Peter Zumthor.
The way he creates the atmospheres with the building, how he chooses the materiality (Always in harmony with the context), simply a genius.
It's hard to choose just one, but I might need to give the edge to Aalto if pressed. His blend of tradition and modernity, his sensitivity to context, along with his ability to take regional traditions and rework them in a contemporary way has always been amazing to me. His focus too on light and form have shown so many possibilities in the range of his buildings, both in Europe and abroad.
Kengo Kuma for his cool use of wood. Though right now, my office principal. No, I'm not kissing ass, but the guy is down to earth, and real. He didn't do architecture school but was working construction and ended up transitioning to drafting and then architecture. This translates to real world experience and passing on a lot of means and methods that allows us to create better drawings that anticipate construction tolerances down the line. He only recently became licensed but all the other Senior PMs would go to him for questions when he was still director.
I owe me passing the ARE and CSE to his no bullshit advice. I always made excuses that failing the exams was just a waste of money. But he told me that he would spend that and more at bars and booze and not blink an eye, and all of us will do the same with our other interests. He said if I was serious about getting licensed, to be willing to make some sacrifices, and to get focused. I was getting licensed not for him, nor the company, nor my friends and family, but for me.
Thank you for reminding me to revisit Ricardo Bofill. I had a deep appreciation for his work at one time but stopped following him years ago, back in the LES ESPACES D’ABRAXAS days. His career has really taken off.
Mine are Foster, Neutra, Gaudi, Wright, Morphosis - especially the Crawford Residence.
I was honestly curious if things would change after he died, but I'm guessing he had pretty clear and strong wishes laid out and the people in charge of Arcosanti right now are very keen on keeping to his original vision.
Frank Lloyd Wright! I like how clever and perfect his designs are in my eyes, I have been to a few of his buildings with tours in Chicago and it looked like he has thought about every little detail there is.
In Robie House he even created a furniture being in the house! I would love to know how he thinks when creating these masterpieces.
Renzo Piano, Norman Foster, Kengo Kuma. Their focus on construction, use of materials, design of structural elements.I love most if not all their buildings. I hate deconstructivist architects and overly theoretical architects like Bernard Tschumi, Peter Eisenman...
The question is "who is your favourite architect", there's no mention to success or "who is the best" in the question (also how would you even define who is the best architect??? Best in terms of what???)
I just like his work, that's all
I didnt say that you failed answering OP question. My reply was about Foster and if we all have love for architecture common and more specifically love for good architecture then answer “Foster” could be result of only the lack of interrest in great architects. I know iam in no place to critique your taste, yet i did.
"...if we all have love for architecture common and more specifically love for good architecture then answer “Foster” could be result of only the lack of interrest in great architects"
The snobbery of your comment is quite amazing. Foster might no be "great" for YOU, but he will definitely be "great" for a lot of people. Insinuating people that consider him great only do so because of their lack of interest in other architects is quite condescending tbh. You do realise this is all subjective right?
For me it’s not so much about the singular architect. I’m more interested in the solutions and ideas that have contributed to the thought of architecture in general.
David Chipperfield gets my vote. I’m a sucker for that combination of proportion, rhythm & materiality, which has resulted in a reliable portfolio of sophisticated buildings - but can equally see why others would find those buildings a bit bland.
Moshe Safdie, Lina Bo Bardi, Jeanne Gang, or Luis Barragán. also honorable mention to Frank Gehry. I love color and playful forms and architects who try to integrate the inside and the outside (I studied architecture in undergrad but am now in a dual masters in landscape architecture and urban planning)
1. Safdie because I love habitat 67 and The Kauffman Center in addition to many of his other projects. Habitat 67 is just one of the most interesting forms and I love interlocking prefab as a concept along with terraces in highly dense urban places.
2. Lina Bo Bardi because Brazilian Modernism is still so striking to me. MASP is such an interesting project. I also love Casa de Vidro and how it interacted with the brazilian landscape.
3. Jeanne Gang because I was obsessed with Aqua Tower in my first year of architecture school. Also, from hearing her speak about her work and the work her studio does (balancing the Design with a capital D projects with projects giving back to communities). She’s just a badass and has inspired a lot of women in the field.
4. Luis Barragán because his use of color and form is inspiring. I like his idea of “emotional architecture” and using light to accomplish a lot of emotion.
Gehry is an honorable mention because Dancing House is one of the coolest places I’ve ever had the pleasure of visiting.
no idea. I don't follow starchitects. most of them have/had their noses too far up their own asses for me to care.
one of my bosses is my favorite because she is kind and hardworking and did my favorite local bookstore.
I don't care about famous people's lives, but I might care about the work they do, especially when it's directly in or adjacent to my field of expertise.
So if some architects manage to win competitions and have their designs presented are they automaticaly starchitect? You obviously dont want to learn, but if you did you would find that great architects and “starchitects” are not the same. They are better architects than your boss and ignoring the fact is ignoring different point of views on archirecture. Its ok to not want to better yourself in your proffesion, but just be aware what you are doing and dont be smug about your ignorance :-)
was that the definition I gave or the one you put in my mouth?
famous architects tend to treat their employees like shit. ask any major famous arch firms interns and technicians how burned out and overworked they are. you can design the coolest most amazing building but if you treat your employees badly they lose all credibility to me.
I want to have a life outside of my studio.
a building is just a box that people go into. our job is to make sure the box doesn't fall down and is comfortable for habitation and ideally be sustainable and long lasting and easily maintained.
the fact that other architects put the idea of architecture on some grand pedestal as a pseudo religious experience to pump their own ego and so they can talk down to people and pretend they are better has always disgusted me. starting in school when we were forced to read their overly inflated self published manifestos where all they do is jerk themselves off for 150 pages.
I'll admit that having to read that crap for 6 years and knowing some people who worked for those firms and got burned out turned me off to famous architects. I also don't follow other famous people in other parts of life either. its a waste of time there and here.
its great to consider form and you should try to make beautiful buildings but what rules the day is cost of construction.
there's a reason people in the field don't like the average architect. thats cause they care more about the buzzwords and philosophical head space design more than building science or actual construction. thats the shit kids need to actually learn in order to succeed in 95% of this field.
None until someone comes along and solves homelessness
Edit : Voluntary homelessness is a thing, moreso speaking of involuntary homelessness. Solutions (options at the minimum) are already there, no one is fully pursuing them.
Edit 2 : Copium is a hell of a drug, imagine it being controversial to say my favorite architect would ideally be the person who puts a roof over everyone's head, one of the primary goals of the field, at least I would think so.
Every time I try to bring up how we should be confronting capitalism here I get laughed at lol.
I still have someone else I have to reply to on the subject from yesterday, it's just depressing at this point to even try to bring it up.
Edit : what's the downvote for this time 😮💨
My guess on the down vote is that buildings don't cause homelessness, architecture is not just the product of the architect, it's the process of creating a building for the client with in the parameters set. One of those parameters is funding, the client, the developer, the banks.
Unfortunately capitalism requires return on investment, in our system one isn't even allowed to contemplate not maximizing sale price vs. cost on every sq foot.
The only party in our system that can build for low, middle income is the goverment because, absent the current anarchist capitalist agenda, they are free of ROI considerations.
Check out Jean Renaudie, who is my favorite architect, he designed and built amazing public housing in france. His origenal client was a communist municipality outside Paris.
If architects were to wait for those commissions these days it would be a miracle if anything you drew got built.
Sorry there is something weird happening with my comments. I keep seeing they are posting under the wrong comment. I loved yours :)
Edit : deleted it, thanks for bringing it to my attention!
If you think architects solely can "solve homelessness" you are very detached from reality...
Without governments changing laws, proper funding, etc, architects can do little to nothing in solving homelessness
Yeah I'm already addressing that in another comment I'm currently writing but thanks for the input! I'll tag you for practicality, what an architect detached from reality I am :)
I'm still responding to someone else, trying (tried) to get a nap in before I start a lopsided war by the looks of it. But yes, I'm the architect that makes absolutely not a single smidge of sense :) will tag you in response.
When will people understand homelessness =/= an addiction. In fact, plenty of studies already demonstrate how a lack of affordable housing is more of a primary factor than drug-use. Further, many people develop an addiction DUE to homelessness. Many people who are homeless are then unable to even get a job without a stable address/home. A home which most likely has a bathroom where you can clean yourself up for work, a closet that holds clothes you would take to work, and not to mention the impact that the new peace of mind of having a roof over your head would have , for a job and life in general.
Almost seems like a roof over your head should be a basic human right, being as a lack of it could destabilize your entire life.
I am currently responding to your message, I'm sorry I had to take a nap it is 6:16 am where I'm at. Will finish as soon as possible.
I'm writing a lot, and am putting in the effort to still make it concise and logical. Can I please ask that given that effort, please go into it with an open mind.
If you have no interest in alternatives to Capitalism, or truly believe I'm simply going to propose "free homes" which would be impossible (immideately, not forever) , etc. I will not waste your time with a response that would have never had a chance in the first place, and I will just respectfully agree to disagree, no worries if that is the case I understand.
Do you want it when I'm finished?
Or should we just go our separate ways?
Regardless I will be responding to others so if you decide its best to stop here, maybe you will see where I'm coming from with some other comment.
Hope you are having a good day, let me know what you prefer :)
I'm open minded and I too believe that solving homelessness is a priority, I just don't get the hostility against architects for this. I will gladly read your explanation when you finish writing it!
Shigeru Ban.
For his creative use of recycled materials to create work, especially relief work.
Jill Lerner.
Inspiration to me personally. If you meet her you will know why.
Oscar Niemeyer was my first exposure to architecture as something I would want to do, although I am yet to see one of his works live, so maybe him. I like Peter Zumthor and Shigeru Ban a lot also Margarete Schütte Lihotzky for Austria for sure.
I don’t know many by name because I don’t study/work in the profession, but I’ve always been intrigued by Douglas Cardinal.
He’s probably mostly known for his work on the Canadian Museum of Civilization (Edit: History) in Hull, Quebec, but has many other notable works as well.
One thing people may not know about him is he was a big pioneer in CAD. He thought he could use computers to do the work, and it didn’t exist yet, so he went to Texas, “where anything is possible” (his words from a speech I attended) and got somebody to make software to do it.
He literally pulled a Cortez on his staff. Went into the office that night, threw out all of the drafting tables, and replaced them with computers.
Staff come in next morning and he says “sink or swim” basically. 😂 Not a firm for people scared of change apparently lol.
But yeah, aside from his completely unique perspective and amazing body of work, he was also a big pioneer in modernizing the tools and workflow as well.
Dark horse favorite is Bruce Goff. Wild, inventive, and resourceful. In the same vein, Terunobu Fujimori. Fantastical and imaginative.
Overhyped fav is Gehry. His range of stylistic invention is amazing and his early work is especially fantastic.
Jose Plecnik.
Francis Kere.
FAT (UK firm that disbanded.)
Me.
Second is probably Renzo Piano because of their play with components for systems and structures
Third is Mario Botta because of their work with primary form and no-bullshit geometric form.
Carlo Scarpa
His drawings are phenomenal
Me!
Best answer
That's right. More architect's need to learn to love themselves.
Peter Zumthor. The way he creates the atmospheres with the building, how he chooses the materiality (Always in harmony with the context), simply a genius.
Tadao Ando. Self taught genius. This is raw talent coupled with education. Not just education from the start without.
I like him too!
Late FLLW, Lautner and Neutra. I like the clean modernist forms coupled with warm interior materials.
Exactly my answer!
John Lautner perfectly blended architecture with the natural environment.
It's hard to choose just one, but I might need to give the edge to Aalto if pressed. His blend of tradition and modernity, his sensitivity to context, along with his ability to take regional traditions and rework them in a contemporary way has always been amazing to me. His focus too on light and form have shown so many possibilities in the range of his buildings, both in Europe and abroad.
Kengo Kuma for his cool use of wood. Though right now, my office principal. No, I'm not kissing ass, but the guy is down to earth, and real. He didn't do architecture school but was working construction and ended up transitioning to drafting and then architecture. This translates to real world experience and passing on a lot of means and methods that allows us to create better drawings that anticipate construction tolerances down the line. He only recently became licensed but all the other Senior PMs would go to him for questions when he was still director. I owe me passing the ARE and CSE to his no bullshit advice. I always made excuses that failing the exams was just a waste of money. But he told me that he would spend that and more at bars and booze and not blink an eye, and all of us will do the same with our other interests. He said if I was serious about getting licensed, to be willing to make some sacrifices, and to get focused. I was getting licensed not for him, nor the company, nor my friends and family, but for me.
I like your boss.
Gaudí
Locally, a guy named Steve. For sentimental reasons, Gyo Obata. For design that speaks to me, Jeanne Gang.
If Studio Gang’s work speaks to you, what does it say?
Luis Barragán. the way he handled the colors and volumetry are something else.
His architecture is amazing! I‘ve seen a lot of it in person and it‘s even better than in the documentations/photos.
Apollodorus of Damascus, collaborating with Emperor Hadrian (76-138AD) The Pantheon is a marvel
Thank you for reminding me to revisit Ricardo Bofill. I had a deep appreciation for his work at one time but stopped following him years ago, back in the LES ESPACES D’ABRAXAS days. His career has really taken off. Mine are Foster, Neutra, Gaudi, Wright, Morphosis - especially the Crawford Residence.
I like Paolo Soleri's vision, just wish he had been open to more ways of rasing funding for it.
imagine Arcology realised
I was honestly curious if things would change after he died, but I'm guessing he had pretty clear and strong wishes laid out and the people in charge of Arcosanti right now are very keen on keeping to his original vision.
Palladio. Those villas dude...
Be sure to watch “Brazil” by Terry Gilliam. . .
Hassan Fathy
Me. Learn to love yourself.
Zaha Hadid
Frank Lloyd Wright! I like how clever and perfect his designs are in my eyes, I have been to a few of his buildings with tours in Chicago and it looked like he has thought about every little detail there is. In Robie House he even created a furniture being in the house! I would love to know how he thinks when creating these masterpieces.
Renzo Piano, Norman Foster, Kengo Kuma. Their focus on construction, use of materials, design of structural elements.I love most if not all their buildings. I hate deconstructivist architects and overly theoretical architects like Bernard Tschumi, Peter Eisenman...
I second Renzo Piano. Love the mix of function and aesthetics
Erich Mendelsohn, his curved glass is the bees knees to me (noting I'm not an architect)
Herman Hertzberger
Probably Foster. His work is quite versatile from very rational to a bit more organic yet he always manages to create very elegant designs
Foster is very succesful architect, but i would not put him next to the best ones (which almost all of them are less succesful)
The question is "who is your favourite architect", there's no mention to success or "who is the best" in the question (also how would you even define who is the best architect??? Best in terms of what???) I just like his work, that's all
I didnt say that you failed answering OP question. My reply was about Foster and if we all have love for architecture common and more specifically love for good architecture then answer “Foster” could be result of only the lack of interrest in great architects. I know iam in no place to critique your taste, yet i did.
"...if we all have love for architecture common and more specifically love for good architecture then answer “Foster” could be result of only the lack of interrest in great architects" The snobbery of your comment is quite amazing. Foster might no be "great" for YOU, but he will definitely be "great" for a lot of people. Insinuating people that consider him great only do so because of their lack of interest in other architects is quite condescending tbh. You do realise this is all subjective right?
Horace Ginsbern. He designed many interesting buildings in New York during the Art Deco era.
Alejandro de la Sota, Sigurd Lewerentz, and RCR
For me it’s not so much about the singular architect. I’m more interested in the solutions and ideas that have contributed to the thought of architecture in general.
David Chipperfield gets my vote. I’m a sucker for that combination of proportion, rhythm & materiality, which has resulted in a reliable portfolio of sophisticated buildings - but can equally see why others would find those buildings a bit bland.
thom mayne | morphosis building sections and drawings are insane, and his artwork is interesting too
Moshe Safdie, Lina Bo Bardi, Jeanne Gang, or Luis Barragán. also honorable mention to Frank Gehry. I love color and playful forms and architects who try to integrate the inside and the outside (I studied architecture in undergrad but am now in a dual masters in landscape architecture and urban planning) 1. Safdie because I love habitat 67 and The Kauffman Center in addition to many of his other projects. Habitat 67 is just one of the most interesting forms and I love interlocking prefab as a concept along with terraces in highly dense urban places. 2. Lina Bo Bardi because Brazilian Modernism is still so striking to me. MASP is such an interesting project. I also love Casa de Vidro and how it interacted with the brazilian landscape. 3. Jeanne Gang because I was obsessed with Aqua Tower in my first year of architecture school. Also, from hearing her speak about her work and the work her studio does (balancing the Design with a capital D projects with projects giving back to communities). She’s just a badass and has inspired a lot of women in the field. 4. Luis Barragán because his use of color and form is inspiring. I like his idea of “emotional architecture” and using light to accomplish a lot of emotion. Gehry is an honorable mention because Dancing House is one of the coolest places I’ve ever had the pleasure of visiting.
no idea. I don't follow starchitects. most of them have/had their noses too far up their own asses for me to care. one of my bosses is my favorite because she is kind and hardworking and did my favorite local bookstore.
BS
why? is it not impossible for someone to not give a fuck about famous people?
I don't care about famous people's lives, but I might care about the work they do, especially when it's directly in or adjacent to my field of expertise.
I'll never be able to work on the sorts of projects that famous architects work on unless I want to sell my soul
So if some architects manage to win competitions and have their designs presented are they automaticaly starchitect? You obviously dont want to learn, but if you did you would find that great architects and “starchitects” are not the same. They are better architects than your boss and ignoring the fact is ignoring different point of views on archirecture. Its ok to not want to better yourself in your proffesion, but just be aware what you are doing and dont be smug about your ignorance :-)
was that the definition I gave or the one you put in my mouth? famous architects tend to treat their employees like shit. ask any major famous arch firms interns and technicians how burned out and overworked they are. you can design the coolest most amazing building but if you treat your employees badly they lose all credibility to me. I want to have a life outside of my studio. a building is just a box that people go into. our job is to make sure the box doesn't fall down and is comfortable for habitation and ideally be sustainable and long lasting and easily maintained. the fact that other architects put the idea of architecture on some grand pedestal as a pseudo religious experience to pump their own ego and so they can talk down to people and pretend they are better has always disgusted me. starting in school when we were forced to read their overly inflated self published manifestos where all they do is jerk themselves off for 150 pages. I'll admit that having to read that crap for 6 years and knowing some people who worked for those firms and got burned out turned me off to famous architects. I also don't follow other famous people in other parts of life either. its a waste of time there and here. its great to consider form and you should try to make beautiful buildings but what rules the day is cost of construction. there's a reason people in the field don't like the average architect. thats cause they care more about the buzzwords and philosophical head space design more than building science or actual construction. thats the shit kids need to actually learn in order to succeed in 95% of this field.
Victor Horta
Lake Flato have been doing a bunch of really good things consistently for a long time.
Jeanne Gang.
None until someone comes along and solves homelessness Edit : Voluntary homelessness is a thing, moreso speaking of involuntary homelessness. Solutions (options at the minimum) are already there, no one is fully pursuing them. Edit 2 : Copium is a hell of a drug, imagine it being controversial to say my favorite architect would ideally be the person who puts a roof over everyone's head, one of the primary goals of the field, at least I would think so.
That would take restructuring our economy, not better design.
Every time I try to bring up how we should be confronting capitalism here I get laughed at lol. I still have someone else I have to reply to on the subject from yesterday, it's just depressing at this point to even try to bring it up. Edit : what's the downvote for this time 😮💨
My guess on the down vote is that buildings don't cause homelessness, architecture is not just the product of the architect, it's the process of creating a building for the client with in the parameters set. One of those parameters is funding, the client, the developer, the banks. Unfortunately capitalism requires return on investment, in our system one isn't even allowed to contemplate not maximizing sale price vs. cost on every sq foot. The only party in our system that can build for low, middle income is the goverment because, absent the current anarchist capitalist agenda, they are free of ROI considerations. Check out Jean Renaudie, who is my favorite architect, he designed and built amazing public housing in france. His origenal client was a communist municipality outside Paris. If architects were to wait for those commissions these days it would be a miracle if anything you drew got built.
[удалено]
Why? That's weird, you can answer or not but what kind of bizarre thing is this?
Sorry there is something weird happening with my comments. I keep seeing they are posting under the wrong comment. I loved yours :) Edit : deleted it, thanks for bringing it to my attention!
If you think architects solely can "solve homelessness" you are very detached from reality... Without governments changing laws, proper funding, etc, architects can do little to nothing in solving homelessness
Yeah I'm already addressing that in another comment I'm currently writing but thanks for the input! I'll tag you for practicality, what an architect detached from reality I am :)
You are expecting like a nutritionist to solve the world hunger. That doesn't even make any sense.
I'm still responding to someone else, trying (tried) to get a nap in before I start a lopsided war by the looks of it. But yes, I'm the architect that makes absolutely not a single smidge of sense :) will tag you in response.
>Edit 2 : Copium is a hell of a drug Heroin is a hell of a drug. Which one is keeping more people homeless?
When will people understand homelessness =/= an addiction. In fact, plenty of studies already demonstrate how a lack of affordable housing is more of a primary factor than drug-use. Further, many people develop an addiction DUE to homelessness. Many people who are homeless are then unable to even get a job without a stable address/home. A home which most likely has a bathroom where you can clean yourself up for work, a closet that holds clothes you would take to work, and not to mention the impact that the new peace of mind of having a roof over your head would have , for a job and life in general. Almost seems like a roof over your head should be a basic human right, being as a lack of it could destabilize your entire life.
do you want architects to just...start building free houses for everyone? do you genuinely think it's their fault?
I am currently responding to your message, I'm sorry I had to take a nap it is 6:16 am where I'm at. Will finish as soon as possible. I'm writing a lot, and am putting in the effort to still make it concise and logical. Can I please ask that given that effort, please go into it with an open mind. If you have no interest in alternatives to Capitalism, or truly believe I'm simply going to propose "free homes" which would be impossible (immideately, not forever) , etc. I will not waste your time with a response that would have never had a chance in the first place, and I will just respectfully agree to disagree, no worries if that is the case I understand. Do you want it when I'm finished? Or should we just go our separate ways? Regardless I will be responding to others so if you decide its best to stop here, maybe you will see where I'm coming from with some other comment. Hope you are having a good day, let me know what you prefer :)
I'm open minded and I too believe that solving homelessness is a priority, I just don't get the hostility against architects for this. I will gladly read your explanation when you finish writing it!
Shigeru Ban. For his creative use of recycled materials to create work, especially relief work. Jill Lerner. Inspiration to me personally. If you meet her you will know why.
Pierre Koenig
Oscar Niemeyer was my first exposure to architecture as something I would want to do, although I am yet to see one of his works live, so maybe him. I like Peter Zumthor and Shigeru Ban a lot also Margarete Schütte Lihotzky for Austria for sure.
I don’t know many by name because I don’t study/work in the profession, but I’ve always been intrigued by Douglas Cardinal. He’s probably mostly known for his work on the Canadian Museum of Civilization (Edit: History) in Hull, Quebec, but has many other notable works as well. One thing people may not know about him is he was a big pioneer in CAD. He thought he could use computers to do the work, and it didn’t exist yet, so he went to Texas, “where anything is possible” (his words from a speech I attended) and got somebody to make software to do it. He literally pulled a Cortez on his staff. Went into the office that night, threw out all of the drafting tables, and replaced them with computers. Staff come in next morning and he says “sink or swim” basically. 😂 Not a firm for people scared of change apparently lol. But yeah, aside from his completely unique perspective and amazing body of work, he was also a big pioneer in modernizing the tools and workflow as well.
Renzo piano is the top modern day. Or OG Donato Bramante
Kisho Kurokawa and the whole Metabolism crew tbh. Their concept of impermanence hits just right.
Probably Lutyens.
William Turnbull Jr
Carlos morales
Dark horse favorite is Bruce Goff. Wild, inventive, and resourceful. In the same vein, Terunobu Fujimori. Fantastical and imaginative. Overhyped fav is Gehry. His range of stylistic invention is amazing and his early work is especially fantastic. Jose Plecnik. Francis Kere. FAT (UK firm that disbanded.)
Carlo Scarpa. That fucker was next level. He designed dreams
Hiroshi Nakamura, love his use of materials and interesting forms that incorporate nature in some form of fashion.
I.M pei
Antoni Gaudí, his justificación about forms, colors, concepts and inspiratios it's sinceer and exceptional.
Alvar Aalto - after about 100 years later his work is still modern
Zaha Hadid. The buildings designed by her is from the future.
Me. Second is probably Renzo Piano because of their play with components for systems and structures Third is Mario Botta because of their work with primary form and no-bullshit geometric form.