Most of us are reasonably insightful and probably gifted to do various things. I have known people who have changed into architecture. I have known people who changed out of architecture. I also know of many other "mix and/or match" career movements.
I'm happy with my decision, though the difficulty/payoff ratio is a little messed up. Here's my list of 5 occupations I might have liked:
- teacher
- health related: pharmacy
- health related: plastic surgeon (the problem is there is no "erase" button for incisions which were not judicious)
- health related: psychiatrist (the creeps who make the news would be difficult to "interview," and I'm sure that psychiatrists may not be able to control the range of their patient load and that would be a violation of the Hippocratic Oath)
- actuary, statistician, or demographer, largely related to population studies
If not the above, which are white collar, then something involved in operating/conducting transit related vehicles.
It is a different list now than when I was young. Here is my 5: Particle physicist. Pediatrician. Research doctor (psychology). Farmer/rancher. Occupational therapy.
wasn't there some archinect-or who bought a ranch in central california and makes goat cheese (i think)? yeah, that would be cool - wonder how they're doing?
"Weird Al Yankovic" is Caly Poly SLO Architecture's most famous alum, and he became an entertainer. I think he may be a has-been by now. I went to school with a guy, who was a senior in the undergraduate section, who should have gone into "stand up."
Funny, and then NOT funny. My Dad wanted me to be an attorney. I typically scored higher on verbal than on quantitative on standardized tests, but business law was THE most boring class I took in college. I would either fall asleep while studying, or get through 8 to 10 pages ... in 1 hour. I told him that training to be a lawyer entailed 3 years of that, so "No way, Jose."
I always have this urge to drop everything, and go open a winery that handles anything but grapes.. This grapefruit wine is bizarre and wonderful. You know, sort of a willy wonka type, plus booze.
I think I would have been happy dropping out and pursuing my stand-up comedy bit, too. Without these student loan payments, I think it would be feasible.
I have a "midlife crisis savings account" that I contribute to monthly. I'll more than likely use it for a car or some ridiculous vacation at some point. But I've also had the idea of using it to completely break away from architecture and open my own brewery in a foreign country.
Both sides of my family at some point owned breweries in Ireland and modern day Slovenia. I've also always had a knack for creating unique homebrews. It's a crazy idea but given the right circumstances I'd certainly like to give it a shot.
Thumbs up on sex therapist. Thumbs down on Aspen. I eventually tired of skiing. But Manhattan, Miami, or L.A. might be a real eye-opener, if that's what the criteria for doing that work is.
I'll bet there is a built-in breach of professional ethics for any type of therapist. I'd bet a lot of patient/client stuff gets discussed at their dinner tables with their spouses.
I would have liked to work in the film industry - perhaps as a producer or director. Or, if I had any talent whatsoever for the job, I think I would have found a career as an orchestral conductor to be satisfying.
I have a midlife crisis fund that I DRAW FROM. My spouse was an addiction therapist for awhile. Spouses of therapists don't hear specifics, but generalities, yes.
How could you people be good at any of what you are doing if you keep changing professions- I sure as hell wouldn't want to hire any of you to be any of the above with relationship to my personal business/life. And while I'm commenting on this thread- you people sure as hell must have a lot of money to spend to fuck around and not know what you want to do with your lives. Having the means to explore is a luxury of the wealthy, but regardless of what class you are in- knowledge and experience cannot be replaced, so I am dumbfounded by how any of you can call yourselves professionals in the field of architecture when your experience seems to be continuously interrupted by these random tangents you go on called "other career options."
i disagree bulgar. getting a job in something other than architecture shouldn't necessarily be any more isolated to the wealthy than getting a job in architecture. one might say staying in architecture is isolated to the wealthy if opportunity and wages keep sliding while productivity is expected to go up. if you look at the professions mentioned, they are oddly enough jobs most of us could typically transfer too. lawyer might require a heavy education burden, as would particle physicist and a few others, but i suspect donna would be a fine sex therapist in aspen and rusty's experience in managing Patrik Schumacher should directly transfer to his management of donna's office.
i didn't even know US Foreign Service was a thing. i might send them an application this week. do you think the sequester ended their ability to hire? i hope my ability to draw a detail of parapet cap flashing doesn't impede my ability to do whatever it is they do.
Interesting to see some people here would have pursued a career in the State Department. I was a political science major as an undergrad and fluent in several languages, so I naturally considered that career as well. I still think I would enjoy it. If that didn't work out, I definitely might have tried my luck in getting a PhD in Poli-sci and eventually teach or even join a think-tank. The reason I didn't go that route was that I had a talent that needed to be nurtured (drawing/visualisation), and I found architecture to be the one kind of job that accomodated all of my interests.
I spent the last couple years developing a video production hobby that turned into a pretty decent side gig. I really loved it and almost changed careers but it just didn't feel right. It's hard when you make more hourly in your side gig then your illustrious architecture career. But in the end I loved building too much and couldn't jump ship.
I will say, If these application decisions keep going the way they are for me so far, I found a few off the grid farms that I've been talking to. I might just head there over the next year and maybe apply again next winter. Just depends on how I enjoy the life! Hell, if more of this horse meat keeps going around, I'd be happy to build my own garden home and produce wholesome food. There's always a market for food.
I always wanted to be a chef...almost bailed on architecture last year to start a food truck business but then I visited Chaco Canyon...That is the most inspiring place.
"Having the means to explore is a luxury of the wealthy, but regardless of what class you are in- knowledge and experience cannot be replaced, so I am dumbfounded by how any of you can call yourselves professionals"
Knowledge is not linear. Money is not required for exploration. Open your eyes and your mind. That is after all the essence of creativity.
Interesting, Bulgar, that you associate interests with wealth. Whatsamatta? Too tied to your material lifestyle to venture out of it? Maybe you should relax your grind a bit and take a side road now and then?
How could you people be good at any of what you are doing if you keep changing professions- I sure as hell wouldn't want to hire any of you to be any of the above with relationship to my personal business/life. And while I'm commenting on this thread- you people sure as hell must have a lot of money to spend to fuck around and not know what you want to do with your lives. Having the means to explore is a luxury of the wealthy, but regardless of what class you are in- knowledge and experience cannot be replaced, so I am dumbfounded by how any of you can call yourselves professionals in the field of architecture when your experience seems to be continuously interrupted by these random tangents you go on called "other career options."
Screen personalities begin to emerge. This dovetails your dislike of M.Arch.3s. Man, I thought I was uptight, and I can be. My only hemorrhoid is that I want people to get at least a 4 year degree before licensing. Moving right along, what happens is that some people are typically in another field for a short time, usually no more than 5 years, before they make a change. Went to HS with this guy. He was smart, but kind of pissy and a douche bag. He winds up in college with me. He takes on a job as a bean counter. He decided he didn't like it, which is perfectly understandable. He then did TWO things: a) took the prerequisite science courses, and b) applied to and finished medical school. He is now a doctor. I'm sure he is still a douche, because people don't change much. However, between his foray into the initial field and required education to be an MD, he crossed the 30-ish line. At any rate, he still has over 30 years of practicing medicine, or more, if he chooses to work past normal retirement age. Your job is the most important thing for your happiness, really. If you muck that up, nothing else falls into place. You should be in a position where you go to work liking what you do. Don't be such a hard-ass.
I have never heard of a prodigy piano player who didn't start playing until later in life... all prodigy piano players I've heard of began when they are incredibly young...
I believe that everyone needs to enter into a profession hoping that they will be the best at it. Even if they aren't, that attitude and drive will make them at least somewhat successful. It takes a lot of time and practice. It also takes talent. Taking a class in design or one day waking up and thinking about real estate and all the parties involved in a project and trying to bypass the architect by becoming an architect isn't going to take one far. Now- I believe that side jobs can be necessary. Look at me- I work two jobs (as I said: one arch and one non-arch for the time being.) But to go from one career to another several times over?
When I graduated from school our speaker made a joke- a C-average Doctor is still a doctor. Would you want that C-Average doctor practicing on you? No. Why would you want to hire an architect that came from a law background, then went on to become a sex therapist (or what have you) and finally became an "architect" when you could hire an architect with experience equivalent to the time it took for that person to earn all his/her professional titles combined? Bottom line- I think people can have epiphanies all they want about their careers, but part of human logic is based on recognizing patterns of behavior and according to the pattern I observed above- architecture may just be another professional notch on one's belt. I don't respect that kind of attitude to pursuing a career and for the universities that accept people like that- they are just doing it for the money.
You sort of don't get it. I worked in field #1 for 5 years. My parents were NOT supportive of architecture school, which is what I wanted to do, either verbally or financially (they paid about 1/4 of my college education). MANY working-class parents do NOT want their kids going into architecture. There were some other things that fed the equation, and which I may have explained elsewhere. While I graduated with honors from undergrad, I also frequently fell asleep inside my books. Not a good sign. I also did not like the work, which I did competently, and it came to a boiling point.
In architecture school, I never feel asleep ... not even at 3 a.m. inking a drawing. Instead of dreading going to work and having a sick feeling in my stomach, I looked forward to it.
You are correct about the Mozart syndrome, where some (most) people actually demonstrate a proficiency for something at an early age. However, there are exceptions. In architecture, that would be Philip Johnson, who I believe was at Harvard or Yale studying architecture between ages 34 and 37, +/- (which I would have NEVER done at that age). If you like old and new jazz, and I do, there's a musician named Bill Withers. His first job? Cleaning toilets at the Los Angeles airport. Can you say the same thing about schoolteachers? I know many who went through the credentialing process after another degree and working at something else. Ok, so you have a lady who worked in the credit industry for 9 years, she then gets an M.A. in teaching, and has been having a blast teaching 3rd grade ever since. Are you going to refuse enrolling your kids in her class because she didn't major in education first? Chances are, you either won't be asking or you won't have a resume/CV on her.
As for the doctor I know of, I believe he was about a 3.6 in business, so an A- student. He was a competitive person, being that he was in track and field, so I'm sure he turned in a similar performance in medical school. He has his own small practice in a specialty. Your point doesn't hold water, as smart as you are. Many people pick a major because there is a precedent in, and pressure from, the family. Many people make these changes asking themselves "What can hold my attention for 8+ hours per day?"
"What can hold my attention for 8+ hours per day?"
Architecture SCHOOL. I would bet money that when people go and work for companies and have to do details for 8+ hours a day maybe they will feel differently. And that is precisely what I am talking about. You can't go from being a doctor/lawyer and disliking the grunt work there and expect there won't be grunt work in other professions. When they get tired of the gruntwork in architecture they will move on to another field. And that is what I "dont get."
i thought about that bulgar, and i think the idea of an adult piano prodigy is kind of interesting. if you're 6 and you're better than some famous piano player (billy joel?), then that's fairly exceptional. if you're 50, it's not as exceptional because your in a field of others who also very talented at playing piano. a you-tube video of a 6 year old playing piano is interesting whereas a you-tube video of a 50 year old playing piano isn't, no matter how prodigious they are. libesking was an accordian prodigy wasn't he? pretty sure that's fairly irrelevant to your point that talent you start with should guide all of your career decisions.
What if a person had the resources, say two good in-state public universities so they didn't burn through a lot of cash, and first picked an eclectic self-designed curriculum in social sciences, general design, and languages and then, with NO work gap, went to a 3+ year M.Arch.? Would that bother you AS much?
Being entertained/inspired etc. and being committed are two totally separate things... when you get into an argument with your wife are you going to divorce her? Same thing with a profession... The plan B option or Plan C, D, E, F, etc is always there and will always be the easier option. Quitters are easy to find. Those who are committed aren't. And I respect committed people. When you meet a couple that has been together for 50 years you're like- "Wow! That's amazing" and in comparison you see people together for 5 years and think "they have a long road ahead of them." The U.S. has the highest divorce rates out of any country. Is that a good thing?
"What can hold my attention for 8+ hours per day?"
Architecture SCHOOL. I would bet money that when people go and work for companies and have to do details for 8+ hours a day maybe they will feel differently. And that is precisely what I am talking about. You can't go from being a doctor/lawyer and disliking the grunt work there and expect there won't be grunt work in other professions. When they get tired of the gruntwork in architecture they will move on to another field. And that is what I "dont get."
All right. I'll give this another whack. Sometimes, it's the milieu of an occupation. I have a friend who was at the very top of her HS class, graduated summa from college, and then graduated top quartile from her (prestigious) law school class. I was invited to some firm functions, and either the stuffiness of the firm itself, if at her office, or the stuffiness of the lawyers at functions held elsewhere, made me feel claustrophobic. She was not wired to do that kind of work long-term. She is now an educator. Now, THAT milieu doesn't bother her, nor would it me. Since you did a B.Arch., were you at a school that had 3 year M.Arch types? If so, did you avoid them like the plague?
Listen- I'm not a sage here... I have a strong stance about this issue- but I'm not saying that there aren't any exceptions. But see- that's the key word: EXCEPTIONS... when you have entire programs dedicated to "exceptions" year in and year out- the significance of the term "exception" gets lost.... It becomes NORMAL.
I think I get it. You think that people MUST identify their penchant for and commitment to architecture at age 17 and, if they don't enroll in a B.Arch. or 4+2 program STAT, they are a loser. That's fine. I've seen that mentality. I think there's a "curve" of when it's reasonable to do so, and when it's not.
another "L" word... how about the "R" word- RESPECT.... I may think they are fun people to hang out with and have some beer- but as professionals... it will take a lot more for me compared to B.Arch's (for example...)
So, someone who may be going to U.Mich. (great) M.Arch 3+ in the summer, and racks up 105 credits of architecture with a 3.8 and has a stunning portfolio, is worthy of less respect than someone who did 105 to 115 credit hours, with similar grades and portfolio, spread out over 5 years because they had interspersed general ed requirements, is that what you're saying? I once started a thread on the receptiveness of certain offices toward career-change M.Archs. and it was met with the typical non-confrontational, PC "oh, it's ok" often found on archinect. The reality is that you EXIST, as do others like you.
No- its because the guy with a B.Arch graduated earlier than the guy with an M.Arch and has (hopefully) already 3.5 years of professional experience under his belt.
For two people of the same age- one graduating with a B.Arch and one graduating with an M.Arch- the guy with a B.Arch will in a regular economy have an incredible head start....
And just for the record- who the F*CK cares about grades??? Even the portfolio is less important to employers... you can make the most pretty pictures, but its how much you know that is of value.
No- its because the guy with a B.Arch graduated earlier than the guy with an M.Arch and has (hopefully) already 3.5 years of professional experience under his belt.
You are being evasive. I asked you about whether they should meet with less respect. You mentioned the "go get a beer with" factor, almost as if an oddity in a zoo exhibit.
As for your 3.5 difference, that presumes the B.Arch. was employed right away. That M.Arch. could have worked summers, so there's 6 months. I'm actually referring to 10 years down the line, when you have an indifferent B.Arch. who hasn't licensed who has an "issue" with the M.Arch. who actually racked up meatier experience and licensed.
If I was hiring someone, I would look at a) portfolio (realistic, not flakey), b) their breadth of work experience, c) their school's reputation, and I would look at grades to some degree, because it means they didn't sleep in steel, HVAC, or lighting, in which many students do, and d) level of maturity, polish, and affability for their apparent chronological age, though not in any particular order.
Grades do mean something, or arch. schools wouldn't award degrees with High Distinction. They mean you didn't skip a beat. They also mean you are more likely to have absorbed the material for the licensing exam, and are apt to pass it. The high grade students in my program are the ones practicing. *Throw those 3 year men and women some bananas into their zoo exhibit* (LOL)
If you didn't go into architecture, what do you think you would have liked to have done?
Most of us are reasonably insightful and probably gifted to do various things. I have known people who have changed into architecture. I have known people who changed out of architecture. I also know of many other "mix and/or match" career movements.
I'm happy with my decision, though the difficulty/payoff ratio is a little messed up. Here's my list of 5 occupations I might have liked:
If not the above, which are white collar, then something involved in operating/conducting transit related vehicles.
What about the others?
It is a different list now than when I was young. Here is my 5: Particle physicist. Pediatrician. Research doctor (psychology). Farmer/rancher. Occupational therapy.
Farmer/rancher.
wasn't there some archinect-or who bought a ranch in central california and makes goat cheese (i think)? yeah, that would be cool - wonder how they're doing?
"Weird Al Yankovic" is Caly Poly SLO Architecture's most famous alum, and he became an entertainer. I think he may be a has-been by now. I went to school with a guy, who was a senior in the undergraduate section, who should have gone into "stand up."
Comedy writer!
particle physicist sounds like a lot of fun
for me, i would add
1. part of a liberal think tank
2. some sort of support role in a US embassy far away just kind of hanging out, not doing much, maybe talk to the occasional tourist.
farmer is about the best way to die rich.
1. Join the US Foreign Service. I'd still like to do this at some point in my life, actually.
2. Macro-economist, perhaps for a large organization like the World Bank or something
3. Interaction/UX Designer
4. Programmer
5. Lawyer, rather quickly followed by suicide
5. Lawyer, rather quickly followed by suicide
Funny, and then NOT funny. My Dad wanted me to be an attorney. I typically scored higher on verbal than on quantitative on standardized tests, but business law was THE most boring class I took in college. I would either fall asleep while studying, or get through 8 to 10 pages ... in 1 hour. I told him that training to be a lawyer entailed 3 years of that, so "No way, Jose."
chef / video game designer because i enjoyed both cooking and gaming or a nurse because monies
I was all over the place freshman year.
1. grow olives
2. run a lodge
3. artist
4. writer
5. all of the above - soon I hope.
1. Intelligence agent (spy)
2. Undercover cop
I love these secret stuffs...
I always have this urge to drop everything, and go open a winery that handles anything but grapes.. This grapefruit wine is bizarre and wonderful. You know, sort of a willy wonka type, plus booze.
I think I would have been happy dropping out and pursuing my stand-up comedy bit, too. Without these student loan payments, I think it would be feasible.
Professional wrestling.
Both sides of my family at some point owned breweries in Ireland and modern day Slovenia. I've also always had a knack for creating unique homebrews. It's a crazy idea but given the right circumstances I'd certainly like to give it a shot.
always wanted to work in a zoo.
LITS, thats a very expensive car you are talking about, or a really cheap brewery!
Sex therapist in Aspen.
A Pimp.
More specifically CEO of Donna's "Sex Therapy" joint in the mountains.
Sex therapist in Aspen.
Thumbs up on sex therapist. Thumbs down on Aspen. I eventually tired of skiing. But Manhattan, Miami, or L.A. might be a real eye-opener, if that's what the criteria for doing that work is.
I'll bet there is a built-in breach of professional ethics for any type of therapist. I'd bet a lot of patient/client stuff gets discussed at their dinner tables with their spouses.
I have a "midlife crisis savings account" that I contribute to monthly.
I always had this suspicion that "children's college fund" is a code for something else.
I would have liked to have the job Tom Hanks has in "Big". Actually I still do. What is that called?
I would have liked to work in the film industry - perhaps as a producer or director. Or, if I had any talent whatsoever for the job, I think I would have found a career as an orchestral conductor to be satisfying.
I have a midlife crisis fund that I DRAW FROM. My spouse was an addiction therapist for awhile. Spouses of therapists don't hear specifics, but generalities, yes.
How could you people be good at any of what you are doing if you keep changing professions- I sure as hell wouldn't want to hire any of you to be any of the above with relationship to my personal business/life. And while I'm commenting on this thread- you people sure as hell must have a lot of money to spend to fuck around and not know what you want to do with your lives. Having the means to explore is a luxury of the wealthy, but regardless of what class you are in- knowledge and experience cannot be replaced, so I am dumbfounded by how any of you can call yourselves professionals in the field of architecture when your experience seems to be continuously interrupted by these random tangents you go on called "other career options."
i disagree bulgar. getting a job in something other than architecture shouldn't necessarily be any more isolated to the wealthy than getting a job in architecture. one might say staying in architecture is isolated to the wealthy if opportunity and wages keep sliding while productivity is expected to go up. if you look at the professions mentioned, they are oddly enough jobs most of us could typically transfer too. lawyer might require a heavy education burden, as would particle physicist and a few others, but i suspect donna would be a fine sex therapist in aspen and rusty's experience in managing Patrik Schumacher should directly transfer to his management of donna's office.
i didn't even know US Foreign Service was a thing. i might send them an application this week. do you think the sequester ended their ability to hire? i hope my ability to draw a detail of parapet cap flashing doesn't impede my ability to do whatever it is they do.
Interesting to see some people here would have pursued a career in the State Department. I was a political science major as an undergrad and fluent in several languages, so I naturally considered that career as well. I still think I would enjoy it. If that didn't work out, I definitely might have tried my luck in getting a PhD in Poli-sci and eventually teach or even join a think-tank. The reason I didn't go that route was that I had a talent that needed to be nurtured (drawing/visualisation), and I found architecture to be the one kind of job that accomodated all of my interests.
I spent the last couple years developing a video production hobby that turned into a pretty decent side gig. I really loved it and almost changed careers but it just didn't feel right. It's hard when you make more hourly in your side gig then your illustrious architecture career. But in the end I loved building too much and couldn't jump ship.
I will say, If these application decisions keep going the way they are for me so far, I found a few off the grid farms that I've been talking to. I might just head there over the next year and maybe apply again next winter. Just depends on how I enjoy the life! Hell, if more of this horse meat keeps going around, I'd be happy to build my own garden home and produce wholesome food. There's always a market for food.
I always wanted to be a chef...almost bailed on architecture last year to start a food truck business but then I visited Chaco Canyon...That is the most inspiring place.
"Having the means to explore is a luxury of the wealthy, but regardless of what class you are in- knowledge and experience cannot be replaced, so I am dumbfounded by how any of you can call yourselves professionals"
Knowledge is not linear. Money is not required for exploration. Open your eyes and your mind. That is after all the essence of creativity.
Interesting, Bulgar, that you associate interests with wealth. Whatsamatta? Too tied to your material lifestyle to venture out of it? Maybe you should relax your grind a bit and take a side road now and then?
Actually- I work two jobs, one arch and one non-arch. Been there done that... and its not because I want to either...
How could you people be good at any of what you are doing if you keep changing professions- I sure as hell wouldn't want to hire any of you to be any of the above with relationship to my personal business/life. And while I'm commenting on this thread- you people sure as hell must have a lot of money to spend to fuck around and not know what you want to do with your lives. Having the means to explore is a luxury of the wealthy, but regardless of what class you are in- knowledge and experience cannot be replaced, so I am dumbfounded by how any of you can call yourselves professionals in the field of architecture when your experience seems to be continuously interrupted by these random tangents you go on called "other career options."
Screen personalities begin to emerge. This dovetails your dislike of M.Arch.3s. Man, I thought I was uptight, and I can be. My only hemorrhoid is that I want people to get at least a 4 year degree before licensing. Moving right along, what happens is that some people are typically in another field for a short time, usually no more than 5 years, before they make a change. Went to HS with this guy. He was smart, but kind of pissy and a douche bag. He winds up in college with me. He takes on a job as a bean counter. He decided he didn't like it, which is perfectly understandable. He then did TWO things: a) took the prerequisite science courses, and b) applied to and finished medical school. He is now a doctor. I'm sure he is still a douche, because people don't change much. However, between his foray into the initial field and required education to be an MD, he crossed the 30-ish line. At any rate, he still has over 30 years of practicing medicine, or more, if he chooses to work past normal retirement age. Your job is the most important thing for your happiness, really. If you muck that up, nothing else falls into place. You should be in a position where you go to work liking what you do. Don't be such a hard-ass.
What went down here the last couple of posts - I thought oberservants question was pluperfect subjunctive?
Any Fringe fans here? Observer...
I have never heard of a prodigy piano player who didn't start playing until later in life... all prodigy piano players I've heard of began when they are incredibly young...
I believe that everyone needs to enter into a profession hoping that they will be the best at it. Even if they aren't, that attitude and drive will make them at least somewhat successful. It takes a lot of time and practice. It also takes talent. Taking a class in design or one day waking up and thinking about real estate and all the parties involved in a project and trying to bypass the architect by becoming an architect isn't going to take one far. Now- I believe that side jobs can be necessary. Look at me- I work two jobs (as I said: one arch and one non-arch for the time being.) But to go from one career to another several times over?
When I graduated from school our speaker made a joke- a C-average Doctor is still a doctor. Would you want that C-Average doctor practicing on you? No. Why would you want to hire an architect that came from a law background, then went on to become a sex therapist (or what have you) and finally became an "architect" when you could hire an architect with experience equivalent to the time it took for that person to earn all his/her professional titles combined? Bottom line- I think people can have epiphanies all they want about their careers, but part of human logic is based on recognizing patterns of behavior and according to the pattern I observed above- architecture may just be another professional notch on one's belt. I don't respect that kind of attitude to pursuing a career and for the universities that accept people like that- they are just doing it for the money.
You sort of don't get it. I worked in field #1 for 5 years. My parents were NOT supportive of architecture school, which is what I wanted to do, either verbally or financially (they paid about 1/4 of my college education). MANY working-class parents do NOT want their kids going into architecture. There were some other things that fed the equation, and which I may have explained elsewhere. While I graduated with honors from undergrad, I also frequently fell asleep inside my books. Not a good sign. I also did not like the work, which I did competently, and it came to a boiling point.
In architecture school, I never feel asleep ... not even at 3 a.m. inking a drawing. Instead of dreading going to work and having a sick feeling in my stomach, I looked forward to it.
You are correct about the Mozart syndrome, where some (most) people actually demonstrate a proficiency for something at an early age. However, there are exceptions. In architecture, that would be Philip Johnson, who I believe was at Harvard or Yale studying architecture between ages 34 and 37, +/- (which I would have NEVER done at that age). If you like old and new jazz, and I do, there's a musician named Bill Withers. His first job? Cleaning toilets at the Los Angeles airport. Can you say the same thing about schoolteachers? I know many who went through the credentialing process after another degree and working at something else. Ok, so you have a lady who worked in the credit industry for 9 years, she then gets an M.A. in teaching, and has been having a blast teaching 3rd grade ever since. Are you going to refuse enrolling your kids in her class because she didn't major in education first? Chances are, you either won't be asking or you won't have a resume/CV on her.
As for the doctor I know of, I believe he was about a 3.6 in business, so an A- student. He was a competitive person, being that he was in track and field, so I'm sure he turned in a similar performance in medical school. He has his own small practice in a specialty. Your point doesn't hold water, as smart as you are. Many people pick a major because there is a precedent in, and pressure from, the family. Many people make these changes asking themselves "What can hold my attention for 8+ hours per day?"
"What can hold my attention for 8+ hours per day?"
Architecture SCHOOL. I would bet money that when people go and work for companies and have to do details for 8+ hours a day maybe they will feel differently. And that is precisely what I am talking about. You can't go from being a doctor/lawyer and disliking the grunt work there and expect there won't be grunt work in other professions. When they get tired of the gruntwork in architecture they will move on to another field. And that is what I "dont get."
i thought about that bulgar, and i think the idea of an adult piano prodigy is kind of interesting. if you're 6 and you're better than some famous piano player (billy joel?), then that's fairly exceptional. if you're 50, it's not as exceptional because your in a field of others who also very talented at playing piano. a you-tube video of a 6 year old playing piano is interesting whereas a you-tube video of a 50 year old playing piano isn't, no matter how prodigious they are. libesking was an accordian prodigy wasn't he? pretty sure that's fairly irrelevant to your point that talent you start with should guide all of your career decisions.
Bulgar -
What if a person had the resources, say two good in-state public universities so they didn't burn through a lot of cash, and first picked an eclectic self-designed curriculum in social sciences, general design, and languages and then, with NO work gap, went to a 3+ year M.Arch.? Would that bother you AS much?
Being entertained/inspired etc. and being committed are two totally separate things... when you get into an argument with your wife are you going to divorce her? Same thing with a profession... The plan B option or Plan C, D, E, F, etc is always there and will always be the easier option. Quitters are easy to find. Those who are committed aren't. And I respect committed people. When you meet a couple that has been together for 50 years you're like- "Wow! That's amazing" and in comparison you see people together for 5 years and think "they have a long road ahead of them." The U.S. has the highest divorce rates out of any country. Is that a good thing?
"What can hold my attention for 8+ hours per day?"
Architecture SCHOOL. I would bet money that when people go and work for companies and have to do details for 8+ hours a day maybe they will feel differently. And that is precisely what I am talking about. You can't go from being a doctor/lawyer and disliking the grunt work there and expect there won't be grunt work in other professions. When they get tired of the gruntwork in architecture they will move on to another field. And that is what I "dont get."
All right. I'll give this another whack. Sometimes, it's the milieu of an occupation. I have a friend who was at the very top of her HS class, graduated summa from college, and then graduated top quartile from her (prestigious) law school class. I was invited to some firm functions, and either the stuffiness of the firm itself, if at her office, or the stuffiness of the lawyers at functions held elsewhere, made me feel claustrophobic. She was not wired to do that kind of work long-term. She is now an educator. Now, THAT milieu doesn't bother her, nor would it me. Since you did a B.Arch., were you at a school that had 3 year M.Arch types? If so, did you avoid them like the plague?
Listen- I'm not a sage here... I have a strong stance about this issue- but I'm not saying that there aren't any exceptions. But see- that's the key word: EXCEPTIONS... when you have entire programs dedicated to "exceptions" year in and year out- the significance of the term "exception" gets lost.... It becomes NORMAL.
I think I get it. You think that people MUST identify their penchant for and commitment to architecture at age 17 and, if they don't enroll in a B.Arch. or 4+2 program STAT, they are a loser. That's fine. I've seen that mentality. I think there's a "curve" of when it's reasonable to do so, and when it's not.
My school only recently created an M.Arch I program.
Hey hey- I never brought the "L" word into this conversation... just for the record.
^ Ok, fine, no "L" word, held up to the forehead ...
But you didn't like THESE PEOPLE, right?
another "L" word... how about the "R" word- RESPECT.... I may think they are fun people to hang out with and have some beer- but as professionals... it will take a lot more for me compared to B.Arch's (for example...)
^
So, someone who may be going to U.Mich. (great) M.Arch 3+ in the summer, and racks up 105 credits of architecture with a 3.8 and has a stunning portfolio, is worthy of less respect than someone who did 105 to 115 credit hours, with similar grades and portfolio, spread out over 5 years because they had interspersed general ed requirements, is that what you're saying? I once started a thread on the receptiveness of certain offices toward career-change M.Archs. and it was met with the typical non-confrontational, PC "oh, it's ok" often found on archinect. The reality is that you EXIST, as do others like you.
No- its because the guy with a B.Arch graduated earlier than the guy with an M.Arch and has (hopefully) already 3.5 years of professional experience under his belt.
For two people of the same age- one graduating with a B.Arch and one graduating with an M.Arch- the guy with a B.Arch will in a regular economy have an incredible head start....
And just for the record- who the F*CK cares about grades??? Even the portfolio is less important to employers... you can make the most pretty pictures, but its how much you know that is of value.
No- its because the guy with a B.Arch graduated earlier than the guy with an M.Arch and has (hopefully) already 3.5 years of professional experience under his belt.
You are being evasive. I asked you about whether they should meet with less respect. You mentioned the "go get a beer with" factor, almost as if an oddity in a zoo exhibit.
As for your 3.5 difference, that presumes the B.Arch. was employed right away. That M.Arch. could have worked summers, so there's 6 months. I'm actually referring to 10 years down the line, when you have an indifferent B.Arch. who hasn't licensed who has an "issue" with the M.Arch. who actually racked up meatier experience and licensed.
If I was hiring someone, I would look at a) portfolio (realistic, not flakey), b) their breadth of work experience, c) their school's reputation, and I would look at grades to some degree, because it means they didn't sleep in steel, HVAC, or lighting, in which many students do, and d) level of maturity, polish, and affability for their apparent chronological age, though not in any particular order.
Grades do mean something, or arch. schools wouldn't award degrees with High Distinction. They mean you didn't skip a beat. They also mean you are more likely to have absorbed the material for the licensing exam, and are apt to pass it. The high grade students in my program are the ones practicing. *Throw those 3 year men and women some bananas into their zoo exhibit* (LOL)
observant, i believe your obsession with education requirements is growing to unhealthy levels.
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.