Deborah Saunt hits out at decision to cut RIBA awards
Chair of RIBA’s awards group says good schemes could be overlooked
The decision to cut the number of RIBA awards handed out this year has been criticised by the chair of the institute’s awards group.
Deborah Saunt, who has now completed her two-year stint in charge of the panel, was responding to claims by RIBA head of awards Tony Chapman that it was easier to win an RIBA award than a decade ago.
Last week the institute handed out 59 awards, nearly the same number as in 2002, compared with 97 last year.
Saunt told BD: “I personally don’t agree it’s been too easy. It’s never been easy to get an RIBA award, ever. I don’t think there is anything wrong with a large number [of winners].”
She added: “Within the RIBA executive there was a perception that they [the awards] were too inclusive. But if something’s good, then great. If you close it down too tightly, maybe some schemes could get overlooked.”
The RIBA Awards group also includes Design Council Cabe director Paul Finch and Allies & Morrison co-founder Bob Allies, with Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios’ Peter Clegg to take over as chair in 2013.
Saunt’s comments were echoed by AHMM director Paul Monaghan, who has sat on RIBA Awards panels previously.
He said: “I have first-hand experience that confirms that the awards remain the most rigorously judged building awards in the country, where the emphasis is on visiting buildings rather than looking at photographs.”
This year was the first time practices could enter projects for the RIBA Awards and the RIBA Regional Awards simultaneously — a split that Monaghan said devalued the regional awards.
The shortlist for the Stirling Prize will be drawn from the 59-strong longlist and is due to be announced next month.
“The main difference this year is that there a lot fewer iconic projects,” added Saunt. “A lot more modest buildings have got awards.”
Postscript:
Debate: Should there be fewer RIBA awards? AHMM’s Paul Monaghan and the RIBA’s Tony Chapman go head to head
Related Articles
- Does architecture need television?
13 July 2012
- Stirling Prize TV show dropped
5 July 2012 | Updated: 6 July 2012 9:31 am
- RIBA announces jury for 2012 Stirling Prize
3 July 2012
- Should there be fewer RIBA Awards?
29 June 2012
- RIBA facing £500,000 deficit
29 June 2012
- RIBA award winners nearly halved
21 June 2012
Have your say
Sign in to make a comment on this story.
Sign InDesktop Site | Mobile Site
Readers' comments (8)
perhaps the reason that there were less awards, is becuase no one can afford the pointless RIBA membership fees
Very good schemes were being overlooked in any case.
Awards should be given to recognise quality and excellence. The RIBA needs to be more transparent in publishing what standards need to be exceeded to warrant an award. Rationing should not be a factor.
Okay, I'm in charge now. I speak for the RIBA. I mean ... I could if you wanted me to. I'd rather not, obviously. Don't know what I'd say. Why do I have to be the one? I don't need this. Why does this have to become my problem? No, I'm out. Forget it. Find somebody else. I'm sick of it. I'm sick of doing everything for this organisation.
One one hand she says good buildings have been overlooked, whilst at the same time saying this year more modest buildings have got awards?
What is all this emphasis on awards? It seems like more and more the profession is driven by getting them. Is designing a building that you and your client are happy with not good enough?
x factor
Awards should be scrapped and architects should avoid free competitions.