While everybody these days seem to be outraged by the flurry of bizzare statements Schumacher has been posting on his page I thought I would just stay clear of it. It just seems to feed him the attention that he is desperately trying to get in any way shape or form.
On the other hand, when someone of incredibe public influence makes confunding statements (that brands humanitarin work or charity as someting lowley or scornful) it is important to rebut them publicly. There are young impressionable minds out there that believes this crap. So I thought what the hell.
Here is what he said and see my reply below:
Patrik Schumacher :
"it is Ban's humanitarian work that the Pritzker jury emphasized in announcing the prize"
I congratulate Shigeru Ban ... love his work, especially the Metz project ... however, I worry if the criteria of the Pritzker Prize ... architecture's... most prestigious prize ... are now also being diverted in the direction of political correctness .... I would wish that architectural innovations that upgrade the discipline's capacity to cope with and facilitate the great urban develpment and restructuring tasks we are facing would dominate choice here ... I am afraid that if criteria shift towards political correctness great iconoclast-innovators like Wolf Prix or Peter Eisenman wont ever stand a chance to be recognized here ...
does this mean that those who aspire to win the Pritzker - or the nobel prize in physics - have to add humanitarian charity work into the mix?
The purpose of the Pritzker prize is as follows:
To honor a living architect/s whose built work demonstrates a combination of those qualities of talent, vision, and commitment, which has produced consistent and significant contributions to humanity and the built environment through the art of architecture.
Notice that it clearly states CONSISTENT AND SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO HUMANITY.
This has always been a part of the Pritzker mandate.
The Pritzker committee has normally overlooked this aspect when awarding the prize as evidenced by its selection of laurites.
Giving the prize to Sheru on these grounds is perhaps a baby step in honoring that clause.
You should note that the Nobel Prize in Physics according to Alfred Nobel's will is to be awarded as follows:
"To the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics ...” So there is no need to worry that the Physics prize will suddenly require its lauriets to do humanatarian work.
In logic and critical thinking, your argument above Patrick, is a classic fallacy called a slippery slope - a form of pseudo-argumentation in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any rational argument or demonstrable mechanism for the inevitability of the event in question.
By the very same logic you made, I could argue (the day after Zaha Hadid won the Pritzker)
I congratulate Zaha Hadid ... love her work, especially her design for Muammar Quadafi's conference center in Tripoli. ... however, I worry if the criteria of the Pritzker Prize ... architecture's most prestigious prize ... are now also being diverted in the direction of empty curvy shapes .... I would wish that architectural innovations that upgrade the discipline's capacity to cope with and facilitate the great urban development and restructuring tasks we are facing would dominate choice here ... I am afraid that if criteria shift towards flashy pseudo rational from manipulation then great Humanitarian-innovators like Cameron Sinclair or Architects without borders won’t ever stand a chance to be recognized here ...
Does this now mean that those who aspire to win the Pritzker - or the Nobel Prize in physics - have to add superficial curvy shapes in to the mix?
Patrick, you have nothing to fear than fear itself - the old world order will prevail. So chill out man! Sounds like you need a hug :)
NOTES ON BECOMING A FAMOUS ARCHITECT
Liberating Minds Since August 2007