CALL IN ARCHITECT FOR GOOD BUILDINGS, IS PROFESSOR’S ADVICE

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18014, 26 November 1926, Page 4

CALL IN ARCHITECT FOR GOOD BUILDINGS, IS PROFESSOR’S ADVICE

PROFESSION MUST PROVE ITS SERVICES ARE NECESSARY. “The Training of an Architect” was the title of an address delivered by Professor Cj'ril R. Knight, of Auckland University, at the lecture hall of the Christchurch Public Library, last night. There was a fair attendance. The speaker was introduced by Mr S. Ilurst Seagcr, who said that a very good work was being done for architecture at the Auckland University. There were fifty or sixty students, all keen, bright voung men. What was needed in Canterbury were bursaries or scholarships to enable students from here to proceed to Auckland to take the degree course in architecture. Professor Knight said that before he came to New Zealand he had heard that it had been settled about eighty vears, and he thought he would find a countr3 T with settlements round the coast, and the rest of it in its native state. He was surprised on arrival to find what progress had been made and what fine cities had been built up. Tie paid a tribute to the Garden City of Christchurch. Referring to architecture, the lecturer said that the great question was, What was wrong with architecture? A great manv people put up buildings without the services of an architect. A large number of people could not see the use of employing an architect before erecting a home. They thought they knew what they wanted, and considered it best to put the money into the budding instead of paying it to an architect. People objected to architects’ fees being based on the cost of the building. Business men askerl what incentive was there to an architect to design as cheap a building as possible? This was a general opinion, but there was a fallacy underhung it. What well-dressed woman, without a course of training, would try to make a ball gown or her husband’s suit? Yet she would carry out alterations to her home without expert advice. Tt was amassing how people would put up buildings worth hundreds of pounds without expert advice from an architect. Where did the fault lie? It did not lie with the public, but with the architects themselves. Architects must prove to the public that their services were essential and worth while. There would Vie no quibble on the question of architects’ fees being based on a percentage basis once the public realised that, by obtaining the services of an architect, the\- could save money and get a better building. To give proper service to the public, architects must be properly trained. Any boy with reasonable intelligence could pass the exam*' .cion for the degree of architect«k* . but to succeed as an architect he must have a love and enthusiasm for the work. It was not a money-making profession, but it was something finer. Those who entered the profession in the proper spirit would find a great joy in life that they’ had not realised before. As far as the training of architects was concerned, he was in favour of the school system as against the apprentice system. It was true that many* great architects had graduated from the apprentice system, but only in face of great difficulties. Tt was argued against the school s>stcm that it did not turn out practical architects, but this was not the case, for, before degrees could be granted, a year’s practical training in an architect's office was necessary. An architect’s work to-day was far more complex than it was in the past, and the profession itself was dividing into specialised branches. It was not nccessar3’ in most countries for a boy’ to take a course in architecture in order to become an architect, but such a course was highly’ desirable. For this reason bursaries and scholarships were necessary to enable those who had not the means to take a course in architecture to do so. Their aim was not to turn out great architects but great architecture. They’ could not ignore the great works of the past. Rather they should build on the works of the past in the development of the new styles. A student shoidd study the works of the past, not to copy them, but to learn the message that they’ had to convey’. lie felt optimistic about the future of architecture, for right through the architectural world there was an enthusiasm for creation and for the solving of architectural problems. Architecture essential in the ljfe of any community, and this was being realised more and more each day. At the conclusion of his address Pro-

fessor Knight was accorded a hearty vote of thanks.