Criticism in Architecture!

Dennis Sharp

The topic of this seminar, "Architectural Criticism" words should find a sympathetic ear amongst
is, I believe, a highly relevant, important and appo- architects and writers alike.
site one. It is concerned with opinions, values and In his essay he went on to define four classes of
value judgements; with the qualitative aspects of critics. He described them thus: "The first can neith-
individual buildings, groups of buildings and the er write nor criticise. The second can write but can-
built environment as well as with design, taste, not criticise. The third cannot write but can criticise,
cultural values, with communities and, of course, the fourth can write and criticise!" "Most critics",
most importantly, with the communication of ideas. Durrenmatt said, "are to be found in the first class,
Here we immediately enter the company of great the most famous are in the second, and in the fourth
writers. Oscar Wilde, writing of critics said: "Those are those who know something about the subject
who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are being criticised. Nobody is to be found in the third
the cultivated. For these there is hope". category - those who cannot write but can criticise
Architectural criticism is a much wider subject than - it is purely hypothetical!".
one might expect. Like other areas of criticism it is Durrenmatt's point about his second category -
tied in with philosophy, history, theory and practice. that appreciation and criticism (of the theatre) is not
It is not an easy subject with which to deal, as any the same thing - is useful. Merely to praise or to
practising writer, editor or critic will soon tell you. It condemn does not amount to criticism. Criticism
is by no means easy to define or to pin down. In a ought to be supported by reasons. We have to work
sense everyone is a critic. Everybody has opinions out just what these reasons are. Are they altruistic,
about buildings, however innocent and inept. Who practical or propagandist? Are they international,
has not heard an instant opinion given about a piece nationalistic or regionalistic?
of architecture: "Gosh, I hate the look of that build-
ing. Doesn't that look dreadful?", or a more general First we have to start with criticism itself. Looking
criticism, like Prince Charles's2 which condemned back over twenty years of involvement as an editor
"London office buildings so mediocre the only way of magazines concerned with architectural history,
you ever remember them is by the frustration they theory and criticism I am amazed by two aspects of
induce!". this current new mood of seriousness about
architectural criticism. It is a relatively new attitude.
Criticism is, after all, about seeing. Criticism is al-
ways about opinions; holding, sharing and even im- From the mid-1960s onwards hardly anyone seemed
posing them. This Seminar is concerned with the interested in architecture, let alone to read about it.
professional aspects of criticism; widely used, forma- Everyone it seemed at the time was into eco-
tive criticism. I want to isolate some of these factors. systems, futurology and man-environment studies.
Into "hippy" dreams of self-reliance, self-build, life
We should commence, however, with some general support systems, mud huts and shelter, doomsday
observations: It was the well known Swiss writer prophecies, cultural anarchy and student revolution.
Friedrich Durrenmatt who expressed serious re- Alongside this there were some devastating views
servations about critics in his little essay Chat about about life itself, and about morality and religion.
criticism in front of the press. He was on a "war
footing" he said, with theatre critics and preferred to Yet with it emerged the well expressed views on
get out of their way if possible. "No writer is insensi- environmental matters of Paul Goodman, Jane
tive to criticism" he said, "no writer is ever quite Jacob's rediscovery of city life, Illich's de-schooling
sure that he can master his own job ... ". As a writer and medical nemesis, Schumacher's small and
and architect myself I know exactly how he felt. His beautiful movement, Bernard Rudofsky's non-
8
 Criticism in Architecture

pedigreed architecture, Dick Sennett's uses of dis- 10 a certain tradition or a particular family of forms,
order, Buckminster Fuller's domes, Paolo Soleri's except through the photographs or verbal descrip-
colossal archaeological Utopias, as well as Lord tions we employ. We should be able to grasp the
Clarke's Civilisation series on TV, Disneyland and point that criticism occurs outside and beyond the
the Beatles. It was all part of a great cultural 'coun- object. Criticism thus exists in its own right. But, as
ter-revolution'. Its success was based very largely on Durrenmatt hinted, it must never become an art
a critical discussion of new dialectics and a broad form for its own sake. It has a servicing function. In
dissemination of views that transcended national our discussions, we shall talk about styles and no
and cultural boundaries. doubt this provides us with a short cut into a critical
The so-called Modern Movement era was conde- assessment. Critics are supposed to know' about these
mned at the moment its chief protagonists died. It things. We are not able to say to a building'S creators
was a period of turmoil, of great unrest and change. "why did you make this or that decision?" Indeed, it
It was the time of the pursuit of many ends as ends in is up to us to articulate our ideas in such a way as to
themselves, an "anything goes" period. It was the communicate not only our comments or views on a
time of the pluralist, the universalist and the general- particular building but to provide information on its
ist. It was one of those periods in time - if I may background, its construction, materials and design
paraphrase Sir Isiah Berlin - of the faxes rather formulation and to distill the very essence of the
than the hedgehogs: "The fox knows many things, object we are discussing. All of this I believe is what
but the hedgehog knows one big thing" , he wrote in we call Architectural Criticism. By such means we
his famous essay on Tolstoy. should be able to conjure up in the minds of an
audience an image of the object itself and a clear
I believe we have again entered into a period of the idea of its chief characteristics, its setting and its
hedgehog. Today, the monists are inspired by the cultural connections.
challenges of unity, of inter-cultural problems, rela-
tionships and definitions. Contrary to the feeling in I have little doubt that discussions of buildings and
the 1960s and early 1970s when we spoke of whole the built environment will have a high priority in this
"environments" (whatever that may have meant) seminar, but we are also here to discuss architectural
and about "urban planning strategies" we now talk criticism, its techniques, its processes and principles.
of Architecture. We are re-united under the banner We shall also be focussing on what educationalists
of architecture. We speak of cities and towns again, would call the acquisition of knowledge based skills.
rather than urban phenomena. We are into the One Some critics in this distinguished company will cer-
Big Thing, Architecture, which is all to the good. We tainly appear more skillful. Others may well feel the
can now concentrate on Architecture and Civic need to re-acquire knowledge once painfully learnt
values, on historical traditions in a seemingly endless but now neglected.
endeavour to explain and understand the nature The organisers of the seminar had it in mind that
processes and the results of man's most imaginativ~ such skills should be passed on to others, that this
and rewarding faculty, to BUILD learned and acquired knowledge, and the abilities
This change has taken some time so I'm not too that go with it, should be shared. Those surrounded
dismayed at the thought that the spread of an articu- by a high degree of know-how, of contacts and
late architectural criticism will also need time to gain references, should be persuaded to explain and
a hold, particularly in those areas in which a strong analyse their position, and to pass on their skills.
critical tradition has been lacking. First you design,
then you build, then you criticise. It is an on-going if
somewhat repetitive process and we should try to Some defmitions
broaden it. Criticism is usually carried out retrospec-
tively. It is a posterior subject. To elevate it to a full Criticism is easy to define in general terms. A suc-
frontal position as part of the design process has cinct definition states that it is "the art of judging the
been suggested by a number of critics, including qualities and values of an aesthetic object". The
Bruno Zevi, the CICA President. Until that happens perceptive 19th century British writer Matthew
it will remain a retrospective activity. It is concerned Arnold defined it as, "A disinterested endeavour to
with recall and indeed much of what one discusses is learn and propagate the best that is known and
spoken of from memory. We talk about buildings thought in the world". The critic, he said, should be
that we have visited and experienced written on flexible, tactful and free of prejudice. Whilst such
read about and probably photographed. We are no~ general definitions may be relatively easy to quote
able to go up to the critical object. We can only say: the application of critical principles is much more
"Look, its like this or that". We are not able to point difficult. There is little concensus here. One set is to
to it and say this characteristic or that feature belong be found in the area of aesthetics. These principles

9
Criticism in Architecture

relate to definitions of concepts such as truth, order, couraged. They are required to fill out the express-
proportion and the beauty of forms. They really are ion of critical thought and writing on architecture
the province of the philosopher rather than the cri- and the built environments of Islam. A broad basis
tic. The critic is involved in the use of such concepts for this approach will be stressed in Ismail
as guiding principles as well as being caught up in Serageldin's paper. It stresses the need for a critical
their fluctuating values relating to changes in taste appraisal of building trends in the Muslim world
and fashion. Aesthetic interpretations are the basis against the background of multi-cultural references.
of architectural criticism as long as architecture re- It also discusses the highly sophisticated state of the
mains an art. The role of the critic is to encourage, craft of criticism in the west. It argues that criticism
and stimulate creative enthusiasm and discussion. in the west is closely associated with the dissemina-
Criticism I would argue should not make it appear, tion of information on the built environment and on
as it often does, that a particular building is the the design of buildings. It stresses that it does this in
result of some miraculous or "secret" design pro- an objective, if not entirely unbiased, way. I agree;
cess. Architecture is a constructive art. It possesses but what do we mean by architectural criticism?
special aesthetic aspects but for all that it is the fruit
of voluntary and explicit choices on the part of the
designer, usually on behalf of a patron or sponsoring What is architectural criticism?
client. Therefore, in the process of criticising a build-
ing it is always important to associate it with the At the outset I suggested we should differentiate
designer, the firm or team associated with its crea- between three related subjects: between architectu-
tion. An explanation of the purpose, programme ral theory, architectural history and architectural cri-
and requirements of the sponsor, patron or client is ticism, at least insofar as this seminar is concerned.
extremely important. Furthermore, an architectural Although these subjects are often seen as inextric-
critic can offer a real service and often act as an ably mixed they clearly are separate disciplines. In-
important intermediary between the architect and creasingly people trained in architectural and art
the consumer and the public. Thus he helps to break history, and architects with an interest in theory and
down isolationist attitudes so detrimental to the involved in education are taking upon themselves
furtherance of architectural ideas and qualities. In a the mantle of architectural critic. On the whole cri-
real sense then the critic can actively participate in tics are not trained but emerge from various back-
architectural and environmental matters. The critic grounds although courses on criticism within sohools
can get close to the design and perhaps become an of architecture have been developed recently. The
important influence on the designer as well. A critic, architectural critic mainly comes from the profession
however, should never try to act like a judge whose or directly from journalism.
decisions are eagerly awaited by the architect or It would be incorrect to argue that architectural
conversely, become someone whose strictures are criticism is a precise science or discipline. Although
greeted fearfully or with disdain. That, I believe, there is now an International Committee of
weakens the whole critical position. So does the paid Architectural Critics (CICA) and almost every mem-
promotion of so-called "independent" critical re- ber is from the kind of background I have just
views of buildings and environmental projects which mentioned, each one remains an independent and
is unfortunately becoming more prevalent in the free agent. Members are not expected to subscribe
western press today. to any collective view about architecture, or about
criticism, nor necessarily to share the same ideas,
although some clearly do. CICA is a pluralistic orga-
Inter-cultural references nisation and provides a platform for the involvement
of architectural "critics" in international architectu-
Architectural criticism does not appear to have de- ral events including, most importantly, architectural
veloped in the Islamic world at the same pace as competitions. It seeks to identify the separateness of
architectural history writing. There is not a body of the critic's role from that of the designer but de-
distinguished critics, neither is there a literature that mands close collaboration. Bruno Zevi has argued
reinforces a current critical viewpoint. However, that critics should be installed in architectural
there is no lack of theory. There is also a substantial offices: this would give architects an opportunity to
body of architectural scholarship. It is obviously felt test their ideas on an objective and neutral person at
that the lack of architectural criticism has probably the outset of a project. Many CICA members are, of
restricted, if not deterred, architectural develop- course, architects themselves who have also chosen
ment. This, as the organisers of this seminar have to be involved with criticism. In that way they con-
suggested, represents a serious void. The acquisition tinue a wholly respectable line of individualistic pro-
of skills and knowledge on criticism have to be en- fessional architectural criticism. Some of them have
10
 Criticism in Architecture

developed specialist interests in aesthetics, in urban through to Gregotti and to the school of critics which
planning, in architecture and theory, in history and includes Giancarlo de Carlo, Manfredo Tafuri and
in wide multi-cultural aspects of the disciplines and Francesco Dal Co. In the United States it is Louise
ideas that form part of the environmental arts and Ada Huxtable and Vincent Scully as well as Reyner
sciences. CICA has few members from the Muslim Banham, J M. Fitch, Peter Blake and others who
world although its membership includes some critics have raised criticism to a high level. S E Rasmussen
and editors from developing countries. and C. Norberg-Schulz working in Scandinavia have
also reinforced the international credibility of
architectural criticism in a similar way to the British
The nature of criticism architectural critical fraternity which has included
John Summerson, John Betjeman and J M. Richards
Most criticism is personal and written by an indi- who in a succession of widely read publications and
vidual for popular or specialist consumption, through the pages of the distinguished British jour-
whether eastern or western. Thus the importance of nal The Architectural Review established an interna-
objectivity in criticism has to be stressed. A lot is tional reputation for good critical writing. Richards
demanded of the critic in the judicious administra- was for many years The Times' architectural corres-
tion of this goal. It has to be allied to good sense and pondent. However, this particular line owes much to
clear judgement, to sagacity and it must be in the 19th century precedent and to the master writers of
hands of someone who can hold their own against that articulate period. There were many critics of
the spread of mediocre mass cultural values. It is architecture. Chief among these stands the eminent
important to be controversial but not offensive as critic John Ruskin (1819-1901). His artistic doctrines
this represents a total negation of the critic's role. and economic theories were responsible for creat-
Stressing the intellectual nature of a building is of ing the opinion of generations of artists and
some importance but to do it at the expense of architects. He looked at nature and especially at the
communication is of course ridiculous. Good critics sublime aspects of nature as a main feature in his
never alienate their readers. However, all criticism world of ideas. He has been credited with creating
should be carefully regulated to suit the needs of the the modern welfare state whilst J. Rosenberg has
medium. An overly intellectual approach to critic- written that: "It would require a revolution to undo
ism may well find a place in a professional or student the revolution which Ruskin brought about". He
publication or another medium like video suited to viewed architecture in a very special way but tended
deep and lengthy analysis but it must be stressed that to underestimate somewhat the value of his major
criticism on the whole is as important in tabloid and critical and theoretical work The Seven Lamps of
popular newspapers and journals as it is in the spe- Architecture.
cialist press. For many years the London Daily Mir- Ruskin's ideas are so well known it is perhaps only
ror employed the services of an environmental cor- necessary for me to say that he set up a pattern of
respondent whose role was to produce snappy, up to categories for a kind of architectural criticism that is
date colloquial stories on new buildings and new still relevant. Given that mass, space, line and col-
environmental developments for that widely circu- our are the main elements of architecture each gen-
lating paper. Popular daily newspapers cannot eration decides what, if anything, is common in their
afford to ignore the changes that are going on and use in an analysis of buildings or indeed the 'great'
every effort should be made to try and influence styles. However, it must be recalled in Ruskin's case
editors, owners and readers to ensure that environ- that he was completely committed to the Gothic
mental criticism is part of their normal fare. Fortu- style and therefore his important views about Unity
nately CICA over the past few years has seen many and Coherence - as fundamental notions of com-
new opportunities open up for critics. position - have to be viewed in that light. Few
critics manage the monumental achievements of
someone like Ruskin although his contemporary
The role of the critic William Morris must also be viewed in context as
someone of great significance in the furthering of
The role of the architectural critic has expanded ideas on critical values in art and architecture. He
rapidly. There are many recognised critics who influenced many others at the tum of the century
themselves represent particular views, attitudes, including the architect and teacher W.R Lethaby,
positions and cultural backgrounds. For years they founder of the Central School of Arts and Crafts,
have shared the international platform. Consider- whose weekly columns in The Builder magazine
able attention has been given over the years to that were the source of inspiration to a whole generation
long line of distinguished Italian architectural critics of architects committed to change including the
that spans from Argan, Dorfles and Bruno Zevi Scottish pioneer Charles Rennie Mackintosh.
11
Criticism in Architecture

Lethaby and the German Muthesius made a pro- New opportunities

found impact on the society they wrote for and they
traversed national and cultural barriers with ease. Nowadays TV and video have become effective
Both were critical of the buildings of their own age, means for specialist information and for the dissemi-
held opinions about them and sought to use some of nation of ideas and criticism. Here there is an enor-
them as 'exemplars' for a better architecture. They mous opportunity for architectural criticism to be-
were both brilliantly perceptive critical theorists and come one of the major areas within the cultural
were both practising architects. Undoubtedly their sphere. It plays already a part in the media through
work indicates a level of competence that we still news channels (short reports as well as researched
would be expected to emulate. As individualists they features), in educational broadcasts and probably
were keen to pursue particular views about most memorably in programmes like 'The Shock of
architecture. Lethaby, for example, was absorbed the New' by the Art Critic of Time magazine and
with the human motives that conditioned and Peter Adam's 'Architecture at the Crossroads' from
shaped the appearance of buildings. His still valid the British Broadcasting Corporation. Both series
thesis was that building practice mirrored the gener- attracted audiences of millions of viewers in
al development of world ideas. He believed in the Europe and the USA Viewing figures asiae, the
efficacy of the creative process and was concerned value of criticism that marries words to images is one
with what he called "the inner heart of ancient build- of the most important, effective and fascinating de-
ings where wonder, worship, ... and symbolism" velopments in art and architecture in our age. We
would provide the main motives for an enquiry into should strive to develop a criticism which is 'visualis-
the nature of architecture. As the historian Statham able' as well as literary.
said: "All architecture - that is all that is worth the
name - is one vast symbolism; symbolism control-
led by and expressive of structure might be the The message of architecture
definition of architecture in the higher sense".
Lethaby fully supported this view not simply be- Architecture of course should be able to convey its
cause of the material attributes of building and the own message, to relate its own story without a word
convenience of structures but as a means of provid- ever being written. Many contemporary architects
ing man with the "opportunity of developing his would like that! For all its shortcomings criticism is
mind and releasing his spirit" "Man," he wrote, "is largely in the written form. The French author
primarily a maker, a builder". Lethaby's thoughts Antoine de Saint Exupery put his pen to it in his
although somewhat esoteric at times (see books such famous philosophical work The Little Prince, 1943,
as Architecture, Nature and Magic) have acted as when he wrote: "Words have the power to make the
direct inspiration for generations of architectural cri- invisible visible". Much earlier the Abbe Laugier
tics. They offer an impetus to deal with subjects had written: "If the problem be well stated, the
above the mundane and the mediocre and provide a solution will be shown ... ". We all recognise the
sounding board on the deeper fundamentals of importance of the phrases, "Architecture speaks",
architecture and design. They also stress the import- or architecture par/ante and the hippy-type exhorta-
ance of nature and the organic as well as democracy tion "architecture communicates". So too, does
and the freedom of speech. writing and it is at this point criticism can enter:
Another critic whose importance should not be modestly perhaps but effectively if the criticism itself
underestimated is the American urban historian is to communicate.
Lewis Mumford. Known internationally, he has What is it that the critic wishes to communicate? I
over many years, set out a consistent attitude to would suggest first of all that the critic is concerned
architectural theory, design and criticism. He pro- with the nature of criticism itself: with its aesthetic
vided one of the major source textbooks The Roots basis, its descriptive range and its general appeal.
of Contemporary American Architecture, 1952, Criticism is primarily connected to culture and cultu-
which indicates the importance of the link between ral values. In its architectural relations it has a spe-
history and theory and stresses its critical overlap. cialised meaning but in its widest sense 'culture' is,
Amongst others Mumford was also instrumental in as T S Eliot suggested in his Notes towards the de-
drawing attention to the critical skills of the early finition of Culture, 1948, "Not something for the few
Chicago architectural writer Montgomery Schuyler but the way of life of a whole people". Further:
whose well informed comments on the architecture "Culture includes all the characteristic activities and
of the late 19th century place him among the finest interests of a people."
architectural critics of his age. We could all make our own list of what such a broad
definition should cover but if we narrow it down to

12
 Criticism in Architecture

an area like architecture or environmental design we close it. Thankfully the same thing cannot yet be
can see immediately certain common cross-cultural said of the architecture critic!
factors. These are the beacons of communication
and the staple of good architectural criticism. I shall
try to list some of them but first of all we must ask The architect as critic
ourselves another question: In order to criticise it,
do we have a clear idea of what arcmtecture is? Le The advantages of the architect as critic are I believe
Corbusier wrote: "It only exists where there is a obvious. The critic who comes to architecture
poetic emotion". "Architecture is a plastic thing", trained in another discipline is disadvantaged. The
he said. "which is seen and measured by the eyes. weaknesses of the "journalist-critic" have been ex-
Obviously if the roof were to fall in, if the central posed many times in the past through lack of aware-
heating did not work, if the walls cracked, the joys ness of architectural history or context and inepti-
of architecture would be greatly diminished; the tude. The academic historian passing off as an
same might be said of a man who listened to a architecture critic too is often suspect, susceptible to
symphony sitting on a pin cushion or in a bad pedantic pressures that can obscure the creative
draught." Great teachers and communicators like issues. There have, of course, been a number of
Le Corbusier have always spoken of this dimension notable exceptions that prove that this rule is not
of empathic involvement in architecture. It is a part hard and fast. In order to understand architecture
of the aesthetic and cultural dimensions we referred however the critic must know how it is made. The
to earlier. It is something that no critic can ignore. centrality of the design process must be acknow-
ledged. The critic must have a notion about how it
works and how a design is conceived and made. I do
Literary criticism not mean to imply that the architect-critic is himself,
through the nature of his conceptual/process know-
We find the most comprehensive form of criticism is ledge, necessarily any better at successfully solving
in the field of literature. Literary criticism has what Le Corbusier called his "pure creation of the
reached a very high level of sophistication. Any mind". No, only that he is probably in a better
academic library will have an enormous selection of position to be able to articulate and explain the
reference books, theses and pamphlets on the nature and problems of a building design. The 'pure
sources, the relationships and the relativities of con- creation' we speak of is, after all, derived from the
temporary literature. Literary criticism is an area of designer's own skills, emotions and spirit. It express-
study that has had a profound effect on the "mecha- es itself through the employment of shapes and
nics" of architectural criticism. Critics and theorists forms and the arrangement of spaces achieved in the
alike have transferred its structuralist and linguistic pursuit of the beautiful and the aesthetic. With this
techniques, its bases in semantic theory and the in mind the critic who is both competent and confi-
study of meanings in order to underpin architectural dent can then produce information that will have
ideas and to provide a critical apparatus for a subject grown up from a keenly felt and well understood
which has very largely been examined from a chro- process. The criticism should then be acceptable to
nological, historical or a comparative point of view. the triumvirate of originating designer(s), readers
Thus architectural criticism, particularly in terms of and critic.
its responsive relationship to literature, has reached
a sophisticated level. It has also cross-fertilised the
criticism of the other arts. Critical criteria
Cinema, theatre and music criticism, as well as that
of the fine arts, is no longer merely an area for Acknowledging an apparent lack of structure in
connoisseurs; there is a great deal of originality in architectural criticism, some years ago I introduced
the approach of critics to these cultural areas. The a number of critical categories in the "Architectural
critic is seen not necessarily as an information Journalism and Criticism Workshop" that was
gatherer nor as an event promoter although this too formed at the Architectural Association in London.
is a function, particularly in theatre and cinema cri- These categories related to an ungraded list of
ticism, but rather as a commentator. The power of criteria. They were neither just a simple series of
the critic has become great in some spheres. The categories nor a foolproof check list but rather an
New York Times theatre critic for example can attempt to create 'a working tool whereby the stu-
assume the ultimate position of the legendary and dents' thoughts and words could be focussed on the
frighteningly powerful critic and express opinions main areas that criticism might be expected to cover.
that can make a success of a show or immediately My list was divided into: environmental, economic,
functional, constructional, political, cultural, and of

13
Criticism in Architecture

course aesthetic categories. Some of these areas design studios of architectural schools aesthetics
overlapped whilst others were added later in an have, of course, always played a part. Students
effort to create a more fluid critical process. They attempt to achieve aesthetic results in their work and
helped greatly in providing clarification of the aims a discussion of aesthetics is usually the mechanism
and content of the critical writing undertaken by the employed by the jury or examination committee. It
students. They formed the basis for sharpening argu- is largely the value judgement process by which
ments and for opening up widely differing areas of student designs are assessed. I think we can say - at
knowledge. In the most simple form they could be- least those of us who trained as architects - that we
come paragraph headings. We also used them in have all experienced these processes. On the whole
discussions and in the course publications produced we are probably still confused by them!
by the students themselves. I don't want to be drawn into a lengthy argument on
The students were then invited to carry out aesthetics now but it would be useful in relation to
architectural criticism of two major buildings: one this discussion of architectural criticism to pose two
new, the other, the Smithson's Economist Building or three questions that arise in connection with it.
in London, somewhat older and already widely fea- Our starting point must be that we believe that
tured in journals and books. architecture is an art form. Therefore, the drawing
Looking back at this work it is interesting to note of analogies from other artistic fields is entirely right
that the students adopted an amalgam of the cate- and proper. This, of course assumes that
gories I had introduced into the course ranging architecture's social, anthropological, utilitarian,
through the 'aesthetic economic', 'the aesthetic func- technical and constructive roles are also taken into
tional', 'the aesthetic environmental' and 'construc- account and treated seriously. All of these, one must
tion and materials' for their critical formats. These assume, respond in one way or another to the aes-
young amateur critics recognised immediately that thetic elements contained by architecture.
the so-called critical and investigative structure of My first question is therefore: What are the aesthetic
such journalism needed to be related to the aesthetic elements that are contained by architecture? Cer-
touchstone which we have defined as the basic ingre- tainly the definitive one which has been referred to
dient of criticism itself. They no longer needed me to (from Baumgarten onwards) is the aesthetic 'phi-
labour the point! They had recognised that it is from losophy of beauty'. The traditional view held of this
the realm of the aesthetic that the most productive kind of beauty emphasises its idyllic and pleasant
criticism emanates. It is not without its dangers qualities. Such an attitude could not be held up in
though. Quite often aesthetic values can be used as a the modern world. Look for example at Goya's
safe harbour. They become a shelter for the critic's "Horrors of War", Picasso's "Guernica", at Dali's
own prejudices and the pursuance of idiosyncratic and Max Ernst's surrealistic images or even Herb
opinions, witness the diatribes engaged in by many Greene's "Buffalo" prairie house (a thing that could
of the writers in those flashy and overdesigned stu- be called beautiful but which evokes an eerie iso-
dent or institutional journals that have exceedingly lated sense in the viewer and raises architecture
narrow circulation paths. again to the symbolic level) to see its modern defini-
tions. We might say then that beauty lies as a princi-
ple within aesthetics although a study of aesthetics
Aesthetic questions does not furnish a definite principle of beauty.
Rather, as Professor Albert Bush-Brown has im-
Central to our whole discussion is the question of the plied: "Each principle has a valid contrary ... discord
aesthetics of architecture. It is a subject that has and harmony; each has its proper role. That is very
been widely discussed and on which there is an different from saying there are no principles at all."
expanding literature. The subject is very much alive The second question I wish to pose is one that
but it is rather elusive. Apart from its essential use in relates to criteria and has been partly ventilated
criticism it is perhaps of passing interest to note its earlier in this paper. It can be framed as follows:
wider significance and usage. Some years ago the How can buildings be discussed using aesthetic
British Government issued a circular on the subject criteria? Here again I think we can summarise the
of "architectural aesthetics" for the use of planning position by saying that we should take into account
and conservation officers who were expected to some major points: Firstly, a building is a physical
administer the planning regulations affecting histor- object and that secondly the critic looks at that
ical and listed buildings and conservation areas. The object and reflects on its cultural background and its
circular provides guidelines on general aesthetic influences. Finally, the perceptions that come from
matters and also deals with materials, finishes, as the object through to the critic are those that repre-
well as appearances and appeal procedures. In the sent its position within the aesthetic framework. For

14
 Criticism in Architecture

a wider discussion of the cognitive and perceptual Conclusion

skills required of a critic we should look at the
writings of Rudolph Arnheim. His work reminds us I began my address with a reference to values and
that not all aspects of perception in a building are value judgements. I mentioned these subjects at the
visual; some are tactile, others acoustic, olfactory and outset because they pervade all aspects of profes-
thermal. also the perception of a building during the sional criticism. As we look at the basis of
day is considerably different from the way it would be architectural criticism, at the critic's roles, at the
recognised under night time conditions nature and mechanics of such criticism and the in-
creasing opportunities for criticism in the media we
Another question is the one that brings us right into
shall be dogged by questions of values and judge-
the arena of qualitative judgements: Can architectu-
ments. The whole essence of a profession is that it
ral critics decide on criteria for aesthetic excellence?
involves expert judgement and not rules of thumb.
Such a question would not imply across-the-board
Architecture is like law and medicine in this respect.
agreement. It might be very difficult to persuade a
Professor Peter Collins reminds us in his book on
critic committed to the "Functionalist" cause to
Architectural Judgement, 1971, that, " ... only a
accept the aesthetic position of a critic who extols
trained architect is really sensitive to the essential
the virtues of Post-Modernism. However, one
elegance of a well constructed and properly func-
would expect an objective critic to stress the unique
tioning building. Laymen inevitably judge profes-
quality of the work that he was viewing. Indeed, it is
sional expertise superficially, and become impatient
worth bearing in mind what Wayne Attoe said in his
with technicalities ... ". It is at this interface of pro-
book Architecture and Critical Imagination, 1978
fessional expertise and lay opinion that the critic can
when he stressed the unique quality of architectural
most advantageously operate
criticism in the arts field: "What is special about
architecture (or environmental) criticism is that it
can have an impact not only on the individual career
but our collective future as well. Decisions about the Footnotes
environment are much more in and about the public 1 This is a composite of the Keynote Address given by

realm than are decisions in the various art worlds Dennis Sharp and his Position Paper which was distributed
and we have learnt that the public realm can be to seminar participants A selected bibliography prepared
sensitive to influence. To capitalise on this unique by Dennis Sharp can be found on pages 142-143
feature of architectural criticism the critic should 2 The future British monarch commented thus in a speech

emphasis that it relates to the future and not be in London, UK, December 2, 1987
satisfied with making categorical judgements or iso-
lated interpretations of the past". Most importantly
he goes on, "The contents of the critique should
focus on how things in the past and present can
teach us how better to handle the future". This is
worth reiterating time and again. Whilst Attoe is
pressing the flesh at the right point he probably does
not give enough credibility to the view that many
other critics work within the public realm. I think
that this can be found to be useful in providing the
architectural critic with a cultural yardstick.
Most importantly, however, Attoe stresses the spe-
cial role that the architectural critic has in provoking
and stimulating opinion about work that will affect
the character of the existing environment. Un-
doubtedly critics do have power and responsibility in
this area and although few critics have prevented
changes actually taking place in the public realm
many have influenced judgements about the way
new public works have been accepted. It should be
remembered that Ruskin deplored Paxton's "Crys-
tal Palace" ('a cucumber frame with two chimneys')
and it was not really accepted as a piece of
architecture until well into the 20th century. It's final
acceptance was because of the criticisms of Victorian
eclecticism!
15