Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc)
Pratt Institute
University of Southern California (USC)
Tulane University
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)
Temple University
University of Oregon
Cranbrook Academy of Art
New York Institute of Technology (NYIT)
Kansas State University
incomprehensible jury comments!
The overused comments thread gave me this idea. Here are a few comments I've taken down from crits we've had in the past year. See if they make sense to you.
1. hyperdized filter. I don't even think hyperdized is a word, is it?
2. wedge-iosity - used to describe a wedge shaped floor plan, funnier at the time
3. split the baby - actually a Solomon reference, I believe, but an alarming phrase to many
4. monocipity - cannot even really pronounce this
Overused terms from our commencement speech.
1. dichotomist paradigms
2. cultural pluralism
3. transformative pedagogy - enough, already!
Finally, three words that are used so often I have their meanings taped to my wall. We can thank Kenneth Frampton for this.
1. phenomenology
2. epistemology
3. ontology
funny!! i didn't know back then and i still dun know it now.
anyone mind to post those meaning for everyone future references? if there is one.
presumably 'hyperdised' is 'hybridised'?
archispeak.
annoying isn't it?
i swear people use these phrases to make themselves sound "smart" and make everyone else feel "dumb" because we have no idea what they're saying but everyone nods in agreement or agrees with what is said when the reality is the user probably has no idea what the hell THEY'RE saying either.
frampton seems to be the biggest culprit. i consider myself pretty smart, not a genius, but pretty smart, can read anything, but i'll tell you, i find it near impossible to finish reading any of his work although i have just to satisfy that masochistic side of me. it's like trying to slog through Machiavelli's "The Prince"...
Pretentious jargon is the staple of academia. The cancer starts there.
After having to look up the definition of five of the last six terms I still don't know what they mean. I thought an onotologist was some kind of a doctor you hoped you would never have to go near.
Ontology has to do with the nature of being. I used to make the same mistake, thinking it was a type of doc!
Zombie jesus thread!
the old man is off his meds
The industry loses these people before they can get licensed, usually.
Who cares, once you graduate and start working, you will realize how vain the jury comments are, and maybe 65% of the education you receive in school. It just doesn't matter, what matters is absorb as much real world knowledge as you can on design, construction, and technical skills which will translate in real world use.
real knowledge as in how to put a building together, what design really means and how what we do effects the built environment and inherently humans. instead of the jargon that's taught in academia
Really knowledge is whatever I deem it to be, not whatever you think.
You sound like a frustrated architect who never built anything. I bet you use the word "juxtapose" a lot.
you sound like an anti-intellectual contractor who couldn’t hack it in architecture school (or couldn’t get into one)
Actually bennyc, I've got three projects on my own, small but fun, three previously completed - 2 restaurants and 1 retail - plus I work full-time in firm as a project manager. Oh, and you know what, I still love reading about Hejduk and Pichler. What was that you were saying?
https://www.amazon.com/Design-...
I recommend reading this book before the next jury, I had a class with the author and it made a huge difference in the jury experience and my studio exsperience.
But in a nutshell if the faculty and guest critics need to be interrogated by you, they make a comment ask a clarifying question. don't be afraid to clap back on a stupid comment. The jury of critics is there for your benefit not theirs so ask questions demand answers and don't tolerate nonsense or trite snide comments. I once said " I expected a truly grown up and serious comment from you not a dismissive statement" and that shut down the "I don't like it" guy and the other jury members and I exchanged meaningful comments that helped shape the project. The jerk Juror was not back for the final presentation. Don't tolerate punishment fight back.
Over and OUT
Peter N
++ Treat the jury as a roundtable conversation of which you are a part, not a judgment for which you're standing. Even if it is really a judgement, your engagement can guide the conversation from a firing squad to constructive advice. Make the jury work for you.
I wouldn't even bother taking the jury seriously. I haven't witnessed anything close to an arch. school jury in any other profession or mode of practice.
Guest critics are at the whim of: how jetlagged they are, interpersonal beef with the other critics, how their marriage is going, when lunch is, how bad the coffee is, cool distracting videos of robot fabrication popping up on their phone notifications, etc. Talk to your actual instructor after the crit for real feedback.
Also, if you get a complete jerk on your crit panel, chances are most of the other architects in the room know he's a jerk and know they have to put with him for some departmental politics-related reason. You aren't the only one in the room thinking it.
I fantasize frequently about being the director of an arch program and overhauling the crit process.
whenever someone says "a priori" take a drink. if someone says "a posteriori" hold up a liquor store
I think architecture school should get rid of crits all together
I think architecture schools should have an entry test of the following questions:
1. What HGTV shows do you watch?
2. What is your favorite color?
3. Have you always wanted to be a designer?
And if anyone answers any of these questions, should automatically be banned for life from entering architecture schools.
When I was in school, I had a crit where the dean of the school told me I was wrong about something that I had done research on (had citations, case studies to support). He just didn't want to see things any other way than his own narrow understanding. He also did the same thing in someone else's studio, where he argued with the professor who had first-hand experience in the very thing the dean was trying to attack.
Joke's on him though. He's no longer dean, but I am a licensed architect, lol!
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.