What is the condition of the architectural profession in Poland today, and what should be the role of the SARP in shaping and elevating the position of architects in the investment process? - We ask Jerzy Szepanik-Dzikowski of JEMS Architekci.
If you look at the condition of the profession through the quality of architecture, it is undeniably improving. I have the opportunity to observe this phenomenon over several decades. Even rejecting the prehistoric achievements of communism, it should be noted that the last thirty years are characterized by a steady increase in the quality of architecture. The level of so-called mass production is increasing, from which, for example, "palaces and mansions" have disappeared, larger buildings are increasingly avoiding unmotivated ornamentation. Also, architectural competitions that often result in outstanding realizations, as well as the activities of many private investors seem to be creating a better and better picture of "architectural production." However, this observation is not only optimistic - abominations and ugliness are still being created in Poland in abundance, and adding more and more spoons of honey to the barrel of tar does not change the taste to a satisfactory degree. What's more, looking at the condition of the profession solely through the level of architectural production is false to the extent that thirty years ago we were scrubbing at the bottom, and this is a level from which it is relatively easy to lift ourselves. If we look at the achievements of Polish architecture against the background of the developed countries of the West and the East, the assessment does not come out well, or at least ambiguously. Modern architectural production does not cope with either the suburbs of cities or industrial and warehouse buildings, either in France, Spain or Italy, but culture and landscape in most countries come to the rescue. Where they don't have a strong presence, reality creaks. To any Polish architect who wants to make himself feel better, I recommend a trip down the Po River valley, where architectural endeavors are not hindered by charming towns or rows of cypress trees - it's as ugly as in Mazovia (though the fences are lower). I have a deep conviction that the problems with the development of our country are not special, they are similar to those throughout the world of "economic success."
STORM ACTION PARK - proj.: topoScope and Archigrest, 2023
photo: Krzysztof Babicki © Zarząd Zieleni m.st. Warszawy.
For years, voices have been heardin the Polish architectural community about the unsatisfactory condition of the profession, the diminishing role of the architect and the increasing responsibility of the architect. The sources of this state of affairs are primarily attributed to the bad and imprecise law, which places the architect in the wrong place and does not grant him the appropriate prerogatives. In the many years of unfair and unequal battles for better regulations, we have not had clear successes. It is therefore worthwhile, instead of stubbornly beating our heads against the wall, to reflect on the reasons for our failures, in the hope that recognizing this state of affairs will allow us to act more effectively. Perhaps the root cause is not in the law either.
I reach back as far as I can, and what I draw is invariably the same image of the architect created first by the academy, then nurtured in the community and sanctified in the SARP. The image of an architect who is a demiurge, an architect who is an oracle in matters of beauty, an architect who has full knowledge of the lives of people and societies, for whom he defines the framework in which they should live and enjoy freedom, provided that they do not go beyond this framework. Such an architect deserves respect for the fact that he proudly bears the burden of being an architect. However exaggerated or hurtful this description may seem, I would argue that an architect's mental profile has a significant impact on his professional actions, his ability to understand reality and his client. Of course, the sheer need, desire to create, sensitivity to beauty or knowledge of man and society are most desirable. When curiosity and willingness to interact dominate the belief in one's own potency in professional attitudes, they prevent degeneration.
STORM ACTION PARK - proj.: topoScope and Archigrest, 2023
photo: Krzysztof Babicki © Zarząd Zieleni m.st. Warszawy.
We must also accept that we live in a world where the goal is mass production, sales, quantity and profit. Massiveness does not abolish individuality. Our creative longings collide with the needs of the man of the macdonaldization era (to use George Ritzer's term) shaped by fashions, promoted trends, advertisements, a man formatted by and for consumption. Consequently, the product expected by the user is to be standardized as much as possible, from function to size to production technology. Constant growth requires uniformity, typification and standardization, which, as we progress, naturally limits the field of freedom in creation and undermines the legitimacy of appealing to beauty. The conflict between mass production and our profession, defined as a creative profession, is immanently built into today's reality. While in the creation of unique objects, which to a certain extent are public buildings (museums, libraries, theaters or concert halls), one can still speak of creation, i.e. architecture in its hitherto understood sense, the mass production of developer housing or office projects, where the market demands the furthest uniformity, is more akin to duplication than creation. Worse, the demands of technical standards and the often absurd requirements of regulations and procedures make this production extremely cumbersome and therefore deeply unsatisfying. With "development" and the passage of time, our profession undergoes far-reaching transformations, a measure of which, for example, is the obvious fact that architects who were active only a few decades ago, such as Carlo Scarpa, Siegfried Leverentz, Alvar Aalto or Hans Scharoun, would have nothing to look for in today's market. Nor would Pniewski, Gutt or Swierczynski be appreciated by the market. Their proper approach to architecture, which is ever-present in our attitude to practicing the profession, is today a source of widespread professional frustration. In simple terms, a contemporary architect has two paths to choose from: one is to specialize in the direction of documentation production, the other is small-scale creativity aimed at a market niche, where creativity, sensitivity and the ability to translate them into implementation requirements are expected. The intermediate path can only be chosen by some earning mass production for the opportunity to finance competitions, and further execution and often subsidizing the design of public facilities. Surcharging, because the level of fees in the sphere of public procurement is far from satisfactory.
In all this conflicting situation, it is worth emphasizing that the first need of the mass consumer is not to satisfy his sensitivity to beauty. He expects first and foremost a material and tangible product, moreover, one that conforms to the standards and fashions imposed by the demands of consumption. Hence, an architect entering the zone of unmeasurable sensitivity usually finds himself walking alone through a minefield carefully planted by regulations, standards, developer requirements, which the direct user of his architecture looks on indifferently, if not hostilely. As a result, the architectural community (not only in Poland) functions in a rather tightly sealed bubble, in which its members find a source of satisfaction in the publications reviewed and read by their colleagues, in the prizes their colleagues award, or in the meetings and symposia their colleagues attend. The question, then, is not how many good houses have been built, as I mentioned in my introduction, but whether anyone else notices them besides ourselves. For I would argue that in the current era the condition of our profession cannot improve as long as it remains misunderstood. And such is the profession of architecture, an image of which we architects breed within ourselves.
STORM ACTION PARK - proj.: topoScope and Archigrest, 2023
Photo: Krzysztof Babicki © Warsaw Greenery Management Board.
There is no simple recipe for changing this state of affairs. It is not created by anyone, but is the result of global processes beyond our control. Architects in many countries of the world complain equally about the difficult situation of the profession, and one can, it seems, combine these complaints with the level of economic development and technological progress. But the above-mentioned processes devastating our profession are not the only ones. Despite their pressure, creativity is alive in the architectural world. It is to be hoped that humanity, and with it architects, will not be locked into a soulless bubble of consumption. It makes no sense to oppose the current of a rushing river, but putting down the oar does not bring us closer to the shore. Moreover, one needs to understand the river in order to swim in it. Our professional community needs to reflect deeply on the role and function of the profession. On the one hand, we must be aware of the needs of the consumers of our homes; on the other hand, we must not reject the non-authoritarian function of architecture. Friedrich Georg Jünger's phrase "people born only to consume, exclusive consumers, will not be able to create wealth" also applies to us. To produce only to consume is to impoverish.
So if we see today the deeply unsatisfactory condition of our profession, if we are struggling every day with laws that we think are bad, with increasing responsibilities, with procedures, withlimiting our field of decision-making with contracts and so on, we should recognize that good laws for us, proper procedures and respectful contracts will not be passed and signed by people who do not see the value of our profession. This does not mean, however, that the cause lies outside our environment. I believe that the only value that is important in the long run is the quality of practicing our profession - not the one guaranteed by laws and contracts, but the one that they do not capture, involving authentic creativity. We should be good architects and, consequently, valued architects. This is a task for our environment for years to come. If someone wants to point out that this is nothing new, he will be right, of course, but one must also admit that the activities of the SARP and the Chamber of Architects in recent years seem less and less oriented to this quality. It is not enough to solicit competitions, exhibitions and discussions, as long as they are directed at ourselves. The problem of our environment today seems to be isolation. What architects should strive for is to be partners with other intellectual and creative communities. Architecture in its non-authentic layer is everyone's business. For this to happen, however, the affairs of others should become the affairs of the architectural community. Building formal and informal relationships with institutions and people in the world of art, culture and science should be one of the primary tasks.
In the introduction to the survey of mental condition in the academic environment of architecture in Poland, conducted in late 2023 and early 2024 at a dozen of the most important universities training architects, we find the following sentences: "I would like the environment to be less toxic and more open to change", "the whole architecture environment in Poland is quite depressive" [cf. A&B 06/2024, pp. 92-97]. While this is a singular opinion, one must agree with it, and it is also a symptom of disillusionment. This disappointment will probably deepen as one enters the profession. In the same survey, 76.4 percent of academics and 86.7 percent of students agree with the statement "the architectural profession is unique - architects have a unique responsibility." As it seems, the belief in the architect's "mission" is fostered by the staff teaching at universities, and perhaps also lives on in society as a kind of founding myth of our profession.
For future students of the profession, its image should be outlined with complete sincerity, as should its challenges. For we need people in our profession who are ready to take up these calls. It is disappointment that makes our environment "quite depressing." I would argue that as close as possible cooperation between universities and architectural organizations is one of the necessary conditions for building the awareness of architectural youth, and this undeniably serves to build the position of our profession.
This text is burned with several illustrations of realizations that carry tenderness and sensitivity - those most necessary and inalienable values of architecture.
Jerzy SZCZEPANIK-DZIKOWSKI
JEMS Architects
more: A&B 09/2024 - CITY, ARCHITECTURE, CAPITALISM,
download free e-publications of A&B
