Noor Anne-Wil Jansen – 1369431

Answer to the criticism question of week 4

Michael Sorkin and Alan Colquhoun both give an extensive review of the work of Michael Graves, a
modernist architect based in the USA. Sorkin’s and Colquhoun’s critique of Graves have a way
different stand point, however they do complement each other. Their work serves as an extension of
each other and give a deeper understanding of the criticized work, in this case Graves’ work.

Sorkin gives critique while Colquhoun performs a review of his work. Both ways of critiquing give us
insights, although performed differently. Sorkin has an almost aggressive activist approach in his
criticism by setting Graves’ work in a social and political context while Colquhoun has a more
emphatic approach in critiquing Graves to be able to understand his design decisions. Colquhoun did
not have such a political agenda as Sorkin had in his review. Colquhoun rose above the social context
and cultural norms in his criticism to look at the work of Graves without preconceived ideas while
Sorkin could not. He distanced himself and wanted to understand Graves’ work through ‘the
American tradition’ (Colquhoun, 1987). Therefore Colquhoun was able to investigate the theory and
technology that are the basis of the design decisions of Graves.
In the title of Sorkin’s critique, ‘Save the Whitney’ (Sorkin, 1985), an already activist critical approach
is clear. He values the social aspects and context in which an architectural design works, and cannot
distance himself from this belief. With this motivation for critiquing Sorkin gives us insight into the
time period and political climate and puts the criticized work into the context of the time. He calls
Graves ‘an architect for the age of Reagan’ (Sorkin, 1985), he notices a trend of buildings not being
respected in their transformation and ties it to the timeframe.

Concluding, the critical approaches of Sorkin and Colquhoun complement each other in that they
give critique on different levels of the design, in this case of the work of Graves. The review by
Colquhoun serves as an extension of the critique of Sorkin. They give a more well-rounded analysis
and serve us different viewpoints.

References

Colquhoun, A. (1987). From Bricolage to Myth, or how to put Humpty-Dumpty Together Again.
Oppositions, 12, 140–151.

Sorkin, M. (1985). Save the Whitney. Village Voice, 71–76.