Eric J. Cesal

The book starts rough — there are odd turns of phrase, derivative constructions throughout (one early chapter all but started by quoting from a dictionary definition of a word), and enough metaphorical explanations using abstract generalizations that sound just plausible enough to be true (like the distinction between kings and sorcerers, or the description of everyone’s favorite bartender). There’s just enough there to make me question whether the author had enough editing and fact-checking at his disposal during the writing of the book, but some of the stuff he says are thoughts similar to my own:

At any rate, there were no jobs for “architect” as I understood that term. It occurred to me that over the last generation, while a bunch of smart people anguished over the distinction between “architect” and “designer” and “intern architect” or “interior architect,” someone stole our damn name.

Once we’re past the first third of the book, Cesal really finds his rhythm talking about the different sorts of architecture that could (but doesn’t) exist. The writing starts to pick up dramatically, becoming a much more concisely argued premise. Cesal’s voice is an important one in post-post-modern architecture, but having been through it some part of my career, I remain jaded that any change will come from within the practice itself. If architecture changes, it won’t happen internally and it will only be slightly affected by outside pressures, like the economy; it would take an entire army of very smart, former architects, who have left the industry and re-entered it for the singular goal of disrupting the old guard into extinction.… (meer)