a step backwards for the RIAI?

MG you got it in one but all the lads are developers architects we see the results all around us ala office block extensions built on to office blocks from the 70s along Harcourt Terrace to name but one example and the footpath literally becomes a ‘foot-path’ and nothing else as is the case all over the city.

Brief “Design to the edge and the last mm.”

I would rather have the developers architect as head of the RIAI than an architects architect with little knowledge of the big picture. I think that Tony Reddy will be able to shake off the cobwebs and fight the RIAI’s corner. An excellent choice. PS are you both students?

Tony Reddy brings architecture to the masses, whats wrong with that?

Am surprised at comment that appointment of Anthony Reddy as president would be a backward step for the RIAI. Most architects work for developers, as most buildings are funded by developers. If MG is unhappy with this situation, he should champion the overthrow of our free market democratic society. The reference to the illegal demolition of Archer’s garage in the post, inferring that AR was involved in this act is slanderous, and it is amazing that this site carries it. If MG has knowledge of AR’s involvement, then he should make it available online, or withdraw his comments. Guilt by association is a common ploy used by cowardly extremists, without a logical arguement.

Anthony Reddy brings filth to the masses.

what his office brings is an apathy to anything other than profit, thinny veiled as architecture. to call what his office produces architecture is to call gareth gates beethoven. and to call Anthony Reddy leader of our countries institute for architects makes me sick.

wrapping a standard, minimally dimensioned apartment layout in a banal a-contextual facade of standard details, doesnt constitute fine architecture in my book.

we are not dealing with the president of developers, the president of quantity surveyors or the head of economics in our country we are talking about architecture.

the comments by vitruviushib are typical of mediocre “architects” who share reddys princple of least design for most profit. threatening someone with pathetic legalities just becase they dont share the smae view as you.

A STEP BACKWARDS? MORE LIKE MASOCHISM

i hope this is not a done decission yet!

i cannot believe they would even consider reddy for the presidency. im surprised hes even a member of the RIAI he doesnt seem to have any interest in architecture whatsoever.
the only building of any merit he has ever done are the offices he works in which shows you where his interests lie.

el architino will not stand for this sort of mumbojumbo.

EL ARCHITINO FOR PRESIDENTE!!!!!!!!

November 21 2003: Tony Reddy elected as RIAI President 2004/2005

Due to the lack of any other nominations for the post of RIAI President fo 2004/05, Tony Reddy of Anthony Reddy Associates will take office on 1 January 2004. Anthony Reddy Associates is a leading architectural design practice. The practice works extensively in Ireland, directing projects from its Dublin & Kilkenny Offices. Anthony Reddy Associates expertise includes Architecture, Masterplanning, Urban Design, Space Planning, Interior Design, Graphic Design and Project Management.

what? its a sad day.
leading architectural design practice? yeah leading in profits, not architecture.
i dont consider anthoney reddy to be an architect.

You should worry about who’s running your country before you start picking on the people who work for it.

I have not read the above thread properly, but I have recently done some study about Anthony Reddy and I would like to work for him.

I am interested in the ideas coming from America, from people like Andre Duany and the New Urbanists. No, I never actually heard about them in college and it is typically American crap – but there are some things about it I like.

For instance, the Smarth Growth movement or Smart Infill movement is taking off a bit now – born in a country that has real sprawl difficulties – the United States. But then I see the Fluid Spaces studio project by Hennighan Peng and I know they are all based loosely around the basic principles of Smart Infill.

I am wondering has a principle like Smarth Growth or New Urbanism really got some relevance in the much denser, less car/freeway oriented urban environment of Dublin.

yeah ok. but what has that got to do with the suitability of anthoney reddy as the representative of our national body for architecture. his design morals are questionable at best. does everyone else feel its fine to reducece our profession simply to an exercise in construction economics?

if anyone has any arguments validating anthoney reddys architecture above a money making machiene i would like to hear them.

Considering they used Anthony Reddy to introduce the RIAI book on Housing, with his essay, rather than someone say, like Shane O’Toole – does that seem to suggest that perhaps Anthony has got some far-reaching vision for the future of how Architecture Profession should progress. I mean, in some broader picture – hell, who knows, this man may not be the be all and end all, as in Tadao Ando or David Chipperfield – not in that mould, but you do not think it would be useful and beneficial to work for a practice like that for a few years?

I take the point, you would prefer to go around practices like that, in the fear of perhaps compromising certain values you might hold dear. What I am saying, is that perhaps Anthony also might have some strong values? Which deserve to be highlighted in the context of the argument generally. I.e. For people who are much too busy to spend any time visiting his web site?

I just thing that Anthony happens to be dealing with Architecture in a way, which suits what is going on in Dublin at the moment. You simply turn your back to a certain urban space, street or edge and look back after a few months, to find the place has changed out of all recognition. Perhaps the current interesting climate in Dublin city and elsewhere for Architects (It is an interesting time) has swung the balance in Anthony’s favour. A lot of what Anthony talks about is to do with change and flux and massive re-arrangement of urban form and scenes.

Because it benefits him and his company enormously brian, to tear apart urban fabric and build anew. i have to agree with what? Mediocrity is the order of the day. Its a conveyor belt of tired old details and weak massing. Slapped on facades with no depth make it look even worse. Corporarchitecture at its heady heights of worst.

not in a position to comment on his ability to lead the riai as i’m not a member, but if business savvy and sucking up to people with money is his way then things could be interesting for the next twelve months

Frankly I am amazed that there is this amount of reaction to the new president of the RIAI, it is bordering on bad taste and certainly may be construed as character assassination. This has been an ongoing problem in the discussion about architectural issues on this and other forums. It also proves the inability (probably not just and Irish thing) to discuss, criticise or constructively debate the qualities of architecture. It certainly shows that not only is there no level ground upon which to stand but it is heavily influenced by local interests. It is these local interests that allows such an apartite system of awards, commissions, honours that plaque the Irish scene that shows us as very poor cousins to the European Architectural scene. The relaxed approach of contemporary architects to work in Europe shows none of these insecurities or hang-ups. Rather than pillory one individual look at the range of past presidents of the RIAI, AAI etc. and look for the type of architectural debate that engenders.

That’s one point of view I guess. I recently did some research about Anthony Reddy myself, since I had heard so much flack being thrown in his direction here.

garethace/brian the fact that corners of dublin are being developed at a remarkable rate is nothing to do with anthoney reddy associates, it is because it is financially viable to develop these sites. it just so happens that reddy has a hand in an awful lot of them. this is in turn because he is best chums with the major developers of this city and is more than willing to sacrafice design quality for increased unit numbers etc. the fact that they are there is of no credit to reddys and the fact that they are banal rubbbish is.

shadow, you are suggesting that i am attacking reddy on a personal note because he is not one of the darlings of the award circuit in ireland? i have never met anthoney reddy the only way i know him is through his ‘architectural’ interventions in dublin city and suburbs. this is what i object against. i am insulted that you saty it is ‘bad taste’ to critcise this man now that he is the president of the RIAI, yet i havnt heard anyone one stand up for the architectural qualities of his creations. i know various people who have worked for his office and all tell of the disregard for architectural integrity in the face of profits or developers whims for more units.
is this the face of irish architecture we want to portray? i am frankly embarassed.

I am not defending anyone. Just don’t single Reddy out as the only one contributing to the problems of architecture in Dublin. And certainly don’t blame architects alone for the mess. Architectural criticism should be just that, architectural. As for the comments, they were not directed against any one contributor.

i completely agree that the criticism on this site should be kept relevant to architecture. this argument is relevant, it is about having a decidedly mediocre ‘architect’ as PRESIDENT of our national body. he is being singled out from the plethora of thoughtless architects in this country, because he has been singled out as president of the RIAI.
i feel it necessary to comment on this matter because i feel it is a poor representation of a fertile architectural community in this country.

well, i don’t think it matters what the design talents of the President are- as long as he acts in the interest of the profession, and the public as a whole.
i for one think that a ‘businessman’ architect like Reddy would make a better president than a ‘pure’ architect who can only relate to other architects.
by the way i agree with the architectural criticisms what? has of Reddy associates, i just don’t think it matters so much- he may still be a good preisdent…

yes cajul, that line of reasoning was the only solice or justification i could take from the whole affair. im sure reddy is shrewd in matters of business and knows the architects-client process inside out. if only as a pure politician he may do some good.

but i still have major concerns that this is all it takes to be considered the pinnacle of the irish architectural community. i think it gives off a wrong image. one that fills the minds of the general public of this country as to what architecture is, or can be.
as a general population, we are only finding our feet in regards to culture in this country.
we only now, have enough money to worry about things aside from basic essentials, and can pursue culture. this point has been reached long ago by countries like france and germany, where they now invest in proper architecture because the populus is able to appreciate it. they wont stand for mediocrity emblasened all over their cities. they are concious of what can be achieved.

here in ireland a builing with shiny re-constituted stone at ground level, and vaugely mock georgian brick facade above passes as being just fine, all-over our cities. people dont care. architecture needs to be brought above the level of mere construcion. reddy doesnt do this, rather he compounds the situation.
a president with more architectural integrity could bring design and great buildings to the conciousness of irish people. instead we have settled for whatever, once again.

But what is much more important is that France, Germany and Great Britian etc, all went through a process of rural – to urbanisation – along, long time ago. This is the hard fact that Ireland is having to face nowadays. That it isn’t like the United States with entire vast lands to conquer using urban sprawl – that land is now valuable in this country, where once it was considered almost worthless.

I particularly like the way that the RIAI Housing book divided itself into Urban, Inner Suburban, Outer Suburban and small town. Because that is rougly representative of the environment in Ireland at the present. I have undergone some very intense study of inner and outer suburbia recently myself. And Anthony has made the point in his essays, that suburbia was ignored by the worldwide profession for decades. The Architectural profession just assumed it was a passing trend that would go away.

On the contrary, the opposite has happened and suburbia has become the basic norm built environment of the vast majority. I see the appointment of this man, as maybe a positive step. A step towards architects really dealing with the reality of the built environment as a whole in 2003. Not just selecting parts that they ‘like’. I remember in the mid-nineties in college doing Trinity spatial analysis, and the staff saying that students ignored the parts of Trinity campus they didn’t like. Possibly a true point.

There are many parts of the urban inner core of Dublin city that Architects do ignore too. A bit like Archaelogists can sometimes get upset if somebody else discovers an ancient monument or site, before they do. The profession of Architecture has to short circuit this usual process of selectively looking at the built environment, and work with planners, urbanists, enginneers, conservationists etc. Otherwise it will remain marginalised.

I always think that in first year in Architectural school, learning to see buildings as cardboard boxes and all of that freehand drawing carry-on is very arty and cool. But I think learning to see buildings as buildings – really experiencing them is important too. It should be taught in Architectural schools from the off. ‘Get on yer bike’. It is the only way. I like maps, even maps of suburbia. Yeah, we spend a long time studying other great cities around Europe, but how much effort does the average young architect invest in seeing/getting to know the suburban environments of Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway?