The Times does a little op-ed for the sticks, noting that Frederic Schwartz is having a little trouble with the — um, sorry, this is obvious — spiraling costs for his proposed memorial for Westchester County.
His initial claim that the project could be built for $200,000 turned out to be off by a factor of four, and then some. The current projection is for $900,000. He can now take a seat at the crowded table of architects who become notorious for misleading and/or bullying the public over costs (the best story of which I know is that of I. M. Pei, who was nicknamed “You Will Pay” by the Dallas press when the city’s symphony hall was under construction — a story I have never been able to verify, at least courtesy of Google, so it may be apocrypha).
I don’t really have an opinion on the value aspect (the numbers aren’t that large, after all), I only question the potential ethics of the circumstance, since the act of creating a memorial, for artists and architects, is often not one of selfless contribution, but a key step in their own memorializing. It would be very irresponsible to charge Schwartz with any particular misrepresentation, but there is an ethical component of design that mandates balancing concept and cost. One should suggest only what is plausible within the expected parameters (though I don’t believe the Westchester competition had a preordained budget), or have a clear enough understanding of what one’s recommendations will require, and on this count there a failure that should be acknowledged. Though it won’t benefit Schwartz (he’s working for free) as often is the case with cost overruns, it still sullies a process that is imaginably raw for supporters of the project — though I should note I am not one of them. I don’t support the welter of monumetalizing that is underway in the region. The closest thing to a reasonable suggestion I know of is Tadao Ando’s, and nothing moving past the proposal stage has come close to the intent of a concept such as this.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
The rising…costs.
The Times does a little op-ed for the sticks, noting that Frederic Schwartz is having a little trouble with the — um, sorry, this is obvious — spiraling costs for his proposed memorial for Westchester County.
His initial claim that the project could be built for $200,000 turned out to be off by a factor of four, and then some. The current projection is for $900,000. He can now take a seat at the crowded table of architects who become notorious for misleading and/or bullying the public over costs (the best story of which I know is that of I. M. Pei, who was nicknamed “You Will Pay” by the Dallas press when the city’s symphony hall was under construction — a story I have never been able to verify, at least courtesy of Google, so it may be apocrypha). I don’t really have an opinion on the value aspect (the numbers aren’t that large, after all), I only question the potential ethics of the circumstance, since the act of creating a memorial, for artists and architects, is often not one of selfless contribution, but a key step in their own memorializing. It would be very irresponsible to charge Schwartz with any particular misrepresentation, but there is an ethical component of design that mandates balancing concept and cost. One should suggest only what is plausible within the expected parameters (though I don’t believe the Westchester competition had a preordained budget), or have a clear enough understanding of what one’s recommendations will require, and on this count there a failure that should be acknowledged. Though it won’t benefit Schwartz (he’s working for free) as often is the case with cost overruns, it still sullies a process that is imaginably raw for supporters of the project — though I should note I am not one of them. I don’t support the welter of monumetalizing that is underway in the region. The closest thing to a reasonable suggestion I know of isTadao Ando’s, and nothing moving past the proposal stage has come close to the intent of a concept such as this.