Conversation with SCHEMA
Architecture media greatly impacts the way we design, the way we learn and also the public’s perception of our industry. Not to mention, given that social media and traditional media now carry a co-dependent relationship, it brings up a lot of questions about how we want architecture media to be portrayed and approached.
Last week, I’ve invited Emma Berton and Jake Wilson (co-founders, SCHEMA) to discuss the approachability of architecture media. What we like about it, what we would like to see in the future, and our unpopular opinions of the Australian architecture media.
Below is the transcript.
What inspired Schema?
Jake: During my time at university I found myself, like so many others, completely swept up in architectural thought, history, and so forth. We dive so deep into all of this and change the way we perceive everything, which serves as such a great basis to design from. But I think a lot of this is lost on the general public; at least that’s what I found through my discussions with friends. There’s a tipping point where it’s all too hard to understand and it becomes “just architect stuff”.
Architecture is such a fundamental pillar of our society and the way we live. We all consume architecture in some capacity - it’s impossible to escape where we live, work, play - and most people do have general opinions on the spaces we inhabit. But there’s a distinct gap between architects and the people that we design for, which is a real problem.
And so Schema has been founded with the intention of addressing this lack of architectural consciousness, utilising it as a platform to convey coherent and accessible ideas. Our aim is for Schema to grow and contribute a diverse series of thoughts and observations on architecture and design. This is all in the hope of generating a greater appreciation and understanding of architecture and its potential, which will allow us to use it far more constructively to improve lives.
Emma: I definitely agree with the above. For me the overstimulation of architecture in university made it apparent that this world we’re absorbed in is so deep and you couldn’t even begin to scratch the surface in a lifetime of study. I always liked the quote ‘good design is obvious but great design is transparent’ and I think this is so relevant because of the way the media and the industry choose to market architecture which also only gets amplified at higher education levels. If you don’t have an interest in good architecture then there is no point it being obvious to those people, it needs to fit seamlessly into their lives.
Architecture is seen as this unobtainable thing to so many people, it is portrayed as the best kind of design and used as an indicator of quality when in reality you can still have bad architecture.
Schema was intended to address a widespread misconception of what architecture is in our everyday lives. It is about starting discussions on who deserves to have an ‘architecturally designed’ home (the answer is everyone because architecture shouldn’t be a status symbol, it is a fundamental human right to have a home that functions to the best of its ability). Accessibility is key and as Jake has mentioned above it is present in so many forms of the built environment that we should acknowledge and appreciate it so that it can thrive.
How has been Schema distributed, or how have you been growing Schema?
Jake: In its current form, Schema is a website first and foremost. With the content that we’re currently creating - which is predominately written essays and photojournals - we’ve found that this is the best and easiest format to present these items. Our writings are something that you need to sit down and pay attention to - you can’t just swipe across, absorb it all in a matter of seconds and then keep scrolling. Having said that, we’re currently using Instagram and Facebook to then market the website and distribute links / glimpses into the article - and we have found that people are accessing the website through this. We are trying to maneuver the formatting limitations of Instragram to help present our ideas to our audience - it’s a marriage between the ways that people currently want to absorb information in such a quick and easy forum, with the more detailed concepts that we’re trying to pack into that. It’s a bit of a contradiction that we’re only just starting to grapple with.
What are you opinions to popular architecture publications and blogs? What do you like about it? What do you dislike about it? What do you think needs to be changed?
Jake: I find this difficult, because on one hand I’m encouraged by the fact that people are now more exposed to architecture and design through accessible media - by that I’m referring largely to Instagram accounts and popular TV shows. It’s great that there’s a general interest in what we do. On the other hand, I’m extremely concerned by the way that these images are consumed at such a surface level - people are becoming so caught up on aesthetics, how something looks in a photograph, without much regard for the design intent behind that and the functionality. When there’s no deeper meaning to a design decision, no thought as to why something should look or perform a certain way, that’s how architecture becomes ‘trendy’ - it’s skin deep. When there’s a story behind a design decision, that doesn’t date and it doesn’t go out of style. And so this all gets back to one of the reasons we founded Schema, if our community develops a greater understanding and appreciation of architecture, then naturally there’ll be a greater willingness to invest time and thought into these topics. Instead of scrolling through Instagram or Pinterest and forming opinions about a building based on its appearance, we read about the concept behind a design, we understand the context and reasons it’s designed this way. Right now I only see this level of information in certain websites and print media (quality books and magazines).
Emma: I agree, I love the way architecture is gaining momentum in Australia but I'm concerned that it will become too oversaturated and that people will lose sight of it’s true purpose. A good blog will explore the concept in order to understand why the building is what it is, this is also true for a good magazine or book also. I am also concerned about how architecture firms are also using blogs and platforms to heighten their overall popularity (this is mainly done by building up their own reputation to gain wealthier clients) I am yet to come across too many not for profit organisations that have been explored through websites and publications, it is mostly designs that function well but look pretty. We also have a major lack of cultural appreciation about the land we build on in this country, architecture is one of the biggest threats to our natural environment in so many ways but we have so much potential to create a harmonious balance - but we seem to be missing the mark. I would like to see an overall appreciation for a more diverse range of architectural projects and companies producing great architecture not just for profit but for its necessity, I believe these things can be just as beautiful and appealing. There should be more discussion from the clients points of view - the architect will always have an opinion on the design but without the client there isn’t a need for it. I would also like to see more transparency in building and project costs and architectural fees - I understand this is a lot to ask however by hiding the price it makes the project feel a lot more mysterious and expensive (grand designs is relatively transparent and it is a great starting point to opening up the money debate which is arguably the biggest barrier for people).
Does social media impact the way you think and design?
Emma: It does for me in a good way because I can use my architectural knowledge to make educated guesses about the intentions of the designer - for a lot of people it is purely cosmetics they see.
Jake: For me I don’t think it’s a major influence on the way I think or design, but it can sometimes come in handy as a stepping stone to accessing further media and information. If I’m casually scrolling through my feed and I come across something that really grabs me, I tend to pursue that further on other platforms - I’ll check out their website or look up that particular project online. In that respect, it helps unlock precedents for a design concept but that’s probably as far as it goes for me - it’s a gateway to external sources.
Outside of that, I have a lot of clients who will send me images of things that they find online, or they put together Pinterest boards. These help me to gauge what the client is into - but it then becomes my role to figure out exactly what they like about something that they see. Do you really like vaulted ceilings with full height glazing, or do you like the feeling of a bright and open space, because there are many other ways to achieve that. It’s a blessing and a curse in that regard, as long as they’re not too caught up on an ‘aesthetic’ that becomes limiting to the conceptual process.
Do you have an unpopular opinion with regards to architecture media?
Emma: There are so many things wrong with mainstream architecture media and marketing by firms most in the public eye. My main gripe is that it promotes egotistical arrogance, as if architecture has status that has to be gained with money. I think there is something to be said about trying to bring architecture into the foreground however it has an economic status profiling that we must get past in order to succeed in curating a beautiful city for ourselves.
Jake: I’d agree with that - most social media platforms are geared towards individualism and self indulgence so I can see how imagery related to specific architecture can contribute to that. As we spoke about earlier, I feel that most of the content that’s shared at the moment is very shallow and doesn’t do much to open a dialogue about broader issues on design. Everything just has to look pretty, which isn’t an accurate representation of a built project. So the ability for architecture to be misrepresented is where I have trouble - which is the same for all streams of media across so many topics.
What do you think the future of architecture media is?
Jake: It would seem that the trends within social media - which have developed rather quickly in a short period of time - all harness the power of imagery as visual stimuli for the consumer. When we look at the shift from Facebook to Instagram to something like *sigh* Tiktok, the amount of text being used is rapidly decreasing, whilst the images are increasing. This all goes hand in hand with a growing consumerist culture, where we’re constantly absorbing monumental amounts of information in extremely short periods of time - something that is far easier via a photograph rather than a block of text.
To this effect, I’d suggest that architecture has lasted this long in this climate because of its ability to be churned out in this format - and we’ve of course discussed the ensuing issues. But at the very least this will allow architecture and design to remain relevant in popular culture. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, so long as we know how to harness that.
For me you still can’t beat a book on architecture or a quality magazine where author’s have the time, space and attention to express themselves. I’d like to think this isn’t a dying art, and I think those within the architecture community generally appreciate the importance of these publications. But the reality is that the internet makes everything so much easier and cheaper nowadays, so there could be room for more growth in this area. We now have the ability to take virtual tours through projects online, so that could take giant leaps forward as virtual reality becomes more accessible. 3D mapping is so advanced now, you can fly around cities using something as simple as Google Earth. The idea of never having to jump on a plane to go overseas, rather you pull on a VR headset doesn’t sound too ridiculous - I can see architecture media following this path.
Emma: I don’t seeing it changing very much just becoming more widespread
Listen to the Podcast Episode here.
About Emma Berton
Emma has a Masters degree in Architecture from Monash University, graduating in 2018. Starting off working in hospitality design and moving onto large sporting and exhibition architecture working at Populous as a graduate, Emma has developed an appreciation for details of all scales and a strong sense of context and program that drive design ideas. Having explored architecture around the world, Emma is interested in exploring how each country approaches design and sustainability and hopes to visit these further through her own work. With a functionalist attitude to architecture and a belief that it is a fundamental human right, Emma would like to see architecture become more accessible to everyone.
About Jake Wilson
Jake graduated from Monash University with his Masters of Architecture in 2018 having developed a strong passion for design and how it can improve the way we live. Jake has now been working in the field for almost four years, and is currently practicing as a lead designer and manager at a small design studio - Graham Jones Design - which focuses primarily on residential works. Having packed in overseas travel through Europe, Asia and America in the past few years, Jake holds a broad perspective on architecture and how it exists in the world, which feeds into his approach to carefully crafted spaces that are beautiful yet functional.
You can stay connected with SCHMEA here or via Instagram (@schema.architecture)