Re-examining the shape of an institution: a center to heal and promote the practice of architecture.

People "tend[s] to discuss architecture as an art or as a science overlooking the fact that architecture is above all a profession;" (Frascari: 16) and a profession riddled with challenges. Current trends prove the architect being consulted for only 20% of all construction work in North America. (Ghirardo: 17) Architects are also amidst the lowest paid professionals, ranking far below doctors, lawyers and even pharmacists. In his book Architectural Practice: A Critical View, Robert Gutman commented on the situation by stating the following:

Compared, say to physicians or lawyers, architects are in a weaker position to generate demand for their services. They have nowhere near the authority over the building industry that physicians enjoy in the medical care system; and they do not have as much influence over building rules and decisions as lawyers can exert through the courts and the legislative system. (Gutman: 98)

Furthermore, architects have, for the most part, turned their back to their communities. As professionals, architects have a responsibility to serve society. After all, architecture is a social act: that of providing shelter. Has the profession forgotten this?

Over the past twenty years, as a profession they [architects] have steadily moved away from engagement with any social issues, even those that fall within their realm of professional competence, such as homelessness, the growing crisis in affordable and appropriate housing, the loss of environmental quality, and the challenge posed by traffic-choked, increasingly unmanageable urban areas.
(Ghirardo: 27)

Existing centers and institutions attempting to address these issues are not enough. They comprise mostly of museums, which are not the proper vehicle to promote architecture as an accessible or social service. Displaying beautiful drawings behind glass cases helps only encourage the notion that architecture is available only to the wealthy.

A new type of institution must be created, one that could both promote the profession and encourage architects to think more socially.

Current institutions however, are typically associated as spaces for the disabled or mentally ill. Images of sterile, long, white corridors are often the images conjured, when one thinks of such a place. This typology is alienating and usually monstrous in size and program; qualities that prove disastrous for a building trying to address the public.

The shape of the institution needs to be re-examined. It must find a new way to approach the city in order to succeed as a vehicle for promotion and public use. For my thesis, I will attempt to address this issue while at the same time developing a program that will both promote the profession and encourage social practice.