Open Letter to Teachers and Students of Architecture Around the World - Christopher Alexander

May 2002
Open Letter to Teachers and Students of Architecture Around the World


What is Our Future as a Profession?


We have today about 500,000 students of architecture in schools around the world. This means that every year about 120,000 graduate, and every decade sees 1.2 million new architects. Are our schools, curriculum and faculty providing the education that is needed? I think not, hence this open letter to both teachers and students.

It has become commonplace to lament that the professional architect is irrelevant. We all know that more and more construction around the world goes forward without the involvement of a professionally trained architect, and our input is limited to something like 3% of all buildings. We all know that fees are decreasing. I was still shocked recently to hear one project manager working for the Ministry of Defense in England who has recently dropped architectural fees on large military housing projects to 0.3% (yes, one third of one percent) because he feels that is consistent with the contribution. Twenty years ago, the architect on such a project would have received 4-5% of construction cost.


The reasons behind the increasing irrelevance of architects are complex. There are many issues facing us, but one of the more simple ones is that we do not have, as a professional community, adequate platforms, forums, or vocabulary for debating our differences and exchanging information. Ten years ago in an interview published by Progressive Architecture I put on the table my proposal for an agenda for a meaningful debate about current mainstream theory. My agenda hasn't changed much and the debate hasn't taken place.


current mainstream theory only deals with a small fraction of buildings
it does not deal with third world construction or community affairs.
findings in the social sciences are ignored
it does not deal with nature or with ecological issues
it does not deal with money and speculative development in a sensible fashion
it makes no substantive empirical account of human feeling
it does not have any organic connection with the world of construction
there is no coherent explanation of values necessary for good buildings
ordinary people don't like the buildings
no discussion of the value inherent in the built world is possible
the definition of beauty is inadequate, nearly non-existant
Now, I am not disingenuous. Setting agendas is a political activity. My agenda is deeply critical of mainstream theory and teaching and of the buildings of the late twentieth century which, with rare exceptions, are alienating and poorly suited to human needs.

I do feel compelled to speak out. I am a member of a professional community, which is not a community. We have no shared framework for accumulating knowledge. If we go on failing to address the human, technical and environmental issues of the built environment in today's world, our failure will simply lead to our own obsolence as a profession and a built environment that can not sustain itself. There is a lot at stake. And the poor Earth is struggling under the weight of the situation.

Complaining about things is an unproductive path. So, my colleagues and I have rolled up our sleeves and undertaken the heavy task of constructing a website. One of the goals of the website patternlanguage.com is to help shore up our community by using the leveraging potential of the internet for the dissemination and exchange of information.


The website is already quite large and grows daily. There is material for research and classroom discussion. For example, we are posting the archives of The Center for Environmental Structure, unpublished and out-of print materials. The classic text which gives the website its name is now on-line. We are developing generative sequences which are step by step algorithms for design and construction. We wish for these to be "open-source" in that professionals can work with them and give input based on their experience.

It is true that websites are time consuming and expensive to maintain so our work will continue to be done incrementally. We do not finance through advertising but through modest membership fees. Although the site is currently rather one-way, we wish to increase our posting of opinions and papers from teachers, students, and practitioners everywhere. Exchange forums such as chat groups and bulletin boards are costly to administrate, but we want to get there.

If I am going to so much trouble, it is because I am deeply motivated to do so. I am working toward a website that will put my agenda points clearly on the table in a way that can't be ignored. If I ask you to not only read this letter but forward it to others and participate in making the website known and used, it is because I believe many of you share motivations similar to mine. We each have our independent ways of working, different areas of interest and opinions on many points, but the underlying motivations and concerns about the built environment are the same. I am inviting you, as architect, or teacher, or student, to make use of the website, share it with others, give your input, and add connections to a badly needed professional network. We need a future generation of professionals who can tackle the real issues of scale, of humanity in buildings, concern themselves with the bulk of building endeavors on Earth, and regain the respect for our profession that is so badly eroded.

You may be reading this letter in one of two forms:

on the website itself, or
as an email sent to you directly by a colleague.
The letter (whether as an email, or on the site) also provides an opportunity for you to write your own thoughts on these subjects, and include them along with the original text of my letter when you forward it.
I would personally, be delighted to hear from you as well. If you have specific questions or interests in aspects of the site, please make yourself known .With my warm best wishes to all of you.

Chris Alexander