View all events

2019 SPRING SUPPER DEBATE: Architectural Awards

Tuesday 14 May 2019

Michael Lowndes
The Architecture Club member

Architectural Awards are a stitch up, aren’t they?

It is an acknowledged truth that the only people who don’t believe in awards are those (few) architects who have never won anything!

So it was surprising that multiple award winners Russell Curtis and Sarah Wigglesworth were outspoken in their support of the motion. Awards are meaningless they argued: if you pay enough, often enough, you are bound to win something eventually. Awards are invalidated by a corrupt process - shortlisting is a cursory activity of 'tinder' bitching; judges, if they bother to visit the buildings, are hamstrung by stylistic prejudice; where bland is rewarded especially if one invests in great communications and lovely architectural photography.

So it is abundantly obvious that awards are nothing more than elaborate PR exercise, where like-minded self-selecting judges (usually old white men) fail to acknowledge genuinely innovative work; where heroes are made of the wrong people and most damningly, where awards programmes are a closed shop with no genuine public involvement. Who asks the user, the occupier and the resident their opinion?

Arguing against the motion were Julian Robinson (the only non-architect) and Jane Duncan - an unlikely alliance of a former town planner and a former president of the RIBA.

Pragmatically they recognised the flaws of the system yet managed to compellingly argue that for all those flaws awards were worthwhile. It is important to remember, they argued, that they are not just about the architect (get over it!) as they also reward the whole team and recognise the collaboration of all disciplines that work together to deliver great buildings. Whilst certainly difficult to navigate and often embarrassingly self-restricting they are not a closed shop, with over a 100 awards available surely it’s much more of a pick n’ mix!

Stitch-ups do happen but rarely. Don’t damn all awards by the uncomfortable exceptions. Choose your award programme carefully; go for the ones which represent the gold standard, where there is a rigour in the judging process, where clear criteria are adopted to allow genuine and rational comparison. You know the system works when there is healthy argument between judges. Challenging debate often leads to the right decision especially when every aspect of a scheme is properly considered.

Awards matter - they are a validation of purpose for established practices and they support emerging practises; they do reward innovation; they allow clients to make informed decisions; they positively influence the planning process. We all love a bit of silverware; it celebrates the best of what we do.

In the cut and thrust of the debate a surprising level of common cause was established about how awards could be improved. There is, for instance, a genuine requirement for greater diversity in the selection of judges with different voices and different perspectives; more recognition is needed of the value of public opinion; that more engagement with, and feedback from, both occupiers and the client is essential.

Good judging is not just about aesthetics (the glamour shot) with proper recognition being given for working methods, new technologies, credentials of sustainability and budget. The ability to deliver quality on tight budgets should be a powerful consideration. We also need to recognise in our awards the contribution of our buildings/places contribution to the growth of existing and new communities.

It was agreed by all that to be genuinely effective awards should be open, thorough, carefully moderated, with stylistic preferences ignored. Perhaps, it was argued, buildings should not be judged until in use for a few years so that they can be exposed to the scrutiny of age - when appearance and performance data can be assessed along with the views of the occupiers.

All awards inevitably involve subjective judgement but this does not invalidate the process, it humanises it. Awards represent the opportunity to properly celebrate architectural achievement and this is to the benefit of us all.

The motion was defeated – architectural awards are not a stitch up.