Design Blog

Brad Pitt - the new face of Architecture?

According to the Sunday Times, Brad Pitt is to design part of a residential complex & its restaurant in Hove. Given that the Times is a quality newspaper, I assume this is an accurate report rather than just another bit of gossip about the actor’s life.

However, this raises several questions..

Firstly: does architecture need a celebrity face? There are many causes and movements that do benefit from celebrity involvement because it draws attention (and money) towards helping the needy. But architecture is not in such need. We have our own celebrities who became stars because of their own hard work and talent. Even if we disagree about their buildings and designs, we respect them because we know how difficult it is to get a chance to do a truly inspiring project, let alone get acknowledged for it.

Secondly: there are far too many of us, who after many years of formal (and rigorous) training, work hard and underpaid in small architectural practices dreaming of working with the best architects/designers or ambitiously waiting for that break-through project to land on our desk. Then Brad Pitt walks into our profession on a red carpet - straight into the office of one of the best architects in the world. Is this fair? Of course not. We can snigger enviously at him but,  c’est la vie… life isn’t fair.

But is this right? What sort of message is this sending out to architects, designers and the public? Architecture is one of the old, true professions - one that requires training, knowledge, experience and talent. Training doesn’t necessarily mean just academic training. Many of the great architects - such as Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe & Marcel Breuer - didn’t have a formal architectural training. Even Gropius or Frank Lloyd Wright didn’t have a degree. But all of them had a background in art and/or design. All of them had learnt a great deal of knowledge and experience from working in the company of eminent architects, designers, artists & theorists of their time before they themselves were assigned to big projects. Architecture was not just a hobby for them, but a full-time passion and commitment. Apparently Brad is Gehry’s apprentice, who has supposedly been giving him guidance in architectural theory and practice. But when exactly? Hasn’t Brad Pitt been rather busy during the last few years making movies?

Brad says he’s “nutty” about architecture  - well, many of us are nutty about reading books, but how many of us can write one? It seems that Mr Gehry thinks Brad has talents beyond his acting skill - perhaps he does, but where is his experience? Where is his portfolio? Other than renovating his own home, what projects has he done that landed him the possibility of being part of a £250m redevelopment project? I’s rather evident that he got the job because of his fame rather than his talent or experience. And this is what we object to. If he got the job because he’s regarded by Gehry to be the next Corbusier - that’s fine - but if he’s in it because he has a pretty face and a celebrity status - that’s just wrong. Not only wrong because it undermines the morale of experienced and ambitious designers but also because it sends the wrong message to the younger generation - architects to-be or not-to-be. Most young people just want to get rich & famous - as quickly as possible but with as little work as possible. In a world of instant gratification they do not understand that most jobs and professions require a process of progression - and this takes time. Becoming a good architect or a designer is a long journey - necessarily so because only through experience can we properly learn our job. Brad has now created the illusion that it’s enough to be “nutty about architecture” to be able to design. This could affect architecture in the same way that make-over shows undermined interior design. Most people think they are interior designers, yet their themed DIY “designs” very rarely show depth or sensitivity to the building or any internal coherence.

Architecture is at a stage where the public has started to enjoy and trust modern buildings rather than only liking replicas of past styles and cultures. I believe this has happened because architectural design has moved away from an impersonal modernism to a more sensual approach - designers have recognised that a building or a space has to complement or enhance its surrounding and must have a relationship with its inhabitants. It seems Brad hasn’t even seen the site he’s been signed up to design. Does he know how people live on the south coast of England? I doubt it. Does he even know where Hove is? Apparently he plans to visit the site for the first time in August. Is he planning to investigate the area and lifestyle of the people for whom he’ll design - or is he planning to design something that could be plugged into any building anywhere in the world? If the latter, this could be his first mistake as a spatial designer and a step back to the soulless designs that look cool on a superficial level but lack depth and sensitivity.

So, Brad, let’s see what you can do!