Studying Architecture at the University of Sydney

The architecture school at the University of Sydney today

Should you study architecture at the University of Sydney? We don't think so.

First off, look at my charts from the Course Experience Questionnaire. These show you what architecture students think of the school. I discuss this information here.

After you have digested that, I give you my own opinion, which you may take or leave. And my opinion is: No, do not study architecture at the University of Sydney. Why? All the senior staff {professors, academics} have been there for decades. Most have had little contact with reality since the 1970s, enjoying the comfy sinecure of their positions year after year after year.

They are old, they are tired, and they look forward to a nice cup of tea and a generous retirement payout. They are no more acquainted with the realities of life in a 21st century architecture office than Queen Elizabeth is with an expired bus ticket. An astonishing amount of the school's senior staff are a scant few years — if not months — from retirement. Our suggestion is wait until they are gone.

Dr Farrelly lobs yet another grenade

As you can read below, we are plenty critical of the University of Sydney's school of architecture. But we get offended at glib whack-a-mole attacks such as those by Dr Elizabeth Farrelly. We've mentioned Dr Elizabeth Farrelly's passionate defence of her proteges (cronies? acolytes? clients? dearest buddies? drinking chums?) at the University of Technology. What we have not mentioned is Dr Farrelly's delight in whacking the University of Sydney school of architecture every chance she gets. Here is the last of many snarks she made ( Sydney Morning Herald, 19 March 2009), while reporting the departure of Prof Heneghan from the school.

Dr Farrelly has a bee in her bonnet. We are still trying to understand her knickers-in-a-twist cognitive dissonance, of which this seems to be an extreme example. Dr Farrelly has been sniping at the University of Sydney school since the early 1990's. Most of the people she originally swatted all those years ago are long gone. So why does she continue to whack Sydney at every chance? We have two theories:

• Dr Farrelly carries a torch for her cronies/acolytes/clients/dearest buddies/drinking chums. In her view they were treated poorly by Sydney (and by UTS). She carries on the fight, like one of those Japanese soldiers discovered in an isolated jungle thirty years later still fighting World War II.
• Dr Farrelly never got her professorship at the University of Sydney. Why do we have more than a sneeking hunch that Dr Farrelly has been hankering after a professorship at the university for yonks? And will she will keep sniping until she gets one?

The history

“my life as a student and academic”

I spent almost twenty years, as a student and academic, at the Faculty of Architecture (School of Architecture) at the University of Sydney, Australia.

Man, was that too long! Let me tell you about my experiences.

Dean Peter Johnson: 1968-1986

Way back when I was a young undergrad, our Dean was the late and beloved R. N. 'Peter' Johnson. We never knew why Richard Norman Johnson was called Peter: one story had it that this was his codename when he was shot down over France in the War. I hope it is true. He was one of the doyens of the Sydney architectural establishment, one of the patrician gentlemen who made up the favoured circle of the architectural elite. He was Professor of Architecture, Dean of the Faculty, and Head of School all in one. No one has held all three titles since, mainly because the 'School' existed nowhere in the University's constitutional machinery: it seems the title had been tacked on to his appointment, but the actual School had never been created.

Dean Johnson ran the place as a very benevolent autocracy: think Frederick the Great. His true love was his practice, and we students only saw him at the odd function, or when he gave a lecture in the one course he taught. In his later years, these lectures were increasingly given to others to do. The most significant event of his reign was the Grand Remonstrance of 1971 (or was that '72?), which was a mass uprising of students, riding coat-tails on the student unrest of the 1960s. The great monolithic courses were carved into a curriculum of a million choices. Not that the long-term effects were that great: the student body has a short memory, and the lessons of history fade quickly.

An inestimable education

In my opinion, the Faculty {school} provided the best undergraduate education it has ever done during the late Johnson years. Architectural academics are, as I have discovered on various travels, not in general the finest minds of the age. But for a few years the Faculty was a veritable Antipodean Athens by comparison to other schools. Not an upper-class twit factory such as the AA or Harvard, but one blessed with excellent scholars and gifted teachers with brains. Adrian Snodgrass, Richard Coyne, Jenny Taylor, Tone Wheeler and Tony Radford were ornaments to the undergraduate curriculum. All, alas, gone or let go.

Two great scholars: Dr Jenny Taylor and Dr Adrian Snodgrass

Jenny Taylor and Adrian Snodgrass were special cases: both inspiring, original and dedicated academics. They are by far Australia's most eminent architectural academics, and by far our best known internationally (we have the stats to prove it, if anyone cares to ask for them). They should have had a Chair years ago at the University of Sydney.

But they were not academic games-players. Unfortunately, promotions went elsewhere. We have heard some malcontents say that these recipients only gained their positions through nepotism, corruption and coercion. We reject and deplore these vile allegations. We have also heard some wits say that the only way one can become a professor at the University of Sydney is to be utterly ignorant of the subject one claims mastery of. We reject and deplore these witticisms, too. Come to think of it, we reject and deplore a lot of things. Like g-strings {thongs} poking over muffin-tops. Man, do we deplore that.

Dean Warren Julian (I): 1987-1995

In 1986 the University suffered a derangement of democracy, and decided that Deans should be elected (the experiment was never repeated, those running the place reverting to the benign authoritarianism that comes naturally to aging academics convinced of the infallibility of their own wisdom). The thought of a contested election after twenty years of distinguished rule struck Dean Johnson as an unwonted indignity. He declined to contest, and soon after gracefully retired to the Chancellorship of another university, which he governed with an affable pomp.

The election winner was Dr Warren Julian, from my own department (DADS— you can read some of the story in my book The Favored Circle, and some more here). Dean Julian took the Faculty out of the Edwardian-gentleman status it had wallowed in for decades, viewing his job as that of a full-time professional administrator. But, to the local chapter of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects (RAIA), Julian suffered from the bubonic sore of not being a practising architect. For many years the profession waged a guerrilla campaign against the Faculty and, by implication, against him. This often consisted of veiled threats to de-register the school, for no good reason. All credit to Dean Julian for bringing us into the 20th century, and none to the RAIA for their malicious attitude.

Dean Gary Moore: 1996-2005

Dr Gary Moore, from the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee (UWM), ran the faculty for a decade from 1996. He was a charismatic figure, popular with the students, and all those who met him for a minute or two. This man was a wheeler and dealer, a mover and shaker! Vice-chancellors {university presidents} and the elite of the Australian profession were impressed indeed.

And good on him, too! As a boss, it would seem, Dr Moore was a tad lacking in people skills: ‘kiss arse up, kick arse down’ seems to have been the motto. We had a few moles in the university monitoring Dr Moore during his tenure: “pig of a man”, “a**sehole”, and “complete c**t” were a few epithets we heard. Some claim to have been bullied and harassed by Dr Moore. But no one made a formal complaint to the university, and we must hold Dr Moore blameless. And there is certainly no statute against being a complete c**t.

On my last visit to the United States I spoke to many people who had known Dr Gary Moore; including many of his graduate students, and his old colleagues at UWM. But not just there: I was surprised to discover that stories about Dr Moore can be found in architecture schools throughout North America. I wasn't actually canvassing views on the Dean; it's just that whenever I mentioned his name I always received an outpouring of vituperation information. Rather to my surprise, opinions about him were unanimous. I can't get into detail here, but I never heard a good word about him. For all I know the man has a fine mind and a modest demeanour; and he may well be a jolly good fellow, a great scholar, and a gifted administrator to boot. If I ever hear anyone actually say any of these things about him, I'll make a point of letting you know.

I think you get an idea of the man from this email he sent out a while ago:

I only met him once. My only impression was that he suffered from Attention Deficit Disorder. However, this is a common affliction of senior academics, who are riveted by the conversations of their superiors, but show little interest in those of anyone below the rank of associate professor.

Dean Thomas Kvan: 2006

Dr Moore's Deaconal imperium was passed to Dr Thomas Kvan in January 2006. You can read an excellent article here by Dr Elizabeth Farrelly (Sydney Morning Herald, Spectrum supplement Nov 19-20, 2005, p 27) eulogizing Dr Kvan's elevation.

No doubt many were looking forward to the passing of the baton: we suspect Prof Heneghan amongst them. Alas, the Curse of the Farrelly had fallen upon Dr Kvan.

On his assumption, Dr Kvan found himself in a kvandary. He'd walked into an administrative cesspit. Some key support personnel had run screaming from the school shortly before. Their departure had made it rather obvious who had been doing the hard yakka, and who had not. It all became a bit too much: after a troubled year, Dr Kvan left for the University of Melbourne in early 2007. We have to hand it to Dr Kvan: normally it takes years to apply for a position at Deaconal level. Yet Dr Kvan was able to jump ship to a post of equal stature in a few short months. Almost like he had planned it from the start. Surely not!

Dean Warren Julian II: 2007-date

Reluctantly assuming the Atlantean burden of previous years, Dr Julian was appointed Acting Dean upon Dr Kvan's unexpected abdication in 2007, 20 years after Dr Julian's first deaconate. In the faculty's alumni newsletter of Feb 2007, Dr Julian described the vigorous search for a new Dean. Alas, the search has proved as gruesome as previous attempts to find a leader. At the time of this writing in 2010, more than three years after Kvan's departure, and as many years after Dr Julian's vigorous search, the faculty remains without a Dean, leaving Dr Julian to shoulder the burden of leadership.