Opinions from the Scientific Committee: A Reason to Return

Abstract

What can one say about this day of the symposium, hearing what new PhDs and PhD candidates have had to say about Chicago architecture? Some critics might say, haven’t we all said enough about Chicago? If you attended the session, you’d know that this isn’t true. New people bring new ideas to the subject, in part, because Chicago is important in the history of architecture. I’m reminded that the symposium was organized in partnership with the 2017 Chicago Architecture Biennial. So, what is important about one, is important about the other. Of essential significance is that both brought new faces and new minds to the city. People who came from outside Chicago had the opportunity to experience the city firsthand, form new opinions and reactions to our environment, and take those impressions back home with them. One may never really know how their visits will impact them, but I’m certain that there will be something, and I hope their experiences will be positive. Who knows, one of the symposium presenters or Biennial participants might provide future generations with a new way of looking at Chicago architecture, clearing a path for one of their successors. Like a recurring Biennial, hosting regular “Chicago Schools” conferences can only be good, for us and them.