chicago...

name the firms, i use to work in chi-town

which firms?.... Split a deal with 'em, Chicago in the summer, LA in the winter. Seattle, every third weekend.

what do you mean, "good modern firms?"

The opposite of "boring stuck in the past architecture firms whose work doesn't stray much from the looks of the same tried-and-true architecture that is best left in the mid 20th century, the kind of firms run by old goats in trifocals who got a wake-up call with the death of PJ, their own mortality called into question, only to realize they are still copying Mies without ever trying to advance the notion of creativity."

wouldn't copying mies be considered a continuation in the modernist school, by some? I think you are trying to say contemporary

Well, when I think of the words "contemporary architecture," I think of this building:


Copying Mies could be the continuation you described. I guess I was trying to describe architects who are afraid to break out of the mold and take some hints from the architects making names these days - the angles of DL, or ZH, or the other architects out there turning heads.

i think you are retarded.

chicago - it's the midwest... but rent is cheap not as good culture of design as LA. it's cold in the winter. real cold. public transportation exists and works.

LA - rent varies on where you live. live cheap, commute will kill you. (i work in santa monica). good culture of design. everyone in santa monica is a frickin' architect or designer or whatnot. weather is wonderful.

seattle - it's rainy a lot. don't know much about this place. lots of good work being built in the area though.

it sounds like you're willing to take any of the jobs. if the job isn't the factor, you have to consider things like living expenses, geography, weather, and the culture of the town...

good luck.

andrew, it rains more in nyc a year than in seattle and it is raining more in LA this year too.

i gotta go with living in l.a. it's pretty damn nice here despite the smog, fires, traffic, plastic people and el nino.

seattle just seems to dreary.

"it rains nine months out of the year in seattle!"

I've lived in Seattle and L.A., and I'm near Chicago (although not right in) right now.

I vote Seattle--it is so not dreary! A lot of those "partly cloudy" days in Seattle are really "one small cloud over there" days. Well, truthfully, it is overcast a lot in the winter, but precipitation levels aren't nearly what we've received here in the midwest this winter. Anyway, on days when the mountain is out, you forget about any bad weather you've had to that point. And you're near salt water (better than the Great Lakes, only my opinion).

I think if you're at all inclined to doing things outdoors (hiking or camping), I'd choose Seattle. You can also do those things from Chicago or LA, but it's more of journey to get to real wilderness. I dont' know, sunbathing and ocean in LA, but sea kayaking and mountain climbing in Washington.

I had much better luck w/public transportation in Seattle than in L.A., don't know how much that relates to your lifestyle.

I'd have to be honest and say both Chicago and L.A. have better museums--not that Seattle's aren't nice, but it's hard to compete with the other two cities on that one. The Art Institute in Chicago rocks.

Of course, if you're in Chicago, you're going to have to spend the rest of your life saying, "Oh, do you like Frank Lloyd Wright? Do you do his kind of architecture?"

ceeer, it does not rain 9 months a year, and i'd take a little rain over not being able to go out side because it is so brutally hot or cold any day. temps are very moderate here.

i agree with snjr on the museum point.

e,

i'm not really baggin' on seattle. i would actually like to visit there sometime.

temps are pretty moderate in santa monica too. my one piece of advice for living in los angeles would be to live west of the 405. it's just better on that side of town.

there are tons of hip pockets throughout l.a., a little bit of everything. it's hard to compete with the beach, imho.


that 9 months thing was from 'sleepless in seattle'

i was wondering where that comment came from. ;]

Chicago has by far the best location if you love to travel. Good central US city with a major major world airport. Nothing beats under $200 airfare to Europe. I was also able to snag cheap flights to east coast cities for always under $100.

For my money that beats smog, fires, earthquakes, mudslides and the possibility of Mt. Rainer blowing its top.

Yeah, and now I have to agree w/A. One thing I like about the midwest is that is close to everywhere except Hawaii, NZ and Australia. I can drive anywhere east and south in a day (two for Florida), and the flights to Europe are hours shorter.

That being said, flying in and out of Chicago is a pain in the butt. In the winter, it's snow; in the summer, it's thunderstorms. Drives me crazy. Still, the United Terminal at O'Hare has a nice dinosaur.

Wait until the New Madrid fault slips, A :)

I'm living in chicago right now, finishing my undergraduate this semester. paying 600 month for rent on the westside.
I'm leaving as soon as a graduate. out, gone, see ya.
Grid Grid Grid Grid Grid Grid

A, Can you please share what years you were accomplishing this?

"Nothing beats under $200 airfare to Europe. I was also able to snag cheap flights to east coast cities for always under $100. "

Manteno--I don't know about Europe, the last time I flew to the UK it was much more than that, but I can fly from Indianapolis to NY for around $100 on ATA.

good point A.

drip, drip, drip. you are right about that in the winter, but not in the summer. most summers can be experienced with little rain >> 4-5 months may yield a few days of rain at best and this winter has been extremely dry. heading to be the third driest on record. the boarder, skier, and their communities are hurting bad this winter.

density was an issue for me when i moved here shalak. i came from sf, and seattle just can't compare to sf, chicago, or nyc. the majority of seattle's housing stock are single family homes. most photos of seattle will show it being dense, but the downtown is wide in one direction yet narrow in the other. i was surprised how small the downtown was when i moved here.