Oct '06 - Feb '08
Philip Nobel over at Metropolis Magazine has written a hilariously scathing critique of the typical characters you will find in any architecture student's review. From the Automaton to the Leaker the stereotypes are so spot-on, any current student of architecture is guaranteed to get a kick out of this article.
Some of the stand-outs:
The Automaton. Students come to architecture with a variety of academic backgrounds. Most bring fresh perspectives and an understanding of the complexities of the world, using them in the studio to, er, “inform” their designs. Not this guy. For him (invariably him) it's all architecture, all the time. Having never studied anything else””having never had an interest in anything else””he is not nagged by the doubt that erudition brings. He draws like a machine””and beautifully. But our poor critics will hunt in vain for an idea: Um, why did you do any of this? Warning. Warning. Does not compute.
The Fashion Victim. The well-meaning intelligent student who loves architecture and wants to do it but cannot get the available critics to teach anything that is not inflected by the latest irrelevant mode. Um, how thick is a wall? Well, as Baudrillard said... End result: a successful career as a restaurateur. Yup
The Leaker. The one who always loses it. He or she has been awake for three weeks. He or she has been totally misunderstood by his or her critic for six weeks. He or she has been dreaming things in his or her head that he or she is unable to draw on his or her piece of paper all of his or her immeasurably frustrating life. It's not incompetence, but there are, shall we say, some issues with creativity. We see before us one half-scratched pencil drawing, one limp tissue-paper model, and a thousand perfect La Tourette monasteries locked inside. You'd cry too.
(Ouch - I think I may have been here before..)
Recognize anyone here? Who are you?
Designis Personae at Metropolis Magazine >