concluding remarks
in what ways, through what education, through what collaboration, through what questions we ask, do they promote more successful urban form? I’ll walk out of the 88
room thinking about that. Another interesting question is, “How do design practices fund and invest in research?” We cease being effective experts when we become lobbyists and interests come into play. There’s that magic line, and I think we ought to understand where it is in terms of knowledge, best practice, and goals we want to discuss. Tom Keane I can’t disagree with anything you said. I just want to add a few things. One of the things that comes through to me is the degree to which all of us would acknowledge that infrastructure fundamentally shapes who we are as people. When we are putting in place systems that allow instantaneous wireless communication, they are going to have a fundamental effect in terms of how we live. Whether you call them the architect or the designer, someone has to think about consequences. It’s not just building the building or street or plan, but what are the consequences of these big decisions we make, particularly when it comes to infrastructure? At the risk of having people walk out the room, I really do believe that there has to be a higher degree of political engagement on the part of those designers. I’ve heard the comment about, “Well architects are always doing public advocacy because we’re public figures.” That’s not public advocacy, that’s marketing. You’re defending the project. That is not advocacy. Advocacy means putting yourself out here. Maybe it means running for office. Lord knows every lawyer runs for office. Business people run for office. But architects don’t run for office. It really means that this profession needs to develop the ability to communicate to the public about design. And I don’t think this has happened.