I am writing my situation down, as a tool to more clearly form my thoughts on the matter, and I am posting this here, so any of you who care to do so (too few of you, I am sure), can comment.
I am one of many (tens of thousands, ohhh yes) of people considering enrolling to get a BAS. I live in New Zealand so I don't have the choice of any of these fancy schools with names in all caps, or full stops in the middle of the name. My choices are either Unitec (in Auckland), The University of Auckland, or Victoria University (in Wellington). If I were to do architecture, I would go to Wellington, as it is a nicer city. Any comment on these schools would be appreciated, but I am not expecting much as this site is very States centric.
This year (my 18th on this fine plaet) I am at the University of Otago, doing pre-med, something I doubt I will get into. I have no interest in the field, and do not know exactly why I chose to come here. (As an aside, 7/8 of the people who do get into med really shouldn't. They couldn't talk to a patient if their precious GPA depended on it. Either that, or they quite literally think that they will single handedly cure cancer.)
My secondary education has been very science based, the only arts subjects I did were English and Photography, and not entirely coincidentally these are the two subjects I got NZQA scholarships in. That said, sciences I can more than manage, just not quite to a scholarship level.
My interest in architecture is a relatively recent phenomenon, I have held it for around a year, but all of my life design has interested me (although not to a great extent, until a short while ago). I do, however, think that the only kind of career I would find satisfying, or at least continually interesting, would have to be creative. Architecture, like photography, provides a balance of the technical and creative that I could see myself really enjoying. A quote from Simone de Beauvoir comes to mind, 'Capabilies are clearly manifested only when they have been realised'. I want to see how much realisation I can manage.
None of you pessimists need a recap on how shitty architecture is looking as a profession at the moment. I think I can gather the grit and put in the work necessary to get a low paying job in something that interests me, and I would rather do that than have a job I hate, and a Porsche to drive to work.
All well and good so far. However, browsing around this site last night, I found one of the, erhm, unfortunate, threads on Parametricism. Plenty of you were bickering like kids. An example: since when does posting an image count as an comprehensible, mature argument? Or is it just to show how goddamned trendy you are? What I really want to know follows:
Is the whole profession as bitter as demonstrated in this thread, or do forums like this profession just attract the loudest and most disposed to tantrums? Is it some combination of deeply held architectural dogmata trying to maintain relevancy/become relevant, and relative anonymity? I would like an idea of how much shit must be borne from people like some of you in here if I were to go into the profession.
That is not to say that you are all as above. Most of you, I am sure, are wonderful people who I would love to have coffee with.
I would greatly appreciate any input, positive or otherwise. Please excuse errors or poor sentence structure, I am tired.
MStrack, I have come to similar conclusions as you about the parametric design rants, and I have two architecture degrees and teach it!
The forums here are extremely combative and most the individuals here are quite intolerant of students or those entering the profession, which I think is a shame. There was a thread recently where a student needed to identify an iconic image. Instead of learning the rich theory behind Boullee's image, he was berated by more "knowing" architects. Students have to get this knowledge somewhere and if the older generation on this forum thinks the younger generation has gone astray, they should try to teach their points, not denigrate (as they have also done on the parametric design threads). I am not a parametric designer, but I do not condone those who attempt it, in fact I admire their tenacity to do something that is so complex and difficult to master.
To answer your question, I think the issue is that this is an internet community, some of the people loudly posting on here have no association with architecture at all, but will give advice to students concerning pivotal career decisions. However, most of these people are out there actually building and have simply lost their spark for learning new things or even just accepting that others may want to try new things. That, unfortunately, is a condition that all designers seeking to try something different must overcome.
MStrack, the most vicious, flaming online arguments I've ever read were on a message board for podiatrists. Their opinions on what causes foot problems were hilariously, wonderfully vociferous and passionate. Any field in which people have passion will engender arguments.
Architecture is incredibly difficult as a profession, but/and as a practice I love it with every breath and will do so forever. You can find an area within architecture that will fill your passion and also manage to pay the bills with it, definitely, and the fact that you're not going into it all starry-eyed means you'll be better off than many.
MStrack, what a nicely worded post. Regarding the "troll" content of this (or indeed any) online forum... just ignore. The flame-ier posts around these parts correspond fairly well percentage-wise to pretty much any other online community :: real community ratio: aka, they represent a very small minority. I can't truthfully say you won't run into your share of bigots, misogynists, misanthropists, arrogant assholes, sanctimonious preachers, name-droppers etcetera in the field of architecture - you would find those people in any random sampling of any group of people. As a whole, architects are a friendly, interesting bunch, mostly with a good sense of humor to boot. The nature of our education means that we are generally well-rounded types, and very intellectually curious; we tend to be interested in travel, and the arts, and we can often be facile conversationalists, with a good sense of humor to boot. I always find myself looking forward to an evening with other professionals in the field, and some of my very closest friends are other architects. There's something to be said for the fact that your colleagues can commiserate with you in a way that others can't really.
However, architects also have to be passionate in order to pursue what we pursue, and of course, as creative professionals, we have learned to defend our positions perhaps more strenuously than most. Our livelihoods often depend on how well we can convince a client of the worth of our ideas, so it's not surprising that that sometimes carries over into the online world a little more strongly than it should. As Donna says, passionate people are just that.
But don't take my word for the decency of architects in real life... I suggest you put out a call (perhaps on this very forum!) to see if you can meet a few local architects for coffee. There are a few kiwis on this board, I know... and one of our very best (sadly, not as frequent as I'd like) commenters is a NZ architect.
1) the school environment for architecture is notoriously hostile and competitive. Most of us make extremely deep and lasting friendships in architecture school - it can have a quality similar to friendships formed in bootcamp, I think: a friendship formed under shared extreme stress - BUT the school environment can be so perverted by the stress everyone's under that it's not really that indicative of the way the profession is post-uni. You should know that, going in, so you don't think "what the heck? these people are all crazy!". Well, they ARE crazy, but it's only temporary insanity.
2) In the profession, unless you're a very odd person, chances are that friendships with other architects will only be a small part of your overall friendships on this earth. Therefore, don't stress too much over what other architects are like, or are not like. If you like the profession, pursue it; you'll make the friendships you want, in life, with the people you like - no matter what profession they're in. No profession is magically made up 100% of lovely, amazing people. You'll run into jerks in every job you take, and you'll make friends in every job you take in life. If I were you, I would make it my business at this point to try to learn as much as I can about the work life of an architect, and make sure that's what you really want to do, before transferring uni.
For me, the biggest question to ask yourself (seriously) when contemplating becoming an architect is: Do I love buildings?
It sounds silly, but it utterly strikes at the root of the profession. You have to have a near-unhealthy actual love of buildings to be an architect. You don't have to have much else - you can be horrid at math, you can be terrible at drawing, you can be extremely antisocial or a rabid theoretician... but you HAVE to love buildings and spaces.
Thank you all for the kind words, they have been remarkably validating. I am glad that the tone of many on here is not entirely reflective of the behaviour of the profession as a whole.
Dani Zoe, your analysis makes a lot of sense. Creative professions have always seemed a lot more Darwinian to me than more technically oriented ones (not that architecture cannot be extremely techinical, but I think you know what I mean). Very personal ideas about where you can take something you have a passion for, combined with the fact that you have to capitalise on these ideas, makes for a ruthless defense of those ideas and the values that may be tied in with them. This can very quickly turn into exclusivity. I will certainly be seeing a lot of this, and I will steel myself as much as I can.
Donna Sink, passion is a wonderful thing, and I do not think I could willingly settle for a career that did not engender it in me. As for the diffuculty of the profession, I feel that I would not forgive myselft if I did not give it my best shot.
mantaray, I do not find that an easy question! But, yes (it is hard to write this sentence without hedging), I do love spaces and buildings. It feels odd typing that, because for me love implies a burden of happiness, on the loved object, that borders on total. I could be happy without architecture, I think, but then again, I myself would have to change a lot for that to happen.
Upon rereading my original post, I have made it sounds like I have a list of criteria, and architecture just happens to tick all of the boxes. That is not the case. I have tried and cannot comprehensibly explain to myself why I want to do architecture.
I am afraid my naïveté is showing.
But regardless.
If there are any local (Christchurch or Dunedin, NZ) architects reading this, I would love to spin a yarn with you sometime, shout out here, and we can get in touch. mantaray, as you say, I will be looking around websites and other places for people in the profession to talk to.
I look forward to become a (hopefully) tolerable commenter here, more to ask questions than contribute, for now, and of course, any more advice would be wonderful.
Cheers,
Michael
May 30, 12 7:11 am ·
·
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.
Some input, please.
My reasons for starting this thread are twofold:
I am writing my situation down, as a tool to more clearly form my thoughts on the matter, and I am posting this here, so any of you who care to do so (too few of you, I am sure), can comment.
I am one of many (tens of thousands, ohhh yes) of people considering enrolling to get a BAS. I live in New Zealand so I don't have the choice of any of these fancy schools with names in all caps, or full stops in the middle of the name. My choices are either Unitec (in Auckland), The University of Auckland, or Victoria University (in Wellington). If I were to do architecture, I would go to Wellington, as it is a nicer city. Any comment on these schools would be appreciated, but I am not expecting much as this site is very States centric.
This year (my 18th on this fine plaet) I am at the University of Otago, doing pre-med, something I doubt I will get into. I have no interest in the field, and do not know exactly why I chose to come here. (As an aside, 7/8 of the people who do get into med really shouldn't. They couldn't talk to a patient if their precious GPA depended on it. Either that, or they quite literally think that they will single handedly cure cancer.)
My secondary education has been very science based, the only arts subjects I did were English and Photography, and not entirely coincidentally these are the two subjects I got NZQA scholarships in. That said, sciences I can more than manage, just not quite to a scholarship level.
My interest in architecture is a relatively recent phenomenon, I have held it for around a year, but all of my life design has interested me (although not to a great extent, until a short while ago). I do, however, think that the only kind of career I would find satisfying, or at least continually interesting, would have to be creative. Architecture, like photography, provides a balance of the technical and creative that I could see myself really enjoying. A quote from Simone de Beauvoir comes to mind, 'Capabilies are clearly manifested only when they have been realised'. I want to see how much realisation I can manage.
None of you pessimists need a recap on how shitty architecture is looking as a profession at the moment. I think I can gather the grit and put in the work necessary to get a low paying job in something that interests me, and I would rather do that than have a job I hate, and a Porsche to drive to work.
All well and good so far. However, browsing around this site last night, I found one of the, erhm, unfortunate, threads on Parametricism. Plenty of you were bickering like kids. An example: since when does posting an image count as an comprehensible, mature argument? Or is it just to show how goddamned trendy you are? What I really want to know follows:
Is the whole profession as bitter as demonstrated in this thread, or do forums like this profession just attract the loudest and most disposed to tantrums? Is it some combination of deeply held architectural dogmata trying to maintain relevancy/become relevant, and relative anonymity? I would like an idea of how much shit must be borne from people like some of you in here if I were to go into the profession.
That is not to say that you are all as above. Most of you, I am sure, are wonderful people who I would love to have coffee with.
I would greatly appreciate any input, positive or otherwise. Please excuse errors or poor sentence structure, I am tired.
MStrack, I have come to similar conclusions as you about the parametric design rants, and I have two architecture degrees and teach it!
The forums here are extremely combative and most the individuals here are quite intolerant of students or those entering the profession, which I think is a shame. There was a thread recently where a student needed to identify an iconic image. Instead of learning the rich theory behind Boullee's image, he was berated by more "knowing" architects. Students have to get this knowledge somewhere and if the older generation on this forum thinks the younger generation has gone astray, they should try to teach their points, not denigrate (as they have also done on the parametric design threads). I am not a parametric designer, but I do not condone those who attempt it, in fact I admire their tenacity to do something that is so complex and difficult to master.
To answer your question, I think the issue is that this is an internet community, some of the people loudly posting on here have no association with architecture at all, but will give advice to students concerning pivotal career decisions. However, most of these people are out there actually building and have simply lost their spark for learning new things or even just accepting that others may want to try new things. That, unfortunately, is a condition that all designers seeking to try something different must overcome.
MStrack, the most vicious, flaming online arguments I've ever read were on a message board for podiatrists. Their opinions on what causes foot problems were hilariously, wonderfully vociferous and passionate. Any field in which people have passion will engender arguments.
Architecture is incredibly difficult as a profession, but/and as a practice I love it with every breath and will do so forever. You can find an area within architecture that will fill your passion and also manage to pay the bills with it, definitely, and the fact that you're not going into it all starry-eyed means you'll be better off than many.
MStrack, what a nicely worded post. Regarding the "troll" content of this (or indeed any) online forum... just ignore. The flame-ier posts around these parts correspond fairly well percentage-wise to pretty much any other online community :: real community ratio: aka, they represent a very small minority. I can't truthfully say you won't run into your share of bigots, misogynists, misanthropists, arrogant assholes, sanctimonious preachers, name-droppers etcetera in the field of architecture - you would find those people in any random sampling of any group of people. As a whole, architects are a friendly, interesting bunch, mostly with a good sense of humor to boot. The nature of our education means that we are generally well-rounded types, and very intellectually curious; we tend to be interested in travel, and the arts, and we can often be facile conversationalists, with a good sense of humor to boot. I always find myself looking forward to an evening with other professionals in the field, and some of my very closest friends are other architects. There's something to be said for the fact that your colleagues can commiserate with you in a way that others can't really.
However, architects also have to be passionate in order to pursue what we pursue, and of course, as creative professionals, we have learned to defend our positions perhaps more strenuously than most. Our livelihoods often depend on how well we can convince a client of the worth of our ideas, so it's not surprising that that sometimes carries over into the online world a little more strongly than it should. As Donna says, passionate people are just that.
But don't take my word for the decency of architects in real life... I suggest you put out a call (perhaps on this very forum!) to see if you can meet a few local architects for coffee. There are a few kiwis on this board, I know... and one of our very best (sadly, not as frequent as I'd like) commenters is a NZ architect.
It's also worth noting two other things:
1) the school environment for architecture is notoriously hostile and competitive. Most of us make extremely deep and lasting friendships in architecture school - it can have a quality similar to friendships formed in bootcamp, I think: a friendship formed under shared extreme stress - BUT the school environment can be so perverted by the stress everyone's under that it's not really that indicative of the way the profession is post-uni. You should know that, going in, so you don't think "what the heck? these people are all crazy!". Well, they ARE crazy, but it's only temporary insanity.
2) In the profession, unless you're a very odd person, chances are that friendships with other architects will only be a small part of your overall friendships on this earth. Therefore, don't stress too much over what other architects are like, or are not like. If you like the profession, pursue it; you'll make the friendships you want, in life, with the people you like - no matter what profession they're in. No profession is magically made up 100% of lovely, amazing people. You'll run into jerks in every job you take, and you'll make friends in every job you take in life. If I were you, I would make it my business at this point to try to learn as much as I can about the work life of an architect, and make sure that's what you really want to do, before transferring uni.
For me, the biggest question to ask yourself (seriously) when contemplating becoming an architect is: Do I love buildings?
It sounds silly, but it utterly strikes at the root of the profession. You have to have a near-unhealthy actual love of buildings to be an architect. You don't have to have much else - you can be horrid at math, you can be terrible at drawing, you can be extremely antisocial or a rabid theoretician... but you HAVE to love buildings and spaces.
Thank you all for the kind words, they have been remarkably validating. I am glad that the tone of many on here is not entirely reflective of the behaviour of the profession as a whole.
Dani Zoe, your analysis makes a lot of sense. Creative professions have always seemed a lot more Darwinian to me than more technically oriented ones (not that architecture cannot be extremely techinical, but I think you know what I mean). Very personal ideas about where you can take something you have a passion for, combined with the fact that you have to capitalise on these ideas, makes for a ruthless defense of those ideas and the values that may be tied in with them. This can very quickly turn into exclusivity. I will certainly be seeing a lot of this, and I will steel myself as much as I can.
Donna Sink, passion is a wonderful thing, and I do not think I could willingly settle for a career that did not engender it in me. As for the diffuculty of the profession, I feel that I would not forgive myselft if I did not give it my best shot.
mantaray, I do not find that an easy question! But, yes (it is hard to write this sentence without hedging), I do love spaces and buildings. It feels odd typing that, because for me love implies a burden of happiness, on the loved object, that borders on total. I could be happy without architecture, I think, but then again, I myself would have to change a lot for that to happen.
Upon rereading my original post, I have made it sounds like I have a list of criteria, and architecture just happens to tick all of the boxes. That is not the case. I have tried and cannot comprehensibly explain to myself why I want to do architecture.
I am afraid my naïveté is showing.
But regardless.
If there are any local (Christchurch or Dunedin, NZ) architects reading this, I would love to spin a yarn with you sometime, shout out here, and we can get in touch. mantaray, as you say, I will be looking around websites and other places for people in the profession to talk to.
I look forward to become a (hopefully) tolerable commenter here, more to ask questions than contribute, for now, and of course, any more advice would be wonderful.
Cheers,
Michael
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.