The American Architect
Vol. CXV
Wednesday, February 26, 1919Number 2253
Does the Architect Function as He Should? A Resume of the Program of the Post-War Committee on Architectural
Practice of The American Institute of Architects
By Robert D. Kohn
[The preliminary draft of the program of the Post-War Committee, as quoted, summarized and discussed in this article by Mr. Kohn, was published in the January number of the Journal of the American Institute of Architects. Inasmuch, however, as the Post-War Committee is seeking the co-operation of the entire profession, including a majority who are not affiliated with the Institute, The American Architect is pleased to give the project the fullest publicity.—The Editors.]
THE leaders in every trade and profession, the thinking men in education, in the law, in engineering and architecture, in the trade unions and in all the manifold industries of the country are giving consideration to the changes that will certainly take place in those industries and professions by reason of the war. There are, to be sure, a great many people who think that the United States is not to be materially affected nor radically changed as are the countries of Europe. Whether this be so or not, even if the direct effect of the war produces no marked changes here, it is certain that eventually the reflex of changed conditions in Europe is bound to require profound modifications in our industrial system. In addition to this, we are moving through a time of searching inquiry into the relation between industry and labor and between the various industries. It behooves the men in every vocation, therefore, not only to study the forces already rising to power before the war and more in evidence since the armistice, but also to inquire into the great question of their own relationship to others while there is still time to avoid even greater evils than those of the existing order of affairs.
It is interesting to note that the new spirit of the time has affected even the conservative religious leaders of the world. Mr. Ackerman recently illustrated this point at a meeting of Brooklyn architects by quoting from reports adopted by the Methodist Church of Canada at a general conference held at Hamilton (printed in full in the New Republic of February 8th). This he read in part as follows:
“The war has made more clearly manifest the moral perils inherent in the system of production
for profits. Condemnation of special individuals seems often unjust and always futile. The system rather than the individual calls for change.”
“The triumph of democracy, the demand of the educated workers for human conditions of life, the deep condemnation this war has passed on the competitive struggle, the revelation of the superior efficiency of rational organisation and co-operation, combine with the unfulfilled, the oft-forgotten but the undying ethics of Jesus, to demand nothing less than a transference of the whole economic life from a basis of competition and profits to one of co-operation and service.”
*****
“We declare all special privilege, not based on useful service to the community, to be a violation of justice, which is the foundation of democracy.”
When a Church Association thus faces the questions of the day, is it not time that every profession inquire searchingly into its activities and relations to the public, taking nothing for granted, reviewing every one of its accepted standards? We cannot stand aside as if we were antiquarians always to live in the past. We must apply the test through our vocations.
The keynote of any such investigation must be the words “right relationship.” As architects we should inquire whether or not we are in right relationship with the public—with those whom we would serve. Secondly, are we in right relationship with those with whom we would co-operate, with the other professions, the engineers, the craftsmen, the industries connected with building and the trade organizations; and thirdly, are we in right relation
Copyright, 1919, The Architectural & Building Press (Inc.)
Vol. CXV
Wednesday, February 26, 1919Number 2253
Does the Architect Function as He Should? A Resume of the Program of the Post-War Committee on Architectural
Practice of The American Institute of Architects
By Robert D. Kohn
[The preliminary draft of the program of the Post-War Committee, as quoted, summarized and discussed in this article by Mr. Kohn, was published in the January number of the Journal of the American Institute of Architects. Inasmuch, however, as the Post-War Committee is seeking the co-operation of the entire profession, including a majority who are not affiliated with the Institute, The American Architect is pleased to give the project the fullest publicity.—The Editors.]
THE leaders in every trade and profession, the thinking men in education, in the law, in engineering and architecture, in the trade unions and in all the manifold industries of the country are giving consideration to the changes that will certainly take place in those industries and professions by reason of the war. There are, to be sure, a great many people who think that the United States is not to be materially affected nor radically changed as are the countries of Europe. Whether this be so or not, even if the direct effect of the war produces no marked changes here, it is certain that eventually the reflex of changed conditions in Europe is bound to require profound modifications in our industrial system. In addition to this, we are moving through a time of searching inquiry into the relation between industry and labor and between the various industries. It behooves the men in every vocation, therefore, not only to study the forces already rising to power before the war and more in evidence since the armistice, but also to inquire into the great question of their own relationship to others while there is still time to avoid even greater evils than those of the existing order of affairs.
It is interesting to note that the new spirit of the time has affected even the conservative religious leaders of the world. Mr. Ackerman recently illustrated this point at a meeting of Brooklyn architects by quoting from reports adopted by the Methodist Church of Canada at a general conference held at Hamilton (printed in full in the New Republic of February 8th). This he read in part as follows:
“The war has made more clearly manifest the moral perils inherent in the system of production
for profits. Condemnation of special individuals seems often unjust and always futile. The system rather than the individual calls for change.”
“The triumph of democracy, the demand of the educated workers for human conditions of life, the deep condemnation this war has passed on the competitive struggle, the revelation of the superior efficiency of rational organisation and co-operation, combine with the unfulfilled, the oft-forgotten but the undying ethics of Jesus, to demand nothing less than a transference of the whole economic life from a basis of competition and profits to one of co-operation and service.”
*****
“We declare all special privilege, not based on useful service to the community, to be a violation of justice, which is the foundation of democracy.”
When a Church Association thus faces the questions of the day, is it not time that every profession inquire searchingly into its activities and relations to the public, taking nothing for granted, reviewing every one of its accepted standards? We cannot stand aside as if we were antiquarians always to live in the past. We must apply the test through our vocations.
The keynote of any such investigation must be the words “right relationship.” As architects we should inquire whether or not we are in right relationship with the public—with those whom we would serve. Secondly, are we in right relationship with those with whom we would co-operate, with the other professions, the engineers, the craftsmen, the industries connected with building and the trade organizations; and thirdly, are we in right relation
Copyright, 1919, The Architectural & Building Press (Inc.)