A small professional assignment has led me these days to find careers with a future. It was my first time. I confess that the information found after a first search, reaches a greater relevance in terms of the trend it draws than in terms of the information itself: upward races vs. declining races, skills vs. vocations, techniques vs. thoughts, practices vs. theories, science vs humanities Of course, the “first” of the two factors systematically sweeps the network. At this point, perhaps someone may think that next it is recommended to study architecture, one of the degrees that today languish out of focus but in the end is worth it for this and that. It is not our intention, you can continue reading peacefully.
When young people are oriented towards technical, practical or scientific specialization, and it is also done by neglecting or minimizing the areas related to the immensity of thought, creativity and humanities, then – believe me – a dangerous and monumental bubble will have formed whose consequences – probably – we don’t want to imagine. In the words of Félix de Azúa:
“The ruling class thinks that culture is something ornamental, when it is the backbone of a country”.1
The backbone of the World, we would add. After years of systematic cuts in the hours and contents related to plastic, philosophy, theater, poetry, art history, and not to say architecture, in schools and institutes, we say, after years of cultural helplessness in the form In four unbalanced and unconnected four-year periods, the data of future employment warns us of the correctness (oh surprise!) of these pseudo-policies for technocrats: few today urgently claim profiles related to these displicent disciplines, human matters dangerously today undervalued.
Education always translates into wealth anywhere in the world.2 Regardless of borders and homelands, narrow places that inhabit two foreign landscapes, the balance between technical and humanistic knowledge should guarantee multiple and shared spaces for a Critical and creative society, decisive and reflective, practical and supportive. We could use some of these “second factors” to decisively undertake some of our current crises.
Have we been so wrong? Let’s not forget that the walls are built from the technique, career technique with a future, but much earlier they do it – not in my name – as a fundamental part of a culture: the culture (not only European) of the legitimized states and their shining fences of hawthorn basted meticulously.
The napalm-smelling culture of Akropolis Now.3
Miguel Ángel Díaz Camacho. PhD Architect
Madrid. March 2016.
Author of the Parráfos de arquitectura. #arquiParrafos
1 Félix de Azúa a few days after occupying the H chair of the Royal Academy of Language, El País, March 14, 2016.
2 “Spain has received in European structural aid since 1986 the equivalent of two Marshall plans, but has spent it on infrastructure […] which does not seem to have been of great help for economic development. On the contrary, investment almost exclusive in education, which was the Irish experience, seems to have been much more effective”. César Molina and Fernando Ramírez, “Brexit, convergence and democracy in Europe”, newspaper Ahora, March 11-17.
3 “Do you smell that? Do you smell it boy? It’s Napalm son. Nothing in the world smells like that. I love the smell of napalm in the morning!”. Apocalypse Now, Francis Ford Coppola, 1979; script based on the Joseph Conrad´s novel “Heart of darkness“, 1899.
Doctor en Arquitectura, Decano de la Facultad de Tecnología y Ciencia UCJC. Presidente de la Asociación Sostenibilidad y Arquitectura, perteneciente al Consejo Superior de los Colegios de Arquitectos de España. Director de MADC Arquitectos, estudio profesional con premios en concursos nacionales e internacionales, en la actualidad desarrolla proyectos en España y Noruega. Escritor y crítico de arquitectura, es autor de los libros “Párrafos de Arquitectura. Core(oh)grafías” (2016) y “Arquitectura y Cambio Climático” (2018).