ship to our fellow professionals and the younger architects who are studying to enter the profession?
Within a few weeks the newly organized Post War Committee on Architectural Practice will send out its preliminary program to every architect in the country, whether a member of an existing architectural organization or not. The committee is not a committee of the Institute. It was appointed by the directors of the Institute, but is expected to add to its membership from the profession at large, and has been directed to try to reach every architect of the country who is qualified to practice his profession. It hopes to get information from the individual and then to report back to the individual from time to time the results of its investigations, so that eventually the whole profession may be made aware of and may develop a guiding public opinion. We may in the end thus define the ways in which the profession should be advancing in order to achieve its highest purpose.
During the past few weeks messages have been received from all over the country indicating that the building fraternity generally considers the committee to have before it possibilities for the greatest good, and welcoming its appointment with enthusiasm. Already architectural organizations in a number of cities have held meetings to discuss the program.
What, then, is this program? In its details it will shortly be sent to many thousand members of the profession (others who are interested may secure copies on application). In general it starts with a declaration of purpose which the committee considers to be “to study and suggest improvements which will affect the conditions and increase the efficiency and adequacy of architectural practice throughout the United States. The desire is to make the study cover the whole country and to reach every qualified person practicing the profession of architecture, irrespective of whether or not that person be a member of one of the established professional organizations.” It then goes on to say that “the experience of the war has bared the weakness of long established methods of performance until institutions of every kind, hitherto thought to be effective, have been found wanting. The conditions affecting the building arts at this time, therefore, not only suggest but demand that they be given the same searching analysis that is being given to every human activity.”
After citing the three main divisions of the investigation which have already been referred to, the program proceeds to outline fourteen main topics on which the committee invites comment and suggestion. The point is clearly made that each of these subjects as stated is not intended to indicate an opinion held by the committee or to signify an
implied criticism of present methods. Persons interested in any branch of the building profession are urged to study the existing procedure with regard to each of these items and to express an opinion as to whether or not these are at present what they should be. The test of right relationship is to be applied to each. Is it what it should be? Should it be bettered? Can it be bettered? How are we to go about it? In considering each item (as far as humanly possible) self-interest is to be set aside, because of the conviction that eventually the best interest of the individual in any vocation will be attained through his rendering the greatest possible service to society as a whole through that vocation.
The subjects of investigation are to be presented under the three categories already referred to arid will at the beginning include the following:
I. The Relationship of the Architect to the
Public
a. Extension of the service that the architect may render: All the professions have been criticized for having worked primarily in the interest of one class to the neglect of others; for the rich or moderately wealthy, and to a lesser degree, or not at all, for the poor. We know that a large majority of all building work is carried on without the services of a competent architect. It is one of our most important problems to discover where lies the responsibility for this condition; with the architect’s training and practice, or with the public? Has the architect laid too much stress on the aesthetic and too little on the business value of his functions? Has he kept in touch with the new developments in industrial methods, the ever-growing demand for better human relations within industry, the new desire for better ways of living, each one of which justifies and requires an environment which will further its development? Is the cost of the architect’s service so great as to make it generally unavailable for the solution of such problems? Does the public consider the architects’ service as a luxury mainly reserved for the wealthy? Granting that it is essential to attempt to secure a solution of every building problem that shall be aesthetically satisfactory, should not the architect none the less urge the importance of his knowledge of wise economy, adequate and practical planning, safety, and the most advanced building methods? Assuming that the profession as a whole will have acquired the knowledge that justifies these claims, what educational work can it undertake to make the public generally aware of them ?
b. Responsibility of the Architect: A large proportion of building is carried on with borrowed funds. A reliable estimate of the cost of the com
Within a few weeks the newly organized Post War Committee on Architectural Practice will send out its preliminary program to every architect in the country, whether a member of an existing architectural organization or not. The committee is not a committee of the Institute. It was appointed by the directors of the Institute, but is expected to add to its membership from the profession at large, and has been directed to try to reach every architect of the country who is qualified to practice his profession. It hopes to get information from the individual and then to report back to the individual from time to time the results of its investigations, so that eventually the whole profession may be made aware of and may develop a guiding public opinion. We may in the end thus define the ways in which the profession should be advancing in order to achieve its highest purpose.
During the past few weeks messages have been received from all over the country indicating that the building fraternity generally considers the committee to have before it possibilities for the greatest good, and welcoming its appointment with enthusiasm. Already architectural organizations in a number of cities have held meetings to discuss the program.
What, then, is this program? In its details it will shortly be sent to many thousand members of the profession (others who are interested may secure copies on application). In general it starts with a declaration of purpose which the committee considers to be “to study and suggest improvements which will affect the conditions and increase the efficiency and adequacy of architectural practice throughout the United States. The desire is to make the study cover the whole country and to reach every qualified person practicing the profession of architecture, irrespective of whether or not that person be a member of one of the established professional organizations.” It then goes on to say that “the experience of the war has bared the weakness of long established methods of performance until institutions of every kind, hitherto thought to be effective, have been found wanting. The conditions affecting the building arts at this time, therefore, not only suggest but demand that they be given the same searching analysis that is being given to every human activity.”
After citing the three main divisions of the investigation which have already been referred to, the program proceeds to outline fourteen main topics on which the committee invites comment and suggestion. The point is clearly made that each of these subjects as stated is not intended to indicate an opinion held by the committee or to signify an
implied criticism of present methods. Persons interested in any branch of the building profession are urged to study the existing procedure with regard to each of these items and to express an opinion as to whether or not these are at present what they should be. The test of right relationship is to be applied to each. Is it what it should be? Should it be bettered? Can it be bettered? How are we to go about it? In considering each item (as far as humanly possible) self-interest is to be set aside, because of the conviction that eventually the best interest of the individual in any vocation will be attained through his rendering the greatest possible service to society as a whole through that vocation.
The subjects of investigation are to be presented under the three categories already referred to arid will at the beginning include the following:
I. The Relationship of the Architect to the
Public
a. Extension of the service that the architect may render: All the professions have been criticized for having worked primarily in the interest of one class to the neglect of others; for the rich or moderately wealthy, and to a lesser degree, or not at all, for the poor. We know that a large majority of all building work is carried on without the services of a competent architect. It is one of our most important problems to discover where lies the responsibility for this condition; with the architect’s training and practice, or with the public? Has the architect laid too much stress on the aesthetic and too little on the business value of his functions? Has he kept in touch with the new developments in industrial methods, the ever-growing demand for better human relations within industry, the new desire for better ways of living, each one of which justifies and requires an environment which will further its development? Is the cost of the architect’s service so great as to make it generally unavailable for the solution of such problems? Does the public consider the architects’ service as a luxury mainly reserved for the wealthy? Granting that it is essential to attempt to secure a solution of every building problem that shall be aesthetically satisfactory, should not the architect none the less urge the importance of his knowledge of wise economy, adequate and practical planning, safety, and the most advanced building methods? Assuming that the profession as a whole will have acquired the knowledge that justifies these claims, what educational work can it undertake to make the public generally aware of them ?
b. Responsibility of the Architect: A large proportion of building is carried on with borrowed funds. A reliable estimate of the cost of the com