arcCA: What is it you’re doing that’s other than or in addition to normative architectural practice?
JC: I direct Public Architecture, a nonprofit organization founded and based out of a private firm, Peterson Architects, in San Francisco. To the best of my knowledge, ours is one of only two arrangements of this type, at least in the U.S. Public Architecture acts as a catalyst for public discourse through education, advocacy, and the design of public spaces. Our “1%” program (see arcCA 05.1), through which architecture firms pledge one percent of their time to the public good, aims to create a culture of pro bono work within the profession. Just to insure full disclosure to the readers of arcCA, I learned about Public Architecture through a conversation with arcCA editor, Tim Culvahouse, AIA. Tim had observed my longtime involvement with a related nonprofit called ArchVoices, whose mission has a great deal in common with Public Architecture.
arcCA: How has your architectural education/experience prepared you to do these things?
JC: I wish I could say that my formal education in college and graduate school, or California’s increasingly prescribed internship experience, prepared me for this kind of work. If either did, I believe there would be many more opportunities for architects to take on and be recognized for nonprofit and public interest work of this type. Instead, my education and my subsequent pursuits have led me to question, and often critique, the system—at least the system we’ve come to rely on for determining who is an architect and who is not.
arcCA: What values are at work? or, simply, why are you doing these things?
JC: Despite their different approaches and immediate audiences, both Public Architecture and ArchVoices challenge the profession to serve a much broader segment of society and think as critically about itself as it does about buildings. It doesn’t take or cost much to do what we do, in either case. Do I believe these are things that the AIA—on the local, state, or national levels—could and should be doing? Absolutely.
arcCA: Do you consider these pursuits to be a critique of normative architectural practice, an extension of it, or something else?
JC: Most of my work has been accidental—meaning, I stumbled across the opportunities, rather than pursuing them. While I’m often associated with the purported 50% of graduates that don’t enter practice, I can’t imagine being any more embedded in normative or traditional architectural practice. I work in a vibrant firm setting every day of the week and I spend more of my free time than not participating in AIA activities.
arcCA: What insight might these pursuits provide to normative practice?
JC: It’s easy for me to say, but I believe normative practice could learn a great deal from—as well as contribute to and benefit from—the work of nonprofit organizations like Public Architecture. The most significant insight is that the vast majority of society cannot afford professional design services or doesn’t realize they have access to such services on a pro bono basis.
Originally published 2nd quarter 2005, in arcCA 05.2, “Other Business.”
