On the 19 and 20 of last September a number of students from several architecture schools in Portugal met at the Casa da Música in Porto for yet another celebration of architecture, the Mesa Talks – a very appealing event indeed. The thirty-year landmark in the career of Eduardo Souto de Moura was the reason for the gathering, which brought together big names in architecture in the same space and time. Their relaxed, informal and even improvised approach to the young public created a convivial proximity. There were moments of sharing, not just design projects, but also some less glorious situations and stories from their lives, such as their inexperience and naivety when they started out, the lack of work, lack of recognition and failure to comply with the project, etc. These good-humoured insights provided by the older generations to the younger architects alerted us all once more to the fact that being an architect is hard work. There are constantly more and more architects, but only those who eat, sleep and breathe architecture will be able to become the “perpetuators of the architectural legacy”, as Paulo Mendes da Rocha put it.

How to explain the current, excessive attraction to architecture on the part of the younger generation? Just like Portuguese football and gastronomy, Portuguese architecture has become an international reference in Europe and the world, meaning that there are ever-growing numbers of young people wanting to be architects simply because it is a trend. That is not the only reason; there is also the response on the part the education system, which facilitates growth in this trend, seemingly without concern for the current labour market situation.

If we compare the context in which the two Portuguese Pritzker Prize-winners began their lives as architects to the current scenario, it is easy to understand that we have gone 180º, not only because back then there were few architects, but also because in the 1990s there was the boom that was the urgent need for housing, meaning there was no lack of work/construction activity. The teaching of architecture also played a much more active role in the professional life. The close master/student relationship, from which Siza and Souto Moura benefited when they were young, was crucial to the development of the first architectural works while they were still students. This exchange of experiences was surely essential for the architectural quality we witness today. Without wishing to criticise today’s teaching in this aspect, for today such methods are unsustainable, but have we not allowed the opposite to happen? Quantity does not mean quality, I would argue, even less so in the economic conditions we have today.

I remember that in the first few years of my architecture course the design professors would frequently say, and I quote: “Being an architect is not a profession, it’s a way of life.” It was an assertion that was hard to forget, perhaps because we didn’t really know what it meant. The most devoted amongst finally come to understand that being an architect means is making sacrifices, it is a way of life, an itinerary on which learning is a constant and the demands are extreme. Nevertheless, there are those who think being an architect is a job like any other; they protest and claim for themselves opportunities and facilities that are impossible in the current scenario. Others try to fit in, they stop dreaming and have no desire to take risks – anything that comes their way will do, regardless of whether they produce good or bad architecture. Both these positions are signs of a lack of intelligence or a lack of love for architecture. We ourselves are also responsible for the deterioration of the situation; we lack ambition and we all have the same few objectives in life that make us little more than a pack: a good job, preferably close to home, good money and stability. That’s what our parents taught us: get a degree to have the right to be part of the pack and the status that brings with it. For the more distracted, that is not the reality we have to deal with, all the more so if we go in for architecture. Besides, should professional and personal realisation not be the main goal for those who invest in higher education?

Portugal currently offers 26 architecture degree courses in public and private schools; they are full every year. According to European statistics for 2008, of 32 Eur-opean countries Portugal took seventh place in terms of numbers of architects, with 16,300. However, in proportional terms it is the country with the second highest number of architects after Italy, the country that produces most architects in Europe. Even so, since 2008 the number of architecture course places available in Portugal has continued to rise, which, in addition to reducing the quality of the teaching, for the number of teachers is not accompanying this growth, nor are the university buildings being extended, only heightens this situation of overload, of which we are all aware. No, there is no work or opportunities for all, but the money has to keep on flowing into the university/state coffers, even if they know they are training (fooling) people for a life of unemployment and frustration. There is an obvious incoherence in the architectural training offer taking into the account the national/European situation and that is reflected not only in the statistics but also in the increasingly frequent demonstrations by young architects protesting their right to survival. Is it a luxury profession? Yes, not everyone can allow himself the luxury of investing in a profession that provides no guarantees for the future, and in which, after an integrated master’s course lasting five years that is rather expensive, if not the most expensive, having an international career will require further investment. 

The education establishment should be giving out more serious warnings as to the reality of the professional life for each course they offer, also providing information derived from labour market studies and trend forecasts, so that when we choose we are alerted to, and prepared for, the future problems, we can begin to think about solutions and, most importantly, so that the profession chosen profession is best adapted to the goals and aptitudes of each one. That would certainly be a measure that would distribute the student numbers more coherently amongst the courses and boost career satisfaction and quality.

Our generation has benefited from our parents making everything easy for us; we don’t run after the things; we expect them to come to us. But more and more we need young people to acquire entrepreneurial spirit, to be cur-ious and willing to learn. That should be the main mission of our education system and our teaching: combating complacency, encouraging our youth to take the initiative, to be curious and to be willing to learn, as arms against crisis. |