Posted by  Another Competitor on September 25, 2003 at 19:29:59:

In Reply to:  Politics of Design posted by William Stratas on September 25, 2003 at 18:44:59:

W. Stratas states, "They would refine their plans in complete isolation from exposure to the approaches and subtleties of the other final proposals"

This is something I hadn't thought of; and a good idea. Does anyone know whether other "2 phase" competitions have taken this approach?

Background:

"At the end of Stage I, approximately five finalists will be selected to proceed to a second stage (Stage II) during which the finalists will further develop their design concepts. The jury will then reconvene to review the revised designs, and select a finalist to be announced in the fall of 2003." - Competition Website

"Q. What happens in Stage II? How will I be notified if my design has gone on to Stage II? Am I to assume then that Stage II is not anonymous? What will the next steps be?
A. Competitors whose designs are selected as finalists for Stage II evaluations will be notified by LMDC. The finalists will be asked to develop their memorial designs further. LMDC will compensate the finalists for their work on developing their proposals. Finalists in Stage II will not be anonymous to the jury." - Competition Website

"During the first stage of the two-stage competition, members of the jury will evaluate anonymous submissions. During the second stage, finalists will be asked to further develop their design proposals, which the LMDC will reveal to the public while the jury continues to deliberate. The jury will select a winning design in fall 2003."
- LMDC Press Release 4-28-03

Finally:

W. Stratas also states, "Again, all this is NOT official, but has been commented on in recent weeks by LMDC officials."

Was this in print? Second hand commentary?

Overall, what approach is best for the memorial selection/development process?

Post a Response -