What makes good architecture or a good architect? Architecture is often judged by aesthetics, but this does not always distinguish one architect from another, nor a good one from a bad one.
What does the licensure, the regulations, and contractual systems that surround architecture cause? How do these legal mechanisms allow architects to be accountable, to have a duty to the public, and guide a decision-making process, regardless of whether they are good or bad?
We want to redefine - or at least clarify - the good of architecture and the way we see architecture as a framework through which to affect change; or any other functions of the profession, that we perhaps don’t currently recognise. We see the profession as a construct that requires robust and productive critical discourse, to evolve, and to do good.

01 THE GOOD

We are interested in The Good and Bad of Architecture. 

What it is…What it effects … and how it does what it does.

But also….What it does it not do…and….What it needs to do.

To architects, Architecture is an activity – that is in PRACTISE. This is different to describing it or reflecting upon the discipline/profession. When we describe architecture we are looking at it as a subject. 

We see great value and importance in describing practice, to understand what it is that architects do.

To architects, Architecture is an activity – that is its PRACTISE. This is acquired through training , A good architect is one that has acquired the necessary skills of an architect. 

This is different to describing it or reflecting upon the discipline/profession. When we describe architecture, we are looking at it as a subject. 

The challenge for us has been to develop the concepts and language to recognise what we do.
The description of practice forces a discussion that we rarely find within the context of practice and the profession. 

We are interested in a discussion that differs markedly from that of the member organisations that represent Architects. to the schools of architecture, the appointed boards such as ARBV, and the findings of the courts and tribunals or to the charter’s laws and instruments that ….

We see issues arise in practice, as a consequence of the profession not having access to the necessary concepts of architecture practice in this framework.

A good example was novation, which seemed to be a question of how we think about the client. Not so much about the responsibility of the client but as to who the client was.  In the Lacrosse Fire it was thought that in novation the client had been the developer, Zacamoco and that it had then became the builder LU Simon

The member Justice Woodward found that in novation the obligation to the client is not altered. The client was neither the developer nor the builder, but the occupants described by the building codes that on the night of the fire who fled the apartments and escaped via the fire stairs. 

For this we need to recognise what laws exist and who they apply to. The architect's act is a law that applies to Architects. It requires them to act in certain way, to attain a greater good, and it enables them to do this.

When we discuss good architecture, we are first talking of it in context of where it first appears – that is, in the Charter of Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) – which states; ‘The institute and its member are to act… for the good of the city’. That said we recognise that the link between concepts of beauty and ‘good architecture’ has always existed throughout history and continues to be a useful criterion. 

At the same time, we need to be having another discussion on the ‘good project’ which values the process of architecture and its potential to achieve ‘greater good’. With this understanding, the work of the architect is to conceptualise how these two are linked to each ot

Notes

02 HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH A ‘GOOD’ ARCHITECT?

We are interested in The Good and Bad of Architecture. 

What it is…What it effects … and how it does what it does.

But also….What it does it not do…and….What it needs to do.

To architects, Architecture is an activity – that is in PRACTISE. This is different to describing it or reflecting upon the discipline/profession. When we describe architecture we are looking at it as a subject. 

We see great value and importance in describing practice, to understand what it is that architects do.

To architects, Architecture is an activity – that is its PRACTISE. This is acquired through training , A good architect is one that has acquired the necessary skills of an architect. 

This is different to describing it or reflecting upon the discipline/profession. When we describe architecture, we are looking at it as a subject. 

The challenge for us has been to develop the concepts and language to recognise what we do.
The description of practice forces a discussion that we rarely find within the context of practice and the profession. 

We are interested in a discussion that differs markedly from that of the member organisations that represent Architects. to the schools of architecture, the appointed boards such as ARBV, and the findings of the courts and tribunals or to the charter’s laws and instruments that ….

We see issues arise in practice, as a consequence of the profession not having access to the necessary concepts of architecture practice in this framework.

A good example was novation, which seemed to be a question of how we think about the client. Not so much about the responsibility of the client but as to who the client was.  In the Lacrosse Fire it was thought that in novation the client had been the developer, Zacamoco and that it had then became the builder LU Simon

The member Justice Woodward found that in novation the obligation to the client is not altered. The client was neither the developer nor the builder, but the occupants described by the building codes that on the night of the fire who fled the apartments and escaped via the fire stairs. 

For this we need to recognise what laws exist and who they apply to. The architect's act is a law that applies to Architects. It requires them to act in certain way, to attain a greater good, and it enables them to do this.

When we discuss good architecture, we are first talking of it in context of where it first appears – that is, in the Charter of Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) – which states; ‘The institute and its member are to act… for the good of the city’. That said we recognise that the link between concepts of beauty and ‘good architecture’ has always existed throughout history and continues to be a useful criterion. 

At the same time, we need to be having another discussion on the ‘good project’ which values the process of architecture and its potential to achieve ‘greater good’. With this understanding, the work of the architect is to conceptualise how these two are linked to each ot

Notes

03 HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH A ‘GOOD’PERSON FROM A ‘GOOD’ ARCHITECT?

We are interested in The Good and Bad of Architecture. 

What it is…What it effects … and how it does what it does.

But also….What it does it not do…and….What it needs to do.

To architects, Architecture is an activity – that is in PRACTISE. This is different to describing it or reflecting upon the discipline/profession. When we describe architecture we are looking at it as a subject. 

We see great value and importance in describing practice, to understand what it is that architects do.

To architects, Architecture is an activity – that is its PRACTISE. This is acquired through training , A good architect is one that has acquired the necessary skills of an architect. 

This is different to describing it or reflecting upon the discipline/profession. When we describe architecture, we are looking at it as a subject. 

The challenge for us has been to develop the concepts and language to recognise what we do.
The description of practice forces a discussion that we rarely find within the context of practice and the profession. 

We are interested in a discussion that differs markedly from that of the member organisations that represent Architects. to the schools of architecture, the appointed boards such as ARBV, and the findings of the courts and tribunals or to the charter’s laws and instruments that ….

We see issues arise in practice, as a consequence of the profession not having access to the necessary concepts of architecture practice in this framework.

A good example was novation, which seemed to be a question of how we think about the client. Not so much about the responsibility of the client but as to who the client was.  In the Lacrosse Fire it was thought that in novation the client had been the developer, Zacamoco and that it had then became the builder LU Simon

The member Justice Woodward found that in novation the obligation to the client is not altered. The client was neither the developer nor the builder, but the occupants described by the building codes that on the night of the fire who fled the apartments and escaped via the fire stairs. 

For this we need to recognise what laws exist and who they apply to. The architect's act is a law that applies to Architects. It requires them to act in certain way, to attain a greater good, and it enables them to do this.

When we discuss good architecture, we are first talking of it in context of where it first appears – that is, in the Charter of Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) – which states; ‘The institute and its member are to act… for the good of the city’. That said we recognise that the link between concepts of beauty and ‘good architecture’ has always existed throughout history and continues to be a useful criterion. 

At the same time, we need to be having another discussion on the ‘good project’ which values the process of architecture and its potential to achieve ‘greater good’. With this understanding, the work of the architect is to conceptualise how these two are linked to each ot

Notes