The Airing Architectures Dirty Laundry Series: #01 GREENWASHING

The science is clear on the construction industry, it's one of the biggest polluters and contributors to climate destruction. There is more and more of a push for projects, practices and the whole built environment to be sustainable, but even a term such as that can make the  industry's path to real change unclear. With 'Sustainable' being used to describe everything from stuck-on solar panels, net-zero airports to open-plan offices, good and bad intentions can easily blur and the planet is no better off for it. 

That's where questions, and more often accusations, of Greenwashing come in. Though grassroots organisations, community groups, press and commentators on social media can see through marketing speak, without regulation developers can use cosmetic green credentials to secure tenants and sail through planning, an architect can proudly cycle to MIPIM to pick up emissions heavy work and a glass skyscraper can be awarded a BREEAM rating and everyone pats themselves on the back with little to no consequences.

How can we really tackle the climate emergency in a way that makes the difference needed? What model should we use to judge a buildings success? Who loses out from ineffective Greenwashing?

Featuring:

Maria Smith, Buro Happold
Angela Dapper, Grimshaw
Sabrina Syed, Arch designer & writer
Joe Giddings, Architects Climate Action Network

amongst others….

Negroni Talk #27 - 25th February 2021

Beatniks, punks and other countercultures were borne out of a restless discontent with the status quo and a desire to shift ideologies for new generations. These ideas and movements manifested themselves through art, music and literature but architecture has trodden a safer creative path. Rebellious architects appeared from time to time but what is their legacy today? Can the industry shake off its timid approach and demonstrate that buildings can affect real change?

 

Speakers:

Tim Abrahams, Architecture Critic (chair)
Piers Taylor, Invisible Studio
Charles Holland, Charles Holland Architects
Shumi Bose, Central St Martins
Caz Facey, Ing Media

Negroni Talk #3 – Where’s the punk in architecture ?

The Recognitions (architecture’s gentrification guilt)

Vyner Street is a locus for the shifting identity of London’s East End. Artists and creatives moved into the area and integrated themselves into the local culture and communities. However, their arrival was a catalyst for regenerative change that they didn’t necessarily want. Architects play a key role in this economic shift and are still present in Hackney and Tower Hamlets. Should they take a stronger position in the development of the area and the way it affects the original communities and the few remaining artists?  

 

Speakers: 

Dr. Jane Clossick, London Metropolitan University (chair)
Cullinan Richards, Artists
Torange Khonsari, Public Works
Dr. Elanor Warwick, Clarion Housing Group
Cordula Weisser, ZCD Architects

Negroni Talk #2 The Recognitions (architecture’s gentrification guilt)

Having provoked debates interrogating all things “Architectural” from its base in east London, “Negroni talks…!” is hitting the road to discover how the Politics Of Architecture plays out in other parts of the UK. Heading North, South, East and West, The Negroni Talks On the Road Tour aims to hold ‘4 talks in 4 towns’, taking a look at what’s happening on the ground by focusing on local factors that shape the built environment, and what this means for it’s inhabitants.  

In overview, the Series presents essentially the same discussion in each of the places visited. This repetition is a means to spotlight differences, but also those areas of similarity between urban environments to make comparisons at a national scale. The fabric of each village, town and city across the land stands as a witness to the fallibility of decision-making where private agendas and the public interest collide. Recording the passage of time in material forms, every built landscape provides its own version of a common history - namely the cause and effect impact that buildings and property have as a political player. 

The talk series poses a series of questions to prompt the discussions:

Process: Building is a simple act with an abundance of complexities. What are the fundamental flaws in the current overall system by which buildings are created?  

Planning: A broken system suffering from a distinct lack of vision? Does it address need and if so whose? As a reactive body, does it have the ability, the will, or the funding to ensure that beyond the concerns of the individual, there is a grander master plan? 

Policy: Is there a lack of assertiveness, a lack of confidence, a lack of knowledge or a lack of ideas on how to carefully harness market forces for the common good?

Permission: Who decides? Are the interests & the imagination of those who say yes or no, broad enough? 

Playing the game: Who sets the rules and is breaking them the only way to build what is really needed?

Procurement: Finance tends to dominate discussions about delivery and determines (and often limits) the scope of what is possible? So, what of our ambition? What could be? 

Potential: Where and how is it being wasted?

Place-making:  Can new buildings offer a necessary variety so that they serve all demographics in society and assist in creating more collective spirited communities in the future? 

Progressiveness:  How do you create processes where quality and invention are expected and not hoped for?

Performance: How do you ensure that all buildings contribute socially & environmentally? 

Past Problems: The built environment offers lessons on mistakes made. It illustrates what works, what has time proven longevity and where ideas/experiments have failed. With the benefit of hindsight, are we clear in what we are doing and what we need to avoid? 

Purpose: What is the point of building? Should we ask this before we do anything?

Planet: Can ‘development opportunity’ become redefined so that new building is allied more with existing built fabric?

Power: How can heritage, identity and representation be used positively to decentralize, diversify and empower?

Politics: Despite the posturing and of our politicians and the promotion of Britain as ‘Great’, are our built environments blighted by a national malaise and if so what can be done to overcome this?

#A2 The Politics Of Architecture Series: BRISTOL

Negroni Talks N°5 Podcast

Thick As A Brick: Dis Honesty And Architecture…

Over years of architectural and building history, the approach to design has frequently been supported by claims of being honest to material, form and context. This becomes a polemic when encompassed into architectural styles and genres: Hi-Tech wears its heart on its sleeve; Modernism, from the roots of classicism, follows function to a degree; and Post Modernism masks and plays games with little care as to whether there is honesty or dishonesty in the styling of buildings.
 
Marked by increasing amounts of financial and political constraints in the UK, progress in  new architectural style and form has become limited. Architects continue to tell us how important they are and fight to illustrate how ethical, or how honest they are to their projects. Is there any truth in the claim that the fashion for a rational pared down aesthetic is any more authentic than the decorative motifs of the past? Architects join forces with developers to PR spin their designs, but surely commercial viability is more straightforward than a fetish for ideology over purpose. Is there possibility in this current age of ‘Fake News’, for  architects to proudly embrace a dishonest design approach and cheat the constraints of the system? How thick is your brick?

Speakers:

Will Hurst, Architects’ Journal (Chair)
Amin Taha, Groupwork
Jo Cowen, Jo Cowen Architects 
Simon Allford, Allford Hall Monaghan Morris
Sean Griffiths, Prof. of Architecture, freelance artist & architect

Negroni Talk #7 Thick As A Brick: Dis Honesty And Architecture…

Fail Safe, Safe Fail, Fail Better!

In engineering and design, a fail-safe is a system that mitigates  further harm or failure. Mistakes, bad decisions and a lack of skill can  cause great harm to projects at any point in the process and architects  often have to step in with their fail-safes. This can involve taking  the blame, sorting the problem or even reversing the fail into something  positive.
 
Though there are many ways to define the success of a  building (PR spin, fees, satisfied clients/users) failure persists and  practices continue as architecture and design always comes second to  financial or political constraints. Counter to this, there are  spectacular and popular pieces of architecture full of failure that are  meekly accepted by the user. In this context, is failing safely working  for architecture?
 
Failure is a part of everyday as designers of  the built environment, so should there be a new discourse on our  achievements, frustrated projects and failed masterpiece? Should we be  more open about them? Can we learn from failure? Or do we continue, in  our fear of being classed as ‘bad architects’, to default into a future  of safe fails?

Speakers:

Tim Abrahams, journalist (Chair)
Carl Turner, Carl Turner Architects
Jane Wernick, engineersHRW 
Valentina Miceli, WilkinsonEyre
Nile Bridgeman, Afterparti

Negroni Talk #8 Fail Safe, Safe Fail, Fail Better!

I’m So Bored With The RIBA: Irrelevance Institutionalised?

Everyone loves taking a swipe at the RIBA. Either it's out of date, too bureaucratic, too ineffective, too expensive, too London centric and lacking diversity or all of the above. Yet with 44,000 members, the RIBA falls into the same difficulty as other British institutions such as the BBC and NHS and being so large that it's an impossible task to keep everyone happy.

The RIBA is still extremely prolific and internationally respected with it's Code of Conduct being seen as a gold standard for architects and a busy yearly programme of awards, competitions, lectures, workshops, exhibitions and community outreach and engagement. At it's heart it's an opt-in members organisation so if it's not for you there's no reason to join. But as a touchstone of British architecture surely it should be listening to valid criticisms from members and those outside?

So what do people actually want from RIBA? What changes would be best? Who is it trying to please and what other organisations are doing it better?

Speakers:

Helen Parton, Journalist (Chair)
Elsie Owusu OBE, RIBA Council National
Russell Curtis, RCka
Zoe Berman, Studio Berman/ Part W Collective
Stephanie Edwards, Urban Symbiotics/ RIBA Londo

Negroni Talks N°9 I’m So Bored With The RIBA: Irrelevance Institutionalised?

Londons Borderlands: Territorial Pissings?

(Borderlands: Boundaries Within The City State)

London is a wonderful metropolis but those that live and work in  the city know that it is really the congregation of many different  fiefdoms. Each place abides by its own rules and cherishes its own  identity. There is no such things as a Londoner; people identify with  their local community, as well as the physical context and history of  their surroundings.

This brand of fierce localism has a knock-on effect for  architecture and planning but what happens to the places that fall  between the gaps? Boroughs care less about the impact of something they  build on their neighbour. Also, borders provide uncertainty about  responsibility for particular areas and the populations that live there.  Boundaries can therefore give rise to neglected landscapes but they  also provide huge opportunities for innovation and experimentation. The  Boundary Estate changed social housing for generations, can we use  hidden hinterlands to create a better city? 

Speakers:

Martyn Evans, U+I (Chair)
Sarah Featherstone, Featherstone Young
Selina Mason, Lendlease
Pooja Agrawal, Public Practice
Mark Brearley, The Cass Cities

Negroni Talks N°10 Londons Borderlands: Territorial Pissings?

Mind The Gap: The Chasm Between Practice And Education

After years spent designing wondrous master-plans for fictional cities, debating the rights and wrongs of the Frankfurt School and churning out thousands of words on the subject - architects leave university to find themselves working on technical details for perfunctory spaces in massive practices.

Surely given the length of time needed and the tens of thousands of pounds spent in the process, Universities could better prepare students for the realities of the professional world?

With all the differing schools of architecture in London and no  shortage of tutors who are architects themselves, why is there this gap between study and practice and what is the best route into the profession? Or is the value and responsibility of an education more than just setting students up for a lifetime of practice?

Speakers:

Laura Mark, Walmer Yard (Chair) 
Eva Franch i Gilabert, Architectural Association
Jeremy Till, Central Saint Martins
Harriet Harriss, RCA
John McElgunn, Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners: RSHP

Negroni Talks N°11 Mind The Gap: The Chasm Between Practice And Education

‘Affordable’ : The Problem With Affordable Housing

In the age of austerity 'affordable housing' is heralded as a basic requirement for new build housing schemes, with any project that doesn't deliver at least a small quota being crucified in the press. But when the term affordable is defined as 80% of market value, and an average house costs £484,716 in London, who can even afford the affordable?

The failings of local councils to provide housing for all Londoners has led to this almost meaningless terminology being thrown only around by developers and estate agents to sell already profitable schemes. With the term 'genuine affordable' hot on its heels and growing as a response, do architects have any power to broker housing that is actually affordable with developers and councils, or is up to the market to decide what is affordable, genuine or no?

Speakers:

Lara Kinneir, New London Architecture (Chair)
Tarek Merlin, Feix&Merlin 
Calum Green, London Community Land Trust
Claire Bennie, Municipal
Patrik Schumacher, Zaha Hadid Architects

Negroni Talks N°12 ‘Affordable’ : The Problem With Affordable Housing

Talking Shit! DRAIN AGE

Stone Age... Iron Age... we are now living through the Drain Age...

Regular news reports of flash flooding showing homes filled with filthy water suggest that our treatment of water maybe based upon suspect principles. The mounting evidence is that our ‘interventions’ within the natural world are more and more frequently coming back to bite us in our cities, towns and villages. Is architecture a key factor in our divorce from reality? 

We put bleach in water, and we drink the water. Man-made fat-bergs cause sewers to back up and the pressures put on pipes appears to coincide with the shameless profiteering that comes with pumping raw sewage into our wildlife, watercourses and seas.

We should ask ourselves what and where we are building. Flood plains made rigid by acres of tarmac and paved hard landscape leave water with nowhere to run except funneled down into hidden tubes that lead ‘somewhere else’.

What is out of sight, remains out of mind.

We also have to look inside and question the impact within buildings. Architects and designers seem stuck in a tug or war between consultants, subcontractors, and the estate agents doctrine of the ensuite 2nd bathroom, where the volumetric space in which people are to live comes in second. Rooms seem required to work around the unmovable obstacles of the service pipe and its associated boxing out. 

Water, so vital to life itself, is in its cyclical nature the most recyclable of resources, so what of its use and its waste? For millennia, humankind lived more humbly amidst nature. Buildings tend to create comfort and convenience by ‘protecting’ us from the elements, but in the landscape of the future can they play a greater role and a more holistic approach to health and sustainability?

S﻿peakers:

D﻿ave Hill, OnLondon (chair)                                                                                                                                                             D﻿r Julia King, London School of Economics
A﻿ndy Downey, Elliot Wood      
K﻿atharina Erne, HTA Design
M﻿ichael Judd, Hawkins\Brown

amongst others….

Negroni Talk #39 - Talking Shit! DRAIN AGE

Negroni Talk #S7 - FROM HERO TO (NET)ZERO: Carbon Footprints

We are in a climate emergency and the built environment contributes 30-40% of the world’s carbon emissions. We have to do something about this and seemingly some governments across the world have belatedly recognised the collective need for us to head towards a net-zero future. Ok, so there’s a plan and we all know what we’re doing, right, but can someone explain clearly what net-zero actually means?  Also does the whole tree planting/off-setting thing really work? It’s just that recently there have been a series of news articles exposing suspicions that it’s all bullshit…. 

As always action will speak louder than words in a world still wedded to processes/materials with high levels of embodied carbon and standard issue PR about ‘being sustainable'. We’re playing a dangerous game with the environment with the 'reality-check’ of carbon neutrality being the only player. How can we make sustainable strategies effective and what happens when political policies change the rules while we’re playing? What can we do to make sure that there is a long-term strategy for the planet, whilst making places for us to live and raise our kids? 

S﻿peakers:

George Morgan (chair)                                                                                                                                                             Matt Bell, Heatherwick Studio
Tara Gbolade, Gbolade Design Studio      
Jonathan Fashanu, Studio Dash                                                                                                               Mitakshi Sirsi, Broadway Malyan

amongst others….

Negroni Talk #S7 - FROM HERO TO (NET)ZERO: Carbon Footprints

Decency By Design

What does it mean to be an ethical architect? Is it about the way you run an architectural practice, the type of work you produce, the people you work for? They say that ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions’ and whilst we’re seeing a growing trend of practices becoming B-Corps, does that mean you’re a ‘decent’ company? 

With the de-regulatory drive to relax the rules and make permitted development easier, the sheer scale of the Post Grenfell cladding crisis, along with recent headline-grabbing ‘scandals’ about the impact upon people having to live in mold and damp infested homes, we really have to think about what buildings are saying to the general public about contemporary standards and the role of the architect. When buildings start to kill people, something has gone terribly wrong with our sense of humanity. Is the architectural profession an ethically motivated defender of values, or complicit with those profiteering off our collective low standards of living? It seems that the powers that be are mostly interested in quick fixes by whatever means necessary, as envisioned by the political brainwave that empty offices and shops can be converted to help solve the national housing problem. The results could very well foster a new wave of rachman-esque modern-day slums, so what protections remain, and who are the guardians of them? 

There could be potential opportunities for sensitive and intelligent projects that could help reinvigorate cities, which might be achieved much quicker than going through the red tape of traditional approval processes. Could this be the time for architects to actively lead a movement to create innovative schemes that benefit the local community, or is it just another moment where they will remain a facilitator in the destruction of social value? 

Developers are always looking for the maximum return on their investments, but their architects should also try to promote decency within regeneration projects and help protect those most affected by changes to our built environments throughout the country. At this moment it remains unclear which way things will go, however, are there simple solutions that could fix several problematic issues in one fell swoop?

 

S﻿peakers:

Rob Fiehn (chair)                                                                                                                                                             Alasdair Ben dixon, Collective Works
S﻿anaa Shaikh, Native Studio     
Emma Osmundsen, Sixty Bricks                                                                                                                                                              J﻿erry Tate, Tate + Co

amongst others….

Negroni Talks #40 Decency By Design

Absurdity In Architecture

When you think about it, Architecture is quite absurd. The importance placed upon the differences between one building design and another, the dedication to detail, the careful choreography and the assertions of taste and quality, all seem to be on a different planet when one looks up at the huge global issues that confront us. The time and energy, the resources spent on the particularity of a design's development, feels somewhat self-centred, myopic and at a remove from the issues of the larger world beyond. 

So too the nobility with which the profession regards itself, the award winning credibility, the multiple skill-sets, the being seen to do the right thing all wrapped up in standard issue PR parlance. What persists is a certainty and conviction with which an architectural design is declared as being the right answer, the correct response, irrespective of how misplaced history often proves such claims to be. 

Architects belong to a list of professions, and along with lawyers and doctors it takes the longest time to qualify for, so you might think that the job is solid, respected and agenda setting. However, getting work to support any practice is basically a shot in the dark. Fees are embarrassingly low. Planning decisions are made on the political whims of elected officials. Clients commission what they want a design to be rather than enquiring what is possible/best. The contractor has come to design architecture as much as the architect. And let’s not get started on cost consultants.

With all of the increasing uncertainty, we seem to have pulled up a seat at the Mad Hatter’s tea party. We find ourselves stuck in/out of our time, knowing that we are no longer what the profession once was, but with no clear idea of how we should really be going forward. Rather than entertain the nonsense and riddles, would it not be better that we steered the conversation towards an examination of what are we all doing and why?

S﻿peakers:

Jason Sayer, Architecture Today (chair)                                                                                                                                                            Sean Griffiths, Professor of Architecture 
Cath Slessor, Twentieth Century Society
Nisha Kurian, London Borough of Tower Hamlets                                                           Dan Burr, Sheppard Robson                                                                                                                                                     

amongst others….

Negroni Talk #41 - Absurdity In Architecture

Negroni Talks #A2

Negroni Talk #S9 AI or Die: Advance or Interference?

How many times have we heard the phrase “race to the bottom” when it comes to architects discussing fees and design quality. With practices closing their doors and citing the undercutting of their fees as a key factor, competition seems to have defeated camaraderie and we have to ask if the profession is eating itself? We want clients (both public and private) to respect the quality that an architect can bring to a project, but how can we do that when we don’t respect ourselves? 

Now that we’re in a ‘cost of living crisis’ and material prices are rising around the world, we are told that profit margins are tighter than ever. But the architect’s fee is often a drop in the ocean compared to the rest of a project’s budget, and is it not the case that a really good quality design can actually save money (and time) if an open-minded person with experience and knowledge is leading the process from an early stage? It is also depressing to see a public sector that places such a large emphasis on fees in their tendering processes, which surely signals to architects how they are valued and how best to win work by incentivising them to Go Low or instead Go Home!

How can we alter the perception of the ‘architect’ so that people recognise design is worth investing in? How can we communicate to the architectural profession that you’re not doing yourself any favours by charging a fee drastically lower than your fellow architects? And what of the organisations and royal institutions set up to protect and promote architects, architecture and schools of architecture? Would a change to both the curriculum in education and a legislative return to the mandatory fee scale in practice, produce a future with architects having a less immature approach to business and an environment whereby the best designs and not the lowest fees become a new benchmark?

In a world where creativity has increasingly become complicit with a controlling commercialism, how should architects better protect the spirit and ideas that can be upheld by progressive building design, as well as themselves and each other as a local, regional, national and global community?

S﻿peakers:

A﻿ngharad Palmer, Landsec 
B﻿ritta Siggelkow, THINK:BUILD
E﻿leanor Jolliffe, Allies and Morrison                                                                                                               L﻿ondon Practice Forum                                                                                                                                                     

amongst others….

Negroni Talk #42 -Fees F:or Free: The Divide And Conquer Of Architecture?

We’ve seen hemp houses and walls made of rammed earth, rammed stone and anything else you can ‘ram’. Timber has designers drooling at the mention of the word and there was even a show about straw last year that had architects queuing round the block. There is a huge appetite for a ‘return to the natural’ with ‘new’ (maybe old!) and exciting building materials, however, the practical implementation of these at a scale that will actually make a difference seems at present negligible. 

The built environment is still dominated by the big three materials of the 20th century, namely glass, steel and concrete, with powerful political lobbyists protecting a material supply chain that is resistant to change. Is this symptomatic of a lack of progressive thinking, imagination, outdated regulation or simply a problem of delivering at scale across different building typologies? Is there a case for a system that takes the best of each material that creates a hybridised system, mixing the best elements of natural and man-made products? For instance, stone buildings have long relied on huge amounts of steel. 

There are many hurdles to overcome. Progressive materials come with their own ecological issues and they don’t fit into a world dictated by fire regulations and insurance companies. Maybe we will be forced to think of materials as transient, moving from building to building with their own passports. Or could we justify something carbon intensive if it provides us a frame within which we could infill with materials grown on a farm or even a lab. And what of ubiquitous use of glass in the future, unless of course we are happy to simply have smaller windows? 

The debate on building materials can be polarising in the extreme, but it’s high time we made some concrete plans for more intelligent design and construction. Or perhaps we just can’t see the wood for the trees….

Speakers: 

Vanessa Norwood, Curator / Cultural Strategist (Chair)                                                                                    Joe Giddings, Built by Nature                                                                                                                      Elaine Toogood, The Concrete Centre                                                                                                            Paul Duggan, Elliot Wood                                                                                                                           Bola Ogunmefun, Tisserin Engineers Ltd

Negroni Talk #S10 Meanwhile……..Materials? : Progressive Ingredients In A Regressive Industry

Mods or Trads? History and Histrionics In Architecture

According to social media, we are in the middle of a culture war for both the past and future of architecture. Lines have been drawn and tribes are assembling on a beach with the tide coming in. On one side we have groups that want to protect our modernist heritage and seem to enjoy high-quality contemporary architecture. On the other is a growing collective that extoll the virtues of traditional aesthetics, often following a stylistic approach to buildings based on historical and classical principles and proportions.

Of course, the reality is much more nuanced, complex and intertwined. The challenge of creating decent cities is highly political and wedded to the constraints and opportunities of financing, and there is the small matter of public opinion. However, it is important that we don’t dismiss the debates raging about preservation, adaptation and the creation of new buildings. The vast majority of people seem to be united by a desire to make places and spaces that are pleasant to live in, with much agreement on maintaining a sense of humanism in our built environment, making architecture that people can relate to, as well as protecting the natural world wherever possible.

This discussion allows us the opportunity to consider the very definition of ‘tradition’ in architecture, especially when you consider that modernism is now 100 years old! Why are places whose identities are tied to post-war building programmes and ‘brutalism’ still viewed as the antithesis to our concept of 'the historic’ and ‘heritage’? In being 25 years into a new millennium, within a multicultural, inter-generational society, what does ‘heritage’ mean anyway? Whose heritage are we talking about and at what point do we draw lines on a timeline of style? Ultimately, does it matter what a building looks like on the outside if the people inside are happy and healthy?

Speakers:

RF HW & TCS (chair)   
Cath Slessor, Twentieth Century Society
Robert Adam, Robert Adam Consultancy Ltd                                                                                                                                     David Kohn, David Kohn Architects                                                                                                             Selasi Setufe, Be FirstNick                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

amongst others….

Negroni Talks #43 - Mods or Trads? History and Histrionics In Architecture

One headphone out, keys in hand and checking the street behind you is a familiar experience for a lot of people on their way home, particularly women and those from marginalised groups. And these feelings are not purely anecdotal, as a recent report from the fitness app Strava revealed that UK women are twice as likely to feel unsafe on a run when compared to the global average. In a similar vein, Arup’s Queering Public Spaces study showed that many LGBTQ+ people feel they have to switch or hide their identities when entering a public space or avoid particular areas altogether. How did one of the richest nations on the planet end up with cities that terrify their occupants, particularly once the sun sets?

It’s clear we need a rethink of how we shape the cities of the future if they are to be truly inclusive places. Those in law enforcement who are meant to protect the public have been found wanting on a number of occasions in the last few years for instance. And state-funded campaigns often seen to place the onus on keeping safe with the vulnerable themselves. So the question is who should be designing our urban landscapes when it has clearly gone so badly for so long? Does profit affect safety when we prioritise endless housing over the creation of mixed-use developments with an abundance of life and fewer dark streets? How do we make sure that everyone feels responsible for tackling fear and not just those we suffer from it? And how much of a case can be made for our cities maintaining a degree of unpredictability: after all a lot of us who have moved from smaller settlements to the ‘big city’ did so with the intention of making the most of the frisson of unknown excitement that comes with collectively living with large numbers of strangers?

From the spray can to the development plan, there are tactics to raise awareness and shine a light (sometimes literally) on the problem. We need to gather solutions and challenge a system that is clearly broken for the most vulnerable in society.

Speakers:

Helen Parton (chair)  
PFarah Benis, FFA Security Group & Catcalls of London
Hanna Benihoud, Artist                                                                                                                                      Deborah Saunt, DSDHA                                                                                                                             Martyn Evans, LandsecU+I                                                                                                                          Sarah Ackland, PhD researcher, muf architecture/art                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

amongst others….

On the night….

Negroni Talk #44 - Fabric Of Fear: A Discussion About Designing Out Danger In The Urban Realm.

The Barbican is under siege! This might seem to be a natural and unremarkable occurrence for a medieval fortified outpost. However, the Barbican in question is a mixed-use residential and cultural complex within the City of London. Home to cinemas, concert halls, the LSO and over 4000 residents, it is also an international symbol of 'modern architecture' and a unique estate within the financial heart of London’s square mile. With its bold forms, spatial variety/complexity and an attention to materials/design detail, it is feted by architectural enthusiasts from around the world, who flock to take pictures and enjoy the activities inside, while TikTok makers dance around the elevated walkways for their followers.

But there is now a new brutalism in town. You might think that this paragon of utopian design and example of volte-face grade II listing, would be protected by its landlords. However, surrounded on all sides and increasingly overshadowed by encroaching commercial developments, this civic landscape feels under attack, with developers circling the ramparts looking for areas to storm and pieces they can occupy. One such skirmish, is the strategic outpost of Bastion House and the old Museum of London. Soon to be vacant, these have been branded defunct and earmarked for demolition, in favour of yet another series of investor driven glass blocks that have become the dominating form of building. It seems that form does only follow finance.

As a cultural citadel in the face of a commercial city, this then is an extreme example of a battle that is being fought in towns and cities across the country (and indeed globally). But does it have to be this way? We know that we can’t lay old buildings to waste like we have done historically, and architects responsible for intelligent retrofit projects are now celebrated as part of a new vanguard. With a strong local opposition to the proposed annexing of these buildings at the Barbican, wouldn’t it make more sense to consider a way to reuse them and ensure they are brought back into the fold as a reinvigorated part of the neighbour hood rather than become a trophy asset, looted and taken over for profiteering?

The outcome, could well set a dangerous precedent for key parts of our twentieth century heritage….

Speakers:

Helen Barrett, journalist (chair)                                                                                                                                                              Robert Elms, broadcaster
Tyler Goodwin, Seaforth Land     
Dr Ruth Lang, Design Museum Future Observatory
Jan-Marc Petroschka and Barbican Quarter Action

amongst others…

Negroni Talk #45 - The Last Bastion: A Battleground Between Value And Values?

You’re an architect until you die, it’s a vocation and not a job. At least, that’s what some people would have you believe, with starchitects continuing to design well into their 90’s and succession plans drawn up to keep their practices going after they have left this mortal coil. Meanwhile, newly qualified architects emerging from years of study are met with a culture of “welcome to the real world ” at an age where others in music, fashion, film, and the arts generally, are already shaping the culture of their time through work that is often promoted as being ‘progressive’ and therefore ‘good business’.

It’s easy to see why the knowledgeable and experienced safe pair of hands would be attractive to a Building Industry that is extremely risk averse. Speculation is more often financial than about generating new ideas, so what does this mean for experimentation and pushing boundaries? 

Optics and Opportunity seem to play a huge role in the perception of Age in Architecture. You can still be considered a young architect well into your 40’s and whilst some ‘emerging and new’ practices are hired to sprinkle some exciting fairy dust on a project, to be consistently considered for significant schemes of a serious scale, you still need to be thought of as a larger and more established player. As with many areas of our culture, should we be worried that there is an incumbent generation that seems to dominate most of the impactful opportunities and commissions, which leaves younger people on the fringes feeling disenfranchised with a clear message that “you are good enough when you are old enough.”

Additionally, there also seems to be a real generation gap forming within the architectural community itself, particularly when it comes to concerns surrounding the climate, inequality, social justice and housing, which primarily affect younger generations. Are those practitioners formed by the C20th, fully committed to addressing these issues with the requisite urgency, vigour and alternative thinking required in the C21st? 

As a profession, where most seem to be passionate about the potential of architecture to improve people’s lives through progressive thinking, how do we better harness the idealism of youth with the experience / knowledge that comes with age, so that it can do so more often? 

Speakers:

Rob Fiehn (chair)                                                                                                                                                              Sarah Wigglesworth, Architect
Dennis Austin, Daab Design    
Bushra Mohamed, Msoma Architects
Adithya David Premraj, Serie Architects                                                                                                         Neil Pinder, HomeGrown Plus

amongst others…

Negroni Talks #46 - Talkin’ ‘Bout My Generation: An Age Old Problem In Architecture?

Why does British Housing Look So Mean & Nasty?
There is an unattractive truth about British housing: the vast majority of it is really ugly. The built environment industry is very good at heaping praise on innovative, game-changing projects with awards and extensive coverage in the media but in reality these schemes serve the smallest fraction of the population. On top of this, we are a nation obsessed with the outward appearance of our housing and ‘fitting in’ which drives planning conditions and results in mediocre responses to complex settings. And all this taking place during the one of the worst housing crises we’ve ever known!

There’s a frontier land out there of dodgy cowboy builders and racketeer businessmen. Who will ride in and save the day? Developers with a conscience who also know how to turn and profit? Architects with some backbone to stand up to their cost-cutting clients? Local authorities that have the wherewithal to game the system? It’s time to saddle up and find out…

Speakers:

Claire Bennie, Municipal (Chair) 
Jonny Anstead, TOWN
Paul Karakusevic, Karakusevic Carson Architects
Annalie Riches, Mikhail Riches
Cany Ash, Ash Sakula Architects

Negroni Talk#17 - 04.11.19. - The Crude The Bad And The Ugly

In the information age knowledge is power and architects now seem unwillingly to part with their juicy titbits. Back stories, Chinese whispers and insider information were once regularly traded as part of an intricate network of professional gossip. The act of giving away secrets was generous but architects could often expect information in return but in recent times many practitioners see their peers as competition and architectural opinion seems sanitised as a result. Is this a failing of our times, where gossip can no longer be seen as a  catalyst to new ideas, new debates, new worlds?

If you’re not part of the in-crowd there’s a good chance you’re missing out on jobs and opportunities because of the fear of nasty rumours and misinformation leaving an indelible mark. So, should architecture bring back the outrage and the Machiavellian intrigue to rumble things up and make our designs and propositions more cutting, more interesting, more fun? The truth? You can’t handle the truth!

Speakers:

Nigel Coates (chair)
Sir Peter Cook, CRAB Studio
Sadie Morgan, dRMM
Leanne Tritton, Ing Media
Amanda Baillieu, Archiboo

Negroni Talk #15 - 09.09.19. - Hot Gossip: Givin’ As Good As Ya Get!

We’ve had enough of the straight white male dominating the development industry. We need more diversity in leadership positions to invest in the places that will stand the test of time.

Things are beginning to change but from boardroom to building site, investors to interns, the gender imbalance across the built environment is a problem for everyone.

Are we satisfied that only 19% of board members of property industry companies are women? That only 1.3% of BAME groups work in the property industry? Or that 99% of all construction workers are male? Having more diverse decision makers will ensure that past mistakes aren’t repeated. 

From everyday sexism, glass ceilings, wolf whistles, “banter” and mansplaining, the industry has a lot to change. How can we ensure that women are applying for jobs in the built environment, staying in them and prospering in the profession? What changes can be made to better reflect the diversity that are the foundations of the city itself?

Speakers:

Christine Murray, The Developer (Chair) 
Danna Walker, Built By Us
Chris Brown, Igloo
Angharad Palmer, Pocket Living
Emily Lawrence, Jestico + Whiles

Negroni Talk #16 - 30.09.19. Jobs For The Boys? Gender In Construction

The architectural community is very upset about climate change. They have banded together and done a petition and everything. Problem is, all the big name practices that started it are using a hell of a lot of concrete and building beautiful airports and energy-guzzling skyscrapers. Also, some architects went along to Waterloo bridge and joined a protest party but what did it achieve? It’s high time we made a difference as an industry but actions speak louder than words and buildings can make more of a statement than statements alone.

Speakers:

Jan-Carlos Kucharek, RIBAJ (Chair) 
Julia Barfield, Marks Barfield
Paul Finch, World Architecture Festival
Maria Smith, Interrobang
Tom Bennett, Studio Bark

Negroni Talk #14 - 29.07.19. Holidays In The Sun: Climate Petitions And Protest

Architecture has a difficult relationship with privilege. Everyone knows the profession is not diverse enough, which is not surprising given the fees and the length of time it takes to study. The general public see the image of the architect as aloof but when education was free we saw the rise of the working class architect. Norman Foster describes his childhood on the wrong side of the tracks in Manchester and now he is a global powerhouse. Could someone rise to prominence like this today or is the system rigged for Hooray Henrys and Sloane Rangers? 

Young practices are emerging which directly address the public good but some see this as another form of patronage to ease the guilt of a design-conscious elite. Should we challenge the status quo or accept that the master/servant culture which runs through British DNA is an  inescapable fact of life?

Speakers include:

Helen Parton, Journalist (Chair)
Ab Rogers, Ab Rogers Design
Ziona Strelitz, ZZA 
Lee Ivett, Baxendale
Tahera Rouf, RCKa

Negroni Talk #13 - 24.06.19. Who’s Your Daddy? : Breaking The Class Ceiling

Long hours and low pay are standard, all-nighters are a badge of honour, and leaving on time is derided as lacking the necessary commitment and 'working by the clock’. Why is architecture as a profession so notoriously tough on staff: Is it passion for the craft that piles on the pressure? An old-school macho mentality? Or does it all stem from the competitive unit/crit-system in education? 

In turn architects are themselves part of a broader property investment and construction industry that can be combative and confrontational in its pursuit of control and profit such that it can often feel like a thoroughly unpleasant environment to work within.

Abuse comes in many guises with bullying, intimidation, discrimination, harassment, humiliation, misconduct and defamation. It operates in areas from the financial, to the emotional and the psychological. With abuses of power, rank, process and statistics, is it not the overall system in which architects find themselves the most significant thing being abused?

What needs to be done? Who is being marginalised in practice? Who is creating a work environment that's open to and safe for all? Who are the real bullies?

Speakers:

India Block, Dezeen  (Chair) 
Fiona Scott, Gort Scott Architects
Sarah Castle, IF-DO
Tyen Masten, Phase 3
United Voices of the World's Section of Architectural Workers

Negroni Talk #18 - 28.01.20. Bully For You! Abuse And Architecture.

Is the icon in architecture about to disappear?
Love them or loathe them, there are a series of buildings and structures that have become ‘iconic’ around the world - drawing visitors from far and wide and reshaping city skylines. Many argue that these totemic built forms are key to local regeneration as they attract people and money. This is not a wholly new phenomenon but recent success has led to a new wave of marketing language around buildings, where any small flourish of form on a block of flats instantly makes the building an ‘icon’ within its area. We have also seen the rise of the ‘starchiect' alongside the growth of iconic architecture, where the cult of personality has become another tool for selling architecture to tenants and the wider public. 

In a world disrupted by pandemics, physical mobility is potentially set to change forever and seismic shifts in culture will inevitably lead to new perspectives. How will we use buildings in the future and what will be important to most people living in towns and cities? Perhaps a quieter preoccupation with interior space and a less assertive design sensibility will take precedence over dramatic external forms. Are we seeing an end to the era of the icon?

Speakers:

Tom Dyckhoff, Writer, Broadcaster, Historian (Chair)
Peter Wynne Rees CBE, Professor of Places & City Planning
Adam Nathaniel Furman, Artist and Designer
Amanda Baillieu, Journalist and founder of Archiboo
Yasmin Al-Ani Spence, WilkinsonEyre
Thom Mayne, founding partner of Morphosis

Negroni Talk #23 - 9th June 2020 - Icon Therefore I Am.

Provocative and irreverent architectural talk series hosted in East London  by Straight Talking Architecture Practice Fourth_space

Popular tracks by Negroni Talks