Global transition of talent...should be restricted or encouraged?

I feel really concerned about the current scenario wherein terms like overseas architects seem threatening rather than welcoming....
There has been a trend of students going to countries like US and UK to study their Masters degree in Architecture and then landing up with no jobs, current news being that Home office in the UK have raised the bar of salary for overseas architect to £75k to further their work visas!!!!!!!!
This is clearly like making a statement that overseas talent is to be shunned.
I am of the viewpoint that architecture being a creative profession should be treated different from other professions in a way that exchange of ideas and learning different techniques of practice should be encouraged rather than drawing boundaries..
Imagine a scenario where there is flexibility in the profession, so the architect is free to explore and learn and practice in any part of the world with minimal resistance, but considering and following the bye- laws of the place, but with a flexibility giving a chance for creative thought to flourish...
I feel the time has come that globalization to be taken in a good way rather than trying to draw restrictive boundaries...
I would love to hear some thoughts on the same..

1 member likes this

Comment

You need to be a member of Architecture Linked - Architect & Architectural Social Network to add comments!

Join Architecture Linked - Architect & Architectural Social Network

Comment by YJ Cho on April 23, 2010 at 5:28pm: hmm... i am torn on this issue. i too agree that being able to work overseas is definitely a great (hopefully ^^) experience and it can help you expand your own views and even add on to your design palette. but living here in korea has made me think about the other end. i've seen a LOT of big construction projects (buildings) being given to foreign architects, MOSTLY because they're "foreign". now a few are indeed famous and i'd LOVE to see one of them build something here in my country (zahid has a project here ^^)..but some... not so recognizable (to me at least) and when i see the actual building....i'm not blown away. yes. its different. but somehow...i dunno...it just seems to be a bit "lacking". this could be due to my own limited architectural judgement of course..but i dunno... when i think about all those projects that appear in magazines, i think "wow. that was ingenous".
and then, i start thinking a bit nationalistic...."why couldn't they given that project to a KOREAN architect???" it's not like ALL korean architects are mediocre and pathetic. there are PLENTY of very talented architects here too... and i figure that even if you are a genius, unless you actually BUILD something...it can't be shown!

another issue i'm reminded is international style vs. regionalism. no matter how talented or opened minded an architect is, he or she will be dictated by his own socio/ethnic/educational background. they can never really exactly know the design sensibilities of the people of that country. you can come close.. but it'll end up looking like a cheap tack-on or knock-off.

i dunno.. i might be just ranting cuz im mad at the executives (the older generation) who just think "hey, let's ignore the korean architect. get a decent foreign architect who's cheap. we'll say he's an "expert".

maybe im still too idealistic. of course i want to earn the big bucks, but not at the expense of uncompromising design. but i digest. (homage to peter griffin) LOL

although i might question the choosing and reasoning of a foreign architect vs local, i am definitely for architects being able to go abroad to (1) expand their own knowledge and culture, and (2) represent their country and share his own cultural background in the host country! ^^ keeping all your architects in JUST your own country will eventually lead to stagnation. (qed. running water vs pooled)

Comment by VISHALAKSHI SUBEDAR on April 19, 2010 at 3:16am: Yes Tyson, a lot of it is politics and decide by people who have no clue what is architecture which also shows how little power architects as a community have to make any major difference or to lay their own rules when it comes to matters of their own profession.

Comment by Tyson on April 18, 2010 at 10:47pm: That's a great point Vishalakshi. I personally think it has more to do with politics than anything else. During tough economic times, you see politicians (at least in the US) give incentives to companies to shore up domestic jobs while discouraging international talent. Architects are also regulated by different guidelines depending on the jurisdiction, so that adds more complexity and expense to the process. Hopefully we can convince our politicians that a collaborative approach is in everyones best interest. Good post.