Posts tagged with "Harvard GSD":

Placeholder Alt Text

Samuel Bravo wins Harvard GSD’s 2017 Wheelwright Prize

Chilean architect Samuel Bravo has been named as the 2017 winner of the Wheelwright Prize by the Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD). He is the fifth awardee of the open international competition that supports research proposals with a travel grant being given to the winner. Bravo will take home a $100,000 grant to aid his design- and travel-based research. His proposal Projectless: Architecture of Informal Settlements studies traditional architecture and informal settlements, touching up Bernard Rudofsky's notion of “architecture without architects," which the artist put forward in his 1964 Museum of Modern Art exhibition. The Chilean architect, according to a press release, plans to visit South America, Asia, and Africa, as he intends to unearth the architectural vernacular of visited sites and work out how to amalgamate these with contemporary approaches to design. Formal architecture only caters for the minority, Bravo argues. The rest live in the informal built environment. The idea of such an environment has been considered before: "There is no such thing as bad architecture; only good architecture and non-architecture," stated Ernesto Nathan Rogers (yes, Richard Rogers' father) and that notion was later echoed by Reyner Banham. In his 1964 exhibition, Ruodofsky said the essentially non-architectural projects featured are "not produced by the specialist but by the spontaneous and continuing activity of a whole people with a common heritage, acting under a community of experience." In light of this, Bravo will look into how project-less environments exist and how formal architecture can inhabit and operate within such confines. In his proposal, Bravo also referenced how design must be sensitive to the potential "cultural frictions" associated with restructuring problematic settlements. The 2017 Wheelwright Prize jury consisted of Gordon Gill, Mariana Ibañez, Gia Wolff, and standing Wheelwright Prize Committee members Mohsen Mostafavi and K. Michael Hays. "Samuel is a sophisticated designer and a mature thinker, qualities that make him an ideal candidate for this year’s Wheelwright Prize," said Mohsen Mostafavi, dean and Alexander and Victoria Wiley Professor of Design at Harvard GSD in a press release. "His work on its own is striking, and the participatory design-build process he has refined over time is additionally compelling. In resurrecting ideas about so-called 'non-pedigreed' architecture and expanding the scope of his research and practice internationally, Samuel’s project opens up new and exciting paths for the next generation of architects."
Placeholder Alt Text

Kenneth Frampton remembers Eduard Sekler (1920 – 2017)

Trained as an architect at the Technical University of Vienna, Eduard Sekler studied under Rudolf Wittkower at the Warburg Institute in London before graduating there as an architectural historian in 1948. Coming to the States as a Fulbright scholar he joined the faculty of the Harvard GSD in 1956 at the invitation of Josep Lluís Sert. A decade later he became the first director of the Carpenter Art Center, a position which he held for ten years during which time he also founded Harvard’s Visual and Environmental Studies Center and co-authored, with William Curtis, a study entitled Le Corbusier at Work: The Genesis of the Center for Visual Arts (1978). Sekler was active as a scholar over a very wide range, publishing his thesis on Christopher Wren in 1956 and his definitive monograph on the work of Josef Hoffman in 1985. He was one of the first theorists to articulate the difference between structure, construction and tectonics, with this last focusing primarily on the static expressivity of built-form as opposed to formal abstraction as an end in itself. As a researcher and teacher Sekler was also concerned with the “space of public appearance” as this could still be found in historic cities throughout the world and this preoccupation fed into his lifelong concern for the preservation of the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal, a place which he visited virtually every year, throughout his prime. In one, or another, Sekler served the GSD for over half a century and he was a regular visitor there even after his retirement. His loyal presence there will be sorely missed.
Placeholder Alt Text

Snøhetta will turn this old house at Harvard into ultra energy-efficient building

A green building research center at Harvard has enlisted Snøhetta to transform its headquarters into a test site for technology that may make it easier to retrofit older homes. Using its modest headquarters as a guinea pig, the Harvard Center for Green Buildings and Cities (CGBC) at the GSD will retrofit its on-campus home. Designed by Snøhetta, the HouseZero project revamps the CGBC's 1924 stick-built house to run without an HVAC system, without daytime electric lighting, and produce zero carbon emissions, among other efficiencies. The project is the brainchild of Ali Malkawi, professor of architectural technology at the GSD and the center's founding director. "Before now, this level of efficiency could only be achieved in new construction," said Malkawi, in a press release. "We want to demonstrate what's possible, show how this can be replicated almost anywhere, and solve one of the world's biggest energy problems—inefficient existing buildings." In the United States, 113.6 million homes use around ten percent of the nation's energy. Although there are plenty of new buildings that are net-zero, there aren't many practitioners working to bring older buildings—especially older houses—up to that standard. For the CGBC, which was founded in 2014 to promote high-performance building techniques through design, HouseZero is a major test project. Instead of considering the house as a sealed box, Snøhetta will create an envelope that passively heats and cools itself. The HVAC system will be replaced with thermal mass, while a ground source heat pump will provide extra energy to regulate temperatures in the warmest and coldest months. Clad in white cedar shingles, HouseZero sports ash and birch interior finishes, natural clay plaster, and reclaimed brick and granite—all high-performing, locally available materials. The building components are outfitted with sensors so the structure can adjust itself for thermal comfort throughout the day while collecting data for future retrofits. A lab inside will be connected to the energy exchange system so architects and researchers can swap and test new facades and materials to further optimize the structure's performance. The project's concept design was developed in collaboration with the Center and with Snøhetta, which will act as lead architect, interior, and landscape architect. (The U.S. branch of Norwegian construction company Skanska is working on the house, as well.) Though it could probably go LEED super-platinum, HouseZero's creators aren't setting out to build for any existing certifications. According the press release, the team "wants to demonstrate an entirely new paradigm for ultra-efficiency, one that is localized and focused on curbing energy demand, with energy production secondary to that." Construction is expected to take between seven and nine months.
Placeholder Alt Text

A new initiative targets fair labor practices for architects

The Architecture Lobby, Yale School of Architecture’s Equity in Design, and Harvard Graduate School of Design’s Women in Design have collectively launched a new accreditation program to promote fair labor conditions in architecture firms called JustDesign.Us. The consortium cites the “rise of massive student debt, stagnating wages, and an overabundance of skilled applicants coming out of professional schools” as the impetus for such a service. Operating from an eponymous website, the project seeks to provide a platform for architects and designers to vet the labor practices of potential employers serving as a new industry tool for more transparent employment. 
“The project aims to provide potential employees with a robust tool for gaining a sense of which firms will treat them fairly, with respect, and support their development as architects, while giving certified JustDesign firms an edge in attracting the best possible designers.”
Planning to release its inaugural list in December of this year, the organization will deploy its operation in two phases; first, solicit nominations online from employees themselves, then certify that the nominated firms comply with “best labor practices.” The initial employee nominations will survey issues such as "labor conditions pertaining to flexibility, agency, fair pay, salary transparency, employee diversity, and family-friendly policies." While the website and its associated documents are light on the specific methodologies to be employed in phase two of the process, or indeed who will be evaluating the firms, the ambition of this program is to cultivate a field that is symbiotically beneficial to workers and employers alike. JustDesign.Us is endorsed by a handful of groups, mostly academic in nature, however has not yet recruited professional organizations such as The American Institute of Architects and The National Council of Architectural Registration Boards. The nomination process is not meant to be punitive and will only review positive employee questionnaires, celebrating firms that excel in fair treatment of their employees not shaming companies that underperform in this regard. Nominations for the first round of review are due by July 15.
Placeholder Alt Text

Bradley Cantrell chosen as Chair of Landscape Architecture at UVA School of Architecture

The University of Virginia has announced the appointment of Bradley Cantrell as the new Chair of Landscape Architecture at the School of Architecture. Cantrell is currently an associate professor of Landscape Architectural Technology at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design (GSD) and director of their Master in Landscape Architecture Program. The Architect’s Newspaper met with Cantrell in April of last year to discuss his groundbreaking work in the fields of landscape architecture, ecological analysis, technology, and artificial intelligence. In that interview, Cantrell describes his work as "cyborg ecologies" that focus on blurring the lines between natural and man-made systems. “I think a lot of people have issues with the idea that we’re actually extending even more control over the landscape,” said Cantrell. “I think there is a fear of that we’re constantly in discussion about how we relinquish control. I think it’s an open question.” He believes that the integration of technology and nature should be seen as a powerful and positive synthesis and something to be celebrated, as opposed to an “us versus them” duality between man and nature. Cantrell discusses the power of technology that is not only designed to serve mankind, but can also be used to serve the natural environment. In our interview, he explained: “I think this idea that there are competing goals and that humanity might not always be at the center of all of those goals—that takes somewhat of an enlightened viewpoint, but it also is one that is necessary for us to have.” Cantrell will step into his new role at the University of Virginia on June 25, 2017.
Placeholder Alt Text

Winners announced for the GSD’s inaugural Richard Rogers Fellowship

The Harvard University Graduate School of Design (GSD) has unveiled the winners of its inaugural Richard Rogers Fellowship. Namik Mackic, Maik Novotny, Jose Castillo, Saidee Springall, Shantel Blakely, and Dirk van den Heuvel will spend three months undertaking urban and architectural research at Richard Rogers's seminal south London dwelling. The class of fellows will be awarded free travel to London as well as $10,000 to aid their research. The residency program was made possible after Richard and his wife Ruth donated the house to the school in 2016. Situated in Wimbledon, the Grade II listed building was built in 1969 and commissioned by Rogers’s parents, Dada and William Nino Rogers. The colorful residence, regarded by many as a British modern masterpiece, emulates the U.S. West Coast vernacular of the time and features a prefabricated yellow steel structure which is made visible by a glazed facade. "The spirit of the Fellowship is intended to carry forward and expand on Lord Rogers’s deep commitment to cities not as ends in themselves, but as a fundamental means of bettering human life," said Mohsen Mostafavi, dean and Alexander and Victoria Wiley Professor of Design at Harvard GSD, in a press release. "At the GSD, our work is organized around the urgent issues cities are facing globally, a pedagogical approach requiring exploration and collaboration across disciplinary lines. We are very fortunate and excited about this opportunity to support, learn from, and promote such cross-disciplinary research internationally, in the context of London’s thriving architecture, design, and art communities and vast institutional resources." Rogers's Wimbledon dwelling will now be used for research into areas that have been pivotal in the architect's life and career. In doing so, questions pertaining to urbanism, sustainability, and how people use cities will be addressed. Projects from this year's fellows will look at public and affordable housing; how food and cooking transform cities; and citizen-driven urban regeneration initiatives.
Placeholder Alt Text

Explore landscape architecture and fashion design together at this new GSD exhibit

The exhibition Designing Planes and Seams is now open at the Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD). The exhibit is co-curated by Harold Koda, fashion scholar and former curator-in-chief of the Anna Wintour Costume Center at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and Ken Smith, acclaimed landscape architect. Designing Planes and Seams aims to explore the parallels between two seemingly disparate design fields—landscape and fashion—to prove that they may not be as unrelated as they first appear. “In the design arts, invention, innovation, and the discovery of new insights and methods of working often happen through cross-disciplinary investigation,” said Anita Berrizbeitia, professor of landscape architecture and chair of the GSD’s Department of Landscape Architecture, in a press release. In this cross-disciplinary exhibition, the curators propose that the two fields share a similar objective: creating structure for an organic body, revealing the designer’s intellectual process, and allowing for cultural expression. “In both clothing and landscape design, for example, seams join different material conditions, gradients, or directions of flow. When considered comparatively, interpretive frameworks emerge that broaden our imagination and yield new possibilities in the conceptualization of landscapes,” Berrizbeitia added. The exhibition includes six dress forms curated by Koda and two from the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s collection, all paired with corresponding landscape architecture projects. The exhibit reveals each piece’s design process and the parallels shared by both disciplines, such as conceptual and tectonic responses to physical constraints. Select student projects from Smith’s Fall 2016 GSD studio “Inherent Vice,” which explored similar conditions of seams, junctures, materials, and form, specifically relating to landscape and urbanization, are also on view alongside the dress forms. The exhibition Designing Planes and Seams is on display until March 26. A reception featuring the curators, Koda, Smith, and Berrizbeitia, will be held on Friday, February 24, at 12:00 p.m. More information can be found at here.
Placeholder Alt Text

Harvard GSD set to launch free online architecture course

Starting February 28 is a free online course from the Harvard Graduate School of Design via the edX learning platform. Titled The Architectural Imagination, the course aims to teach participants about the cultural backdrop to architecture and how to "read" architecture "as a cultural expression as well as a technical achievement." The Architectural Imagination lasts ten weeks (though is self-paced) and requires roughly three to five hours of engagement per week. Guiding you through the course will be its creators: K. Michael Hays, Eliot Noyes Professor of Architectural Theory and associate dean for academic affairs, Harvard University; Erika Naginski, professor of architectural history and director of graduate studies, Harvard University; and Antoine Picon, G. Ware Travelstead Professor of the History of Architecture and Technology and technology director of research, Harvard University. A statement on Harvard GSD's website reads:
Architecture is one of the most complexly negotiated and globally recognized cultural practices, both as an academic subject and a professional career. Its production involves all of the technical, aesthetic, political, and economic issues at play within a given society. Over the course of ten modules, we’ll examine some of history’s most important examples that show how architecture engages, mediates, and expresses a culture’s complex aspirations.
Landmark buildings, selected for their cultural and architectural important from various historical contexts, will be used as a source for analytical material. Hands-on exercises such as drawing and modeling will also take place to bring students "close to the work of an actual architect or historian." The course's syllabus has broken down into three parts: Part I: Form and History Module 1: The Architectural Imagination: An Introduction Module 2: Reading Architecture: Column and Wall Module 3: Hegel and Architectural History Module 4: Aldo Rossi and Typology Part II: The Technology Effect Module 5: The Crystal Palace: Infrastructure and Detail Module 6: The Dialectics of Glass and Steel Module 7: Technology Tamed: Le Corbusier’s Machines for Living Part III: Representation and Context Module 8: Drawing Utopia: Visionary Architecture of the 18th Century Module 9: The Pompidou Center in the City of Paris Module 10: Presenting the Unrepresentable The edX platform was founded by Harvard and MIT in 2012. Now the free online education service offers up a wide variety of courses including some from ETH Zurich, and the University of Tokyo. To learn more about this course, visit its website here.
Placeholder Alt Text

New Harvard GSD fellowship aims to promote student diversity

The Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD) recently announced the creation of the Phil Freelon Fellowship Fund, part of a wider $110-million-plus push (dubbed "Grounded Visionaries") to improve and expand the GSD. The fund will provide financial aid to African Americans and other underrepresented groups. Phil Freelon, the architect for whom the fellowship is named, called the fellowship’s establishment “an important step in broadening the GSD’s reach” at the announcement ceremony last week. “As the design profession continues to attract a more diverse talent base, this gift will provide students of color with financial assistance that could make pursuing an advanced degree at the GSD possible,” he said. Freelon earned his Master of Architecture from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and served as a Loeb Fellow at the GSD from 1989-1990. He is still closely involved with the GSD as a lecturer and researcher. His firm, The Freelon Group, has won dozens of awards for designing museums, higher education spaces, and science and technology facilities, and was acquired by Perkins + Will in 2014, where Freelon now serves on the board and as managing and design director of the North Carolina office. His work includes the National Center for Civil and Human Rights in Atlanta, Historic Emancipation Park in Houston, and the recently opened National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington D.C. James G. Stockhard, Jr., former curator of the Loeb Fellowship, praised him as a role model for students at last week’s event. “He is the kind of leader—strong, clear, selfless, and principled—who helps the rest of us find the courage to join him in striving for the best we and our society can be. He asks us to be the best designers, the best colleagues, and the best citizens we can imagine,” he said.
Placeholder Alt Text

New Richard Rogers Fellowship unveiled by Harvard Graduate School of Design

The Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD) has launched the Richard Rogers Fellowship. The program will use esteemed British architect Lord Richard Rogers's seminal south London dwelling to host a residency program in aid of architectural and urban research. Situated in Wimbledon, the Grade II listed building was built in 1969 and commissioned by Rogers's parents, Dada and William Nino Rogers. The colorful residence, regarded by many as a British modern masterpiece, emulates the aesthetic that was popular on the U.S. West Coast at the time and features a prefabricated yellow steel structure which is made visible by a glazed facade. Rogers donated the home to Harvard GSD earlier this year, despite the building briefly going on the market for nearly $4.8 million in 2013. The new Harvard GSD fellowship is open "accomplished professionals and scholars working in any field related to the built environment.... And is dedicated to advancing research on a wide range of issues—social, economic, technological, political, environmental—that are critical to shaping the contemporary city," said the school in a press release. "The Fellowship is inspired by Lord Rogers’s commitment to cross-disciplinary investigation and engagement, evident across his prolific output as an architect, urbanist, author, and activist." By occupying the building, the school said they aim to ensure that the property continues to be used as a residence. Six fellows will be granted three-month terms at the house each year along with travel expenses to London, and $10,000 cash prize. "The goal of the residency program is to support research that addresses alternative and sustainable urban futures," the school said. The Harvard GSD is now accepting applications to the fellowship. Candidates are required to have completed a Bachelor’s degree, though the school stated their preference for "advanced degrees." A CV, portfolio of design work and/or research work, and research proposal must be submitted by November 28 of this year. More information can be found here. Winners will be announced in early December 2016.
Placeholder Alt Text

Landscape architect Bradley Cantrell on “cyborg ecologies” and new ways to look at nature

In a basement laboratory at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design, Bradley Cantrell flips a switch, and a river begins to flow. On a table surveilled by movable sensors and a Microsoft Kinect, pulses of water carry bits of colored sand down a model riverbed.

As an associate professor of Landscape Architectural Technology and director of the GSD’s Master in Landscape Architecture Program, Cantrell runs experiments like these to better understand the natural elements that make up his profession’s palette. But by using computational methods to analyze and even redesign nature, he’s also breaking new ground in the field. Cantrell’s work blurs the lines among environmental engineering, landscape architecture, and artificial intelligence. He sat down with The Architect's Newspaper contributor Chris Bentley in April.

The Architect’s Newspaper: Your work has been described as “computational landscape architecture.” How would you define it?

Bradley Cantrell: I like the term “responsive technologies.” I use a slightly more provocative term sometimes and talk about “cyborg ecologies” or “cyborg landscapes.” It’s really that there isn’t this differentiation between natural systems and human constructed systems. Our technologies actually augment and, yes, change these, but we should celebrate that synthesis as opposed to setting up a duality. We think about nature as being bound in this one place, humans being bound in another. My take is that we should celebrate the connections between those two. It’s not my goal to put computation into everything. But my work uses computation to set up this set of interconnected relationships in a more advanced way.

You talk about embedding sensors and computational technology into the physical landscape, so the landscape reacts to its users in a kind of conversation—what are some of the possibilities of that?

We have this fluid modeling table, but we’re not really modeling a known landscape like the Mississippi Delta. What we’re really doing is using the dynamic nature of that fluid flow and looking at the way the sediment behaves within that. And we’re trying to then use ways of sensing the surface morphology so we can get a digital model of that surface. We can also get spot elevations so we understand how high places are; we can understand how fast water is moving. But then using that data, trying to imagine what are the interactions with that data in real time. We could begin to calculate the actual power of the river to build land or erase land. We could use it to stabilize certain portions, allow other portions to be more in flux.

But the idea there is that by using computation we could take on multiple goals. So it could be about building land, but also that land ebbs and flows because there’s another cycle of a bird species or something like that. Right now we’re taking a very naive approach and just saying, “What are the possibilities of how we can manipulate the system?” And then ideally beginning to layer complexity into that. Right now, when we want to change a river system, we dredge or build a levee to hold water over here and make it dry over there. So it’s a much more traditional construction method, and this one speaks to this kind of real-time interaction with the landscape.

That feedback is one that I think is really important. It speaks to the flora and fauna, too. There’s the idea of resistances among all of these different actors, that there is a form of evolution. And that leads to more resilience within that system because in some ways we’re not depending on a single moment that holds everything together.

You want to let natural systems run their full range of behaviors, but it’s risky to engineer unpredictability into our landscapes. What’s the right amount of uncertainty?

This is a really big question that I don’t have an answer to. But I think it’s a really interesting one. If you think of the way we’ve manufactured something like the Mississippi River, the current state of it has all been put into place for human beings. It’s about navigation up and down the river; it’s about protecting human settlements. And then there’s a whole series of effects from that that alter the surrounding ecosystem. But we then build other things to remediate those effects. My take would be that the relationship could just be more advanced between all of those systems. Sure, there’s going to always be these issues that pop up. But ideally the way things are being managed can propagate those changes back out to the system.

It’s not about taking all the levees down. It’s about how we’re interacting and changing the way the flow occurs in one spot, but we aggregate that off of a thousand points and suddenly the whole river system behaves slightly differently. Can we hold the river in place for a certain amount of time with some certainty? And then can we open that up and allow the river to take on a new course?

When you use terms like “cyborg coast” and “synthetic ecologies,” it sounds like you’re the Dr. Frankenstein of landscape architecture. But building responsive landscapes does not mean replacing natural systems with technology, right? What’s the ideal balance between reengineering nature and conserving it?

I think a lot of people have issues with the idea that we’re actually extending even more control over the landscape. I think there is a fear of that we’re constantly in discussion about how we relinquish control. I think it’s an open question. I would say that you do run the possibility of basically manufacturing everything. As our technologies have gotten more advanced, what we’ve seen is really having more and more control over deeper and deeper levels of biological life. Commercial agriculture is a good example of how we’ve extended that control in a way. But one of the issues there is that it all hinges on basically one variable, and that’s productivity. When everything is hinged on that, then we get a very homogenous situation across commercial agriculture. And that’s where I think this idea that there are competing goals and that humanity might not always be at the center of all of those goals—that takes somewhat of an enlightened viewpoint, but it also is one that is necessary for us to have.

Where do digital representations of the environment still come up short? Is it impossible to model a natural system without oversimplifying it?

I think there’s a kind of clarity in terms of the actual changes we’re making. It’s very difficult for me to say that when I perform this operation, it propagates up through the system in this way. It’s not all about us having better models and better simulations. Part of that is about having a clear understanding of what we’re modeling and the relationships in those models. I think that part is one that’s somewhat missing. Some of these get ironed out just by convincing someone in a small plot of land that this might be an interesting idea and going out and starting to test it.

Even an art project that takes the sediment diversion and uses it as a way to kind of print or paint the landscape—that isn’t all about exactly how the ecological system performs—may sound silly, but it’s a step in that direction. Then people start to see the potential. Building the system and letting people see how it operates is an important step—even if it’s art first.

What’s the next step in actually implementing these ideas?

All the work now is in the lab. I try to make the work a bit more robust by actually working with civil engineers, computer scientists, and ecologists to make sure that they understand that this work exists, because those conversations are the ones that become the most interesting. When an ecologist says, “I never really thought of the idea that you would create basically a robot that would create an ecological system that was outside of human construction.” Suddenly there’s a new place where, is that wilderness? Is that commercial agriculture? Is that design, when you’ve made a robot that thinks for itself and is actually changing the world around us? If we haven’t really manufactured it and it’s a place that we don’t actually understand how it completely works, because it’s this other thing making it, it’s almost wilderness on one hand. The genesis is human construction, but the actual actions are computational logics.

We’ve tried our hardest throughout time to make sure we’re not part of nature. In some ways we’re realizing that there is no separation. We’re actually remanufacturing the Earth similar to any other species that has the same capabilities we might have. That’s something for us to come to grips with. When we do, we suddenly have a new responsibility in the world. It’s not about us doing something and nature responding. What we’re doing is possibly just wrong. It’s not about responding. It’s that we need to be the ones that rethink our processes.

Placeholder Alt Text

Four Finalists Compete for the Harvard GSD’s $100K Wheelwright Prize

There are four finalists competing for the Harvard University Graduate School of Design (GSD) international travel fellowship this year. For the uninitiated, the Wheelwright Prize is almost like a Fulbright research grant, but for young international architects. Aimed at architecture graduates of the past 15 years, the winner will receive a sweet deal: they’ll take home $100,000 towards research outside of the United States (or if living internationally, outside their country of residence). Additionally, there are opportunities to lecture at the Harvard GSD and publish research in a GSD publication. The four finalists are presenting their work at the Harvard GSD this April 20th. Last year’s award went to Erik L’Heureux, an architect and assistant professor based in Singapore. His proposal centered on studying architecture in equatorial zone cities like Jakarta and São Paolo. The prize was founded in 1935 in memory of Arthur W. Wheelwright, and originally awarded to top graduates of Harvard’s GSD program. The prize opened up four years ago to young international architects beyond GSD. The prize has gone to a roster of notables that include I. M. Pei, Paul Rudolph, and Eliot Noyes. Here is a rundown of the four finalists and images of their past work. The GSD selected the four finalists from a pool of over 200 entrants from 45 countries. Samuel Bravo Chilean architect and assistant professor Samuel Bravo has a background working on earthquake reconstruction in historic areas in South America. His proposal is titled Cultural Frictions: A Transference, From Traditional Architecture to Contemporary Production. Matilde Cassani Architect, designer, and curator, Matilde Cassani, from Milan, has worked on sustainable developments in Germany and rebuilding after tsunamis. Her studies have focused on public space, migrant communities, and modern sacred/religious spaces. Her proposal is titled Once in a Lifetime: The Architecture of Ritual in Pilgrimage Sites. Anna Puigjaner Barcelona-based architect Anna Puigjaner (MAIO) focuses on the impacts of flexibility in architecture and design. Her past work has explored adaptable, site-specific installations, as well as the connections and tensions between urban and domestic life. Her proposal is titled Kitchenless City: Architectural Systems for Social Welfare. Pier Paolo Tamburelli The fourth finalist is architect and visiting professor Pier Paolo Tamburelli, cofounder of baukuh architects (based in both Genoa and Milan). He has worked on mixed-use and public buildings, as well as masterplans and historic renovations. His proposal is titled Wonders of the Modern World.