Architecture Topics

Case Study House 22, also known as the Stahl House, designed by Pierre Koenig in Los Angeles, is one of the most iconic examples of mid century modern architecture. Overlooking the city and defined by steel, glass, and extreme exposure, the house became a powerful symbol of modern living in postwar California.
In this episode, we explore how Case Study House 22 transformed domestic architecture into an image. We look at its design, its unconventional relationship to everyday life, and the role photography and media played in shaping its legacy. More than a house, it became a photograph, a cultural reference, and a vision of modern life consumed at a distance.
This episode is part of a mini series on the Case Study House program, examining how modern architecture moved from living, to discipline, to image, and what that shift still means today.

Designed by Craig Ellwood in the early nineteen fifties, Case Study House number sixteen, also known as the Salzman House, offers a rigorous vision of mid-century modern living in Bel Air, Los Angeles. Here, architecture does not adapt to daily life. Instead, it establishes a clear order, asking its occupants to live carefully within it.
In this episode, we explore the Salzman House as an exercise in discipline, precision, and control. From its carefully organized plan to its framed relationship with outdoor courts and terraces, the house reveals both the elegance and the limits of modernism when order comes first.
Positioned between the flexibility of the Eames House and the later iconic Case Study Houses of Los Angeles, CSH16 helps explain why the dream of a perfectly designed modern home was both influential and difficult to sustain.

Case Study House number eight, designed by Charles and Ray Eames, is often celebrated as an icon of modern architecture. But its true significance lies not in how it looks, but in how it was lived in.
In this episode, we explore a house that treated architecture as a flexible framework rather than a finished statement. A place where work, family life, and creativity unfolded side by side, and where objects accumulated naturally over time.
We look at how the Eameses approached design, why this house could only have emerged in postwar California, and how it challenged the idea that modern living needed to be controlled or perfected. More than a prototype, the Eames House became a demonstration of how architecture could support everyday life without dominating it.
This episode continues our mini series on the Case Study Houses, moving from the program’s founding ideas to a lived example where life, not image, took the lead.

After the Second World War, the United States faced an urgent question. How to house a new generation, and what that new way of living should look like.
In this episode, we explore the origins of the Case Study House program, an ambitious experiment launched in California to rethink the modern home. Architects, editors, manufacturers, and clients came together to treat the house not as a finished object, but as a prototype for everyday life.
We look at why this experiment emerged when it did, why it took shape in Southern California, and what tensions it revealed between modern ideals and real domestic life.
This episode lays the groundwork for a mini series about life, discipline, image, and legacy, and how the Case Study Houses changed the way we imagine home.

For decades, a handful of architects shaped cities, skylines, and the public imagination. They were ambitious, controversial, sometimes flawed, and often brilliant. We called them starchitects.
Today, almost all of them are gone, or well into their seventies, eighties, and nineties. And strangely, no new generation has replaced them.
In this episode, we look at the data behind the rise and disappearance of the starchitect, ask why no young global architectural figures are emerging, and explore how regulation, mega firms, public backlash, and fear of ambition have quietly reshaped the profession.
This is not a nostalgic defense of flashy buildings or big egos. It is an argument about vision, authorship, and why architecture, and society as a whole, might be worse off without people willing to push boundaries, take risks, and occasionally fail in public.
A critical, opinionated episode about ambition, innovation, and what we lose when architecture becomes safe, polite, and predictable.