Firmitas, utilitas, venustas. How about, amare, passionis, affectum as a bare minimum, Mr. Vitruvius?

 

Szymon Wojciechowski for Architecture Snob Magazine #2

 

Was the stern’s Roman intention to see the architecture only as dignified, solemn and respectable and completely undisturbed by fleeting affairs of love? Or did he simply know how much of slave-stonecutter’s sweat and hate had stained each volute and groove of the ionic colonnade?

 

We will never know for sure, but I suspect that as the wise man that Vitruvious was, he knew that the passions and feelings should be well balanced in the field of architecture with experience, knowledge and hard work.

 

In our times Glenn Murcutt used to tell his students that they must ‘put into their work firstly effort, secondly love and thirdly – suffering’. Please, note that love is safely sandwiched between other qualities.

 

It is stating the obvious that the best outcome results from the mix of love and hard work, passion and professionalism, art and craftsmanship. Unfortunately, this holy balance does not happen as often. But when it does, it leads to the pieces of architecture that we celebrate, we publish, we enjoy to discuss. These are the trendsetters of architecture. Sometimes even masterpieces.

 

But then again, two questions spring into my mind. The first one is: can we, practicing architects, really say that love is ever-present in our designs?

 

In my case the honest answer is: we practically always start with love, passion and enthusiasm. But so often the Murcutt’s middle layer – love – starts to dwindle, wear down and disappear between effort and suffering. Time pressure, overworking, excessive client’s demands, personal conflicts, ‘value engineering’, bureaucracy… We are all familiar with these love-eating monsters.

 

We are painfully aware what might or rather will happen and always manage to avoid turning love into hate. Or at least: almost always. We try to achieve it by implementing and cultivating the team work spirit. The design team works as a mental support group, if somebody is hit hard by reality there is a chance that somebody picks up and carries further the flame of love.

 

The first defense line in securing the quality of the design or a project is by wearing the cold shield of professionalism. We bear in mind what Herman Hertzenberg said: ‘If you think you cannot make the world a better place with your work, at least make sure you don’t make it worse’.

 

Someone might point out (and they would be right): this is a shameless minimalistic approach and this is definitely not enough!

 

Here comes my second question: does the trendsetting architecture really decide about the public space quality?

 

I feel that in Poland but also in many other countries the problem of the man-made landscape is not the lack of high-end architecture. The source of damage lies in the omnipresence of low-quality standard, every-day architecture which may be created with or without love, but definitely unprofessionally. The overall architecture and public space perception is so different in, let’s say, Finland and other Nordic countries. It has such high esteem because there are practically no buildings below a certain level of design quality.

 

Our architectural world tends to concentrate on the best 2-5% of what is constructed. We are creating artificial bubbles and trying hard not to notice the reality around us. This may be one of the reasons why the majority of the population is so silent and so indifferent to our discussions and our values as the architects and designers. They are perfectly aware of the discrepancy between the values we preach and what we in reality construct.

 

Too sad to be true? Well, I rather see the sea of opportunities and ways for creating change. First stop: surrounding the precious love by bodyguards of professionalism.