![Sample our Arts journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110799/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Arts.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper reflects upon an attempt to challenge dominant perceptions of what an architect “looks like,” and to debunk clichés about who architects are, through the visual documentation of a collective portrait of the profession. The project documented the participants at a specific architectural event at a particular historic moment – in Sydney, Australia. Rather than emphasizing the particularity of individual architectural “authors,” the photographic series displayed a cross-section of the Australian architectural community – anonymously and without hierarchy – incorporating its “behind-the-scenes” participants on the same plane as its “stars.” This paper examines the motivations behind the original photographic documentation, and reflects upon the subsequent reframing and exhibition of the work as part of an advocacy project, addressing gender equity in architecture. Despite the longstanding and significant contributions of women in Australian architecture, and given that high-profile, authorial positions in architecture are more likely to be occupied by men, the paper conjectures that the category of the “behind-the-scenes worker’ in architecture is, itself, gendered.
Notes
1 Dodd called for a series of “actions” to take place on the margins and in the interstitial spaces of the conference venue. The selected “actions” were (modestly) funded, publicized and supported as part of the program of the conference.
2 Somewhat to our surprise, some participants chose to be photographed in pairs, or groups. Each participant completed a release form, allowing their image to be used in later manifestations, including papers such as this one.
3 Portraits and Architecture, curated by Christopher Chapman, ran from September 11 to November 15, 2009, http://www.portrait.gov.au/exhibitions/portraits-architecture-2009; see also the curator’s essay at http://www.portrait.gov.au/magazines/33/thinking-about-architecture-and-portraiture.
4 See Christopher Chapman’s online catalogue essay: “Thinking About Architecture and Portraiture: Dr Christopher Chapman Describes the Experimental Exhibition Portraits + Architecture.” September 1 2009. National Portrait Gallery. Available online: http://www.portrait.gov.au/magazines/33/thinking-about-architecture-and-portraiture.
5 Naomi Stead, “Buildings, Photographs, Sculptures: On Medium and Disciplinarity in the Work of the Bechers,” in Architecture, Disciplinarity and Art, ed. Andrew Leach and John Macarthur (Ghent: A & S Books, 2008), 135–149.
6 Thierry de Duve, “Bernd and Hilla Becher or Monumentary Photography,” in Bernd and Hilla Becher: Basic Forms (Berlin: Schirmer Art Books, 1999), 7.
7 Susanne Lange, “History of Style – Industrial Buildings: The Photographs of Bernd and Hilla Becher,” In Bernd and Hilla Becher: Basic Forms of Industrial Buildings (London: Thames & Hudson, 2005), 10.
8 James Lingwood, “The Weight of Time,” in Field Trips: Bernd and Hilla Becher, Robert Smithson (Porto: Museu de Arte Contemporânea de Serralves, 2002), 74.
9 Norman Bryson, “The Family Firm: Andreas Gursky and German Photography,” Art and Text 67 (November 1999–January 2000), 80.
10 Michael Mack, “Architecture, Industry and Photography: Excavating German Identity,” in Reconstructing Space: Architecture in Recent German Photography, ed. Michael Mack (London: Architectural Association, 1999), 9; Karl Blossfeldt, Art Forms in Nature (E. Weyhe, 1929).
11 Armin Zweite, “Bernd and Hilla Becher’s ‘Suggestions for a Way of Seeing’: Ten Key Ideas,” in Bernd and Hilla Becher: Typologies (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), 14.
12 Quoted in ibid., 14, n. 37.
13 A crucial text here is Andrew Saint, The Image of the Architect (New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press, 1983). See also Dana Cuff, Architecture: The Story of Practice (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992).
14 Allie Wilkinson, “This is What a Scientist Looks Like: Change the Perception of Who and What a Scientist is or Isn’t,” Tumblr blog, http://lookslikescience.tumblr.com; see also Anon., “Looks Philosophical: This is What a Philosopher Looks Like,” Tumblr blog.
15 Anon., “Looks Philosophical.”
16 Cordula Rau, ed., Why Do Architects Wear Black? (Vienna: Springer, 2009).
17 In 2011, a large interdisciplinary team of researchers was successful in securing Australian Research Council funding for a project entitled “Equity and Diversity in the Australian Architecture Profession: Women, Work and Leadership,” 2011–2014. Led by Dr. Naomi Stead, then of the University of Queensland, the project involved seven researchers (Professor Julie Willis, Professor Sandra Kaji-O’Grady, Professor Gillian Whitehouse, Justine Clark, Dr. Karen Burns, Dr. Amanda Roan and Dr. Gill Matthewson) and five industry partners – three large architecture practices, an architectural media company and the Australian Institute of Architects.
18 The project built upon earlier research by Paula Whitman, Going Places: The Career Progression of Women in the Architectural Profession (Brisbane: Royal Australian Institute of Architects and Queensland University of Technology, 2005).
19 Parlour brings together research, informed opinion and resources as a site for active exchange and discussion. It seeks to expand the spaces and opportunities available to women in architecture while also revealing the many women who already contribute in diverse ways.
20 Our ongoing thanks are due to Associate Professor Lee Stickells, University of Sydney, for the invitation to curate this exhibition.
21 The exhibition was curated and designed by Naomi Stead, Maryam Gusheh, Justine Clark, Fiona Young and Gill Matthewson, with photography by Nick Bassett. Typography and infographics by Catherine Griffiths.
22 For example, see Julie Willis and Bronwyn Hanna, Women Architects in Australia 1900–1950 (Canberra: Royal Australian Institute of Architects, 2001); Robert Freestone and Bronwyn Hanna, Florence Taylor’s Hats: Designing, Building and Editing Sydney (Sydney: Halstead, 2008); Julie Willis, “Invisible Contributions: The Problem of History and Women Architects,” Architectural Theory Review 3, no. 2 (1998): 57–68; Bronwyn Hanna, “Australia’s Early Women Architects: Milestones and Achievements,” Fabrications 12, no. 1 (2002); Julie Willis, A Statistical Survey of Registered Women Architects in Australia (Adelaide: Faculty of Art, Architecture and Design, University of South Australia, 1997).
23 This has also been the finding of international studies of gender equity in architecture, including Ann de Graft Johnson, Sandra Manley, and Clara Greed, Why Do Women Leave Architecture? (London: Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) and University of West England, 2003); and Bridget Fowler and Fiona Wilson, “Women Architects and Their Discontents,” Sociology 38, no. 1 (2004). See also Eva Matsuzaki, Patricia Gibb, and Imbi Harding, Consultations & Roundtables on Women in Architecture in Canada (Vancouver: Royal Architectural Institute of Canada, 2003).
24 For example, see Francesca Hughes, The Architect: Reconstructing Her Practice (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996); Diana I. Agrest, Leslie Kanes Weisman, and Patricia Conway, The Sex of Architecture (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1996); Debra Coleman, Elizabeth Danze, and Carol Henderson, eds., Architecture and Feminism: Yale Publications on Architecture (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1996); Jane Rendell, Barbara Penner, and Iain Borden, eds., Gender, Space, Architecture: An Interdisciplinary Introduction (London: Routledge, 1999); Annmarie Adams and Peta Tancred, Designing Women: Gender and the Architectural Profession (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000); and, more recently, Despina Stratigakos, Where Are the Women Architects? (New York: Princeton University Press, 2016).
25 For example, see Igea Troiani, “Zaha: An Image of ‘The Woman Architect,’” Architectural Theory Review 17, nos. 2–3 (2012): 346–364; Sarah Treadwell and Nicole Allan, “Limited Visibility: Portraits of Women Architects,” Architectural Theory Review 17, nos. 2–3 (2012): 280–298; Julie Willis, “Aptitude and Capacity: Published Views of the Australian Woman Architect, Architectural Theory Review 17, nos. 2–3 (2012): 317–330.
26 In the Australian context, the work of Gill Matthewson has been crucial here; Gill Matthewson, “Women in Architecture: Who Counts?,” ArchitectureAU (November 3, 2014), available online: http://architectureau.com/articles/counting-women/; originally published in Architecture Australia 103, no. 5 (2014). See also Gill Matthewson, “Updating the Numbers, Part 1: At School,” in Parlour: Women, Equity, Architecture, January 29, 2013, available online: http://archiparlour.org/updating-the-numbers-at-school/; Gill Matthewson, “Updating the Numbers, Part 2: At Work,” in Parlour: Women, Equity, Architecture, January 26, 2013, available online: http://archiparlour.org/updating-the-numbers-part-2-at-work/; Gill Matthewson, “Updating the Numbers, Part 3: Institute Membership,” in Parlour: Women, Equity, Architecture, February 10, 2013, available online: http://archiparlour.org/updating-the-numbers-part-3-institute-membership/; and Gill Matthewson, “Mind the Gap,” in Parlour: Women, Equity, Architecture, March 16, 2016, available online: http://archiparlour.org/mind-the-gap/.
27 Gillian Rose, Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Materials, 2nd ed. (London: Sage, 2007). See also Howard Becker, “Visual Evidence: A Seventh Man, the Specified Generalization, and the Work of the Reader,” Visual Studies 17 (2002): 3–11.
28 Joanne Entwistle and A. Rocamora, “The Field of Fashion Materialized: A Study of London Fashion Week,” Sociology – Journal of the British Sociological Association 40, no. 4 (2006): 743.