Richard Meier in Tel Aviv

rothschild1.jpg

I’m sure people are going to disagree with me on this – but it’s a Friday, and I’m going for it.

While China and Dubai were at the peak of their construction booms there was a large debate taking place as to whether or not architects faced ethical and moral issues when they took on projects in these two regions. Issues were raised about workers’ rights, the countries’ political stances [foreign affairs in particular for China], questions of where the money was coming from…just a number of legitimate questions being raised as to whether or not accepting commissions under these circumstances was the ‘right’ thing to do. Some architects decided it was acceptable, for whatever reason, and some did not [and one in particular changed his mind when the money was right].

So my question is this: what about work in Israel? Now, I know questioning the Israeli State is unpopular for whatever reason in the US – but I think it’s a legitimate question. Take Richard Meier’s proposed luxury condominium project in Tel Aviv. Is it cool that he’s designing a project that has an average unit price of 1.3 million euro [plus VAT], in a country involved in the destruction of another sovereign state over what comes down to religion and land? I’m fairly certain that the majority of Palestinians affected by the actions of Israel’s rethinking of the landscape are civilians.

I, for one, have worked on projects in both China and the Middle East for a developer from Dubai [not by choice, really, but still] – so I’m not one to be throwing stones here. I even kind of like Meier’s building – although the image of the lower floors reminds me of a re-imagined Peabody Terrace by Sert. I’m simply wondering where we draw the line in the sand when having an ethics debate in architecture – and if the assault by some on China and Dubai was legitimate [in that it was really about those issues], or if it was more about lingering issues with those two governments.

[note: Meier's project got me thinking about all this for whatever reason, but I'm not casting judgment on the man or his work - it's just an example.]

Share this post:
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • email
  • StumbleUpon

Related posts:

  1. Yankee Subsidy
  2. VS 03.08.2008: Meier on Charlie Rose
  3. $80 Million for Bikes
  4. Eye Candy: Richard Galpin
  5. Zaha in Dubai : the Opus

Posted: May 15th, 2009
at 10:26am by orangemenace


Categories: architecture

Comments: 9 comments



 

9 Responses to 'Richard Meier in Tel Aviv'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Richard Meier in Tel Aviv'.

  1. I think that as long as Israel remains a democracy, no matter how flawed, it doesn’t fall under the same category as China or Dubai. Those are autocratic regimes, a big difference.

    Hrag

    15 May 09 at 10:45 am

     

  2. Right. BUT, that’s kind of what I was alluding to at the end of this post – opinions of China and Dubai seem to be equally based on feelings towards their governments, and on worker’s rights [if not slightly weighted in the former]. So, if they both pass laws tomorrow protecting their workers to a standard similar to the US [not going to happen, but play along], do we stop questioning working in those countries? Or is their political structure being different from ours the issue at hand.

    And, more importantly, are the actions of Israel acceptable because it’s a democracy [its kind of a theocracy, isn't it?]? Can we consider it ‘ethical’ to do work there simply because they treat their own citizens similar to how the US government treats us?

    orangemenace

    15 May 09 at 11:01 am

     

  3. A very interesting and relevant question, both on the China/Dubai front and the Israeli one. I think professionals, to a large extent, proceed with projects in countries with dubious ethical standards/standings by creating a “Chinese wall” between their work and their personal beliefs … an imperfect system in an imperfect world.

    Blacksmith Jade

    15 May 09 at 11:30 am

     

  4. [...] AMNP – Richard Meier in Tel Aviv With all the discussion about ethics and architecture, AMNP goes there with a hot button issue that no one has really brought up: [...]

     

  5. “and one in particular changed his mind when the money was right”
    it kinda boils down to this, it reminds me of that Philip Johnson ‘I’m out to work for the Devil himself if he’s building’; http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3104611

    also if you remeber richard rogers getting messed around “In February 2006, Lord Rogers hosted the inaugural meeting of the campaigning organisation Architects and Planners for Justice in Palestine(APJP) in his London offices. At that time Lord Rogers had secured a commission for a $1.7 billion expansion of the Jacob K. Javits Convention Centre in Manhattan, the late Senator Javits had been an ardent supporter of Israel. However within weeks he had publicly dissociated himself from the group, “I unequivocally renounce Architects and Planners for Justice in Palestine and have withdrawn my relationship with them.”. This statement followed pressure from strong pro-Israeli interests in New York, who threatened him with the loss of this prestige commission.”

    Rogers didn’t have the balls, as it would mean losing a project. so it seems architecture to be in this predicament.

    ceteris paribus

    16 May 09 at 6:17 pm

     

  6. Calling Israel a democracy is like calling the election of Saddam Hussein or Egypt’s Hussni Mubarak a legitimate democracy.

    Democracy is a fluent world that has different regulations from country to country.
    Israel’s democracy isn’t like the US or Europe. We are talking about a country that 70%-80% of its inhabitants are refugees on their own land. A country that proclaims itself to be a Jewish state with a religious agenda that wants to fulfill biblical prophecies on the expense of its original inhabitants.

    Have you ever wondered why there is no “One state solution”?
    The answer is that if the Palestinians get to vote then that will destroy any chance for “Israel” being a Jewish country for the Jews.

    That’s why its a Two state solution., to insure that the majority of Palestinians wont effect the Jewish government.

    BeMyBro

    17 May 09 at 2:05 am

     

  7. Wow, so as long as a country is a “democracy”, it can do no wrong? The US is a “democracy” (more accurately a “republic”, but let’s not get didactic here…), thus it can invade Iraq based on lies, bomb wedding parties in Afghanistan, killing some 1 million in the “War on Terror”, setting up state-sponsored kidnap and torture programs and still smell like roses compared to China, simply because it is a “democracy”. Makes total sense to me. Therefore Israel could lay siege to Gaza, drop bunker busters, white phosphorous and cluster bombs on unarmed Palestinian families, invade Lebanon and destroyed its infrastructure and still smell like roses compared to Dubai.

    And please don’t throw strawmen back, eg. listing the litany of China’s and Dubai’s sins.

    In the end, I really think that architects should judge for themselves based on their own conscience. Politics is subject to manipulation and propaganda, always has been. Most of the time, we know next to nothing about the true conditions and facts of each country, and are brainwashed into thinking what our governments want us to think, without ever questioning. Most of us don’t even know that “good” NGOs like the “National Endowment of Democracy” is a Congressional-CIA outfit, putting out information and memes that get picked up by the “friendly” mass media, even venerated ones like NYTimes and CNN.

    It’s all guys wearing black or white hats to us. If you (a generic “you”) care about, say, the Tibet issue, do go and read up credible reports, documentation, etc. from BOTH sides for yourself. Don’t blindly follow what the prevailing opinion says. Also, designing 1 million dollar apartments is very different from say, designing a TV tower – the former caters to the wealthiest, profiteering power elites while the latter is a part of an information infrastructure that serves the society. Watch episodes of CCTV if you’re unsure if it’s an “evil state apparatus”. Frankly, I don’t find it any worse than Fox News on any given day, except it is really, really boring. In the end, even blatantly propaganda programs like those in the former USSR, Saddam’s Iraq and N. Korea are preferable to insidious, falsely “objective” and “embedded” media that are believed by their audience. At least the Russians knew how to read the Pravda, but Americans and Europeans are easily “sold” by their media.

    Architortured

    27 May 09 at 7:04 am

     

  8. [...] Richard Meier in Tel Aviv [...]

     

  9. Great idea but smells like fish. As Oscar Niemeyer said: “Architecture has no power. Give a site in a favela to an architect and he will built a house on it.” Add some Jews to it and you have a discussion.

    hetbors

    12 Dec 09 at 10:36 pm

     


 

Leave a Reply