Search results for "sci arc"

Placeholder Alt Text

Moving Forward

How can architects build the equitable discipline we deserve?
For those of us in schools of architecture, September is an exciting time animated by the return of students and the arrival of those beginning their journey. Architecture school is a powerful framework for cultivating capacities—a place of exploratory, creative, integrative, and rigorous learning and making. The design studio at the heart of our curriculum powerfully enhances student development as peers work together through face-to-face interaction in a shared space. However, those of us involved in accredited U.S. architecture programs will convene a population of students and faculty skewed toward white, male, and able-bodied people from well-off families. Studies by the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture (ACSA) and the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) show that our discipline is marked by gaps in participation and advancement by gender and ethnicity, leading to a profession where these disparities are even more pronounced. As David Gissen has pointed out in these pages, we lack data on other key factors, including ability. As exhilarating as starting an architecture degree can be, it also marks one step in a screening process that yields a demographically skewed profession and academic discipline. Where are the missing cohorts, and what factors are turning them away? How are we inadvertently sidelining women, first-generation college students, people of color, disabled people, and other traditionally underrepresented constituencies? How can we enrich architectural education and practice by expanding access and improving the value proposition? I am passionate about architecture’s intellectual and creative capacities, so I believe that a society that relies on architects to translate its needs and desires into built form deserves better. The underrepresented population turned away by the cost and other challenges of architectural education deserves better. Those of us in the field deserve better. What will make the field more accessible—and more compelling—to a diversity of talent? How can we build the discipline we all deserve? One familiar consideration is people, as more diversity in firm leadership and architecture school faculty will counter explicit and implicit bias by expanding the range of visible role models, mentors, and gatekeepers. A second well-recognized component is content: Presenting a diversity of perspectives and models within research and curriculum will better train our profession to serve society. If the theory syllabus, for instance, covers feminism and multiculturalism only in week 13—after students have chosen their paper topic and checked out to charrette for final reviews—the ways that women, people of color, disabled people, and queers have interpreted and shaped our built world will seem like an afterthought to the achievements and preoccupations of the propertied white men who historically have been recognized as architects. People and content are priority areas for any good diversity, equity, and inclusion strategy. Pipeline and mentoring programs starting with pre-college and continuing through faculty and firm promotion are essential, as are strategies for expanding what counts as core knowledge. Our ability to make substantive change is limited, though, if we don’t also tackle the ways we structure our degree programs and practices. By making high demands in money and time, the formats of education and practice distort the demographics of our field. Consider licensure: NCARB reports that the average time it takes from commencing architectural studies to obtaining licensure is more than 12 years. This is a very long probationary period marked by continuing education, tracking, exams, and diminished earnings. Given that the rigors of licensure may outweigh the rewards, people with fewer resources often pursue other career paths. Nearly half of those pre-licensure years are typically consumed by education. Whether you enter the field through an undergraduate professional degree or through a liberal arts or science degree followed by graduate study, architectural education requires a lot of academic credits. For many students, this also translates into a high debt burden. Many of those credits consist of design studios that meet for three to four hours per credit—rather than the typical one-hour-per-credit standard—while also demanding another three or four times as many hours in evening and weekend work. This curricular burden multiplies with each course or studio. Architecture school culture expects intensive effort disproportionate to the credit achieved. Studio is one of the glories of architectural education, increasingly emulated in other fields from engineering to business. But who can afford to dedicate this much time to schoolwork? Probably not a parent, a caregiver, a student-athlete, a first-generation college student working a job to offset costs, or a person with a disability that magnifies the endurance test of long studio nights and charrettes. This dynamic carries forward into practice. The habit of undercompensated overwork, instilled in studio, primes students for exploitation in the workplace along lines described by the Architecture Lobby. Studies by the American Institute of Architects Equity by Design committee suggest that the heavy time demands placed on many junior and midlevel associates push women out or take them off the top promotion track, because those years coincide with the period when many are starting families. To address these issues, NCARB and other organizations are reducing time-to-licensure by changing the Architecture Experience Program and launching Integrated Path to Architectural Licensure degree options. Faculty should extend this work deeper into the format and culture of architectural education, reviewing our assumptions about learning so that we attract and foster a broader range of talent. In doing so, we can accelerate progress toward building the discipline we deserve. To test these ideas, my colleagues and I at the University of Michigan’s Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning are embarking on a human-centered redesign of architectural education. Working in close contact with interaction and experience designers has shown me the value of human-centered design as a way to see interactions from varied user perspectives, and to redesign processes to promote success. By mobilizing this approach in architectural education, we hope to understand how our current students and those missing cohorts perceive and experience both our degree programs and the larger profession. Identifying the factors that turn people away will help us test ways to bring a wider range of people into the intellectual and professional world we cherish. One tool for building the discipline we deserve is pursuing academic innovation by piloting new approaches to teaching and learning, with the goal of improving the value proposition of architectural education. In many fields, institutions are combining online platforms with new business models to offer learning in a wider range of formats beyond the standard multiyear, full-time residency model. Some schools offer courses in self-paced online modes or create microcredentials that allow learners to gain competency. This lets them try out a new field through part-time study, which is compatible with work and other obligations. Architecture schools already deploying academic innovation or testing alternative formats range from IE University and Academy of Art University to the London School of Architecture and Build Academy. Our focus at Taubman is on something we’re calling equity innovation: academic innovation that promotes equitable access to learning and professional opportunity. This spring we launched an Equity Innovation initiative aimed at the human-centered redesign of architecture school. By experimenting with a broader range of ways for students to learn, we believe we can meet the needs and priorities of a more diverse community of future architects. As a first step, we have convened a task force and launched a multiyear competitive incentive funding program to elicit, develop, pilot, and deploy new approaches. Drawing on research by NCARB, ACSA, Equity by Design, the J. Max Bond Center, and other sources, we aim to understand the dynamics of selection and attrition shaping our student population. What are the points at which prospective architects exit the field? What curricular structures and experiences promote success equitably? Does the portfolio requirement unduly weed out promising candidates from impoverished urban school districts? Can more inclusive review practices promote gender equity? Can we lower the cost of education by complementing the high-contact model of the atelier studio with other platforms for design learning? What can we draw from the achievements of historically black colleges and universities, other minority-serving institutions, and past initiatives such as the one described by Sharon Egretta Sutton in When Ivory Towers Were Black? By prototyping—and ultimately deploying—equity innovations across and beyond the curriculum, we aim to remake our field. This work presents challenges, of course. Many faculty, alumni, and students are attached to our current ways of teaching—they worked for us, after all—and are loathe to tinker with cherished institutions like the desk crit, the all-nighter, and the marathon review. Others may fear a loss of status and cultural capital if the field draws less on the canons of Western philosophy and elicits theoretical knowledge from a more diverse range of sources. Finally, not everyone wants to let go of cultural capital built on selectivity and exclusion. I hope that by advancing this conversation within architectural education we can solidify the core strengths of our field, disentangle them from needlessly exclusionary mechanisms, and find common ground in enlisting a broader range of talent to design our world. Building the discipline we deserve is no small task, so we will partner with professional organizations and other schools to promote architectural excellence on more accessible terms. Join us in creating greater opportunities for all.
Placeholder Alt Text

Post-Landscape Ontology

SCI-Arc exhibit will explore post-digital attitudes toward environment and landscapes
The Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc) has announced Environment[al], a forthcoming exhibition curated by Herwig Baumgartner and Marcelyn Gow that will explore “contemporary attitudes toward environment in a post-digital context.” The exhibition and installation will feature the work of a slate of renowned international designers, architects, and landscape architects as it seeks to examine the changing character of environmental concerns in the face of technological innovation and climate change.  According to a press release, Environment[al] will feature the work of Izaskun Chinchilla of Izaskun Chinchilla Architects, Enric Ruiz Geli of Cloud 9, Carme Pinós of Estudio Carme Pinós, Wolf Prix of Coop Himmelb(l)au, Gilles Retsin, and Günther Vogt of Vogt Landschaftsarchitekten.  The exhibition will be supported by a panel discussion taking place June 15th that will feature Baumgartner, Chinchilla, Geli, Gow, Restin, and Vogt as well as Violeta Burckhardt, Vittoria Di Palma, SCI-Arc director Hernan Diaz Alonso, and SCI-Arc history and theory coordinator Marrikka Trotter. The exhibition will seek to engage with the ways sites, objects, and spaces generate “multiple authenticities” in contemporary constructed environments and will include transforming the school’s campus gallery into an interactive installation. The gallery will be transformed into a “landscape/substrate” designed as a diagrammatic facsimile representing the soil and geologic conditions of the Owens Valley to the northeast of Los Angeles. The space will also host a “sound map” installation portraying recordings taken along the banks of the Los Angeles River that will play when participants interact with elements of the installation.  The exhibition is slated to open at the school’s campus gallery June 15, 2018. 
Placeholder Alt Text

Yeezy Home

Kanye West launches “Yeezy Architecture” studio after visit to SCI-Arc
Following another recent Twitter spree and a series of problematic, rambling public interviews, multidisciplinary artist and designer Kanye West has announced the creation of a new architecture arm called “Yeezy Home” that will seek to expand West’s creative output to include architectural and urban design.  In a late-night tweet, the Hidden Hills, California-based rapper solicited the talent of aspiring designers, calling for “architects and industrial designers who want to make the world better.”  https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/993221454740185088?s=21 West’s cryptic tweet comes just over a week after the controversial creative visited the Southern California Institute of Architecture’s (SCI-Arc) Spring Show, a showcase of the school’s spring semester work. The visit prompted a tweet from Kanye highlighting the work of M.Arch I student Ashley Morgan Hastings and her desalination-focused project.  Following the visit, West tweeted out praise for the student: https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/990734224670867456?s=21 West has a long history of associating himself and collaborating with architects and designers, including a 2012 collaboration with Dutch architects OMA for the design of the 7 Screen Pavilion project, a pyramid-shaped projection room used to screen West’s Cruel Summer film at the Cannes Film Festival.  Amid an earlier tweetstorm two weeks ago, West unveiled Axel Vervoordt-designed the interiors for the mausoleum-like Hidden Hills home shared with wife Kim Kardashian. The top-secret designs follow previous collaborations with New York City-based Family and London, England-based architect John Pawson.  After proclaiming his “obligation to show people new ideas” following West’s renewed support for Donald Trump in a recent song, Kanye’s latest foray into design seems to be more involved, however. CityLab reports that the rapper recently purchased a 300-acre property in Los Angeles that West intends on developing himself. In a wide-ranging interview with Charlemagne Tha God, West hints at his future plans, saying, “Yeah, we’re going to develop cities.”
Placeholder Alt Text

Fantasy Lab

SCI-Arc show postulates a fictional energy future that doesn’t go far enough
In a recent installation at the Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc), Mark Foster Gage Architects attempts to bring the notion of parafictional art fantasy to the realm of architecture—with mixed results. Gage’s Geothermal Futures Lab considers the notion that, given the current regime of “fake news” and “post-truth” reality, architects might have renewed license to create new visions for the future rooted primarily in fantasy. In lectures and writings, Gage argues that architects from Vitruvius onward have always engaged in some form or another with parallel or alternate versions of reality through their works and that conditions are ripe today for this tendency to take hold once again. Furthermore, Gage posits that these efforts represent a facet of the Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) school of thought and could potentially be used to fend off the ever-increasing erosion—or flattening—of a shared reality that occurs when the people who lead and represent the nation are fundamentally preoccupied with telling lies. In the exhibition text, Gage asks, “Might architecture’s power in this new world be conducted through an elasticity of the real that encourages citizens to develop doubt about their presented realities—and therefore perhaps become more resistant to ‘fake news’ and ‘alternative facts?’” For the installation, Gage seizes this opportunity as a justification for postulating a new energy-generation technology called “laser ablation geothermal resonance” that draws its power from sources deep below the surface of the earth in order to sustainably supply Los Angeles with over two-thirds of its daily energy needs. To convey the fundamentals of this fictional energy revolution, Gage fills the SCI-Arc gallery with a stage setting meant to approximate a control center for the power generator, installing lab equipment, a metal detector, a faceted gold-leaf-covered reactor, a pile of rocks, and a collection of high-powered lasers and imaginary technical drawings for display. Technically speaking, the student-produced machine drawings are exquisite in their effusive and cheeky detail. Drawn to convey exploded axonometric views of the reactor and other components, the starkly outlined assemblage drawings also incorporate recognizable pop cultural elements, with hidden My Little Pony and Mr. Potato Head figurines buried within the constructions. The reactor mock-up is impressive in its detailing as well; it features the fractal and agglomerated geometries Gage’s other academic work is known for, while spewing fog from its lower extremity. But overall, the exhibition—and Gage’s interpretation of what parafictional fantasy in the era of “fake news” can provide to the field of architecture—falls flat. It’s not the physical objects that result from Gage’s exploration that are in question, but rather the interpretations that underlie them. For one, it belies a fundamental misreading of the current political-cultural moment to describe the Trumpian notion of “fake news” as a symptom of the so-called “great flattening” of intellectual hierarchies OOO represents. Practically speaking, “fake news” is not so much a product of the erosion of objective truth as much as it is an acknowledgment of multiple, covalent, and oftentimes contradictory perspectives that have always existed. Like it or not, “fake news” represents not merely plurality, but a new era of simultaneity writ large. The president and his lackeys have not so much created a fantasy world for their devotees to occupy as elevated a parallel existence that has always been very real to its adherents. In a lecture supporting the exhibition, Gage cites the Black Lives Matter and #MeToo movements as emblematic of “flattening” as well, a comparison that also doesn’t really apply. If OOO ideology is rooted in the “removal of human as primary subject” from perceived reality, how can two movements entirely rooted in acknowledging and prioritizing the fundamental humanity and agency of two often-maligned social groups serve as a case study? The comparison is flawed and problematic, representing a misunderstanding of not just what drives these movements, but also of what we can learn from them as architects, as well. And lastly, like so many other recent attempts at projecting future scenarios, the project is not really “speculative” in the literal sense and represents merely an intensification of existing modes and technologies, raising the question: If architecture’s power right now lies in its ability to speculate, what does it mean to have so many of its fantasies seem so underwhelmingly conventional? Southern California Institute of Architecture January 26 through March 4
Placeholder Alt Text

Emerging Voices 2018

LA-Más’s vibrant, socially conscious architecture sweeps L.A.
The Architectural League of New York’s Emerging Voices award and lecture series highlights individuals and firms with distinct design “voices”, singling out those with the potential to go on to even greater heights. 2018 saw two rounds of judging; first by a panel of past Emerging Voices winners, and a second to pick the winners. The first-round jury included Virginia San Fratello, Sebastian Schmaling, Wonne Ickx, Lola Sheppard, Marcelo Spina, Carlos Jimenez, and Marlon Blackwell, as well as members of the second-round jury, Sunil Bald, Lisa Gray, Stella Betts, Jing Liu, Paul Makovsky, Tom Phifer, Chris Reed, and Billie Tsien. AN originally profiled all of the emerging voices firms in our February print issue. LA-Más founders Helen Leung and Elizabeth Timme will deliver their lecture on March 22nd, 2018, at the SVA Theatre in Manhattan. For LA-Más, architecture does nothing if it doesn’t address a need. Guided by co-executive directors Elizabeth Timme and Helen Leung, the nonprofit urban design organization believes that too many young architects have become disconnected from this fundamental aspect of the discipline. By combining expertise in both design and policy, and by forming productive partnerships with other nonprofits, community groups, and local governments, the duo is creating street-level strategies for empowering communities that are often overlooked or threatened by demographic shifts. Working in collaboration with district councils or local business development groups, LA-Más has developed a series of vibrant projects, throughout L.A. designed to create a safer and more accessible pedestrian experience. These high-impact, low-cost projects include wayfinding, murals, street furniture, and temporary parks like the cartoon-inspired interventions of Hollywood Pop!, which converts a vacant corner lot into a privately owned public space where passersby can share their thoughts about the neighborhood’s future. More substantial transformations have resulted from their small business support program, which was created to provide local mom-and-pops with design services and additional support. LA-Más doesn’t just give these businesses a new storefront; they give them a new outreach network and help with leases, licenses, and websites. “They don’t just feel like they’re surviving,” said Timme, “but that they’re supported, which is a huge paradigm change.” These projects aren’t the result of abstract planning exercise but of listening to the people who live and work in the neighborhood. Timme added: “That’s what Helen and I do—we facilitate a conversation between a community and the city.” LA-Más’s work with accessory dwelling units (ADUs) is its most ambitious, and perhaps most impactful, project yet. Created to combat the housing crisis in L.A., its ADU Pilot Project is an opportunity to get residents directly involved in the development of their communities by building affordable housing in their own backyards—literally. In collaboration with organizations including the mayor’s office, local council, and Habitat for Humanity, the firm is building their first ADU in the Highland Park neighborhood. The two-bedroom, 1,000-square-foot project will not only be a model for affordable and contextual housing solutions but for innovative financing and future ADU policy. And it’s the best example yet of the benefits offered by LA-Más’s unique blending of policy and planning. As Leung said, “Because we can combine all these skills, we get to test ideas, implement, figure out what works, ground it in the need of the community, and really push the boundaries of what’s possible.”
Placeholder Alt Text

SHOWTIME

Craig Hodgetts reviews Sylvia Lavin’s “The Duck and the Document” exhibition at SCI-Arc
SHOWTIME! H-e-e-e-e-e-r-r-r-r-s-s-Sylvia! Armed with the good stuff. Pirouetting with John Soane, Peter Eisenman, and even Charles Moore. Connecting the dots with intellect, passion, and forensic precision, and trotting out never-before-seen docs blown up to the size of garage doors. Demonstrating not simply with words—which were choice, USDA prime—but with a full-blown demonstration of why what those words were about should matter. And what were they about? Some soon to be forgotten parametric wonder? Some arcane theoretical contest? Or a newly discovered manifesto that intends to change the course of everything? Not at all. They are a reality check, a course correction—maybe, even a scold (though that was never her tone)—that brought many in the room to a thudding encounter with reality. With those words—and the images that accompanied them—Lavin plays Lazarus to a fault, raising tired old post-modern architecture from the dead, breathing new life into what might have been warmed-over pizza and breathing new life into the age-old contest between meaning and symbolism. In the exhibition and lecture “The Duck and the Document: True Stories of Postmodern Procedures” at Southern California Institute of Architecture’s (SCI-Arc) Keck auditorium, Sylvia Lavin unearths implicit links between architecture as diverse as James Wines’s and Robert Venturi’s work for Best products, Eisenman’s handrail phobia, and Moore’s yearning to be “free”—to weave a tale of architecture’s gradual loss of autonomy as mechanization takes command*. Increasing regulation, nearly insurmountable hurdles in the supply chain of—for instance, colorants—drove architects to adopt a myriad of ruses and “workarounds” to achieve the effects they envisioned then, and one must admit, apply even more in today’s supplier-dependent world. Lavin’s message to students and aspiring architects is plain. By displaying well-chosen documents and correspondence which underscore the increasing frustration of the post-modern era’s most celebrated architects, she has been able to reveal the minutia behind their efforts, the tests of authorship, and the ultimate outcomes of conceptual and intellectual battles those architects (mostly) lost. With some surprise we learn that MLTW—Moore’s firm with Bill Turnbull, Richard Whitaker, and Donlyn Lyndon (symmetry: His father was a well-known architect)—is “long overdue” on an invoice for $24.53 from Knoll. In another example, we discover an invoice for a single half hour of Moore’s time, billed at $15.00. Pantone paint chips appended to a specification from Venturi’s office attest to his resignation in a battle over color with porcelain panel manufacturer Ervite and the scrutiny of focus groups is revealed in voluminous correspondence about the Sea Ranch project, MLTW’s celebrated Northern California retreat. In the gallery one is treated to an array of trophies from that era – a twisted handrail from Eisenman’s House I, in which the curator describes the architect wrestling with code requirements which conflicted with his aesthetic vision—a pair of porcelain-enameled Warholesque panels from Venturi’s florid Best products showroom and a quartet of columns from the Deborah Sussman- and Jon Jerde-designed Los Angeles 1984 Olympics signage—all poignant reminders of a time when the decorated shed reigned supreme. One might ask “what is the purpose of such a show at this time”? Is it to be a counterweight to the pervasive grip of digital design? A plea to restore the autonomy of architecture? Or a simple reminder that as bad as it gets, it’s nothing like the travails endured by our predecessors? My guess is that it is all of the above and more. A provocative and thoughtful peek behind the masks of those masters tells us a lot about ourselves and, at the very least, helps us navigate today’s even rougher waters of regulations, stakeholders, and committees. *Yes, that is Gideon’s phrase. Craig Hodgetts is founding principal and creative director at Los Angeles-based architecture firm Hodgetts + Fung. The Duck and the Document, curated by Sylvia Lavin, with associate curator Sarah Hearne and exhibition design by Besler & Sons, is on view at the Southern California Institute of Architecture gallery through May 28, 2017. See the SCI-Arc website for more information.
Placeholder Alt Text

Bilbao (Prison) Effect?

Frank Gehry to teach “The Future of Prison” course at SCI-Arc

This post is part of our years-long running Eavesdrop series (think page 6 for the architectural field). It’s your best source for gossip, insider stories, and more. Have an eavesdrop of your own? Send it to: eavesdrop[at]archpaper.com.

The Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc) announced last winter that architect Frank Gehry would be teaching one of the school’s elective vertical studios for the spring 2017 semester. According to an image promoting the studio on the university’s Instagram, the studio is titled “The Future of Prison” and “calls on emerging architects to break free of current conventions and re-imagine what we now refer to as ‘prison’ for a new era.”

Could Gehry and his students re-imagine the carceral system the way his firm did with tourist-driven arts destinations? Perhaps the class could propose new designs for the Metropolitan Detention Center in Downtown Los Angeles, the 757-bed jail located just one mile from the SCI-Arc campus. The jail is due to be replaced sometime between 2027 and 2030 under the auspices of the city’s new Civic Center Master Plan. If rebuilt elsewhere, planners would be wise to look to Gehry’s SCI-Arc studio for ideas and inspiration.

Placeholder Alt Text

OOO-ver the top

Watch Slavoj Žižek and Graham Harman argue at SCI-Arc
Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc) hosted controversial philosopher Slavoj Žižek last week during the most recent installment of the university’s Duel + Duets speakers’ series. The event—moderated by Anna Neimark, SCI-Arc faculty and principal at architecture firm First Office —took the form of an extended debate between Žižek and Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at SCI-Arc, Graham Harman. In opening the debate, SCI-Arc director Hernan Diaz-Alonso lauded the speakers as necessary poles in philosophical discourse, saying, “these are two thinkers that are fearless: They don’t operate in gray zones. They have clear, strong opinions and they define different views. That’s something that we treasure (at SCI-Arc).” Debate strayed across the philosophical spectrum and included a full-throated explanation by Harman of the Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) theory. Of course, Žižek issued an extended, hilarious rebuttal. Žižek, who controversially supported Donald Trump during the 2016 election, commented on the current political situation in the United States, calling Trump an “assemblage” of cultural and political currents. Despite the setting, the conversation stayed largely away from architectural matters except in the most abstract terms, including a reference to the architectural symbolism of Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. Harman argued that at this unstable political moment, architects should make a turn toward formalism. Ultimately, the trio duked it out for nearly two hours, including an extended back-and-forth with the audience. SCI-Arc has posted a recording of the entire talk to its Facebook page.
Placeholder Alt Text

Feel the Learn

Miami’s Frost Museum of Science by Grimshaw aims to be paragon of sustainable architecture
Miami’s new science museum will open its doors on May 8, 2017. The Phillip and Patricia Frost Museum of Science (or Frost Science, for short), which sits Miami's Downtown Museum Park, is part of Miami-Dade County’s initiative to make Miami a “cultural hub.” The 250,000-square-foot campus—designed by London-based Grimshaw Architects, who worked with local firm Rodriguez and Quiroga—is divided into four entities: the Planetarium, Aquarium, North Wing, and West Wing, which will include exhibit space, the Learning Center, the museum’s Science Store, and a museum café. The building is designed to be an exhibit itself, with examples of sustainable building practices and local wildlife. A rooftop urban farm and “Living Core” will be dedicated to showcasing native vegetation, while a solar terrace of photovoltaic panels will supply the building with energy. As part of the museum’s Everglades exhibit, there will also be an on-site wetland. These features should help the project achieve its expected LEED Gold rating. “The technology, engineering, and sustainability features found throughout the museum rival those on a global stage and will inspire and motivate generations to come,” said Frank Steslow, Frost Science President, in a press release. “Our goal is that Frost Science will be an international destination and vibrant educational space that encourages curiosity and investigation.” On top of the building’s built-in experiences, the museum will also feature exhibits on the history of flight, from dinosaurs to aerospace engineering, and the physics of light, and will, of course, provide ample opportunities to engage with local wildlife at the three-level aquarium. The museum is currently in its final stages of construction, awaiting the arrival of its new inhabitants. For more information about the museum’s exhibits or to purchase tickets, visit their website here.
Placeholder Alt Text

Solidarity

SCI-Arc issues statement in support of immigrants, students in light of Trump’s anti-Muslim travel ban
Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc) Director Hernan Diaz-Alonso and Chairperson of the Board Tom Gilmore emailed a letter of support to members of the SCI-Arc community directly impacted by President Trump's anti-Muslim travel ban yesterday afternoon. In the memo, which has since been posted to the university's Twitter and Instagram accounts, Diaz-Alonso and Gilmore voice solidarity with the students who have been impacted by the controversial (and potentially illegal) executive order signed by the president late last week, saying, "We want you to know that every one of us is affected by this. What affects one of us in our community affects all of us." It is unclear how many students, faculty, and staff at SCI-Arc have been affected by the order. See below for the full text of the memo.
Dear SCI-Arc Community, Let’s remember at this uncertain moment that SCI-Arc was founded on the premise that architecture can make the world better. In almost half a century since a small group of passionate individuals moved into modest sheds in Santa Monica, SCI-Arc has built a global community of students, faculty, and alumni that have dedicated themselves to a noble vision of civilized space. This vision has inspired us to bring the world, in all of its diversity, to our campus here in Los Angeles, and we will continue to do so. Architecture can be a marker in civilization for its finest values and aspirations. It has the capacity to bring people together in extraordinary ways. Recent political trends would have us turn inward and away from one another. This is something that SCI-Arc can never do. We refuse to let architecture become a tool for divisiveness and demoralization. Over the weekend, a new executive order has impacted some of you directly. We want you to know that every one of us is affected by this. What affects one of us in our community affects all of us. We also want you to know that we see it as a profound risk to our core mission and the open future that belongs to all of us at SCI-Arc. Every member of the SCI-Arc community, regardless of where you come from, what you believe, or whom you love, is indispensable to our mission. Creating an environment that stimulates education, speculation and humanity is at the center of who we are and do.  SCI-Arc is committed to protecting the rights to all the members of our community, and to do whatever is possible within the law to keep doing so. Now as always we stand together with you to defend a more just and open future.   Hernan Diaz Alonso Director/CEO Tom Gilmore Chairman of the Board
  (Also see: Studio Libeskind comes out against Trump travel ban, will boycott companies that support his administration’s policies)
Placeholder Alt Text

Honoring Millar

SCI-Arc and Woodbury University both launch new architectural scholarships
The Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc) and the Woodbury University School of Architecture in Los Angeles separately announced new scholarship opportunities for students this week. SCI-Arc’s latest new scholarship program—the third such new initiative launched in the last year by the university—is part of a new partnership with the country of Colombia aimed at benefitting students attending the university's new SCI-Arc Bogota program. SCI-Arc Bogota was launched last year in order to create a pipeline for Colombian and South American students seeking access to SCI-Arc’s undergraduate and graduate architectural programs. In a press release announcing the new scholarship, SCI-Arc Director Hernan Diaz Alonso said, “We are happy to continue expanding SCI-Arc’s relationship with diverse parts of the world,” making reference to the Bogota location as well as the recently-opened SCI-Arc Mexico outpost in Mexico City the school also debuted last year. The new initiative will be helmed by Juan Ricardo Rincon Gaviria, principal at Taller Paralelo Arquitectos in Bogota, a noted international firm. SCI-Arc Bogota’s educational program also includes a double-degree accreditation with the University of the Andes’ masters program and a full annual scholarship grant for Colombian students with the Foundation for the Future of Colombia (COLFUTURO).  COLFUTURO was founded in 1991 by public and private sector leaders in the country to “promote, guide, and finance graduate studies for Colombian professionals” attending international universities. The foundation benefits a selected student who is awarded up to $50,000 over two years in financing. SCI-Arc’s new scholarship aims to match this amount for the selected student. Applications for the foundation’s Loan-Scholarship program are due February 28; the winner of the scholarship will be announced in May 2017. Woodbury University also announced this week that initial contributions to the Norman R. Millar Scholarship Endowment fund had surpassed $30,000. The fund, which will benefit the school’s overall architectural scholarship programs, was started by the university after Millar’s death early last year. Starting in 1999 Millar served as dean of the university’s architecture school and is credited with helping increase its enrollment threefold over the course of his tenure. Millar also focused strongly on increasing diversity at the school and was instrumental in developing the Integrated Path to Architectural Licensure (IPAL) initiative through the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB). IPAL facilitates students’ ability to complete the requirements necessary for architectural licensure concurrently along with their degrees. In a press release announcing the scholarship fund’s endowment, Ingalill Wahlroos-Ritter, interim dean, Woodbury School of Architecture, lauded Millar’s contributions to the university, saying “Norman’s talent and experience as a practitioner and vision as an educator helped thousands of young people achieve success in the field of architecture. Hardly a day goes by that we don’t hear from a former student, colleague or fellow architect whose career was inspired by Norman’s leadership, and who wishes to honor his legacy by making a contribution to the scholarship endowment established in his memory.” Donations can be made to the Norman R. Millar Scholarship Endowment here.
Placeholder Alt Text

Žižek v. Harman

Slajov Žižek and others to speak at SCI-Arc during Spring semester
The Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc) has released a list of its featured public programs for the Spring 2017 semester that includes, among its events, a debate between controversial Slovenian philosopher Slajov Žižek and SCI-Arc Distinguished Professor of Philosophy Graham Harman. SCI-Arc’s lecture series will be complemented by two exhibitions that will occur throughout the semester. The Duck and the Document, curated by Sylvia Lavin, will showcase a collection of architectural ephemera that includes handrails and facade panels salvaged from canonical buildings from the 20th century. Drawing Conclusions, curated by Jeffrey Kipnis and designed by Andrew Zago, will explore the year of 1990 as a potential “apex” for hand drawing as a representational, technical, and conceptual tool for architects. The university's public program for the semester will include the following events: Didier Fiuza Faustino Lecture, 01/25/2017 Mat Olson Lecture, 02/01/2017 José Oubrerie: Chapel of the Mosquitos Library Gallery Exhibition Opening, 02/03/2017 José Oubrerie + Todd Gannon Duel + Duet, 02/06/2017   Graham Harman + Slajov Žižek Duel + Duet, 03/01/2017 Peter Cook Lecture, 03/08/2017 Neil M. Denari Lecture, 03/15/2017 Jeffrey Schnapp Lecture, 03/20/2017 Drawing Conclusions Symposium + Exhibition Closing Reception, 03/24/2017 Sylvia Lavin Lecture, 03/29/2017 Jake Matatyaou + Amalia Ulman Lecture, 04/03/2017 Giancarlo Mazzanti Lecture, 04/05/2017 The Duck and the Document SCI-Arc Gallery Exhibition Opening Reception, 04/14/2017 Spring Show Exhibition Opening Reception, 04/29/2017 Maxi Spina: Thick SCI-Arc Gallery Exhibition Opening Reception, 06/16/2017 For more information on SCI-Arc’s events, see the SCI-Arc website.