"Time to Rock The Boat" - John Bentley Mays

[TonyV]

Granted I've been away from Toronto off and on during August and September, but I did catch this article and I'm surprised that no one here commented on it. Or maybe I missed it, maybe it's in some other section (moderators?). Thanks.

JBM speaks of a disturbing silence on architecture these days. Any comments?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/real-estate/its-time-to-rock-the-boat/article1282344/

 

[Urban Shocker]

Thank goodness some architects aren't afraid of plain speaking or of ruffling a few feathers when necessary - either with Mayne in their sights or when faced with underwhelming entries for Urban Design Awards.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Too true, though it would be nice to hear some of Jack's comments towards Mayne. If the rule to which Bentley Mays refers exists, even if it is a mere 'gentlemans' agreement,' it certainly speaks to the climate of design in Toronto: A few firms knocking out excellent, contextually appropriate buildings amid a slew of me-first Kirkor's who seem intent on competing for who can most egregiously misuse the architectural details of the past.

 

[Urban Shocker]

That "gentlemen's agreement" rarely seems to break down, even at parties where everyone has had a few to drink. I think it's a holdover from when architecture as a professionally organized body got going here over a century ago. American architects were getting many of the the plum commissions, new forms ( the office building, the apartment building .. ) were coming across the border with them - along with new construction methods - and Ontario architects had to come up with an effective way of promoting local talent. Circle the wagons, raise professional standards ... and don't be too critical of "our" guys.

 

[Hipster Duck]

JBM has a point: the Toronto architecture community is rather incestuous and having most architects belong to one umbrella organization like the OAA stifles any opportunity to really rock the boat. It's not really their fault, though. Belonging to a professional organization with connections is often a prerequisite to professional success. What I would suggest to counteract this is for somebody to create a splinter group that represents architects with a different sort of vision; at least a group of "secessionists", some of them high profile, would have to band together to get it really started.

While I appreciate the Toronto architecture community's rather unified vision of late-century modernism, sometimes you have to invite a few dissenting crazies to get a party really started. I would love to see architects with competing aesthetic ideas - even representatives of architectural styles that I'm not too crazy of, like postmodernism - come in and challenge the establishment. Through all this back-and-forth bickering and shouting, I think a heightened discourse would emerge, and maybe even a new, architectural style.