focus
encountered
the discussion I've
all
sense that
this
in
is
misses the real point entirely.
the
style.
of
the poison
exposure.
and
It
it's
It shirks the tests of analysis
hidden.
it's
however,
Mainly,
a restricted
complex,
it's
social,
opposes
it
it's collage,
responsive,
it is beyond
it's
pieties:
overworked
of
number
the hell
say what
seems able to
on
to
a
specific
lines clearly drawn
the long run.
democracy requiring periodic
Jefferson had
a
fertilization
with the blood of patriots
to
keep
its
health.
Page #32
think that
A bloodbath may not be the answer at MIT but I
stress
Department values.
Reading
Clearly,
the
visiting
some
one that
dynamic element
to
view.
components.
This might
introduced.
must be
this
can be solved
familiar
by realigning
numerous
the
confirmation
lends
MIT's "problem" is
restructuring,
of
lines
the
between
documents only
I do not think that
internal
on
that things are very tense indeed at the level of
departmental
by
-
I had
sense
the
sufficiently
I cannot
is crucial.
dramatic exposure of tensions certainly
a'
be through the importation of a strong person on a horse though
recent
especially
shifts
in
through the arrival of independent
not
bode
to
seem
Equally, it might come
approach.
for that
well
do
leadership
and
strong
minded
faculty
who are not obliged to the institutional pieties of the place.
Certainly it must come from an opening of the department to
the
community, from an end to the period
larger architectural
of chronic
that
isolation
for so many years.
MIT has
even
enjoyed,
There's no question
at all
in
insisted
on,
my mind that
a new wind needs to blow down those corridors if
MIT is to
regain the stature and passion it should have.
Envoi
I've
been
asked
to append a few
courses of action
that
strike
specific
me as relevant
suggestions
or
about
desirable.
Page #33
MIT seems to be in
I have only one.
Basically,
school
architectural
becoming
an
design.
There's
Islamic
endowed
a handsomely
Center.
Studies
being
mad and which
like
recruiting
spent on a Media Center which is
everything but
A fortune is
has arrived.
A new Real Estate Institute
is
that teaches
the process of
about to move into a luxurious new building designed by a
big-time corporate architect.
the
coming
Departmental reports rail about
the Institute
computer culture as
wires itself up
Meanwhile, back in the studios, the
to invent the millennium.
same little complexes in timber continue to be drawn.
There's
into
Resources are poured
something absolutely crazy here.
everything
education:
but
the
the practical
What can I
environment.
central
study
of
fact of
the design of
the built
recommend?
That the
specifically
Media building be expropriated immediately for
design studios?
architectural
the use of the
That fifteen energetic design instructors
That new Dean be
immediately be added to the payroll?
sacked
in favor of a powerful person of known and widely expressed
design sympathies.
Would it be entirely out of place for a
great architect to head the school?
for
impassioned
designers
whenever they can be had?
None of this
numbers
large
instruction
unreasonable:
possible.
If
Would it be out of place
of
the question is
my observations
of
simply whether
current
trends
to
it
are
offer
would be
would
be
correct,
Page #34
MIT seems to be in the process of designing itself out of the
teaching
reversed.
and cultivation
of architecture.
The trend must be