Princeton University's campus environment presents unique challenges and opportunities for architecture to act as a social condenser.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Princeton is a sublime undergraduate university. It has a good architecture school.
But I absolutely believe that architecture is a social activity that has to do with some sort of communication or places of interaction, and that to change the environment is to change behaviour.
When I was in architecture school at Princeton, the worst thing you could say about someone was that they were eclectic.
Architecture is the story of how we see ourselves. It is the architect's job to service everyday life.
The aesthetic of architecture has to be rooted in a broader idea about human activities like walking, relaxing and communicating. Architecture thinks about how these activities can be given added value.
I could be happy doing something like architecture. It would involve another couple of years of graduate school, but that's what I studied in college. That's what I always wanted to do.
There is no modern prototype for a campus. You have to have a completely different model which has to do with transparency and exposing social connectivity and breaking down the Balkanization that happens departmentally.
I think all good architecture should challenge you, make you start asking questions. You don't have to understand it. You may not like it. That's OK.
To work in architecture you are so much involved with society, with politics, with bureaucrats. It's a very complicated process to do large projects. You start to see the society, how it functions, how it works. Then you have a lot of criticism about how it works.
I taught at Princeton for 39 years, and the school of architecture on the campus is the worst building on the campus.