1.

Wow. A must read. Is this the end for the starchitect myth???

2.

yeah I thought that article was hillarious. you had all the other hotshit architects lauding mr. viñoly as "rigorous" and "precise" when in fact he forgot about little details like the roof of the building... which maybe says more about the odd mix of subjectivity and objectivity that abounds in "starchitect" culture in general than mr. viñoly's, specifically. it's all hillarious. yes.

3.

Have you seen the glass roof on this building? It is awesome. I cannot believe that this building could have been designed and built with the extreme level of architect incomptence that the contractor now claims. Where was the general contractor and the construction manager with their zillion-dollar fee in this story?

Is it even remotely realistic to imagine that on a project this large that ALL cost over-runs could be solely attributed to the architect, and not one decision made by the owner, or shared by the construction manager, construction scheduler, cost estimator, contractor, or anyone in the army of sucontractors involved?

This story is bad news for everyone in the design business, hot shit or not. When clients and contractors look to their architect & engineer's professional liability insurance as a way to fund their projects, it promotes a work environment that is anti-collaborative and back-stabbing. A culture of litigation already plagues the medical profession, which drives astronomical insurance rates and distorts how we get medical care and professional advice.

Does the owner in this case really believe this lawsuit will get them "free" funding for their job?

4.

Hey, wait a minute..."vicki vale" is an anagram of "rafael vinoly"!

Oh, no it's not. Sorry. Still, I'm suspicious.

5.

This is too funny.

Since when has one man been single-handedly responsible for everything on a multi-million dollar project? Wasn't World Trade Center enough to represent who holds the much of the real decision power?

It seems to me that if crap can get published, then it is easily believed for fact. The article is biased, no questions. Or has everyone forgotten how to think for themseves?

6.

It's about time. The public--and even worse, most architects--never hear about the horror stories and problems that architects cause for their clients. This is a suit that is long overdue, because the stuff of this suit happens *all the time*. An architect's deliverable work product is a set of construction documents--not a design concept--and owners have been held legally accountable for their consultants' work for decades.

I think this is a very important case, not just for Vinoly, but for the future of the profession. It needs to be litigated instead of settled, so that practitioners, famous or obscure, understand just what their real obligations are. Are they to their client? Or to some cultural cause, some holy mission in the name of "Great Architecture"?

7.

Since when is the architect responsible for shortfall's in their client's fundraising efforts?

Read the quote from the client, lamenting their $7 million dollar shortfall in donations last year. They had "no choice" but to sue, to try and cover the project costs.

Maybe the lesson to be learned is for architects to stop working for flat-broke cultural institutions, and to stick to well-funded luxury condos. Yay.

8.

Umm...

So you are saying that the cost overruns in question (delays) were caused by the client's inability or unwillingness to pay for them?

That's a great argument!

9.

fuck rafael vinoly, he aint nothin but a bitch

10.

fuck rafael vinoly, he aint nothin but a bitch