architecture at this moments isn’t solving any question, there is no questioning, every single aspect achieved got established, got a fact, worst than when the MoMo invented design, now the establishment belongs not to the intellect of some schools or personalities, now it does belong to politics the which follow the market
the question in the schools, are easy, always solvable, always inside the system so you will be freely to respond, because you can respond, they are meant for you to respond to it/them, you might be, even experimental-although this is not what is happening at this moment in any school, at least that I know- even radical, not happening in many of the students that are taking the lessons as established rules to follow, the questioning is not coming from critics to old systems, the critics are based on ideals of success or impositions of radicalisms or its real name, eclectisms-small pieces of- more and more eclecticisms-small pieces of-
the questions outside the school, are non solvable because they carry on the issue of ”reality/realistic” when you approach them, the typ(rad)icality of the piece has to be produce with the established parameters but it needs the rupture to become success /the more rupture, even if it doesn’t solve anything will carry the higher success/
it is the figure of the architect still alive? it is there possible to produce architecture?