Like most, I have heard the claims Mr. Pitt has made about his "passion" for architecture and his pretensions to design but had decided to ignore this ridiculous issue till I read an article in which the author compared Pitt to Le Corbusier and Mies van der rohe in the context that like Pitt, they didn't have a formal architecture education. What? Pitt should not be mentioned in the same sentence as these architects as he has not even had any sufficient experience in the field. This is obvious as some of the few Pitt designed buildings in the project, "Make it right" have materials that are off-gassing!First of all please, let me say here and now that architecture is not art! Being an architect is not about making pretty, purely conceptual drawings without having the faintest idea about what the structural system is going to be, the potential occupant experience or where the HVAC ducts and systems will go, among a myriad of other things. If this were not the case, any first year architecture student could come up with a design and hope that some competent engineers could make it work.
It is important to note that this whole love of architecture from Brad started about a few years back after he asked Frank Gehry to redesign one of his mansions. The two became good friends after that and I guess from hanging out with Gehry, Pitt began to think that he had some talent too. In that same light, I guess since I have met with many psychologists and studied personality typology in relation to the psychology of architecture, I could claim to be a clinical psychologist myself.
So if Brad wants to contribute financially to projects then that's all well and good, but for him to go to the White House and be touted around by Nancy Pelosi as "a hero" when his designs have basically been cleaned up by more experienced practices such as MVRDV, Shigeru Ban and Morphosis is ridiculous and unfair. I have heard opinions that Mr Pitt is good for the image of the profession and can use his fame to finance architectural projects and get goverment´s attention to raise millions of dollars, something that lots of architects would really like to do anyway. I don't have any problem with this except if Mr Pitt limited his actions to financing and didn't have pretensions to being an architect.
Images obtained from: www. archiblog.info
For more info, check: blog.miragestudio7.com/2008/02/brad-pitt-and-the-pink-project-in-new-orleans/
2 comments:
Well stated. I believe that it is fine for Mr. Pitt to fashion himself a benefactor for architecture and play the role of patron to the many architectural causes he supports. Like you, the issue I have is that while he may want to be a designer, unless he goes back to university and takes his AREs, he will never be an Architect.
In today's world, architecture is no longer a gentleman's profession picked up through a dutiful apprenticeship period and a tour of Europe. Instead it is a long protracted battle against bureaucratic benchmarks, internship with non-benefactors, and salaries that never make up for the cost of your education until one day you win the ability to be held legally liable for millions of dollars worth of construction delays and liquidated damages not to mention a guardian of the public's health safety and welfare all for a fraction of what other legally sanctioned professionals make. It is a hard uphill battle with little rewards, and so help me if some hollywood dilettante is going to cheapen those two letters after my name that I am still fighting to be legally able to use (RA).
Thank you. I couldn't have put it better!
Post a Comment