Mallika Rao
GET UPDATES FROM Mallika:

Paul Goldberger Moves To Vanity Fair, Eulogies For Architecture Criticism Not Far Behind

Posted: 04/ 2/2012 3:22 pm Updated: 04/ 2/2012 4:16 pm

Skyline

Call it a high-stakes game of Red Rover: The New Yorker's influential architecture critic Paul Goldberger is leaving for that other Conde Nast property in the sky, Vanity Fair, and it's causing a bit of a stir.

Arguably the leading figure in architecture criticism, Goldberger split his career between the two historical arbiters of the field: The New York Times, where Goldberger won a Pulitzer, and The New Yorker, where there are no reports he will be replaced. According to The Observer (smaller but keen-eyed other fish in the Manhattan media bowl), his exit from the latter is a bigger deal than just paperwork at the Conde Nast HR office. We're talking the End Of Things big. Oh yes!

In a hefty insidery piece titled "With Paul Goldberger Leaving for Vanity Fair, Is This the End of Architecture Criticism at The New Yorker?," Matt Chaban answers his headlining question with the sad results of a little online digging over at The New Yorker's classic Sky Line column, resurrected by Goldberger in 1997 after a half-century hiatus:

"There has not been a single Sky Line column since September 19 of last year, followed by two blog posts over the next week, and nothing since. Of the 14 pieces written last year, out of a total of 178 (according to The New Yorkerā€˜s online archive) over a 15 year career, only six made it into the magazine—five columns and one Talk piece. Never mind that when you google either ā€œarchitecture criticā€ or ā€œarchitecture criticism,ā€ Mr. Goldberger’s author page at The New Yorker is the second result, after Wikipedia."

The dry spell isn't limited to The New Yorker. Writing at his personal blog in March of this year, architect and former Slate critic Witold Rybczynski positioned his bunking from Slate in line with a slacking off of architecture criticism across the board:

"The New York Times has a ā€œchief architecture criticā€ who hardly ever writes about architecture. Paul Goldberger, our leading critic, has not appeared in the New Yorker since May 2011, and that was a piece about New York taxis. I always check to see what Sarah Williams Goldhagen, the interesting critic of The New Republic, has to say, and she hasn’t posted anything since November 2011...I don’t know whether it’s the recession and dearth of new buildings, or whether after the boom years, when architecture became faddish, the fad has simply faded."

As for Goldberger's work at Vanity Fair, it promises to be a departure from pure architecture criticism. In the release announcing his hiring, VF editor Graydon Carter placed Goldberger's strengths in the fields of "architecture, urban planning, and design." Alongside his pragmatic reasoning for the move (Goldberger needs more time to work on his biography of Frank Gehry, and the VF position offers him that), Goldberger told The Observer to expect "stories that are design-oriented, not strictly architecture," and said he's "excited to be doing that." Purists may as well start tolling the bells and steeling themselves for more investigations of "Ralph Lauren's vision of Wasp perfection," the crux of an old one-off Goldberger wrote for Vanity Fair in 2007 that for all its diversions from the science of architecture, is a pretty fun read.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW CULTURE

Call it a high-stakes game of Red Rover: The New Yorker's influential architecture critic Paul Goldberger is leaving for that other Conde Nast property in the sky, Vanity Fair, and it's causing a bit ...
Call it a high-stakes game of Red Rover: The New Yorker's influential architecture critic Paul Goldberger is leaving for that other Conde Nast property in the sky, Vanity Fair, and it's causing a bit ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 16
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
03:03 PM on 04/06/2012
We're going to stop relying on big media to produce the architectural criticism we wish to consume, and we're making our own!

Stop by our home made architectural blog saga:

www.criticwithatsquare.com
11:22 AM on 04/03/2012
Too bad that in such a depressed state people like you, the ones commenting, are not doing anything productive to save or change the perception of architects. This is the most immediate problem/struggle facing the industry. Getting people to become aware of their environments and the effects poor design has upon the psyche of people. I am currently blogging about it over here in Kosovo where the picture is truly dire. Image a society who has never owned or participated in the creation of their urban experience. I think Ghery is a great innovator and provacature whos projects inspire change and departure from the rigid impedness of modernism. Architecture can be more than a box serving programatic functions. It can and should be a metaphor to the state of humanities social and psychological evolution.
photo
Lo Chiaro
Knowledge + wisdom defeats ignorance
07:34 AM on 04/03/2012
Considering the challenges of our cities, architecture is sorely needed. Unfortunately, architecture is preoccupied with being news, largely through works that seek peer admiration over cultural production or solving meaningful problems.

Hard to blame the architects because authoring spectacular objects is highly rewarded through awards, celebrity status and winning more work.

Personally I think it's a kind of vicious cycle that ends up turning the public off and driving architecture out of culture and into the margins.
02:50 AM on 04/03/2012
The problem is that the general public's understanding of architecture is simply limited to the affect of the form. And as a critic, it's difficult to communicate or illuminate to the general public why they should or shouldn't care about a particular piece of architecture that doesn't happen to look like a big, sparkly fish.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BlackYowe
I am a classical- liberal woman and a Jeweler.
12:23 AM on 04/03/2012
Most modern archeticture is horrible so why bother criticise it we all know it.
photo
brooklyncitizen
Soror quaerens lucem
08:55 PM on 04/02/2012
Critics are useless at least for Architects and Artists. Maybe theater and restaurants need critics but in the plastic arts they either comprehend little and simply affect a posture on the subject or they are frustrated that they could not do either as a profession.
An architecture critic may serve as a marketing tool but beyond that it is pointless. Our buildings reflect our current values....and are impermanent, poorly built and all flash and no substance.
05:08 PM on 04/05/2012
Says the man who (presumably) lives within sight of the Chrysler Building or even The Empire State Building,...but ESPECIALLY The Brooklyn Bridge.

"impermanent....poorly built and all flash and no substance".....seriously?

I must be missing some hidden irony or sarcasm

Without offense
tm
photo
brooklyncitizen
Soror quaerens lucem
11:23 PM on 04/05/2012
yes. seriously. I'm an Architect working for over 20 years, there has been a significant decline in building methods and construction (driven by cost) and design ain't what it use to be.
we are not producinggreat architecture here....Europe is a different story.
photo
brooklyncitizen
Soror quaerens lucem
11:23 PM on 04/05/2012
BTW it should be "says the woman"
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:52 PM on 04/02/2012
If they want us to take writing about Architecture seriously, they need to stop lionizing Frank Ghery and the monstrosities that he has spread all over the world. Just because they are "different" and "daring" does not make them good.
08:26 AM on 04/03/2012
Blah, blah
In point of fact, I also dislike Ghery's work....but try, for a moment, to think "outside the box"
(and, possibly beyond your own jealously, and/or selfishness)

"If they want us to take writing about architecture seriously..." It will NOT be about settling old scores..or personal issues.

You KNOW I'm right
TM
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:54 AM on 04/03/2012
I have no score to settle with anyone. Ghery has blotted the landscape for years to come with ugly buildings. I have an esthetic sense, not jealousy or selfishness. You on the other hand seem to have a lot invested in being RIGHT. So YOU ARE RIGHT! Feel better now?