Saturday, July 03, 2010

Conditions Mag: The Future of Competitions - Tell Them What They Need

Architectural Competitions are usually seen as a technique for unknowns to make a name for themselves, for clients to collect solutions to specific problems or to stave off the boredom of the 9-5 (I loathe Construction Administration work). Lately, while open competitions have arguably been thought a fine way to discover the best starting solution for a client's particular need, the economic downturn has made competition extremely fierce (which is fine) yet also meant that the overtly pragmatic cadence has increased, that is the proffered solutions are more intent on merely complying to the competition brief (with an eye solely on winning) in lieu of experimentation and risk which furthers the profession as a whole.

Conditions magazine is asking for solutions to re-examining architecture competitions in order to alleviate the strain of merely winning the competition.

Ironically this request is held in competition format.

Proposals can be submitted in practically any available format (unavailable formats, ie. from the future or prehistory, may not apply). It should result in a good romp of ideas and I look forward to pondering my own submission (with the proper libation of course) that will save the noble open competition.

Historically the architectural competition has been a testing ground for new ideas. It was understood as a space in which research and development, as well as the creation of critical architectural proposals, were possible. Today, competition architecture has increasingly become a service provision for the jury and a fulfillment of the technical requirements of the brief – in other words, simply what is needed to win the competition. Needs are generating ideas whereas ideas should be generating needs. The outcome is often predictable and conventional, stripping competitions of their significance as a critical tool.

Stimulus
- What needs to be changed, and how, in order to make competitions once again a tool for generating new ideas?
- What can be changed to improve the interaction between commissioner, client and end-user in the competition process?
- How do the mechanisms of competitions affect the built environment?
- What is the potential of architecture competitions?

THIS TIME YOU ASK THE QUESTIONS AND YOU GIVE THE ANSWERS

This competition attempts to instigate change by challenging the established in a critical but constructive manner. Join us by contributing the questions not yet asked!There are no fixed requirements regarding submitted material. Entries could be in the form of a text, manifesto, collage, illustration, SMS, image, fax, diagram, installation, paper architecture, runners up, brief, historical material, etc. The essential idea is to explore the potential of the architectural competition – it is up to you how to communicate it. Please address the principle question of how to return to a condition where competitions generate ideas rather than simply deliver solutions. The format and material should be in relation to the concept of your submission.

We challenge experienced architects to take part and share their perspective on the matter.

The jury

- Boris Brorman Jensen (DK), architect, associate professor Ã…rhus, Ph.D, Harvard fellow.
- Gary Bates (NO / USA), architect, teacher and curator, founding partner of Spacegroup
- Markus Miessen (GE / GBR), professor, architect, writer, curator, founding partner of nOffice and Studio Miessen.

The entries will be judged anonymously.

Submitted material should reach us by the 1st of November 2010

submission@conditionsmagazine.com
CONDITIONS ANS, Fjordveien 3, 0139 Oslo, Norway
T: +47 97183747

Questions: info@conditionsmagazine.com
(answers to questions will be posted on this website)

1st prize: 2.500 euro
Winner & Runner-ups will:
- be published in a special competition issue of CONDITIONS
- take part in a Scandinavian exhibition
- take part in a dialogue how to implement your ideas


Resources:

Conditions Competition Website

Competition Flyer (.pdf)

Why Open Architecture Competitions are good for Architects (a counter argument)

Why Open Architecture Competitions Are Bad for Architects