Impressions of the Jury of Lead Dušan 2007

Results of the Lead Dušan Competition 2007
Impressions of the Jurors
Lead Echoes (exhibition)

---

Ing. arch. MÁRIUS ŽITŇANSKÝ, PhD.

"Competitive environment," high expectations, curiosity, respect, and learning from innovative personal laboratories.
The responsibility to choose the "superstars" from the absurd amount of large qualitative differences among the individual studios' opinions, where either they walk the established "Czech path" (so praised in Slovakia), or react to new trends in a globalized world, but also swift "walks" of overlook.
I did not find a "superstar," although some works intrigued me, inspired me, but did not surprise me. I was looking for those that would amuse me and leave me with a special memory in my subconscious...
I respect and appreciate the responsibility and engagement of the personal studios of "Czech work."
In summary: I appreciate the work of the nominated studios more than individual work.

---

Ing. arch. Antonín Novák

What pleased me:
The very existence of the competition allowing an overview of the state of architecture at the faculty; a dedicated leader; jury members striving to orient themselves and appreciate the commendable in such a short time; individual studios already striving in the assignment to react to current or future social problems, thus creating undeniable added value compared to standard academic assignments; the welcoming reception by the kind Dean; Mr. Horský and his magazine; the interest of the majority of students in dignified presentation of their own design.

What displeased me:
Large differences in the quality of individual studios; frequent absence of presentation context of the design; rarity of collective collaboration.

What displeased me overall:
The repulsive and off-putting spirit of the high-rise building making longer stays and encounters impossible; unbelievable turnstiles at the entrance degrading every visitor to a potential thief.
Final wish:
As soon as possible, a more suitable new building for all existing and future students and teachers of ČVUT.

---

MgA. Vendula Šafářová

I enjoyed judging the Lead Dušan. Though I was shocked as to why me, of all people?, I took it as a challenge! It was stimulating to discuss with both "Dušan" and the jury members. It was fun to defend projects that deserved it, but there were few voices. Competing is always unfair, but it is a game and must be taken that way. Our society loves competition! I am sorry if we did not uncover some "genius" project and believed in flashy matters, but progress must happen—maybe even "hot," so I wish it FLOW! I appreciate the architects who dedicate themselves to the students and the students who are able to reflect their efforts, see HŠH. It makes studying and working much better! Students, do not be afraid and inspire us more and more!
Infantka

---

Prof. Dipl. Ing. Ivan Reimann

How to evaluate originality and is originality a criterion of quality? After reviewing the works and jury of the Lead Dušan, I realized that the difference between dozens of projects striving for originality merged in my memory into some gray indistinguishable mass of mediocrity, from which very little emerged. Why is that? Almost subconsciously, I recalled the statement of Colombian writer Gómez Dávila. I think it explains: "Intentional and systematic originality is modern uniformity of mediocrity." In architecture and in every creative work, I do not seek unusual forms; I hope to encounter an unknown interpretation of reality, which, if authentic, finds its own expression. Where it has not been found, I prefer a well-made "normal" house. After all, I believe that every outstanding project arises from a deep understanding of normal life. I have found this normality, good craftsmanship, and clear opinions only in a few studios and projects. The almost unmanageable number of various, qualitatively and methodologically disparate studios does not help education and understanding; on the contrary, it harms them. It levels the criteria of evaluation and suggests that anything is possible today and that everyone can do what they want. That this is not the case and should not be, I hope we all know, at least subconsciously.