You can't wrong with either. None of this crap matters except for which architect you like more. It's 6 months not 6 years. Have fun.

Make sure it's a paid position

tough choice,  you can't go wrong either way. I would go to rome, but that's just because I like italian ladies better than french. and gelatto. and espresso.

correct me if i'm wrong, but kuma in paris is a branch, and fuksas in rome is the main office, right?

i'd go to fuksas... not to mention rome IMHO is sooo much nicer than paris. and cheaper too. and warmer. 

Any opinions on how famous they are from a American architecture school perspective.

Both are paid however very barely will I support the stay.

Kuma is branch office while fuksas is the main studio. I'm unsure how much difference it makes.

Any opinions on how famous they are from a American architecture school perspective.

Both are paid however very barely will I support the stay.

Kuma is branch office while fuksas is the main studio. I'm unsure how much difference it makes.

You should be focused on what you will get out of the internship, not which "brand name" gives you clout with a university. Which one's philosophy aligns with what you think about architecture, which one do you think you'll learn most from, etc... Choosing a firm to work for solely on name is like choosing if you want to wear Nikes or Reeboks. Sure one may look better than the other, but it depends on who you're talking to and more importantly what you learn, and what you put into it and helped to produce.

This name brand starchitect era needs to end. It's nice we celebrate good work in our profession, but it borders on fetish sometimes with the names.

Josh Mings, working for a starchitect earlier in your career is the only way to become a starchitect later on.

Narcus, go to Rome with Fuksas. The HQ's of offices are where you want to be, providing the city they're located in is enjoyable. Unless Kuma's office in Paris seems like you'd enjoy their work more, choose Fuksas in Rome.

"...working for a starchitect earlier in your career is the only way to become a starchitect later on."

Ha!, what tool you are.

Yeah, I don't buy that one bit. Plenty of people doing good work in this world without working for a starchitect.

Also I have no desire to be a starchitect in the current sense of the word. My aim is to leave the world a better place than I found it using the talents I've been given. Be that locally or globally, it doesn't matter as long as a tangible impact is made.

Non Sequitur, my opinion is based on the fact that every contemporary starchitect worked for an older starchitect earlier in their career. I'm fine with you insulting me, but it's not very warranted because I didn't state my stance on whether I think thats good thing or not.

Josh Mings, yes, plenty of people are doing good work in this field that are not starchitects or never worked for one. So many architects unaffiliated with starchitecture are doing better work than starchitects, and making a better impact on the world as well. Being a starchitect doesn't guarantee you do great work in the first place, it just means you are famous in this field. However, some of them do the best work in the world because they are briliant designers, and fame became a byproduct of their success.

br, i think you mean every contemporary starchitect worked for rem koolhaas.  the rest don't really count right?

who did gehry work for?  is nouvel a starchitect?  who did he work for? 

I've toured Fuksas. The firm is a good size with several design teams working on different projects at a time. The building where Fuksas is located is cool too. Rome is really nice and Fuksas seemed like a nice place to work for.

gehry worked for Victor Gruen, a star architect (of sorts) at the time.

To become famous (or more famous) he deliberately courted philip johnson, at least so says his biography. 

Kuma is in paris regularly and is pretty good person to learn business from if you are able to. It is much smaller place too, which may be better than tokyo office...just a guess though.

there is some truth to the merit of the kind of work that you learn about in a star architect office versus a professional office that is focused on other matters. If you don't learn how to run a 10000m2 super cool museum project then you wont be able to do one...its pretty straightforward and I see it all the time, and feel it personally in the kind of effort we are taking to get bigger projects in our own office. We are working madly to break out of where our experience has taken us so far. Even with two of us working for pritzker offices in our youths it is a hard slog to learn the habits we need.   we werent exactly paying attention at the time...

6 months is not enough time to really worry about though. Go to the city you like. Unless its really about style, in which case fuksas and kuma are more or less 180 degrees from each other in philosophy.