The new issue of “Purpose” is devoted to people in their 50s and to their presence in the world of culture. I would like to look at this problem in the context of artistic activity. Is there a moment in human life when artists lose creativity?

More than one answer seem to be possible. We can find quite a number of examples in the past — artists who created their best works in their young days and who then lost their creative power, and those whose best years coincided with their mature years. They didn’t have to “pursue a career” any longer and they discovered they still had great reserves of originality. There are also such who throughout their artistic life, until their death at old age, feel constant artistic tension.

Actually, one cannot say whether young age or adulthood is best to make great discoveries or create masterpieces. All depends on the character of an artist and the way of his artistic development.  
There are fields, however, where maturity is of great importance. This is particularly true about architecture. Before writing this text I looked through the biographies of the most famous architects. It turned out, as I had expected, that a great deal of outstanding works were created just before or after fifty years of age. Here are a few examples to support my observation:    
— Filippo Bruneleschi (born 1377) — the dome of Sanata Maria del Fiore 1420-1936; Pazzi Chappel 1430;
— Leone Battista Alberti (born 1404) — Palazzo Ruccellai 1446-1972; Santa Maria Novella 1456-1470; San Andrea w Mantui 1472;
— Andrea Palladio (born 1508) — Willa Rotonda 1567; Il Redentore po 1576;
— Guarino Guarini (born 1624) — San Lorenzo (1666-1680); Palazzo Carignano 1679-1685;
— Johann B. Fischer von Erlach (born 1656) — Church of St. Charles Borromeo 1715;
— Leo von Klenze (born 1784) — Alte Pinakothek 1826-1836; Propylee 1846-1862;
— Gaudi (ur. 1852) — Casa Mila 1906-1910; Sagrada Familia 1883-1926;
— Le Corbusier (born 1887) — Unité d'Habitation 1947-1952; Notre Dame Chapel in Ronchamp 1950-1954;
— Mies van der Rohe (born 1886) — Farnsworth House 1945-1950; Seagram Building 1954-1958;
— Kenzo Tange (born 1913) — Yoyogi National Gymnasium for the 1964 Summer Olympisc in Tokyo 1964;  Fuji Television Building 1994;
— Frank Gehry (born 1929) — Dancing House 1995; Guggenheim Museum 1997;
— Zaha Hadid (born 1950) — Rosenthal Center for Contemporary Art Cincinnati 1998; Phaeno 2005.

I don’t want to suggest that young architects cannot create outstanding works. I only want to point out that practically in all periods, including our times, mature age of architects has had beneficial influence on the quality of architecture. It’s enough to remember who are considered the stars of today’s architecture. We won’t find young men among them — only mature architects. In this context the list of the Pritzker Prize (architectural Oscars) winners is worth noting. Not even once has the prize been awarded to a young architect, many got it in their declining years, but all of them were over fifty. It is natural, because the prize is awarded, in a way, for lifetime achievements, which is also very symptomatic.

All these facts make us wonder why it is like that. While in other artistic fields careers are made by very young people, in architecture it is the other way round. It’s because architecture is a field where the best results are obtained owing to profound theoretical knowledge combined with a lot of experience. And both the factors are not acquired in a few years’ time, but as a result of long-standing efforts. Before an architect is ready to create his own language, he has to learn, understand and re-interpret the repertoire of forms and rules that cover a broad spectrum of issues: from the structure of buildings and their usability through various notions of beauty to the hard problems of the mediation between the expectations of the public and of the architect himself. Therefore, creating one’s own style and winning over to it investors and the public require a lot of effort and long practice. All that is obvious to those who, after many years of working for other architects, can finally found their own architectural office.
 
And so, the answer to my question is that not only should an architect in his 50s not think about retirement, but also he should hope that the best is still ahead of him.