Age in architecture

Who could find fault with the atmosphere created at Fourth_Space’s Negroni Talks? Good pasta, good drinks, and good discussion: who could be disappointed? I certainly was not.

Our recent participation on age and Architecture brought to the surface pertinent issues facing the profession. Some of which are, dare I say, are age old. To set the scene, Negroni Talks begin with a provocation and asks invited speakers to chime to offer their POV, experiences, etc. then the floor is opened to the audience. All this while enjoying a nice meal and a glass of your favourite.

I was taken by several points of view related to a sense of frustration and disappointment with stifled opportunities for young Architects. This was perhaps best articulated by Bushra Mohamed (Msoma Architects), that far too often Clients, rather than equating youth to vibrancy, dynamic thinking, and opportunity, deem youth to mean inexperience and risk. Bushra finds that her practice is too often relegated wing position to larger practices which, although provides credible experience, permits full authorship of design.

Neil Pinder of HomeGrown plus underlined the dilemma that society is placing on young students where systems prevent young people from “failing small”. Neil goes further to say that only through failing small, stumbling, and yes falling, do we absorb lessons and create life experiences. 

Sarah Wigglesworth reflected on her career in building her studio and the challenges of providing a platform for young female voices. When poised to discuss studio succession to the next gen, Sarah’s experience was that her younger staff preferred to forego taking the reigns as the difficulties of running an office were too challenging. To this Sarah pondered if there was a degree of risk aversion within the next generation itself compared to her generation.

This opened an interesting, and at times polarised, discussion of age, voice, and financial reward. Several younger Architects expressed feelings of a lack of exposure to tangible career building experience with insufficient financial recognition as being a common thread. The audience discussed the profession’s historical reliance on “youth” as a motor for exploration which at times boarders on exploitation.

I offered my thoughts on the professions’ tendency to undervalue one’s experience up until the age of 35, then re-evaluate an Architects commercial viability once they reach age 50. This leads to a fall-off of knowledge and a loss of mentoring for younger Architects. Personally, I think our profession has a significant issue in understanding the value of the mature Architect, the importance of knowledge transfer and the criticality of sharing knowledge and experiences.

Claire Bennie, from Municipal, summarised it as the profession’s three cycles: 15 years learning, 15 years of doing, and 15 years of “giving back” through teaching. I agree with Claire’s triple tranche view of an Architect’s career and can see the value of how each of these cycles has led to my own career decisions.

All in all, I enjoyed the discussion and will certainly be attending other Negroni Talks.