<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">

<channel>
<title>A Roundtable Debate on Foreclosed: Rehousing the American Dream : Responses</title>
<description>Design Observer ::Â Join the Discussion</description>
<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/foreclosed-exhibition-roundtable/34578/</link>
<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
<dc:creator>Design Observer Group</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2012-08-16T01:45:48-05:00</dc:date>
<copyright>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0</copyright>




<item>
	<title><![CDATA[Responding to "A Roundtable Debate on Foreclosed: Rehousing the American Dream"]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[I am so sympathetic to the many of the goals of this exhibition - and find it so difficult to follow the argument, either in words or in the designs.<br />
<br />
I can say similar things about Mr. Angotti's arguments. In the end, if the places are not well designed, the policies will get us nowhere. That is another lesson of the last 50 years.<br />
<br />
It is clear what Angotti dislikes, but impossible to tell where he thinks a good job has been done.<br />
<br />
I will attempt to read these again another day to see if I can get farther, because I do believe in the goals and the ambitions.]]></description>
	<author></author>
	<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/foreclosed-exhibition-roundtable/34578/#comments</link>
	<dc:date>2012-08-16T01:45:48-05:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
	<title><![CDATA[Responding to "A Roundtable Debate on Foreclosed: Rehousing the American Dream"]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[As a non-design professional, for whom I would assume the exhibit and Mr. Martin's statement might be aimed at, I find the discussion interesting, but somewhat baffling.  Mr. Martin's use of language and terminology is inherently exclusionary to those who are not of the academic/professional of which he is a part.  The other essays here are more readily understandable to a layperson.<br />
<br />
The disappointment expressed by Mr. Martin, that none of the teams used a public process to inform their entry is legitimate.  Based upon lectures at the Alaska Design Forum, it appears that many designers have little interaction with the end users, whether it is housing stock or another product.  The most apparently successful designers are those who engage the end users, whether it is residents of Medellin, Colombia, Aboriginal Australians, or buyers at Sacks 5th Avenue. <br />
<br />
Mr. Agnotti accurately summarized the problem, that we cannot design ourselves out of a problem, whether it is sprawl, foreclosures, or racial divides.  The faith in design to solve problems is similar to the faith in technology to solve our problems.  Perhaps it would be useful to step out of the the world view that seems to inhabit these conversations and look for a different one.  Take as an example that of social work, where they ideally look for and base their work on the clients' strengths and desires.  Lecturing or telling society to change, without asking why it should or what currently drives the actions, will just result in frustration and a smaller and smaller audience.<br />
]]></description>
	<author></author>
	<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/foreclosed-exhibition-roundtable/34578/#comments</link>
	<dc:date>2012-07-05T02:52:00-05:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
	<title><![CDATA[Responding to "A Roundtable Debate on Foreclosed: Rehousing the American Dream"]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[I posted this article on Facebook, and a friend who is not involved in planning or architecture commented on the theme of forgetting history, and how it is similar to the themes of the book "1984". The theatrical erasure of Pruitt Igoe has become a stand-in for the failure of modernism and public housing- I remember taking undergraduate planning classes at a very liberal university where public housing was being taught as being synonymous with failure. Everyone has bought into this fabricated history, and also to the new reality of public-private partnerships. That being said, I commend Amit Price Patel for taking a nuanced stance and recognizing that the fundamental goal is to provide housing and to recognize it as a right, rather than to quibble over the funding and ownership mechanisms. <br />
<br />
We need more effective ways to build housing quickly and cheaply, and this requires both a design solution and a policy solution. Even in cities like San Francisco where there is a push by the local government to create housing for people at all income levels, the process works too slowly and leaves too many people out. Housing policy is a failure when there are thousands of people waiting for a home that they can afford. ]]></description>
	<author></author>
	<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/foreclosed-exhibition-roundtable/34578/#comments</link>
	<dc:date>2012-06-26T14:51:24-05:00</dc:date>
</item>



</channel>
</rss>

	


