Brian Goldstein

Exactly: 80% chance you will get fired soon, 10% chance you will get paid, 100% chance you will have no creative control, 99% chance your name will get dragged through the media and future clients will avoid you.

bsky.app/profile/byer...

It’s the architecture profession’s oldest story. With relative foundational and economic weakness, firms rarely say no when they should definitely say no.

If you want to know why Republican redistricting efforts have hit a wall, look no further. All those congressmen in R+15 districts are suddenly facing a future where they may have a lot more time for golf.

An irony is that if Trump actually built a tasteful, practical, and normally scaled ballroom there is little likelihood his successors would demolish it. But if he builds a garish thing too big to be able to sensibly use then it seems unlikely it will last.

This, first state with free universal child care, free tuition for residents at public universities… New Mexico has become a trailblazer in how to address the affordability and inequality crises.

Jewel just glitched and sang the "Dreams last for so long
Even after you're gone" verse twice in a row in the Macy's parade (more likely, the lip sync track glitched).

I mean he’s not wrong. Whoever follows him would probably not even be an architect!

One of your favorite architectural historians got to opine about the Stahl House for a good long time on yesterday’s BBC Newshour. My spot starts at the 39:40 mark. Take a listen! www.bbc.com/audio/play/w...

Basically the moral of the story is that our heckling is working.

You are one of the few who can slather the syllabus in pope advice.

For someone who fancies himself a Vitruvian, there is no greater violation than an out of proportion, out of symmetry, "untutored" (to use Eisenman's term) building. He doesn't want to be a laughing stock. But also sees a future (and career) beyond Trump.

Trump wants a bigger White House ballroom. His architect disagrees. The president and James McCrery had argued in recent weeks over the project’s size, with Trump pushing him to expand the ballroom.

This is really intriguing bc I'm sure McCrery's reluctance is driven in part by the critiques of architects in general--who are calling into question his chops--and his fellow Classicists on the conservative end, who *also* have asked if he is following the rules, so to speak. wapo.st/4prs3HI

Can’t tell if joking bc you teach at a Jesuit school. (Anyways, the pope is right.)

Come for the discussion of weak connecting lines between letters, stay for the closing (critical) quotes from the owner of a conservatives-only design firm, which I’ll admit I found a totally fascinating idea.

If we can just keep her busy with her bumbling then she can neither ruin the Smithsonian nor succeed in further weaponizing the DOJ.

Hopefully I can find a "grocery" store!

I'm going to be buying some old-fashioned "groceries" this very weekend, as it happens!

Happy birthday!!!!

I know!

Oops! That should be 2001. I’m in denial of my middle age because I remember reading those articles like it was yesterday.

This was perhaps the stupidest thing to come out of all the architecture messing around so far (not saying it's worse than tearing down the East Wing, but in terms of pure idiocy it's hard to top).

The Crimson has a long history of being awesome. A funny coincidence nearly twenty-five years later is that the reporter who covered the Summers presidential pick back in 2021 was @vermontgmg.bsky.social. www.thecrimson.com/article/2001...

Thanks for sharing, @wayneb.bsky.social! Elizabeth's essay is awesome and very fun ("Pet Pourri" alone counts as fun).

*Shockingly*, “we go high” doesn’t work but standing up to the bully does. This is Schoolyard Knowledge 101.

Was he ashamed before he got caught?

It's all very "No, I don't have any background in the arts but I am qualified to lead the Kennedy Center because I watch Dancing with the Stars"

Not at all the point here but WHAT IS UP WITH THESE GLASSES???? So much of this administration feels like a movie with miscast roles yet they are just forging ahead with it.

The most interesting thing about the House Epstein vote at this point is how illustrative it is of the absolute and pitiful fealty of House Republicans to Trump. "Vote against it." "Yes, sir." "No, vote for it." "Okay, sir."

Not the first time I’ve been distracted by the trivial fact!