‘In the next generation there are encouraging signs of a continuing pluralism. Graham Crist and Stuart Harrison are investigating the civic narrative expressionism orginially identified by Peter Corrigan as a way of dealing with the reality of the suburban city.’ (Leon van Schaik, Design City Melbourne)
Antarctica may be new to the scene, but its team definitely isn’t. Each of the five directors has made their mark prior to joining the group, mostly in academia or through various contributions to the architectural community. Among the gorup are Graham Crist, concurrently Program Director of Architecture at RMIT University, and Peter Johns, the man behind Butterpaper, and informative and entertaining architecture website. There’s also Dianne Peacock, formerly editor of sub-plot (a zine conerned with contemporary architectural culture, art and activism) and Brendan Jones, who had his own practice, JAW architecture, prior to Antarctica.
Rounding out the team is Simon Whibley, bringing experience from his time at Lab Architecture Studio, Garner Davis Architects and as a lecturer at RMIT. Producing architecture is only one goal for Antarctica – their expertise extends to urban design, web and multimedia design and art practice. The directors also aim to develop propositions about contemporary practice, research and teaching.
AR Next review
+++++
Antarctica began as a proposition about contemporary architectural practice. At its core is the idea that the experience and talent of young architects can be drawn together in some way, without shoehorning individual practice ito a branded style and under a conventional business structure.
+++++
The proposition was made as an alternative to the isolated pursuit of individual small practice within an environment that provides fewer and fewer opportunities for newcomers. This was seen as a potential water of the skills of young architect who have the capacity but not necessary business credentials or history to tackle more significant architectural projects. By operating as a collective, individual practitioners could pool their knowledge and skills to challenge for projects beyond the domestic and small scale.
+++++
The proposition was also that it was a strength to maintain and intensify the diversity of the individual members of its collective, by providing a means within its structure for members to participate in a variety of ways. Furthermore, such a ‘virtual office’ did not require all its members to be in the same location or city, to only ever operate under the collective or to only be architects.