IlmoitusAdvert
Published in 5/2024 - Crossing the Borders
Why Is Finland Not More Visible Abroad?
Rainer Mahlamäki sees at least three factors that explain the modest international visibility of contemporary Finnish architecture.
The photos in the article show the 11 Finnish buildings that have been shortlisted for the Mies van der Rohe Award. The prize has been awarded every other year since 1988. 30–45 buildings have been selected for the shortlist in each round.
“Finland can be proud of its contemporary architecture.” This statement is written by journalist Antti Kuronen in the grounds for his selection of the winner of this year’s Finlandia Prize for Architecture. His praise is not without merit. Awarded annually for the last eleven years, the prize has showcased projects that provide an excellent account of the versatility and vitality of Finnish architecture. The selections cover a variety of building types, in addition to a wide geographic distribution. Over the years, wood construction has strengthened its position, and the quality of its implementation has improved. New wood architecture slots in nicely with our traditional country image and its green values, realizing the objectives of a carbon-neutral climate policy. We know how to mend old structures and are gradually learning to utilize the possibilities that lie in our aging building stock. New building types, such as various hybrid buildings, are making their presence known. This year’s Finlandia Prize winner, the Tammela Stadium by JKMM Architects, represents exactly this type of solution, exemplifying the way in which such a hybrid can be resolved seamlessly within the existing urban fabric. Every now and then, we are treated to striking public buildings. Highly motivated young designers are graduating from our schools of architecture. There are plenty of positive signs in the air.
“Finland’s reputation as a nation of fine architecture rests upon two names, Alvar Aalto and Martin Luther. The latter is included because of the pivotal role that your Lutheran churches have played in your country’s architectural history.” These were the words of a German journalist, well-acquainted with Finland, in the inauguration speech at the Berlin opening of a travelling exhibition showcasing Finnish design and architecture in the jubilee year of our independence in 2017. Two further names that are closely linked to Finland are Eliel and Eero Saarinen, and each new decade has produced Finnish architects whose work has also carried over to the international scene. Furthermore, we have two decades of post-war architecture that has been recognized in many ways.
All of this is to say that Finland has its international reputation, but what is the case with the latest Finnish architecture? Every now and then, Finnish architects succeed in international competitions, and completed projects are sometimes presented in international media. Invitations to international reviews, such as the main exhibition at the Venice Architecture Biennale, have been few and far between. International architecture awards, such as the triennially awarded UIA prizes or, perhaps the most significant European prize, the Mies van der Rohe Award, have so far eluded Finnish designers. As regards the latter, it looks like we are among the few European nations that have yet to have one of our compatriots included in the list of finalists over the more than thirty-year history of the award.
It is difficult for the very correct and proper contemporary Finnish architecture to compete in this game.
There are at least three simple factors that explain the international visibility, or lack thereof, of contemporary Finnish architecture.
The architectural atlas is expanding and the global design supply is increasing. The concept of a country brand has ceased to exist. The media tends to follow either established international heroes, such as Steven Holl, or go on a hunt for new rising stars whose works carry a particular sense of novelty and a hefty dose of today’s environmental consciousness. It is difficult for the very correct and proper contemporary Finnish architecture to compete in this game. We no longer have a leading hardy perennial like Aalto to represent us, and the younger generation is struggling with the many challenges of a difficult economic environment, not least because of the severe slump in the construction sector. There are simply not enough opportunities to work and show what an architect is made of.
The second contributing factor is that the construction industry is not innovative but is stuck repeating the old, outdated ways of building. Mainstream new construction still relies on precast concrete. It is not easy to create groundbreaking designs with hollow-core slabs – unless someone comes up with a radical and brilliant solution for reusing them. The only aim in research and development in the construction industry seems to be to streamline the processes and profitability, not to elevate the true architectural quality. The problem runs deeper than people tend to be aware of, and the role of architects should become more visible in national construction-sector development projects. Design work is often subjected to the rigid control of construction companies. The status and voice of the architect remains weak in comparison to other European countries.
It is not easy to create groundbreaking designs with hollow-core slabs.
The third problem is the lack of communication concerning architecture. In most European countries, architecture is featured visibly and regularly in the culture and economy sections of daily newspapers. In Finland, the journalistic visibility has decreased from one decade to the next, and we now find ourselves in a situation in which one only comes across the occasional, rare piece of more serious writing about Finnish architecture. Gone are the printed, hardback reviews of contemporary architecture that used to be compiled, first every five years and then every two years, also making the rounds internationally. The Finnish Architectural Review stands as the only remaining, regularly published print to also present Finnish architecture to an international audience. The Finlandia Prize for Architecture, then, is the only regular review of the latest Finnish architecture, but it does not come with a printed publication. The Museum of Finnish Architecture has had a key role in the visibility of Finnish architecture in the form of exhibitions arranged in Finland and abroad. The museum has served as a window out into the world, but lately the window has only been slightly ajar.
The primary task of an architect is to create and maintain a healthy and pleasant living environment, well-being and beauty. Our own country is our primary playing field. Internationality is given too much emphasis in all areas of life these days, but I have to admit that it would be uplifting to see Finnish architecture showcased more visibly abroad as well. It would also be nice to hear Antti Kuronen’s words of praise repeated by a foreign journalist. ↙
RAINER MAHLAMÄKI is Professor Emeritus of Contemporary Architecture and co-founder of Lahdelma & Mahlamäki architects.