Opinion: Why Michael Graves Should Have Won the Pritzker

Subscriber Access

In March of this year, two of the world’s great architects died in the same week. The coincidence was unusual not because of the similarities between these two men - the advanced stage of their careers, their age and relative success - but because of the marked differences. In the few days between their mutual passing, one of the two was awarded architecture’s highest medal, the Pritzker Prize. This year’s winner, Frei Otto, had been notified of his triumph in the months prior to his death. Someone you might call his alter ego – stylistically that is – the late, great Michael Graves, died shortly after the prize was awarded to Otto.

Otto was a leading light of a particular strain of European modernism, whose most lauded works were mainly completed in his youth; on the other side of the pond, Michael Graves ran a busy commercial practice with more than 350 completed buildings, but was reviled by some for his revisionist, classical style.

Opinion: Why Michael Graves Should Have Won the Pritzker - More Images+ 2

Content Loader
About this author
Cite: Lachlan Anderson-Frank. "Opinion: Why Michael Graves Should Have Won the Pritzker" 21 Jun 2015. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/644866/opinion-why-michael-graves-should-have-won-the-pritzker> ISSN 0719-8884

You've started following your first account!

Did you know?

You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.