hmmm...a degree and 99 cents will buy you a cup of coffee in most parts of the US. There's an IDEA for you.
So, NONarchitect, you aren't the 'detail oriented type' so my guess is you won't be cut out for any type of employment that requires any degree of specificity. Stick to pouring that 99 cent cup-o-joe. even starbucks may prove a bit 'detail oriented' for your tastes.
You aren't the 'masochist type' and while i wholeheartedly respect your lifestyle decision i'm guessing you mean that you don't like long hours for little physical compensation. You would rather get an 'idea oriented job'. i can't recall the last time i saw a job listing with that title. You might spend your whole life searching for that particular career...but then again you aren't a masochist so i'd guess that search would last about a summer on someone else's dime, all to end in vain and you'd be back pouring that all-too-familiar-cup-o-joe.
So, to sum up. you seem destined to continue as a 'nonarchitect', nonarchitect.
If you want an idea oriented job, try the field of post-secondary education or even research if you could find such a position. But, everyone in every professional field has to pay their dues. Spend some time becoming a good architect and then maybe someone will care to listen to your ideas let alone pay you for them.
the war against passive-agressive thread starting continues..........
even if you want a job as a kinko's clerk, i wouldn't volunteer that you're not 'detail-oriented'. i can't think of any employer who would find that attractive.
ins.of. faction, im sorry to be judgemental but i think that you sound like the intern who is bitter about the world and people because all you did for the past 3 months is a glazing detail. does not mean that everyone has to be like you, and after all, its a very simple question that non- is asking. say yes or no godamnit !
and steven, i dont think nonarchitect here is mentioning that this is the way he is going to approach a prospective employer.
finally, nonarchitect, this attitude (demonstrated by architects) is why architecture as a profession sucks. And yes if you are looking for an idea-oriented profession, it is absolutely possible to do so, just need to find the right avenue, maybe its not architecture.
it is a simply stated question, but i wouldn't say that it is simple to answer.
what does non mean by "idea oriented?"
what is non's understanding of the profession?
to what level is non non-detail oriented?
what is non's interest in architectural ideas?
marketing directors could be taken as idea oriented, but i wouldn't call it making architecture, but it's still a position in the field. i see the partners working more with ideas, but they have to do a lot of other shit too, and it takes a long time to get to that position.
if you're talking about working with architectural theory or history, then it seems like the easiest way to make money would be to go into teaching or writing.
the way non's question was posed made him/her sound like they were not interested in paying close attention to things, or working hard, which are two traits that most successful people in the profession (should) have.
i don't think it's really fair to say that the responses above are "why architecture as a profession sucks" because they are individual opinions, and clearly not views shared by absolutely everyone.
To answer your question, I don't think you can get much of a job without being a detail oriented person. It seems to me you need to be somewhat anal to be a succesful architect. (this is the main reason why I will never be a successful architect.) The idea oriented positions are mainly filled by those who are detail oriented, but have earned some leeway (?) through their experience, and by those who have their own funding and don't have to answer to hire ups because they can be their own boss.
Fortunately or unfortunately, saying you are not detail oriented (I am not.. sorry) is like admitting you are a murderer, for some reason. I would encourage you not to advertise this fact or even admit to it. Every employer, in every field, wants their employees to be detail oriented.
so, yeah... we're screwed.
(if you are detail oriented, I didn't mean to lump you into my sad circle...)
sodapop, for one i dont think rem koolhaas' architecture is very 'detail oriented' (i know i can get into a lot of trouble stating this, but ....)
if you guys are talking about hardcore architecture, and following the time-tested route of being an architect (interning for x years, taking the exams etc etc)...then it is important to be a 'detail-oriented' architect.
If you take the time, think of a way around trying out different avenues, you still might be able to get a lot of interesting stuff done at idea level
I can see what you mean about koolhaus' work. Although, I think it depends on the project. I think in his work the physical implementation defers to the larger ideas, rather than vice versa, as it does in the work of many starchitects.
And I agree with you it probably is important to be a detail-oriented architect. With the complexity of even small projects there are so many facets to consider, so much coordination, having a handle on all aspects is crucial.
Personally, I just don't have that personality/temperment/mindset/whatever, so I don't know if there is room in most firms for the non-detail oriented person, or if we are just the mediocre employees or what. I think I have strengths in other areas, but sometimes I'm going to forget to change the date on the drawing, or I'm going to miss where the newly changed detail alters the plan on the 4th floor or something. It's just going to happen.
arer you kidding? koolhaas' rhetoric might make you think he ignores details but don't let him fool you. He is as serious about the construction and its effect as Peter Zumthor or H+deM. His details are not an afterthought and better than most, occassionally even brilliant.
Yes there are design driven firms that run 9 to 5 and don't do overtime. But they are pretty rare and you probably have to move to Europe.
Yes there are design driven firms that run 9 to 5 and don't do overtime. But they are pretty rare and you probably have to move to Europe.
jump
WTF? what does that have to do with anything in the above discussion? I'm confused...
Also can you give examples of the Koolhaus details that are brilliant? I know that sounds a little smart ass, but I've never thought of him as a real detailer, and I'd like to hear your point of view...
whose to say which is architecture or building? To a layperson a wallmart around the corner is architecturally adequate, it serves its purpose, and more people visit this "architecture" than any architecturally significant building.
and hence we have our problem.......that 'wal-mart' is considered architecture, rather than, say any one of our most important civic buildings/squares/etc. which are also being designed and built much in the same vein of our wal-marts.
in your minds is architecture solely limited to that which meets a certain standard of visual aesthetics, or is there also a component of architecture related to improving the general quality of life which may be outside that scope as well? don't get me wrong architectural design is definitely an art for me, but as such it is perhaps the only art that holds the power to shape people's lives in a positive way; most of what we probably think and speak of as architecture is limited to a form of entertainment for the intellectual elite.
Quality of life. And what the human mind/intellect can design and then build in the name of 'quality of life' - as vague a term as that is.
Designing and building habitable space is against all odds, right?
It's a battle with the environment, materials, form, construction, policy, communication, etc, etc, etc. There isn't much more satisfying than beating these odds - even if the glitches are more numerous than the successes within a particular building. I'm sure Rem isn't happy with many apsects of say, the Seattle library [since that's where I am right now, studying with a group of friends]. But damn, it's a controversial civic space that has completely put into question the role of library in current culture. One has to consciously be interested in looking at/for books here amongst the thousands of people wandering around only to look at the building.
What if Rem designed a big space-ship Wal-Mart in the middle of a city? Then would people think Wal-Mart was offering an edgy, cool, cultural critique? Because, all in all, Wal-Mart is the ultimate cultural critique in every way - architectural, economic, political, social - without even trying to be.
And as I sit here at the 'Starbucks Youth Reading Room' [get 'em hooked on coffee young], I can absolutely imagine a complete switch - the old Wal-Mart greeter guy standing at the main entrance and all the books moved to the big box in the burbs.
Maybe that's the way it should be since it's way more important to the masses to be able to buy an economy pack of underwear and boxed frozen appys for tonights party all at the same time and for under $50.
lo sodapop. 9-5 design-led firms means just that. They pursue architecture based on conceptual rather than commercial considerations, but don't believe in overworking themselves to do it. I know a few places like that, with happy staff and interesting work, but they are all in UK and NL. So maybe m. non has a chance to work in a creative atmosphere without cutting 5 years off of his life expectancy to do it.
As far as detailing goes my philosophy is that good detailing is not necessarily defined by the elaborate work of, for example, Ingenhoven or Foster. While that approach is clearly technically brilliant it is hard to think of a better example of sheer creative willpower than the exposed structural steel (re-bar) in the ceiling of the theatron at the educatorium. It isn't a fine-grain detail that technical wonks drool over but it certainly is brilliant. A normal office would just make the slab thicker and not bother. There are many other examples.
Leaking buildings are not a good indication of professionalism, but I haven't heard that of Koolhaas before. Sejima, now, MOST of her buildings leak, but that is because she lives in denial of reality. Koolhaas doesn't exactly seem that type...
the exposed structural steel is probably the brainchild of cecil balmond....dont get me wrong, i like koolhaas' and more importantly his philophy, but i just dont think his work is detail oriented.
whatever, i find it really pissing off when the person who started the thread runs away not contributing to the discussion. nonarchitect where ther )**)*) are you?
could be cecil, but credit doesn't matter so much to me. I mean, it is OMA (whatever that means) and the detail is nice. I rather like the big wood balustrade there as well. It isn't refined or anything, but a nice detail. It may not look like money but I would bet a fair amount of time was spent working it out. Same goes for most of his buildings. Not that he partakes of the technical gymnastics of Maki or Sejima to get the look, but his staff are clearly putting in the time to get things right and often doing innovative things. corrigated glass as acoustic isolator, and gold leaf decoration in the Porto interior are recent examples.
but it was always so. crap buildings are nothing new. the only reason we care now is because we have an industry to protect, and there are more architects looking for work than there used to be.
i think we give people far too little credit when it comes to how they (we!) live in the city. Wal-mart type places are part of the package for now, and I agree that sort of typology isn't the most conducive to neighborhood-making, and none too pretty to look at either, but even if those places were built as part of some orgasmic urban paradise the way we live wouldn't change a damn bit.
perhaps 'not detail oriented' isn't in reference to architectural details. there are plenty of things you can do with an arch degree without spending one second of your life designing a single building.
Being "detail oriented" means having no vision and finding security in the little things that have nothing to do with the overall pattern. Being an idea person means having a vision, which is where all projects come from anyway.
I do not take the initial question of this discussion to mean anything as specific as architectural detailing, per se, but rather as a preference for type of work.
The fact is that detail oriented people do not shoulder the responsibility involved in leadership, only his or her element. Idea people, visionaries, do not punch out at the end of the day. They are responsible for the motives, the "why's" of a project, and the effects of the results. So are there jobs for this type? Absolutely! But they require sacrifice, risk, depth, and initiative and a hard core degree of devotion.
Anyway, I agree with le bossman's last comment...lots you can do with an arch degree...you just gotta "look outside the box" and use that good ol' imagination.
Arch is one of those degrees that famously touches everything--aesthetics, engineering, physics, sociology, psychology, history, art, philosophy, film, photography, etc...
It is a good degree to have. A frustrated person can always get another degree, in math or law or business, for example, and an arch degree will only enhance the person's application.
good comment elephant. architecture does span every facet. and that's what seems so great about the education and the people involved - they seem open to exploring whatever in relation to the built environment.
hey, how absurd do you guys think it is to just be finishing a highly unfilling masters degree in another design related profession but thinking every waking moment about getting another in architecture?
spent one semester of this degree in architecture and loved it to death.
i'm almost 30 though and getting kinda tired of academia.
where can an architecture degree take you ?
seriously...? if you're not the detail oriented type, or the masochist type..is there any chance of getting an idea oriented job ?
hmmm...a degree and 99 cents will buy you a cup of coffee in most parts of the US. There's an IDEA for you.
So, NONarchitect, you aren't the 'detail oriented type' so my guess is you won't be cut out for any type of employment that requires any degree of specificity. Stick to pouring that 99 cent cup-o-joe. even starbucks may prove a bit 'detail oriented' for your tastes.
You aren't the 'masochist type' and while i wholeheartedly respect your lifestyle decision i'm guessing you mean that you don't like long hours for little physical compensation. You would rather get an 'idea oriented job'. i can't recall the last time i saw a job listing with that title. You might spend your whole life searching for that particular career...but then again you aren't a masochist so i'd guess that search would last about a summer on someone else's dime, all to end in vain and you'd be back pouring that all-too-familiar-cup-o-joe.
So, to sum up. you seem destined to continue as a 'nonarchitect', nonarchitect.
If you want an idea oriented job, try the field of post-secondary education or even research if you could find such a position. But, everyone in every professional field has to pay their dues. Spend some time becoming a good architect and then maybe someone will care to listen to your ideas let alone pay you for them.
the war against passive-agressive thread starting continues..........
even if you want a job as a kinko's clerk, i wouldn't volunteer that you're not 'detail-oriented'. i can't think of any employer who would find that attractive.
sic' em, iof.
tag team back again check it top
wreck it, let's begin
ins.of. faction, im sorry to be judgemental but i think that you sound like the intern who is bitter about the world and people because all you did for the past 3 months is a glazing detail. does not mean that everyone has to be like you, and after all, its a very simple question that non- is asking. say yes or no godamnit !
and steven, i dont think nonarchitect here is mentioning that this is the way he is going to approach a prospective employer.
finally, nonarchitect, this attitude (demonstrated by architects) is why architecture as a profession sucks. And yes if you are looking for an idea-oriented profession, it is absolutely possible to do so, just need to find the right avenue, maybe its not architecture.
it is a simply stated question, but i wouldn't say that it is simple to answer.
what does non mean by "idea oriented?"
what is non's understanding of the profession?
to what level is non non-detail oriented?
what is non's interest in architectural ideas?
marketing directors could be taken as idea oriented, but i wouldn't call it making architecture, but it's still a position in the field. i see the partners working more with ideas, but they have to do a lot of other shit too, and it takes a long time to get to that position.
if you're talking about working with architectural theory or history, then it seems like the easiest way to make money would be to go into teaching or writing.
the way non's question was posed made him/her sound like they were not interested in paying close attention to things, or working hard, which are two traits that most successful people in the profession (should) have.
i don't think it's really fair to say that the responses above are "why architecture as a profession sucks" because they are individual opinions, and clearly not views shared by absolutely everyone.
I sympathize with your point of view.
To answer your question, I don't think you can get much of a job without being a detail oriented person. It seems to me you need to be somewhat anal to be a succesful architect. (this is the main reason why I will never be a successful architect.) The idea oriented positions are mainly filled by those who are detail oriented, but have earned some leeway (?) through their experience, and by those who have their own funding and don't have to answer to hire ups because they can be their own boss.
Fortunately or unfortunately, saying you are not detail oriented (I am not.. sorry) is like admitting you are a murderer, for some reason. I would encourage you not to advertise this fact or even admit to it. Every employer, in every field, wants their employees to be detail oriented.
so, yeah... we're screwed.
(if you are detail oriented, I didn't mean to lump you into my sad circle...)
sodapop, for one i dont think rem koolhaas' architecture is very 'detail oriented' (i know i can get into a lot of trouble stating this, but ....)
if you guys are talking about hardcore architecture, and following the time-tested route of being an architect (interning for x years, taking the exams etc etc)...then it is important to be a 'detail-oriented' architect.
If you take the time, think of a way around trying out different avenues, you still might be able to get a lot of interesting stuff done at idea level
I can see what you mean about koolhaus' work. Although, I think it depends on the project. I think in his work the physical implementation defers to the larger ideas, rather than vice versa, as it does in the work of many starchitects.
And I agree with you it probably is important to be a detail-oriented architect. With the complexity of even small projects there are so many facets to consider, so much coordination, having a handle on all aspects is crucial.
Personally, I just don't have that personality/temperment/mindset/whatever, so I don't know if there is room in most firms for the non-detail oriented person, or if we are just the mediocre employees or what. I think I have strengths in other areas, but sometimes I'm going to forget to change the date on the drawing, or I'm going to miss where the newly changed detail alters the plan on the 4th floor or something. It's just going to happen.
Take it easy on him.
nonarchitect, if Gerhy did it, then so can you!
instrument, im sorry but each time i read your post above, it makes me mad...u having a bad day??? or maybe its me
"'tweener intern" found this from your bio
arer you kidding? koolhaas' rhetoric might make you think he ignores details but don't let him fool you. He is as serious about the construction and its effect as Peter Zumthor or H+deM. His details are not an afterthought and better than most, occassionally even brilliant.
Yes there are design driven firms that run 9 to 5 and don't do overtime. But they are pretty rare and you probably have to move to Europe.
jump
WTF? what does that have to do with anything in the above discussion? I'm confused...
Also can you give examples of the Koolhaus details that are brilliant? I know that sounds a little smart ass, but I've never thought of him as a real detailer, and I'd like to hear your point of view...
be a critic
i've actually heard a lot of bad comments about rem's detailing especially of his early work. water, water everywhere.
what is architecture?
Few and far between. Most is just 'building' - not 'architecture'.
whose to say which is architecture or building? To a layperson a wallmart around the corner is architecturally adequate, it serves its purpose, and more people visit this "architecture" than any architecturally significant building.
and hence we have our problem.......that 'wal-mart' is considered architecture, rather than, say any one of our most important civic buildings/squares/etc. which are also being designed and built much in the same vein of our wal-marts.
in your minds is architecture solely limited to that which meets a certain standard of visual aesthetics, or is there also a component of architecture related to improving the general quality of life which may be outside that scope as well? don't get me wrong architectural design is definitely an art for me, but as such it is perhaps the only art that holds the power to shape people's lives in a positive way; most of what we probably think and speak of as architecture is limited to a form of entertainment for the intellectual elite.
Quality of life. And what the human mind/intellect can design and then build in the name of 'quality of life' - as vague a term as that is.
Designing and building habitable space is against all odds, right?
It's a battle with the environment, materials, form, construction, policy, communication, etc, etc, etc. There isn't much more satisfying than beating these odds - even if the glitches are more numerous than the successes within a particular building. I'm sure Rem isn't happy with many apsects of say, the Seattle library [since that's where I am right now, studying with a group of friends]. But damn, it's a controversial civic space that has completely put into question the role of library in current culture. One has to consciously be interested in looking at/for books here amongst the thousands of people wandering around only to look at the building.
What if Rem designed a big space-ship Wal-Mart in the middle of a city? Then would people think Wal-Mart was offering an edgy, cool, cultural critique? Because, all in all, Wal-Mart is the ultimate cultural critique in every way - architectural, economic, political, social - without even trying to be.
And as I sit here at the 'Starbucks Youth Reading Room' [get 'em hooked on coffee young], I can absolutely imagine a complete switch - the old Wal-Mart greeter guy standing at the main entrance and all the books moved to the big box in the burbs.
Maybe that's the way it should be since it's way more important to the masses to be able to buy an economy pack of underwear and boxed frozen appys for tonights party all at the same time and for under $50.
lo sodapop. 9-5 design-led firms means just that. They pursue architecture based on conceptual rather than commercial considerations, but don't believe in overworking themselves to do it. I know a few places like that, with happy staff and interesting work, but they are all in UK and NL. So maybe m. non has a chance to work in a creative atmosphere without cutting 5 years off of his life expectancy to do it.
As far as detailing goes my philosophy is that good detailing is not necessarily defined by the elaborate work of, for example, Ingenhoven or Foster. While that approach is clearly technically brilliant it is hard to think of a better example of sheer creative willpower than the exposed structural steel (re-bar) in the ceiling of the theatron at the educatorium. It isn't a fine-grain detail that technical wonks drool over but it certainly is brilliant. A normal office would just make the slab thicker and not bother. There are many other examples.
Leaking buildings are not a good indication of professionalism, but I haven't heard that of Koolhaas before. Sejima, now, MOST of her buildings leak, but that is because she lives in denial of reality. Koolhaas doesn't exactly seem that type...
the exposed structural steel is probably the brainchild of cecil balmond....dont get me wrong, i like koolhaas' and more importantly his philophy, but i just dont think his work is detail oriented.
whatever, i find it really pissing off when the person who started the thread runs away not contributing to the discussion. nonarchitect where ther )**)*) are you?
haha
could be cecil, but credit doesn't matter so much to me. I mean, it is OMA (whatever that means) and the detail is nice. I rather like the big wood balustrade there as well. It isn't refined or anything, but a nice detail. It may not look like money but I would bet a fair amount of time was spent working it out. Same goes for most of his buildings. Not that he partakes of the technical gymnastics of Maki or Sejima to get the look, but his staff are clearly putting in the time to get things right and often doing innovative things. corrigated glass as acoustic isolator, and gold leaf decoration in the Porto interior are recent examples.
heres an architectural reality. in small town amerika sprawlmart is the new mainstreet. this is the real (de)evolution of the built environment.
but it was always so. crap buildings are nothing new. the only reason we care now is because we have an industry to protect, and there are more architects looking for work than there used to be.
i think we give people far too little credit when it comes to how they (we!) live in the city. Wal-mart type places are part of the package for now, and I agree that sort of typology isn't the most conducive to neighborhood-making, and none too pretty to look at either, but even if those places were built as part of some orgasmic urban paradise the way we live wouldn't change a damn bit.
perhaps 'not detail oriented' isn't in reference to architectural details. there are plenty of things you can do with an arch degree without spending one second of your life designing a single building.
Being "detail oriented" means having no vision and finding security in the little things that have nothing to do with the overall pattern. Being an idea person means having a vision, which is where all projects come from anyway.
I do not take the initial question of this discussion to mean anything as specific as architectural detailing, per se, but rather as a preference for type of work.
The fact is that detail oriented people do not shoulder the responsibility involved in leadership, only his or her element. Idea people, visionaries, do not punch out at the end of the day. They are responsible for the motives, the "why's" of a project, and the effects of the results. So are there jobs for this type? Absolutely! But they require sacrifice, risk, depth, and initiative and a hard core degree of devotion.
Anyway, I agree with le bossman's last comment...lots you can do with an arch degree...you just gotta "look outside the box" and use that good ol' imagination.
Arch is one of those degrees that famously touches everything--aesthetics, engineering, physics, sociology, psychology, history, art, philosophy, film, photography, etc...
It is a good degree to have. A frustrated person can always get another degree, in math or law or business, for example, and an arch degree will only enhance the person's application.
good comment elephant. architecture does span every facet. and that's what seems so great about the education and the people involved - they seem open to exploring whatever in relation to the built environment.
hey, how absurd do you guys think it is to just be finishing a highly unfilling masters degree in another design related profession but thinking every waking moment about getting another in architecture?
spent one semester of this degree in architecture and loved it to death.
i'm almost 30 though and getting kinda tired of academia.
sorry to make this about me, nonarchitect.
a failed marriage and a nervous breakdown (that is, if you're any good...)
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.