Architecture Anonymous?

And so I write this, in this modern day and age, in the age of me-ness, where the individual is king. Instant gratification, instant satisfaction - that’s the buzz that’s been circulating the globe. It comes as no surprise or novelty that I say that architecture has become victim to that too. Architecture with a capital A. But everyone knows that this is only the case for the big architects; the starchitects, as they’ve been aptly coined. Whatever happened to the everyday architect?

Well on one hand you might argue that for starchitects to exist, there must be some level of anonymity and mediocrity to balance their fame, fortune and ingenuity. Yet many will tell you, that behind some of that glitz and glamour lies, if you can believe it, nothing. The many glimmering projects that you see rising in Beijing and Dubai are no more than gargantuan trophies that are mere spectacle, chosen over the solid and good architectural design that we’ve been taught to respect and emulate throughout our lives in the academic studio.

We aren’t heading towards an attitude of anti-big-architecture here. Most contrary, we’d sing the praises of good, grand architecture any day. Falling prey to the postmodernist consumerism tendencies of this our present time however, has been one of the cardinal sins that some architects have committed. The everyday architect, that we know and expect, strives to bring good design under the roofs of the everyman who hires him. Good design is actually out there. Yet the reality is that big architecture is skewing the perspectives of the general public, and giving the wrong impression when it comes to answering the question: what is design?

Do people know the merits of good design? Who practices it? Shouldn’t good architecture be rewarded with some basic recognition? You would think so.

And so it is in Singapore’s burgeoning condominium scene, where the only big names in the game are, really, the real estate corporations. They are aplenty on this tiny city-state, including Far East Organization, Hong Leong Corporation, Wing Tai Asia, Jones-Lang LaSalle, Keppel Land, SC Global, Frasers Centrepoint, Habitat Properties… the list goes on. These - are the big players, believe it or not, in Singaporean architecture.

Take a minute to visit the REDAS (Real Estate Development Association of Singapore) website and you’ll come across the ‘New Homes’ section on the main page, showing glossy, airbrushed images of spanking new condominiums with supermarket-sale-style graphic explosions proclaiming each project as ‘NEW!’. You then proceed to click on any one of the virtual brochure links provided, arriving at colorful flash websites with flickering buttons, aimed at squeezing dollars out of every last square foot of what someone will soon be calling home. It’s perfect money making genius; and every thing is wired like a bank. Only one question remains: where is the architect in all this?

On the other side of the world, in gritty Manhattan, New York, money is no less a commodity. In fact, if anything, money makes Manhattan go round. Property in New York isn’t cheap; especially if you’re living on Manhattan Island, the much-purported centre-of-the-world. Here however, people have decided that if you’re going to live it up, you’d be better off with something designed by a World Famous Master Architect.

Maybe Architect XYZ could do the job; on the contrary, it could very well be Master Architect ABC of the globally acclaimed firm, 123; just that it might cost a little bit more for that level of design and ingenuity. You must be wondering: What am I getting at? It’s simple. There is so much more recognition and acknowledgement for quality design in other parts of the world.

Take this example of Manhattan, where every other up-and-coming condominium is pegged to the name of a renowned practice, like Ateliers Jean Nouvel (40 Mercer Street), Herzog and de Meuron (40 Bond Street), or Enrique Norton from TEN Arquitectos. The reality is that people are attracted to quality design; and having proven names like this behind such projects add heft and reassurance to the developer’s sales pitch. But does it?

What do people look at when they see an advertisement for a new apartment block? What catches the eye? Could it be good looks, or good bargains? It’s hard to ignore the bread and butter issues; and so money is probably a no-brainer in the criteria. But a market catering to those who can actually afford a condominium in Singapore, (or London, Shanghai or South Korea for that matter) could also afford to assume more affluently-informed choice-making from its buyers. The situation now is far from this, though it has been showing encouraging developments of late (mind the pun).

Let’s take a recent development in Singapore’s comfortable District 10 area, the Duchess Residences by United Overseas Land (UOL) and Low Keng Huat (Singapore) Ltd. ‘Refining the art of tranquility amidst modernity’, and ‘Where the modern and nature co-exist’ are just some of the catchy phrases used. Artist’s impressions are provided, which in actual fact are painstakingly created renderings produced by architects. The project looks good; and it’s not your run-of-the-mill cookie cutter, wedding cake design. However, there is no mention of the design architect, or the real reasons why it constitutes a good design – the result is an ignorance of why design is actually called design. Ask many people what design means – and they’ll tell you its clean lines, nice colors, and maybe unique features. Many will say they prefer ‘less-designed’ things, things that are simple and ‘not too flashy’ – as you might infer, people don’t even know what design means.

So, to realign this argumentative, the main point of contention isn’t that we should always acknowledge condominium architects – of course it would be great if you had a famous architect on board to add incremental value to your development. Face it; until you’ve made a name for yourself as a proven design and architectural force, no one’s going to put your name up there for advertisement value. (However, note that if every project were actually required to have its architect publicly mentioned; architects would have huge added responsibility and motivation to ensure good, solid work!)

I think the real argument is that people do not have any inkling as to what actual design is; especially in a place like Singapore where design is thought of as something ‘out of the ordinary’; and not, as real design is, very well thought through. It is a common misconception; one that should be corrected very soon.

Already, we can give much credit to governmental bodies such as the DesignSingapore Council, who earlier this year introduced a competition to the public, named 10 Touchpoints of Design. Early stages of the competition had the public vote for the top 10 public amenities (i.e. post boxes, sidewalks, public railings, bus stops, to name a few) which they thought could be redesigned. The later stage of the competition would see local Singaporean designers vying for the chance to redesign these amenities. Winners would get to see their designs produced and implemented. This, DesignSingapore hopes, would help raise the public’s awareness of the value and implications of good design. The designers themselves would be acknowledged, of course, each given his fifteen minutes of fame.

Designers have always had to prove themselves before recognition; and today this notion is even more relevant and important, as designers increasingly emerge as brand names themselves with signature products to market. We all know how important it is to be recognized. But in Singapore, and in much of Asia, condominiums will probably continue to sell with developers as their brand names, and not their designers. This could mean a few things: either developers aren’t acknowledging good design; people don’t see the value of real, good design; or the architects aren’t doing a good job.

I believe in the talent and quality that architects here have, however, until the fundamental aspects of real, good, solid design are brought to the general public in full detail and demonstration, architects and designers will remain anonymous. Which brings us to back to square one: Should architects maintain anonymity?

JJ is the co-founder of 5ft Creatives and he is now a legal alien in the USA